McGinnis vs. Wayne

[Bird Boy]

Here's just somthing I threw together (it all refers to the TV series)
Round 1: Training

Wayne- Studied years before coming batman (he trained in all martial arts, esacping.. you name it..)

McGinnis- Just became Batman over night (according to Dini, he took some martial arts before becoming Bat's, but, not enough that Wayne knew)

Winner of round 1: Wayne

Round 2: Partners

Wayne- Had 3 Robins, & Batgirl
McGinnis- Doesn't need a partner. he has the suit

Winner of Round 2: McGinnis

Round 3: The Suit

Wayne- Spandex, w/ various HAND HELD gadgets

McGinnis- has the suit which gives him extra strength, and the gadgets are sorta computerized, so he doesn't really have to handle them (exception: bat-a-rangs)

Winner of Round 3: Wayne

Round 4: Reason for being Batman

Wayne- Saw his parents murdered, and vowed to be Batman

McGinnis- His Dad died (but not in front of his eyes) and found out Wayne's secret. He just became Batman

Winner of round 4: Wayne

Round 5: Shining Moment

Wayne- (I don't think they really showed one..)

McGinnis- End of ROTJoker. The fight with the Joker

Winner of Round 5: McGinnis

Winner: Bruce Wayne

******End of Rounds*******

So, with all of that said, do u guys want to disagree/agree with me? Create a round 6? Hope you enjoyed my little fight thing.. :cool:

-Bird_Boy

P.S. Oh yeah, those are just MY OPPIONS. I'm sure yours will be different. They are both Batman in their own way. Wayne is just the stronger Batman.

[Inque]

Vilians:

Bruce Wayne - Clayface, Mr. Freeze, The Penguin, etc.

Mcginnis - Inque, Spellbinder, Blight, etc...

Winnder: Terry Mcginnis by FAR!! ......mostly because of inque! :D :cool:

[Kylewayne]

Tadadadadadada...DA......BRUCE WAYNE!!!
He is the only true BATMAN :D , besides the vilains in B:TAS and the new adventures are the coolest!!!:cool: ( Catwoman , Poison Ivy, Harley Quinn, Joker, etc...)
The only coolest :cool: vilain in Batman Beyond is INQUE!:D

[Shriek]

Wayne was the first Batman. No one will ever let someone take him over. Not even his son Tallant will be the true Batman..

Tallant is Bruce and Talias son in Elseworld's Finest.

[Inque]

i see you received the avatar and it works! :p

[Salvor]

Wayne IS the most interesting one indeed. This "contest" brings out that point well.

[Inque]

Originally posted by kylewayne

The only coolest :cool: vilain in Batman Beyond is INQUE!:D

AMEN!!!

[Clayface]

Originally posted by Inque
Vilians:

Bruce Wayne - Clayface, Mr. Freeze, The Penguin, etc.

Mcginnis - Inque, Spellbinder, Blight, etc...

Winnder: Terry Mcginnis by FAR!! ......mostly because of inque! :D :cool:

No way! I'd give that round to Wayne - his villians had heart and soul to then - a lot of Terry's don't. I don't think there's even the slightest comparison between the quality of Wayne's Rogue's Gallery and Terry's. Besides, Wayne had the greatest, coolest villian of all time - ME!

[Nightwing]

Originally posted by Clayface


No way! I'd give that round to Wayne - his villians had heart and soul to then - a lot of Terry's don't. I don't think there's even the slightest comparison between the quality of Wayne's Rogue's Gallery and Terry's. Besides, Wayne had the greatest, coolest villian of all time - ME!



That's very true, and I agree, but heart doesn't pay the villains bills! The vast majority if not all of Terry's villains were extremely dangerous as far as what they could do. Of course, because of the depth, development and heart that Bruce's villains had, they were capable of more. But where one on one fighting is concerned, I don't know where Terry would be without his suit. Blight, Shriek, Inque....I think there were a higher number of distruction prone villains for Terry than for Bruce.

Although Bruce and everything else about him is still my pick for "winner" even though I don't like to compare them like that.

[Clayface]

Originally posted by Nightwing

But where one on one fighting is concerned, I don't know where Terry would be without his suit. Blight, Shriek, Inque....I think there were a higher number of distruction prone villains for Terry than for Bruce.


First, I'd say Bruce has as many, if not more villians that are just as power ful - Clayface, Mr. Freeze, Bane, Scarecrow, Killer Croc, Poison Ivy, etc. And it was never said that we're talking only one on one fights - you have to consider not just brawn, but brains. And Bruce's villians again win out inthe brains department - Ra's Al Ghul, Catwoman, Joker, etc. Bruce's villians out number, out wit Terry's, and he has just as many brute strength villians.

[Robin III]

There's a problem with Terry's Villains though! They're mainly re-hashes of existing ones! While the costumes are different (and in some cases, better) they're still old villains from the comics! Nonetheless, they are interesting to watch, but just not very original. Admittedly, there are other ones who are original (or I just haven't though of anyone similar!) but still, some main ones (or re-appearing ones) are re-done.

Blight is pretty much Dr. Phosphorus or the Corossive Man

Inque is like LadyClay, the 4th Clayface

the Royal Flush Gang is the same as the JLA Gang, (but Ace wasn't mute)

Spellbinder is a Batman villain who does the exact same thing but he's actually a she right now. Originally the character was a man, but one of his henchmen killed him when she got powers from the devil's agents (long story, but hey, cool villain)

Mr. Freeze.... Nuff said

The Jokerz.... Again

Chappell (Bane's Doctor) isessentially Bane but not very smart

Mad Stan is like the Tick's Bigshot (who is supposed to be a Punisher take-off anyway)

Ma Mayhem was a 60's villain for cryin' out loud! (Known as Ma Parker though)

Earth Mover I'm stretching a bit, but like a Poison Ivy type who'se able to control the environment. I liked this character (especially the design) but the main idea is still taken!

Terriffic Trio (the Fantastic Four)

---

Those are the main one's that I can think of off the top of my head, but overall, I'd say that this causes for Wayne to win in the villain category. While the Beyond team has done an amazing job of making these new villains worthy of watching, they're still based elsewhere in the comic world.

[Inque]

Originally posted by Clayface


I'd give that round to Wayne - his villians had heart and soul to then - a lot of Terry's don't.

true they don't have heart and soul, but they did try with Inque in that whole Inqueling episode. But who needs heart and soul when you've got strength, power, finesse, cool abilities, killer looks, and sex appeal? :D

[Salvor]

I agree with most of you (for once, even with you, Clayface!). Bruce's villains do outwit Terry's. And most of Terry's villains show an obvious dearth of depth: their aims are often not so original and some of them do stem directly from existing ones.

The tragic aspect of villains like Clayface of Mr Freeze is what appeals to me the most.

[James]

Hmm, but surely Terry's villians are Wayne's villians also? :rolleyes:

As for Terry's not being as good as Wayne's older enemies... yeah, it's true. But since Terry is not actually meant to be half the Batman that Wayne was/is (that is made very clear in BB!) I think Terry can just think himself lucky.

Give the kid a break! He did kick Joker's butt!
Well... just about...
......after the Joker had given him a serious kicking...
and after Joker had leveled half the city...

Hmm, Gotham be thankful the villians have toned down so much or there wouldn't be much left on Terry's watch! :D

[DR. BELCH]

--I'm more of a Blight fan than an Inque fan, but she's just a harlot's hair under ol' skullface in my estimation. I actually almost sympathized with the guy near the end of "Ascension", when he started fussing that he just wanted to be left to his lonesome. When he gently smiles at his secretary and bites into a corned beef sandwich that she brought him, he looks absurdly human...though when Terry accuses him of the death of his father, he immediately hardens into his more familiar role of monster: "Do you have the slightest idea how little that narrows it down?" The question remains: would Terry have happily snuffed out Blight, or attempted to rehabilitate and cure the former Derek Powers?

[Inque]

Originally posted by DR. BELCH
--I'm more of a Blight fan than an Inque fan, but she's just a harlot's hair under ol' skullface in my estimation.

Harlot's hair???:confused:

[Peace Keeper]

When he gently smiles at his secretary and bites into a corned beef sandwich that she brought him, he looks absurdly human -DR. BELCH

That was a a smile? I thought it was a more of a nasty, "What the hell are YOU starring at!" face.

[DR. BELCH]

Originally posted by PEACE KEEPER
That was a a smile? I thought it was a more of a nasty, "What the hell are YOU starring at!" face.

Well...admittedly, it's hard to tell, since without makeup ol' skullhead doesn't have visible lips. Though it's easy to read the secretary's (rather odd) look of pity as she glances wistfully over her shoulder. :(
That's a particularly memorable scene, BTW, because you can look right through Blight's cheek as he chews his food...yuk.


Originally posted by INQUE
Harlot's hair??? :confused:

A nicer-sounding euphamism for another figure of speech that refers to a small distance between points...but instead of "harlot" it uses a word that starts with w and rhymes with more. I even recall hearing Inque referred to using that word somewhere in the archives.... :eek:

[Inque]

Originally posted by DR. BELCH


but instead of "harlot" it uses a word that starts with w and rhymes with more. I even recall hearing Inque referred to using that word somewhere in the archives.... :eek:

where?

as far as we know, she only had one affair with some dude, who eventually gave birth to deanna. if she had one night stands with other people, then she could be what you refferred to. but i doubt it, she wouldn't have wanted to take anymore risks with more children.

[DR. BELCH]

Originally posted by INQUE-- where?

Aqui:
http://www.toonzone.net/cgi-bin/wf/wwwthread.cgi?action=show&board=wfbb.archive64&bnum=64&num=4543&bg=wfbb.archive64

Though it doesn't necessarily mean she has had relations with men for money. Deanna, in "Inqueling", criticizes her for selling her body to unscrupulous scientists and letting them turn her into a freak. Inque says, basically, "But I did it for you, baby." To me that sounds like a defense mechanism--self-delusion--more than anything; she isn't lying to anyone but herself. She'd have done better raising Deanna herself poor and honest rather than palming her off on a foster family, then wallowing in debauchery for years as she funneled her ill-gotten gains into her daughter's pocket under the guise of being a good mother.
Then again, if she had done that, Batman Beyond would be all the poorer without its darkest star. ;)

[Inque]

Originally posted by DR. BELCH

Aqui:
http://www.toonzone.net/cgi-bin/wf/wwwthread.cgi?action=show&board=wfbb.archive64&bnum=64&num=4543&bg=wfbb.archive64


i actually replied to that post......i remember it.



Deanna, in "Inqueling", criticizes her for selling her body to unscrupulous scientists and letting them turn her into a freak. Inque says, basically, "But I did it for you, baby." To me that sounds like a defense mechanism--self-delusion--more than anything; she isn't lying to anyone but herself.
another one of my theories: she already knew what they were going to do to her body. she wanted to take advantage of the power and get the money. she probably thought that she could keep the child while being "inque" but then she got soo wrapped up in being paid a lot by other people that she just didn't care that much for her daughter. i think even though she was badly hurt and in deanna's home, she still didn't care for her daughter. she was only putting on an "act" to get deanna to help her. but ironically, deanna was also playing an "act" against inque. i don't really think inque was that badly hurt after getting hit by the gun. she probably could have healed herself without getting any mutagen. anyway, the mutagen that she got had a strong acid solvent that dissolved her anyway and probably did nothing to help her at all. we all know she survived because she came back in the call part 1. and she probably survived super-man. being thrown apart into different places is wayyy better that getting frozen in ice or being dissolved by water or acid. she could just pull herself back together, it would just take a little longer.



Then again, if she had done that, Batman Beyond would be all the poorer without its darkest star. ;) [/B]

very true

[ShadowsofBlack]

Originally posted by Inque
Vilians:

Bruce Wayne - Clayface, Mr. Freeze, The Penguin, etc.

Mcginnis - Inque, Spellbinder, Blight, etc...

Winnder: Terry Mcginnis by FAR!! ......mostly because of inque! :D :cool:

I'd have to give it to my man Bruce. He had just as many derranged psychotic freaks to fight but without the benefit of a strength enhance, pain absorbing suit. Not to take anything away from Terry, since he did beat the suit when that computer guy downloaded himself into it.

[ShadowsofBlack]

By the way, what episode was all this revealed in? I love Batman Beyond and I hate to miss episodes, but it can't be helped. I'd really like to see the episode Inque is in with her daughter.

[DR. BELCH]

she already knew what they were going to do to her body. she wanted to take advantage of the power and get the money.
Agreed. From the beginning she was morally curdled and opportunistic. She rationalized her behavior by saying it was for her baby; maybe she did it so well she believed her own lies after a few years. IMO, that would make her an even more tragic, even almost lovable, figure.


she probably thought that she could keep the child while being "inque" but then she got soo wrapped up in being paid a lot by other people that she just didn't care that much for her daughter.
The self-serving lies continue...she starts to resent the baby and ditches her, but tells herself someday she'll return rich and sweep her off to Easy Street. Meanwhile she tries to kill the guilt by throwing money at it. Inque fools herself, but not her little girl.


i think even though she was badly hurt and in deanna's home, she still didn't care for her daughter. she was only putting on an "act" to get deanna to help her. but ironically, deanna was also playing an "act" against inque.
At first. But I started thinking Inque began to soften ("For the first time in my life, I feel like a mother!") when she fumbled to lift her keyboard and Deanna helped her. Note those twin smiles, though neither of them are facing each other. Inque's was genuine...but Deanna's was fake. I think all those old delusions of a happy home with her daughter tricked Inque into letting her guard down. That's what made her betrayal and "death" all the more delicious. Deanna takes after Mommy far more than she realizes... :eek:


i don't really think inque was that badly hurt after getting hit by the gun. she probably could have healed herself without getting any mutagen. anyway, the mutagen that she got had a strong acid solvent that dissolved her anyway and probably did nothing to help her at all. we all know she survived because she came back in the call part 1. and she probably survived super-man. being thrown apart into different places is wayyy better that getting frozen in ice or being dissolved by water or acid. she could just pull herself back together, it would just take a little longer.
To someone like Inque, always runnning, always scheming, time is of the essence. She hates to be needy and without the drugs she'd have to spend months of painful recovery that she doesn't want. That's her flaw: being selfish and seeking a quick fix. She could have healed fairly well without them, but it's like having a broken leg and not having it properly set by an expert--it mends, but badly, and it causes the victim pain and a limp for years. As for her appearance in "The Call", was it storyboarded and shot before or after "Inqueling"? KWB is notorious for showing episodes out of order. Fox was no better; I recall they showed "The Strange Secret of Bruce Wayne" before "Two-Face", though it's evident the latter occurred before the former.

[Inque]

Originally posted by ShadowsofBlack
By the way, what episode was all this revealed in? I love Batman Beyond and I hate to miss episodes, but it can't be helped. I'd really like to see the episode Inque is in with her daughter.

the episode was called "Inqueling", it was a season 3 episode.

[Rahziel]

Terry did the exact think that Bruce couldN'T do in his days as Batman, DEFEAT THE JOKER FOR GOOD! it seems the roles of Terry and Bruce switched there. Bruce chooses to ignore the taunts of Joker and power through, Terry wisely chooses to return the favor. I take it he knows Bruce well now and how silent he can be. i guess nobody payed attention to terry when he said "history's my favorite subject"
Originally posted by SJJ
Hmm, but surely Terry's villians are Wayne's villians also? :rolleyes:

As for Terry's not being as good as Wayne's older enemies... yeah, it's true. But since Terry is not actually meant to be half the Batman that Wayne was/is (that is made very clear in BB!) I think Terry can just think himself lucky.

Give the kid a break! He did kick Joker's butt!
Well... just about...
......after the Joker had given him a serious kicking...
and after Joker had leveled half the city...

Hmm, Gotham be thankful the villians have toned down so much or there wouldn't be much left on Terry's watch! :D :cool:

[Clayface]

Originally posted by Rahziel
Terry did the exact think that Bruce couldN'T do in his days as Batman, DEFEAT THE JOKER FOR GOOD!

I think you're giving Terry too much credit there. If the Joker that Bruce came up against could have been defeated by simply shorting out a microchip (which is all Terry really did to "defeat" the "joker"), Bruce could have done it too. Terry defeated a piece of electronic equipment that took over someone's body - Bruce did that all the time (see any of the Mad Hatter eps). Now if Terry had been up against the real Joker, a Joker that couldn't have been defeated by the destruction of a little chip, I'm not convinced Terry would have faired any better, unless he got an advantage from the suit. Stick Terry in the original Bat-suit, against the original Joker, and I don't think he would have faired as well.

