Why aren’t people complaining about Rocksteady not making video games for other DC characters? Speaking of video games why is Batman the first thing you see when you play MK vs DC? Why didn’t WB produce movies about other DC characters from 1997 to 2005? Why do you think Batman got a lot of screen time in the Lego movie? Why is Batman in the Green Lantern Blackest Night, TMNT and Predator comics? Ever since Mr. Nolan’s Batman films and the Arkham games Batman’s fan base is getting out of hand, before the dark knight rises came out the fans made threats to people who didn’t give the movie good reviews.
I don’t dislike Batman, I dislike his fan base. Well, I do have issues with this character, but I'll get into that later. Personally, I wouldn’t have minded Batman getting all this attention if the writers would come up with better stories or do interesting things with Dr. Hugo Strange, Mr. Freeze, Bane, and have Batman be at Ra's al Ghul's mercy. (Plus, a Nightwing movie.) The fans do things that annoys me, like comparing Batman to other characters, especially Superman. It’s not fair to do that because of how different they are.
A Batman fan: I can relate to Batman because he’s human, which makes him relatable and a more realistic hero.
By that logic, we should relate to Mr. Zimmerman and the late Bin Laden for what they have done because their human. As far as him being realistic, he’s not; he’s far-fetched. Even Mr. Nolan’s Batman films were far-fetched; I mean, there were elements of Sci-Fi in those films. Also, there are comic books that made Batman more realistic than Mr. Nolan’s films. Batman is not really human, I mean, he does things that aren’t humanly possible, like breathe underwater for ten to twenty minutes, jump from skyscrapers and land perfectly, and his brain is like a computer.
How is he human and realistic if he can do the things I just mentioned? Also, the writers of this character don’t explain how he can do these things. I’m so sick and tired of the because I'm Batman excuse. If I hear that again, I'm going to hurt someone. The because I’m Batman statement holds no value because we know he was trained to become Batman for years. Michael Jordan would look silly if he said I can shoot half-court shots because I'm Michael Jordan. We know he was trained to play basketball. (Granted! Not every NBA player can do that, but that's not the point.)
As far as being relatable goes, I can understand that he saw his parents get shot and murdered right in front of him at a young age; that’s not easy to live with. However, how many people do you know who watch their parents die and dress up as a bat to fight crime? None, I thought so. So, what do you mean, Batman is relatable? Also, what happens to people when they go through a traumatic event? They go to therapy; do you think Bruce would still be Batman if he got help? Heck, do you think he would still be Batman if he finished his training with Master Kirigi?
Whether or not Batman should be considered a hero doesn't change the fact that he's an angry man who doesn't know how to deal with his parent’s death. Alfred and other characters have said that to him, well, not word for word. This is no different if any wealthy person drives into a dangerous place at night and hits criminals with a police club. If you don’t believe me about Bruce not getting over his parent's death, then why are there episodes of Batman: The Animated Series and the Justice League cartoons where Bruce would be happy if his parents weren't murdered?
I’m not trying to be insensitive; I know losing loved ones is not easy to deal with; however, being fixated on their deaths is not the best way of coping. Bruce is letting his fear and anger control his life, just like Spider-Man is letting his guilt control his life. Well, in the Batman Gotham Adventure comic called Batman no more suggests that he would still be Batman because his absence has negative effects on everyone he knows.
To the people who say Superman is overpowered, how is rarely losing any better? I mean, fans say Batman can beat anyone with prep time. Athletes and Soldiers use prep time to prepare for battle or a game. Do they always win? If the answer is no, then why is Batman excluded from that? Side note, I’m surprised that no one made a comic book series or TV show based on Bruce’s seven-year leave from Gotham, before or after Batman Begins. I think it’s funny that Batman was able to stop the Justice League in JLA: Tower of Babel. I mean, he can make plans to stop the Justice League, but he can’t make a plan to stop the Joker.
A Batman fan: The Joker is unpredictable.
Yeah, so what? He should know that by now.
He’s not that smart. I'll elaborate on that later. He's self-aware about how his trauma affects him, but he doesn't do anything about it. This makes him look less sympathetic. He doesn't fight fair with it comes to metahumans. This wouldn't be an issue if he didn't have an ego and wasn't a hypocrite. I mean, how can you say guns are for cowards, and you don't fight metahumans directly? Also, he's no different from the villains as far as having an obsession. How is Batman's obsession with crime any different from the Joker's obsession with discrediting Batman, the Riddler’s obsession with proving his intellect, the Scarecrow’s obsession with fear, Poison Ivy's obsession with plants, Firefly's obsession with burning things, Mad Hatter's obsession with finding Alice, the list goes on.
