monkeu posted:

monkeu posted:

monkeu posted:

This is from almost 80 years ago just like I said, so yep, you're an idiot. I'm glad all you "Batman fans" in here defending this terrible movie seem to be getting your evidence from Cracked articles you've googled.


These are both from The Dark Knight Returns, a comic which I specifically used in the post you quoted as an example of a comic that isn't in the official continuity and one which is a prime example of a "What If?" story. The intelligence level in here continues to truly astound me

Grendels Dad posted:

Explain why you thought Superman in BvS is edgy or gently caress off.

monkeu posted:

This is from almost 80 years ago just like I said, so yep, you're an idiot. I'm glad all you "Batman fans" in here defending this terrible movie seem to be getting your evidence from Cracked articles you've googled.

monkeu posted:

Ah yes, some stuff from about 70 or 80 years ago before they had introduced the death of his parents

Halloween Jack posted:

This is what you said:

And it is wrong, wrong, wrong. You'd know that if you read the comics, instead of cracking Google articles like an idiot.

monkeu posted:

Hahahahahah you're so pathetically desperate to be right when you know that you're wrong that you're nitpicking to the extreme. Sorry, it's actually from about 6 months after they introduced the death of his parents, but quite obviously from 70 or 80 years ago when they were still establishing the character.

Find me a wealth of examples from within continuity from the last half century. Quick! I think there's some more "batman killing" articles you can frantically Google! Strangely enough people publish articles like that, because the entire basis of the character is that he doesn't use guns and he doesn't kill

monkeu posted:

These are both from The Dark Knight Returns, a comic which I specifically used in the post you quoted as an example of a comic that isn't in the official continuity and one which is a prime example of a "What If?" story. The intelligence level in here continues to truly astound me

monkeu posted:

the entire basis of the character is that he doesn't use guns and he doesn't kill

monkeu posted:

Hahahahahah you're so pathetically desperate to be right when you know that you're wrong that you're nitpicking to the extreme. Sorry, it's actually from about 6 months after they introduced the death of his parents, but quite obviously from 70 or 80 years ago when they were still establishing the character.

Find me a wealth of examples from within continuity from the last half century. Quick! I think there's some more "batman killing" articles you can frantically Google! Strangely enough people publish articles like that, because the entire basis of the character is that he doesn't use guns and he doesn't kill

monkeu posted:

Find me a wealth of examples from within continuity from the last half century. Quick! I think there's some more "batman killing" articles you can frantically Google! Strangely enough people publish articles like that, because the entire basis of the character is that he doesn't use guns and he doesn't kill

monkeu posted:

These are both from The Dark Knight Returns, a comic which I specifically used in the post you quoted as an example of a comic that isn't in the official continuity and one which is a prime example of a "What If?" story. The intelligence level in here continues to truly astound me

Guy A. Person posted:

Also I am pretty sure the movies are not in continuity so I am not sure why they are being held to that standard. The guy who said the movie was a "What if?" earlier had it right. Batman have killed and used guns over the past few decades and people have still recognized him as Batman, that is not the core aspect of his character.

monkeu posted:

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Sir Kodiak posted:

Another casualty of the BvS thread

Halloween Jack posted:

Going from memory, I believe the origin story was introduced in Detective Comics #36 in 1939 and the second Hugo Strange story, with death by Bat-machinegun and Bat-hanging, was from Batman #1 in 1940. If you want more examples, you're going to have to do what you fear most: read and actually engage with artistic texts. I'm not your secretary.

This is why you need to read. You think that "not doing a thing" can be the "entire basis" for a character. So Batman is functionally the same character as the cast of Archie Comics, who are all functionally the same character.

Reading is fun, man. Trust me. The thoughts only hurt at first, or so I'm told.

Fuckman posted:

I really enjoy how effortlessly pretentious this post is about trivia from a comic book released 76 years ago

Halloween Jack posted:

It takes very little effort to pull my copy of Batman Archive Editions Vol. 1 from the shelf to fact-check. Are you sure you know what the word "pretentious" means?

Fuckman posted:

Holy poo poo you sound like the biggest wiener in the world

Halloween Jack posted:

Rubber tires. Honest.