[James]

Now if Terry had been up against the real Joker, a Joker that couldn't have been defeated by the destruction of a little chip, I'm not convinced Terry would have faired any better, unless he got an advantage from the suit. Stick Terry in the original Bat-suit, against the original Joker, and I don't think he would have faired as well.

I agree that Terry actually did very little to defeat the Joker - it was just a chip which required shorting. That's fair enough.

But credit where it's due. Terry was fighting on his own. This is a 17 year old kid who fighting one of Gotham's terrors. While an able street fighter, he has had none of the training - physically or mentally - that Bats had. He hasn't got the psychotic motivation.

Add to the fact that he was, in some essence, fighting Tim Drake (Joker says he knows all the fighting techniques that Bats and his Boy Blunder did), I think Terry proved himself well accomplished - batsuit aside.

My point? Terry is still a novice Batman yet he manages to defeat the Joker despite all the odds - and by himself. He proves he is a different Batman and doing so perhaps lays to rest the critics who claim he'll never be like Bruce.

Newsflash: This guy is to bring a totally different style to the Bat. A little clutzy, less professional and not quite as obsessive as our Batman. A dirtier, more empathic, (you could even say professionally motivated) Batman. Considering what he's accomplished as a teenager I think he could shape up to be an excellent rival to our Brucie...... but then he had an excellent - extremely bad tempered - tutor....

[Rahziel]

Your missing something, Terry would have done better against the original Joker if you asked me. let's look at the facts: ROTJ Joker inhabits the body of Tim Drake and knows all of Drake's secrets and abilities he learned as Robin and uses it against Terry, because he knows Bruce/Batman fights in routine technique. You fail to realize what Terry could have done to Joker if he continued to fight him one on one. McGinnis got to him and he was losing his edge. If he wasn't in Tim's body, I feel the battle would have been alot more violent and all Terry had to do is fight dirty and un-bat-predictable; things coud have heated up there, perhaps....
Originally posted by Clayface


I think you're giving Terry too much credit there. If the Joker that Bruce came up against could have been defeated by simply shorting out a microchip (which is all Terry really did to "defeat" the "joker"), Bruce could have done it too. Terry defeated a piece of electronic equipment that took over someone's body - Bruce did that all the time (see any of the Mad Hatter eps). Now if Terry had been up against the real Joker, a Joker that couldn't have been defeated by the destruction of a little chip, I'm not convinced Terry would have faired any better, unless he got an advantage from the suit. Stick Terry in the original Bat-suit, against the original Joker, and I don't think he would have faired as well.

[Nass]

Bruce is the greatest Batman, he had a family to avenge. A whole background he was trying to protect, of course only he knew about it, and a few others like Alfred and his partners. Most of his villains had something to do with Bruce, they had a personal grudge aside from the part where Batman had to stop them from taking over HIS City he VOWED to protect over his parents graves. I never saw Terry be so into it, and vow to avenge his father. His villains arn't really aware Terry McGinnus exists, what does Shreik and Terry have to do with each other? How does Terry personally hate MAd Stan or Inque aside from them being part of his job? Essentially, Terry wasn't as into the mytho of Batman as Bruce was, and wasn't as much into protecting his family's heritage. Itd be interesting to see if Paul Dini would have made it even darker down the line by creating a whole new villain to kill someone else close to Terry. I dunno if his mother or brother would be it, I feel bad just for talking about it, but the writers really didn't want to bring back Blight. He wasn't over used, but I guess they didn't want to over do it. Some people say that Joker was over used, I personally don't think thats possible. I like Beyond, its the perfect continuation of Batman, but it could use some tweaking, some advancement in the story....it doesn't seem like Terry's done totally evolving into Batman. Many people ROTJ did that, but just because he beat Joker that makes him Batman? He beat Bruces villain? No, not quite. If anything it was with Blight, which he didn't even really do. He didn't save him or anything, and Powers son isn't getting in trouble. Even in Terry's time Bruce is taking care of the scum in his own company, its that element of the original Batman. At least thats my opinion. You wouldn't be able to launch Beyond without Batman, and that makes it a sequel which are rarely better than the original. And I don't usually say that about sequels, so I guess I really beleive in Bruce here. Im spent.

[Inque]

Originally posted by Nass
How does Terry personally hate MAd Stan or Inque aside from them being part of his job

terry definitely hates inque. you can see that in the episode "inqueling". he has that speech with max. he's definitely got something personal against inque. it's just not part of the job. inque affected one of the people that are close to terry. terry definitely cares for bruce.

[Clayface]

Originally posted by SJJ

But credit where it's due. Terry was fighting on his own. This is a 17 year old kid who fighting one of Gotham's terrors. While an able street fighter, he has had none of the training - physically or mentally - that Bats had.


Right, which is another reason I don't buy it. The writers expected us to just accept the fact that Terry is this great fighter without showing us his training, or his past experience. I believed Bruce could hold his own against all the terrors of Gotham, because we're told of his extensive trainging - they developed that aspect of him. I just don't buy that Terry would be that good of a fighter on his own, or with the minimal training he'd received at that point.



Originally posted by SJJ

My point? Terry is still a novice Batman yet he manages to defeat the Joker despite all the odds - and by himself.


Yeah, but what does that prove? Not much in my opinion. What did he do that was so great? He held his own in a fight? Whoop-dee-do. He got under the Joker's skin? Bruce has done it (was it mad love I'm thinking of?). He fried a chip? Bruce has done that too, and it certainly didn't take much skill. And then we're expected to believe that a novice did it all. And, like I said, i don't buy it. They didn't establish him enough previously for me to buy the idea that he's as good as Bruce because he got lucky once.

[Clayface]

Originally posted by Rahziel
You fail to realize what Terry could have done to Joker if he continued to fight him one on one. McGinnis got to him and he was losing his edge.

But what would Terry have done to him if the fight continued? We don't really know. We can theorize all we want, but we don't know. Did Terry get under his skin? Sure, its easy to do - Bruce has done it before. Did Terry hold his own in a fight? Sure - presumably because he was trained by Bruce. Would Terry have kicked Joker's *****? Quite possibly - but I'd say that he could because of the advantage the suit gave him. Joker knew Tim's moves, but he didn't know the secrets of the new Batsuit, so Terry had an advantage. Put Terry in the original suit, and stick him up against the original Joker, and I'm not convinced he'd do all that well, and I'm certain he wouldn't do any better than Bruce.

[James]

originally posted by clayface
Right, which is another reason I don't buy it. The writers expected us to just accept the fact that Terry is this great fighter without showing us his training, or his past experience. I believed Bruce could hold his own against all the terrors of Gotham, because we're told of his extensive trainging

Well it looks like Terry's getting his experience 'on the job' as it were. No one is saying Terry is trained mentally or physically as well as Bruce. He has a degree of combat and acrobatic skills and a very powerful suit to make up for the obsessive years Bruce put into the Bat.

If they had given Terry the same circumstances as Bruce - the same equipment as Bruce used, doing the job as perfectly as Bruce did, Terry would not be believable. They didn't.

Terry is far more fallible than Bruce. He gets kicked in far more often and falls for traps Bruce would not have given a moments thought for. His suit makes up for his training short comings and he has a mentor to guide him.

But Terry is learning and growing. His fight with the Joker was tough. It may have just been a computer chip, but he had a far deadlier Joker to fight (one who could predict all of his 'Bruce' trained moves). In the end it came down to Terry's street training to make the difference.

I'm not saying Terry is a better Batman than Bruce. There is no doubt there. Terry is proof the symbol of the Bat can go on ... and evolve. The mantle doesn't have to be carried by someone as scarred and in some way twisted as the villains he fights. Batman does not need the psychotic edge to fight psychotic crime.

Terry is about atonement. Terry is sanity fighting insanity. I think that makes him an interesting Batman in his own right. Only Terry's future could tell us if he could surpass the talents of Bruce.

We can only guess...... :cool:

[Rahziel]

I never went on the record to say Terry was better than Bruce, I like McGinnis more because he's not the ordinary Batman. Batman Beyond shows us how someone without all the burdens Bruce has can uphold the mantle of the bat. It's cool to me to see someone from a totally different world handle the responsibility. But too many can only compare them two instead of accepting their differences.....
Originally posted by SJJ


Well it looks like Terry's getting his experience 'on the job' as it were. No one is saying Terry is trained mentally or physically as well as Bruce. He has a degree of combat and acrobatic skills and a very powerful suit to make up for the obsessive years Bruce put into the Bat.

If they had given Terry the same circumstances as Bruce - the same equipment as Bruce used, doing the job as perfectly as Bruce did, Terry would not be believable. They didn't.

Terry is far more fallible than Bruce. He gets kicked in far more often and falls for traps Bruce would not have given a moments thought for. His suit makes up for his training short comings and he has a mentor to guide him.

But Terry is learning and growing. His fight with the Joker was tough. It may have just been a computer chip, but he had a far deadlier Joker to fight (one who could predict all of his 'Bruce' trained moves). In the end it came down to Terry's street training to make the difference.

I'm not saying Terry is a better Batman than Bruce. There is no doubt there. Terry is proof the symbol of the Bat can go on ... and evolve. The mantle doesn't have to be carried by someone as scarred and in some way twisted as the villains he fights. Batman does not need the psychotic edge to fight psychotic crime.

Terry is about atonement. Terry is sanity fighting insanity. I think that makes him an interesting Batman in his own right. Only Terry's future could tell us if he could surpass the talents of Bruce.

We can only guess...... :cool:

[ShadowsofBlack]

Thanks, but I get my BB on WB. How do I determine what season I'm in?

[James]

It's cool to me to see someone from a totally different world handle the responsibility. But too many can only compare them two instead of accepting their differences.....

I agree! I love both characters which is why I love BB with Wayne and Terry and not Max!

[DR. BELCH]

Inque:
terry definitely hates inque. you can see that in the episode "inqueling". he has that speech with max. he's definitely got something personal against inque.

Little wonder! She crawled down his throat practically the moment they met, and forced him to vomit. I'd hate her, too! I've had a dame get under my skin before, but that was... :eek:

In "Disappearing Inque", the roles are reversed--he's in her! IMO, that'd make a great still shot--Inque looks absurdly pregnant! :D

[Peace Keeper]

Rahziel and JNN are on the level. Terry is my fave too. You can't give Bruce and Terry the same life story. Terry fights as well as the next 17 year old guy. His suit compensates for his lack of formal training. <<hmmm that sounds very familiar. I think I just plagiarized that from someone else's post>> Under the mask, he's just a regular teenager. He's easy to relate to......and he's hot.:p

You guyz should read the TERRY vs JOKER THREAD.

[Rahziel]

thanks for agreeing, he deffinitely his own Batman : "I was never a Robin!!!"
Originally posted by Peace Keeper
Rahziel and JNN are on the level. Terry is my fave too. You can't give Bruce and Terry the same life story. Terry fights as well as the next 17 year old guy. His suit compensates for his lack of formal training. <<hmmm that sounds very familiar. I think I just plagiarized that from someone else's post>> Under the mask, he's just a regular teenager. He's easy to relate to......and he's hot.:p

You guyz should read the TERRY vs JOKER THREAD.

[Clayface]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Peace Keeper
[B]Rahziel and JNN are on the level. Terry is my fave too. You can't give Bruce and Terry the same life story. Terry fights as well as the next 17 year old guy. His suit compensates for his lack of formal training. <<hmmm that sounds very familiar. I think I just plagiarized that from someone else's post>> Under the mask, he's just a regular teenager. He's easy to relate to......and he's hot.

Ahhh, and there is another reason I don't care for Terry as much - I don't relate to him. Bruce I can relate to - I can understand his motivation, and his driving obsession. He gets into a suit that looks like a bat because he's a bit crazy. I just don't buy a normal guy getting into a suit like that for any old reason (can you tell I'm not a big fan of the heroes in tights idea?). Even as a kid, I always thought it was rather silly that people would get in costumes to fight crime, but with Bruce, it made sense to me - the guy went a bit nuts when his parents were offed, and so he he ended up in a costume fighting crime, and its his obsession that keeps him in that suit. I've never really been able to accept the idea that Terry would wear the suit just for the sake of fighting crime. Granted, the show wouldn't be the show without him in the Batsuit, but the motivation just isn't as believable to me. And I can't really relate to him as just a teenager - I like Bruce because he's older - because I can relate to his everyday trials and tribulations, as opposed to those of a teenagers. It's that old man in me showing through. ;)

[Rahziel]

Don't you remember ROTJ when he explained his reason? Atonement is what motivates Terry: The ability to help others in need, After being such a troubled kid, he feels that this is retribution for all the trouble he caused in his passed as well as feeling like a worthwhile human in his own eyes again. he faces demons of his own. Though the demons are not as heavy as the one's Bruce has, to me it is the driving force that keeps him going as Batman. "just an average dude in a suit?" Yeah, we know vengeance is what put him in that suit and alot of people didn't like how he became Batman, but let's face the facts: Terry also wanted to stop the nerve gas from being shipped besides getting the guys who killed his dad. Bruce could have shut down the suit , but he sympathized with Terry because he felt his pain. After terry succesfully stopped Powers and Fixx, who came to Terry asking him to continue as Batman?Like it or not, Bruce chose him and don't think he would just let a nobody resume the mantle of the Bat, he beleives in terry. To Terry, it's more than just a job, if it was that trivial to him, he would have ever put his life on the line the way he does, it's his calling....

[Peace Keeper]

hmmmm, I guess you guyz don't want me to have my bed sheets.


Originally posted by Clayface
I just don't buy a normal guy getting into a suit like that for any old reason...I've never really been able to accept the idea that Terry would wear the suit just for the sake of fighting crime. [/B]

If some one came up to me and was like, "Yo, here's a super hero suit. Go fight crime," I would take it!!!!!

I hope you would do the same.

[James]

. I've never really been able to accept the idea that Terry would wear the suit just for the sake of fighting crime. Granted, the show wouldn't be the show without him in the Batsuit, but the motivation just isn't as believable to me. And I can't really relate to him as just a teenager - I like Bruce because he's older - because I can relate to his everyday trials and tribulations, as opposed to those of a teenagers. It's that old man in me showing through.

I can empathize with Clayface on this. Teenager characters, on the whole, don't seem very realistic in TV/Movie storylines. Possibly because writers often bestow too many adult qualities on the teenager character. People who have been through teenage then find these character's unrealistic and hard to identify with.

Teenage is a time of emotional confusion, superficial behavior and self absorption. Rarely is it a period of responsibility, stability and self control. We've all been there/are there. It's tough. The world looks down on Teens and Teens look down on the world.

I think that's why Bruce makes easier to identify and perhaps a little more believable. Bruce's character (apart from the tight wearing bit) is very much that of an adult who has learned the responsibility of being an adult.

However.... I don't feel that Terry's unrealistic. Yes, Terry is a teenager, but the Bat has given him focus and responsibilities than a teenager doesn't normally have to deal with.
This big change was never portrayed as coming easy to the lad and he has had several conflicts of interest resulting from his 'job' (but then, so did Bruce in 'Mask Of The Phantasm').

Terry's responsibilities to his 'atonement' (ROTJ) has made him an outsider from school. Not just because he is rarely there - from what we can gather he was never really there - but because the responsibility has separated him from his peers. He is very much an adult in a teenagers body. Even Max, one of the more grown up, dare I say, stable characters is far more juvenile than him (wishing to join his 'exciting adventures'). This is why I think Bruce has such a low opinion of Max. Max is intelligent but still learning about herself. She is still a teenager. Terry is more. Terry is, perhaps unique.

Max is at the level, IMO, of a Robin. Young, enthusiastic, and excited about the dangers and adventures ahead. Bruce has grown out of the need of a Robin. He knows how dangerous the world can be for a Robin.

Terry is different. Bruce isn't looking for a Robin - he's looking for a Batman and like it or not, Terry is proving that he has already what it takes to pick up the mantle of the Bat, batsuit or not.

[Rahziel]

especially if it meant saving my home town and others in need, i always wanted to do that., i know how you feel. I wish i had a nifty batsuit like that. I bet we all in here do......

