Batman General Discussion

I get that, and I was up defending her till "If you don't turn yourselves in Imma tell on you, whats that you dont want me to well Ill just get in your way of saving people then."

I wonder what does she think all the supervillains will do after that.

she thinks they will stop if batman isn't around and that if they dont the cops will handle them

Bullshit, the cops couldn't even handle Killer Moth. Even then they won't stop, there basically the new Mob & before Batman came to the scene crime families were unstoppable in Gotham.

It was sad when Kate & Clay had to break it to Steph that the reality they live in can't be solved so easily. Cass' issues are way too complex to be solved by two regular people for example & Kate doesn't even wanna be a cop, she does love her job as Batwoman. Steph ironically needs a reality check which hopefully she comes too in due time.

edited 29th Dec '16 7:39:50 PM by slimcoder

I really hope they dont make clayface a villain again. Or if he does he at least gets to reconnect with his "daughter" in gotham acadamy.

The Joker will stop if Batman isn't around. Every other villain will cheer "PARTY TIME!" and start running wild.

Really, they still can have Basil reformed and an evil Clayface at the same time. They just have to bring back Hagen, or Shondra, or Cassius, or even Preston. Or they could just adapt Ethan Benett in. There's no shortage of Clayfaces in record.

edited 29th Dec '16 7:56:08 PM by NapoleonDeCheese

yeah I know that I'm just worried. I really like Basil trying to be a better person.

Did you miss the part where she was bluffing about that?

Bluffing about ratting them out, yes. But she's serious about trying to "save Gotham from my own kind", and even took out the Bat-Signal, which no matter what way you slice it, is reprehensible and generally shows her to be a neglectful and irresponsible "See You Next Tuesday"

As a Steph fan I'm disgusted at this behaviour, it's character assassination and she is so far above this. The whole point of Rebirth is to steadily restore the elements of old, that should apply to all the growth we'd seen before, not just the highlights of a past life she long evolved past. This is the sort of Steph I outright despised in the 2000s, I grew to like her when she herself grew as a character, and grew well out of this kind of recklessness.

Oh come on, disabling the Batsignal is "reprehensible"? Dramatic much? She didn't do any permanent damage or anything. You make it sound like she murdered someone.

It's not character assassination. If she were doing what she's doing for no good reason, then maybe that'd be true. But she does have a reason. Is it irresponsible, and irrational, and naive? Yes. But it also makes sense. She's not in her right mind through a mix of grief and emotional manipulation.

edited 30th Dec '16 8:14:30 AM by caivu

Cutting off the Batsignal is no different from cutting off the means to communicate a Doctor or a Fireman. You can make all the petty apologist rationalises for Steph's behaviour all you want, but losing your bloody boyfriend shouldn't fuel this kind of behaviour that will prove a detriment to the whole city.

She knows better, the Steph I spent my 20s reading knows better.

The Batsignal is not the only way Batman has of learning that crime is going on. If it were, that'd be one thing, but that's not the case. Her action there was more symbolic than anything.

And she's not doing this just because she lost Tim. She was manipulated as well.

If you're referring to Batgirl!Steph, then I'm sorry, but that doesn't inform her current characterization, because she doesn't have those experiences now, at least not in any meaningful sense. Again, if she did and were behaving this way, I could see your point.

edited 30th Dec '16 11:50:53 AM by caivu

Bluffing to Batman is stupid anyway, because yeah, like the World's Greatest Detective isn't going to see through a teenager's bluff.

If you aren't going to actually bother doing something to Batman, then don't bother threatening to do it either. It just makes you look like a childish idiot.

Is that really so unbelievable, especially when the options are "do what I say or I tell everyone who you are"? It'd be stupid if he weren't concerned about that, however remote the chance may be.

Can you explain why? Why would a hollow threat be childish or idiotic?

Besides, I think that helps to show that on some level, Steph knows she's wrong, and that Batman and co. are needed.

edited 30th Dec '16 4:44:29 PM by caivu

Why would a hollow threat be childish or idiotic?

