What if Tim Burton Continued with Batman Forever and Batman & Robin

[Fudgie]

Great, you don’t have a clue who James Bond is.

I’ll explain: he does have gadgets (including cars) and he is trained in fighting, very muchy like Batman. Watch the movies, they’re great.

Does Bond carry the arsenal of gadgets on a belt around his waist? Can Bond enter a room unnoticed the way Batman does? Does Bond have a Batmobile, Batwing, Batskiboat, Batcycle at his disposal? Did Bond travel the world and get trained by masters in martial arts and escape artistry?

Cos if you think them on equal footing just cos they both have gadgets and can fight, then you don't know either character very well. Lots of fictional characters fall under that very big umbrella heading.

Now that said, what does any of this have to do with Bond killing being a good thing again?

You're the one that brought Bond into this discussion. You tell me.

I’m just questioning this notion of measuring the quality of a movie according to the legality of the main role’s actions.

Bond is doing the job he was legally trained for. Batman is not legally or morally obligated to go out and play judge, jury, and executioner with people's lives especially when the kills are not even necessary in order to stop or save someones life.

I hope you’re not trying to tell me how to reply. I thought you were against that.

I asked you a question. Do you perceive questions as someone telling you what to do?

I don’t know if you’re aware of this but everything that Batman is is against the law. Law doesn’t allow people to chase criminals by themselves, specially while hiding their identities. Law doesn’t allow to have people with cars that are able to launch missiles and destroy public and private proterty as Batman does all the time.

Man, Batman concept himself is against the law.

Jay walking and littering is against the law, too. But I dont condemn people for that cos they aint hurting anyone and playing god with peoples lives. Of course Batman is legally against the law. But his offense at worst are stuff like stealin evidence from crime scenes and some property damage. He aint hurtin anyone doing that.

If Bruce Wayne were so moral as you love to think he’d be a cop or a lawyer. But Bale’s or Keaton’s Bruce, he knows that’s not enough.

Bruce Wayne knows Cops and Lawyers just dont cut it in a city as filthy as Gotham, but that doesnt mean that he thinks the only way to solve the problem is to kill it. He can stop crime without doing that.

I’m pretty sure a lot of future victims were saved when Batman blew Axis up. And a lot more when Joker died.

Thats weak reasonin. You cant kill people on the premise of what they could or might do in the future. Anyone with violent tendencies or a history of violent tendencies could kill again. Should we line em all up against the wall and give em the firing squad cos they could kill again?

Sure, once the code was cracked there was no chance the Joker could, for example, use the same Smilex formula to gas Gotham. Oh wait, there was!

Looks like the Joker had to be stopped at any cost. Once Axis is destroyed there’s absolutely no chance of future Smilex production, see?

Goin in there and roundin up Jokers men, and then havin the Cops shut down the place would put an end to the poison operation there. Batman didnt have to blow the whole place up. Or if he felt absolutely compelled to, he could have rounded up Jokers men first and cleared em out and then blew it up. But he has no value for human life thats why he did it. Soulless killer.

And lol at the idea of blowing up Axis because he killed his parents. He wanted Joker dead because he killed his parents. Axis thing was just to stop the mass poisoning.

'kay then explain why he didnt destroy the place earlier? Like when Joker was actually usin the place to poison the city products? Why did he go straight there and bomb it right after he realized Joker killed his folks?

It’s not his place to chase them either. He just took that task against any law.

Put a mask on and try to tell the police that you are going to chase criminals on your own account. You’ll be in jail before those criminals.

You cant seriously be comparin catching criminals and givin them to the Cops to killing them.

There's a lot of reasons why Batman would.

Yeah like being a soulless killer vigilante with no regard for human life.

Thing is, those reasons won’t make any movie any better or worse by themselves.

Maybe not for you. But it ruined Batman for me in those movies. It goes against everything Batman stands for. Cant enjoy a Batman movie that bastardizes Batman like that.

If a corrupt politician killed Bruce’s parents that could be possible. As far as I can remember it’s not the case.

Jokers men didnt kill his parents either. Devil fire breather and strongman didnt kill his folks either. So if he can extend his murderous rampage beyond the Joker, then he can for the other rotten apples in Gotham. He nearly killed Penguin and Catwoman in Returns too.

