Does Batman Die

Slice 1 - Image 1 Slice 1 - Image 2 Slice 1 - Image 3 Slice 1 - Image 4
Slice 2 - Image 1 Slice 2 - Image 2 Slice 2 - Image 3 Slice 2 - Image 4
Slice 3 - Image 1 Slice 3 - Image 2 Slice 3 - Image 3 Slice 3 - Image 4
Slice 4 - Image 1 Slice 4 - Image 2 Slice 4 - Image 3 Slice 4 - Image 4

Does Batman Die

Related BUZZ:

Does Batman Die - Yahoo News Search Results

Colm Feore returns to Gotham as The Dollmaker (with video)

Canadian-American actor and go-to villain portrayer Colm Feore is once again going over to the dark side. Feore, noted for playing Pierre Trudeau, King Lear and others on screen and stage, will guest-star in the Monday, April 13, episode of […]

Daredevil Keeps Brooding in New Trailers

With its eloquent chiaroscuro and inky-black silhouettes, Netflix's upcoming Daredevil series appears to be channeling Frank Miller's Clinton-era miniseries Man Without Fear as much as it does Christopher Nolan's Über-popular Batman movies. Eschewing the histrionic fun of NBC's The Flash, the two newest trailers for Daredevil are dour and moody, ... More »

DC's Convergence reboot starts today: Here's what you need to know

This summer, DC and Marvel are making big efforts to get new readers with fresh superhero stories of all genres. Because Convergence and Secret Wars are still fairly-to-completely confusing if you've been out of the loop for a while, and especially so if you're just looking to start. Nevertheless, there's some great stuff going on in the trenches of Convergence and Secret Wars, it just needs to ...

Which Taken Knockoff Is the Best? We Ranked All 14 of Them

When Taken was released in 2008, it looked at first glance like a modestly budgeted, cleverly high concept, essentially throwaway thriller. The most noteworthy thing about it was its surprising star: Liam Neeson, he of the brooding mien, baritone brogue, and impressively varied acting résumé. Neeson was not a stranger to popcorn ... More »

Delicious/tag/Does%20Batman%20Die

recent bookmarks tagged Does%20Batman%20Die

Top Answers About Batman (creative franchise) on Quora

Top Answers About Batman (creative franchise) on Quora

What would be your story if Batman turns evil and a villain and all the heroes from DC and Marvel world try to stop him? At what level could Batman do the damage and how could he be stopped?


Interesting question. 

Batman's greatest strength is his intelligence and level of paranoia.   He plans for everything but doesn't kill.  Evil Batman would.  So you need someone on that level. 

So I'm not going to rehash choice others made, I intend today add today the list.

So going over various heroes and villains DC is a bit weak on long term planners.  On that side I can think of one person who would figure out Batman went evil. 

Vandal Savage



He is dangerous.   So dangerous that Evil Batman should kill him first, if he could find him.  He is really the only DC villain who plans like Batman does. 

I will link his page at the bottom but he is an unparalleled general, fought super heroes for decades, led armies throughout time.  So on DC's side of the house he would be the one to figure out the heroes and villains the Batman is taking out, organize those that are left.  And then push to kill him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Va...

On the Marvel side, (besides those listed) I give you

Dr. Doom



well, He Is Doom.

He blends science and technology wearing a suit more advanced than any powered armor wearer in either universe.  He is one of two of the most paranoid people in the marvel universe.  Magic will always be the x-factor that Batman can't totally plan for. 

 In my opinion, the one who plans just as much would be this hero.

The Black Panther


If anyone in Marvel is Batman's superior in the planning department it's the Black Panther.   Besides having files and plans for every hero and villain (he neutralized Storms powers during a fight) he also has plans to defeat Galactus with his own resources.

He is Marvel's greatest tactical planner,  hero wise.   For those who don't Know his abilities he has beaten Captain America in a fight every time but once when Cap mentioned that he knew something was wrong with the Black Panther because he did win.

He has more resources than Batman has access to with a tech level 50 to 100 years more advanced than ours. His country (of which he is King of) has cured Aids and cancer. He is one of the wealthiest people in either universe.

Make no mistake, his thought process is different.   He is a King.  While it would take Batman turning evil to kill, the Black Panther would kill a threat now to defend his people. If any hero is going to put evil Batman down for good, it's him.

http://www.comicvine.com/black-p...

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 21 May 2015

What if Bruce Wayne is actually in Arkham asylum the whole time and Batman is just a delusion he has? Would all of his villains be the orderlies and doctors who work there?


What if Bruce Wayne was also shot in Crime Alley with his parents and his entire life afterward consists of dreams and hallucinations that a comatose Wayne has had since his injuries during his childhood?
 
This might explain:
 
  1. The fact that his "secret identity" is kept secret despite his wearing a mask that only covers half of his face and his really being the only logical suspect for being Batman.
  2. The impossibility that a Batcave could have been constructed under his home secretly and remained a secret.
  3. Batman's nearly magical ability to dodge bullets and to recover from injuries that would have paralyzed or killed another man.
  4. The fact that all of his "Rogue's Gallery" of villains escape to return to menace both him and Gotham repeatedly despite many of them committing offenses which should garner them life sentences without parole or the death penalty
  5. The pantheon of super-powered beings who did not exist when Wayne was a boy (Them and their adventures are fantasy projections inside of his mind)
  6. Wayne/Batman's ability to combat super-powered beings and to defeat them, despite his own lack of special abilities
  7. His insistence on not using firearms of any type, despite their being the most effective tool for the job.
  8. The public's willingness to accept and even support a costumed vigilante even when the vigilante is willing to use military-style weapons in urban areas
  9. The fact despite several of Wayne's enemies knowing his "secret identity" that they consistently fail to use it to their advantage.
  10. The fact no one around him (Alfred, Leslie Tompkins, etc.) ever strongly discourages his actions or suggest that he receive significant psychological counseling for are clearly deep-rooted issues.

None of the above happens because Batman's universe isn't real. It's how a young boy (and later a man) might "see" the world if he was in a coma and his only thoughts were generated by his subconscious. Bruce Wayne's days are spent in a persistent vegetative fantasizing about himself being a hero.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 20 May 2015

Why do people obsess over Batman?


Of all the normal humans, only an ultimate  idiot without a clue  or an ultimate  badass with a plan can stand up and face the most powerful being in the Universe



and then say threateningly

"tell me, do you bleed?...You will!"
 

We all know Batman is not an idiot to go fight Superman without a plan.

Ergo, a normal human, who can stand among the pantheon of DC Superhumans as an  equal, deserves to be obsessed over.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 7 May 2015

Why is Batman considered to be the ultimate badass?


Because only an ultimate  idiot without a clue  or an ultimate  badass with a plan can stand up and face the most powerful being in the Universe



and then say threateningly

"tell me, do you bleed?...You will!"
 

We all know Batman is not an idiot to go fight Superman without a plan.

Ergo, Batman is badassery personified!

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 7 May 2015

Why does Batman use his "Batman voice" with Ra's Al Ghul in Batman Begins?


Speculation (As it seems to have been a continuity error on the part of the filmmakers): Every time Bruce Wayne dons his Batman uniform, he switches his mindset to that of Batman and thus thinks, acts, and talks like Batman from that point forward.

There's a scene in The Dark Knight Rises when Catwoman disappears without Batman noticing and he comments upon it when he's ALONE using his "Batman voice" even though no one can hear him. Clearly, when he is character, he stays in character.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 18 April 2015

Why do people obsess over Batman?


How can you even ask this question ?

Bruce's story to being batman is so heart wrenching , not only in the movies but also more in the comics(for guys and girls) who read comics too that it makes me his worshipper.

Part 1: Losing his parents
In a city like Gotham , where his father owned the single great company and he(Bruce Wayne) being the only son losses his parents , both of them in a rainy night in an alley.
In this part , the portrayal of not just Bruce , but his well known butler Alfred pennyworth and his childhood friend and love Rachel , their relationship , bonding , dialogues emotions were crafted so perfectly that i had tears sometimes. Bruce in some years goes away from this city in despair , away from pain to seek a degree.

For example , when Bruce return's to Gotham for the hearing of his parent's murder , Bruce still had the anger raging inside him and he mostly hated everyone. Alfred , his butler had this to say


Another ?
So you see , these dialogues , the actor's and these emotions . Man , you could feel your life revolve in fron't of you while watching this.

Part 2 : The girl you've always loved.
Rachel , in Bruce's case is the girl he always loved but couldn't get her. There is always this one girl in everyone's life , you'll love her no matter what , no matter how many days have gone by , no matter if she loves you or not( a little maybe) and when you watch Bruce get hurt because of her , a little part in you , reminds you of yourself and you're miserable love life .


Part 3 : I'm Batman. The master of  theatricality and deception.
Batman is one of the finest human combatants Earth has ever known. He trained in the US for various martial arts for 10 years. He has mastered 127 styles of martial arts including Muay Thai, Escrima, Krav Maga, Capoeira, Savate, Yawyan, Taekwondo, Judo, Jujitsu,Ninjitsu, Kendo, Fencing, Kenjutsu, Kali, Bojutsu, Francombat, Boxing, Kickboxing,Hapkido, Wing Chun, Parkour, Shorin Ryu, Silat, Chin Na, Kyudo, Aikido, Varma Ati,Jeet Kune Do, Shaolin, Ba Gua, Hung Gar, Tai Chi, Kung Fu, Kenpo, and Karate. His primary form of combat is an idiosyncratic admixture of Tae Kwon Do, Judo, Muay Thai, Kickboxing, Karate, Boxing, Jujitsu, and Ninjitsu.
-Source , The DC comics wikipedia.

No one does it better than Batman. Appearing out of nowhere, using gadgets for distraction, that deep voice, that secret cave , that bat-mobile. It's hard not to fantasize about him . and of course the awesomest Butler that he has.

This is the real deal ,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=...
Batman's Backup , using ultrasonic waves produced from a atransmitter hidden in his boots to attract ONLY BATS , and thousand of bats.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=...
Part 4 : Sacrificing is in his blood and soul.
He lives for others, he lives for the city and believes strongly that one day , one fine day Gotham will make it through the raging sotrm it has always been facing.



The above picture sum's it all.
and hence Batman will always remain dear to us guys n gals.
Thank you Bob Kane along with Bill Finger for creating Batman in such a wonderful way.

To end this answer , i'll leave you with this picture. An epic comic named "the dark knight returns" by Frank Miller where batman does defeat superman, and he has this to say to Clark Kent(superman).



See Questions On Quora

Posted on 18 March 2015

Why are people fascinated with the Joker?


Because Joker is a big unknown.

For other villains in comic books (not just DC universe), we pretty much know where most of them come from (at least the major ones). We know their true identity, we know their background, we know their goal (often involve dominating the world, or revenge or both), we know their specific mental illness (sociopath, pyromaniac, OCD... etc), we know their super power (if they have any) ... but we know virtually nothing about Joker, who he was, where he came from, what he wants. And that's his appeal.

Name the most famous serial killer in the world: Jack the Ripper. We don't know who he was (there're theories, sure, but no definitive ID).

Think about the most scary (and best part) of any horror movie, it's the part where you don't know what's going on, it's the part where you see a shadow in the corner of your eyes, the flicker of lights, the weird apparitions, but can't quite put your finger on. The minute you know who died in the house and haunted the poor family, everything gets boring.

We're fascinated by the unknown. It gives us infinite room for imagination. Joker is probably the biggest unknown in Batman's universe, that's why people are fascinated with him.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 6 February 2015

Why are people fascinated with the Joker?


Because they really don't consider his character carefully.

As portrayed by DC Comics, especially within the last three decades, The Joker is an amoral and sadistic mass murderer whose mental illnesses (which are never specified) are used as an excuse to justify his myriad killings. While in reality his homicidal sprees would have been ended by his execution either at the hands of the of the police or by the state, the comics keep him around as he is viewed s being Batman antithesis and thus his arch-nemesis.

Fans of the franchise are willing to overlook The Joker's extremely disturbing behavior because he is the most entertaining of Batman's "Rogue's Gallery" and because close review of the character would reveal ugly realities that would make him far less entertaining.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 6 February 2015

Why are people fascinated with the Joker?


Because his motive is chaos. He just wants to see the world burn and takes delight in causing chaos. There are a few people around who are like this but very few of them have much in the way of brains. But the Joker was a genius. A combination of chaotic intent and high intelligence makes for an interesting character.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 5 February 2015

Why is Michael Keaton a better Batman than Christian Bale?


Michael Keaton is a different Batman than Christian Bale, but for the time and portrayal of their respective characters, they're both very good Batmans (Batmen?).

The thing that sets Keaton and Bale apart from the others who have portrayed Batman is the fact that they gave believable performances as both Batman and Bruce Wayne.  Keaton nailed the discomfort at playing a role, the violence sitting just under the veneer, and the guilt that drove Bruce to be the Bat and to push people away.  Bale nailed the "rich playboy" persona, balanced with an honest caring about the people closest to him.

The Bale Batman would never have been successful or believable in the late 80s, and the Keaton Batman would be a joke in the present day.  But, for their times, they were both the best Batmen that we could hope for.  They were both the Batman that we wanted, and the Batman that we deserved.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 16 December 2014

What are Batman fans called?


Awesome.

Also, cool and smart. We are called fans and fanboys sometimes in general conversation, too, in the context of comics and genre fandom.

Some of us use the term batfans, or bat-fans, too. I use that often when talking specifically to a group of people, members of message board, etc focused on Batman.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 21 April 2014

If people were asked to direct Batman 4, what would the plot be?


I'll address the three options, each for one of the possible ways to do it. The first option is based on the reality of the situation that exists now (Nolan's films are done and they are never going to do sequels to them, Ben Affleck is the new Batman, and the Batman movies have to be set in the cinematic world with the new Superman movies); the second option is a pure fantasy "what if the Nolan films continued?" scenario just for the sake of addressing it since so many people want to suggest movie ideas set in that world; and the last version is what I'd do if I had a totally clean slate and there was no existing demand or plan from this point forward, and I was free to do whatever I wanted  to create a totally brand new from-scratch Batman franchise.

* FIRST OPTION: Ben Affleck is Batman, as planned. This is my own personal preference at this point, keeping the Nolan franchise off limits and starting with a new Batman who exists within the newly established DC Comics cinematic continuity that includes Man of Steel.

Batman has been around for at least a decade or more, he is a veteran crime fighter whose rogues gallery of main villains already exists. I would create a world in which Robin already existed -- and died. The Robin who died was the second Robin, a young kid Bruce took in to replace the original Robin, Dick Grayson. Grayson, the first Robin, is in college now and estranged from Bruce. The second Robin was killed by the Joker. We don't see any of this, it all happened in the past and the film would start with a 40-some year old Batman still fighting crime but without a partner now. This Batman will be based on a mix of the Grant Morrison "bat-god" Batman and the Scott Snyder Batman in the current comic books. He's prepared for almost everything, he has a wide array of advanced technology and methods at his disposal, and the stories are heavily focused on being detective tales with a dark Gothic twist.

I'd have the Joker already exist and locked up in Arkham -- and I'd cast Cate Blanchett or Joaquin Phoenix to play the Joker. I'd cast Jon Hamm to play Harvey Dent. I'd cast Bryan Cranston to play Hugo Strange. I'd cast John Cleese as Alfred. I'd cast Denzel Washington as Commissioner Gordon. The story would be that Gotham's "freak" villains are all pretty much locked up in Arkham Asylum and the mobs have been broken down and are in tatters due to Batman's long campaign against them. But a new force comes to town -- the Penguin (played by Alan Ford, ideally), a British black market arms dealer who used to be part of an extremist group in Ireland that fought against the IRA. Penguin is ruthless, ready to wage real warfare against anyone who gets in his way, and he organizes his hardline Protestant paramilitary friends and colleagues into a violent new mob that comes to Gotham City. Unlike the rest of the mobsters in the city, he's not afraid of Batman at all.

Penguin is bringing all the "freak" villains (the masked villains and other weirdos who are the crazy comic book villains in Gotham) into his mob family, too. The chaos in the mobs of Gotham causes a lot of gangs to fight one another for territory while mobsters are fighting one another to take control of the different broken mob families, and Penguin uses this chaos to his advantage because of his powerful organizing abilities and the fact he's more ruthless and violent than any of the other mob bosses. He fights like it's a literal war, and nobody -- not even Batman -- is prepared for the wave of terror Penguin unleashes in his bid to take over Gotham's underworld.