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

Well, look at a basic scene like Senator Finch visiting Lex in his father's den, for an example of fans' difficulty reading such as performances.

Eisenberg as Lex pretty much states outright that he thinks trying desperately to keep things the same is unhealthy. It's silly, magical thinking, because you can't bring your parents back.

That's all superficially sensible but, after Eisenberg drops that line, his entire face twitches and then goes blank. The point of this twitch, this blank-faced expression, is to signal that Lex has not given up the goal of resurrecting his father. He actually believes he can bring his father back if he changes everything.

The question is of course why Lex would want to bring back his abusive father, and that comes when he mocks Finch - play-acting as her, tapping the table annoyingly. When Finch grabs his hand, it's a gesture that's both violent and intimate. Not only does Lex want to be smacked, he sees this gesture as Finch's invitation to be smacked in return. Hence Doomsday.

On top of this, the scene immediately preceding this debate over 'a weapon of assassination' is Lois leaving for Washington to investigate the high-tech 'silver bullet' she found. We pretty much cut directly from Lois leaving Metropolis to Finch arriving at Lex's house. So the mysterious metal in the bullet and wheelchair is, metaphorically, kryptonite - and vice-versa.

I felt this was almost too blatant, but plenty of people nonetheless complained that Lex was 'random' and had no plan.

Halloween Jack posted:

Hot dog! Thank you.

Uncle Wemus posted:

so he wants to bring his father back so he can get revenge on him?

Uncle Wemus posted:

so he wants to bring his father back so he can get revenge on him?

Halloween Jack posted:

Going from memory, I believe the origin story was introduced in Detective Comics #36 in 1939 and the second Hugo Strange story, with death by Bat-machinegun and Bat-hanging, was from Batman #1 in 1940. If you want more examples, you're going to have to do what you fear most: read and actually engage with artistic texts. I'm not your secretary.

This is why you need to read. You think that "not doing a thing" can be the "entire basis" for a character. So Batman is functionally the same character as the cast of Archie Comics, who are all functionally the same character.

Reading is fun, man. Trust me. The thoughts only hurt at first, or so I'm told.

monkeu posted:

Hahahah you're very lucky that there's apparently a moderator in here that loves terrible movies and appreciates pure idiocy or I would have responded to this dismal attempt at a troll 6 hours ago. Bravo at continuing to prove that your only knowledge of Batman comics is stuff that you can get to with one or two quick google searches.

Your ineffectual attempts to deflect attention from the fact that you're wrong by nitpicking my choice of words is simultaneously hilarious and pathetic. Here's some major events from the past few decades. I'd love to hear your explanation on how your theory that "Batman isn't against killing or guns" fits in with them.

• Explain to me how that fits in with Bruce having to take a very important job away from JPV.
  
  
• Explain to me how that fits in with the significance of the pivotal moment after a major natural disaster.
  
  
• How does it explain Batman's reaction to what happened with Jason, Barbara and Damian?
  
  
• How does his apparent willingness to kill and use guns possibly fit in with Morrison's celebrated run?
  
  
• How does it explain the massive significance of his choice to defeat Darkseid?

That's just a few questions that you'd easily be able to answer if you were right (you're not) and if you knew much about the character outside of terrible movies and what you frantically Google (you don't).

Hahah so start desperately googling I guess. I purposely made a couple of them a little ambiguous for you. Can Punishbat's faithful sidekick GoogleGeek rise to the challenge?! All signs point to no

monkeu posted:

Detective No. 27 posted:

To answer monkeu's questions using his own, distorted logic, that version of Batman hasn't been cannon for six years so his opinions on Batfleck wouldn't even change if he was directly modeled after 90s Batman/Morrison's run.

monkeu posted:

Hahahahah I love it, more proof that people defending this trash don't know what they're talking about. The New 52 finished months ago, and Rebirth has merged it with the old continuity. Check the numbering in Action Comics and Detective Comics.

Even if you do want to argue that the New 52 is all that counts now, show me some examples of Batman murdering and using guns from the New 52. Start googling. There aren't any, as an actual Batman fan I've read it all.