Also if a masked vigilante showed up WITHOUT killing people the police would be forced to hunt him down and arrest him anyways. Batman is against the law no matter what.

And they did initially. Nolan's movies handled this better cos although the 'official policy' was always to arrest Batman, the good cops of Gotham like Gordon turn a blind eye and support him cos they know hes a decent guy helpin the city in ways they cant and he aint hurtin anyone doin it.

In Burton Gotham you can go around killing criminals and the cops will cheer ya for it. So stupid.

If he doesn’t kill then that would make otehr people not killing? Can you elaborate in the logic of this?

Sure. Batman is a product of his parents been murdered. He doesnt want to inflict that on anyone else. A daily night of torture consumed by pain and anger. Forced to feel like you have this great penance on you.

I’m sure Batman relates a lot more to sons of innocent people like he was.

No way. Innocent or guilty, the children are always innocent. They cant help who or what their parents are.

Anyways no child would want his daddy to go to jail forever. But if daddy kills people dady has to face the consequences.

A child can at least see and speak to their daddy in prison instead of crying by his grave side. Many familys visit relatives in jail and maintain relationships with them through the hard times. Death is not the consequences daddy has to face just cos Batman plays god and decides so.

Yes.......... so?

He finds an effective way to save people from criminals but he needs to go ‘nah, it’s too easy, I’ll stop doing it this way’?

What do you mean yeah so? Once you start killing you dont stop. Thats why Batman doesnt do it. He said so himself. Once you cross that line hed never go back.

Batman context: a man in a personal look for justice goes beyond the law.

That context can – and so it has been done many times - range from killing to no killing.

And those who go outside the law and kill are in the wrong morally and legally.

I’m sure his m.o. is a known matter also.

No cos even later on after he cracks their poison code for 'em the newscaster says Gotham still doesnt know if hes friend or foe.

Wrong again. He cares a lot about Batman but feels that mistery around him is essential. And guess what, it worked.

No it didnt work for me. Batmans not supposed to be an enigma. Hes a multi dimensional character with lots of layers for exploration. Burton didnt care. Hed rather shows us Joker lustin after Vicki Vale and waffling about art than exploring his leading character.

But he knows Hictchcock’s words also: The better the villiain is the better the movie will be.

Too bad he didnt follow Hitch***** lead and not sacrifice the other characters in favor of giving all the attention to the villain. A good director can make a great villain without being at the expense of the hero or other characters in the picture.

Endangering the life of a dozen of policemen and destroying public and private property: “be a bit wreckless.” Only in your world.

Oh so you dont think he was wreckless then?

Let’s not forget how many police cars Batman literally destroyed in such a violent way in those tunnels. “It was a miracle no one died.” More than a miracle it was some unbelievable thing the writers had to add.

Nail on the head. He was in the wrong. He knows it. It was said to him by Alfred. Nolan had the good taste to address the point at let the audience know too that what Batman did there was wrong. Burtons movies are tasteless enough to not address this serious issue at all.

Every life in Gotham City since those criminals werew about to spread toxic gas all over the city.

The gas was already made. I mean he knew Joker was gonna be at the parade at midnight. How fast did he think gas on that scale could be produced and hauled into Gotham? We already know he didnt have to blow up the place in order to shut down the poison operation in there. There is no excuse for what he did. It was an act of vengeance.

I didn’t say he killed him, I said he’s morally responsible because he could have saved him. In fact, he saved him when he thought he was a man looking for justice. Then he changed his mind and let him die when he felt like it.

He saved him the first time cos he crated the dangerous situation in Ras house by triggering those explosives so it was his responsibility to get him outta there. He didnt place Ras on that train on that suicide mission.

Not the same as killing but in your book his lacks of morals would make him unworthy of our interest.

No it doesnt cos Batman wasnt the instigator of the situation Ras placed himself in. Batmans oath is to never take a life. He didnt take one.

The children were there, Batman blew up the cars anyways.

He blew up cars with nobody in 'em. So I still say ya cant prove he didnt check first before doin it.

People were walking in that mall, Batman shot his guns and passed by running anyways.

There was nobody near those glass doors when he drove in there.

Cops were obviously in those police cars, Batman crushed and made the cars to crash violently all the same.

We already covered that one.

