|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Sept 11, 2018 5:13:35 GMT
There WAS controversy over Burton's Batman killing. And people have nitpicked Nolan's Batman indirectly getting people killed, which is still a bit different from outright machine gunning people and not even acknowledging his rule. As for that article, did you actually read it? Of course, most of the actual examples are from before the comics implemented his no-killing rule (which, btw, was before Superman could even fly in the comics - do we really want to stay true to that era?). Then you have a couple of examples that aren't even Bruce Wayne (Azrael and Thomas Wayne), two that are alternate realities (including one by post-sanity Frank Miller), one that was easily retconned to where they survived (KGBeast), a video game example where Batman only technically killed them but then revived them (Arkham), and one that is a fan theory with no basis in reality (The Killing Joke). So keep that dick, good sir, for I shall not be sucking it. I don't remember any controversy regarding the killing in burton films. Again don't recall any of that for the Nolan films. The point is he killed in the comics. When BvS first came out, all i heard was "BATMAN DIDN'T KILL IN DA COMICS !!!111 NOT MUUUHHH BAAAATMAAAAN!!!111" Now get back to sucking! I can't say I remember any backlash during the Burton films, but then again, I was born after it came out, but I always thought it was a generation thing among moviegoers and comic book readers. They were just excited to have this dark Batman film for the first time on the big screen in contrast to the Adam West films, so they really overlooked some of the aspects of Batman that were ignored. As someone else said, "no killing" was never addressed. But Batman is so mainstreamed today and probably the most popular superhero, everyone knows him and about him, and Nolan really helped solidify the "no-kill" rule, same with the Arkham games, that it's so ingrained in pop culture now and kinda a crucial part of his character and what makes him so admirable as a hero. |
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Sept 11, 2018 10:40:54 GMT
you are trying too hard, Brad. Trying too hard? I merely quoted you saying you only sometimes fantasize about abusing children and ass-raping your daughter. 
this is were intelligent language and context interpreation become crucial. "Hardly" is an adverb meaning a polite "certainly not".
I redrafted your Snyder masturbation slur into a Gunn-type pedo-comment you defended. This act can "hardly" (read: certainly not) be construed as me having child abuse fantasies a la Gunn, which however you suggested via your false equivalence fallacy. Thus, my pun of you trying too hard(ly).
And even if I had depraved child abuse fantasies like Gunn, I hardly work for Disney selling children products, do I? Fire me hardly, cowboy!
|
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Sept 11, 2018 14:31:49 GMT
Trying too hard? I merely quoted you saying you only sometimes fantasize about abusing children and ass-raping your daughter.
this is were intelligent language and context interpreation become crucial. "Hardly" is an adverb meaning a polite "certainly not".
I redrafted your Snyder masturbation slur into a Gunn-type pedo-comment you defended. This act can "hardly" (read: certainly not) be construed as me having child abuse fantasies a la Gunn, which however you suggested via your false equivalence fallacy. Thus, my pun of you trying too hard(ly).
And even if I had depraved child abuse fantasies like Gunn, I hardly work for Disney selling children products, do I? Fire me hardly, cowboy!
What was it you said? Oh yeah, when the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser, much like you did when you retooled his post because he got to you. |
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Sept 11, 2018 19:24:48 GMT
Trying too hard? I merely quoted you saying you only sometimes fantasize about abusing children and ass-raping your daughter.
this is were intelligent language and context interpreation become crucial. "Hardly" is an adverb meaning a polite "certainly not".
I redrafted your Snyder masturbation slur into a Gunn-type pedo-comment you defended. This act can "hardly" (read: certainly not) be construed as me having child abuse fantasies a la Gunn, which however you suggested via your false equivalence fallacy. Thus, my pun of you trying too hard(ly).
And even if I had depraved child abuse fantasies like Gunn, I hardly work for Disney selling children products, do I? Fire me hardly, cowboy!
|
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Sept 12, 2018 9:52:57 GMT
this is were intelligent language and context interpreation become crucial. "Hardly" is an adverb meaning a polite "certainly not".
I redrafted your Snyder masturbation slur into a Gunn-type pedo-comment you defended. This act can "hardly" (read: certainly not) be construed as me having child abuse fantasies a la Gunn, which however you suggested via your false equivalence fallacy. Thus, my pun of you trying too hard(ly).
And even if I had depraved child abuse fantasies like Gunn, I hardly work for Disney selling children products, do I? Fire me hardly, cowboy!
I hardly think so, palio.
en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/hardlywww.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hardly
The rest is context interpretation skills.
|
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Sept 12, 2018 19:42:47 GMT
I don't get why Ben Affleck Batman was so controversial. "But...But... Batman doesn't kill!!!" Then where was that outrage over Tim Burton's Batman? Where was that outrage when Nolan's Batman got people killed? And he also killed in the comics: screenrant.com/times-batman-has-killed-people/So you "Batman doesn't kill" dick bags can suck my dick!
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Sept 12, 2018 20:18:05 GMT
The first link included my example. The second includes: And personally, as someone whose first language is not Australian, I've never heard it used the way you're using it. |
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Sept 12, 2018 21:08:15 GMT
The first link included my example. The second includes: And personally, as someone whose first language is not Australian, I've never heard it used the way you're using it. and I'm not fluent in Las Vegan you flaming galah! To give the sauce bottle a fair shake: language is a flexible system of permutations and variable meanings. You must interpret language sensibly, not cuck a U-ey by putting the cart before the kangaroo. I tend to shy away from using linguistic extremes, as it's one of our Lord Lucas' holiest teachings:  Bloody oath, mate! |
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Sept 17, 2018 9:10:45 GMT
this is were intelligent language and context interpreation become crucial. "Hardly" is an adverb meaning a polite "certainly not".
I redrafted your Snyder masturbation slur into a Gunn-type pedo-comment you defended. This act can "hardly" (read: certainly not) be construed as me having child abuse fantasies a la Gunn, which however you suggested via your false equivalence fallacy. Thus, my pun of you trying too hard(ly).
And even if I had depraved child abuse fantasies like Gunn, I hardly work for Disney selling children products, do I? Fire me hardly, cowboy!
What was it you said? Oh yeah, when the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser, much like you did when you retooled his post because he got to you.  it's a famous Sacrates quote, you tool. Debate lost indeed. |
|