So this would be focused on being a realistic, noirish crime story. Batman would be based largely on the 1970s Batman from the Denny O'Neil and Steve Englehart stories, very detective story oriented.

The twist to the story is when an Irish IRA bomb maker and computer hacker comes to Gotham to hunt down Penguin. This former IRA member wants revenge because the Penguin killed his brother. So the IRA guy -- whose brilliance with codes and cyphers and hacking and elaborate bombs and traps earned him the name "Riddler" (and played by Norman Reedus or Paddy Considine) among the paramilitaries in Northern Ireland -- engages in a war against the Penguin across Gotham City. I'd make him kind of like Simon the villain from Die Hard With a Vengeance, having a bunch of demands and tests and bomb threats etc around Gotham City that he forces the cops and Batman and certain companies to participate in, each thing being some piece of a bigger plot to bring down the Penguin. Bombings, machine gun fights in the streets of the city, cutting off the city's power, threatening to erase the bank accounts of everyone in Gotham, etc -- these are different aspects of the growing war and batman finds he is losing his ability to keep control of the criminal underworld.

Penguin complicates the whole situation when he makes Batman an offer -- Penguin says that if Batman will work together with him to find and stop the Riddler, then Penguin will agree to a cease fire with Batman and the police, basically a situation where Batman and the cops let Penguin reorganize the waring factions of the mobs in the city and put an end to the gangland war that's erupted due to Riddler's efforts, and Penguin will agree to stop the violence and cut out certain of the worst criminal enterprises (sex slave trade, drug dealing to kids, gang killings) and will also agree to provide Batman and the police with information about other underworld elements and help Batman keep control of the "freak" criminals who come to Gotham (like Joker). If Batman refuses, the Penguin says he will unleash all the "freaks" to terrorize Gotham with random mass violence and attacks, while his army tears the city apart to find the Riddler. He swears the bombings and crime will reach a level worse than anything in Northern Ireland's history, and that he'll focus on making the worst sorts of crimes -- the sex slave trade etc -- into a major industry in Gotham just to spite Batman.

So Batman, seeing that the lack of a firm hand in control of the underworld has led to gangland war that's causing too many civilian casualties and the Riddler's attempts to bring the war in Northern Ireland to the shores of Gotham, faces an impossible situation and a hard choice to make. Can he really make a deal with the devil and allow Penguin to operate in Gotham, as a "lesser evil" scenario? He is torn and unsure what to do.

As Riddler proves increasingly hard to capture and his puzzles and demands have double and even triple meaning, Batman finally captures a single image of the Riddler on a surveillance camera -- just one of his hands and part of his arm, which is covered in several tattoos (in my version of the character, he has a lot of tattoos of symbols, puzzle pieces, etc, like the Russian mobsters who have all those secret-meaning tattoos -- the IRA bombers and hackers, in this fictional concept, have tattoos representing different jobs they've done and facts about their past, and the trick if you're one of these elite bomber-hackers is to have such elaborate and impossible-to-solve codes that nobody else can solve your tattoo cyphers & puzzles but you). Batman deciphers the cryptic code in one of Riddler's tattoos, and the code reveals the name of Riddler's dead younger brother. Batman figures out that young man was killed by Protestant loyalists in Northern Ireland, and the young man had an older brother who vanished and every record of that missing mysterious brother is gone, erased from every database in the world.

Batman realizes the missing mystery older brother is the Riddler, and now he has a name and a motive, and he has Commissioner Gordon release the information to the public with a "thanks" to Batman for figuring it out. The Riddler is furious, nobody has ever solved his codes before, and now his attention turns increasingly to not just getting revenge against the Penguin, but also proving he is superior to Batman. But Batman deduced this would happen, that the Riddler would become emotional and angry over Batman solving the cypher and making it public, and Batman's counting on the fact it will cause the Riddler to focus more on him (Batman) and eventually slip up. Meanwhile, Batman refuses the Penguin's offer, now thinking that if the Penguin is angry and likewise slips up, then both Riddler and Penguin will be distracted and off their game, making them likely to take advantage of one another in a moment of weakness or error, and giving Batman the chance he needs to gain the upper hand at last. He goes to Dick Grayson and asks for his help, and the two former partners team up to take down the Penguin and Riddler.

Imagine a Batman movie that's a mix of The Town, Miller's Crossing, and Die Hard: With A Vengeance, but with Batman showing up to solve the crimes. I'd also include a scene of Batman going to Arkham Asylum to talk to the Joker, just a short scene early in the film after the Riddler first shows up and puts his initial "puzzle" demand out in public. Batman goes to see the Joker to ask what he thinks of the puzzle, but Joker merely taunts Batman by asking whether Batman keeps Robin's bloody suit on display somewhere to look at it and blame himself -- Batman in fact has the dead Robin's suit hanging where he can see it every day so he never forgets his mistake, and so the Joker's remark haunts Batman and makes him realize how well the Joker knows him and so he wonders if he (Batman) is becoming too predictable and if that's why he's having a hard time dealing with the Penguin and Riddler.

###

* SECOND OPTION: Hypothetical revival of Nolan-Bale Batman continuity. I actually wrote a Forbes article explaining this option in detail, so here are the main bits...

I think they would try to bring everyone back for a sequel to TDKR, but Christian Bale probably would turn the offer down — he’s made it pretty clear that his returning depended on Nolan wanting to make another film. But let’s assume that a lot of the supporting cast, such as Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman, did return. If they were able to also convince Joseph Gordon-Levitt to return, he’d surely play the new Batman-in-training, but some major threat would arise that forces Bruce to return to Gotham.

And the obvious choice of threat would be the return of the Joker, who escaped Arkham in the events of The Dark Knight Rises and now demands that the “real” Batman come back to face him again. The Joker would have to create a threat big enough to leave Bruce no alternative, probably involving the Joker capturing John Blake and then also kidnapping Alfred and Gordon — maybe using an idea loosely adapted from the concept behind Scott Snyder’s ongoing (and brilliant) comic book storyline “Death of the Family,” in which the Joker is attacking all of the people closest to Batman. Not a direct adaptation, but something similar to the Joker’s broad sentiment and plan of targeting everyone around Batman.

So, if Bruce returns in that situation, they’d have to recast the role, and I think someone like Jake Gyllenhaal or Joe Manganiello would be an example of an actor they might consider to step into the role in this scenario. Gyllenhaal was actually one of the two final actors up for the role when Nolan was making Batman Begins, the other of course being Bale, who eventually got the part.

Anyway, Bruce returns to rescue everybody, Blake says that he isn’t really comfortable in the Batman role and wants to create his own symbol and legend — Nightwing would be the one he’d create, of course — and he convinces Batman that now that Bruce has found happiness and had some time away from Gotham, he should try to come back to who he really is and serve Gotham as Bruce the philanthropist while serving at night as the one true Batman. Catwoman would also return with him, of course.

Would Gary Oldman agree to come back as Gordon? Maybe, but if not then they could probably secure either Sam Rockwell or Bryan Cranston to take over as Gordon. The hardest part of it would be recasting the Joker, but there are several actors who seem like strong candidates for such a task — I could imagine they’d ask Johnny Depp, for example, and Michael Fassbender, just for a couple of names to consider. I think that while using the Joker would be controversial to some fans, this is the only way to really return to the Nolan world in a big, confident way and offers something that could really force Bruce to come back from retirement. And it shows what happened with the Joker after Bane unleashed everyone from Arkham. It would get a lot of media buzz and the attention would help the film achieve the epic and must-see status necessary to live up to the Nolan reputation.

This could either continue the Nolan idea of "no other superheroes in Batman's world" and ignore the Superman movies and other superhero films, OR it could establish Batman and merge his realistic world into the supposedly realistic world of Man of Steel. My idea would be that this Batman would show up in the Superman movies sometimes and in the Justice League movies, but then his own solo films would ignore all of that stuff and not mention other superheroes. Let the solo Batman movies keep him in Gotham fighting realistic villains, and then every few years he can get called to help out when some major global crisis arises or something.

I don't favor this option at all, I think the Nolan films should remain a trilogy that ended and is left alone. I only offer this as an example of what I'd do IF this were the way the new film was done. And of course, we now know that the Nolan Batman will never return, that whole bat-world is completely finished and a brand new Batman unrelated to anything in the Nolan movies is going to be in the next film. So I want to be clear that I know there is no chance whatsoever of this scenario -- a new Batman movie that's a sequel to the Nolan films -- ever taking place. This is purely a "what if" for fun example of what I'd have done IF the next film were going to be a sequel to the previous Nolan movies.

###

* THIRD OPTION: If the upcoming Batman vs. Superman film somehow manages to fall apart/flops/whatever (none of that will happen, but just pure hypothetical fantasy for a third option), and it's now too late to try to revert back to the Nolan-Bale version of the franchise, so I have to reboot. In this scenario, I don't go with the older veteran Batman from the Affleck scenario, but I also don't do a full origin either.

I'd convince the studio to let me break it into two pieces. I'd create a TV show about a young 20 year old Bruce Wayne traveling the world seeking training in martial arts, detective skills, criminology, etc. He wouldn't be Batman in this show, this is his pre-Batman life and the series follows him in Europe and elsewhere as he studies to become Batman. The show would be a detective and action show, each episode would have him stumbling across some new case and using his new skills to try and solve it, while in the meantime hunting for and finding new teachers along the way.

This show would start running on TV at the same time the movies start, with the TV show being set about ten years prior to the movies. The show would run for maybe five years, ending with Bruce deciding it's time for him to return to Gotham City.

The TV show and movies would release at the same time -- you'd be seeing TV shows set in the past, showing you Bruce's younger days that led him to become Batman, and you'd also be watching the movies that show Batman as a superhero who has been around in Gotham for five years already. Anyone watching the films never sees any Batman origin stuff, the first film I made would have him about 30 years old and he's been around several years. To find out about his past and training, you'd have to watch the TV show. Or you could ignore the show, if you don't really care about his past. This lets the films jump right into something we didn't get on film yet -- a Batman who has been doing his job many years, is good at it, but is still young and in his prime. The Burton films featured a Batman who had just gotten started yet was already in his 30s. The Nolan films gave us the origin story and his first two years, then he stopped being Batman for a long time until returning for one final mission. So we've never had a series that provides a serious, veteran in-his-prime Batman for an extend set of films. That's what I'd want to create here.

The movies, then, would not show Batman's origin, and these films would be totally apart from any other superhero films -- no Superman, no other superheroes at all, this is how to do it IF the existing plans for an entire superhero universe fail to work out, remember. I'd just start off with an established Batman who has already been around for five years, he's good at his job and he feels confident and in control of the city. And this is when the "freak" villains start to rise in the city, and Batman has to change his tactics and raise his game to a higher level of intensity to deal with these new threats.

I'd start off with an adaptation of the comic Monster Men, with Hugo Strange (still casting Bryan Cranston for this recurring villain role) as a brilliant, unstoppable scientist and psychologist who works for the Gotham police and prisons, helping evaluate criminals and doing tests etc -- but he is secretly taking money from the mob to conduct his own experiments on prisoners to try and create new drugs to enhance human strength and memory.

Strange's experiments create "monsters" who are genetically altered prisoners with tremendous strength and no sense of pain or coherent thoughts. They'd be like the "rage zombies" from 28 Days Later, but on steroids to make them stronger and almost swollen in appearance. Strange would test these "monsters" by unleashing them at various times to kill his enemies (massacring the mobsters to whom Strange owed money). The police are baffled by the crimes that seem to be the result of wild animals that attacked and killed mobsters. Batman investigates, and Strange decides to test his monsters against Batman. When Batman stops the attacking monsters, Strange becomes increasingly fascinated by Batman's prowess and then determined to destroy Batman. Strange takes more work with the police, now giving them evaluations of Batman and claiming Batman is dangerous to the public.

Batman's investigation leads him to Strange's laboratory and uncovers the links between the mob and Strange's experiments, which leads to Batman discovering the prisons were providing Strange with test subjects for a price. Batman takes down the mobsters but has to protect them from the last of the "monsters" Strange sends after them to shut them up and cover his trail. The mob kills off witnesses at the prison to silence them, and the corrupt officials in the Gotham City government and at the jails/prisons likewise cover their tracks to protect themselves, which inherently also helps protect Strange. Batman knows Strange is guilty, but cannot prove it. Strange becomes an outspoken critic of Batman, a TV talking head who blames Batman for crimes etc.

Part of the mob's attempts to cover their tracks and kill witnesses involves hiring a freelance criminal who goes by the name "The Red Hood" to break into a company that was diverting chemicals and medical supplies to Hugo Strange, and the Red Hood is supposed to assassinate the people at the company who were part of the scheme and then burn the whole chemical plant to the ground. Batman finds out during his investigation and arrives to stop the Red Hood, and in the process the Red Hood apparently dies when he falls into a one of the chemical vats. Batman cannot save the Red Hood, and must hurry from the building before the Red Hood's well-placed bombs detonate and destroy the whole place. This of course is secretly the origin of the Joker, but I wouldn't make it a big deal or show him as the Joker in this film, it would be a small subplot related to the mob story involving Hugo Strange.

Batman must face the fact that his war on crime is entering a whole new, weird stage that he never foresaw and he's going to have to learn new tricks to deal with it. So from this point on, I'd use each film to introduce a new stage of the "freaks" replacing the previous "normal" crime in Gotham, and Batman being dragged down into darker places and confronting stranger things than he ever expected to have to deal with in his mission.

###

UPDATE:  Interestingly enough, as information has come out and the status of the project has advanced, it appears that WB is using a mix of my first and third options for the rebooting of Batman!

WB is developing a TV series called GOTHAM, which is basically a merger of the two concepts I talked about here -- it will be a show about the police and criminals of Gotham City, but it is set in the past so it also has the young Bruce Wayne elements in it as well.

Then, for the films, Affleck's Batman is basically going to be almost exactly what I described for the characterization, and he will indeed have a bad relationship with Dick Grayson (who will already be an adult and moved away). He also will be relying on a lot of advanced high-tech stuff, much more so than in any previous film. And his whole world of villains etc will already exist and he'll be an older, weary crime fighter.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 28 January 2014

What are some of the best Joker-Batman interactions in comics?


Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker: The scene where Batman drives the Joker batty.

The Joker: [Batman puts the Joker in an arm lock] What are you doing?
Terry McGinnis: Fighting dirty.
The Joker: The real Batman would never -
Terry McGinnis: Told you you didn't know me.
-
Terry McGinnis: [retreats into the rafters] The real Batman never talked to you
-
Terry McGinnis: The real reason you kept coming back was you never got a laugh out of the old man.
The Joker: I'm not hearing this...
Terry McGinnis: Get a clue, clowny! He's got no sense of humor! He wouldn't know a good joke if it bit him in the cape... not that you ever had a good joke.
The Joker: Shut up... shut up!
Terry McGinnis: I mean, joy-buzzers, squirting flowers, lame! Where's the "A" material? Make a face, drop your pants, something!
The Joker: Show yourself!
Terry McGinnis: You make me laugh. But only 'cause I think you're kinda pathetic.
[mimics the Joker laugh]
The Joker: Stop that!
Terry McGinnis: [still laughing] So you fell in a tank of acid, got your skin bleached and decided to become a supervillain. What? You couldn't get a job as a rodeo clown?
[continues laughing]
The Joker: [pulling out some grenades] Don't you dare laugh at me!...
Terry McGinnis: [laughs more] Why? I thought the Joker always wanted to make Batman laugh!
The Joker: YOU'RE NOT BATMAN!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V...This whole movie is available for free on Youtube at beyondthelot's channel.

While it isn't Bruce behind the cowl, I like the idea of Batman finally figuring out the Joker's weak spots. A distant second would be Batman pummeling Mistah J. after he kills Jason Todd- but even then, there was no psychological sophistication behind his pure, hot rage.

Thank you for the A2A, Jesse. :)

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 11 January 2014

Would the climax of The Dark Knight Rises have been more thrilling had Batman broken Bane's back in the same way as he did to him and then spared him from death and kept him alive so as to make his punishment more severe by making him watch the foiling of his nuclear bomb plot?