[Rahziel]

that's the best explanation of the psyche of the BB series i heard so far. To me, terry was never a typical teen. His street knowledge and days as a juvie caused him to "mentally mature" faster and become disinchanted with the "fads" of the average teen. In those days, he fended for himself back then. Being a reformed juvie has taught him alot about the world: responsibility to himself, his family to do better in life. I bet and that is why he's can fitting into the shoes of batman like no other teen could. he seems not to be a stranger to having big responsibilities in his life.

[Peace Keeper]

Originally posted by Clayface

...I like Bruce because he's older - because I can relate to his everyday trials and tribulations...

Yeah, you multi-billionaires have it really rough.

I never new my old Farscape Buddy was pro Bruce. You have been rendered "irreversibly contaminated."

...I feel so betrayed.

[Rahziel]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Peace Keeper
[B]

Yeah, you multi-billionaires have it really rough.

yeah, Peace, some just don't think change is good. I like McGinnis. He's doing a good job for someone his age. this being the reason many hardcore bruce fans player hate him. they feel he shouldn't won the battle with joker because he's too inexperienced, maybe, but he was always resourceful...

[Clayface]

Originally posted by Rahziel
Don't you remember ROTJ when he explained his reason? Atonement is what motivates Terry: The ability to help others in need,

Yeah, I do remember that, and I thought it was sort of lame. I mean, how many superheros have we seen with that exact same motivation? Booooooooooring! Part of the reason I've always loved the Batman mythos is because Bruce is such a different "superhero" than your average guy in tights. The DC and Marvel universes are buried under superheros that do the right thing just because its the right thing to do, or to make up for some past wrong-doing. Its so cliche. But the Bruce charater is different, as there's a bit of insanity that drives him. When seeing a replacement for Bruce, I would have liked to have seen that sort of uniqueness in the new character, and I didn't get it. So, i wasn't impressed.


Originally posted by Peace Keeper

If some one came up to me and was like, "Yo, here's a super hero suit. Go fight crime," I would take it!!!!!
I hope you would do the same.

Well, actually, I'm afraid I wouldn't. Far too much responsibility and risk in taking on such a thing. If lives were in immediate danger, I'd probably take it temporarily to save those lives, but I certainly wouldn't make it a career. Just another reason I've never been a big fan of superhero comics - I just don't find it believable. Sure, as kids my friends and I would pretend to be superheros, but as an adult, I just don't think I'd ever really become one.


Originally posted by Rahziel

yeah, Peace, some just don't think change is good. I like McGinnis. He's doing a good job for someone his age. this being the reason many hardcore bruce fans player hate him. they feel he shouldn't won the battle with joker because he's too inexperienced, maybe, but he was always resourceful...

I hope you're not lumping me into that category. I'm not someone that has a problem with change. I personally was very excited to see Dick take the mantle of the bat (for however short it was) in the Knightsend storyline in the comics, and I don't have a problem with Gordon retiring in the comics either. Change is not a problem - change for the sake of change, without great writing to back it up is.

I don't really have a problem with Terry becoming the new Batman, but I do have a problem with the motivation behind it, and the character development. They just haven't done a good enough job to convince me that Terry is at the level or ever will be at the level of Bruce, and haven't convinced me of his motivations. Terry has great potential, but I don't feel that that potential has been brought out in the writing for the show or for the comics.

I also don't have a problem with him defeating the Joker in ROTJ. I do however have a problem with people saying this is proof that he's a great Batman, since his defeat of the Joker really didn't take much in the way of skill or ingenuity. Any joe-blow could have fried the chip on his neck.

[Rahziel]

...but that situation can't be helped. We all knew the whole bruce wayne persona before BTAS or TNBA even begun because he's been around since 1939. Terry's whole persona was never touched on strongly because of the writer's choice, he's a new character and WB is ending the series. that's leaving us all high and dry. There's so much we don't know about Terry and I was hoping they would have touch on it in better detail(flashbacks or a whole devoted ep. or two). I feel cheated that I won't get to know important info on a character I like so much. I know how u feel, but nonetheless he's a pretty cool take on a legendary character...

[Nightwing]

I agree with both of you. I don't think Terry was developed enough, and he should have gotten much more. BUT I still like him a lot, even though honestly I can't really "relate to him" per se.

Heck, the accepted challenge itself of Terry's to become the next Batman show's he's got guts!! I mean, with Batfans like us, who needs critics! Nevertheless, Terry gave it a shot and proved he's worthy, if not that then potentially worthy.

[James]

I disagree, Clayface!


I also don't have a problem with him defeating the Joker in ROTJ. I do however have a problem with people saying this is proof that he's a great Batman, since his defeat of the Joker really didn't take much in the way of skill or ingenuity. Any joe-blow could have fried the chip on his neck.

Terry skill and ingenuity comes prior to the chip frying. He beats the Joker without resorting to punches - by manipulating him.

The Joker likes to appear carefree and whimsical. We all know this is just the method to his madness. He is cold and calculating. He is waiting to spring his next move when you're off guard. It's how he remains unpredictable. Meanwhile, he will irritate the life out of you so that you make the stupid mistake out of anger or fear. Essentially, he makes sure he is calling the shots.

The Joker doesn't get into fights. He pays(?) people to do that for him. He knows it's best to keep a safe distance. He's no idiot. In ROTJ he was well aware of the chip in his neck. He knew that was his Achilles heel. He could use Tim's skills to defend himself but really he wanted to avoid any direct confrontations if possible.

Terry's ingenuity is how he turns the tables. He disappears into the rafters. Good move. Joker likes to see his audience. He likes to be the one watching you while you don't know it. He doesn't like it the other way round. Then the insults. Insightful or just using his spiteful teen gene? :p Who knows. The effect, in any case, works. Joker loses control.

I don't think Terrance wanted to be crushed by the ceiling, but it got him into very close contact with the Joker, and with the Joker out of control. The Joker was furious and at the same time overconfident.

Terry took advantage of all this. Whether you agree with the details here, the fact, IMO remains. Terry used his enemy's weakness against himself. This is the way of the Batman. Without having to resort to fists, Terry beat the Joker. He used his head. Bruce has reason to be proud of the guy.

[James]

Heck, the accepted challenge itself of Terry's to become the next Batman show's he's got guts!! I mean, with Batfans like us, who needs critics!

Not a truer word said, sir. Just see it as character building! :cool:

[Peace Keeper]

Originally posted by Clayface
"Well, actually, I'm afraid I wouldn't. Far too much responsibility and risk in taking on such a thing."

:o You know what? I am glad you wouldn't take the suit. Quite frankly, I don't think you've got what it takes. You're just not SUPERHERO material.

[Clayface]

Originally posted by Peace Keeper

:o You know what? I am glad you wouldn't take the suit. Quite frankly, I don't think you've got what it takes. You're just not SUPERHERO material.

Ho hum. And I'm sure you do? :rolleyes:

[Clayface]

Originally posted by SJJ

Terry's ingenuity is how he turns the tables. He disappears into the rafters. Good move. Joker likes to see his audience. He likes to be the one watching you while you don't know it. He doesn't like it the other way round. Then the insults. Insightful or just using his spiteful teen gene? :p Who knows.


And that's exactly my point. We don't know. Maybe he was insiteful. But maybe he was just being a wise-***** and got lucky. They didn't convince me he really had skill, and that's what I've been saying all along.

[ShadowsofBlack]

I just love these open forums of discussions. Whether I'm being a smart ass (can I spell that out without any reprocussions) or not, I can no longer discern, but I do love reading you guys posts. I'd have to agree with the whole "do the right thing" concept being uninspired. I love Terry just the way he is, I just wish they wouldn't have let Bruce go out on such a bad not (For God's sake, picking up a gun?) But it would have been cool if Terry were just a bit on the edge when it comes to mental stability.

[ShadowsofBlack]

...since people do it anyway, but if given the opportunity, I would probably don (is that the right kind of "don") the tights. But I wouldn't be a very moral one. Say I spot a drug dealer on the streets, I'll beat him down, take him money, and leave just enough on him so the cops can arrest him. Or say there's a corrupt CEO (a real life Luthor or Powers), I'd probably force him to launder money from his company and into bank accounts that I set up in the Caymans or something. All in all, I don't think I'd do it just because it's right, but because I'd have fun doing it.

[James]

And that's exactly my point. We don't know. Maybe he was insiteful. But maybe he was just being a wise-***** and got lucky. They didn't convince me he really had skill, and that's what I've been saying all along.

Doesn't matter. It was calculated and intended. That's what important - not what inspired it.

Terry does have a mouth, but it is a grown up one. You don't see him taunting people outside work (like say Nelson does) - except of course, Mr Wayne.
Terry has learned - a bit like the Joker and Spidey - to use his mouth to distract his opponent. Terry is different to Wayne. With him being different in character, motivation and history he couldn't and shouldn't be the same Batman as Wayne.

If he tried that approach he would be a failed Batman. Batman must be true to the holder of the mantle. That is partially where the honour lies in the Bat.

IMO of course! :D :D

[Rahziel]

Yeah, I do remember that, and I thought it was sort of lame. I mean, how many superheros have we seen with that exact same motivation? Booooooooooring! Part of the reason I've always loved the Batman mythos is because Bruce is such a different "superhero" than your average guy in tights. The DC and Marvel universes are buried under superheros that do the right thing just because its the right thing to do, or to make up for some past wrong-doing. Its so cliche. But the Bruce charater is different, as there's a bit of insanity that drives him. When seeing a replacement for Bruce, I would have liked to have seen that sort of uniqueness in the new character, and I didn't get it. So, i wasn't impressed.

Do you really want an exact carbon copy of Bruce? Now, that would really be boring and unoriginal. Hey, maybe it's cliche, but he's a superhero like any other in DC. Neither he or Bruce are above the cliche, they fit into it somehow. To be honest with you, i think someone with Terry's past shouldn't have a tragic event occur like Bruce did. Bruce had the money and resources to train and become batman, McGinnis would have more than likely regressed into a life of crime if that were to happen to him, no one to stay on his about doing right.




I also don't have a problem with him defeating the Joker in ROTJ. I do however have a problem with people saying this is proof that he's a great Batman, since his defeat of the Joker really didn't take much in the way of skill or ingenuity. Any joe-blow could have fried the chip on his neck.
[/COLOR] [/B][/QUOTE]


Like any joe-blow could get that close to Joker? on Bruce and Terry could do that in battle. It took ingenuity for the simple fact that he psyched out Joker and turned the tables. Not just that, he was armed with the joy buzzer the whole time meaning he was baiting the clown prince of crime. come on....

[Clayface]

Originally posted by SJJ


Doesn't matter. It was calculated and intended. That's what important - not what inspired it.


Ahhh, but it does. Maybe it doesn't matter to you, but it does matter to me. We've seen Terry be a wise ass to all sorts of people. They've never convinced me that he's doing this as a "method" - it always comes across as him just being a wiseass. You see it as calculated - I see it as being a stereotypical wisecracking teen.



Originally posted by SJJ

You don't see him taunting people outside work (like say Nelson does) - except of course, Mr Wayne.
Terry has learned - a bit like the Joker and Spidey - to use his mouth to distract his opponent. Terry is different to Wayne.

But that doesn't make him a good Batman! Kids in grade school know how to use insults to distract each other and throw each other off. They don't necessarily do it consciously, but they do it. You're telling me all it takes to be Batman is a "skill" a grade-schooler has? I don't think so.


Originally posted by Rahziel
Do you really want an exact carbon copy of Bruce?



I never said that. What I did say is that they made Terry too cliche and too much like a carbon copy of so many other superheros. I wanted something more original, just like Bruce's character/motivation is more original.




Hey, maybe it's cliche, but he's a superhero like any other in DC.



Exactly my point. He is a superhero like any other in DC. I wanted more innovation than I got.




Like any joe-blow could get that close to Joker?



In a battle situation or in general? Yeah, I think anyone could get close to him in a non-battle situation. Heck, Bonk could have taken out the Joker if he knew about the chip - he could get as close as he wanted to the Joker before he mouthed off and got himself killed. So could any of the Joker's gang. In a battle situation, where the Joker knows you're the enemy, its much harder to get in close to him. But, in that case, Terry had a huge advantage - the suit. And so we come back around to my original statement regarding the Terry/Joker fight. Put Terry in the original suit, without all the spiffy enhancements, and I don't think he would have faired as well.

[Rahziel]

[color=burlywood]
In a battle situation or in general? Yeah, I think anyone could get close to him in a non-battle situation. Heck, Bonk could have taken out the Joker if he knew about the chip - he could get as close as he wanted to the Joker before he mouthed off and got himself killed. So could any of the Joker's gang. In a battle situation, where the Joker knows you're the enemy, its much harder to get in close to him. But, in that case, Terry had a huge advantage - the suit. And so we come back around to my original statement regarding the Terry/Joker fight. Put Terry in the original suit, without all the spiffy enhancements, and I don't think he would have faired as well.



Terry was still getting his tail kicked by Joker even with the suit! Everyone talks of the black suit as if it were such a cheat for Terry. Wayne came to rely on it too, even if was for age-related reasons, it still was used by him too. Both of them can still get creamed by an average joe if they let thier guard down; just like bruce did in REBIRTH. Even when Terry caught Joker with the knee to the mid-section, it didn't do massive damage to him. i just see the suit as mainly body armor. the suit wasn't a main factor in that battle, you'll have to come better than that...

[Clayface]

Originally posted by Rahziel
Terry was still getting his tail kicked by Joker even with the suit! Everyone talks of the black suit as if it were such a cheat for Terry. Wayne came to rely on it too, even if was for age-related reasons, it still was used by him too. Both of them can still get creamed by an average joe if they let thier guard down; just like bruce did in REBIRTH. Even when Terry caught Joker with the knee to the mid-section, it didn't do massive damage to him. i just see the suit as mainly body armor. the suit wasn't a main factor in that battle, you'll have to come better than that... [/B]

Are you stoned? LOL!

You said it yourself, Terry was getting his butt kicked by Joker even with the suit. Not much of a Batman then, is he? Even with all the advantages, he still got whupped.

And, tt was a cheat for Terry. Bruce took on the original Joker without the suit. Terry didn't.

Bruce relied on the suit because of age. Terry's young - he shouldn't need the suit for the same reasons.

The suit is much more armored than the original suit. Its also much more than just armor, and it does give him advantages. The suit can fly at high rates of speed, hover, and make hair pin turns - all things that give Terry a mobility advantage that Bruce didn't have in the original suit. The suit didn't play a part in the Joker battle? That's funny, I seem to remember him using the suit's enhanced strength several times, and I seem to remember him using it to get up into the rafters, to get advice from Bruce on the headset, to survive some massive blows that would have knocked out Bruce in the original suit, etc. Once again, put Terry in the original suit, I'm not convinced he'd fair all that well.

[Rahziel]

NOPE. It was a straight up fight. you seemed to have missed my point: Even if terry had the original suit like Bruce, he could have still won using the same battle plan. come now, he wasn't afraid to fight his own suit in LOST SOUL, do you really think he could have been defeated by Joker? Everyone must mark that ep out of existence because it is sole proof that he can take on a tougher foe and still come out on top. if u look at it, both of the battle are kinda familiar- Joker in a microchip and vance program in his batsuit. have you ever noticed that?

Both battles, he got the job done, i'm pretty confident that he could have done it, that's my opinion. i'm being open minded here but you seem so negative about Mcginnis. to make u feel better, i never said he's better than bruce....

[Clayface]

Originally posted by Rahziel
NOPE. It was a straight up fight. you seemed to have missed my point: Even if terry had the original suit like Bruce, he could have still won using the same battle plan.



And my point is, it wasn't much of a plan at all - it was something anyone could have come up with - it didn't take a whole lot of ingenuity or skill. Thus, I don't feel it was a huge showing of Terry being the Batman.




come now, he wasn't afraid to fight his own suit in LOST SOUL, do you really think he could have been defeated by Joker?



Yes, I do. Put him in the old suit up against a Joker that can't be defeated by a simple electrical shock, and he wouldn't have faired any better (or in my opinion, as well as) Bruce did against the original.