My entire point: morals don’t define how good a movie is.

That depends on the movie. Nobody would like a Spider-Man or Superman who does what Keaton Batman did any more than a killing Batman is acceptable.

The excuse tossed around that it was done for like a year in the beginning is weak sauce. One year out of Batmans 50 year existence and they portray him as the very thing he isnt. Like makin Gordon a useless non entity when theres like decades of great Gordon and Batman working relationship stuff. Its for these reasons and more why Burton Batman flicks fail as Batman movies.

I remember it was Goirdon the one who insisted in not killing him. Batman’s only reply: “I’ll do my best.”

Then you'll also remember that when Joker challenges Batman to kick the hell out of him at the end Batman says no cos hes doin it by the book and cos he doesnt want to.

That said, he looked for revenge in the comics. Read "Batman Year Two." It wasn't until someone else killed Joe Chill that he stopped trying to kill him with the same gun Chill used 'that night.'

He wanted revenge but he didnt get exact it. Chill even tells Batman that he wont kill him. We never find out if he would or not cos like you say Chill got killed.

Yeah. Absolutely right.

Not a very convincin argument.

And I love your ideas: Batman needed to be created because Gotham’s police is way too corrupt and when he decides to stop Axis chemicals... he needs to call the police

Why not? Even the Cops are capable of shuttin down a chemical factory for gods sake.

Not only Batman knew it was needed, he proved blowing Axis worked.

Yeah cos nobody died at the parade did they.

Pretty stupid. Have you noticed he carries an utility belt? Guess why? He knows he might face some dangers so he knows he has to be prepared. You don’t need to be a psychic to know that.

Ya cant carry somethin you dont have yet.

Oh, so it’s okay.

Even when he was ill for three days, and he didn’t recover until Fox prepared an antidote.

Yes. being sick doesnt equal death. Any competent doctor could make an antidote by analyzing his blood like Fox did. Rachels case was different cos she was given a fatal dose.

So he didn’t even know if there was antidote or not? Then he destroyed those cars and put all those policemen’s lives in danger just in case?

No he knew it would be there later cos Fox said he'd bring over what he had.

And now that you mention, if the dose was a concentrated one, potentially lethal, and Crane explained that aloud and Batman knew about it... a) how is that Batman gassed Crane with a potenmtially lethal gas? And b) How is that Crance got the same dose Rachel did and no one gave him the antidote and yet he didn’t die?

How do ya know Crane got the same dose as Rachel? You dont. He clearly didnt since Crane was fine. Ya dont know how many different concentrations of the gas Scarecrow carries.

 

[Fudgie]

Fudgie, you shouldnt base Bond abbilities on frigging Roger Moore....please, if you are not bothered to know the literary character at least watch the Craig (and to a lesser extent) and Dalton movies. Bond is not some lucky guy with gadgets, he's been extensively trained way beyond using guns and stuff, that fella is a ruthless killing machine, you need way beyond attitude and luck for that letme tell ya.

Yeah and what extreme fighting skills did Craig display that show hes on Batmans level?

 

[Spoonman]

Yeah and what extreme fighting skills did Craig display that show hes on Batmans level?

Neither me nor El Payaso were saying Bond and Bats were in equal terms, the way I see it is that you just said something very ignorant abut the Bond character with such self assurance that each of us just pointed that out, simple as that, they are obviously not on equal terms but Bond is no avarage though guy, that is all. Oh an as to what fighting skills Craig displayed on screen? Better than what Christian "Elbow, spin, elbow, elbow..non existing kicks" Bale did.

 

[Fudgie]

Neither me nor El Payaso were saying Bond and Bats were in equal terms, the way I see it is that you just said something very ignorant abut the Bond character with such self assurance that each of us just pointed that out, simple as that, they are obviously not on equal terms but Bond is no avarage though guy, that is all.

I never said nothin ignorant about Bond. I never called Bond an average guy. I said he has not got the advantages Batman has. And Im right. Batman is in an entire league above Bond in the gadgets and fighting department.

Oh an as to what fighting skills Craig displayed on screen? Better than what Christian "Elbow, spin, elbow, elbow..non existing kicks" Bale did.

It got the job done. He wasnt exactly fighting high class fighters. Just common thugs.