Let me ask you something, Batman fans; how is Bruce Wayne different from any other wealthy person? He isn’t, as far as spending most of his money on himself. Just because he isn't a douchebag like Tony Stark or Donald Trump, that doesn't protect him from the stigma of being rich. Crime exists because of poverty and inequality, to an extent. If he can afford to upgrade his Batsuit, the Batcave, equipment, and make his Batmobile more secure than the President’s limo, then he has nothing better to do with his time or money.
Side note, another reason why Gotham City is a mess is that they can't or won't execute the Joker because he can hide behind the insanity plea. Are you kidding me? How smart do you have to be to see that the Joker is aware of his actions? Yes! He's crazy, but he's not stupid. Also, I find it funny that they don't suspect Bruce is Batman, not just because he has the means to be Batman, it's because of the different wards he has.
The bottom line is that DC and WB need to give Batman a break and focus on other DC characters, stop making other DC characters look bad just to make Batman look awesome. Well, to be fair, some DC characters are not really DC characters. I don’t have time to get into that. Also, stop doing that with the Joker, I mean, stop making the other Batman villains play second fiddle to make the Joker look good.
You tried to expose us to Green Lantern twice with a movie and, cartoon, but the movie wasn’t a hit, and the cartoon got canceled. There hasn’t been a good Superman movie in decades. I didn’t consider Man of Steel to be a good movie. Also, when are you going to make good Superman video games? Do I really have to comment on Wonder Woman? I’m glad that Green Arrow is getting his moment to shine in the show Arrow, I just wish it wasn't at Batman's expense. I hope the Flash show does the same for the Flash. So, DC, WB, you'd better pick up the pace; look at how many characters Marvel has introduced to the public.
P.S. If Batman is so awesome, why wasn’t he picked to fight Goku in Death Battle? If Batman were picked, how do you think he can beat Goku?
Here’s an example of how crazy a fan acts.
Since we're on the subject of Superman, one of the things they have in common is that both characters are hard to write. Batman is hard to write because writers focus on different aspects of the character, which leads to different interpretations, ask Frank Miller. Side note, this is what bothered me about Greg Rucka's run of the character in the 2000s, he took the worst traits of this character and put them on full display with no rhyme or reason. Also, if you think Bruce Wayne/Batman suffers from a personality disorder, you have no business writing superhero comic books. Yes! He is mentally disturbed, but not to that degree.
Everyone doing their own thing with the character can be problematic because we won't have a definitive version of this character. Batman is a character who fights crime and inspires people. Yes! He uses fear and violence. However, he doesn't internalize it. This character may not be known for telling jokes, but he does have his moments of dry humor or says something that can be turned into a joke. Batman reminds me of James Bond as far as going on adventures, having hi-tech gadgets, and getting with women.
Going back to interpretations, my favorite interpretation of Batman is Batman: The Animated Series because that version humanizes the character. Batman tries to reason with the villains, show them compassion, and he smiles. He's not always a brute. I also like Mr. Bale as Batman, because he uses Batman as a symbol to inspire people. Superman is hard to write because people don’t find this character appealing. You can make Superman one of the smartest characters in the DC Universe, and people will still complain. People shouldn’t have an issue with that because his father, Joe-El, was a scientist. You make Superman-like Batman people complain, you make Superman a father people complain, see, you can’t win when it comes to Superman. Also, I think people dislike Superman for the wrong reason and like Batman for the wrong reason.
How is he human and realistic if he can do the things I just mentioned? Also, the writers of this character don’t explain how he can do these things. I’m so sick and tired of the because I'm Batman excuse. If I hear that again, I'm going to hurt someone. The because I’m Batman statement holds no value because we know he was trained to become Batman for years. Michael Jordan would look silly if he said I can shoot half-court shots because I'm Michael Jordan. We know he was trained to play basketball. (Granted! Not every NBA player can do that, but that's not the point.)
As far as being relatable goes, I can understand that he saw his parents get shot and murdered right in front of him at a young age; that’s not easy to live with. However, how many people do you know who watch their parents die and dress up as a bat to fight crime? None, I thought so. So, what do you mean, Batman is relatable? Also, what happens to people when they go through a traumatic event? They go to therapy; do you think Bruce would still be Batman if he got help? Heck, do you think he would still be Batman if he finished his training with Master Kirigi?