[i]
Everyone must mark that ep out of existence because it is sole proof that he can take on a tougher foe and still come out on top.
[/b]


Actually, I mark that one out of existence for a number of reasons. 1) It was a forgettable episode. 2) It was an incredibly cliched storyline (thus resulting in #1). 3) I found it hard to believe that Terry was that skilled of a fighter, when we hadn't been shown anything to back up the idea. I don't buy that he'd be that good from street fighting, and we were never shown (at least, up until that point) that he had gone through any formal training.




i'm being open minded here but you seem so negative about Mcginnis. to make u feel better, i never said he's better than bruce....


I'm not negative about McGinnis - I'm negative about the way his characterization was handled.

[Rahziel]

Yes, I do. Put him in the old suit up against a Joker that can't be defeated by a simple electrical shock, and he wouldn't have faired any better (or in my opinion, as well as) Bruce did against the original.


a simple shock?? come now. it wasn't a simple shock, look at what it did to ace, that shock almost had him finished off by Joker, meaning it is quite powerful, a shock like that close to the brain (in the neck!) could immobilze anyone.


Actually, I mark that one out of existence for a number of reasons. 1) It was a forgettable episode. 2) It was an incredibly cliched storyline (thus resulting in #1). 3) I found it hard to believe that Terry was that skilled of a fighter, when we hadn't been shown anything to back up the idea. I don't buy that he'd be that good from street fighting, and we were never shown (at least, up until that point) that he had gone through any formal training.



U seemed to really blame the character instead of the writer's, man! i too wish there was more of him to go on. Unfortunately there's not but i still appreciate the character alot..

Oh, yeah, please keep the insults down, we are having a good debate, let's not turn it personal and ugly, because i'm really enjoying the fact that I'm getting attention here. No one cared about my BB issues in the old forum. thanks for paying attention.

[Clayface]

Originally posted by Rahziel

a simple shock?? come now. it wasn't a simple shock, look at what it did to ace, that shock almost had him finished off by Joker, meaning it is quite powerful, a shock like that close to the brain (in the neck!) could immobilze anyone.



By simple, i meant, there was nothing ingenious or skillful about it. Electricity is electricity, and as you said, it could immobilize anyone - and in fact most likely would have in all honesty killed both Ace and Tim/Joker if it was really that powerful.




U seemed to really blame the character instead of the writer's, man!



As I said, the character had potential, but for the most part didn't impress me. The character is a direct extension of the writers and their ability. Thus, when I criticize the character, I'm criticizing hte writers as well.




Oh, yeah, please keep the insults down, we are having a good debate, let's not turn it personal and ugly, because i'm really enjoying the fact that I'm getting attention here.



Insults? When did I ever use insults?




No one cared about my BB issues in the old forum. thanks for paying attention.


Hey, everyone's opinion counts, whether you agree with them or not. Besides, if we all agree, all these posts are gonna be nothing more than "Yep, I agree". How boring! :)

[Rahziel]

Insults? When did I ever use insults?




sorry, dude, i took that 'stoned' remark badly, my mistake...



Hey, everyone's opinion counts, whether you agree with them or not. Besides, if we all agree, all these posts are gonna be nothing more than "Yep, I agree". How boring! :)




You have point there , too. so, what should we talk about next? I'll get your answer when i get back from work... how about "what if Batman Beyond continued 10 yrs. in the future?" just throwing ideas out....

[James]

All quotes Clayface (c)


Yes, I do. Put him in the old suit up against a Joker that can't be defeated by a simple electrical shock, and he wouldn't have faired any better (or in my opinion, as well as) Bruce did against the original.

Difficult, if by 'original you are referring to the ROTJ incident with Bruce and Joker, then it's difficult to say. Bruce fought poorly against the Joker because he had lost control. His feeling were clouding his actions.
In a straight fight, Bruce would have bettered the Joker, as I believe Terry would.


And that's exactly my point. We don't know. Maybe he was insiteful. But maybe he was just being a wise-***** and got lucky. They didn't convince me he really had skill, and that's what I've been saying all along.

You've missed my point :) . It doesn't matter if it was Terry being a wise ass. That's one of his skills - just as Bruce's silence is one of his. It's utilizing your skills to your advantage that makes you a good Batman and that's what Terry did.


You said it yourself, Terry was getting his butt kicked by Joker even with the suit. Not much of a Batman then, is he? Even with all the advantages, he still got whupped.

Yes, but the Joker had the advantage of Tim's training. So Bruce's training was useless to Terry - which meant Terry had to use some - ahem - moves which he had learned elsewhere.......


By simple, i meant, there was nothing ingenious or skillful about it. Electricity is electricity, and as you said, it could immobilize anyone - and in fact most likely would have in all honesty killed both Ace and Tim/Joker if it was really that powerful.

No, the skill was getting close to the wryly beast to short him out. To be fair in such circumstance, it was a good idea to try shorting out the chip. Yes, it's obvious to us as viewers, but there was no guarantee it would stop him. Terry put a hefty gamble on his life hoping that would work.......

Summing up, I love Bruce and Terry. The premise of the old Batman training the new is what makes the show so facinating. The dynamic behind those two is great and despite my hatred for teenage heroes (is there really such a thing?) I have warmed to Terry.
The writers have not made him to a super Batman. Yeah, he's learning on the job. True, he makes tons of mistakes. He gets beaten to a pulp frequently and still works under the misguided belief that he can juggle a social life with the Bat. I think the writers have done a damn good job.

As I've said, IMO Terry is believable. An adult head on a kid's shoulder. They've kept this character true to form. He's young, but he's learning.

The writers make sure that this Batman is still falliable. He doesn't have the training that Bruce had and he needs guidence. Never once do the betray the original Bat by giving you the impression he's pulled off some massive feat which Bruce couldn't have in his day. Terry gives the old man the respect he deserves and occasionally Bruce will return the favour.

They've shown us that Terry is never going to be a carbon copy of Bruce, but still stands for everything the original Batman did.

Bruce is proud of the dude, therefore so am I ;)

Nuff said. :cool:

[Rahziel]

Summing up, I love Bruce and Terry. The premise of the old Batman training the new is what makes the show so facinating. The dynamic behind those two is great and despite my hatred for teenage heroes (is there really such a thing?) I have warmed to Terry.
The writers have not made him to a super Batman. Yeah, he's learning on the job. True, he makes tons of mistakes. He gets beaten to a pulp frequently and still works under the misguided belief that he can juggle a social life with the Bat. I think the writers have done a damn good job.

As I've said, IMO Terry is believable. An adult head on a kid's shoulder. They've kept this character true to form. He's young, but he's learning.

The writers make sure that this Batman is still falliable. He doesn't have the training that Bruce had and he needs guidence. Never once do the betray the original Bat by giving you the impression he's pulled off some massive feat which Bruce couldn't have in his day. Terry gives the old man the respect he deserves and occasionally Bruce will return the favour.

They've shown us that Terry is never going to be a carbon copy of Bruce, but still stands for everything the original Batman did.

Bruce is proud of the dude, therefore so am I




that was beautiful and so true. At the learning path terry's going in, i wouldn't really change a thing about him, just give him more depth...

[Clayface]

Originally posted by SJJ

You've missed my point :) . It doesn't matter if it was Terry being a wise ass. That's one of his skills - just as Bruce's silence is one of his. It's utilizing your skills to your advantage that makes you a good Batman and that's what Terry did.


I don't think its so much that I missed your point - its more that we have very different definitions of what a "skill" is. I wouldn't consider either of the things you mentioned skills. Thus, my complaints with the idea that Terry being a wise-guy makes him a Batman - I feel that doesn't have anything to do with him being a/the Batman.




No, the skill was getting close to the wryly beast to short him out.


Again, i think this is a case of different definitions. I don't really consider that a skill. As I said in my last response, in a non-battle situation, anyone can get close enough to him, and in a battle situation, Terry had the advantage of the suit.




The writers have not made him to a super Batman. Yeah, he's learning on the job. True, he makes tons of mistakes. He gets beaten to a pulp frequently and still works under the misguided belief that he can juggle a social life with the Bat. I think the writers have done a damn good job.



Hmmm. Indeed, he has been shown to make mistakes, which I think is cool, because it does show he's not up to snuff yet. But a majority of the time, I'm not sure what we saw as mistakes were intended that way from the writers' viewpoints. It felt to me that a lot of the time the writing was just sloppy. Terry would make a huge blunder, and there was never really any later reference to this blunder, or a lesson to be learned from it. If the writers had consciously acknowledged these in the script more often, and shown us that Terry was learning from these mistakes, I'd give the writers more credit. But, like I said, it often seemed to me that the mistakes Terry made weren't intentionally written in, but rather a slip-up in the writing.




As I've said, IMO Terry is believable. An adult head on a kid's shoulder. They've kept this character true to form. He's young, but he's learning.



I'm curious - in what way did you mean "believable"? I mean, I think he's a believable teenager character, but I'm just not sure what you meant by that statement.




The writers make sure that this Batman is still falliable. He doesn't have the training that Bruce had and he needs guidence.



I think in a few of the episodes, they did indeed intentionally show us flaws, but I feel that in a lot of the eps it was just a result of shoddy writing, as I said above.

Overall, I think a lot of our differences in opinion on this subject come from what we each consider to be the makings of the "real" Batman. What you're looking for as "proof" is different than what i'm looking for in "proof".

[Salvor]

ahh good old argueable issues... :)

[James]

Clayface again... ;) ;)
I'm surious - in what way did you mean "believable"? I mean, I think he's a believable teenager character, if that's what you meant. I'm just not sure what you meant by that statement.

I mean that he is not, IMO, created as the perfect teenage. What makes Teenagers so hard to empathise with in shows is they are:

1. Either too adult in nature to be a real teenager
2. Too much like a teenager to actually to make a believable hero.

I think is written to fall neatly between the two. He still display certain Teenage qualities - he's over confident, he's has a bit of a mouth......
Yet he has those important adult qualities. He has learnt responsibilty, to act selflessly with courage and respect for life.

This sort of teen is IMO unusual, but that's why I think Bruce has kept him on - because he is unique. At the same time, while not a normal teen, he is a teen that us post teens can stomach (well, just about in your case CF! :) )

As for the rest, we obviously do disagree with certain qualities in the writing/character of Terry - but then that's what has made this thread so facinating - I'm sure Rahziel would agree as well!

[Nightwing]

Originally posted by SJJ
Yet he has those important adult qualities. He has learnt responsibilty, to act selflessly with courage and respect for life.

I agree. But I just wanted to add, my favorite of Terry's responsible traits. I absolutely love his heavy interest in history and research. No not just the "History's my favorite subject!" line. I mean things like, after his odd and questionable encounter with Wayne, he read up on him. And he knows how elevators used to work, before Gotham's technology made the city all lazy town. The entire town if not country is softened by the advances and conveniences of the future. Not this kid.


Originally posted by Clayface
....in a non-battle situation, anyone can get close enough to him, and in a battle situation, Terry had the advantage of the suit.

But this I'm not sure I understand. I feel the suit only highten's Terry's Batman persona enough so that he doesn't get killed during his crusade since, as I said in my first post, Terry's villains are more destructive than Bruce's. And BB time seems to have bad guys destroying things more. Just evens out the playing field a bit, to provide an excuse against fanboy accusations such as "how can he withstand all 6 of those guards while not having the extensive training Bruce did?" or something to that effect.

[James Harvey]

Good point. The villians are more phsyical than mental. They'll blow things up and tear things apart than play mind games with Terry. And I think this is a big change that the suit has to accomidate. If al the villians play mind games, then there's no need for a suppsed up suit. But if it's gonna be fisticuffs, then he needs the suit.

[Rahziel]

As for the rest, we obviously do disagree with certain qualities in the writing/character of Terry - but then that's what has made this thread so facinating - I'm sure Rahziel would agree as well! [/B][/QUOTE]


I do agree. But now it can't be changed as the WB(fools!) don't wanna renew the show. i still can't beleive this is happening!

I personally feel on the whole issue of the two batmen that Terry is an ideal Batman for someone his age. they don't betray him as the "invincible" force that Bruce was, yet....
as for his fighting abilities, on one knows where he learned them. terry fights better than an average teen; look at SPLICERS train scene, LOST SOUL vs vance/batsuit. ROTJ vs. the Jokerz in the club, REBIRTH vs the Jokerz in front of the club & Wayne Manor. if the series was to continue from when Terry is older and stronger, i bet he'll be kicking serious butt! he just needs to gain more physical strength and train seriously in martial arts. We've only seen him once in training(TFDAR) and they should have shown more of that!!!!!!!!!

[Nightwing]

Originally posted by Rahziel
I personally feel on the whole issue of the two batmen that Terry is an ideal Batman for someone his age.

I think that sums up Terry to the letter, not taking to account the enemies Terry/BB had, not giving him the development of which he was capable, of course.

[Clayface]

Just a few more minor comments from me.



Originally posted by Nightwing

But this I'm not sure I understand. I feel the suit only highten's Terry's Batman persona



I don't feel that it hightens his persona but rather his physical prowess. I'm sure that physically, Terry is up to snuff - he's a very fit teenager. I'm not convinced that his fighting ability is necessarily up to snuff, but that's a matter of opinion. But all the suit adds is physical attributes - and Batman is not made by physical attributes alone.




enough so that he doesn't get killed during his crusade since, as I said in my first post, Terry's villains are more destructive than Bruce's. And BB time seems to have bad guys destroying things more.



I don't agree at all. We get more flamboyant destruction in BB, but that's, IMO, just because the show has focused more on the action aspects rather than the detective aspects. Terry's villians are more destructive? I wouldn't say so. Freeze wasn't destructive? Or Bane? Or Scarecrow? Or Killer Croc? Or Phantasm? Or Clayface (that's me!)? Or Ra's? Or Joker? They all commited mass destruction in BTAS/TNBA. For every villian in BB, there was a villian of equal (or possibly greater) physical strength, not to mention most of Bruce's villians also had incredible mental prowess.




Just evens out the playing field a bit, to provide an excuse against fanboy accusations such as "how can he withstand all 6 of those guards while not having the extensive training Bruce did?" or something to that effect.


Yep, that's how it feels to me - an excuse or gimmick. Instead of making Terry as creative and self reliant in battle as Bruce was, they depend on the suit, and use it as an excuse to explain how he can do things above and beyond the normal abilities.

The argument that Terry did something incredible over Bruce in defeating the Joker has been dependent on two main ideas from what I've seen.

1) He was very clever in doing it. I don't agree, because I don't think the idea of shorting a piece of electronic equipment with a zap of electricity is all that ingenious. And some consider the "getting under Joker's skin" a preconceived/clever notion on Terry's part, and like I said, I was never convinced that it wasn't more than just him being a smart ass.

So, then the argument goes on to a second idea:

2) Terry had great physical prowess to be able to defeat the Joker. I say that his fighting ability hasn't been sold enough to me to be believable, because we weren't shown enough of his past and training, and that the edge he did have over Joker physically was the added strength and manuverability of the suit. Thus my statement about Terry's suit giving him the advantage in battle over the Joker. Does that clear up anything?

Just remember: its all my humble opinion, of course. :)

[Rahziel]

Yep, that's how it feels to me - an excuse or gimmick. Instead of making Terry as creative and self reliant as Bruce was, they depend on the suit, and use it as an excuse to explain how he can do things above and beyond the normal abilities.

All my humble opinion, of course. :)
[/B][/QUOTE]


I guess that's why they call it batman 'beyond'! LOL....

to me it seems the BB villians are on a higher level (only actin-wise) than the past villians. the majority of them are superhuman or posses a superhuman feat. In terry's day in age, I feel even a young Bruce would gladly don the suit. The suit is just a way to keep up with the advancing styles of crime in Gotham. All some can see is that "Terry needs the suit because he's no bruce wayne" rather than seeing that "the intensity of the gotham criminals has shot up from 50 yrs ago, the suit is highly recommended. Not even bruce could have survived the battle with the teriffic trio just wearing his normal suit, he would reached for that fire-proof suit that he defeated Firefly with. In the end, I'm saying that enhanced suits are okay given the circumstances....

[Clayface]

Originally posted by Rahziel

All some can see is that "Terry needs the suit because he's no bruce wayne" rather than seeing that "the intensity of the gotham criminals has shot up from 50 yrs ago, the suit is highly recommended.



