Follow TV Tropes

Following

History Headscratchers / TheBatman2022

Go To

OR

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** Many organizations, even perfectly legal ones like sports organizations, have written and unwritten codes of conduct on what people can do and what might cross the MoralEventHorizon. The [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions Geneva Conventions]] are an attempt to at least try and curtail the horrors of war by establishing certain "rules" that everybody agrees to abide by. Less formal examples are [[https://sabrenoise.com/2013/09/24/hockey-code/ "the code"]] in UsefulNotes/IceHockey and {{Kayfabe}} in UsefulNotes/ProfessionalWrestling. For the Mob, one of those rules is "snitches get stitches", in that you don't sell other criminals out to the cops. If you do, you forfeit any rights you might have had under the code and you're set up to be killed. That's why real-life governments have WitnessProtection as an incentive for potential informants to talk to them. In Falcone's case, he is a "snitch", so he'd be lucky if all he got were stitches. As said above, if the Riddler hadn't killed him it'd only be a question of which other mobster like Cobblepot would get to him first.

to:

** Many organizations, even perfectly legal ones like sports organizations, have written and unwritten codes of conduct on what people can do and what might cross the MoralEventHorizon. The [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions Geneva Conventions]] are an attempt to at least try and curtail the horrors of war by establishing certain "rules" that everybody agrees to abide by. Less formal examples are [[https://sabrenoise.com/2013/09/24/hockey-code/ "the code"]] in UsefulNotes/IceHockey and {{Kayfabe}} in UsefulNotes/ProfessionalWrestling.MediaNotes/ProfessionalWrestling. For the Mob, one of those rules is "snitches get stitches", in that you don't sell other criminals out to the cops. If you do, you forfeit any rights you might have had under the code and you're set up to be killed. That's why real-life governments have WitnessProtection as an incentive for potential informants to talk to them. In Falcone's case, he is a "snitch", so he'd be lucky if all he got were stitches. As said above, if the Riddler hadn't killed him it'd only be a question of which other mobster like Cobblepot would get to him first.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** Many organizations, even perfectly legal ones like sports organizations, have written and unwritten codes of conduct on what people can do and what might cross the MoralEventHorizon. The [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions Geneva Conventions]] are an attempt to at least try and curtail the horrors of war by establishing certain "rules" that everybody agrees to abide by. Less formal examples are [[https://sabrenoise.com/2013/09/24/hockey-code/ "the code"]] in UsefulNotes/IceHockey and {{Kayfabe}} in UsefulNotes/ProfessionalWrestling. For the Mob, one of those rules is "snitches get stitches", in that you don't sell other criminals out to the cops. If you do, you forfeit any rights you might have had under the code and you're set up to be killed. That's why real-life governments have WitnessProtection as an incentive for potential informants to talk to them. In Falcone's case, he is a "snitch", so he'd be lucky if all he got were stitches. As another troper said, if the Riddler hadn't killed him it'd only be a question of which other mobster like Cobblepot would get to him first.

to:

** Many organizations, even perfectly legal ones like sports organizations, have written and unwritten codes of conduct on what people can do and what might cross the MoralEventHorizon. The [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions Geneva Conventions]] are an attempt to at least try and curtail the horrors of war by establishing certain "rules" that everybody agrees to abide by. Less formal examples are [[https://sabrenoise.com/2013/09/24/hockey-code/ "the code"]] in UsefulNotes/IceHockey and {{Kayfabe}} in UsefulNotes/ProfessionalWrestling. For the Mob, one of those rules is "snitches get stitches", in that you don't sell other criminals out to the cops. If you do, you forfeit any rights you might have had under the code and you're set up to be killed. That's why real-life governments have WitnessProtection as an incentive for potential informants to talk to them. In Falcone's case, he is a "snitch", so he'd be lucky if all he got were stitches. As another troper said, said above, if the Riddler hadn't killed him it'd only be a question of which other mobster like Cobblepot would get to him first.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** Maybe he has a gadget in his suit to prevent this, like Christian Bale did with the taser?