Sidenote, there was a time in the comics when he tells other characters that he's motivated by his parent's death. That annoyed me because other characters lost more than him "cough" Superman "cough". Heck, Cassandra Cain is a more tragic character than him. (Bruce’s parents would still be alive if they had Alfred wait for them in their car when the movie was over, or if Bruce’s parents had taken a Taxi instead of walking in a dark alley. Seriously, what were they thinking?) The fact that Batman is a Billionaire is enough for you not to relate to him. I mean, most people don't know what it's like to be a Billionaire. So let me get this straight; you can relate to Batman despite him being wealthy, but you can't relate to Superman despite him being vulnerable to human emotions. What are you people smoking!?!
I’m not trying to be insensitive; I know losing loved ones is not easy to deal with; however, being fixated on their deaths is not the best way of coping. Bruce is letting his fear and anger control his life, just like Spider-Man is letting his guilt control his life. Well, in the Batman Gotham Adventure comic called Batman no more suggests that he would still be Batman because his absence has negative effects on everyone he knows.
His trauma is also affecting his relationships; it's hard for him to allow himself to be vulnerable with anyone besides Alfred, and this causes him to push people away. This is how I can relate to this character because I do this, so I won't be a burden on anyone. This makes Batman a tragic character because he feels like he can't escape being Batman, and he's obsessed with crime. The bottom line is that whether or not you can relate to a character is not a good enough reason to like or dislike that character. You don't need to do that to be on their side. If that's the case, then the X-Men shouldn't be popular because we don't have superpowers.
Also, if you don’t like the Government, then you shouldn't like Batman. If you're not fond of the Government spying on people, manipulating people, and strong-arming them, then why does Batman get a pass? He's also one of the most paranoid and distrustful characters I've seen in fiction. Why do you think he has kids as sidekicks? Because they're easy to manipulate. (To be fair, almost anyone can be manipulated if you have authority over them, but I digress.) He does give them stability, plus this shows that Bruce wants a family. Despite that, I would like to see a story exploring how Bruce and his team feel about getting involved in his war on crime?
Also, if you don’t like the Government, then you shouldn't like Batman. If you're not fond of the Government spying on people, manipulating people, and strong-arming them, then why does Batman get a pass? He's also one of the most paranoid and distrustful characters I've seen in fiction. Why do you think he has kids as sidekicks? Because they're easy to manipulate. (To be fair, almost anyone can be manipulated if you have authority over them, but I digress.) He does give them stability, plus this shows that Bruce wants a family. Despite that, I would like to see a story exploring how Bruce and his team feel about getting involved in his war on crime?
Being a part of Bruce's crusade doesn't have a positive effect on everyone.
I know the writers did this in the cartoons however it was one-sided. His allies resent Bruce because they feel like he cares more about the mission than his surrogate family and Bruce doesn't reassure them that that's not the case. The thing I want to see happen more with Batman is him losing fighting the villains or trying to stop their plans. Where’s the fun in reading or watching this character if you know he’s going to win in the end?
That’s the main reason why Knightfall is one of my favorite Batman stories because that’s one of the few times Batman gets his butt kicked. He also lost to the reaper in year two, but that story has issues. Batman couldn't beat KGB in Batman ten nights of the beast. Deathstroke beat him in his comic called City of Assassins. I was annoyed that Deathstroke or Bane didn’t give Batman a run for his money in Arkham Origins.
Seriously what was the point of showing us this if this was not going to happen in the game?
To the people who say Superman is overpowered, how is rarely losing any better? I mean, fans say Batman can beat anyone with prep time. Athletes and Soldiers use prep time to prepare for battle or a game. Do they always win? If the answer is no, then why is Batman excluded from that? Side note, I’m surprised that no one made a comic book series or TV show based on Bruce’s seven-year leave from Gotham, before or after Batman Begins. I think it’s funny that Batman was able to stop the Justice League in JLA: Tower of Babel. I mean, he can make plans to stop the Justice League, but he can’t make a plan to stop the Joker.
Going back to the Joker, I find it hard to believe that he knows Batman well enough to know that someone else is under the cowl. There are two things he knows about Batman they are he doesn't kill, and he's resourceful. In the World’s Finest Movie, I'd better see Superman or Wonder Woman mop the floor with Batman; fans seem to forget that Batman is human. I hope this movie will remind them of that.
Let me readdress the things I don’t like about Batman, I'm not fond that he got kids involved in crime-fighting. Yes! He does train them, and he's protective of them. However, it's still irresponsible. Plus, they're not prepared to deal with the aftermath of it. Just like the Army doesn't prepare soldiers to deal with the aftermath of war, they wouldn't suffer from survivor's guilt or PTSD if that wasn't the case, but I digress.