 

[returntovoid]

His character didnt evolve. DC stopped him from being in killer after all the complaints they got from readers in Batman #1.

That was the creative/editorial reasoning for it.

If you think in terms of story/characters, he evolved.

He had literally just tried to squash the Penguin in his duckie with the batskiboat.

What are you talking about????

He just damaged the duckie a bit, he didn't try to squash him.

If Catwoman wasnt supernatural, and that sand truck had not been driving by when it was she'd be a red splat on the street after he punched her off the building.

He did not try to kill her.

So why did Batman not shut down Axis earlier in the flick when Joker first launched his poisoned product enterprise?

Batman needed time to investigate and learn about it.

Since he's human, not psychic or superhuman.

So you admit hes like the Punisher then?

No, hell no. Punisher does not spare some, he exterminates all.

At least, killer Batman spares some.

Where was the honor in blowing up Axis when he didnt have to?

Joker took over the factory, you also saw that the goons were heavily firing machine bullets all over the armored Batmobile so they were prepared this time knowing that if they shoot Batman in his mouth that he could die. Remember that the Joker goons figured out he was human back in the alley because the mouth area looked human when they tried to take his mask off.

Where was the honor in setting that poor bastard on fire with the Batmobile turbine when he could have just got out of the batmobile

That guy in the devil suit tried burning people.

There was too much chaos and lives at stakes that Batman had to be quick.

He took out five clowns surrounding him with a batarang later in the flick, and one of them had a bazooka pointed at him. Its not like he has to kill these people.

He spared those clowns, he didn't kill them.

Its like Burton looked at Batmans comic book history and chose the weakest and worst representations of the characters.

The original 1939-1940 Batman comics are regarded as one of the best decades of Batman comics by Batman fans, comic book fans, Batman historians and scholars. You act as if Burton took the 50's or 60's Batman comics or the 60's TV show for the representation.

No 1939-1940 Batman comics = no Batman at all

He can do that without murdering them as the comics have proven many times over.

Did you not fully read that blog post by jamesCameronOnl???

While Batman stopped killing for a long time (he was killing again, although occasionally ever since the late 60's), he never showed any kind of exceptional resentment or fear towards fire weapons and there's far too many examples throughout the decades to present them all, but he did use them during the silver age (panel below from World's Finest Comics #27)

In the 80's and 90's (panel below from Detective Comics #627)

And still uses them occasionally today (panel below from Detective Comics #710)

And while Batman stopped killing ever since the 1943 due to becoming a kid friendly character, despite the fact that he got his moral code he resumed occasional killing starting with the late 1960's in Brave and The Bold # 83 in which he destroys a German plane using a hand grenade and uses dynamite to blow up a convoy of German soldiers as they are crossing a bridge. As Batman said while breaking his rule in Batman #420 (1988): Sometimes you have to ignore the rules. I'm not in this business to protect the rules, I serve justice. Since there's also too many instances showing Batman occasionally killing since the late 60's, here are just a few examples from each decade

In the 60's (panel below from Brave and The Bold # 83)

In the 70's (panel below from Batman #290)

In the 80's (panel below from Batman #425)

In the 90's (panel below from Detective Comics #613)

In 2000's (panel below from Batman #576)

Althought the modern age Batman kills mostly for self defense,

that's not always the case, as also illustrated by some panels above. When the enemy seems to dangerous to be kept alive, Batman does what's necessary. Some examples:

Batman #271 (1976)

Batman #337 (1981)

In Batman: Legends of the Dark Knight # 54, a demon called Osric Drood gains power by draining Batman's blood, and as he explains, he can only sustain his energy using murderers' blood. By the end of the story Bruce wonders if he would save the man he had killed in self defense if he had a chance

Batmans about striking fear through imagery and theatrics, not being a executioner.

Sometimes criminals push things too far and leave you in a be killed or kill situation.

How merciful of him. He only did that so they could spread the word about him. 'I want you to tell all your friends about me'.

I see that you only quoted quarter of the post. In the post I also mentioned that instead of killing, Batman disarmed the asian Joker goon that had the katana swords and the other goon ran away with fear but Batman let him go instead of chasing after him to kill him.

Eventually hed find himself killin muggers and car jackers just cos he believes a few months in prison wont make them change their ways and theyre nothin but a stain on society.