... because hollow threats are childish and idiotic, especially when the part they're aimed at knows well they're hollow?

I, I'm not sure how one is supposed to react to a question like this. I mean, like, wow.

You say that like it's self-evident or something. It's really not. Why would such a threat be stupid if there's a chance it could get you what you want? What she did was a type of Brandishment Bluff or a Weapon for Intimidation.

And are you saying Batman knew at the time that her threat was toothless? Because no, he didn't.

edited 30th Dec '16 5:30:50 PM by caivu

a hollow threat's very definition is childish and idiotic. it's you saying I know this won't work but I'm going to throw a tantrum with this thing that won't work

What? That's not what a hollow threat is at all. A hollow threat is using an unloaded gun to get someone to do what you want or else you'll shoot them, for example. "Throwing a tantrum" is not a necessary part of it.

edited 30th Dec '16 5:35:01 PM by caivu

Again, we are talking about throwing hollow threats at Batman. By definition, throwing hollow threats at him is even dumber than it usually is (and yes, usually making hollow threats is dumb, because most people aren't that stupid and quickly will realize you are all bark and no bite), because unless you are as smart or smarter than Batman you won't fool him for a moment.

Basically, if you're enough of a bad mofo to pull a hollow threat on Batman, with him believing it, odds are you're badass enough you don't need to deliver hollow threats in the first place. By that point you can make threats Batman knows you can deliver on.

I mean, even with Batman himself, the standard 'Speak or I'll throw you off this building, for reals' hollow threat will usually only work on dumb street punks and henchmen, the kind we only see them fighting Batman once before being thrown into jail or killed by their employers.

Once any villain worth their salt realizes Batman hasn't killed them yet, they'll just laugh at any death threat he tosses on their faces. Now, those who are fearful of being beaten to a living pulp by him will talk regardless, but that is a threat he will deliver on, hence not hollow.

edited 30th Dec '16 5:44:46 PM by NapoleonDeCheese

I have to state that I laughed at the fact that Steph had counter-measures for everyone on the team but when The Goddamn Batman asked what's she gonna do to him, she was all like "Nope I got shit."

It was like this funny comment I read that was basically "Bitch did you think you could pull one over on Batman, just what's wrong with you?"

Steph was claiming that she would release his and the others' identities to the public. He had absolutely no way to know she was lying about that at the time. If someone pointed an unloaded gun at me and told me to do something, if I weren't 100% sure that gun was unloaded and had no other options, I'm doing what that person says. Am I stupid for assuming a gun is loaded if it's being pointed at me? It's the same deal here. This doesn't reflect badly on Batman at all. It's not about being smarter or more badass than he is. It's about knowing what kind of threat is most effective to get him to listen and comply, and that doesn't take a genius to figure out.

The weight of what Steph was threatening is the whole point. It's such a dire threat that he has to believe her, because again, there was no way he could tell otherwise at the time. He can't just magically know she's bluffing.

edited 30th Dec '16 5:58:29 PM by caivu

Well, today's Batman was pretty cosy, if you can call sex on a bed of diamonds on a chilly evening "cosy"

edited 4th Jan '17 5:34:09 AM by Zarius

Was that supposed to be a Halle Berry reference?

It's been a pet peeve of mine that DC keeps insisting the Joker's legally insane despite not being so. He knows what's right and wrong and is proud he's the latter, and while impulsive he does show a methodical side in his actions. Rarely does he come across as someone who's genuinely mentally ill. And yet they keep trying to claim he's genuinely crazy because crazy is his gimmick, and they need an excuse to send him to Arkham Asylum instead of actual jail or execution(depending on what state Gotham is).

The term "super-sanity" was clearly invented either as a lampshade, a way of getting out to the fact he doesn't fit any proper mental illness, or both. Morrison himself is guilty of trying to justify he's mentally ill despite actually fitting it by having his mind be screwy to telepaths like J'onn J'onnz who somehow can't make him sane.