Do I really have to comment on his no-kill rule? I mean, it shouldn't come at the expense of other people. Under the Red Hood addresses this issue; Jason (Bruce's former ally) feels like Bruce values that rule more than him. The reason he gave Jason for why he doesn't kill the Joker is that he's afraid that he won't stop killing or lose his humanity. If that's the case, then Bruce shouldn't be fighting crime because doing this should cost you something; if you're not willing to pay the price, then what are you doing this for? I'm starting to think that the reason why Batman doesn't kill the Joker is that he enjoys chasing after him on some level. Look at how Arkham City ended if you don't believe me. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I want to see Batman dropping bodies left and right, but if he has to resort to killing, it shouldn't make him look less credible. Some religious people put themselves in a position to break the 6th commandment by joining the Army or the police force. Does that mean that they don't take their faith seriously?
Let me ask you something, Batman fans; how is Bruce Wayne different from any other wealthy person? He isn’t, as far as spending most of his money on himself. Just because he isn't a douchebag like Tony Stark or Donald Trump, that doesn't protect him from the stigma of being rich. Crime exists because of poverty and inequality, to an extent. If he can afford to upgrade his Batsuit, the Batcave, equipment, and make his Batmobile more secure than the President’s limo, then he has nothing better to do with his time or money.
Look, I'm not saying that this character isn't a philanthropist or that he shouldn't spend most of his money on himself; however, there are smarter ways to fix Gotham than putting himself in danger. For example, Bruce should have given his hi-tech gadgets to the Gotham P.D. to create a special task force. Do you see what I mean when I say he's not that smart? Heck, even Alfred suggested that in The Dark Knight Rises. Don’t give me that Gotham P.D. is corrupted nonsense. If that’s the case, then Bruce should have hired Lawyers to get rid of the Police Department so that the Department can be rebuilt.
Before you say Bruce used his wealth to rebuild Gotham after No Man's Land, first of all, that's a given. I mean, Gotham is not going to rebuild itself. Second, Bruce had to do that to save face. (If you read No Man's Land, you know what I'm talking about.) This all boils down to credibility. Do you think Bruce's efforts as a philanthropist are credible? Personally, he still doesn't have the high ground. I know you can't fix everything with money, but you can't fix things from a distance either. If you read Knightfall, you know he took his life of luxury for granted.
If Bruce did the things I suggested, then Gotham could be fixed, but no, he wants to send that money on himself because he has problems. Heck, Bruce’s father made the same suggestion in the trailer for the latest Arkham game. That's the problem, it's hard to appreciate Bruce as a Philanthropist when the movies and cartoons don't focus on that. (If they did, it's an afterthought.) Besides No Man's Land, the popular Batman comics don't focus on that either.
Also, Batman’s villains can be stopped without Batman around, like the GCPD should have put a RICO case on Black Mask and Penguin. The FBI can stop the Riddle; his riddles are not so hard that they can't figure them out. Bane exists to challenge Batman; no Batman, no Bane. Ra’s al Ghul wouldn’t come to Gotham if he sees that Gotham isn’t corrupted. Two-Face would be in a psych ward and get surgery for his face. SWAT can handle Poison Ivy, and Killer Croc can be contained and get help for his condition. Also, Mad Hatter would also be in a Psych ward, and The Joker can be stopped without Batman by playing mind games with him.
Besides Clayface, Catwoman is the one villain that can be hard to stop; she's smart, resourceful, and maintains a low profile. To be fair, I don't consider Catwoman a villain; she works better as a morally ambiguous character. I found it odd that Batman doesn't have a plan to stop her from stealing. That's because he's trying to... (My editor pops me upside the head.)
Besides Clayface, Catwoman is the one villain that can be hard to stop; she's smart, resourceful, and maintains a low profile. To be fair, I don't consider Catwoman a villain; she works better as a morally ambiguous character. I found it odd that Batman doesn't have a plan to stop her from stealing. That's because he's trying to... (My editor pops me upside the head.)
Me: What! I wasn't going to say anything sexual.
My Editor: You were thinking about it.
Me: I didn't say anything! (My editor grabs a bat, no pun intended.) Fine, I'll move on.
You tried to expose us to Green Lantern twice with a movie and, cartoon, but the movie wasn’t a hit, and the cartoon got canceled. There hasn’t been a good Superman movie in decades. I didn’t consider Man of Steel to be a good movie. Also, when are you going to make good Superman video games? Do I really have to comment on Wonder Woman? I’m glad that Green Arrow is getting his moment to shine in the show Arrow, I just wish it wasn't at Batman's expense. I hope the Flash show does the same for the Flash. So, DC, WB, you'd better pick up the pace; look at how many characters Marvel has introduced to the public.
No comments:
Post a Comment