Batman does not kill petty criminals, even the Burton and 39-40 Batman would not do that.

 

[Fudgie]

That was the creative/editorial reasoning for it.

Yeah based off the public complaining about Batman bein a killer.

If you think in terms of story/characters, he evolved.

No he just stopped killing after Batman #1.

What are you talking about????

He just damaged the duckie a bit, he didn't try to squash him.

He crushed the duckie with his batskiboat and took the things head off in the process. It was totally destroyed. If Penguin had not managed to get out of it in like 1.5 seconds hed be dead meat.

He did not try to kill her.

What do you call punching her off a building?

Batman needed time to investigate and learn about it.

Since he's human, not psychic or superhuman.

What investigations did he do? He went there straight there out of the blue after he realized Joker killed his folks. We are never shown him doin any investigations about it.

No, hell no. Punisher does not spare some, he exterminates all.

At least, killer Batman spares some.

Actually Punisher has spared many.

Joker took over the factory, you also saw that the goons were heavily firing machine bullets all over the armored Batmobile so they were prepared this time knowing that if they shoot Batman in his mouth that he could die. Remember that the Joker goons figured out he was human back in the alley because the mouth area looked human when they tried to take his mask off.

So you think Batman cannot sneak into a huge dark chemical factory and cherry pick off armed thugs one by one? BS. If he can just walk around the streets in the open and take out the armed Red Triangle gang who have guns and bazookas then he can take out the men in Axis. Cant believe Im actually defendin Keatons Batman competence to you.

That guy in the devil suit tried burning people.

There was too much chaos and lives at stakes that Batman had to be quick.

Why didnt he kill all of the red triangle thugs who were armed and could easily kill someone? Why didnt just get out of the batmobile and disarm the thug with a batarang and kick his butt? Theres no reason for it other than he wanted to kill him.

He spared those clowns, he didn't kill them.

Yeah and they were just as much of a threat to innocent people as devil guy.

The original 1939-1940 Batman comics are regarded as one of the best decades of Batman comics by Batman fans, comic book fans, Batman historians and scholars.

1939-1940 is not a decade. Its one year. One year out of a 50 year history where a version of Batman got dropped cos people hated seeing Batman killing.

If it was so great then killer Batman would have been adapted into more live action versions of the character. But Burtons the only one who did it. I'm glad his overly violent style caught up with him in Returns.

You act as if Burton took the 50's or 60's Batman comics or the 60's TV show for the representation.

How did I do that then? Id have to be callin them campy flicks for that.

No 1939-1940 Batman comics = no Batman at all

He wouldnt have lasted past 1940 if thr DC editorial staff didnt adhere to the publics wishes to get rid of killer Batman.

Did you not fully read that blog post by jamesCameronOnl???

I did and we already discussed it. His examples are not of batman making deliberate kills.

Sometimes criminals push things too far and leave you in a be killed or kill situation.

That wasnt the case for Keatons Batmans kills.

I see that you only quoted quarter of the post. In the post I also mentioned that instead of killing, Batman disarmed the asian Joker goon that had the katana swords and the other goon ran away with fear but Batman let him go instead of chasing after him to kill him.

I covered this with ya too. I said Keaton Batman kills when it suits him.

Batman does not kill petty criminals, even the Burton and 39-40 Batman would not do that.

He gets no points for that. Ya might as well pat Ted bundy on the back for not killin kids.

 

[returntovoid]

I'm f'ing done with answering to your posts, you are far too stubborn to stop unfairly bashing the Burton films. Just admit that they are not your cup of tea, no use proving how horrible you think they are.

What investigations did he do? He went there straight there out of the blue after he realized Joker killed his folks. We are never shown him doin any investigations about it.

Hhhm... as Bruce he was watching the smilex commercials on TV and had suspicions. So he bought those products from the supermarket to study the chemicals/ingredients carefully and figured it out later, this was overtly implied. He also explained his findings to Vicki in the Batcave, later after rescuing her.

 

[Fudgie]

I'm f'ing done with answering to your posts, you are far too stubborn to stop unfairly bashing the Burton films. Just admit that they are not your cup of tea, no use proving how horrible you think they are.

