Sledge wrote:So the main change we're seeing is that comic Bats will go out of his way to save even criminals, whereas Batbale doesn't feel the need to protect criminals from the results of their own actions (I wonder if comic Bats would still bring criminals in if he knew they'd face the death penalty?).
As a matter of fact the "death penalty" issue was covered once in the comics.They made sure not to have Batman comment on wether he believed in it or not but he continued to bring in the bad guys.
He also Broke the Joker out of prision when he was sentanced to death for a crime he did not comit.
Sledge wrote:Whilst it's a change from the comics, I didn't feel it was an unreasonable one, and it's certainly a lot better than Tim Burton's costumed psychopath.
I wasnt complaning about the changes....just making note of them.
And I really didnt have a problem with "Tim Burton's costumed psychopath" version of Batman [as you called it] my broblems with the 89 Batman wovie have more to do with the writting.
Sledge wrote: Surely Bruce had been in the League headquarters long enough to know if there were other prisoners?
I cant see how you can come to that conclusion.Bruce was pretty shocked when he first encountered prisoner the first time he saw him and he was pretty supprised by the League's plans for both him and the prisoner.
Bale's Bat is nowhere as smart, observent or as intuitive as his comic book counterpart.
Sledge wrote:There was nothing to suggest Ra's was running some sort of prison,
I would say that the very fact that they had one prisoner is more then enough reason to assume that there were more then one.
The fact alone that the League had the meens to capture and contain him is reason enough to believe that they have expereance in dealing with prisoners.
Sledge wrote:so I don't think Bruce has too much blood on his hands.Yes, some of the League died (not least the fake Ra's), but they didn't have to stand and fight in a burning building.
Maybe not but thats something the comic book Batman would never do.
But ever since the 89 Batman film movie Batman has been killing so its no real shock.
Sledge wrote:Clearly they weren't Star Trek fans
.
LOL
Sledge wrote:Thing is, Batman's origin story has never been set in stone apart from the bare bones of "Bruce Wayne's parents are killed in front of him as a child. He devotes his life to training and many years later fights crime while dressed as a bat." Batman Begins took elements from different stories and worked them into something that worked for the plot of the film. To come back to why I referenced it in the first place, it did exactly what Transformers didn't: stayed true to the heart of the character/s. Batbale isn't exactly the same as comic Bats, but they share the same trauma, the same passions and the same refusal to kill. Ra's in Begins isn't an immortal, but he is a terrorist whose motives we can sympathise with, but whose methods we despise.
In comparison, Transformers got a few incidental details right but missed the larger points. Ok, so Prime still transforms into a truck. But where's the contradiction within Prime that he is probably the finest Autobot warrior but doesn't want to fight? Missing this is, to me, like putting Christian Bale in an exact copy of comic Batman's costume, but then giving him a machine gun. It misses the point of the character, and misses what gives him such appeal.
Again I agree with the motive behind your statement but not with the facts that you use to suprort it.
Batman's origin was indead "set in stone" quite a number of times in the last 60+ years.And while Transformers does not have the same amout of time behind it....it's origins werent set in the same kind of stone Batman's origins were.
When Batman's origin was written there was only one interpertation of the character to contend with.But when TF's origin were first introdused to the fandom there were four branches of the appleal to.
With the origin's of TF you have to deal with the The Marvel U.S. comic book ,G1 toon, The toy bio's and the Marvel U.K. comic book interpertation of the origin which all differ from one an other at some point.
While I aggre that Bay's movie "missed the mark" I can understand why it happened and trying to compair it to other adaptations from comic or cartoon to film will never be fair.
Granted the writters of Batman begins did a far better job of taking the eliments of the character that we knew and bring it to their film but its not like they did a better job of staying true to Batman's origins.
Batman begins writters were just better writters then Bay's Transformers writters......and thats why I fear the outcome of the new Star Trek film.
