see your point there, BUT the Green Goblin was the arch enemy of Spiderman, He always was, Sure he may not be the same person under the mask, But the Green Goblin is the arch enemy. But after one movie, They killed him(Maybe)
He killed Spiderman's girl. And he knows who Spiderman is. He is the arch Villian, not Venom, Not Dr Ock, Not Carnage, Not the lizard, When I think of Spiderman, Green Goblin comes up.
Like Batman, Joker.
I would had saved the Goblin until movie 3 (If that is the last movie in the series).
If I was incharge, I would have made a whole orgin movie of Batman(No Super villians)
Have the Joker in the 2nd movie, He loses gets put in Arkham.
Have maybe Twoface or the Riddler in the 3rd movie. (No super Villian team ups)
And than end the series with a knightfall like way, With Bane being the final guy to beat. (Joker comes back in the 3rd movie, along with some other villians)
Originally posted by OtterVomit
Yeah I hope Batman doesn't kill the villians in every movie. Put them in Arkham. Especially the Joker. Joker's death should be saved until the movies are going to end, or if they ever make a Dark Knight Returns movie (and how I wish they would).
I agree that Batman should not kill the villians in every movie,that they should all wind up in Arkham.Especially the joker.Joker should NEVER have died in batman 89.That betrayed everything about the comic and made the movie stupid the way batman killed him "even though many people live in denial that he killed the joker and others in cowardly fashion." that will suck suck if he kills people again in cowardly fashion like he did in the first two films ruining the movies for the true batman fans. 😠
They never killed Riddler. He was put in Arkham. Joker killed himself. Penguin killed himself. Catwoman never died either. She is still at large. And this is gonna be off topic but I love this pic so... http://www.jokerfanpage.mynetcologne.de/images/joker.gif
Originally posted by Mr Parker
yeah like he said,wow! thats some kind of argument. 🙄the only penguin that rules is the one from the 60's show with Burgess Meredith..Danny Devito was horrible as the penguin.
I don't need to argue it.No point in arguing.It's my belief 😉
And yes Burgess Meredith ruled as The Penguin.
I've thought about this a few times now. So Joker's death was a result of Batman hooking his leg to the statue. Did Batman know it would give way and make him fall? Or did he expect the Joker to let go and dangle by his leg - meaning he never intended to kill him? Shouldn't Batman have been more careful? If that's the case, why didn't he try and save him when he fell? He was in a difficult position himself, but why didn't he TRY?
You see, given the presentation, we will never know if Batman intended to simply catch Joker, or kill him. However, we understand that Batman didn't really try to save Joker when he fell. I think a better thing to do would have been for Batman to fire another grappling hook to stop Joker falling, miss, and then Joker dies.
Penguin's death was also similar. Batman kinda knew that Penguin would press the button, and when Penguin got attacked with the Bats and fell, Batman just stood there. Yes Batman didn't make Penguin press the button, (well he kinda did with that reverse psychology thing) but I've always felt the real Batman would try to save him.
However, both of these deaths happened pretty quickly, so you could argue that in both cases Batman didn't recat quickly enough. That's open to opinion like most of the deaths here.
Next up is Two-Face in Forever. This is the dumbest death because it's so stupid. Batman & co are confronted on some girders by Two-Face (how the hell he got there is a question in itself), and Batman throws the coins and Two-Face falls. This I think is the most unforgivable Bat-crime because Batman should have known that Two-Face was gonna fall, and he just didn't care, he just makes a quip and throws the coins (how the hell did he knew a bunch of coins would be useful? "Better bring the Bat-coins for this one, might need to make Two-Face fall from something" WTF?).
hahaha...well, not that I"m speaking for Tim Burton but I think he was trying to make Bats as sorta-Punisher-type. He just wants to put the villains away for good. Bats was so much darker than his comic counterpart. For some reason, it didn't bother me that much that he killed (another example would be when he strapped on the bomb to the strong circus guy in BAtman Returns and just let him explode in the sewer). I think it was his overall attitude as the avenging dark knight that made him so convincing. If I had to choose between a lighthearted-won't kill-Batman vs. a vengeful, killing one (and if these are the only 2 options), I'd go the 2nd version...despite how much it strays from the comics.
i'm not so sure if two-face or joker are the next villians...that would be sweet if they were because those are the two best bat-villians imo but all i read was that there will be a person familar with bruce wayne waiting to make there move...i dont see that being two-face unless they have harvey dent in the first movie, and i dont see that happening unless its a cameo and they're going to need more than a cameo to explain the two-face saga (unless they want to screw it up like they did last time)....it could be the joker but it could also be killer croc, penguin, riddelor, or any other villian with ties to batman
Lets see, batman is enough clever too see that the cathedral was on ruin, was too old. He could have supposed that the statue could break. And yeah, when the bats atacked the penguin, batman could do more than he did. And yeah , he killed the joker goons in the factory and the strong man of the circus, clearly, he was a killer in the movies. A punisher type. By the way, Great points, red superfly.
And yeah, the two face dead was cowardly too, beasides of stupid. So, Bruce is all the movie saying to Dick that he shouldnt kill two face and he goes and kill two face. It was non sense and as bad as the rest of the script.
I hope in Begins we see Batman as a sadistic SOB, but never goes the whole nine yards and actually kills anyone.
I don't want to see anyone die directly from Batman's actions, it's just not Batman. Even if they fall, Batman will save them.
I mean, I actually think Batman keeping the felons alive is more sadistic than killing them. Killing a felon is not a punishment, it's giving them the greatest freedom of all, death. This is Batman's philosphy, he wants felons to suffer. He beats the living tar out of them and then keeps them alive, and lets them rot in a jail cell. I know if I'd been screwed over by some punk with a gun who killed my parents, if I turned into a vigilante I'd cause pain to the criminal world, and let them suffer as their victims have suffered. Batman is more about causing pain and serving a twisted sense of justice - killing felons does not come into that.
Who would suffer if he killed a felon? The only person that cares about the criminal would be themselves, so why would Batman kill? This has so much potential in the movie. Would could see Batman literally cripple someone, and keep them alive - making them wish they were dead.
Also, Batman needs those criminals to spread the fear of Batman. He chooses the Bat to strike fear into those who do evil.
The no-kill motto is great in my opinion. He's more sadistic than ever if he roughs someone up and lets them live. Letting them die would be a reward - he wants them to suffer and know pain like he has most of his life.