Added: 652

Changed: 86

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
More possibilities


** The real question is, how did Edward Elliott get ahold of the Waynes' family secrets? (Answer: journalism.) Everything the Riddler said about the Waynes seemed to come from Elliott's notes, so he must have gotten ahold of them somehow. While the police are searching his apartment, they only mention accounting ledgers, but the notebooks Batman looks at on his shelf are different sizes and shapes, so Elliott's notes are probably in there somewhere too.



** It's also very possible Falcone deliberately killed the journalist to have the Waynes under his thumb.

to:

** It's also very possible Falcone deliberately killed the journalist to have the Waynes under his thumb. (In fact, Alfred explicitly says this, although that's just Alfred's interpretation.)
** Presumably Falcone also had a lot of control over the news outlets - Wayne might just have asked him to kill the '''story''', bribe or threaten the editors to make sure it doesn't go to print.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None



* It's worth noting that it's Halloween. They probably thought he was some guy in a costume instead of the real thing.

to:

\n* ** It's worth noting that it's Halloween. They probably thought he was some guy in a costume instead of the real thing.thing.
** Keep in mind that in ''VideoGame/BatmanArkhamOrigins'' which operates on a similar timescale to the film (about 2 years into his career), Batman is still an urban legends with even characters like Gordon doubting he exists, his existence is only confirmed in the Gotham Royal mission, when he is seen on Vikki Vale's news broadcast, likely for the exact same reason; until Riddler, Batman has mostly stuck to regular criminal deals, which don't tend to have many cameras around, aside from the cops, who likely are not publiscising the fact that they are working with a vigilante, the only information about him was rumours and whispers, no one believes the bat exists... until he comes for them.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** The Riddler's ''stated'' goal is to expose the corruption at the heart of Gotham, but his ''real'' goal is simply to lash out and punish the world that, in his mind, neglected and abused him as a child only to then cast him aside and completely forget about him. Deep down he's not really the crusader for the 99% that he presents himself as and believes himself to be, and is in fact a lot more self-centred; his initial targets are indeed rich and powerful, but they are also just emblematic of the system which was supposed to protect him but didn't; he frames it as striking a blow against a corrupt system, and in part it is, but it's ultimately more about revenge for what happened to him. Really, he nihilistically believes that pretty much ''everyone'' deserves to suffer because he suffered. Like Catwoman, when it comes to the crunch he doesn't really believe that Gotham is either salvageable or worth salvaging, and basically thinks that pretty much everyone except himself, his followers and (initially) Batman deserve to be washed away for what happened to him. It's all about him, ultimately. This is essentially the fundamental difference between him and Batman -- Batman initially lashes out at the criminal world because he wants vengeance for what happened to him, but ultimately comes to realise that this is a futile and limited goal and comes to embrace helping and protecting others, while Riddler presents himself as a champion of the oppressed and downtrodden but is ultimately self-centred and just wants vengeance for wrongs against him. They've essentially switched places by the end.

to:

** The Riddler's ''stated'' goal is to expose the corruption at the heart of Gotham, but his ''real'' goal is simply to lash out and punish the world that, in his mind, neglected and abused him as a child only to then cast him aside and completely forget about him. Deep down he's not really the crusader for the 99% that he presents himself as and believes himself to be, and is in fact a lot more self-centred; his self-centred. His initial targets are indeed rich and powerful, but they are also just emblematic of the system which was supposed to protect him but didn't; he frames it as striking a blow against a corrupt system, and in part it is, but it's ultimately more about revenge for what happened to him.him. It's less implicitly SecretlySelfish, as another commenter suggests, and more outright Secretly Selfish. Really, he nihilistically believes that pretty much ''everyone'' deserves to suffer because he suffered. Like Catwoman, when it comes to the crunch he doesn't really believe that Gotham is either salvageable or worth salvaging, and basically thinks that pretty much everyone except himself, his followers and (initially) Batman deserve to be washed away for what happened to him. It's all about him, ultimately. This is essentially the fundamental difference between him and Batman -- Batman initially lashes out at the criminal world because he wants vengeance for what happened to him, but ultimately comes to realise that this is a futile and limited goal and comes to embrace helping and protecting others, while Riddler presents himself as a champion of the oppressed and downtrodden but is ultimately self-centred and just wants vengeance for wrongs against him. They've essentially switched places by the end.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** Many organizations, even perfectly legal ones like sports organizations, have written and unwritten codes of conduct on what people can do and what might cross the MoralEventHorizon. The [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions Geneva Conventions]] are an attempt to at least try and curtail the horrors of war by establishing certain "rules" that everybody agrees to abide by. Less formal examples are [[https://sabrenoise.com/2013/09/24/hockey-code/ "the code"]] in UsefulNotes/IceHockey and {{Kayfabe}} in UsefulNotes/ProfessionalWrestling. For the Mob, one of those rules is "snitches get stitches", in that you don't sell other criminals out to the cops. If you do, you forfeit any rights you might have had under the code and you're set up to be killed. That's why real-life governments have WitnessProtection as an incentive for potential informants to talk to them. In Falcone's case, he is a "snitch", so he'd be lucky if all he got were stitches. As another troper said, if the Riddler hadn't killed him it'd only be a question of which other mobster like Cobblepot would get to him first.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** Also worth noting that Penguin had already personally caused a massive pileup including an ''explosion''. At that point any police department would also be justified in stopping him by whatever means possible.


