Originally posted by ivebeendepped43
Also thats absurd and total rubbish to say that Batman murdered that guy in Batman Begins just because he didnt save him.Not saving him AFTER he went out and tried to destroy a city after he had already saved him once before and cowardly murdering someone like Batman did in those pitiful Burton Batman movies are like comparing apples and oranges,anybody with logic and common sense would know that
Ok, so by what you are saying, if someone is trying to destroy the city, we have to let them die... They can't be saved, and must be allowed to die... Isn't that EXCATLY what Batman stood against in Begins?
And yes, for the third time,it IS the same thing... When you let someone die, it's like saying "I don't care if you live or die, you can die for all I care..." Now does that sound like comics Batman? I personally have no problem with it at all, Batman killing when necessary is good, but all of you who whine and complain about Burton's vision killing but refuse to acknowledge that Nolan's vision killed are getting redundant, and don't know what killing/murder is... If Batman was captured by the police after that, he'd most likely get murder in the second degree... See? It's still MURDER! That means KILLING!
Originally posted by Bat Dude
Ok, so by what you are saying, if someone is trying to destroy the city, we have to let them die... They can't be saved, and must be allowed to die... Isn't that EXCATLY what Batman stood against in Begins?And yes, for the third time,it IS the same thing... When you let someone die, it's like saying "I don't care if you live or die, you can die for all I care..." Now does that sound like comics Batman? I personally have no problem with it at all, Batman killing when necessary is good, but all of you who whine and complain about Burton's vision killing but refuse to acknowledge that Nolan's vision killed are getting redundant, and don't know what killing/murder is... If Batman was captured by the police after that, he'd most likely get murder in the second degree... See? It's still MURDER! That means KILLING!
Stating the obvious but some people wont get it.
Originally posted by Bat Dude
Ok, so by what you are saying, if someone is trying to destroy the city, we have to let them die... They can't be saved, and must be allowed to die... Isn't that EXCATLY what Batman stood against in Begins?And yes, for the third time,it IS the same thing... When you let someone die, it's like saying "I don't care if you live or die, you can die for all I care..." Now does that sound like comics Batman? I personally have no problem with it at all, Batman killing when necessary is good, but all of you who whine and complain about Burton's vision killing but refuse to acknowledge that Nolan's vision killed are getting redundant, and don't know what killing/murder is... If Batman was captured by the police after that, he'd most likely get murder in the second degree... See? It's still MURDER! That means KILLING!
Originally posted by xNIXSONx
...Batman Begins' Batman didnt kill anyone...
*sigh*
Originally posted by Bat Dude
Ok, so by what you are saying, if someone is trying to destroy the city, we have to let them die... They can't be saved, and must be allowed to die... Isn't that EXCATLY what Batman stood against in Begins?And yes, for the third time,it IS the same thing... When you let someone die, it's like saying "I don't care if you live or die, you can die for all I care..." Now does that sound like comics Batman? I personally have no problem with it at all, Batman killing when necessary is good, but all of you who whine and complain about Burton's vision killing but refuse to acknowledge that Nolan's vision killed are getting redundant, and don't know what killing/murder is... If Batman was captured by the police after that, he'd most likely get murder in the second degree... See? It's still MURDER! That means KILLING!
Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
IA I highly doubt the animated Batman would have left Ras on that train. I was happy that Batman did not save him but I do think it was wrong that he didn't.
Regardless of wether its right or wrong the point is its not in Batmsn character to do it.
Originally posted by Mr Parker
He's gonna come back and claim to you that just because he didnt save Ras al Goul on the train at the end,that he murdered him in the second degree or something like that. 🙄
if you watch carefully, Ras closes his eyes before the train disconnects with the rail and launches into the building. That means, he accepts his own fate and demise, he was not murdered by any degree, nor did he commit suicide, he simply died by no ones hands but his own...or by a rail accident
Originally posted by xNIXSONx
atleast he didnt run over or shoot a thug like Keaton.
Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
It personally doesn't get my panties in a bunch if Batman kills a couple of thugs or has waffles for breakfast that he never ate in the comics. I am open to different interpretations of the character if the movie is good
yo STFU, (just kiddin lol)
well, it could make or break what many percieve as a hero. A hero holds many morals and boundaries that cannot be crossed, there are great differences between ex// Superman and The Punisher.
If Superman burnt a robber to death using his heat vision, if Spider-Man intentionally pushed the killer of Uncle Ben out of a warehouse window, If the Thing clobbered a mugger causing him to die from internal bleeding. IF BATMAN RAN OVER, SHOT AND USED HIS TURBO ENGINES TO BURN BAD GUYS , i ask you, where is the heroism in that
Daredevil left Kingpin to the authorities, Fantastic Four left Dr Doom in a shipping crate, Batman left Carmine Falcone tied up, and Keaton left his victims in a pool of their own blood with bullet wounds, extreme degree burns from a jet engine on the back of the Batmobile, and tread marks...what kind of hero is that?
Originally posted by xNIXSONx
yo STFU, (just kiddin lol)well, it could make or break what many percieve as [B]a hero
. A hero holds many morals and boundaries that cannot be crossed, there are great differences between ex// Superman and The Punisher.If Superman burnt a robber to death using his heat vision, if Spider-Man intentionally pushed the killer of Uncle Ben out of a warehouse window, If the Thing clobbered a mugger causing him to die from internal bleeding. IF BATMAN RAN OVER, SHOT AND USED HIS TURBO ENGINES TO BURN BAD GUYS , i ask you, where is the heroism in that
Daredevil left Kingpin to the authorities, Fantastic Four left Dr Doom in a shipping crate, Batman left Carmine Falcone tied up, and Keaton left his victims in a pool of their own blood with bullet wounds, extreme degree burns from a jet engine on the back of the Batmobile, and tread marks...what kind of hero is that? [/B]
I don't think it makes him that much less heroic unless he is killing random citizens on purpose.
Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
True enough a hero must have moral codes. But I actually think Batman's were developing in the Burton film. I think he had decided he was not going to kill anymore towards the end of the movie and that's why he tried to sway Selina from offing Max. I think his character up to that point in the Burton movies was new at the crime fighting game on the grander scale and still somewhat reckless. There was never one time I sat up in the movie and said "OMG Batman killed that circus clown!" To me it was not THAT serious. I was entertained and that was enough for me.I don't think it makes him that much less heroic unless he is killing random citizens on purpose.
hmm understandable i guess. Well i guess being the devil's advocate here, posting against Burton's bat flick, i gotta say, why hasnt Keaton's Bruce/Batman realized that must stay on one side of the line as a vigalante but also as a hero, comparing this to Anakin in the prequel trilogy of his journey from light to dark, as he gave into vengeance, etc.
Burton does seem new to the superhero type stuff, the only thing that he did that was experienced was create a morbid, unreallistic, and unproportionate world that you can find in all his films, and not only that but having a Batman that is introduced as if he was crime fighting for sometime, but who in reality is inexperienced, being beaten by ONE of joker's thugs, being shot down in a Batplane by a handgun...
yeah, i guess you could argue that he had to kill those bad guys cuz he was in a life or death situation, but there's always a choice, he couldve pulled out his grappling hook or not turn on the NOS or afterburners
Originally posted by DARKLORDCAEDUS
Who did Batman kill in Begins?
Well, there was fake Ras, who he just left there to die, not really caring what happened to him, and then there was the numerous ninja that didn't survive because he intentionally blew up the monastery... (sounds like the Axis Chemicals situation, doesn't it?) And then he left the real Ras to die on the monorail (though it remains to be seen if he survived), again, completely contradicting his "no one is beyond saving" motto...
So, actually, the Begins body count is pretty high, if you want to get technical...
Originally posted by Bat Dude
Well, there was fake Ras, who he just left there to die, not really caring what happened to him, and then there was the numerous ninja that didn't survive because he intentionally blew up the monastery... (sounds like the Axis Chemicals situation, doesn't it?) And then he left the real Ras to die on the monorail (though it remains to be seen if he survived), again, completely contradicting his "no one is beyond saving" motto...So, actually, the Begins body count is pretty high, if you want to get technical...