No, because that would have been overly dramatic and thus would have felt forced. Batman doesn't do what he does for the glory or gloating. He does what's needed by the city and the people. Once the bomb was ticking to explode, destroying Bane became a low-priority. It would have made no sense to spend extra ten minutes just so that Bane realizes that he is wrong and defeated. He had a city to save.

Batman is not about revenge. He is about justice and keeping Gotham safe.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 4 September 2013

Why is Christian Bale (actor) being replaced by Ben Affleck (actor) as Batman in the upcoming Superman sequel?


Because the Batman from the previous three films is over. They are not going to make any more movies about that Batman. Chris Nolan created a final film that ended the Batman series in which Christian Bale played Batman.

So Bale cannot continue to play Batman since his version of Batman is completed and won't be used ever again. The Batman in the next series of films will be a totally different version, unrelated to any of the previous Batman movies. It wouldn't make sense for Christian Bale to return to play a totally new and different Batman. Everyone would make the mistake of thinking he's supposed to be the same Batman character from the other movies, which he's not.

WB considered continuing the Batman world that existed in the Chris Nolan movies and having Christian Bale return as the same Batman from those previous films. But after a lot of discussions, there was no way to make it work because Nolan didn't want his version of Batman to be used again in those ways (in a world with Superman and other superheroes) and because it would erase Nolan's intention of bringing a conclusion to Batman's character arc. Christian Bale wasn't going to agree to come back as the same Batman if Nolan was opposed to the idea, either.

So WB realized the best option was to let the Nolan Batman movies remain ended, and so the studio had to start over with a brand new Batman. Thus they would need to cast a brand new actor for the role. And that's what has now transpired, and Ben Affleck has signed on to play the brand new Batman.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 23 August 2013

Why is Christian Bale (actor) being replaced by Ben Affleck (actor) as Batman in the upcoming Superman sequel?


Because Christian Bale's Batman is over


There are many takes on Batman. Christopher Nolan had Christian Bale portray Batman in a world like something out an American cop drama, except the protagonist and major villains are as durable as John McClane or a Schwarzeneggar hero. That trilogy has fully concluded to Nolan's satisfaction.



Because Nolan's Batman can't exist in a world with superhuman space aliens
now imagine Christian Bale in the Bat-spaceship

Nolan wrote a Batman trilogy in a world where people with actual superhuman powers don't exist. Fighting is done with bullets, punching, and explosions. Batman is pretty smart and has nifty gadgets, but he is not a super genius who can invent a Bat-suit that can rocket him through the vacuum of space, or a Bat-portal to another dimension.

Nolan's gritty 'realistic' Batman just wouldn't fit in the Man of Steel universe where some folks can fly, destroy a city on a whim, and even have super science for space travel. He would either have to break the consistancy of the universe he used to be in, or every other being would have to be heavily downgraded to not instantly vaporize him in a fight because of constant kryptonite shenanigans.

For a new take on Batman, you need a new face to be Batman. We'll see how Ben Afleck does.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 22 August 2013

Why is Christian Bale (actor) being replaced by Ben Affleck (actor) as Batman in the upcoming Superman sequel?


Christian Bale has said numerous times that his story as Batman was completely told in Nolan's trilogy and it wouldn't make sense for him to play the role again.

"We were incredibly fortunate to get to make three [Batman films]. That’s enough. Let’s not get greedy," - to Entertainment Weekly

And he's right.  Nolan's story is nicely packaged and complete.  It would be a bad idea to do anything more with it.  The Man of Steel universe is a different universe, so it should have a different Batman.

As for why Affleck - go watch "The Town".

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 22 August 2013

Who would win in a fight between Iron Man and Batman? Why?


I think this would be a really close fight, but Batman would ultimately prove smarter and more tactical, resulting in his victory.

How? He wouldn't wear the normal Batsuit. He'd go mechanical.
Two examples of this come right to my mind.

The Dark Knight Returns
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=...
In this fight, Batman ultimately wins through his tactical abilities.
He exploits Superman's weakness (Kryptonite), and he keeps up with Clark physically with the suit.
Batman would do the same to Iron Man. I imagine the weakness he'd exploit would be the power core (in a non-lethal manner, of course). Batman would be able to keep up physically with his suit.

The same goes for Batman's suit in the New 52 Batman #8 - Attack on Wayne Manor.


This suit also helps an ailing Batman keep up physically with the members of the Court of Owls, fending them off long enough to ultimately win. Batman would not have been able to do this without the mechanical suit.

As long as Batman has his armory and any mechanical suit with him, he would be able to win. Would it be easy? Not particularly. However, it'd be possible and likely. Both Iron Man and Batman are geniuses and tacticians, but Batman would ultimately prevail due to his experience and fighting expertise. They would be extremely competitive physically with their respective suits/armor. It would ultimately come down to each one's actual ability, a realm in which Batman would overtake Iron Man.

This fight would probably take a form similar to the one partially shown in the above video between Batman and Superman.

Conclusion: Batman would win with a mechanical suit (which is completely fair).

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 3 June 2013

Who would win in a fight between Tyler Durden and the Joker? Why?


In a pure "fight" situation, meaning a physical altercation between them as-is without their minions or advance trick planning etc, I don't think it would be a hard battle to predict -- Tyler Durden would win.

We're using the film incarnations, as the question details say. So, Tyler was presented as clearly a man who didn't give up and could endure brutal abuse, damage, and pain while still fighting back and staying on his feet. His fighting skills improved dramatically over time, and by the end of the film he was able to shoot himself in the face and walk away from it.

The Joker is mentally tough, but physically he wasn't particularly challenging. He relied on props, weapons, and helpers (minions or dogs etc) to weaken or distract his opponents, and he relied on advance planning. In a regular fight, which I think this question is talking about, the Joker wouldn't last long physically. True, he might laugh while Tyler punches him and say, "You have nothing... nothing to threaten me with..." except that Tyler DOES have something to threaten him with in this specific situation -- his strength and fighting skill, since the contest is merely one of physicality. If Tyler kicks the Joker's butt and the Joker can't fight back anymore, it doesn't matter if the Joker thinks it's funny or not, Tyler still won the fight.

Now, if we alter the expectations and say "they are their on-screen personas, and that includes weapons and advance planning," then it's a bit harder to predict. Both men might arrange strange bombings and traps for one another, and both men could bring weapons. If we released Tyler and the Joker into the city and told them to go find and beat one another, and they had a few minions with them, who would come out on top then?

Probably Tyler again. Why? Because the Joker would be making his plans unaware that some of his own men are going to sabotage his efforts, because they're secretly members of a club that they can't talk about...

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 5 April 2013

Reviews of: The Dark Knight Rises (2012 movie)


My full review is here:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mark...

For a short review:

It was the perfect ending to the perfect Batman trilogy. This was the best film of the series, the scope and emotional power of it is beyond any other superhero film to date.

My expectations going in were high, but I had a fear about my expectations being too high. That wasn't a problem, because it was better than I had hoped. It's the best superhero movie I've ever seen, no qualifiers or anything, just the best. And I think it's a shoo-in for an Oscar nomination for Best Picture. Bale's performance is so good, he might get a nod for Best Actor.

It was part "Batman Begins," part "The Dark Knight," and a lot of "Tale of Two Cities." It's a superhero movie, a drama, a war movie, and a prison-break film, all rolled into one.  It delivers everything I had hoped for, and more. I think it had the best plotting, the most complex character arc for Bruce of the whole series, the very best action and fight scenes by far, and a spectacular score.

Bane was excellent, Tom Hardy did more with his eyes and voice than most actors do with their whole face. Catwoman was the definitive on-film version of the character, Anne Hathaway was pitch-perfect.

I loved it, I'll be seeing it several more times for sure, and I think most people will walk out of the theater blown away by what they saw.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 7 March 2013

Is the Joker based on anyone?


According to Wikipedia, the origin is disputed. Bob Kane and Jerry Robinson, the artist, disagree on exactly who had the idea first. However, they agree on who was the visual inspiration for the character's appearance.

Kane says that he came up with the idea when Robinson showed him a Joker playing card, and that his idea for the character was based on the idea of someone who leaves such a card at crime scenes. Robinson doesn't dispute the card story, but says that he came up with the idea entirely himself and provided sketches and a character outline describing the villain's personality.

However, they both agree that the Character's appearance was based on Conrad Veidt, a film actor who appeared in Casablanca and The Man Who Laughs (later the title of a Joker story). Veidt tended to play crazy bad guys or Nazis.


See Questions On Quora

Posted on 14 November 2012

In The Dark Knight, how did the Joker really get his scars?

Anonymous

I always wondered about this too until I realized that it might be the case that neither story was true.
The Joker, as portrayed in the Dark Knight, was a truly selfless individual, wholly devoted to creating chaos in the world and mind of others.  So when he was telling those stories of 'how he got his scars', he is really telling the story of the person he is about to victimize.
In the case of the mobster, the Joker either heard from sources, or concluded from his over masculine behavior, that the man either did not have a father growing up or had a very abusive father. So the Joker narrated a horrific story of an abusive father to press on his emotional scars (if you re-watch the movie, this street-toughened man was unreasonably freaked out by the Joker). In the case of Rachel, the joker thought, up to that point, that Harvey had fled by himself, leaving behind his girlfriend to stand up for him. So the Joker told a story of how he too once tried to protect 'his spouse', but she did not appreciate his attempts and leaves instead, leaving him permanently scarred. It could be the case that, had batman not intervened, the Joker would have cut open Rachel's face to 'introduce a little anarchy' into her and Harvey's relationship.
Now I realized this doesn't exactly answer your question. But I hope this realization is somehow more emotionally satisfying that knowing the exact  event that gave him the scars. In addition, my answer is also very speculative, but I think these speculations are consistent with the Joker's subtle yet manipulative character. And one of the reasons that he's such a memorable villain is because there is so much subtext to his actions

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 19 August 2012

Why did Bruce Wayne chose to become "Bat"man?


In the movie Batman Begins, Bruce chooses the bat for his symbol because he has a bat phobia stemming from a childhood accident. He picks his own most-feared creature and turns it on his enemies, hoping that he will make himself stronger by using a symbol which actually frightens him. Embracing and transcending and eventually becoming the things we fear most can be an extremely powerful personal journey.

In comics, he usually chooses to become a bat simply because a bat appears dramatically to him during an extreme emotional low-point. In one classic panel, he's brooding in front of a statue of his father when a bat flies in the window and lands on it. In another, he sees the bat out of a window. In the wonderful Batman: Year One, the bat actually flies in through a closed window and flings glass everywhere. His decision usually happens in a moment of serendipitous clarity, and he latches very suddenly onto the bat because it symbolizes the kind of dark, predatory thing he wants to become.



As readers, however, we know the real reason he becomes a bat: because it's exactly the brooding, unsettling kind of creature that works well in stories about a dark, corrupt city and in mysteries about fear, madness, and obsession. Bats remind us of vampires, they're unusual and kind of gross-looking, they're associated with spooky holidays and spooky stories, and they have erratic, wild flight-movements that many people find disturbing. Batman is a bat because the comics were designed to have a specific emotional tenor and specific dark themes, and bats symbolize those feelings very well.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 28 July 2012

What factors contributed to The Dark Knight being a better movie than The Dark Knight Rises?


It's always harder to write the last act. In movie three, you have to wrap things up and tie the series with a bow. That's a tough task compared to the freedom of a second movie where the possibilities are still limitless.

The Dark Knight Rises is not as good as The Dark Knight, but the latter was an amazing movie. It had the benefit of the origin story being dealt with and allowed Nolan and company to start the story at full stride.  Meanwhile, The Dark Knight Rises is taxed with being a good movie in its own right AND also concluding the entire trilogy. That's a much trickier task as it could suffer from being a good movie but an average conclusion or vice versa. A finale is obligated to deliver more.

The Empire Strikes Back is almost universally considered a better film than Return of the Jedi. The middle act is usually the strongest part of most trilogies.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 27 July 2012

What's Ra's Al-Ghul's backstory?


This question is definitively answered in The Dark Knight Rises. However, to avoid spoiling anyone, I am FIRST going to answer it using evidence exclusively from the first film. Then I am going to answer it a SECOND time using the explicit evidence from the third Batman film. Do not read past the break unless you have seen TDKR. (I have told the story with the minimum amount of evidence necesarry and avoided several secondary plot twists, but still, you want to see this for yourself. Trust me.)

In Batman Begins, Liam Neeson's character is first identified as "Henri Ducard," a member of the League of Shadows, a secret organization of assassins dedicated to "keeping balance" in the world. Throughout history, they have contributed to the fall of several "decadent" societies, like Rome. They judge that Gotham is emblematic of modern decadence (I can only assume he really means American decadence, but that is not explicitly stated) and have targeted it for their next act of mega-destruction.

Henri Ducard introduces Bruce Wayne to someone he calls "Ra's al-Ghul", the leader of the League of Shadows. He then trains Bruce in the ninja-style combat of the League. During this time, he reveals that he once had a wife, who was somehow taken from him and died.

Near the end of the film, he reveals that he is Ra's al-Ghul, and that all the other people who have borne that name during the course of the film (at least two) were decoys. He really leads the League of Shadows, and he has brought them here to Gotham to destroy its decadence and allow world riches and power to once again be "balanced".

According to the story revealed in TDKR, absolutely everything Ra's/Ducard reveals about himself in particular-- that he leads the League, that he had a wife who died, that he is Ra's, that the League's mission is to destroy civilizations, etc-- was absolutely true. Ra's al-Ghul's only real deception in the first film was to tell the first lie about his identity.


---


THE DARK KNIGHT RISES SPOILERS AHEAD


---



In TDKR, we learn that Ra's al-Ghul was a "foreign" (likely western) mercenary who was active in an unnamed, extremely arid middle-eastern or north African country 30 years prior to TDKR. While working for a local warlord, he fell in love with his daughter, the princess. They were secretly married. The princess became pregnant.

However, they were discovered, and Ra's was sentenced to death. This country had a notable feature: its major jail was actually an enormous pit in the ground, bricked up along the walls like a humongous well. The people who were thrown inside were left in cells at the bottom to rot. However, it was said that whoever could climb the walls of the pit and escape would find freedom. Ra's was going to be thrown into that pit and imprisoned there indefinitely.

However, the princess bargained for her husband's life, and she was thrown into the pit instead, while Ra's was abandoned in the wilderness. He somehow made his way to the League of Shadows. During this time, he trained to become one of them.

Meanwhile, the princess gave birth in the pit jail. Her child grew up entirely underground, "in hell," becoming very tough. The princess was one day killed by other prisoners when her cell was left unlocked-- the implication is that she was sexually violated and murdered. But before anything could happen to the kid, a stranger swooped in and became the kid's protector. This stranger kept the kid alive and well.

Eventually, the kid climbed up the walls of the jail and escaped, leaving the benefactor to a terrible fate. Eventually, Ra's al-Ghul's forgotten offspring tracked him down and asked to join the League of Shadows. Later, however, the child defected from the League over a disagreement of principles with Ra's.

Ra's was, at this point, already the leader of the League. It is implied that much of his internal fire and conviction is born from self-loathing over his decision to leave his wife and unborn baby in a pit-jail for about eight years, and the fact that his child has not forgiven him for this. However, we don't know anything else about his life after his child takes off. It probably continues along unknown assassin-y lines from this point until he meets Bruce Wayne and decides that Bruce is the one destined to bring about Gotham's downfall. Batman Begins proceeds from here.

Unsubstantiated speculation from me and me alone:

I do not think that Ra's was his actual name. In the comics, Ra's al-Ghul is not an ordinary name: it actually means "The Demon's Head." I would not be surprised if Henri Ducard was Liam Neeson's character's real name, and that Ra's al-Ghul was a name passed down between leaders of the League. The actor playing him in TDKR does not appear to be middle-eastern, and he is dressed in what seems to be western, camouflaged military garments from the second half of the 20th century. Additionally, there is a lot of ambiguousness in the first film about which character is really Ra's and whether or not that is a real identity.