Added DiffLines:

** Falcone is a dead man at this point regardless. The Mob is ruthless in dealing with even suspected informers. As Frank "The Irishman" Sheeran told his biographer, their policy is, "When in doubt, have no doubt." If Riddler hadn't done it, they soon would have.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** This one's simple; Falcone being exposed as a police informant is damaging because it means that he ''can't be trusted''. Professional criminals tend to be suspicious and paranoid people at the best of times; they kind of have to be, because they live their day-to-day lives in ways which leave them open to arrest, serious criminal charges and the possibility of lengthy periods spent in jail (or even execution). Ergo, they are ''especially'' distrustful of the possibility that the other criminals they deal with might expose their criminal acts to the authorities for their own advantage. However, in the world of organised crime they still have to work together to some degree (it's kind of there in the name), so to the extent that "honor among thieves" actually exists, it's pretty simple; it's essentially an agreement that "I won't tell if you won't." It's the whole idea behind [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omert%C3%A0 omertà]]; you keep quiet about my crimes, I'll keep quiet about yours. The fact that Falcone informed on Maroni means that basically any chance that any other criminal might have trusted him is dead, because if he informed on Maroni, he'd inform on them.

to:

** This one's simple; Falcone being exposed as a police informant is damaging because it means that he ''can't be trusted''. Professional criminals tend to be suspicious and paranoid people at the best of times; they kind of have to be, because they live their day-to-day lives in ways which leave them open to arrest, serious criminal charges and the possibility of lengthy periods spent in jail (or even execution). Ergo, they are ''especially'' distrustful of the possibility that the other criminals they deal with might expose their criminal acts to the authorities for their own advantage. However, in the world of organised crime they still have to work together to some degree (it's kind of there in the name), so to the extent that "honor among thieves" actually exists, it's pretty simple; it's essentially an agreement that "I won't tell if you won't." It's the whole idea behind [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omert%C3%A0 omertà]]; you keep quiet about my crimes, I'll keep quiet about yours. The fact that Falcone informed on Maroni means that basically any chance that any other criminal might have trusted him is dead, because if he informed on Maroni, Maroni to serve his own purposes, he'd inform on them.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** This one's simple; Falcone being exposed as a police informant is damaging because it means that he ''can't be trusted''. Professional criminals tend to be suspicious and paranoid people at the best of times; they kind of have to be, because they live their day-to-day lives in ways which leave them open to arrest, serious criminal charges and the possibility of lengthy periods spent in jail (or even execution). Ergo, they are ''especially'' distrustful of the possibility that the other criminals they deal with might expose their criminal acts to the authorities for their own advantage. However, in the world of organised crime they still have to work together to some degree (it's kind of there in the name), so to the extent that "honor among thieves" actually exists, it's pretty simple; it's essentially an agreement that "I won't tell if you won't." It's the whole idea behind omertà; you keep quiet about my crimes, I'll keep quiet about yours. The fact that Falcone informed on Maroni means that basically any chance that any other criminal might have trusted him is dead, because if he informed on Maroni, he'd inform on them.

to:

