Is Batman realistic? Or just a comic book character?

[Gotham Knight]

your eloquent posts always make for a great read, colors.

[The Dark Knight]

From what I gather, everybody thinks batman is non realistic.

Somebody should give Christopher Nolan the memo.   

Nolan doesn?t need any memo. Nolan is going to do what he he?s going to do. After TDK, they?re going to let Nolan do his own thing. Basically whatever he wants. He?s sure deserves that right.

The more realistic Batman universe usually isn?t really my ideal cup of tea ? though when I?m in the mood for that kind of thing, to tell you the truth, I do like it quite a bit. I got swept up in the hype big time, as you would recall.

Batman is a broad church. There is room for Burton?s take as there is room for Nolan?s take. It's like the weather in Gotham. If you wait long enough, it's going to change to something more to your liking.

[burtongenius]

To me, Nolan's Batman Begins and the Dark Knight are realistic.  If anyone has any objections, please enlighten me.


As far as a realistic vs. a non realistic batman co-existing, thats just plain stupid.  I mean, Gotham is a real city.  There are real criminals.  Bruce Wayne is a normal person who wears a real bat costume/suit.  He has big muscles.  And he's rich.  And he has a heart for humanity.  All of those things are needed for batman.  Which is why there is only one batman.  None of those things seem supernatural.  Theres no room for an unrealistic batman.  Superman and spiderman are great fun because they have unrealistic, yet cool powers.  Batman is something totally different.

[The Dark Knight]

To me, Nolan's Batman Begins and the Dark Knight are realistic.  If anyone has any objections, please enlighten me.

I think it's all been said by others and myself quite a bit. Not sure if I want to go into it again.

As far as a realistic vs. a non realistic batman co-existing, thats just plain stupid. 

No, it's not. They are seperate universes of continuity.

Theres no room for an unrealistic batman.

There is. That would mean there is no room for Burton's two Batman films. Batman since inception has been unrealistic. Nolan's world is more real than others, but that's as far as things go. I just don't get your logic on this one.

[burtongenius]

You're right.  There is no room for burton.

[The Dark Knight]

You're right.  There is no room for burton.

?!

[Paul (ral)]

?! too!

i think burtongenius is confusing realism with verisimilitude

[Gotham Knight]

Superman and spiderman are great fun because they have unrealistic, yet cool powers.  Batman is something totally different.

Have to disagree on all counts. The allure of Superman and Spidey, to me at least, is that these character's vast powers are often constrained within the limits of their respective personalities. Independently, their life experiences, at their apex, often mirror real life, and that is why I think we find them so fascinating. The familiarity of their humanity is realistic, even if the adventures they partake in are not. That is why I think they are, as you say, great fun; the allowance for the human condition, but with room for a separate universe where amazing things are possible. Batman, I feel, is no different, save for the depths to with his condition is taken. Like Spidey, a loved one/s is/are taken from him, which breaths life into a crime fighting career, but the after effects that chalk the outline of his life from then are more unsettling, and in a way, singularly realistic in a sense. However, the world he lives in cannot be seen as a complete mirror, nor can Spidey?s/Marvel?s New York or the gilded Metropolis of Superman. Our society, for the most part, has not degenerated into the disorder that requires a Batman or a Spidey. Take it however you want; a social commentary foretelling the things that will happen if these shadows of the now remain unaltered, or a step into wild askew entertainment that allows real world problems to chip away at modern myths. What I?m trying to say is, the people themselves, Peter Parker, Bruce Wayne, Kal El of Krypton, are tangible?real, the depression, the pain, the elation, the roller coaster of emotion is our own and thus realistic, but the world, the powers, the possibilities, and the rules that revolve around them are fanciful, unrealistic realizations of the world we see everyday. So, is Batman realistic. Yes. And no. (Yay! A cop out answer!)

That?s my psuedo philosophical take on the matter. At face value, I can only reiterate that yeah, all the different bits of batman as a person/character are real, the writers pull it from themselves and real people, but the world is a fantasy. He has a rogue gallery rampant with unrealistic deformities, but the fact that it?s mostly made up of the physically deformed is a look at our ?rogue gallery,? which often manifests as damaged people whose scars we cannot always see, which is one of the staples of the modern Batman.

[Paul (ral)]

^
^
QFT

[burtongenius]

In response to ral.

By fun, I meant the supernatural super powers of superman and spiderman.  You're right, the human condition, the personality strugges are the same, but the powers are unrealistic.  Thats why batman is different.  He is realistic.  He's just a regular guy (well, not average but you know what I mean).  Thats why batman is so different and appreciated from other heroes (though their is nothing "out there" about an Iron Man existing but....)

I don't think burton should've done batman (please don't stone me).  Burton is not a very realistic director (not that directors have to be- its just that batman is a realistic character and therefore deserves a director that will carry out the realism).

I can see the villains in batman being a fantasy but I dont see any fantasy in a city with criminals.  The writers just got carried away with some of the villains (again, I still think the Penguin is realistic- not the devito version- more like the animated series version- one without webbed hands).