Well, that view comes from, IMO, poor writing. If the writers wanted to get across the idea that the future villians were that much more intense, they should have done a better job of it. I remember back when we first heard about the new suit, before the show ever aired, and I thought it was a really cool idea that he'd have this futuristic suit to keep up with the "villians of the future". But after watching the show, I was rather disappointed with the execution of the idea. Everytime I see Terry do something "the easy way" with the suit, all I can think to myself is "Bruce could have done that with a grappling hook", or "Bruce could have done that with the old style batarang", etc.




Not even bruce could have survived the battle with the teriffic trio just wearing his normal suit, he would reached for that fire-proof suit that he defeated Firefly with.



Well, two things here. First, I absolutely hated the fact that the writer's had Bruce use the fireproof suit. It was neat looking and all, but it came across as another gimmick to me - something that they stuck in the show to sell yet another Batman repaint in the toy stores. I felt that it was a bit of laziness on the writer's part to resort to a special suit, rather than just come up with a more ingenious way for Bruce to use what was already available to him. One of the things that always thrilled me about the Batman universe was that Bruce didn't need a special superpower suit like so many other heros - he used his head, and made do with whatever was at hand at the actual battle scene. When you start getting into special suits, you start crossing over into the "true" superpower comics, which is something I've never cared for.

Second, having said what I just did, I think Bruce could have absolutely survived the Terrific Trio battle - he just would have had to use his head more, and depend less on physical prowess.




In the end, I'm saying that enhanced suits are okay given the circumstances....


I agree and I disagree. Like I said, for the most part, I feel its a cop out, and just falls back into the standard superhero comics/cartoons - the "I'm more powerful than you" syndrome. I was excited at first about the prospect of the futuristic suit in BB, but was ultimately somewhat disappointed with the execution.

As usual, its all IMHO. ;)

[James]

The man with that face full of clay...
The argument that Terry did something incredible over Bruce in defeating the Joker has been dependent on two main ideas from what I've seen.

I certainly wouldn't argue that Terry did anything to the Joker that Bruce couldn't have done. Yes, the end result was the Joker was destroyed, but the situation could have been played out to a similar end by Bruce's Batman (Bruce would fought the Joker by a different approach - but I think he'd have ended up shorting the Big J as well).

Terry's situation was a little different in the fact he wasn't dealing with a human being (by that I mean the Joker - not Tim!), so Terry has an easier situation to resolve. No need to bother capturing the Joker as Brucie would have to. He just had to purge the programme. So no one can level a finger at Bruce and say 'Terry did something you never could!' because Terry had the luxury of fighting a programme rather than a living person.

Saying that, it doesn't make Terry's feat any less remarkable for an up and coming big B - but I don't think anyone can say it better (or worse - he succeeded, right?) victory to Bruce's Batman and as we have argued post to post, was, IMHO, a test of skill and integrity which Terry came tops - by doing it his way. Which is cool 'cos I'd have been really irritated if they had made Terry into a clone of Bruce, using the same tactics and style of his predecessors!

[Peace Keeper]

Yep, that's how it feels to me - an excuse or gimmick. Instead of making Terry as creative and self reliant in battle as Bruce was, they depend on the suit, and use it as an excuse to explain how he can do things above and beyond the normal abilities.

CLAYFACE, SHUT YOUR ANAL RETENTIVE MOUTH! YOU JUST KEEP WHINING ABOUT THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN. NOT TO MENTION THAT YOUR POSTS ARE SO GOD D@MN LONG, I CAN'T BEAR TO READ THEM. I CAN'T [explentive deleted] STAND IT ANYMORE! IF YOU HATE THE SHOW THAT MUCH, DON'T WATCH IT! WHEN WILL YOU GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD THAT TERRY IS NOT BRUCE! AND JUST B/C YOU WERE IMMATURE AS A TEEN, DOESN'T MEAN EVERYONE ELSE HAS TO BE! I DON'T SEE WHY YOU THINK THAT IN ORDER FOR A CHARACTER TO BE CONSIDERED "DEVELOPED," YOU HAVE TO KNOW EVERY MINUTE DETAIL ABOUT THEIR LIFE. MAYBE IF TERRY HAD 3/4S OF A CENTURY TO FINE TUNE HIS IMAGE, YOU'D FEEL DIFFERENTLY ABOUT HIM. I LOVE BRUCE, TERRY, AND THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THEM. BATMAN BEYOND IS A FAST PACED, HIGH ACTION, SCI-FI EXTRAVAGANZA. ASIDE FROM ADDING A LITTLE MORE VIOLENCE, I WOULDN' T CHANGE A THING.

LIVE IN THE NOW! Old school BATMAN was good for its time, but now it's dated

Post edited by Administrator DickGrayson

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by Peace Keeper

CLAYFACE, SHUT YOUR ANAL RETENTIVE MOUTH! YOU JUST KEEP WHINING ABOUT THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

[and a lot more in that vein]

[COLOR=royalblue]BOTH YOU AND THIS BOARD HAVE GOTTEN OLD. DON'T BOTHER WRITING A RESPONSE. I WON'T BE BACK TO READ IT. How's that for burning bridges?

:eek:

I mean, in the "Why I love you guys" threads we've been talking about how great this board is, and how everyone is patient and tolerant and no one flames anyone else, and how that makes this board such a great place. . . .

. . . . and so you're teasing us with a fake flame.

Please tell me I'm right.

[Rahziel]

Clayface got him a little pissed. Every here in this topic, including me, has been bringing up very valid points about Terry and the differences in the two Batmen. Clay keeps stressing the same issues: "terry cheated with the suit, that's why he defeated Joker" (bogus), "Terry wasn't dwelled on enough" which is crazy to compare that character to one that's been around for 62 yrs. That many, everyone and they're grandma should know about bruce compare to Terry who first appeared less than two years ago. these complaints of Clayface finally ticked someone off, i'm shocked it wasn't me....

[Rahziel]

my mistake...

[Clayface]

*sigh*

I'm not even going to bother responding to Peace Keeper's comments, other than to say: as I've said the whole time, its all my opinion. If you don't like my opinion, that's fine, but don't flame me for expressing it.



Originally posted by Rahziel
Clayface got him a little pissed. Every here in this topic, including me, has been bringing up very valid points about Terry and the differences in the two Batmen.



I've never said your points weren't valid, or that the two characters aren't different Batmen. I've only expressed my opinions on why I don't care for Terry or the BB show as much as I like the original. If you're seriousaly getting that upset over someone's differing opinion on something as trivial as a cartoon, I'd suggest a nice vacation in the Bahamas or somewhere else that you can unwind a bit. ;)




Clay keeps stressing the same issues:



Because those are the issues being discussed.




"terry cheated with the suit, that's why he defeated Joker"



Which is my opinion.




(bogus),



Which is your opinion.




"Terry wasn't dwelled on enough" which is crazy to compare that character to one that's been around for 62 yrs.



Not at all. They had how many episodes of BB? Quite a few. They certainly had the time to do it. One good two or three parter could have done it. I've read plenty of new and/or original characters in the comics that have been developed more in just a couple issues than Terry was developed in the entire series. I've read books where the character was more developed. None of these needed "62 years" to be developed. Its not a matter of how many years they had to develop the character. Good writers can develop a character in a minimal amount of time.

[Rahziel]

Some of the best events that defined bruce took many yrs to be made, by different writers. Maybe they started out writing BB with intentions to keep it going so that we may learn more about terry in the (I wish it was a-) 4th season or so. But, WB rained on that parade leaving us high and dry, ever thought of that? it could be..

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by Rahziel
Clayface got him a little pissed. these complaints of Clayface finally ticked someone off, i'm shocked it wasn't me....

Hey-- We're all pretty passionate, or we wouldn't be here. but WF is the great place it is because that passion gets channeled constructively into discussion and argument, not into shouting matches and flame wars. This thread's been a case in point. The participants have said very thoughtful and intelligent things, and have reacted to each other with courtesy and curiosity; and when tempers got on edge earlier they backed away. Of course, the issues that separate them have not been resolved (by any means). In fact, it's become increasingly clear that those issues are larger and more complex than it originally looked. But even this is a discovery of a kind-- and ought to inspire more curiosity and desire for discussion, not less.

And if someone's opinions are hopelessly and intractibly at variance with your own? Then discussion stops-- that's all. That's one of the beauties of a message board as opposed to a face-to-face (or face-to-Clayface;) ) conversation: you can just let it quietly disappear. So why stomp out and slam the door after you? After all, if Peacekeeper (or anyone else) is entitled to tell Clayface to go to hell simply because Clayface won't concede his position (or, what is worse, defends opinions tenaciously and intelligently), then Clayface is entitled to tell those who disagree with him to go to hell too. And then we're just another message board, one of those places people go to flame those who disagree with them.

[Clayface]

Originally posted by Rahziel
Some of the best events that defined bruce took many yrs to be made, by different writers.



Very true. But my examples still stand. There are plenty of examples of new characters that are well developed in a matter of a few issues of a comic book. There's really no excuse for it not being done in the numerous episodes BB had.




Maybe they started out writing BB with intentions to keep it going so that we may learn more about terry in the (I wish it was a-) 4th season or so. But, WB rained on that parade leaving us high and dry, ever thought of that? it could be..


Yeah, it could be, but that would be awfully short-sited of the creators. Timm, Dini and company are well aware that TV shows don't last long, no matter how good they are. They had the rug pulled out from them several times in the past - just look at their experiences with BTAS. What's more likely, in my opinion, is that the WB probably squashed any hopes for character development, because the WB is only interested in flashy shows with little substance, especially in something they consider a "kids" show. They want action and adventure, not character development, and I'm betting BB suffered because of it.

And let me say this: very nicely put, Maxie Zeus.

[Rahziel]

it happens to the best of us. Oh well, opinions are opinions, they're like a@@holes, everybody has them and thinks the other's stinks........

[Clayface]

Say, i just noticed something.There are 90 friggin' responses to this thread! This has got to be some kind of record! Woo-hoo! Do we all get little trophies? :D

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by Rahziel
it happens to the best of us. Oh well, opinions are opinions, they're like a@@holes, everybody has them and thinks the other's stinks........

ROTFL! What I wouldn't give for one of Flash's animated smilies right about now....:D

[Rahziel]

Down with pokemon! Funny it may be, but ver, very brainless c@@kfighting between silly creatures if u ask me. in another topic, that's why i like Digimon better, it has mind to it and a great story with plot twist with enough action to compliment it. that's why it's beating out pokemon in ratings now. back to the subject, WB bites now, the line up feels completely naked without a Batman show in it. that was the only reason i watch Kids WB, now i have no reason!!

[Rahziel]

Originally posted by Clayface
Say, i just noticed something.There are 90 friggin' responses to this thread! This has got to be some kind of record! Woo-hoo! Do we all get little trophies? :D


We have the longest thread on the board and there was never a dull moment in this debate, we rule!!!!!!

[Clayface]

Yep, TNBA and BB were the only reasons I watched the WB too. But after they pulled the plug on TNBA, and then screwed everyone over with the ROTJ edits, I've stayed away from them.

Say, does this mean I have to take Peace keeper off of my buddies list now?
:D

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by Rahziel
Down with pokemon! Funny it may be, but ver, very brainless c@@kfighting between silly creatures if u ask me. in another topic, that's why i like Digimon better, it has mind to it and a great story with plot twist with enough action to compliment it. that's why it's beating out pokemon in ratings now. back to the subject, WB bites now, the line up feels completely naked without a Batman show in it. that was the only reason i watch Kids WB, now i have no reason!!

And again I say: Amen!

[Rahziel]

that comes from the bottom of my heart. WB will live in infamy for this!!!! Batman is the backbone of Kids WB, wether they like or not! Give the people what they want, WE WANT BATMAN , WE WANT BATMAN!!!!!!!!


Luckily, i have almost every episode taped....

[Clayface]

Originally posted by Rahziel
Luckily, i have almost every episode taped....

Yep, me too. I have everything but Unmasked taped.

[Rahziel]

well, with the path they've taken, there's nothing to watch on KWB anyway. They won't see me until UNMASKED airs!!! then i will fade away again.......

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by Rahziel
Luckily, i have almost every episode taped....

What are you missing? I do have all of them taped and might be able to help you out.

(I know, this takes us really off topic, but I want to see that post count go higher, and higher, and higher, and higher, and higher and ... )

[Clayface]

Well, this makes it 100! And page 6!

(Don't worry, moderators - I won't pad the total count anymore. I promise!)

[Maxie Zeus]

Gosh, you're right. I have been boycotting the WB all this time and didn't even notice. I guess I've also been boycotting CBS and ABC and UPN and about 200 cable channels.....

[Rahziel]

Curse of kobra pt 1 and 2
April moon, season 2
king's ransom


there may be more from season 3, but i don't remember all the titles to know for sure...

[Nightwing]

Originally posted by Clayface

I don't feel that it hightens his persona but rather his physical prowess. I'm sure that physically, Terry is up to snuff - he's a very fit teenager. I'm not convinced that his fighting ability is necessarily up to snuff, but that's a matter of opinion. But all the suit adds is physical attributes - and Batman is not made by physical attributes alone.

Looking back at being quoted I definitely chose the wrong words in regards to the suit augmenting Terry's physical strength. Instead of that, I said it hightened his "Batman persona" for lack of a better description. That was probably confusing. I mean, how could a hightened suit magically turn a guy into Batman. I hope the surrounding parts of that post better described what I was thinking.





Originally posted by Clayface

I don't agree at all. We get more flamboyant destruction in BB, but that's, IMO, just because the show has focused more on the action aspects rather than the detective aspects.[/B]

This might sound strange because I agree completely. That's exactly what I've been saying about Terry's villains. I didn't mean to imply that I put them on a higher level of recognition than Bruce's villains. I fit into the catagory of bitter-Bruce-only fans. (It's just that I like Terry too.) What I'm saying is, they are more physical than mental. And that in part, of course has to do with the fact they aren't developed enough. I wasn't comparing Terry's villains to Bruce's in the form of a competition, or finding the better. Comparing mirrored aspects of Bruce's world to Terry's world is something I don't do, because I think it's uneven and unfair to do so (as I said in my first reply to this awesomely indepth thread).






Originally posted by Clayface

Instead of making Terry as creative and self reliant in battle as Bruce was, they depend on the suit, and use it as an excuse to explain how he can do things above and beyond the normal abilities.

Just giving him Bruce's abilities would be bad development I'd say. :-) And since he's just starting out, I don't think the suit is a crutch, as stated, but instead, a stepping stool until he's developed enough (and here come the water works because we know that will never happen for us) to be as strong, skilled and admirable in his abilities as Bruce is. It's just necessary since he's beginning his life as Batman much earlier than Bruce. I don't think it's fair to hold that against him. And it doesn't bother me enough to hold it against the writters, because I don't feel they made him do anything Batman-like credited by the suit that I thought was over the top.

Plus, against villains with no heart or mind, and only physical attributes to their character's "development" what could a writer make Terry do besides punch him/her? Although they DID do good with Inque in that regard, so I'm thankfull for that.





Originally posted by Clayface

The argument that Terry did something incredible over Bruce in defeating the Joker has been dependent on two main ideas from what I've seen.

1) He was very clever in doing it. I don't agree, because I don't think the idea of shorting a piece of electronic equipment with a zap of electricity is all that ingenious. [/B]


I agree. But I think this sounds like a bitter Bruce talking. The need to defend Bruce because some might think Terry is better than Bruce since he defeated the Joker. I don't see it as Terry defeating Joker before Bruce. I see it as Terry's Batman completing, and helping Bruce's Batman, because Joker's most cruel joke to Batman left him the most bitter and weak that he ever was once his retirement years were upon him. But Terry had the strength to save him from his grief, and Tim Drake from his....unfortunate situation.





Originally posted by Clayface

2) Terry had great physical prowess to be able to defeat the Joker........Thus my statement about Terry's suit giving him the advantage in battle over the Joker. Does that clear up anything?
[/B]

I think it does. The idea that Terry defeated Joker makes him better and stronger than Bruce isn't true, which is what Clayface is saying, I think. But this wasn't an argument for me to defend or shun because I didn't consider strength or fighting skills at all in my interpretation of their final battle. The first time I ever thought about it at all was when reading/replying to this post actually. To me it was all about the characters, which is what made the movie so powerfull in my eyes. Terry's/Batman's character defeated The Joker's. That's what freed Bruce and Tim.

But to sum up I don't think defending Bruce is necessary, I think it's fairly obvious. And I don't think it's fair to compare their two worlds.