** This one's simple; Falcone being exposed as a police informant is damaging because it means that he ''can't be trusted''. Professional criminals tend to be suspicious and paranoid people at the best of times; they kind of have to be, because they live their day-to-day lives in ways which leave them open to arrest, serious criminal charges and the possibility of lengthy periods spent in jail (or even execution). Ergo, they are ''especially'' distrustful of the possibility that the other criminals they deal with might expose their criminal acts to the authorities for their own advantage. However, in the world of organised crime they still have to work together to some degree (it's kind of there in the name), so to the extent that "honor among thieves" actually exists, it's pretty simple; it's essentially an agreement that "I won't tell if you won't." It's the whole idea behind omertà; [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omert%C3%A0 omertà]]; you keep quiet about my crimes, I'll keep quiet about yours. The fact that Falcone informed on Maroni means that basically any chance that any other criminal might have trusted him is dead, because if he informed on Maroni, he'd inform on them.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** This one's simple; Falcone being exposed as a police informant is damaging because it means that he ''can't be trusted''. Professional criminals tend to be suspicious and paranoid at the best of times; they kind of have to be, because they live their day-to-day lives in ways which leave them open to arrest, serious criminal charges and the possibility of lengthy periods spent in jail (or even execution). Ergo, they are ''especially'' distrustful of the possibility that the other criminals they deal with might expose their criminal acts to the authorities for their own advantage. However, in the world of organised crime they still have to work together to some degree (it's kind of there in the name), so to the extent that "honor among thieves" actually exists, it's pretty simple; it's essentially an agreement that "I won't tell if you won't." It's the whole idea behind omertà; you keep quiet about my crimes, I'll keep quiet about yours. The fact that Falcone informed on Maroni means that basically any chance that any other criminal might have trusted him is dead, because if he informed on Maroni, he'd inform on them.

to:

** This one's simple; Falcone being exposed as a police informant is damaging because it means that he ''can't be trusted''. Professional criminals tend to be suspicious and paranoid people at the best of times; they kind of have to be, because they live their day-to-day lives in ways which leave them open to arrest, serious criminal charges and the possibility of lengthy periods spent in jail (or even execution). Ergo, they are ''especially'' distrustful of the possibility that the other criminals they deal with might expose their criminal acts to the authorities for their own advantage. However, in the world of organised crime they still have to work together to some degree (it's kind of there in the name), so to the extent that "honor among thieves" actually exists, it's pretty simple; it's essentially an agreement that "I won't tell if you won't." It's the whole idea behind omertà; you keep quiet about my crimes, I'll keep quiet about yours. The fact that Falcone informed on Maroni means that basically any chance that any other criminal might have trusted him is dead, because if he informed on Maroni, he'd inform on them.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** This one's simple; Falcone being exposed as a police informant is damaging because it means that he ''can't be trusted''. Professional criminals tend to be suspicious and paranoid at the best of times; they kind of have to be, because they live their day-to-day lives in ways which leave them open to arrest, serious criminal charges and the possibility of lengthy periods spent in jail (or even execution). Ergo, they are ''especially'' distrustful of the possibility that the other criminals they deal with might expose their criminal acts to the authorities for their own advantage. However, in the world of organised crime they still have to work together to some degree (it's kind of there in the name), so to the extent that "honor among thieves" actually exists, it's pretty simple; it's essentially an agreement that "I won't tell if you won't." The fact that Falcone informed on Maroni means that basically any chance that any other criminal might have trusted him is dead, because if he told on Maroni, he'd tell on them.

to:

** This one's simple; Falcone being exposed as a police informant is damaging because it means that he ''can't be trusted''. Professional criminals tend to be suspicious and paranoid at the best of times; they kind of have to be, because they live their day-to-day lives in ways which leave them open to arrest, serious criminal charges and the possibility of lengthy periods spent in jail (or even execution). Ergo, they are ''especially'' distrustful of the possibility that the other criminals they deal with might expose their criminal acts to the authorities for their own advantage. However, in the world of organised crime they still have to work together to some degree (it's kind of there in the name), so to the extent that "honor among thieves" actually exists, it's pretty simple; it's essentially an agreement that "I won't tell if you won't." It's the whole idea behind omertà; you keep quiet about my crimes, I'll keep quiet about yours. The fact that Falcone informed on Maroni means that basically any chance that any other criminal might have trusted him is dead, because if he told informed on Maroni, he'd tell inform on them.

Top