If I had to guess, I'd say he was a French soldier-- that he was actually named Henri Ducard-- who quit the French army and spent years as a mercenary before he became a member of the League. After ascending to leadership, he adopted the title Ra's al-Ghul, which is "immortal"-- the immortality of ideas is one of his big topics, isn't it?-- because it embodies a principle and is not linked to any one man. This is why he keeps appointing other Ra's al-Ghuls, even though that behavior doesn't seem to be necesarry to his mission. It would also neatly explain why he is not Arabic, why Ra's al-Ghul isn't an actual human name, and why he trains Bruce: perhaps he wants Bruce to become a leader of the League himself, and act under that identity in the future.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 20 July 2012

What is the probability for The Dark Knight Rises to be box office hit of the year considering that it will not be released in both IMAX and 3D?


The Dark Knight Rises is not being released in many more IMAX theaters than The Avengers, and maybe not ANY more than the latter film. It seems they are both slated to be screened at close to 300 or so theaters during their early runs in the USA. So in terms of IMAX, The Dark Knight Rises doesn't really have any big advantage.

In addition, The Dark Knight Rises is not in 3D, and thus lacks the added financial bonus of 3D ticket pricing. Worldwide, this will be a HUGE factor, because outside of the USA Batman movies are not nearly as popular as domestically. In 2008, The Dark Knight made LESS money in foreign markets than it did in North America -- it is in fact the ONLY film in the top 34 highest grossing films of all time that made more money in North America than in the rest of the world. Batman strongly reflects a particularly American perspective and sentiment about vigilantism and superheroes, and just doesn't have the same level of popularity that other superheroes have overseas relative to their domestic popularity.

The Dark Knight Rises is also clearly a very adult, dark film, and not at all the sort of movie parents are going to allow their younger children (meaning little kids) to go see. This also affects its global popularity as a summer superhero blockbuster -- it'll still be popular, make no mistake about that, but it won't have the same sort of broader audience size in terms of families showing up with younger children, nor the same sort of feel-good popularity that other superhero movies get.

Comparing the ticket sales from the 2008 Batman film, and considering adjusted-for-inflation ticket prices, The Dark Knight Rises appears to need a pretty substantial increase in audience attendance over the previous Batman movie, if it hopes to beat the early weekend attendance of The Avengers, too.

So here are the two main facts to remember:

1.  The Dark Knight will of course be a huge success, will make tons of money, and might be the biggest and most popular and highest grossing film in the USA this year;

2.  The Avengers almost surely is going to gross more than The Dark Knight Rises worldwide due to the simple math and facts regarding all of the advantages it has in its favor, while The Hobbit might beat both of those films due to the massive global popularity of that series and the added 3D and IMAX prices etc.

I wrote a whole article about this over at Forbes, so I'll link to that because I get into the numbers in more detail in the article, if you're interested in seeing more specifics:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mark...

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 23 May 2012

Has Batman ever killed anyone?


Yes, his original creators wrote him as a gritty pulp hero who had no qualms with ending the lives of criminal scum. Since then D.C. adapted a no-kill policy into his backstory but Batman has ended some lives in the recent Christopher Nolan movies.

In Batman Begins, he blows up a whole monastery full of ninjas in a fit of rage. He is quite sure he killed them because years later when Bruce Wayne hears the name Ra's Al Ghul at a party he gives a shocked expression that reads "What!? But I KILLED HIM years ago in Tibet!" Batman finishes the job when he  deathtraps the real Ra's Al Ghul in a speeding train that crashes (interestingly this is how Doctor Octopus planned to kill Spiderman in his respective film).

In The Dark Knight his most notable kill is pushing Harvey Dent into a hole, killing him with the fall. He may have killed some people when he was driving on his motorcycle shooting grenades at cars too, but that wasn't explicit.

You could say (Nolan's) Batman does not premeditate any murders, but he is still fallible to emotionally-driven manslaughter.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 12 May 2012

Has Batman ever killed anyone?


Yes, Batman started out in the first comics carrying a gun and regularly killing criminals by shooting them, strangling them, knocking them off buildings, knocking them into vats of acid (not the Joker, but another dude in the first Batman story), pits, etc.

The rule against killing came later.

Batman "kind of" killed the Joker in the 1989 film Batman, stating his intention by saying outright "I'm going to kill you," and then tying the Joker's leg to a statue that yanked him from a helicopter and sent him plummeting to the ground, dead.

In Batman Returns, Batman overtly kills two people: he turns the batmobile around and blasts the jet engine onto one of Penguin's circus freaks, burning the man alive. Later, he sticks a bomb down the pants of a Strong Man and kicks the guy into a hole where the bomb -- and the man -- blow up. Batman grins at this killing, by the way.

There are other gray areas where Batman can be blamed for maybe round-about "causing" a situation that killed someone, but these are the best examples of Batman outright killing people.

*EDIT:  I should note that there are instances of Batman killing people in modern comics history, not merely those early comics. In the mini-series The Cult, for example, Batman is drugged and uses a submachine gun to kill someone. In another 1980's story, he was bitten by the vampire Monk and turned into a vampire temporarily, causing him to kill someone. He has also accidentally killed people, if that counts. Oh, and if we wanted to consider instances where it seems his clear intention was to kill someone -- although it later turned out to not have killed them after all -- we could consider that he tried to trap KGBeast in an underground tomb to die of suffocation/starvation. There are probably a couple of other instances I'm forgetting, too.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 12 May 2012

What are the roadblocks to a Justice League movie being made?


I think the biggest obstacle is the risk of looking like an attempt to cash in on, and copy, the Avengers.  WB had an opportunity to get their JLA movie out there first, but the let it go.  A bunch of pre-release buzz that compared it to the Avengers, and found it not as good, would be box office poison.

On the positive side - an advantage WB/DC has is that unlike the Avengers, DC doesn't need to do a bunch of movies to introduce and setup a fan base for each character.  While six years ago the average person had no idea who Iron Man or Thor was, the characters of Most of the JLA are known to almost everyone - thanks to TV series, cartoons, and merchandizing.

Personally, I think the smartest thing WB could do is bring in Bruce Timm and his team that did the incredible Justice League animated series, of about a decade ago, to develop an epic story.

They could one-up the Avengers by doing a Hall of Doom or Crime Syndicate story with a team of villains.  Timm and co have shown its possible to do that without overcrowding the story.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 2 May 2012

Which actor did the best job as Batman in film?


That's a tough call, as it comes down to two for me: Christian Bale and Michael Keaton.

There's no doubt that Bale is brilliant. After all, this is the man who pulled off one of the best and most convincing psychotic performances ever, in my opinion, in American Psycho. And watching his transformation in The Machinist is almost heart-stopping. So you expect him to succeed at the role of Bruce Wayne/Batman. If anything, ol' Bruce can look to the persona of Patrick Bateman and think, "There, but for the grace of God, go I."

So I think it's more of the shock factor that makes me give the nod to Michael Keaton. I mean, this is Mr. Mom, Johnny Dangerously, Beetlejuice. The fact that this man, a largely comedic actor (up until that point in his career), played--and brilliantly pulled off the role of--Bruce Wayne/Batman, is a testament to his sheer range and likability. (I need to disclaim here that Michael Keaton is one of the actors I respect the most because of his performance in my favorite theatrical drama, My Life. So I am a bit biased).

I think the difference of between the two also boils down to the tone of their respective movies. Nolan's Dark Knight movies are beautiful, with superb acting, excellent writing, spot-on direction, breathtaking cinematography, and seamless special effects. But Burton's Batman films were a lot more fun. Jack Nicholson as the Joker ("If you're gonna go, go with a smile" and "Wait'll they get a load of me") and Danny Devito as The Penguin, the over-the-top gothic sets, the subtle comedic undertones ("I'm Batman. I'm Batman..."). I can honestly say I enjoyed those movies more, even if the Nolan films are technically superior.

So, for me, it's Michael Keaton. Christian Bale is a better actor, hands down, looking at his whole body of work. But Keaton captured a fun and likable side to Bruce Wayne/Batman that Bale never has.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 1 May 2012

Which actor did the best job as Batman in film?


Christian Bale.

I'll give you some reasons for my selection... [SPOILER ALERT: PLOT DETAILS FOLLOW]

Take the film The Dark Knight and watch a few key scenes. Watch Bale portraying Bruce Wayne at the dinner with Rachel and Dent.  Then watch Bale as Bruce in the scene where he's weeping and asking if he brought death upon Rachel.  Then watch Bale as Bruce at the fundraiser for Dent, when Bruce is on the balcony telling Rachel that he can finally stop being Batman.  Then watch Bale as Bruce when he rides his motorcycle to the memorial for Commissioner Loeb, and he finds the cops blindfolded and tied up in the building.

In the first example, he's the witty lighthearted playboy. In the second, he's an emotional wreck and a man filled with doubt and fear of not living up to everyone's -- including his own -- expectations. In the third, he's a man in love reaching out to be vulnerable yet strong enough to take the risk and embrace an uncertain future. In the last example, he's a detective operating in the twilight between his daytime persona and nighttime identity, he is tense and silent, careful and like a spy, he uses a version of his "Batman" voice despite being in plain clothes, he's all business and yet not the intimidating, animalistic ninja-like presence he becomes at night.

Look at how Bale portrays all of those different personas and aspects of Bruce Wayne seamlessly. They are at once very different from one another, and yet never feel like he's portraying completely different characters -- you can sense and feel Bruce in all of them, and they all come from a true part of his personality somewhere in his heart. Pay attention to the effortless shift from one to the other, the nuances of Bale's body language, his walk, his eyes and eyebrows -- look at the way playboy Bruce sits, compared to the way Bruce sits at the computers in the "bat-bunker," or look at how he struts when he's walking as a playboy compared to how he seems like every muscle is coiled when he's walking from his motorcycle to the building later.

Now look at him in the cowl as Batman.  Look at the scene where Batman confronts Dent while Dent is playing fake "Russian roulette" with a prisoner.  Watch Batman's face, his body language, his voice -- it's like a totally different actor is under that cowl. If someone told us that another actor played Batman in the mask, most of us would be able to believe it. Because when Bale takes on Bruce's final, most dominant persona, he transforms completely. Go ahead, play that Batman scene described above, alongside one of the Bruce Wayne scenes. Watch how much an animal-like stride informs Batman's movements. Look how, despite the armored bulk, he seems at once powerful and menacing yet graceful and fluid. His voice isn't just subtly changed -- he growls, he is ferocious, he is the monster villains fear him to be.

Watch Batman in the interrogation room with the Joker. Watch that scene as he slowly builds to the boiling point and erupts, listen to his voice and look at his eyes, look at his face. Bale conveys the desperation, the fury, the near homicidal rage and helplessness with just body language and tone of voice -- and it's pretty hard to inject subtlety and nuance into screaming, but he does it.

And yet, as much as this Batman is a creature entirely apart from the human Bruce Wayne beneath the cowl, there are moments when he reins in the "monster" and the man shows through.  Recall when Rachel is thrown from the window and Batman leaps to her rescue, remember how after their safe landing she asks about Dent and Batman's voice softens -- not entirely, because when he's Batman the persona is dominant -- to assure her Dent is safe.  Then recall the end of the film, when he tries to convince Two-Face to surrender. Think about that moment when Dent ask why he was the only one who lost everything, how Batman hesitates a second, and how when Batman responds, "It wasn't," we once more see the man showing through the "monster" as his voice softens and almost breaks with the surge of emotion and pain.

I loved Heath Ledger's performance as the Joker, it was brilliant and worthy of the Oscar he was awarded posthumously.  However, I think people fail to fully appreciate Bale's own great performance in the film -- and in the one preceding it -- in part because Bale makes it appear so effortless, he lets us take it entirely for granted that we will see all of these complex differences within the same man. Bale's sublime portrayal is one of his best on film, and yet one of his most underrated, and it's a real shame. I am hoping that perhaps with The Dark Knight Rises if he delivers (as I've no doubt to expect he will) a performance as great as the last two films but with the added elements I know about the character and arc in the upcoming film, maybe he'll have a shot at getting some AA love next Oscar season. Too early to really suggest such things about a film we've not seen, of course, but when I think about Bale's Batman and Bruce Wayne, and consider what's coming in this final film to end the whole legend, I can't help but expect the exceptional.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 1 May 2012

Who would win in a fight between Hercules and Batman?


Batman.

This is Batman we're talking about.  This is the guy who has a chunk of Kryptonite stowed away just in case he ever needs to stop Superman.

Hercules is killed when he puts on a robe that has Hydra's blood on it.  Bruce Wayne has the time and money to hunt down Hydra's blood and weaponize it to use against Hercules.

Hercules is so screwed because Batman does his homework.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 16 February 2012

What does Jack Nicholson think of Heath Ledger's performance as Joker in The Dark Knight?


There is no reason to believe that Nicholson has seen The Dark Knight.

As my good friend Anon has already stated, Nicholson told MTV he was furious about not being asked to play the part again, even going so far as to wonder if it was a mistake, as if they had intended to ask him, but something got messed up in the front office. He says "It's a part I always thought I should play."

When asked if he would see the new film, he responded, "I'm not inclined to watch it because of what I said. But if it's a good movie, I'll catch up with it somewhere. I don't think they ever really captured Tim Burton's spirit [since he stopped being involved]. They kind of drove the franchise into the ground." [1]

Clearly, Nicholson believes that he and Burton did the movie "correctly", and that any other attempts are therefore wrong.

Michael Keaton, on the other hand, who was Batman to Nicholson's Joker, had nothing but praise for The Dark Knight. He said, in an interview with the LA Times, "I never saw the other ones [in the 1990s] but I saw most of the one that starred Heath Ledger which, if you ask me, is off-the-charts. Amazing stuff. The whole thing is great, everyone involved is great.That approach and that tone is exactly what I wanted to do with the third film when we first talked about it. [...] I wanted to go darker." [2]

[1] http://www.mtv.com/news/articles... http://herocomplex.latimes.com/2...

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 7 January 2012

Wouldn't Bruce Wayne's vast wealth be better spent improving Gotham City through philanthropy?


He spends a lot on philanthropy.  This is established both in the recent films and for well over a generation in the comics.  There was an old story in the 70's where at some point Batman even yanked a fistful of bills out of a utility belt compartment to help a community organizer keep a drop-in center afloat.

Gotham is a singular place, and if you're a person of good will you've got to be very careful there where you put your money.  It's a 3- or 400-year-old Puritan settlement among whose founders were ancestors of the Waynes, and from at least its first day in British hands it has had a structural underbelly of venality and avarice.  We're talking witch hunts; rape and murder of native residents; double-ledgering of its earliest tax collections; that sort of thing.  It is, of its nature, a corrupt place, and the best that the Batman can do is ameliorate that corruption.  It gets its nasty tendrils into every aspect of the lives of people of the city and, short of gutting Gotham and re-booting it like a haunted house, the forces in whose interest it is to turn best intentions to evil will retain - if not always the upper hand - a measure of control of every unguarded move within the city.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 24 October 2011

Who would win in a fight between Batman and Spider-Man? Why?


Spiderman is extremely quick and agile. That and his spider-sense allow him to get in exactly one joke before Batman beats him into submission.

Peter Parker, like most Marvel heros, has no combat training. He gets by on various powers and the general stupidity of his gallery of villains. Batman is not the Green Goblin. He would know all of Spideman's tendencies and weaknesses and would systematically reduce the web-slingers options down to "eat bat-fist."

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 19 October 2011

Who would make the best Batman of all time?


Daniel Day Lewis is my choice. He could portray the intelligence, intensity, physicality, decency and torment of the character better than anyone else I can think of.

Lewis is simply an extraordinary actor. As much as I love Bale in the role, I think Lewis would bring an even more fascinating, layered characterization to Batman and Bruce Wayne. And as he's shown in several roles, including The Boxer, he is as physical as any actor to play Batman and as charming as any to play Bruce Wayne.

And yes, the eyes. Can you imagine Lewis' eyes peering out from behind the cowl? He really wouldn't even need the costume to strike fear into the hearts of criminals. DDL would be the definitive Dark Knight in my opinion.


"I'm Batman."

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 24 September 2011

Who will be Batman after Christian Bale?