I'm stubborn and unfair cos I dont like the Burton movies? In what warped world does that make sense? I have admitted several times that I dont like his movies and think they are bad Batman movies and I've been give lots of reasons why I think it when I could have easily just made one dimensional posts just saying I think theyre bad and not givin any reasons why I think it.

Hhhm... as Bruce he was watching the smilex commercials on TV and had suspicions

How do ya know he has suspicions about Axis?

So he bought those products from the supermarket to study the chemicals/ingredients carefully and figured it out later, this was overtly implied. He also explained his findings to Vicki in the Batcave, later after rescuing her.

No he bought the products to crack the poison code. Nothin was said about the source of the chemicals. He explained to Vicki the dangerous combos of products. He also said Jokers tainted lots of products at their source. Nothin was said about Axis been the place they were makin it.

 

[returntovoid]

I'm stubborn and unfair cos I dont like the Burton movies?

You're inclined to dislike them, that's your opinion and I respect that.

But trying to prove they're horrible is unfair on those who like them.

How do ya know he has suspicions about Axis?

He saw Joker stabbing a Mobster with quill pen in public as Bruce, he figured out it was the guy Jack that he dropped in the chemical tank and in Jack's file it was listed that he's good with chemistry. Seeing Joker in that commercial convinced him that something wrong is up.

Fell into chemical tank/is good at chemistry/is poisoning people with products = he's using Axis chemical for the poison to kill people.

Nothin was said about the source of the chemicals.

Well, they couldn't show him in the lab for a very long scene.

Suspend your disbelief and it's already implied that he knows the source.

Nothin was said about Axis been the place they were makin it.

No character said it.

But there was a scene in Axis where Joker was guiding his goons to transport loads of chemical tanks.

 

[Fudgie]

You're inclined to dislike them, that's your opinion and I respect that.

But trying to prove they're horrible is unfair on those who like them.

So you're sayin nobody should be allowed criticize any movie cos its unfair to people who do like them? You're pullin my leg right?

He saw Joker stabbing a Mobster with quill pen in public as Bruce, he figured out it was the guy Jack that he dropped in the chemical tank and in Jack's file it was listed that he's good with chemistry. Seeing Joker in that commercial convinced him that something wrong is up.

Well yeah of course he knew somethin was wrong. Joker just announced on TV he was poisoning everyones products. Dont have to be Sherlock Holmes to work that one out.Because Jack fell into a vat of chemicals and became Joker, and hes good with chemistry, Bruce deduced from those two pieces of info that Axis is where its been made?

Even if I bought that illogical conclusion I gotta ask ya again why didnt he go and tell the cops about it or go in and shut it down himself then? Why did he wait until after he found out Joker killed his folks, and then blow the whole place up when he didnt have to? He could have shut it down in at least three other ways without killing anyone. Ya want me to list 'em again?

Well, they couldn't show him in the lab for a very long scene.

Why not? Why could we not even have gotten a 2 minute scene where we see him work it out?

Suspend your disbelief and it's already implied that he knows the source.

Its too big of a plot point to just suspend my disbelief. Its the first time he kills in the movie and its a huge mass murder scale slaughter. It was also totally unjustified. It makes no sense that he waited until then to try and shut down Axis.

No character said it.

But there was a scene in Axis where Joker was guiding his goons to transport loads of chemical tanks.

I know that. I'm talkin about Batman sayin it in the cave scene with Vicki you were talkin about.

 

[returntovoid]

So you're sayin nobody should be allowed criticize any movie cos its unfair to people who do like them?

Go ahead and criticize as to why you don't like them but don't go too overboard to the point that users will get in a overly heated debate with you that's leads to humongous chunks of reply.

why didnt he go and tell the cops about it or go in and shut it down himself then?.

He must have been wanted dead or alive considering he was considered just as dangerous as The Joker, no one knew clearly what the hell he was and most believed him to be a urban legend.

 

[Fudgie]

Go ahead and criticize as to why you don't like them but don't go overboard to the point that users will get in a overly heated debate with you.

If people get heated with me over discussin a movie thats their problem. I dont respond to it. I keep makin my points with a calm head. I havent insulted anyone for their opinion. But you called me stubborn and unfair just cos I dont agree with ya.

He must have been wanted dead or alive considering he was considered just as dangerous as The Joker, no one knew clearly what the hell he was and most believed him to be a urban legend.