[James]

CLAYFACE, SHUT YOUR ANAL RETENTIVE MOUTH! YOU JUST KEEP WHINING ABOUT THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN. NOT TO MENTION THAT YOUR POSTS ARE SO GOD D@MN LONG, I CAN'T BEAR TO READ THEM.

Good lord, Mr Face! Now perhaps will understand the dangers of democracy. Now you see the recklessness of speaking out and offer a potentially contentious opinion!

Dear me, there's certainly some issues going on there! Pity Peace Keeper didn't cool down a bit and join in the fun! Afterall, in some form or another, we all like Batman here - we don't have to agree in which format we prefer.......

and 6 pages of well mannered opinions can't be too bad! :D


Maxie Zeus:
That's one of the beauties of a message board as opposed to a face-to-face (or face-to-Clayface ) conversation: you can just let it quietly disappear. So why stomp out and slam the door after you? After all, if Peacekeeper (or anyone else) is entitled to tell Clayface to go to hell simply because Clayface won't concede his position (or, what is worse, defends opinions tenaciously and intelligently), then Clayface is entitled to tell those who disagree with him to go to hell too.

Very true. I have no problem with harsh language or people getting a little riled about something they care about. It was the this-is-my-opinion-and-to-me-it's-the-law-cos-i-refuse-to-look-at-the-any-possible-replies-to-my-point attitude ;) .

What I find refreshing about threads like this is that they make you think about your own views. When CFace disputes my point it means that I have to consider what I have said and see if it his point affects the validity of my argument. It's all about self assessment rather than waiting for the other guy to turn around and say: 'Hey! Dude you were right and for the last 20 posts I was, like, totally wrong!'

IMO, of course.

[James]

originally posted by NightwingI didn't mean to imply that I put them on a higher level of recognition than Bruce's villains. I fit into the catagory of bitter-Bruce-only fans. (It's just that I like Terry too.) What I'm saying is, they are more physical than mental. And that in part, of course has to do with the fact they aren't developed enough. I wasn't comparing Terry's villains to Bruce's in the form of a competition, or finding the better. Comparing mirrored aspects of Bruce's world to Terry's world is something I don't do, because I think it's uneven and unfair to do so

Crikey. Nail on the head if I ever saw one.

[Clayface]

Interesting post, Nightwing! A few comments from me, of course....




Originally posted by Nightwing

This might sound strange because I agree completely. That's exactly what I've been saying about Terry's villains. I didn't mean to imply that I put them on a higher level of recognition than Bruce's villains.



Well then, I guess I misunderstood! Sorry about that. It came across to me that you were saying that Terry's villians were nastier than Bruce's, and thus the need for the suit. So, I pointed out villians of Bruce's time that I felt were just as nasty.




I fit into the catagory of bitter-Bruce-only fans. (It's just that I like Terry too.)



To be honest, I don't buy the "bitter bruce only" fans bit. I've seen maybe two people that never ever gave BB a chance strictly based on the idea that Bruce was the one and only Batman. I think that's a rather silly belief, if I do say so myself. Most of the complaints I've seen about BB were, IMO, valid and based on other ideas than just "its not bruce". I think most anyone that watched BB with any regularity liked Terry at least to some degree (I know I did). This idea of bitter-bruce-only fans comes as a label, I think, from those that are unwilling to discuss the shortcomings of the BB show.




What I'm saying is, they are more physical than mental. And that in part, of course has to do with the fact they aren't developed enough. I wasn't comparing Terry's villains to Bruce's in the form of a competition, or finding the better.



Again, my bad. I misunderstood you.




Just giving him Bruce's abilities would be bad development I'd say. :-)



Yep, I agree with you there. Though I wouldn't have minded seeing him train, and slowly aquire Bruce's abilities. I guess one of the complaints I have about the show is based on the idea that it all just came to easily to Terry. With Bruce, you had this great backstory about how he had to work so hard to get where he was. He dedicated his life at a very young age to bettering himself - training everywhere and all the time. It took him his entire childhood to get to the point that he was able to hold his own against villians like we see in Bruce's time. That was what always appealed to me about the character - the fact that he just didn't put on a supersuit and go fight crime - he put in his dues, and is a self made man. I was never into the superheros as a child, because I knew that I could never be that - I knew I wasn't going to find a supersuit one day, and suddenly become a hero. But then one day I find this great story about a "normal" man, with no special powers and no special suit that can do just as much as all the other superheros out there. That was incredibly inspirational to me, and of course, that really appealed to me - that a man can turn himself into something that great. So, I guess, part of what I find unappealing about BB is that it falls back into that superhero aspect - that he just picks up a supersuit, and "Bam!" he's a superhero.




It's just necessary since he's beginning his life as Batman much earlier than Bruce.



Now see, I don't really see it that way. I've always felt that Bruce started his career as one form or another of Batman at the time that his parent's were killed and he vowed to fight crime.



I don't think it's fair to hold that against him. And it doesn't bother me enough to hold it against the writters, because I don't feel they made him do anything Batman-like credited by the suit that I thought was over the top.



In this aspect, it goes back to the idea, for me, that it's just comes too easily for Terry. If Terry wants to get to the top of a building, all he's gotta do is fire up the jetpacks. But for Bruce, he really had to work - he had to use his grappling hook and his sheer physical strength. It's that aspect that I liked about Bruce - that he had to depend on himself, and not the suit.




Plus, against villains with no heart or mind, and only physical attributes to their character's "development" what could a writer make Terry do besides punch him/her? Although they DID do good with Inque in that regard, so I'm thankfull for that.



That I agree with.




I don't see it as Terry defeating Joker before Bruce.



I agree. Unfortunately, there are some that don't. Thus, my intial comments about why I didn't agree with that stance. Dont' get me wrong - I absolutely loved ROTJ, and I think next to MOTP, its the best Batman animated movie. I have no problem with Terry defeating the Joker, or all the good that he did in doing so. It just never came across to me as a defining moment - a moment that made me say, "Yeah, Terry is Batman now."




The idea that Terry defeated Joker makes him better and stronger than Bruce isn't true, which is what Clayface is saying, I think.



Yep, that is exactly what I was saying.




To me it was all about the characters, which is what made the movie so powerfull in my eyes. Terry's/Batman's character defeated The Joker's. That's what freed Bruce and Tim.



Amen to that.

[Clayface]

Originally posted by SJJ

Good lord, Mr Face! Now perhaps will understand the dangers of democracy. Now you see the recklessness of speaking out and offer a potentially contentious opinion!



Your'e so right. What was I ever thinking? I'm so ashamed! *sniff, sniff*
I'll never offer up my opinions again! I've seen the light!
(Yeah, right! ;) )




What I find refreshing about threads like this is that they make you think about your own views. When CFace disputes my point it means that I have to consider what I have said and see if it his point affects the validity of my argument. It's all about self assessment rather than waiting for the other guy to turn around and say: 'Hey! Dude you were right and for the last 20 posts I was, like, totally wrong!'



Yep, and unfortunately, some people just can't deal with that sort of self-assessment. Personally, I feel that its just that sort of interaction that makes things so interesting around here - the fact that most people here can handle a debate without getting all bent out of shape.

[Bird Boy]

This turned out to be a very LONG post. Cool.. glad I picked a topic that suited everybody... :rolleyes:

Now, Off w/ Kids WB!'s heads! I want to see Unmasked..and I want to see it...NOW! :mad:

-Bird_Boy

P.S. Course, we're used to delays right? anybody remember a certain straight-to-video movie...? ;)

[James Harvey]

I think it's about time I pop in for a sec to play crowd control!
:)
This has been actually an interesting thread to read, how is continues to change from topic to topic, and yet bring itself back full circle. Anyways, just a reminder to tell you that this is an ALL-AGES board meaning no swearing (or at least minimal with the lesser swear words - and even swears words like "covered" swears count too, folks) and stuff. Keep everything on the PG/PG-13 level. Read the rules if ya don't know what I'm talking about. Just respect each others opinions and don't try and force your onto others. It's easy to start flaming and stuff becuase of that. Don't cram something down their throat until they choke. Just keep it fun and on the level. Well, I'm sounding like a authority figure so I better end this post!
:)

[Inque]

another i noticed between terry and bruce........ didya ever notice that Batman Beyond's Gotham City has a little more cultral diversity? Not that's its a bad thing, just something i noticed.

[Nightwing]

Originally posted by Inque
another i noticed between terry and bruce........ didya ever notice that Batman Beyond's Gotham City has a little more cultral diversity?

Sure did. I think that's cool. It's a little thing about the show. But it's the little things that matter most. Hehe

[James]

posted by Clayface
It just never came across to me as a defining moment - a moment that made me say, "Yeah, Terry is Batman now."

Interesting point, Clayface. Once again I must respectfully stand opposed.

In some way, I think defeating the Joker - by any means - is a test of a Batman's mantle. This was Terry's gig and he succeeded in stopping Gotham's all time nastiest.

In a way, and perhaps in Bruce's eyes, this was the equivalent of Terry losing his (crime fighting) virginity. In this respect (and I think this is what the writers was trying to convey by having Terry atop the tower at then end in Bruce's old pose) this is quite a defining moment

..........IMO, naturally. :)

[Salvor]

Originally posted by DickGrayson
I think it's about time I pop in for a sec to play crowd control!
:)
This has been actually an interesting thread to read, how is continues to change from topic to topic, and yet bring itself back full circle. Anyways, just a reminder to tell you that this is an ALL-AGES board meaning no swearing (or at least minimal with the lesser swear words - and even swears words like "covered" swears count too, folks) and stuff. Keep everything on the PG/PG-13 level. Read the rules if ya don't know what I'm talking about. Just respect each others opinions and don't try and force your onto others. It's easy to start flaming and stuff becuase of that. Don't cram something down their throat until they choke. Just keep it fun and on the level. Well, I'm sounding like a authority figure so I better end this post!
:)
Imposing... :)

[James Harvey]

Really? That was imposing? Well, I guess that's part of my "job". Still, I just don't want this to spiral out of control. The ingredients are there, but thankfully everyone here is mature enough to keep things on the level.

[Bird Boy]

well, I'm bumping this thread too. Though maybe the newbies would wanna read it, and DickGrayson thought ppl might be interested in it since the Spidey VS. Batman thread. SO, here it is..bumpity bump bump! :)

-BB

[Beyond Batman]

I know I'm a big Batman Beyond enthusiest, but I think my point may take the winning punch.

Bruce Wayne has been developed, redeloped, portrayed and viewed over 60+ years. You have to admit, Bruce Wayne has so much more depth and character development. Although Terry has a lot of potential, he'll never BE Batman. Even the producer said it himself, that Terry isn't Batman. He's "a" Batman, but he's not "Batman" (and he stressed not in an interesting manner. By far, Bruce Wayne takes home the gold on this fight.

It's too bad we won't be able to see more seasons of BB, and see Terry reach his full potential... or maybe the future yet has a place for him? Or so we'll see.

[James]

BEYONDBATMAN:
Even the producer said it himself, that Terry isn't Batman. He's "a" Batman, but he's not "Batman" (and he stressed not in an interesting manner. By far, Bruce Wayne takes home the gold on this fight.

Depends on your definition of THE Batman. No he's not the orginal, but to me, he is THE Batman.

Batman, appears to be the reflection of the owner of the suit - Terry may not be the orginal, and very likely won't be the last, but he is Batman. He stands for all that Bruce did - however his motivations and technique vary radically.

I think his involvement as Batman is just as vital as Bruces' (well perhaps not QUITE as vital :) ). Terry is the first bit of living proof that mantle can be passed on, and succeed. This never has been the case before. Look at Azriel.

Terry has proven you don't have to a bitter twisted soul. His Batman is one of Redemption - less to do with his fathers death, and more to do with his wish to give something back to society. He is the villian turned hero - and I think that's an important leap for The Bat and will secure the legacy for the future.......

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by SJJ


Depends on your definition of THE Batman. No he's not the orginal, but to me, he is THE Batman.

Batman, appears to be the reflection of the owner of the suit - Terry may not be the orginal, and very likely won't be the last, but he is Batman. He stands for all that Bruce did - however his motivations and technique vary radically.

Nicely put. I completely agree with you.

[Firefly]

To me Bruce is the only Batman I never thought Terry was I always thought that he was "barrowing" the costume Bruce is well more developed I always liked batman because he was the worlds Greatest detective but as far as i'm concerned Terry hasn't done enough Detective work.

[James]

To me Bruce is the only Batman I never thought Terry was I always thought that he was "barrowing" the costume Bruce is well more developed I always liked batman because he was the worlds Greatest detective but as far as i'm concerned Terry hasn't done enough Detective work.

There is no doubt that Bruce is Batman relied on Detective Work rather than brute force, but this is a different Batman - reflecting a different man and a different time.

And in fairness, several episodes deal with the problem of detective work (Babel, ROTJ, Rebirth to name a few that spring to mind). Add to the fact that Terry has had no more than a couple of years of experience in the role means it's hard to judge how much detective work he will do once he leaves Bruce's tutorship.

It seems to me Bruce's work - on the whole - is helping Terry learn the detective side. Between the suit and and Terry's natural fighting skills, it's the skills in detection and thinking which Terry needs more work. Give the lad some space!

Terry is Batman. Depending on what you believe, some say the Bat originally found Bruce.... in this light, the mantle is more important than the man. Bruce may have been the first and the best, but it doesn't mean that he has ownership. I think Bruce is of this opinion too. He no longer sees Terry as someone borrowing the suit - but as his successor. I thought the final scenes of ROTJ made this point if you want something to reference....

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by Firefly
To me Bruce is the only Batman

Originally posted by SJJ
Depending on what you believe, some say the Bat originally found Bruce.... in this light, the mantle is more important than the man. Bruce may have been the first and the best, but it doesn't mean that he has ownership.

This is probably the fundamental issue that separates Bat-fans: Is "Batman" a character or role that anyone can aspire to, a mantle that anyone (with the right training) can assume? Or is "Batman" identical to Bruce Wayne, the dark and brooding personality that took hold after his parents' death?

Those who believe the latter will always be suspicious of supposed successors, no matter how good they are, because by definition only Bruce Wayne can be Batman. Those who accept the former can (in principle) tolerate a successor, though they may disagree as to whether or not Terry in fact measures up.

With Bruce's line at the end of ROTJ it does sounds like he is endorsing the former view, that "Batman" is a title that can be passed down to an heir. (But of course those who disagree can simply assert that Timm and Dini have made a mistake here, and misunderstood the essential nature of Batman.) On the other hand, Frank Miller's "The Dark Knight Returns," which dramatizes Batman as an integral part of Wayne's damaged soul, seems to endorse the alternate view.

For my own part, I'm pretty neutral on the question: I think both ways of understanding Batman can and have led to interesting stories; I'm content to see both variations worked out.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by Maxie Zeus

For my own part, I'm pretty neutral on the question: I think both ways of understanding Batman can and have led to interesting stories; I'm content to see both variations worked out.

Same here. Unfortunately, I don't feel that anyone that follows Bruce will ever be given a fair chance. And that angers me. As soon as any situation develops in which a new Batman arises, the criticisms begin. That attitude that only Bruce can be Batman seems to be held by most and that prevents any of the potential that a new Batman has from being reached. And writers for the Batman comics seem content with that. I thought Paul Valley had great potential. But it became clear quickly that the writers' only interest was in creating a monster so that Bruce could make his glorious return. Terry McGinnis has potential, but again, no one seems to care. Batman Beyond is criticized and then dismissed since it's not Bruce Wayne in the suit. Even when there are great moments, like ROTJ, there's little respect from most. The attitude seems to be "yeah, so what? Terry's not really Batman anyway."

The only way that any character following Wayne can have the same depth is by development through time. Bruce Wayne wouldn't be the character he is today if not for all the decades of writing the Batman comics have produced. But since few seem to be fair in accepting a new Batman, this development can never happen again. No chances are taken. And when a rare situation develops in which we do get a new Batman (Batman Beyond), it's in an unofficial capacity. It could be said that at least the series exists. Well, it doesn't, as Batman Beyond appears to be already dead. But do most really, truly care? Probably not. Because Terry's not the "real" Batman, he's not Bruce Wayne. And as I've said in many other posts, that's just wrong. Unfortunately, few seem to see it that way.

