PDA

View Full Version : Batman: Strange Days - Bruce Timm's Batman 75th Anniversary Short



sumnerd
07-09-2014, 08:03 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFwOS2R9o_8

Bladewind
07-10-2014, 05:15 AM
I loved it right up until the end ! Why did Bats let Strange fall to his death? The batarang/ grapple couldn't have gone around both of them?

Sheesh.

Der Schatten
07-10-2014, 01:45 PM
I loved it right up until the end ! Why did Bats let Strange fall to his death? The batarang/ grapple couldn't have gone around both of them?

Sheesh.

Because he's no longer a superhero.

Bladewind
07-10-2014, 02:08 PM
Because he's no longer a superhero.

Precision - he's no longer being written as a superhero, but yeah.

Der Schatten
07-10-2014, 02:15 PM
Precision - he's no longer being written as a superhero, but yeah.

Fictional characters are whatever their writers say they are.

If a fictional character is no longer being written as a particular thing, doesn't that mean they are no longer that particular thing?

If you write Snoopy as a day-dreaming dog, he's a day-dreaming dog. If stop writing Snoopy as a day-dreaming dog and instead you write him as a murderous super-spy, he's a no longer a day-dreaming dog, but rather he's a murderous super-spy. In this case, Snoopy was a day-dreaming dog. But not anymore.

If Batman continues to be written not as a live-saving superhero, but rather a dark action-hero with a bat-fetish, then he's no longer a superhero, but rather a dark action-hero with a bat-fetish.

Bladewind
07-10-2014, 03:00 PM
Fictional characters are whatever their writers say they are.

If a fictional character is no longer being written as a particular thing, doesn't that mean they are no longer that particular thing?

If you write Snoopy as a day-dreaming dog, he's a day-dreaming dog. If stop writing Snoopy as a day-dreaming dog and instead you write him as a murderous super-spy, he's a no longer a day-dreaming dog, but rather he's a murderous super-spy. In this case, Snoopy was a day-dreaming dog. But not anymore.

If Batman continues to be written not as a live-saving superhero, but rather a dark action-hero with a bat-fetish, then he's no longer a superhero, but rather a dark action-hero with a bat-fetish.

Thing is, it could be fixed rather easily. The short above by having the grapple catch both of them... by choosing not to let the villains die in every single freaking movie. It's a conscious choice.

I know, Bats had a gun when he started out and Supes wasn't the moral boy scout we so love to see him as... but the character evolved into that.

My favorite part of Batman The Dark Knight was not the fact that he refused to let the Joker die. That elevated him beyond street thug. It's a simple thing for the comics to do.

They simply need to choose to wright the character a certain way.

What's funny though, is that this conversation can quickly devolve into a "Batman wouldn't do that" conversation and we'd both be missing the point.

I concede the point though Der Schatten. He is whatever he is written.

Der Schatten
07-10-2014, 04:14 PM
For what it's worth, I completely agree that not only is it an easy fix, but also that it shouldn't need fixing because he should be written as a superhero.

Bladewind
07-10-2014, 04:26 PM
Your signature says it all.

saint_matthew
07-10-2014, 08:31 PM
I loved it right up until the end ! Why did Bats let Strange fall to his death? The batarang/ grapple couldn't have gone around both of them?

Strangely I'm alright with the ending (if you'll excuse the pun). He shot out a bat-line to secure the girl, Hugo let go of the girl & fell to his death. Had he kept hold he wouldn't have fallen, he let go out of fear of Batman. Batman couldn't launch a second line without letting loose the first one, at the very tipping point when doing so could have sent her over the cliff to.

I'm alright with this conclusion, it reminds me of the actions of EARLY Batman.... Like Batman still uses guns Batman: Proto-Batman if you will.

Bladewind
07-11-2014, 06:02 AM
It`s not that I find it bad. It just stands out to me... Just as "I won`t kill you, but I don`t have to save you" in Bats Begins, and the him saving the Joker in Dark Knight...

There`s a book I was reading, a lot of it was meandering drivel (in the sense of repetitive and Captain Obvious worthiness) but The Philosphy of Batman was interesting on a few levels, adressing this very issue. I wonder where the writer would take his topic with the edgier and edgier versions of Superheroes...

saint_matthew
07-11-2014, 06:36 AM
It`s not that I find it bad. It just stands out to me... Just as "I won`t kill you, but I don`t have to save you" in Bats Begins, and the him saving the Joker in Dark Knight.

It didn't stand out for me because I figured it was more early Batman story, complete with prop-plane, tear gas, the grey scale colour & the gun-shaped bat-line launcher. I suppose had it been a contemporary Batman it would have stood out to me more.

kingk
07-11-2014, 04:16 PM
Rewatching this, I'm just sorta confused what Batman's plan was with the line launcher. If Strange didn't fall, presumably he would have killed his hostage. But it fits the genre, like the other issues people have pointed out, so I don't care. Besides, Strange falls into a misty ravine, clearly he survived.

saint_matthew
07-11-2014, 06:51 PM
Besides, Strange falls into a misty ravine, clearly he survived.

Rule 1 of comic books: If you didn't see a corpse they aren't dead.

Rule 2 of comic books: If you DID see a corpse but there was more than a millisecond between the action that resulted in death & death, they still aren't dead

Rule 3 of comic books: If you saw the character die right before your eyes & there was no possible way they aren't dead, they still aren't dead

Exception clause: Unless you are Uncle Ben.

Bladewind
07-13-2014, 04:32 PM
It didn't stand out for me because I figured it was more early Batman story, complete with prop-plane, tear gas, the grey scale colour & the gun-shaped bat-line launcher. I suppose had it been a contemporary Batman it would have stood out to me more.

I see that. Gloves are more early Bats too...

Ares
07-13-2014, 09:20 PM
I'd say that if a character has a long history of being a certain way, but then is changed dramatically in a sense that diverges significantly from previous portrayals in a bad way (which I admit is entirely subjective), I don't know if that makes 'the character' no longer that way so much as it just makes that writers interpretation of the character not what he was. There's a reason people had such a disconnect with Frank Miller's All-Star Batman and Robin, because that Batman was so different from any other version of Batman that it was basically some crazy Earth 34 Batman where the heroes are all parodies of themselves. I guess what I'm saying is that characters with a significant amount of history and mythos behind them are more than whatever their current portrayal may or may not be, at least in my mind.