I'm not talkin about him walkin into the Cop shop and tellin them first hand. An anonymous phone call or somethin would do the trick.

 

[returntovoid]

An anonymous phone call or somethin would do the trick.

Well, this depiction of Batman wants remain hidden in the shadows as much as possible. Wouldn't the cops be able to trace the number he's calling from??? There's no way that he could use a pay-phone and breaking into the police office would be too risky considering no one there trusts him if he were caught.

 

[Fudgie]

Well, this depiction of Batman wants remain hidden in the shadows as much as possible.

So an anonymous phone call would be right up his street cos its anonymous.

Wouldn't the cops be able to trace the number he's calling from???

Do Cop shops trace every phone call they get when their phone rings? You also have to be on the line long enough to trace a call.

There's no way that he could use a pay-phone

Why?

and breaking into the police office would be too risky considering no one there trusts him if he were caught.

He doesnt need to do that. Hes not trying to reach life on the other side of the galaxy, hes just makin an anonymous tip to the Cops. You make it sound like its an impossible task to pick up a phone and saying somethin that would take about 10 seconds to say.

 

[returntovoid]

Why?

Pay-phones are not in dark alleys.

Pay-phones are usually on side-walks and subways where people are.

Also, if Batman calls from Wayne Manor then after talking, the cops will trace it to that Mansion and figure out Bruce Wayne is Batman. What's the point of a secret-identity, then???

 

[Fudgie]

Pay-phones are not in dark alleys.

Pay-phones are usually on side-walks and subways where people are.

You think hes gonna walk to a pay phone dressed as Batman? He can do it as Bruce Wayne, or send Alfred to do it. Youre makin a big deal out the simplest thing like usin a public pay phone.

Also, if Batman calls from Wayne Manor then after talking, the cops will trace it to that Mansion and figure out Bruce Wayne is Batman.

The Cops cant trace anythin unless he stays on the phone for at least 2 minutes. It would take less than 20 seconds to give 'em the info they need.

 

[returntovoid]

After reading user JamesCameronOnls brilliant blog post on the connection between BTAS and the Tim Burton Batman films. I think Tim Burton's depiction of Riddler, Two-Face, Mr. Freeze, Poison Ivy and Scarecrow would have been similar to BTAS except far darker/twisted.

 

[Zachhelms]

If Tim Burton directed Batman Forever and Batman and Robin, the movies would actually be pretty good. Batman Returns was great and is still today my favorite Batman movie. I loved the whole Gotham atmosphere and the villains were great. After Tim Burton left, the movies went down will. I don't think Nolan's movies are as good as Batman Returns.

 

[GothamAlleys]

After reading user JamesCameronOnls brilliant blog post on the connection between BTAS and the Tim Burton Batman films. I think Tim Burton's depiction of Riddler, Two-Face, Mr. Freeze, Poison Ivy and Scarecrow would have been similar to BTAS except far darker/twisted.

Yea, BTAS is as close to getting a sequel to Burton's movies as we will get. And Im sure Burton's Two Face wouldnt be a ******ed cousin of Joker with bubblegum face and Riddler wouldnt be an overly flamboyant homosexual Joker knockoff

 

[Ponyboy]

I wonder if Burton would've kept Billy Dee as Harvey?

 

[GothamAlleys]

He sure would and it wouldve been interesting to see Billy Dee's take. TAS in a way followed by having Dent of a different ethnicity. Another interesting thing about it is that very likely Stan Winston would continue on with Burton, so the design of Two Face wouldve been done by the great late Stan

 

[Two-Face]

I wonder if Burton would've kept Billy Dee as Harvey?

No question hence why he was cast it's a shame Billy Dee wasn't in Returns.

 

[akfj]

He sure would and it wouldve been interesting to see Billy Dee's take. TAS in a way followed by having Dent of a different ethnicity. Another interesting thing about it is that very likely Stan Winston would continue on with Burton, so the design of Two Face wouldve been done by the great late Stan

What?!?!

 

[Majik1387]

Having Dent with a tan equaled a different ethnicity to some people.

 

[Travesty]

Having Dent with a tan equaled a different ethnicity to some people.

So did Two-Face continually lay on one side of his body to keep up with his tan?