1284
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 17 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

... and yet, he'd STILL be infinitely more effective if he either properly funded Gotham, or started actually killing evil people. Instead, he does neither... Batman still sucks balls even in the good interpretations. . ... mind, I still enjoy most of his comics and stories, but dude is just as healthy of a role model as The Punisher: Not at all. For the opposite reasons, ironically.

[-] OpenStars@startrek.website 13 points 10 months ago

Simply handing drug dealers and corrupt politicians a boatload of money isn't likely to do much of anything - he'd be bankrupt in a year and the city worse off than when he started. That's why the Harvey Dent arc was so crucial: Batman can only do so much in the shadows, but what the city really NEEDED was a hero who could operate in the light of day (though he still needed support from the shadows).

Ofc the real answer is that the premise of the franchise is based on Batman punching people, as in physically, so his goal isn't even saving the city so much as making satisfying wham bam pow sounds.

More "political" franchises are fewer and further between, which is why Star Wars and to a lesser degree Trek (in this regard) were so popular. Both involved a radical, violent and bloody overthrow of the corrupt forces (Trek having been in the past but in Wars it happening "live" and being the central feature).

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Did I say, "hand them money" or "properly fund"?

What part of "proper" says, "hand money over, no strings attached" to you?

A serious and properly written Batman would be even better than The Boys. I love how everyone pretends it'd somehow turn Bruce in to a typical politician...

[-] frickineh@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

Yeah, the refusal to kill is the worst part about Batman. Like, it's cool that you have a moral code or whatever, but when you keep putting mass murderers like the Joker in a prison you know he's gonna escape from, you should probably think about your life choices. You kind of get why Jason Todd went a little nuts when Batman didn't kill the Joker after he brutally murdered a child that Batman dressed up and put in his way. Holy shit, just shoot the guy in the fuckin face, you know?

[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

That's kind of the point. Bruce is just as mentally unwell as the villains he fights.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Yea... At a certain point, Batman becomes 100% culpable because he had a guaranteed end handed to him and didn't take it.

The dude plain solves Trolly problems incorrectly.

[-] qarbone@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

As Feathercrown said, most modern stories have Bruce aware that he's nuts. If he starts killing, then he doesn't stop killing and things go bad. He's essentially like on Murderers Anonymous and making sure to stay away from anything that could trigger him down an even darker road.

this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2024
1284 points (100.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

6034 readers
2213 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS