Cowman

Not even to call the relevance of said subject into question?

Eh, whatever. Nitpicking biological realism in comic books..... yeesh.

Here's a fun activity.

Try and count all the involuntary actions or movements you make over the course of one day. And you're telling me Supes can suppress all those involuntary actions, but not other ones.

Look, of COURSE a physical relationship with Lois is unrealistic given his powers. But so is the idea that the guy could go more than a week without blowing his cover.

And thanks for the reading recommendation, but I'm about as interested in the sex-logistics of my favorite superheroes as I am in the sexual preferences of the puppets on Sesame Street. In other words, not at all.

How is it any different from the "mental gymnastics" it takes to explain how he simply gets through the day without crushing or destroying something?

I mean, THAT'S where yer playin' the unbelievability card?

Oh I know. And like I said earlier, its mostly just my personal feelings on the matter. For me, trying to go super-realistic with a superhero kinda defeats the point of HAVING a superhero. Even a non-powered one like Batman.

Again, this is just my feelings and not to take anything away from Nolan's Bat-movies; they're great. Maybe that's what makes it tougher for me. Seeing the Joker done so well, I wanna see Batman's other iconic villains handled just as well. To me, Poison Ivy and Mr. Freeze don't seem like too big of a leap in believability.

But I suppose that's just cause I'm a comic fan so I'm more accepting of that kind of thing.

Oh well, maybe they'll get into that kind of stuff now that Nolan's leaving and they're making the Justice League movie.

See, I might have agreed before. But after the success of Spiderman, Iron Man, Thor, and Captain America; I don't think I buy that anymore.

If you can make a serious Capt. America movie and STILL have the big 'A' on his forehead and the little wings on his mask, then I say the other folks just ain't trying hard enough.

Loki had those honkin' huge horns!! Nothing's more ridiculous than those frickin' things, and they totally worked. I think Nolan made great movies starring Batman. I'm just not sure he made great Batman movies.

Which is one of the only problems I have with Nolan's otherwise excellent Batman movies. Maybe Catwoman, Poison Ivy, Penguin, Robin, and the rest aren't all that realistic; but they're all part of Batman's universe, history, and character.

Implying that they're too silly or campy for Mr. Nolan's grown-up Batman movies seems a disservice to the source material to me. I know I should just regard it as an alternate version of the character, but it still bothers me.

Though, if I'm understanding your points correctly, I don't think we're actually disagreeing on anything. It seems to be mainly a case of semantics. You see "suspension of disbelief" as a separate thing, where I think of camp as a form of "suspension of disbelief". Heck, I'd call Scarface and the Lord of the Ring movies a bit campy.

Again, don't get me wrong. I thought all the Nolan Batman movies were really good; the Dark Knight would be on my list of favorite superhero movies. I just wish we could've seen what he could have done with Robin and villains like Poison Ivy and Mr. Freeze.

When I looked it up, I got this one;


“Camp” n. or “Campy” adj. refers to intentionally exaggerated thematic or genre elements, especially in television and motion picture mediums.


YAY for posting definitions!!

So yeah, "exaggerated thematic or genre elements" certainly sound like superheroes to me. Or do you think that an actual, real-life Batman WOULDN'T be dead within a week?

West and Bale represent the two ends of the spectrum. West was super, extreme campy while Bale went for microscopic to non-existent levels of camp. The animated series, I think, struck the happy balance. Capturing Batman's dark, moody tone and themes while still utilizing his full entourage and history.

Heck, they put Ace the Bathound in Batman Beyond. To me, THAT shows an understanding and love of the character. Much more than just sweeping anything you don't like under the rug.

I've been a fan of comic books since before I can remember, and I still think costumed superheroes are a bit inherently campy. The same as action-movie stars, mythological heroes, horror movie killers, and James Bond-ish spies and evil masterminds are inherently campy.

I think the bigger problem is that society has this view that "camp" is automatically a bad thing. People are in such a frenzy to make their movie, book, etc. "meaningful" and "realistic", that they feel any hint of levity or fantasy will spoil it.

Camp is not automatically negative. In fact, it can be a very important element to have. Like angst, pathos, tragedy, comedy, or any other broad literary themes; it's all in how you use it. And if used correctly, even camp can be an advantage to a story.

You can bet Nolan's "camp-less" Batman would've never saved a transformed Wonder Woman by singing. No, cause that would've been too silly.

Oh, I get it just fine. And I actually defended it a little when it became a big sticking point in the second movie.

But you must admit; it IS a bit camp. Which can't be avoided since Batman (any comic book hero actually) is inherently campy. Some comic book movies embrace it, but incorporate it poorly (i.e. Batman and Robin), some embrace it and incorporate it well (i.e. Avengers, Iron Man), and some seem to be actively fighting it, which is where the Nolan Batman movies fit IMO.

I thought all the Nolan movies were really good, but it does seem to constantly be on the verge of seeming a bit ashamed of it's source material. Heck, I thought Bane's head-thong was MUCH campier than the luchador mask. I mean, you can't tell me that if they had a black and white full-head mask with the red lenses explained as night-vision or something; it wouldn't have been perfectly believable.

Instead we got the H.R. Geiger rebreather, which just looked kinda silly.

Yes, we wouldn't want to be campy about anything.

*glances at guy wearing bat mask and using bogey-man voice*

True, but I'm more forgiving of character death if it's clear it was always planned that way. I've watched movies and played video games where characters die and not had a problem with it.

This is mainly a problem with TV shows and comic books. In those mediums it seems more contrived than usual. Maybe I'm just being cynical about a trope I don't like; or about the fact that it always seems to happen to my favorite characters.

I'm never affected this way. Whenever a favorite or likable character is killed off all I see is the attempt to add gravity and emotion to the story. I never feel that emotion though; just annoyance that they've killed off a good character for shock value.

Maybe I'm just being a stick-in-the-mud, but it always strikes me as the easiest, most boring and unimaginative way to add depth to your story. Every time it comes up I just roll my eyes in frustration.

Nonsense.

Humans are ****ed up enough for anything.

Careful what you wish for.

Ah, but isn't that kinda the point of doing it?

I've always said the William Shatner's most popular character is 'William Shatner'.

Is it wrong that I actually squee'd a bit at that idea?