Amph THE DARK KNIGHT RISES(now also general Batman discussion)

Discussion in 'Community' started by Import_Jedi, Oct 27, 2010.

  1. Jabba-wocky Chosen One

    Member Since:
    May 4, 2003
    star 8
    Why are you posing the question so cautiously? It's painfully obvious that Batman killed Ras. I am not aware of a single person who has ever suggested anything less after seeing Batman Begins.
  2. I Are The Internets Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 20, 2012
    star 7
    Because the rabid Nolan fanboys might come to my apartment and beat me up. [face_worried]
  3. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
    Nah man, the real tough guys are the Nolan haters.
  4. Order66Survivor Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 10, 2012
    star 1
    uhhhh....cause Batman doesn't kill
  5. GenAntilles Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 24, 2007
    star 4
    He didn't kill Ras, he just didn't save him. Ra's was a ninja, if he couldn't escape from a falling train slamming into a building and exploding it's his own fault. [face_not_talking]
  6. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 9
    Except we like BB and TDK. We just recognise that Rises was the trilogy ending on a whimper, not a bang.

    But you know this, it's just that you need to post trolling comments to boost your flaccid self-esteem right?
  7. Order66Survivor Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 10, 2012
    star 1
    quick note ive been following this thread the past couple weeks and now im caught up and have decided to join in. I realize this comment is counter-productive to getting people to stop bickering.

    but ive found MAYBE one post where @Arawn_Fenn made any sense and @Ender_Sai didn't.

    i'd like to say "hey i'm not taking sides" but it's an easy choice here.
  8. I Are The Internets Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 20, 2012
    star 7
    What if in The Dark Knight when Batman is dropping Eric Roberts from that building it turns out that Eric Roberts had a heart condition and the trauma of the pain in his legs caused his heart to stop?
  9. Spider-Fan Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 15, 2008
    star 4
    Don't. Feed. The Troll.
    Darth_Invidious likes this.
  10. Order66Survivor Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 10, 2012
    star 1
    tough **** for him shoulda told Batman what he wanted


    (I think he would have failed the Mob Boss Physical anyway with such a condition)
    Last edited by Order66Survivor, Jan 14, 2013
    Darth_Invidious likes this.
  11. I Are The Internets Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 20, 2012
    star 7
    Meh probably wouldn't be plausible anyway. Just a thought.
  12. Order66Survivor Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 10, 2012
    star 1
    i assumed you had no intention of being plausible when you posed the question, just thought'd i'd throw back an answer :)
  13. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
    Then in what way does that statement refer to you? ( Oh, wait... you thought the first part was serious... )

    Interesting... is that a confession?
  14. AAAAAH Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 8, 2012
    star 4
    RACHEL GOOZE died in the submarine explosion off the coast of montego bay due to the machinations of the jokester. how can you guys not even remember this stuff?
  15. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
  16. drg4 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 30, 2005
    star 4
    Actually, I don't buy the "once Batman crosses that threshold, there's no stopping him" conceit.

    If Batman possesses the will to wage a one-man war on crime, then why can't he come to a perfectly moral and rational conclusion, make an exception, drop the Joker off a rooftop, and soldier on as a humane guardian of Gotham?
    The very notion that he'd devolve into insanity or amorality is absurd; hell, Gandhi himself would advocate acing that rotter after his third escape from Arkham.

    Comic book fans: Was there ever a story that really delved into this moral quandary without being one-sided? Like where the Gotham citizenry confronts Batman over his refusal to put an end to the Joker's recurring mass killings?
    Order66Survivor likes this.
  17. GenAntilles Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 24, 2007
    star 4
    Red Hood made the same argument in the movie.
  18. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 9
    Hush. 6th issue. When Batman is beating the snot out of the Joker. Jim Gordon explains it pretty well.
  19. GenAntilles Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 24, 2007
    star 4
    Yeah the fact that Batman doesn't kill anyone gives the GCPD a cover for why the don't go after him.

    To be honest it's Gotham's fault they haven't executed Joker by now or at least lobotomized him.
  20. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 9
    The death penalty is a proven non-deterrent. The Batman is a proven non-deterrent (nor, in the DCU, is Superman). So what would killing the Joker achieve except nothing?
  21. SithLordDarthRichie London CR

    Chapter Rep
    Member Since:
    Oct 3, 2003
    star 8
    Joker can't be killed by the state, because if you're insane you can't by tried for murder and whatnot. Joker has the perfect get-out-of-death-row-free card and given neither the justice system or Batman will kill him (and Arkham has terrible security) he can carry on doing what he wants repeatedly.