EDIT: Well the correct answer to this questions apparently will turn out to be... CHRISTIAN BALE -- Christopher Nolan In Talks To Oversee Justice League

Most likely, it will be someone that's not on anybody's radar right now. But here are some names I'd toss into the mix as worthy contenders who might eventually make the eventual official short-list:

  1. Ryan Gosling -- Oscar nominated and easily among the best performers of his generation, Gosling would be akin to the Christian Bale casting decision, a great actor bringing serious weight and dimension to the role.  He's also been a big fan-favorite for several roles already, including recently Green Lantern, so he's certainly going to show up on a lot of fan favorite lists for the part of Batman, and keep in mind that the casting of Christian Bale was influenced by a widespread and vocal fanbase calling for him to get the part.
  2. Armie Hammer -- Since he was previously cast as Batman in the defunct Justice League: Mortal film project (he even got so far as trying on the costume), Hammer might actually have pretty strong odds of making the official short-list and being offered the role.  He's a strong performer with charisma and a quality that makes him a natural fit for a character people look to for leadership, and he's definitely got the physique for the part.
  3. Josh Hutcherson -- Turning 20 next year (the same year Christopher Nolan's Batman series draws to a close), Hutcherson wouldn't take over the role for at least two to three years, at which time he'd be 22-23, so this is casting for a much younger incarnation of Batman and clearly would be designed to establish a series that runs longer than just three films.  Hutcherson is a such a great actor, with a raw pent-up energy and emotion, and he previously auditioned for the part of Spider-Man in the reboot (he even recorded a really cool audition tape of himself as Peter Parker using his newly acquired powers to stop some school bullies). For a younger Bruce/Batman, Hutcherson is definitely a top contender in my book.
  4. Matt Lauria -- A rising star and fitting comfortably in the late-20s/early-30s range that studios and comics tend to prefer for superheroes, Lauria could bring a vulnerability to the charm of Bruce Wayne and a rough edge to Batman. He kind of reminds me vaguely of Viggo Mortensen, whom a lot of fans regularly mention for just about any and every role in a Batman film, including Batman himself for a Justice League movie. He's probably the biggest long-shot name on my list here, but I think he has a lot of talent and could be a dark horse candidate for the role down the road.
  5. Liam Hemsworth -- Hey, his brother Chris took the Thor role (both of them tried out for the part), so it would be fun if Liam grabbed the high profile role of Batman instead. This would be another case of younger casting (Hemsworth being 21 now, and so probably about 24-25 when any Batman reboot starts filming) but with his star rising and having already tried to nab a superhero role, I'd expect Hemsworth to at least let it be known that he's interested in the role of Batman.
  6. Jake Gyllenhaal -- Moving back toward older casting in the low-30s age range, Gyllenhaal is another actor who has long been on the wish-list of many fans to appear in some capacity in a superhero film franchise. He's already getting some buzz among fans discussing the future of the Batman franchise, he in fact tried out for the part of Batman when Chris Nolan took over the series (apparently it came down to a choice between Bale and Gyllenhaal, so he got pretty darn close), and his sister has appeared in the current series of films. A superb performer who would bring serious weight to the role, he is another name that I do expect will end up on the eventual short-list when the studio starts drawing up the list.
  7. Joe Manganiello -- Look toward possibly a Batman reboot that forgoes the "early years" and instead picks up with an already-established, older Batman, Manganiello has a lot to bring to the table. He's a terrific actor, has a strong fanbase, he looks like a superhero, he was on the short-list to play Superman in the reboot film, and he's another fan-favorite for a lot of different superhero roles. Yes, he'd be almost 40 by the time filming got under way, but he looks younger and has too many positives in his favor to leave him off the list.

And as a bonus answer, I want to add some other casting suggestions.

For the role of Police Commissioner James Gordon:

1.  Sam Rockwell -- My top choice to play Gordon in a new series of Batman films, Rockwell can bring a quality and weight to the character to embody the mixture of weariness and steadfastness the role needs.

2.  Denzel Washington -- Obviously one of the greats, Washington was once upon a time on my own personal shortlist of actors to play Batman. Now, I think he's one of the best options for Gordon, having a certainty and leadership quality combined with a sense of humanity and softheartedness that would work great for the character.

3.  Ed Harris -- The gruff, grizzled veteran portrayal of Gordon would be done to perfection if Harris got the role. I can already see him with a mustache and cigar, wrapped in his trench coat and standing on a rooftop waiting for Batman to arrive for their nightly discussion.

For the Role of Alfred the faithful butler:

1.  John Cleese -- I'd love to see Cleese portray Alfred as the snarky, insubordinate gentleman Frank Miller always wrote him to be. Like David Niven with biting satirical humor and mockery, sort of.

2.  Geoffrey Rush -- I know he's Australian, but he's also a phenomenal actor who could pull off the role perfectly.  I'd tone down the snark for his Alfred, but only a bit and make it more subtle perhaps, while retaining the more fatherly element Michael Caine brought to the role.

3.  Hugh Laurie -- This is a different sort of casting angle, with a younger (but still middle-aged) Alfred who might be given a larger role to play in the stories, at least in terms of his military background as a medic and relating his own military experience during wartime with Bruce/Batman's war on crime. I think he'd bring a unique flavor of intellectual argument and camaraderie with Bruce, being less a replacement father-figure and more a big brother/uncle role.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 7 September 2011

Why is Batman Mark Hughes' favorite superhero?


The quick, easiest answer is that I began reading Batman at a very young age. In fact, Batman comic books are among the books that helped me learn to read as a child. My older brothers were Batman fans, and they would read me their comic books and later let me borrow them constantly to read and reread. I also read Spider-Man and Superman as a child, and likewise loved them, but Batman was the first and most consistent in my first couple of reading years, and while I was a big fan of other characters as well, none had the same degree of impact on me as did Batman.

Why?

I can think of a number of reasons Batman was so particularly and consistently my favorite. My older brothers were a big influence on me, and any superhero they thought was cool, so did I. In addition, Batman comics were the most numerous in our household at that time because they were avid readers of the monthlies.

Over time, as I got into elementary school and started reading them even more often, the stories were those of Steve Englehart and Denny O'Neil, some of the greatest Batman stories ever written. And the character's detective skills, the urban environment and crime stories, the darkness and mood, all appealed to me a great deal.



As a young boy, I felt great sympathy for Bruce as a child who witnessed the death of his parents, and who grew up defined by that moment so that it turned him into an instrument first of vengeance and then of justice -- and his journey drew sharply the lines separating the two concepts. I remember very clearly when one of my brothers told me (I am paraphrasing since I don't recall the exact words, but this is pretty close, I'm sure), "He couldn't get revenge for himself, but when he grew up he realized it's better to get justice for others." Even though I was still pretty young, I got what he meant and thought about it constantly from that moment on.

Into my teen years, Batman was always there, but moved to the background as I focused more on the teenage angst of Peter Parker and how even as Spider-Man he was unfairly treated and his greatest enemies were not super-villains but the daily moments of his real life. Then, in 1986, into my life came Frank Miller, and Batman returned to forever dominate my love of comics and mythological storytelling.



The Dark Knight Returns stunned me, and in its first book (from a total of four) it provided me with the most emotionally powerful, insightful, and gripping portrayal of Batman I'd ever seen. The final page is arguably the most perfect of any comic book, ever. With one simple sentence -- "I see... a reflection, Harvey... a reflection," -- Miller took my breath away by encapsulating so perfectly the struggle within Bruce for the future of his soul and identity. I love this book, and so I was incredibly happy to hear that Miller was writing the official "reboot" of Batman comics the following year. When Batman: Year One arrived, it exceeded my every expectation as a one-two punch from Miller than instantly cemented his place forever as one of the greatest Batman writers who ever lived.


Look at that image a moment -- Batman as a creature leaping from the shadows, Jim Gordon leveling his pistol to defend himself. The gray colors, the simple lines, the dominance of dark and blackness, this was one of my first encounters with noir storytelling in comics in which I could actually fully appreciate it. No super-villains here, it was all mobsters and corrupt public servants and street criminals. This is a pure "cops-and-criminals" urban crime story, in which an obsessed man dressed in a scary costume happens to show up stalking the criminals while the cops slowly realize they need to try to hunt this caped madman down.

It was a modern telling of those oldest Batman stories in the 1930s and 1940s, when he regularly faced off against thugs and gangsters, in which he was a terrifying angry vigilante only slowly coming to realize his more important role as a symbol for the city to rally behind.

So upon the firm foundation of Englehart and O'Neil, Miller added to my life experience with Batman, and I began to think a lot about what differentiates him from the other characters whom I also love to read and of whom I'm a big fan, yet none of whom could ever hope to replace Batman as my favorite. And the answer was pretty easy to see.

Batman is a mortal, and however much he trains his body to the point of physical perfection in fighting and gymnastics etc, it's nothing compared to how he has trained his mind. He has no superhuman abilities, he relies on his wits and intellect, he is forever seeking to improve his knowledge, and he is determined to apply that intellect and knowledge in every possible way to help others and improve people's lives while doing everything in his power to stop injustice and bullying and inequity. He wears a costume not for his own benefit, but for the protection of those close to him and in order to promote the idea of himself as a symbol more important than his identity as a "hero." Batman's costume was meant to serve a practical purpose largely missing from most other costumed heroes -- he wants to strike fear, to look like a creature more than a man. And deep down, buried amid his motivations and justifications, there is a scared and lonely child left behind forever in the flash of a gun barrel, by a violent reality that taught him a horrible lesson about how unfair and ugly and painful the world can be.

We are all at one time or another in our lives confronted with moments that define us, often moments that force us to define ourselves, and usually we aren't prepared for them and so they are all the more successful at truly revealing our most vulnerable sides and unspoken truths. Here, in Batman, was someone who fought hard against allowing this moment to define him in negative or paralyzing ways, who wanted with every fiber in his being to be better than his worst or most painful moments, and to turn loss into the hope to survive and to rise above such injuries. It is, at every moment, a never ending tale of redemption. Batman fights to redeem himself, but more importantly to redeem all of us -- even, in many ways, his enemies, for whom he holds out hope for their victory over their own inner demons (as Miller puts it far more eloquently in The Dark Knight Returns at one point).



It's no coincidence that the recent Batman films by Christopher Nolan mirror most of the stories, periods, tone, and feel of these Batman comics that are my favorites and that defined my love of the character. So these films reinforced my attachment to Batman and all of the reasons he is, and will always be, my favorite character.


EDIT: I made a glaring omission here, and I need to mention it. When talking about the comics I read as a child, I focused on Batman, and then when mentioning my teen years I focused on Spider-Man. In both cases, however, I should have talked about the other character who has most consistently been on my radar as a fan, one who was always on my collecting list even when others -- including at times Batman or Spider-Man -- fell off my list, one who I have to admit probably pound for pound had the greatest comics written for him during the previous decade, and who from childhood to this day remains one of my all-time most loved characters: Captain America. I saw the film and every bit of my lifetime of admiration and enjoyment of this character came rushing back, so I cannot possibly fail to give him his due here.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 23 July 2011

In The Dark Knight, why did the Joker steal money from the mob?


It was part of an orchestrated plan to bring chaos to ALL the people of Gotham, not just the law abiding citizens but also the money grubbing criminal elements.  Remember, he is on nobody's side but his own.  He has equal disdain for the mobsters as he does the police, citizens, etc.  The only person he truly respects is Batman.

He could have carried out his plan without the endorsement of the mobsters but by including them, he was able to turn it around on them in the end by burning the money he reclaimed from Lau and taking over crime in Gotham ("This city deserves a better class of criminal and I'm going to give it to them").  He also needed their inside connections at Gotham PD to kidnap Rachel Dawes and Harvey Dent.  He basically used them to carry out his ultimate goal and had a little fun at their expense along the way.  Truly, one of the most complex yet insanely relatable villains of any comic series.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 14 July 2011

How was Heat used as inspiration for Christopher Nolan's film The Dark Knight?


Chris Nolan discussed the influence in relation to the opening sequence in The Dark Knight, which involves a big bank heist committed by the Joker and his crew.  Nolan took inspiration for this scene, including trying to make it innovative and fun to watch while also attempting to maintain a strong sense of realism (usually he goes for illusionary realism, but for this opening he wanted a more directly realistic feel), from the big heist sequence in Heat, which involves a bank robbery followed by a massive gun battle in the streets of downtown L.A.  The sequence is famous and among the greatest heists and gunfights in cinema history.

Nolan, a fan of Michael Mann (the director of Heat), wanted to open The Dark Knight with a bold, memorable heist sequence, so he took his inspiration from the best.

We might also note that both films are very frequently cast in blue tones, both maintain a relationship between the criminals and cops/heroes that's at once adversarial but also familiar to the point of almost feeling intimate at times. The city plays a recurring role throughout the film, visually and as a presence you can often see reflected in the personalities of key players. Both films are overall serious urban crime thrillers, too. So these are some other sorts of similarities they share. The main one, though, is the direct influence of Heat with regard to the opening heist in Nolan's film.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 11 July 2011

In the Dark Knight, what was the technology used by Batman to spy on everyone, and how did he design a system to deal with that type of data volume?


Okay... I'll give it shot...

Batman's bat-sonar technology is more comparable to Echelon than Hadoop, I think. The basis of the technology is the ability to tap into every telephone in a city, and to then monitor all incoming and outgoing calls.  From there, it uses a sonar-like imaging to detect distances to and from different echos and vibrations, distances to other phones and thus to voices ON those other phones, the degree of vibration of a phone's "diaphragm" due to surrounding sounds (measurement of this can produce either accurate recording of the sounds, or be used for sonar distancing), and triangulating the position of certain sounds at certain locations compared to GPS coordinates (allowing a more accurate comparison for distances, for example if a ringing church bell is known to be at a certain location and a phone picking up the ringing bell is at another GPS location, you could figure out a more accurate reading for the location of some car driving by between the two locations), and other similar data.

Then, on top of that less accurate layer of information, Batman's system fed a signal emitting a frequency pitched to be inaudible to the ear, but which acted to send directed waves that bounced back to be read and analyzed for a second layer of information providing an even more detailed set of references and imaging.

This data was then fed into the computer system that analyzed it and, using presumably Google Maps and other satellites and programs (including probably any and all data on file for building schematics, blueprints, square footage, etc, plus addresses of people and census data for households etc), to create different 3D layered simulations like a detailed video game that creates a realistic scale map of a city in which the game takes place (think of Fallout and the DC setting, for example, but on a much more elaborate and accurate scale). This model was then layered atop the data feed from the phones, using reference points and GPS positioning to adjust and tweak the model to a more accurate depiction and to fill in any gaps in the data.

Finally, this 3D rendering of the city was altered to continuously update with incorporation of the most recent real-time data for people, cars, and stationary objects within a certain radius of focus -- meaning when Fox zoomed in on an area, more and more focus of data stream would be directed at that area in order to optimize the mapping of that area. That's why the more he zoomed in, the more detail he could see. Likewise, for Batman, where he's at, there is this same sort of directed focus to optimize the data and provide the best readings and imaging.  This detailed situational data is then rendered in 3D within the 3D map of the city.

This of course required computer systems on par with the largest, fastest, most advanced systems in the world. Bruce obtained government grants in order to gain access to the types of technology and computer systems -- including, presumably, Echelon -- that were required to take in and make sense of the data he'd be supplying. He had to have redundant systems built at Wayne Enterprises, too, it would be sensible to conclude, and the whole thing was probably among the biggest spying operations ever conducted in history, despite the fact it lasted only one evening.

And of course, this is all me taking the little bits we know from the film, little bits we know about technologies that might be related, little bits of actual info about Echelon and related spying technologies, and then just using my imagination and best guesswork to come up with an explanation of the system. I'm sure a computer tech and spy masters could provide a much better, more accurate assessment of how the system would have to work, but for now I think this explanation works well enough.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 7 July 2011

How could Robin be in a Christopher Nolan-esque Batman (creative franchise) film without camping it up or ruining the mood/tone of the film? Would it be possible without compromising the fundamentals of Robin's character as we know him?


First, disclaimer:  I am a fan of solo Batman stories, I think the character works best alone and I agree with a lot of the arguments about why Batman would not bring a young teenage kid with him on patrol.  I am a big fan of the Chris Nolan films, and I think that the illusionary realism of the Nolanverse makes it even harder to fit in a sidekick like Robin.