[mxyzptlk]

i do not know why your asking this it would not be close. batman would kill terry with the suit. plus to me terry will never really be batman. he just is`nt really the dark knight bruce wayne was. plus batman has about a billion times the training and experience terry has.

[Rahziel]

That is so true here in his forum. Terry has done some pretty amazing things as a young batman, but every compares him to bruce and dismiss them instead of acknowledging them and wanting to give him a push. i batman beyond was meant to be "bruce Beyond", he'd still be in the suit. the show is "Batman Beyond" meaning to me "batman after bruce". Why can't anyone accept this?

[James]

mxyzptlk:
i do not know why your asking this it would not be close. batman would kill terry with the suit. plus to me terry will never really be batman. he just is`nt really the dark knight bruce wayne was. plus batman has about a billion times the training and experience terry has.

It's not a question of who is the best Batman - or who would beat the other in a fight. It's simply is Batman simply a fragment of Bruce's id and therefore cannot be passed on to anyone else, or is Batman a mantle which stands as a protector and reflects the character of whoever owns the suit?

In reply to Maxie, even The Dark Knight Returns gives a little hint to the role of Batman being the mantle rather than the man (only a tiny one though). Bat writers can't resist the bat-coming-through-Bruce's-window reference, which while in some respects is just meant to be incident what inspires Bruce, there is always that undertone that the bat has chosen Bruce. Now that sounds really stupid on paper! Terry has one of those 'chosen' moments in 'Rebirth' with the bat caught in the grandfather clock....

It's a tough one. Essentially, Bruce was Batman. He made Batman what it was. A brooding relentless vigilante with little sense of humour... yet Batman in an embodiment of fear for criminals and a signal of justice for citizens - in this sense, I think the Batman becomes a mantle and what's important is that the man is worthy of that mantle. None of the citizens seemed to notice the difference between old and new Batman. They just see the icon, not the methods - and THAT imo, is what is important.

The icon, not the methods.

Or which Batman is best!!!

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by SJJ
Essentially, Bruce was Batman. He made Batman what it was. A brooding relentless vigilante with little sense of humour... yet Batman in an embodiment of fear for criminals and a signal of justice for citizens - in this sense, I think the Batman becomes a mantle and what's important is that the man is worthy of that mantle. None of the citizens seemed to notice the difference between old and new Batman. They just see the icon, not the methods - and THAT imo, is what is important.

The icon, not the methods.

Or which Batman is best!!!

So true. To me, when the mask is on, there's no Bruce Wayne, there's no Terry McGinnis, there's only Batman. In ROTJ, when McGinnis tries to contact Wayne after being attacked at the dance club, he says "The Joker's little playmates were after me. Me! Not Batman." A scene in Batman Forever was similar. A furious Grayson throws wild punches at Batman for failing to save his parents. Batmans reply: "If Bruce Wayne could have given his life for your parents, he would have." In both cases, Batman comes across as being a separate person from Terry McGinnis or Bruce Wayne. That's what I've always loved. Once the costume is put on, there's only Batman. Like you said, it's what Batman represents, not who's wearing the costume. It's the icon, rather than the methods or the man.

[mxyzptlk]

theres only batman? see batman is just a suit and a name but what makes batman is the person under the suit. and i feel batman can only be as scary or mysterious when its bruce wayne.

[James]

mxyzptlk :
theres only batman? see batman is just a suit and a name but what makes batman is the person under the suit. and i feel batman can only be as scary or mysterious when its bruce wayne.

True, Bruce maybe the more mysterious Batman so far, but I still think as long as the man under the suit can bring justice to the citizens and fear to the criminals, then he is Batman - his methods and motivation does not have to be the same.

[mxyzptlk]

i still do not agree. but everybody has the right to an opinion.

[Nightwing]

Originally posted by mxyzptlk
theres only batman? see batman is just a suit and a name but what makes batman is the person under the suit. and i feel batman can only be as scary or mysterious when its bruce wayne.

I actually think both of you are right. See I think the suit and the person have to go hand in hand, otherwise the person inside isn't Batman and will inevidably get killed or fail in some way or another. The costume is worn by those who's only desire is to go the distance. If you can be that strong, unbelivably so and with a physical and mental strength stronger than anything ever measured, then it's possible. Terry is trying to rebuild his life, using the costume and the mantle to do so, and with every little bit, he earns the mask. He's no where near Bruce's stature yet, but the proof is in the pudding, I'm sure; he's much much to young yet.

[mxyzptlk]

i still do not know if i will ever except terry as batman.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by Nightwing


I actually think both of you are right. See I think the suit and the person have to go hand in hand, otherwise the person inside isn't Batman and will inevidably get killed or fail in some way or another.

Yeah, you're right. I didn't mean that anyone that puts on the costume automatically becomes Batman. Paul Valley, as I mentioned before, was a monster. Clearly, he was not deserving of the name Batman.

As you said, a certain desire is needed for someone to succeed as Batman. Terry's already demonstrated that he has that. He's earned the right to mantle. Understand that when I say that, I DON'T mean his learning is complete. He's still got some development to go before he reaches top form as the dark knight. Be that as it may, he is Batman. He's may not be anywhere near Bruce's level, but he doesn't need to be in order to call himself Batman. That he's already earned, regardless of whether he ever reaches Bruce's level.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by mxyzptlk
i still do not know if i will ever except terry as batman.


But you're approaching this in terms of who's better and that's not what Batman is about. One doesn't have to be better than Bruce in order to do what he does. After all, no two Batmen will ever fight each other, but rather the criminal elements of the city.

[mxyzptlk]

azreal and batman fought when azreal was batman.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by mxyzptlk
azreal and batman fought when azreal was batman.

Yeah, but the only reason that happened was because Paul didn't deserve the role. Bruce was Batman, while Paul was an out-of-control disaster that needed to be defeated. Terry isn't like Paul. He understands what being Batman is about and has handled the role well.

[mxyzptlk]

still you never know what terry some how became unhinged.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by mxyzptlk
still you never know what terry some how became unhinged.

But then, so could Bruce.

[DR. BELCH]

The Imp from The Fifth Dimension/Jason Voorhies' grave:

still you never know what terry some how became unhinged.
A rather morbid query: what wold it take to crack Terry up? He's lost his father already--suppose his mother or Matt were next? Or suppose he were forced to watch Dana get assaulted or killed? Would it be enough to turn him into a revenge-crazed borderline psycho? And would Bruce, if he were still living, see that darkness in the boy and demand that he relinquish the suit? That would have made a great final ep/comic issue.
And who's to say Bruce isn't mad? He's admitted before that he may have fanatically redoubled his efforts but lost sight of the goal as he edges closer to the abyss....

[Nightwing]

Yeah I was thinking the same thing myself. Bruce has ALREADY cracked! The exact time could probably be argued, but I'm thinking somewhere along the line of 9 years old, eh? Hehehe.

I want Terry to get darker, but not like Bruce. Bruce has long since been lost. I don't want such tragedy to happen to Terry (I mean, look what it did to Dick and Bruce's relationship). I think it would be healthier for Terry to get darker by means of the city's effect on him, and how horrible and widespread activities of evil are.

[James]

mxyzptlk:
still you never know what terry some how became unhinged.

IMO, I think in some ways Bruce is more unstable than Terry. Bruce's drive is powered by his emotional scarring. Terry's is a little more straightforward (and thus not half as interesting!). Terry sees Batman as a form of redemption and - until Bruce fully passes the mantle - as a job. Terry could stop being Batman. I don't think Bruce could. I'd say Bruce would be the easy to drive over the edge - but I think that's why Bruce is so much more popular than Terry. There is an edge to Bruce which Terry is unlikely to form as he seems to have come to terms with his fathers death and his motives for Batman.

I wonder what Terry would have been lika as Batman if he hadn't had Bruce to guide him. Moreover, I wonder what Bruce would have been like if he had a proper mentor which could have helped him come to terms with his parent's death.

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by SJJ
IMO, I think in some ways Bruce is more unstable than Terry. Bruce's drive is powered by his emotional scarring. I'd say Bruce would be the easy to drive over the edge - but I think that's why Bruce is so much more popular than Terry.

It's also why so many people identify Batman with Bruce Wayne and don't think the mantle can truly be passed on. And there's a lot to be said for it as the conception that underlies the Batman mythos.

When you identify Batman with Bruce Wayne, you make the entire story into a psychological character study: Who is this person, and what makes him tick? You can never be sure what he's going to do, or how he is going to justify himself. He is always ripe for a fall. There is tremendous suspense in such a story, and terrific possibilities for the writers and artists to explore as they push him to the edge, just to see where that edge is.

It's somewhat less exciting when you think of "Batman" as some abstract figure that Bruce Wayne invented and might pass on to someone else. Then it becomes a much more straightforward matter of social justice: How should a conscientious vigilante act, and how hard is it to act that way?

The first is about character formation, and the latter about the adventures after that character forms. One of the weaknesses of BBeyond proved to be that the Batman character was already formed by Bruce, and we didn't get to see Terry's character form as he tried to pick up that mantle.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by SJJ

Terry sees Batman as a form of redemption and - until Bruce fully passes the mantle - as a job. Terry could stop being Batman. I don't think Bruce could.

I don't believe being Batman is just a job to Terry. When comparing him to Bruce, it's easy to say yeah, Terry could stop being Batman. But I think Terry's words and actions in ROTJ show being Batman is not something he could easily drop. When Bruce told Terry to give back the suit and Terry, hurt, threw it down and left, I don't believe there was any sense afterward that Terry had actually quit, that he had actually given up. That spoke volumes to me about Terry's commitment to the mantle. It doesn't seem to me that at any point Terry would say "Ok, I'm redeemed. I can give this up now." None of his actions or words imply that he sees Batman as a curse that he's looking to throw off as soon as he's passed some redemption point.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by Maxie Zeus
It's somewhat less exciting when you think of "Batman" as some abstract figure that Bruce Wayne invented and might pass on to someone else


Sure. But whether everyone finds Terry interesting or not has nothing to do with whether he's deserving of being called Batman. The problem is that most seem unable to separate the two. Yes, Bruce Wayne is a far superior and far more interesting character than Terry McGinnis. And that will probably always be the case. But that doesn't change the fact that others can be Batman. The opinion that Bruce Wayne is a greater character than any that could follow him is not a vaild reason for denying that the mantle can be passed.

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by DarkAngel
But whether everyone finds Terry interesting or not has nothing to do with whether he's deserving of being called Batman. The opinion that Bruce Wayne is a greater character than any that could follow him is not a vaild reason for denying that the mantle can be passed.

I'm balanced almost exactly between the two positions: that Batman is Bruce Wayne and cannot pass on the mantle, and that Bruce Wayne is a role that can be passed on. I can see merit in each position, and will defend each depending upon which direction the attack is launched from. (This is just to tell everyone where I stand, if it matters.)

What I said earlier was offered as an explanation for why many find the "Bruce-is-Batman" position attractive: It makes for a more interesting and fruitful dynamic between character and story. I agree that this is not a reason for thinking that analysis true.

But by the same token, thinking that Terry is or could be an interesting character is not a reason for thinking that the "Batman is a role" analysis true, though it can be an explanation for why many people like it.

Anyway, I'm not sure what would count as a reason for thinking either analysis is true. If you say "Jupiter is the largest planet in the solar system," presumably you can offer evidence for why you think that sentence is true, and not merely reflective of a personal preference (you prefer to think of Jupiter as the largest planet). Similarly, if you say "Terry McGinnis could be Batman" or "Only Bruce Wayne could be Batman" you should have some evidence for thinking that sentence is true and not merely reflective of a personal preference (you prefer to think of Bruce Wayne as the only possible Batman). But what could that evidence be or consist in?

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by Maxie Zeus


What I said earlier was offered as an explanation for why many find the "Bruce-is-Batman" position attractive: It makes for a more interesting and fruitful dynamic between character and story. I agree that this is not a reason for thinking that analysis true.



Sure, I understand. I was just pointing out why I felt that line of reasoning didn't work.




But by the same token, thinking that Terry is or could be an interesting character is not a reason for thinking that the "Batman is a role" analysis true, though it can be an explanation for why many people like it.



You're right. Just as preferring Bruce as a character isn't reason to say only he can be Batman, finding Terry interesting isn't a reason to support the idea of Batman being a role. But that's what I was trying to say, that who one likes better has no place in determining whether the mantle can be passed or not.

The reason I phrased my earlier post the way I did was because most use that kind of argument to say Bruce is the only Batman. It's often said that no can be as "scary" as Bruce, or as great a detective as Bruce, or as great a fighter as Bruce, or be as driven as Bruce, etc. And that's just not valid. Putting all that aside, we've got two men who wore the suit, two men who have called themselves Batman. So how can anyone say that only one was truly Batman? What basis is there for saying that Bruce was Batman and Terry wasn't. None, as far as I can see.

[James]

DarkAngel:
Putting all that aside, we've got two men who wore the suit, two men who have called themselves Batman. So how can anyone say that only one was truly Batman? What basis is there for saying that Bruce was Batman and Terry wasn't. None, as far as I can see.

Which is why in the end I think it comes down to a simple point - what is Batman?
It's clear that the proficiency of the two characters is relatively a moot point. Obviously, skill is required to be the Batman, but to what level is hard to objectify. Batman has always been a shadow to his enviroment (there is a costume for every occasion! - water, snow, urban etc). As long as the Batman can master the enviroment in which he works, the style or method becomes irrelevant. In other words, it doesn't matter if Terry has a battle suit or just a simple silk cloak, providing he is in control of the terrain/enviroment he works in, his devices are of little interest to us.

Basically, I don't think the 'Ow, Bruce didn't need the battlesuit so he's the batman' really has any merit.

So if methods and comparisons are not to be judged, what's left?

Simply, how he is perceived by others.

How do those who are aware of his existence judge him?

In the example of Azriel (excuse my spelling, my intoxication is inhibiting my need for research! :) ), here we have a Batman who is feared by the criminal element AND feared by the citizens of Gotham. This is why he was not worthy of the mantle.

Terry and Bruce share the same image - irrespective of their methods and equipment. They are both feared by the law breakers and they both have respect from the citizens. Both - understandably - have a dubious relation with the law.

This is what both have in common and what I think is essential to excepting BOTH as Batman.

Yes, Bruce started it. Yes, Batman is an extention of Bruce's vision - but that can be said about any concept. It has to come from someone's head.

So the Batman has to have a common link - and that is that it does what it's creator set out to do. Bring justice to the people and fear to those who break the law. In this respect I can't see how anyone can deny Terry's existence as Batman anymore than Bruce's . . . .

If you're arguing abiut who is the more interesting or who is the better Batman - then go ahead - but I think that is a rather yawnsome topic!! :)

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by SJJ


Yes, Bruce started it. Yes, Batman is an extention of Bruce's vision - but that can be said about any concept. It has to come from someone's head.

So the Batman has to have a common link - and that is that it does what it's creator set out to do. Bring justice to the people and fear to those who break the law. In this respect I can't see how anyone can deny Terry's existence as Batman anymore than Bruce's . . . .


I think that's it exactly. And I agree that debates over which one is more interesting or better are boring. Actually, it would be more accurate to say that such debates upset me, since I don't see why it's necessary to choose one over the other. They're both on the same side.

[mxyzptlk]

Originally posted by DarkAngel


But then, so could Bruce.

sorry i have been gone since friday so i am a little late but who cares. bruce in my opinion is too old to become unhinged after all he has delt with i do not think any of the small time villians terry faces he would become unhinged.

wahooooooooooooo post 500 yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

[James]

sorry i have been gone since friday so i am a little late but who cares. bruce in my opinion is too old to become unhinged after all he has delt with i do not think any of the small time villians terry faces he would become unhinged.

I think the point was that Bruce as a character was more likely to become unhinged than Terry (if parading around in a cloth cape and hiding in allyways until the early hours isn't considered unhinged in the first place! :) )

I don't think Terry shows any signs of becoming unhinged. Certainly at this point in Bruce's career (eg; the first few years) the comparison in stability between him and Terry would be that he was most likely to lose it . . . .

But unlike Azriel, neither Bruce nor Terry take any enjoyment out of violence (although Terry did like his occasional scrap!) I think that was the flaw in that Batman - not being unhinged as such, but being of such a violent disposition that when Azriel become heavily involved as the Batman (as all who take the mantle become) his violent nature become to prevalent.

IMO.....