    Joker's death at the end of Arkham City when trying to get the cure for his Titan Disease was his own fault. Batman actually admitted that despite everything Joker had done to him and others he still would have saved him since he had the cure before Joker spilled it. I'm not sure I would side with that, I mean if Joker had cancer and Batman could cure him I don't see why he should, he didn't save Ra's on a train yet he would save Joker from death?
    The guy murdered Robin, crippled Batgirl, killed Talia (in the game storyline) as well as countless civilians yet Batman would still save him from certain death? I can't see how that would make Batman a bad guy especially if Joker's death is not to do with him.
    Order66Survivor likes this.
  22. Darth_Invidious Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jun 21, 1999
    star 5
    I don't know Ender. Maybe stop an unrepentant mass-murderer for which there can be no hope of rehabilitation or -- as proven time and time again -- permanent confinement?

    I'm of the opinion that Jason's comment to the Joker at the conclusion of the Red Hood story is the one that best explains the Joker and his MO: he simply isn't as crazy as he'd like people to believe. There is a cunning sociopathic mind at work there. But to me, someone that's completely off his rocker wouldn't be able to get away with what he does and would probably find himself most of the time inside a padded cell, not out on the street murdering or otherwise causing chaos until the next time Batman catches him. No, he's not that crazy. But he plays a very crazy, ****ed up game centered mostly around the Bat.

    After all, both in the the comics and in TDK, he's pretty much said it: Batman completes him. Joker does what he does because he's an agent of death and chaos as far as he's concerned, yes, but mostly because he wants to attract the attention of the one person that defines him. He loves to push Batman's buttons in the hopes of achieving any of two things that'd give him victory on the "game" he plays: make Batman as crazy as he is or otherwise make Batman kill him. Nothing would give him the ultimate pleasure even if he's not alive to see it. And Batman, to his shame, knows it. He pretty much said so during The Killing Joke: their dance will only end when one or both of them are dead.

    So the Joker will kill boatloads or even entire cities full of people, make the world burn, get captured and escape over and over again as long as he gets to play his game. That goes beyond the scope of an ordinary sociopath or psychopath. The Joker is nothing but a remorseless terrorist passing himself as a costumed madman. And you're saying killing the Joker achieves nothing? Jim Gordon and Batman are as good as accomplices for letting that cycle continue instead of doing what needs to be done, mainly sending that bastard straight to hell. And I don't believe either of them would devolve into unstoppable maniacs with disregard for law and order for doing just that. Maybe it would be a disservice for law and order, but the Batman is a vigilante. He stands outside of the law by doing what he does. Therefore, he is a champion of justice. And the blood of the thousands of people killed by the Joker cries out for such justice.

    Let's put it another way: Batman has been called the Dark Knight. And the Joker is a dragon; a beast - a monster - that only exists to cause death and destruction. And a knight is often protrayed as a dragonslayer. The knight kills the dragon, he doesn't stop short of the killing blow and just lock it away for a while until it escapes and causes more death and destruction. Killing the dragon doesn't make the dragonslayer a villain. He'll still be a hero because he will be saving lives. The Batman IS NOT saving lives by letting the Joker live, he is simply salving his conscience at the expense of the next unknown victims of the monster he should vanquish. So why would Batman stop being heroic - being a champion of justice - if he makes the one exception with the Joker? Do you truly still think killing a thing like the Joker achieves nothing?
    Last edited by Darth_Invidious, Jan 15, 2013
  23. EHT New Films Manager

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Sep 13, 2007
    star 6
    I love how the Joker is still a much more interesting topic of conversation even though Bane was the villian in the most recent Batman movie. As I said before, the villian(s) of Rises was one of the letdowns, IMO.
    Order66Survivor likes this.
  24. EHT New Films Manager

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Sep 13, 2007
    star 6
  25. GenAntilles Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 24, 2007
    star 4
    So it's proven if you execute someone they go on and commit more crimes? Really Ender? :rolleyes:

    It's a deterrent for the person it's used on. You execute the Joker you he can't kill anymore people. So what would killing the Joker accomplish... him not being able to kill more people. It's that simple.

    Also if Gotham has been unable to find a loophole to execute Joker by now, or no cop or citizen has been willing to just shoot him and be done with it it's their own fault. You can't tell me someone like the Joker would still be alive. If Bin Laden got captured, escaped, pulled another 9/11 attack, got captured, escaped, etc... about 100 times you can bet no law in America would protect him.
    Last edited by GenAntilles, Jan 15, 2013
    Darth_Invidious likes this.