Now, reverse-disclaimer:  All of the above being said, I also feel Robin cannot be denied as a crucial, defining aspect of the Batman myths, nor should anyone discount the quality and depth of the character of Dick Grayson or some of the subsequent Robins (such as Tim Drake, or the current Damian Wayne).  Robin plays an important role in Bruce Wayne's arc, not only the father-son aspect but also by raising the specter of Bruce's conception of a future in which someone must carry on the mantle of Batman perhaps, not to mention the way Robin's character allows Bruce to work through his own trauma and come to terms with his own path in life.  Finally, a key consideration is also that at some point, a Robin has to die in Batman's life, because how he deals with that loss and his role in, and the subsequent guilt and perhaps blame (imagined or real) he sense from Alfred and others, are major elements of Bruce's character development.

So, my preferences might be for Batman solo in Gotham, but I also appreciate Robin and think he's a necessary element of Batman's myths, and I feel ultimately he even become important to introduce at some point.

Whether that point arises in the Nolan films or not, however, is a good question. We've been told this is Nolan's final Batman film, and that he plans to completely wrap up his Batman world with this film by "ending things" in some way that completes this franchise. That's right, after the upcoming third film, there will not be another Batman story in the Nolanverse with any of the characterizations and continuity that exists in these Nolan films. They are going to completely reboot the franchise after the third film.

That means Nolan's entire Batman universe will exist solely within these three films. There is speculation that Nolan's going to do something dramatic to signal the "end" of the franchise, such as killing Batman or having him retire/quit. While I personally don't believe we'll see any death-of-Batman story, I think Nolan will definitely do something dramatic as a way to put "The End" on this film.

One way to do that would be to introduce Robin in some manner.  The two ways to go would be to either actually have Robin featured as a character throughout the film (interpreted in some Nolanverse manner), or to introduce Dick Grayson late in the film and end it with Bruce taking the boy in -- or maybe just Bruce on his way out on a date, with two tickets to the Flying Graysons at the circus -- as a way to end by saying "and now the future of Batman is set in motion."

I think the first option (using Robin in the film throughout the story) is possible within illusionary realism and without losing the fundamentals of the character.  Consider, just as one hypothetical example:  Dick Grayson's family die early in the film, Bruce offers to take the boy in until other arrangements can be made, and then at some point in the story Bane and Talia (and maybe a third character...) attack Bruce, revealing his Batman identity to Dick. Or perhaps Dick figures it out through sleuthing. Or maybe Dick wants revenge to kill whomever murdered his parents, and Bruce stops him by offering a different path (becoming his apprentice).

However it happens, Dick knows Bruce is Batman, and his early role is shown in the film -- scouting out locations and gathering data, basic reconnaissance stuff at first but not actually getting involved in patrols or fighting crime. Late in the film, Dick could decide to sneak out and follow Batman somewhere, and then that leads to him being around for the final climactic events. The film ends with Dick convincing Bruce to train him not just as a helper, but as a true ally who needs to begin training now, at an early age, to be ready sooner than Bruce was (Dick could make a compelling argument of "What if you'd started your training when you were my age, instead of in college? Think of how much better you'd be now, how much we can do in the future!").

I think a scaled-back involvement level, and Robin only getting involved in the real "crime fighting" by accident through sneaking out after Batman, would keep it from being campy, and allow a basis for showing Dick as a tough, smart kid who has the potential that convinces Bruce to start really training him at the end, and we know it will lead to this great team in the future.

There are a number of ways to easily adapt the suit into something workable -- remember, if he's not a kid sidekick, he can just have an outfit that hints at his future role as "Robin" and that doesn't have to be intended to protect him against bullets etc. So, for example, what if they borrowed the idea from the recent Batman annuals, and Robin isn't just an acrobat but also does parkour or other urban-gymnastic stuff and he wears green cargo pants with his red hooded sweatshirt that has his family "team" symbol on it (the Flying Graysons maybe using a yellow and red robin emblem? just an idea). He could tie a black bandana over the top of his head  and cut eye-holes in it as a quick spur-of-the-moment disguise when he follows Batman.

That's just a rough top-of-my-head example of how to HINT at the Robin suit in this film, to suggest what he'll do down the road, since in this one we only see him join Bruce's life and the film ends maybe with the scene of Bruce administering the famous candle light oath to Dick. That'd be a helluva closing scene, eh?

That same scene works if Dick is only introduced as a background character in the film, and Bruce just takes him in and we get the implication that the story now continues into the future as a new chapter in Batman's life, the end. Or, as I said, maybe the film ends with Bruce on his way to see the Flying Graysons and all we hear is the name, and we know what it means and that the future will change his life forever.

If Batman's going to die or quit, then they might present an entire "Robin" element that's basically the aforementioned example in which Dick is throughout the film and dons the outfit hinting at Robin, but maybe even a more directly crime-fighting suit that mixes the Robin outfit with the Nightwing outfit, and the "team" of Batman and Robin is a one-time event in which Bruce takes Dick Grayson in and then Dick figures out who Batman is, and comes to his aid against the villains who killed Dick's family. Batman is injured or dies, and this leaves Dick to decide to begin training himself to take up the mantle of Batman some day. That's one alternate way to radically reinterpret the Batman myths. I doubt that kind of thing will happen, though.

There's also the chance for a very unexpected adaptation of Robin.  Keep in mind, Juno Tate is playing the character Holly Robinson, a street kid who is linked to Catwoman/Selina Kyle (played in the film by Anne Hathaway)... but when I heard about the actress and the character being in this film and having a potentially expanded role from the one she serves in the comics, I couldn't help thinking about Carrie Kelly, the young girl who becomes Robin in Frank Miller's graphic novel The Dark Knight Returns.

Might Nolan throw us all for a loop by mixing Holly with Carrie and giving us a female Robin? Doubtful, but not completely implausible.  If this were done, I could see a mix of the above-mentioned Dick Grayson concepts in terms of her role as someone helping out with recon and such but not direct "crime fighting."  But really, I seriously don't expect this to happen, it's just an option to consider for how they could introduce Robin and remain faithful to some incarnation of the character while doing something original and unexpected at the same time.

The Nolanverse is far more capable of fitting in different, even seemingly outlandish characters than people might think.  The trick is that despite what a lot of people think, the Nolan films are not truly "realistic" -- they succeed in creating the illusion of realism. That is a very big canvass, on which it's possible to paint a lot more than one might expect at first glance. I once wrote an example of Mr. Freeze in the Nolanverse, to demonstrate how the Nolanverse allows for a lot of unique and envelope-pushing adaptations of even seemingly impossible-to-adapt villains. It can be done, even for a Boy Wonder.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 2 May 2011

How could Mr. Freeze be portrayed in the world of Chris Nolan's Batman?


I posted this question in order to answer it (after being asked about the topic in a comment to my answer on another question), to demonstrate that the illusionary realism of the Nolanverse has great potential for innovation and unique adaptations of characters you might at first assume don't fit into the world of Chris Nolan's Batman.

This is an excerpted example, from a long list of "Nolanized" (adapted into illusionary realism) Batman villains, which I wrote as part of a series of articles about the Nolanverse for a fan-&-film site.

Keep in mind, this is NOT really itself a proposal for a storyline for a Batman film, it's mostly about Mr. Freeze himself as a character within that Nolaverse world -- thus it doesn't focus on Bruce/Batman, who in an actual film would be the central character and all other arcs must feed into the film's narrative and into Bruce/Batman's arc.

In addition, part of the point was that some characters could slip into the Nolanverse and push the boundaries of illusionary realism a bit more, in a gradual way and within larger stories that help ground it with more realistic elements. I imagined this Mr. Freeze characterization as part of a storyline that also included Black Mask taking over organized crime in Gotham with his "False Face Society" as his attempt to merge the traditional mafia elements with the emerging "freaks" and masked-villain trend in Gotham, so all of the Mr. Freeze stuff could transpire within a broader story  with mob elements and street crime etc for the overall setting, and Mr. Freeze himself would not be the main "villain" (plus he's a sympathetic character, not fully "villainous") and is a supporting character with a smaller personal arc that eventually comes to feed the main story and pose a significant threat.

So, here is my rough outline for a pushing-at-the-boundaries-of-illusionary-realism description of Mr. Freeze:

Dr. Victor Fries works for a competitor of Wayne Enterprises. Fries works in that company's  applied sciences division, and he focuses on three fields: (1) cryogenic processors for slow freezing that prevents thermal shock; (2) cryogenic fuels, primarily liquified natural gas (LNG); (3) cryobiology, where Fries has made huge leaps in theoretical application of cryogenic freezing of terminally ill patients and is on the verge of applying for permission to conduct human testing.

Wayne buys out the company, and Fox orders shutting down of the cryogenics dept run by Fries. Fox's reasons are (1) Wayne already has its own cryogenics dept in applied sciences, focusing on different more financially and scientifically sound applications; and (2) Fox feels that Fries has undertaken some morally questionable directions in terms of both application and testing.

Fries believes his new advanced cryogenic processor makes his theoretical application of human freezing achievable, and is fanatical about the projects and linking them together. Fox says he is aware that Fries' wife has terminal brain cancer, and that Fries was being influenced by personal concerns in his work and this was making him blind to the dangers and risks etc. Fox notes that as Fries grows more fanatical about those projects and more certain of himself, his work in other areas -- the fuel -- also suffered from his hubris and risky pursuits. Finally, Fox notes that during the buyout, Wayne Enterprises discovered some irregularities regarding Fries' access to some of the experiments with the fuel, and some inappropriate computer file transfers to IP addresses linked to the Pentagon.

Fries had secretly sought military support for his cryobiology experiments, showing how they could theoretically help with injured soldiers. He used his radical new theories on cryogenic fuel for military vehicles as a jumping-off point to argue that it also has applications for different weapons systems. The Pentagon was most interested in the latter, but strung Fries along on the former to keep him supplying them with info etc.

After Fox fires him, Fries tries to get the military to fund him continuing his research. They demand some examples of directly-applied cyrogenic fuel bombs. Fries has to break into Wayne Enterprises, steal components, and gets some military funds to continue his work on that project. But he skimps on the weapons so he can secretly divert some funding for human freezing, for his wife. He successfully freezes her, but afterwards realizes an error in his calculations regarding UNfreezing her. His cyrogenic processor is imperfect for reversing the effects.

He informs the military, who not only cut off his funding but also kick him out of the lab they rented for him, and they take his wife away for study. He is also ordered arrested, but escapes by detonating acontainer of liquid hydrogen. He has stored the other weapons systems elsewhere, and he breaks into Wayne Enterprises and steals even more equipment to construct bigger weapons.

He hides some cryogenic bombs around Gotham, and threatens to detonate them unless his wife is returned to him so he can try to figure out how to eventually unfreeze her. He even tries first to break into the hospital and steal her back, using a liquid nitrogen sprayer and some other simple weapons, but fails and is injured by his close contact with the nitrogen. He has to done a protective suit when handling etc the weapons and such, and partially freezes part of himself where his flesh and organs are severely damaged by contact with the nitrogen and from some gunshots, etc.

One of the military applications Freeze developed is an underwater mine that would freeze waterways to assist in naval blockades. He builds a prototype, and part of his attempts to get his wife back involves him dropping the mine into Gotham harbor and it freezes the water solid, but it is beyond even his own calculations and the freezing keeps gradually spreading outward (like "Ice-Nine"). He lies and claims to have the ability to reverse it, as part of the blackmail to get his wife back. Ultimately, he DOES get her back and figures out how to unfreeze her -- Batman tries to stop him, but he argues that if he isn't allowed to proceed, he won't be able to reverse the mine's effects and stop the freezing that's spreading into the ocean. So Batman has to let him unfreeze his wife to make sure it works, and then that successful test allows the water freezing to be stopped.

EDIT:  I would have to add that Freeze's wife would end up dying after being unfrozen, there needs to be some kind of tragic end to it all. Maybe the process of unfreezing his wife DOES provide the information on how to stop the spreading ice in the ocean, so the world can be saved, but his wife dies in the process of unfreezing -- Freeze could face the horrible choice of knowingly causing his wife's death by rapidly unfreezing her, or refusing to do it (since it'll kill her) but knowing that if he refuses then he won't gain the final information he needs to stop the ocean freezing, and thus his wife will perish with humanity anyway. All of his efforts have been in vain and lead to this tragedy, and I think that is perhaps the best way to end his arc.

(Source: http://www.batman-on-film.com/op... )

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 20 April 2011

How does Selina Kyle go from a prostitute in Batman: Year One to a rich socialite?


I present to you, the most awesome fan assessment of Catwoman's history -- and how she got from point A to point B -- of all time.

http://dr-von-fangirl.livejourna...

Here are some excepts from the above site, showing how she goes from different parts of her life to the next...

[EXCEPTS]

Dr. Von Fangirl Now Proudly Presents: The Ultimate Catwoman Origin

...People who don't like Selina's origin as a dominatrix, for example, state over and over again that the events of Batman: Year One have never been confirmed by other sources, or that they've been contradicted by Catwoman: Year One. Others say that she never trained with Ted Grant, or that she couldn't possibly be as skilled as she is in the art of hand-to-hand combat because we never saw her training with anyone, or that it doesn't make sense for a dominatrix to suddenly have mad cat burglary skillz.

...

Piecing together the timeline took a fair bit of doing and a fair bit of me pulling my hair out, but all in all, the result was worth it. The timeline draws from several different sources that contain information about Selina’s beginnings: Batman: Year One, Catwoman: Her Sister’s Keeper, Catwoman Annual #2, Catwoman #0, Catwoman: Secret Files and Origins, Catwoman #81 and Catwoman #94.

In the interests of clarity and conciseness, I had one rule while compiling the timeline:

Events must be either CONFIRMED by another comic or UNDISPUTED throughout continuity to make it onto the timeline as canon.

If part of an event is disputed, while another part of the event is confirmed, then only the confirmed part makes it onto the timeline. Also, with the exception of a couple of pages from Selina's Big Score (still found in Batman: Ego and Other Stories), all of these comics are out of print. ...




































































[END EXCERPT]

*NOTE FROM MARK HUGHES -- FYI, I encourage everyone to check out this woman's full site, lots of insightful stuff and great writing. Plus, I only excerpted some of this entry, there's a lot of her added insights and discussion about Catwoman's origins and it's very worth reading, highly recommended!

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 11 April 2011

In The Dark Knight, how did the Joker really get his scars?


There is no straight answer given in the film (is there ever with Nolan?), but what we can do is look at the Joker as he appears in The Dark Knight and see how the scars characterize him.

This film is very much about 'people who bear scars'. The idea of Batman was inseminated the day a young boy saw his parents murdered before him. Harvey Dent's emotional scar takes physical form, splitting his face in two. These people obsess over their scars as what defines the core of their being.
The Joker though? He bears his scars with laughter.

Joker's many stories for his scars is in a way mocking these people. They cling to their scars as a life changing event, they brag about their scars, so he puts their conviction to the test.

The Joker holds a mirror up to them so they may be judged by their own ideals. This is the opposite of Batman who judges everyone else with his ideals, such as his view that Gotham is too dumb to realize how badly they need him, or deeming that only Batman is to be the Dark Knight because no one else is fit to bear this burden.

Harvey Dent was idealistic and determined, the Joker tested him with an emotionally anguishing choice. Harvey Dent, not just as his friends knew him, but as he knew himself, after that day ceased to exist, his ideals were consumed by the fresh, bleeding scar the Joker had given him.

Batman saves the murderous Joker's life and gloats to him over the loftiness of his code, but in a high pressure situation kills his best friend Harvey Dent. Ideals are compromised, excuses are made, and the Joker goes on laughing.

The origin of the Joker's scars isn't explained because to the Joker, it doesn't matter. One isn't defined merely by scars, but by ideals to live by. The Joker lives by his code without wavering. Scars are superficial.

That's why the Joker is Batman's greatest nemesis, because he makes the Dark Knight doubt himself.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 30 March 2011

Who's better: Batman or Superman, and why?


The answer is Batman.

As a comic book character:
Superman will always get props for being the first real superhero. However, nowadays, I think most people find Batman comics more enjoyable to read:
  • More relatable, in that his powers are almost in the realm of possibility
  • Batman has one of comicdom's best rogue galleries, ever. The Joker, Two-Face, Poison Ivy. Superman's villains are often just evil variations of Superman -- a metal version, an alternate dimension one, a color-shifted one, etc., etc. Lame.
  • More compelling character flaws = more human = more interesting.
  • More interesting weakness. Kryptonite? Really? There are a huge number of different colors of Kryptonite, because they got so bored with it that they had to keep coming up with more variations.

In a fight:
Superman is absurdly powerful. The fact that Batman, a mortal human, can and has competed with / defeated Superman is a testament to how ridiculously badass Batman is.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 7 July 2010

Who's better: Batman or Superman, and why?


As Marc Bodnick commented, there are multiple ways to interpret this question. People have debated almost every aspect of this issue, so in the end, it really boils down to a matter of opinion.
  1. Who would win in a fight? This can be broken down into multiple scenarios. Clearly, in an unarmed fight, Superman would defeat Batman.  Superman would be impervious to any physical attacks that Batman could muster and Batman would have little defense. Batman, however, is usually prepared and relies on a combination of intelligence, strength, and  technological gadgets. As in the Dark Knight Returns, Batman would suspect that he would need to fight Superman and have Kryptonite on hand in order to defeat Superman.
  2. Powers. Batman doesn't have any superhuman powers like Superman, however, that forces him to be more intelligent. Batman must anticipate the actions of foes much more than Superman. It is also extraordinary that Batman is able to leverage his human abilities to "superhero" status. Superman's abilities are due to being a Kryptonian on earth. Any other Kryptonian would likewise have superpowers on earth.
  3. Character. Since Batman isn't able to brute force his way out of most situations, his stories are usually more interesting. Also, Batman has to have the discipline to maintain his abilities. Superman could sit on a couch and watch TV and he would still be Superman. Batman needs to constantly work out and train. Batman also needs to keep tabs on all his foes as well as stay on top of technological developments in order to remain competitive. Batman has also had to deal with more trauma in his life. Sure, Superman was adopted but so are a lot of normal humans. Batman witnessed his parents murdered in front of him and had to deal with survivor guilt as a young boy.
  4. Commercial / media success. Again, debatable. However, in the top 100 movies based on domestic gross receipts, there are 3 Batman movies and zero Superman movies. Source: http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime...


See Questions On Quora

Posted on 7 July 2010

In The Dark Knight, how did the Joker really get his scars?


Whatever way he is claiming at any moment.

As in the comics, the Joker regards the past as a mutable medium, which only exists insofar as it is remembered, and the act of remembering and forgetting is, in fact, creation and destruction. Was the Joker the leader of the Red Hood gang? A failed stand-up comic forced into crime by the gang he appeared to be leading? Did his wife die in an accident? Was she murdered by a corrupt cop? Did she exist at all? Because the Joker is able to forget and remember at will, the truth is whatever version of his backstory that he is remembering at any moment, regardless of whether that history conflicts with what he remembered yesterday.

In the words of Nietzsche:

[Beasts] do not remember; mankind does.  Man is an historical animal, whose memories weigh down upon him.  Happiness is forgetting, though remembering is what gives man the ability to utilize lessons from the past in the present.

In some sense, the Joker is a Nietzchian ideal: a man with total control over both remembering and forgetting.

This is what makes him a nemesis of the Batman: Bruce Wayne cannot forget anything. The deaths of his parents, of (in the comics) the second Robin, of (in the movie) his oldest friend, these memories and this history are the essential components of his character. Every action is motivated by memory and history he is unable or unwilling to escape.

See Questions On Quora

Posted on 15 May 2010

reddit.com: search results

Does anyone wish Barbara...(SPOILERS)

Anyone wish she stayed dead? I'm not asking to be a dick or anything, but i feel like if she stayed dead then the dark tone of the game would've felt more...Present. Also, it would've made the story a lot better too because it would be very emotional. Especially since Barbara has appeared in every Arkham game (on consoles anyway). Some people are glad she wasn't dead, but i kind of wish that her suicide was a hallucination, then Batman finds out she was alive, and she actually does die after that. Would've made players go "Oh, so she's alive! Oh, so she isn't..." and again, would've made the story more emotional.

submitted by ThePornCollector-- to BatmanArkham
[link] [25 comments]

Posted on 29 August 2015

Batman is being stalked by one of the cosmic clones from Mario Galaxy. How long does he last?

Cosmic Whatnot?

In Mario Galaxy, there were sections where the player had to run from a cosmic clone. This clone would perfectly imitate the movements of Mario or Luigi. Physical contact with the entity would result in the player losing 1/3 of his life.

Uh...TL;DR?

Here's some footage of what I'm talking about. For mobile users, it starts at 40 seconds in.

So what does this have to do with Batman?

Batman is being chased by a similar entity. Assume that there's literally no way to stop this thing.

  • There is no way to hinder its movements, as the clone can go through walls or run in mid-air without stopping.

  • Creating an anti-clone gadget or asking someone for a favor won't work.

Batman dies if he gets tagged three times. How long does he last?

submitted by Cardboard_Boxer to whowouldwin
[link] [21 comments]

Posted on 19 August 2015

Batman VS The sex curse from It Follows

So Batman and Catwoman finally bang, and it turns out - surprise! She has the curse from It Follows. If Batman does not have sex and pass on the curse, an unstoppable monster will come for him and try to kill him. If the person that he gave the curse to dies, it passes back to the person who had it before...which would be Batman. Plus, since he doesn't want to see Catwoman die, martyring himself to save others isn't going to be an option. Can Batman survive the curse while still attending to his superhero duties?

Round 1: Batman is on his own here.

Round 2: The whole Justice League is ready to help him out, as well as "help him out" with his curse problem.

submitted by Cleverly_Clearly to whowouldwin
[link] [87 comments]

Posted on 15 June 2015

I really don't want the Arkhamverse to end...

Again, I've posted before how I don't get the fascination with killing Batman or Batman at the end of his crime-fighting days.

My hope is that Batman does not die in Arkham Knight and WB Montreal, or whoever, takes on mantle and keeps producing Batman games.

Of all the other comic book characters he translates well to this because he isn't super powered (what threat is there to Superman in a video game?) and he also has an entire mythos surrounding him and his allies/enemies.

People talk about a suicide squad game but I like playing as Batman specifically to beat up the "bad guys" and whatnot, not play as them.

And don't get me started on Batman Beyond.

You didn't necessarily need an arch over the whole three games. Any Batman adventure/mystery can stand on its own and I wish that's the direction they'd take with future games.

It's probably very moot for me to even care but does anyone else agree?

submitted by Harrier42 to BatmanArkham
[link] [37 comments]

Posted on 1 June 2015

[Batman] Someone is going back in time to stop Thomas and Martha Wayne from being murdered. This means Batman will never exist. Does Bruce follow him back in time and stop him so that his parents can die?

It boils down to this:

  1. Batman can either let this person go back in time and save his parents from dying, resulting in Batman never existing.

  2. Or he can follow him back and stop him, but would have to watch his parents die, or at the very least listen to the gunshots and screaming all over again.

What does he do?

submitted by Thpawn to AskScienceFiction
[link] [93 comments]

Posted on 1 May 2015

Obsessed with Batman

[WP] The scarecrow has poisoned Gotham's water supply with a toxin that makes everyone post Batman prompts.


"Obsessed with Batman," the Joker had declared himself at the last meeting of supervillains. And it got me thinking: if only everyone in the city really took the time to consider the absolute lunacy of it all, they'd probably hate him too. I mean, a man running about in a bat costume and beating up ordinary citizens? Ok, maybe not "ordinary" citizens. Some of us are a little strange. But we're still people, right?

That nugget of an idea turned into a plan, as they often do. If everyone in the city was like Joker, the Batman wouldn't stand a chance. We just needed them to think about him a little bit more. A lot more, actually. So much so that they are driven mad by their new-found obsession. Driven to the point that they'll do anything to get rid of him and clean the scourge from their minds, maybe?

The chemical mixture was simple, really. Child's play for someone of my abilities; I specialize in madness. Joker, my partner in this endeavor, was responsible for devising some sort of delivery method. Unsurprisingly, he came up with some elaborate scheme to deploy clown-shaped hot air balloons that sprayed it into clouds, to be dispersed by rainfall. Dumping the barrels into the reservoir would have worked, but I like to indulge the Joker whenever possible. Stay on his good side, you know?

I can hear the pitter-patter of the rain on the rooftop now. It's always been a comforting sound for me; doubly so knowing that it will lead to Batman's demise in just a few days.

I load up Reddit on my phone and check /r/Writingprompts, as usual. But today is not for writing; today is for assessing results.

[EU] Batman dies unexpectedly, this troubles The Joker so much that he swears to protect Gotham himself, and does a better job than Batman ever did.

The top post, and rising quickly. Perfect; he's the only thing that anyone wants to hear about. I show the Joker, and he cackles appreciatively. His laughter bounces around the empty warehouse.

"You know," he says after a while. "I didn't mention this before, but there is one potential drawback."

I cock my head inquisitively

"They become obsessed with Bats, right? Well, what if their madness goes a different route than mine? What if they're more like him? What if they want to become Batman, instead of killing him?"

Before I could answer, the lights snap off. Someone has cut the power.

A flash of lightning illuminates the room. In the windows above, silhouettes. Not one, but dozens. Dozens of pointy bat ears.

submitted by Luna_LoveWell to Luna_Lovewell
[link] [3 comments]

Posted on 25 March 2015

Bruce Wayne dies, Sterling Archer becomes the new Batman. Can he still beat the Joker?

Archer has read the comic books so he knows what's up.

Round one: New Bats retains his aversion to guns and such, but Archer still knows krav maga. How does he fare?

Round two: The Sterling Knight goes on a rampage, no weapons barred, full access to Bruce Wayne's resources. Krieger is his Lucious Fox. Who can't he beat?

Bonus Round: Could Archer keep his new identity secret?

submitted by Mechakoopa to whowouldwin
[link] [231 comments]

Posted on 22 February 2015

Does Batman's "no-kill" policy end up in more deaths (likely indirect) than if he had a strict, "at-your-discretion-only" kill policy?

This applies to all versions and universes, including both (or, all three, if you count Burton/Keaton as separate from the 90's abominations, which I do) movie universes.

Most people know that Batman has a strict rule to never kill any enemy, no matter what the circumstances are, as he's "no executioner" (at least, post-Golden Age of Batman around the late-1930s-early-40. During this point Batman was a badass who was closer to The Punisher than a ninja detective. He even used firearms, hanging criminals from his Bat-Plane, slicing them with swords, running them over with cars, throwing them off rooftops, slicing them with Batarangs, etc.).

Ironically, Batman had set up an automated protocol via satellite to kill any of his fellow superheroes in Justice League of America (JLA). JLA is pretty much the DC version of The Avengers, and it includes Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Green Lantern, and others. Batman set this up and tailored it specifically for each superhero -- which seems a little dark for me. So, you could argue that he has "planned" to kill superheroes on a more specific, drawn-out way than he has planned to kill villains.

Also, I think it's his no-kill policy that makes him so popular, since it shows humanity, discipline, and respect. The credit would at least partially go to the super-conservative moms in the late 1940s, who weren't fond of "this Batman character" wielding guns and killing people. So, DC immediately him (and Superman and everyone else from "Detective Comics"),

Here are the reasons for his no-kill policy:

  • This rule is rooted in mostly in principle -- to not "stoop down" to the level of those he's fighting -- which is why he also never uses a firearm, since it was the weapon used on his parents. (Nolan did a good job of catching the casual audience up to speed on his no-kill/no-gun policy, even though it took lucky timing by Falcone's hit-woman to "prevent" Bruce from using the gun, and it took a couple of slaps from Rachel to set him straight. My favorite part is when the Fatmans -- aka fake Batmans who happen to be fat -- use guns in the beginning of The Dark Knight, and Scarecrow says "that's not him" -- which is a sign of begrudging respect and acknowledgement). **

  • His rule is also based on fear**, fear of what he may become should he allow himself to kill, since it could be a slippery slope if he kills based on justification and "justice."

  • Lastly, he has the rule to limit the "heat" he gets from the Gotham Police, since killings -- even of high-level mobsters -- would be a homicide/murder case, since he's a vigilante and not a part of law enforcement. If he started to kill some villains, no matter how guilty the villains are/were, the killings would still be murder charges, and Batman would start to look more like a serial killer than a "guardian of the night."

But anyway, would Batman be a more effective and efficient superhero if he didn't have that rule?

Now, I'm not saying that his M.O. would be "kill all mobsters," or, in other words, it's not like Batman would be out hunting for people to kill.

My proposal/hypothetical would be: What if Batman allowed exceptions to his rule, where he deems that the benefits (immediate and permanent cessation of the near-certainty of further deaths, crime, and chaos) of killing of the villain would significantly outweigh the costs (costs being: slight loss of humanity, compromise of principle, added "heat" from cops, possible self-loathing from "stooping down" to the level of those he fights, etc.)?

Most of the time, Batman gets the job done without needing to kill, and I acknowledge that. Also, this wouldn't really be a personal code or a self-administered "license to kill" (i.e., "I am allowed to kill when justified"), but it would be an exception to his current code (i.e., "My code: I will not kill anyone. But in exceptional cases where it is the only option to prevent further deaths of Gotham citizens, I have to do my duty and ensure the safety of Gotham.")

There are instances where if he killed a villain who not only had already killed many citizens, but his eventual (and inevitable) "escape" from Batman would lead to more deaths. The Joker would be an obvious example, and he's pretty much takes advantage of Batman's rule, at times mocking him that Batman's persistent need for order can lead to collateral damage/deaths when it faces chaos (Joker). So, for example, if Batman actually breaks his rule and kills the Joker -- and it would NEVER be a situation where it would be an execution-style killing, but more likely self-defense or to thwart the villain from going through with a mass murder plan -- wouldn't it be fair to say that the good significantly outweighs the bad?

Take The Dark Knight for example.

If Batman had killed The Joker when The Joker was literally firing at him (though, likely not firing to kill Batman, since he didn't want Batman to die), with The Joker saying "hit me, come on, hit me, hit me, HIT ME!" (which, as I said, was an example of The Joker taking advantage of Batman's "one rule") he could have killed him WITH the police (especially Jim Gordon) witnessing The Joker firing at Batman. The Joker's death would have prevented plenty of deaths: the deaths at the precinct and holding cells (btw, how in the hell did The Joker survive all of that but no one else did?); any deaths from Batman's encounter at the unfinished condos; the turn of Harvey Dent into Two-Face, which resulted in more deaths, including his own; and finally, killing The Joker would have prevented that situation where two ferries with 600-700 people total were prepped with enough explosives to kill either and/or both ferries, and not only where they one click away from blowing themselves (or the others) up, but The Joker was literally about to blow them both up had he not asked (or mini-mologued, "speaking of which, do you want to know how I got these scars?", followed by Batman retorting with his own quip of "no, but I know how you got these!" and shooting out his arm blades and throwing him off the building, before, of course, saving him.

TL;DR -- Does Batman's strict no-kill policy inadvertently lead to more deaths than prevent deaths? It's not so much that I would advocate a "license to kill" mentality, but more of a "there's an exception to every rule" mentality, where exceptional circumstances call for exceptional measures. For e.g., in The Dark Knight, plenty of people died after Batman bailed on his Batpod with his chance to kill The Joker, who was a half-second button-press away from killing 600+ people on the two ferries.

submitted by Death_Star_ to AskScienceFiction
[link] [139 comments]

Posted on 11 November 2014

[DC] How does Batman not die when he fights with the JLA? (possible Man of Steel spoilers)

Okay, maybe the title maybe a poor question. I know Batman has all the toys, he is the World's greatest detective, he is as strong as the writer makes him and with prep can beat/survive against almost anyone right?

I just re-watched Man of Steel, how the hell could Batman even be involved with something like this? Metropolis was destroyed and Superman gets tossed around like a rag doll. I don't see how Batman would be of any help to the JLA if a threat stronger than that of General Zod were to attack Earth. Granted, this is a movie and a completely different universe. I'll admit I am a Marvel guy and don't know a whole lot about DC. I do know that Batman has varied from writer to writer and universe to universe in intellect and strength. It just seems to me that the only usefulness Batman could provide to the JLA s intellect and technology.

submitted by iisdmitch to AskScienceFiction
[link] [8 comments]

Posted on 12 August 2014

Batman kills so many in the Burton films...

I was re watching the first two Burton films when I noticed Batman was pretty brutal in those films.

  • The First time was when Batman blew up the factory. There were at least 4 people standing around that car when his wheels dropped the bombs. Best part of all...Batman wasn't even in the car!! He practically droned them.

  • Batman chases the Joker up the church only to be met by one of his better henchman. They scrap it out for a bit and then he thinks he knocks Batman down the tower. When he goes to see if he's gone Batman pulls him down to his doom, the henchman seems to fall like almost endlessly. There was no way he could survive that.

  • The last person he killed on the first one was the Joker. When he tried to get away on a helicopter Batman attached him to a heavy gargoyle...now what did Batman possibly think this was going to do? In the comics he would of let him go to find him another day, but it seems like he was just not having it.

    • The beginning of the second movie there is a penguin henchman in a devil costume burning up stores. Batman with his batmobile drives in front him, does a 360, and then proceeds to catch him on fire with the back of his car!! If this man didn't die he had some serious done to all over his body.
  • Lastly Batman take a bomb from a henchman that he fights. He must of seen there was a lot of time still on it so he took it elsewhere. Batman then runs into this clown he can't knock out with his fist, so what does he do? He attaches the bomb to the man's stomach and throws him into a pit. The explosion coming from the pit was huge so nine times out of ten he died.

    Edit: This has been a really good discussion so far, but try not to downvote people for their opinions guys. Some people hate, like, and feel indifferent about the first two Burton films and that's ok, because in the end it's all about the Batmans. I just started this to see what other bat fans thought about them as well.

submitted by Pandorasbox64 to batman
[link] [95 comments]

Posted on 11 July 2014

Batman vs Light Yagami (Death Note)

Who would win if Bruce took the place of L in the anime?

Edit: This is Batman in the exact position L is in the anime, Batman is unknown to the world and is only known to the higher ups of the police department. He's called upon after all the criminals start to die, he's in complete secrecy. Light has absolutely 0 idea that Batman exists. How does Batman tackle this situation?

submitted by LittleMantis to whowouldwin
[link] [45 comments]

Posted on 12 May 2014

The Joker DOES have a superpower

No one could pull off half the random crap Joker does unassisted. All the near deaths, convoluted plots and inevitable escape attempts... impossible without some other force at work. But really, it's his name that gives it away. He's got a power any comedian, class clown or joker would kill for.

He has a supernaturally good sense of timing.

That's why all his schemes can work and why the only times he gets caught are when he can safely get away later. Because even if he's unaware that he's doing it, he's always in the right place at the right time.

Edit: Joker probably isn't aware he even has this power, but it's part of the reason he never gets over his insanity. Because everything always works out for him, he's never confronted with facing reality aside from the chaos he creates. Except... for... the Batman. Maybe he's immune or maybe he's just so organized he can cut through the chaos, but for whatever reason Batman's the only one who can overcome this subtle power. Joker may be aware of this subconsciously or just pick up that things go wrong whenever Batman's around, but he knows he NEEDS to kill him.

Edit 2: Maybe the Joker doesn't need to KILL Batman, but I think he does want some kind of final conflict where two enter and one leaves. Whether Joker hopes HE'LL die in the conflict or just prove that his reality is the correct one depends on which Joker you're talking about, I think.

submitted by Codoro to FanTheories
[link] [292 comments]

Posted on 14 April 2014

Scarecrow's bombs in Arkham Knight are a ploy

After years of plotting his revenge against Batman the Scarecrow returns in Arkham Knight to gather the other super-villains and crush the dark knight. At least, that's what we're led to believe. The opening trailer tells that the Scarecrow has planted fear gas bombs around Gotham and has told the authorities, who evacuate the citizens... But Why? In Batman's profile of Scarecrow and his interview tapes found in Arkham Asylum, Scarecrow is described as a man who must instill fear in others in the name of research. When Batman finds Scarecrow's boat in Arkham City, it does not contain a set of blueprints, some fear gas and a "I will have my revenge" sign. The boat contains the results of an experiment on an inmate. If Scarecrow is so obsessed with research, why would he tell authorities of his bombs and evacuate an unsuspecting test city of 6 million people? (I understand that this is a convenient way for the developers to explain why there are no civilians in the city, but Rocksteady is normally very good with covering up potential plot weak points). Scarecrow is too intelligent to think that a compilation of independent super-villains will kill Batman (he's defeated them before). Furthermore, Scarecrow understands that if Batman does die, the police and military will not respect the no killing rule when retaking the city. So if killing Batman is not main priority then what is? The answer is that Scarecrow is using the bombs and the battle to prepare the city to be a perfect fear laboratory. In the confusion he can send some of his henchmen down into the steam-works (disguised as trapped workers) to attach cans of fear gas to Gotham's water and gas lines as well as the air ducts of major buildings. Another group of henchmen can simultaneously break into city hall and forge records of these new "additions". Thus when Scarecrow is "defeated" or goes into hiding and the city returns to normal, he will have a perfect test city with which to conduct fear experiments in a controlled environment.

submitted by MrZartacla to FanTheories
[link] [5 comments]

Posted on 9 March 2014

What does r/Batman think of "The Batman" series from 2004?

I know that this series has mixed reviews from die hard Batman fans. However, for me, "The Batman" is what led me to my Batman obsession, and before it, and didn't care for him at all. I want to here other people's opinions on a series that wasn't always comic accurate, and that changed a lot of characters looks and personalities from their original persona.

submitted by gandhiloveslincoln to batman
[link] [12 comments]

Posted on 14 August 2013

(Lots o' Spoilers) How TDKR should have ended...

... exactly the way it did. I see some complaints that having Batman go out the way he did was a cop-out, and I find myself in total disagreement.

Here is a character, like every famed and beloved comic book hero, who is plagued by his total inability to change. It's written into his dna. Bruce Wayne never changes, he's Batman and he'll always be Batman. If other characters have to hate him for it, we'll draw our drama from that (Batman Beyond). But no matter what, Bruce Wayne is Batman. In no format have we ever been really allowed to see the Batman character realistically evolve, until now. And that is just as daring a move as the rather obvious and un-clever one a lot of us predicted. Some of us wanted Batman to die. Well, he does.

Batman dies. Nolan has said that TDKR draws a lot from Tale of Two Cities. When Gordon reads the last lines in front of Wayne's tombstone, I thought it was meant to mean that this man has died so that the city may live. It's almost the same thing as TDK, really. Batman just making more sacrifices to ensure the future of his city. But it's not about that. In Tale of Two Cities Carlton dies so that Darnay, a man that he believes has much more to live for, can survive. In this way Carlton feels that his life had meaning. Batman doesn't die for Gotham, he dies to save Bruce Wayne. It's a genius incorporation of a genius novel, and integrating it's themes into the themes of Batman is a brilliant conceit from the (sometimes maligned) script.

submitted by JackStolen to batman
[link] [87 comments]

Posted on 21 July 2012

Alright r/batman, would you be interested in a TDKR predictions poll?

My friends and I are planning on making a bunch of predictions for TDKR and putting some money on it. Then I thought, wouldn't it be great if /r/batman did the same thing? (No money of course). So how about it? I would totally be willing to create a Google doc or something, and then turn the data into graphs, charts, etc. /r/awake did this recently and I thought it was really cool.

If you're interested, upvote, comment, downvote, anything! I think this would be really interesting to get the predictions from the most knowledgeable Batman fans around. Also, let me know when you think the poll should be posted, closed, possible questions and answers, where the poll should be or anything else! (Date is important because more and more information is leaking out via trailers, leaked info, and cough action figures). It will also be interesting to see just how wrong (and right) our predictions are after the movie is out.

Possible Questions: 1. Does Batman die? A) If yes, then is he replaced? 2. Final scene? 3. Does Bane break Batman's back? 4. What is John Blake's role in the plot? 5. Does Ra's al Ghul come back, or is he simply in a flashback? 6. What is Miranda Tates role in the plot? (Love interest, Talia, other) 7. Does Anne Hathaway pull off her role as Catwoman? 8. How hyped is the movie to you? 9. Do you believe the movie will live up to the/your hype? 10. Will the movie receive any award nods? (Best film, directing, score, acting, effects, etc) 11. Do any other characters die? 12. Does scarecrow make an appearance? 13. When will you see the movie?

(Note: I tried to stray away from questions Nolan has officially denied, such as any Joker references. Also we want to prevent possible spoilers for twists people never thought about such as the new alleged toy spoiler, possible spoiler)

TL;DR I want to post a quick poll to get the community's predictions on TDKR, would you be interested?

edit: formatting/grammar

submitted by yoalan to batman
[link] [16 comments]

Posted on 21 June 2012

Anybody else think that the heavy hinting that Batman will die means he probably won't?

I mean, if he does die, then Christopher Nolan's practically already told us as much, what with images of the broken mask, the end of the prologue, the trailer in which Bane says, "When Gotham is in ashes, you will have my permission to die." I dunno, it just seems like a bit of a massive spoiler to give away several months before the film's released. Anybody else reckon Nolan's in the process of pulling off a massive bluff?

submitted by joebutters to movies
[link] [34 comments]

Posted on 15 December 2011

Steam Game Swap

This is a subreddit for people who are looking to trade games on Steam. Want to trade physical games? Try /r/gameswap. Want to trade TF2 items? Try /r/tf2trade. Want to trade Dota 2 items? Try /r/dota2trade. Want to trade games for money? Try /r/GameSale. Want to trade CS:GO Items? Try /r/GlobalOffensiveTrade Want to trade trading cards? Try /r/steamtradingcards [link]

Posted on 21 June 2011

Someone stole an article I wrote about how awesome Batman is, and published it on "Yahoo contributor network" as his own. Reddit, should I even bother calling this guy on his shit?

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1229567/on_why_batman_is_the_greatest_person.html?cat=38

What's worse is, the guy used a really old draft, probably posted somewhere back in 2004ish. Current draft below, for comparison's sake, does having a .doc that's been copied around between hard drives multiple times really prove anything in this situation?

I thought it might be a laugh to write to him and Yahoo claiming that there's a $2,000 royalty fee on this article then just sit back and wait for the $ signs to come rolling in but beyond that I really wouldn't know if it's even worth pointing out to him that he's a shit for plagiarism, petty as it may be in this instance.


On why Batman is the greatest person, fictional or non, ever An urgent news bulletin

Batman. Even if you haven't read the comics, even if you haven't seen the movies, you know who he is. In a nutshell: Wears a scary as shit superhero costume, hangs out with the JLA, and beats suspects at roughly a Rodney King level of brutality. But what makes Batman more special than, say, not Batman?

He has no super powers

In your rush to assume that you were already up to speed with how Batman operates you may not have considered that he in fact possesses no super powers. So how does he do all of that amazing stuff? Simple, he trained long and hard for the majority of his childhood and all his adult life. Batman is trained in almost every conceivable art of fighting. Hell, he's even a ninja. And one thing that’s certain about ninjas is that they never, ever screw around. Unless you pay them specifically to screw around. Sure, it's easy to beat up your run-of-the-mill graverobbers and bootleggers and tubthumpers with ninja skills and gizmos, but then... Batman also beat up Superman. Yeah.

He can beat up fricking Superman

In Frank Miller’s Elseworlds tale 'The Dark Knight Returns', an aging Batman faces a bleak future where gangs of hooligans are killing in his name, getting about Gotham city with their violence and skateboards and varying rapster lingos.

Superman meanwhile has become the US Government's official lapdog, a strongarm enforcer of shady policy and the like. When Bruce Wayne once more decides to take on the mantle of the bat, political unrest sees the President send Superman after his old friend Bruce, with orders to stop him by any means. Of course, Superman knows that Batman will never be brought in alive, and so, of course, the two battle it out in an epic struggle punctuated by nuclear ICBMs raining down and snappy one-liners being tossed about in rapid fire succession as all hell breaks out around them.

It’s here that the veteran underdog’s heart begins to give, but it won’t quit on him before a final chance to wipe the shit-eating grin off Superman’s shit-enjoying face, pummeling Supes with a handy set of kryptonite gloves—engineered years ago for just such a contingency.

"You're beginning to get the idea, Clark. This is the end, for both of us. We could have changed the world. Now look at us. I've become a political liability, and you, you're a joke. I want you to remember, Clark... in all the years to come... in your most private moments... I want you to remember my hand at your throat... I want you to remember the one man who beat you..."

And then… Batman dies. Or does he? No. He totally fakes it. He rocks up six months later living under an assumed identity, teaching wayward street toughs how to fight crime. Just like Andy Kaufman.

He's the world's greatest detective

Batman's not just trained by the best fighters on this or any planet, but also the greatest criminologists and forensic psychologists. Bruce Wayne spent his adolescence travelling around the world, using his vast inherited wealth to study under skilled detectives and scholars of subterfuge. He learned about the criminal mind from the inside out by getting in amongst the seedier element of society on the ground floor of Gotham’s gritty underbelly—to observe, and acclimatize. Waiting for the moment when confidence and opportunity would align. Getting ready for a day when he could finally punch someone really fucking hard in the nutsack and then the face.

He recovered from a broken spine

When the super-criminal Bane busted all the inmates out of Gotham's Arkham Asylum, it fell upon Batman to round them all up. Each death at their hands was another for which he blamed himself. By the time that last mental case was recaptured, Batman was weak, exhausted, and just aching for a shit.

Only then did Bane strike, tracking Batman to his secret “bat’s cave”-themed lair, known as The Batcave, and with the aid of the super-steroid and sometime Spider-Man villain 'Venom', defeated the Dark Knight in hand-to-hand combat. Hoisting Batman high above his sizeable frame, Bane brought him down hard with a knee to the spine, fucking Batman’s shit all the way up to eleven.

Most people don't come back from a broken spine. There was, well, Bruce Lee, and that’s probably all. Therefore, while fictional, Batman remains the only living person who has recovered from a broken spine. It was a long, hard road back to good health and fighting form, but he returned triumphant, having sex with Bane’s sister and posting it on the internet.

He never loses

Batman is not only mentally and physically honed to perfection, but relentlessly driven by a score which can never be settled. When his parents were murdered in front of him as a boy, Bruce vowed to avenge their deaths with his indefinite war on crime. If he were to ever stop being the bat, he would be breaking that promise to his dead parents. If he were to lose, he would no longer be Batman. Therefore, Batman always wins. Physics.

He’s intimidating

Criminals are a cowardly and superstitious bunch, and thank God for small favors, as that cowardice manifests itself as a crippling fear of bats for an almost suspiciously high percentage of Gotham’s criminal underworld. Maybe the phobia of bats is a self-fulfilling prophecy, or maybe Bruce just got incredibly lucky, thanks to the environmental factors of a moderate climate and plentiful caves lining up perfectly with a population both enthralled and terrified by Sir David Attenborough’s recent, Bats: Nature’s Draculas.

He will haunt you

If by some miracle you thwart Batman, you will spend the rest of your life looking over your shoulder. He will always find a way. The guy is literally insane, it’s not even worth the grief. While you’re busy sleeping and eating and shitting Batman is in a cave somewhere doing chin-ups while frowning at a computer printout of your face and current location. Oh yeah, and he only sleeps two hours a day. How? He’s fucking Batman.

He has a pretty expensive computer as well

In closing, Batman’s great. Just don’t screw with him. Don’t rob a Gotham bank or kill any prostitutes because Batman will be there to wreck your entire universe. It’s unclear where he stands on circumventing DRM or grey market imports but I personally wouldn’t take the risk. Batman will keep on fighting, and punching, and detecting the shit out of crimes, until the day he either dies, is replaced by someone with a scarier costumer, or resolves his numerous emotional issues.


Edit - Has been taken down by someone helpful in the thread, a lot of good advice handed out, and I'm glad for the feedback. This has been an overall positive experience, I appreciate you Reddit.

submitted by omasque to AskReddit
[link] [133 comments]

Posted on 7 December 2010

Who Would Win?

If you love to imagine the planet-exploding battles of the fictional gods who will never be, taking pointless knowledge gathered from a life spent reading and gaming and swinging it like a gladiator's sword in discussions on reddit... then welcome home, my friend. You are indeed where you belong. Come join our discussions, post your own battles and kick some ass! [link]

Posted on 14 October 2010