[QUOTE=Caivu;3974716]It does!
[ATTACH=CONFIG]72508[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]
Oh my mind just went to an entirely different place
Printable View
[QUOTE=Caivu;3974716]It does!
[ATTACH=CONFIG]72508[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]
Oh my mind just went to an entirely different place
[QUOTE=Konja7;3975287]That's terrible.
So, Batman code is I won't kill you directly, but I would let you die in a horrible way. How is he a better person with the second option?[/QUOTE]
Next time they want to use Beast, they will reveal that Battyman didn't REALLY break his neck or make bothersome grunting noises at him until he went insane and hung himself. Batman wouldn't kill--particularly over his very unloved sidekicks, or he would have pulverized Joker into bacon strips after he killed Jason so horribly.
[QUOTE=Caivu;3974716]It does!
[ATTACH=CONFIG]72508[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]
That means the script would look exactly like that plus some exposition. Heh.
[QUOTE=G-Potion;3975552]That means the script would look exactly like that plus some exposition. Heh.[/QUOTE]
King musta had a lotta deadlines for the series that he actually cared about coming up.
[QUOTE=G-Potion;3975552]That means the script would look exactly like that plus some exposition. Heh.[/QUOTE]
You gotta admit: Grunting is pretty easy dialog to write!!!! :):)
[QUOTE=ConnorHawke;3975421]Oh yeah I remember that one. Steel bars against the door, right? It's harsh, but conceivably escapable.
Breaking the neck and leaving him there still seems so out of character, to me at least.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, it'd be more merciful to pull his ugly head right off his neck. What's the difference?
Interestingly enough, the Animals in the Pit story is a real Russian tale. The dialgoue of the story in the issue very much imitates the dialogue of the actual story. Though the way it is framed in the issue I struggle to see how the moral of it is applicable to the two characters.
I also think young Bruce's interest in the story despite the disturbance of his father. It seems to me to indicate that Bruce was a disturbed child even before the death of his parents. More so than is typically let on.
Not to mention that is extremely cruel to let a person die of hunger and thirst. I don't understand this concept that he doesn't kill him, although he puts the person in danger of death and does nothing to save them. Apparently you are not a murderer if you does not give the coup de grace.
I remember one of the first comics that I read where two characters fought in a building, the winner of the fight threw the other into a dangerous position hanging from the ceiling and about to fall. The character said he was not going to kill him, but not save him either. I could not help thinking "You threw him into his mortal situation, you are killing him if you do not save him"
[QUOTE=bat1987;3974020]He did do something similar during their first encounter in ten nights of the beast. Not saying that its not ooc, but what can you do.[/QUOTE]But back than Beast was portrait as a guy who was to powerfull for Batman to take down in fight, and he had killed over 100 people during the story (which included to poisoning over 80 people just to ill one guy).
And Jim Starlins whole run the no killing rule was constantly challenged.
[QUOTE=Pohzee;3975698]Interestingly enough, the Animals in the Pit story is a real Russian tale. The dialgoue of the story in the issue very much imitates the dialogue of the actual story. Though the way it is framed in the issue I struggle to see how the moral of it is applicable to the two characters.
I also think young Bruce's interest in the story despite the disturbance of his father. It seems to me to indicate that Bruce was a disturbed child even before the death of his parents. More so than is typically let on.[/QUOTE]
Why ofcourse, its King, Bruce HAS to be disturbed, everyone has to be mentally disturbed. Its King's bread and butter.
[QUOTE=Aahz;3975741]But back than Beast was portrait as a guy who was to powerfull for Batman to take down in fight, and he had killed over 100 people during the story (which included to poisoning over 80 people just to ill one guy).
And Jim Starlins whole run the no killing rule was constantly challenged.[/QUOTE]
It had nothing to do with power level or revenge. Starlin's run was fairly political at times. Nights of the Beast was a political story..Batman left Beast because he knew that the Beast would get political protection. If King really did what everyone says he did then he not only does he not understand Batman, he doesn't the story he tried to homage.
[QUOTE=oasis1313;3975672]Yeah, it'd be more merciful to pull his ugly head right off his neck. What's the difference?[/QUOTE]
This way he's completely helpless and, barring dramatic rescue, faces a painful death. If he just killed him, he'd spare him the pain.
King went out of his way to point out the improbability of rescue and survival.
But it's well established that he's not a killer, so, barring sending someone to help him, Batman just broke the golden rule.
[QUOTE=Pohzee;3975698]Interestingly enough, the Animals in the Pit story is a real Russian tale. The dialgoue of the story in the issue very much imitates the dialogue of the actual story. Though the way it is framed in the issue I struggle to see how the moral of it is applicable to the two characters.[/quote]
That tale isn't meant to impart a moral, I don't think, after reviewing the history and nature of these types of Russian folktales. They are just entertainment. This is not Aesop
[quote]I also think young Bruce's interest in the story despite the disturbance of his father. It seems to me to indicate that Bruce was a disturbed child even before the death of his parents. More so than is typically let on.[/QUOTE]
Well I saw it that both Beast and Bruce had the same story read to them, and it made them equally savvy and vicious when backed up against a wall, like the fox. It was painting the two as equals. Which I think is total BS, but whatever. Batman should really handily take out the Beast in practically every circumstance.
[QUOTE=Scott Taylor;3976368]That tale isn't meant to impart a moral, I don't think, after reviewing the history and nature of these types of Russian folktales. They are just entertainment. This is not Aesop
Well I saw it that both Beast and Bruce had the same story read to them, and it made them equally savvy and vicious when backed up against a wall, like the fox. It was painting the two as equals. Which I think is total BS, but whatever. Batman should really handily take out the Beast in practically every circumstance.[/QUOTE]
I ended up reading that too. Though I'm not entirely sure what entertainment comes of that story.
And I'd say that the Beast chopping off his own hand is a testament to his resolve, but not necessarily cunning. Neither character really came across as particularly intelligent is this issue of grunts. It was like two cavemen fighting.
[QUOTE=Scott Taylor;3976368]That tale isn't meant to impart a moral, I don't think, after reviewing the history and nature of these types of Russian folktales. They are just entertainment. This is not Aesop[/quote]
So there wasn't a bit of 'be careful who you hang with because they might consume you or make you destroy yourself'?