"I won't kill you, but I don't have to save you"

Christopher's 2005 reboot of the Batman franchise that tells the origins of how Bruce Wayne became Batman.
Posts: 195
Joined: March 2012
Location: American Gardens Building, West 81st Street
juliansplat4 wrote:Does anyone think we're overthinking this?
Probably. It's really just a badass line. :batface:

Posts: 175
Joined: February 2012
Jonas Agersø wrote:About the Joker, we've been over this. The Joker has a plan, he always has. "Its all part of the plan"
Didn't he use that to sum up the police and Harvey Dent?

Posts: 4111
Joined: January 2012
he lft ra's a way out. While i think he should have saved him I think the fact that batman killed in the early comics is important here; maybe it was a nod to that? Anyway, it's going to come back to haunt him. he was responsible for the deaths of many people indirectly because he refused to cave in and now someone, bane, is going to hold him accountable for it. It doesn't ruin the film for me in any way and while it's odd for batman to react like this I can understand it as a reference to the early interpretations of batman where he was carrying a gun and was killing his opponents.

Posts: 139
Joined: July 2011
Batfan175 wrote:While i think he should have saved him I think the fact that batman killed in the early comics is important here; maybe it was a nod to that?
Batman's time as a killer in the comic books did not survive beyond the first year of publication. Also those deaths were almost always accidental or in self-defense. For the majority of Batman's history, he has had the no-kill rule in place. However that doesn't mean that there hasn't been exceptions or that he hasn't "bent" the rule from time to time. Ultimately, for Batman it always comes down to serving justice and protecting Gotham.

I think the only nod to the gun-toting days may be the way the grappling-gun is designed and worn on his belt.

Posts: 16715
Joined: March 2012
I always thought this argument was the equivalent of Superman not technically killing Lex Luthor if he fell off a building and then watched him die. If he's against killing, and has the capacity to save him, it's killing him. Trying and failling =/= killing, letting someone die when you are fully capably of doing so as a way to say you didn't kill them = BULLSHIT.

But the rest of Begins is so damn cool I let it slide.

Posts: 889
Joined: January 2012
Location: Australia
I'm really conflicted about this.

Obviously Batman thought it was for the best.
Ra's Al Ghul would be nipping at his heels forever if he didn't die.
But then again, why didn't he kill Joker?


Urgh, It hurts me to say this but It's think it's the definition of a cop-out line. :( :(

Posts: 105
Joined: April 2012
So, how would Ras plan on getting off the train? It was he who smashed the controls right? He was willing to die it seems.

Posts: 18329
Joined: February 2011
Inceptionist wrote:So, how would Ras plan on getting off the train? It was he who smashed the controls right? He was willing to die it seems.
:facepalm:

Posts: 105
Joined: April 2012
Who said anything about stopping it?

Posts: 18329
Joined: February 2011
Batman destroys the controls, not Ra's.

Post Reply