[mxyzptlk]

blah blah blah blah blah i still say terry good become unhinged.

[James]

mxyzptlk:
Blah blah blah blah blah i still say terry good become unhinged.

I could get nasty over this, but I won't. Everyone is entitled to an opinion but if you're too lazy to bother justifying it or even replying sensibly to the last post - just don't bother posting.

I get the impression the only excuse for this post is to score another hit on your post total.

Please don't post unless you have something to say mate. It's just rude.

:(

[mxyzptlk]

you want an explination ok here it is: terry is a teenager(a raging ball of emotions) which could interfere with being batman. and bruce is past that stage he has moved onto the stable man phaze of live so and he has passed the time for a mid life crisis. while terry in my opinion is to young to handle theburden of being batman. that is my explination tank you very much sir.

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by mxyzptlk
you want an explination ok here it is: terry is a teenager(a raging ball of emotions) which could interfere with being batman. and bruce is past that stage he has moved onto the stable man phaze of live so and he has passed the time for a mid life crisis. while terry in my opinion is to young to handle theburden of being batman.

I like this. It is true that while Terry has suffered, he really hasn't been pushed as hard as he could have been. It would make an interesting BB straight-to-video movie: After ROTJ Terry thinks he's got the Batman gig down pat, and then something comes out of nowhere to rock him good and hard.

[James]

you want an explination ok here it is: terry is a teenager(a raging ball of emotions) which could interfere with being batman. and bruce is past that stage he has moved onto the stable man phaze of live so and he has passed the time for a mid life crisis. while terry in my opinion is to young to handle theburden of being batman. that is my explination tank you very much sir

That's better - an intelligent reply, that's what I like to see.

That is indeed true and a fair point - Terry is still very young - although as I've said before, he is pretty mature for his age. I think more to do with the death of his father than the role of Batman.
As for being too young to handle the burden of being a superhero - I don't see anyone leveling that argument towards Dick Grayson or even Tim Drake for that matter (who does much solo work as well).

IMO, I think ROTJ is an interesting stage for Terry, which seems to deal which I think tries to wrap up many of the contenions over Terry's abilities. I don't think it can be argued that Terry acts like an 18 year old in that story. His actions are pretty mature and methodical. The only point in the story where his own age really surfaces is when he is talking to Gordon. Arrogance is inherently a teenage trait.

I sometimes wonder if ROTJ is there to tie up the series..... a bit like the ROTJ (Return Of The Jedi), where Luke is told he won't be a full Jedi until he faces Vader, I think Terry is very much in the same position with Mr J. The Joker being the Bat-foe.
Once he has confronted and defeated the Joker on his own, can Terry really be considered worthy of the Bat mantle.

I think with Bruce's acceptance of Terry as Batman at the end of the show, pointing out it's the man more than the mantle - we can assume that Bruce is giving a stamp of approval.
The Terry on the 'bat' tower at the end seems to imply to me that Terry has 'come of age' in terms of the Bat.

[mxyzptlk]

the reason no one talks about tim drake or dick grayson is cuz they were sidekicks they did not have to handle it on his own. one might argue that dick grayson is now on his own thats true but he had years of expearience with him and a whole lot of training.

[James]

mxyzptlk:
the reason no one talks about tim drake or dick grayson is cuz they were sidekicks they did not have to handle it on his own. one might argue that dick grayson is now on his own thats true but he had years of expearience with him and a whole lot of training.

Fair point, but both Dick and Tim were taken on as early teens and I think the maturity was what Bruce took the years to teach them, Terry is a lot older and certainly more mature than Tim and Dick were when they began. Despite this, both did a hell of work on there own (thanks to the DC spin-off machine).

My point is that youth doesn't seem to valid argument to whether one can become Batman. If one shows the immaturity and self indulgence that teens often display in abundence, then whether you are a teen or not, those characteristics don't lend themselves to the role.

I certainly don't think tha Terry is 'a raging ball of emotion' as you it. First series maybe, but he has matured greatly since then. The burden of the Bat has helped make the man.

It's the character of the man not the age. I think Bruce, Terry, Dick and Tim all have the inate strong characteristics required... I think Bruce is pretty much ironing out all the rough edges of Terry's character!

Meeting the Joker I think was the final test which removed the last quality which hinders any superhero. Arrogance. Terry thought that the Joker would be no different than the rest. He was wrong and learnt the hard way...

[mxyzptlk]

yeah he is also a stupid kid.

[James]

I think he's a bright and gutsy kid - I certainly would have it hard to stand up to someone like Bruce!

I think if Bruce thinks he's got what it takes - I'll go with the professionals opinion...

[mxyzptlk]

that not nessicerily true cause you wonder if the real bruce as in the one in comics approve him or not.

[James]

that not nessicerily true cause you wonder if the real bruce as in the one in comics approve him or not.

We're not talking comics here. Terry doesn't exist in the comics (aside from the poor tie in comic) so it's a moot point. Comic Bruce can hardly offer an opinion on something that doesn't exist to him.

Bruce in BB exists and the closest we'll get to a real comparison. He may be wrong, but as far he is concerned, and in a change of opinion to early on in the cartoon, Terry is worthy of Batman. Batman is a figure that in Bruce's eyes (and I think I can speak for comic Bruce on this one) that Gotham requires.

Bruce can't go on forever - this means the mantle has to be passed on - providing it goes to someone worthy. Terry seems to have all the qualities required to be Batman. Humanity, bravery and the need for justice. All the other skills are irrelevant providing he can achieve bring fear to the criminals while protecting the innocent. That is what Batman is about. That is what Terry has proven he can do.

Batman doesn't require a Bruce to continue... the mantle can move on. Bruce is unique however, and no one will be able to replace his methods.

[mxyzptlk]

the people who made bb are notthe true creaters of bruce wayne. so who are they to decide whether he would approve of terry or not.

[James]

the people who made bb are notthe true creaters of bruce wayne. so who are they to decide whether he would approve of terry or not.

My last post does not say that they do. It says that I believe that comic Bruce would want the mantle to continue providing it's carried by the right person.

My point, if you read the post carefully, is that Bruce on the cartoon is good indicator (or at least the best we'll get) to what Bruce would feel towards Terry.

Since Terry has proven to have the qualities to bring fear to the criminal element while fighting for the people of Gotham, I don't think Bruce would have a problem with that.

Fact is, like him or not, Terry does his job well - and by ROTJ, his coming of age implies that perhaps the future of future Gotham will lie with him.

Terry is Batman. Not Bruce, but Batman.

[mxyzptlk]

this kinda funny cause the actual argument should be who would in a fght bruce or terry but we are not evan talking about that any more.

[James]

True, bad that's why I like these long threads cos the arguments and topics can change and evolve. Personally, I think the validity of Terry as Batman is far more interesting that who could beat the other one up! :)

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by mxyzptlk
this kinda funny cause the actual argument should be who would in a fght bruce or terry but we are not evan talking about that any more.


I agree with SJJ that it's a lot more interesting to discuss Terry's right to the mantle as opposed to who would win in a fight. If Bruce Wayne (when he was Batman) were to fight Terry, there's no question Wayne would win. But what does that prove? Nothing really. That says nothing about who Bruce and Terry are as people or what they bring to Batman.

[joker]

Originally posted by Clayface


No way! I'd give that round to Wayne - his villians had heart and soul to then - a lot of Terry's don't. I don't think there's even the slightest comparison between the quality of Wayne's Rogue's Gallery and Terry's. Besides, Wayne had the greatest, coolest villian of all time - ME!

yes bruce had much cooler villians.....but joker is so much cooler that clayface.

[joker]

Originally posted by SJJ
.

Give the kid a break! He did kick Joker's butt!
Well... just about...
\

the only reason terry beat him was because they had to fit it into an hour and a half.

[mxyzptlk]

harley quinn is the coolest bats villian.

[James]

Joker:
the only reason terry beat him was because they had to fit it into an hour and a half.

No offense, but that's a silly argument. You could level that at Bruce and any of his encounters - or at any program on any topic.

The reason Terry beat the Joker is because he manipulated him. He turned the Joker's skills against himself and played that guy at his own game. I don't see his victory as any better or worse as one of Bruce's individual victories. To me it was an important fight and the ultimate test of whether he could be Batman.


mxyzptlk:
harley quinn is the coolest bats villian.

I agree. They should have put her up against Terry too. She's cool!

[mxyzptlk]

in a fist fight i bet she would win cause of her enhanced skills from poisen ivys little potion thingy.

[Frozen]

Did you just say Harley could beat Terry? Terry? As in Batman Beyond? Hmmm, I'd have to say I'm dubious about that. As much as I really do love Harley too, I can't see her coming out of anything in a fight with Terry other than bruised pride and a bad headache. Sorry.

[James]

Frozen:
Did you just say Harley could beat Terry? Terry? As in Batman Beyond? Hmmm, I'd have to say I'm dubious about that. As much as I really do love Harley too, I can't see her coming out of anything in a fight with Terry other than bruised pride and a bad headache. Sorry.

As much as I like Harley, I can't see her beating Terry - Terry's fought far worse than her!
However, mxyzptlk did state 'in a fist fight' so that is not so unthinkable. I've seen Terry kicked around many a time...

Perhaps it would be round 1 to Harley, but I think Terry would win the war!!

[Frozen]

Well, in ROTJ, Terry beat ALL Joker's gang in the night-club - in a 'fist fight', and that includes Harley's two off-spring, so I'm firmly of the opinion that Terry would beat Harley hands down...

[mxyzptlk]

see the problem is the cartoons do not show you her true abilities. here are some stats.

1. extremely smart psycholigist
2.survived no mans land
3enhanced abilities form ivys potion
4.trained for month strait in arkham boiler room
5.survived living with the joker when he wanted to kill her

terry
1suit
2trained with bruce
3beat joker but the rest were mainly small time crooks

[DR. BELCH]

--the scary thing would be if Terry somehow met the young Harley and fell in love with her. Face it, she's completely crackers, but she's not a bad looker. I wonder who'd be angrier about that, Bruce or Mr. J.? :eek:

[mxyzptlk]

mr j does not evan like harley he plays her. she beat him up and started her own gang hints how her series came about.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by mxyzptlk
see the problem is the cartoons do not show you her true abilities. here are some stats.

1. extremely smart psycholigist
2.survived no mans land
3enhanced abilities form ivys potion
4.trained for month strait in arkham boiler room
5.survived living with the joker when he wanted to kill her



The cartoons don't show her true abilities? Mxy, Harley's first appearance was in a cartoon, Batman the Animated Series. And although I'm not familiar with the comic book version of Harley, I seriously doubt it's a superior portrayal. The animated episodes have done an excellent job of bringing her to life and showing off her strong points. In any case, if we're talking about her versus Terry, then we have to be sticking to the animated representation. As good as Harley is, she can't beat Terry. She wouldn't survive a day facing the threats Batman does. You would never say that Harley could beat Bruce. Show Terry the same respect. He's Batman.

[mxyzptlk]

harley could never beat bruce cause terry isnot as good as bruce. terry uses the suit as a crutch in my opinion. and that is his main prooblem without the suit he could not beat the villians he faces but bruces did not need his strengh magnified by ten to beat his villians. so if someone ever found out who he was he could not fight them off if they got him without his suit.

[DR. BELCH]

--which is my point. He's a man. I think (young) Harley would do wise to forget her fists and use her--ahem--feminine wiles on our young Knight. After all, Terry's predecessor had a weak spot for dames--Talia, Lois, Babs, Selina, Susan. etc. No reason his protegee should be much different, and maybe even worse (he resisted Ten and got over the bubble girl, but I'm thinking sooner or later the Batlibido will win out!)

As for Harley surviving Joker's abusive rages--well, a batterer isn't always an s.o.b. When not smacking her around I bet Mr. J's a pussycat. I'll refrain from specualting on their carnal relations, but maybe Harl's a bit of a masochist (that little bag she carries? I suspect there's candles and bonding straps next to the boxing glove gun and the rubber mallet "I was a Girl Scout," she admits, slightly abashed, with a puckish grin. "Ain't their motto 'Be prepared?').

[mxyzptlk]

no in harley quinn issue one he tried to kill her with joy buzzer but she figured it out and threw him into a bill board tiype thing

harley quinn issue two she played two face for alotta money.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by mxyzptlk
terry uses the suit as a crutch in my opinion.

That's not true. He handled the Jokerz in the ROTJ dance club scene very well and without the suit. And even with the suit, he's shown repeatedly that he can fight very well. The suit doesn't fight by itself, so the fighting ability is all Terry. Going back to the dance club fight, Terry also proved he could take repeated hits and still clean their clocks. He took two wicked hits from behind from the twins. Then a solid kick to the stomach or chest area. Then the fat dude smashes him full in the face sending flying back several feet. What does Terry do then? Kick their butts. That can't be debated. Its fact. Terry can fight. Terry can take punishment without the suit and still destroy his opponents. Terry would handle Harley no problem.

[mxyzptlk]

first of all i said thats my opinion

second of all thats a small time gang

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by mxyzptlk
first of all i said thats my opinion

second of all thats a small time gang

Ok, it's your opinion. I understand that.

As for the Jokerz being a small time gang: That really doesn't change the fact that those were major hits Terry took without the batsuit on. Getting up from those strikes and and still beating up on them is a big deal.

[Nightwing]

I'd say the same people who made the great Bruce in BTAS and TNBA are roughly the same group who did BB, give or take. All with Bruce Timm and Paul Dini at the helm.



Originally posted by Clayface
No way! I'd give that round to Wayne - his villians had heart and soul to then - a lot of Terry's don't. I don't think there's even the slightest comparison between the quality of Wayne's Rogue's Gallery and Terry's. Besides, Wayne had the greatest, coolest villian of all time - ME!

I remember this quote but it was about something else that I brought up on an earlier page. In comparing various items of Bruce to Terry (which I do not do because the scale is VERY unballanced). What I said before this reply was that Terry's villains are more physical and violent prone than Bruce's are. And that's actually complimenting Bruce's villains, because his villains have more development behind them.

That in part is why I think comparing Bruce to Terry is unfair to do. Which is why I think a lot of people don't want fans to like Terry's Batman more than Bruce's. Bruce is better, much better. He was given more time, more development and more everything. But Terry is great in himself. That can't be denied.

But wow, what a thread huh? :)

[mxyzptlk]

after days of pondering and reading comics i still say harley would beat up terry

[Frozen]

OK, I'm open minded - give us some concrete reasons why Harly could beat Terry. Seriously. I'm open to persuasion IF you have a reasonable argument...

[DR. BELCH]

--do you mean in a fair fistfight, or just by wiggling her--well, you know--under his nose? I mean, I think she'd rather use sex as a weapon than brute force...or is that more at Catwoman?

[Frozen]

I presume Myx means a knuckle to knuckle fist fight... I say again, Terry beat the living daylights out of Joker's gang in ROTJ - including the Dee Dee twins. I think this is a good indication that he can handle Harley...

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by Frozen
I say again, Terry beat the living daylights out of Joker's gang in ROTJ - including the Dee Dee twins. I think this is a good indication that he can handle Harley...

That's exactly it. The Dee Dees showed great ability, but Terry handled them with relative ease. There's no way Harley could beat him. In fact, I would say that the Dee Dee twins could take Harley.

[mxyzptlk]

well, i am saying sex or fists. and i think she would use both . i mean in harley qunn issue nine she out ran and beat a man hunt. she has shown suductive abilities also and has great fighting talent. she is very smart has a much better edgication than terry.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by mxyzptlk
well, i am saying sex or fists. and i think she would use both . i mean in harley qunn issue nine she out ran and beat a man hunt. she has shown suductive abilities also and has great fighting talent. she is very smart has a much better edgication than terry.

I'm not denying her smarts or seduction ability. But look at all the villains Terry's faced and defeated. He's handled himself well against Inque, Royal Flush Gang, Joker, Blight, Talia/Ra's, that computer genius that took over the batsuit, the group that uses mind power over physical skills, Curare, Superman gone bad, and so many others. I'm not knocking Harley's abilities. I know she's smart, tough, sexy. But Terry's faced individuals that can do a heck of a lot more than she can and succeeded against them. If Terry couldn't beat Harley, he wouldn't have lasted a week as Batman. He'd be dead already. Again, that's not to slight Harley. It's just that Terry's faced villains with intelligence and very impressive abilities. And he's beaten them.

[James]

terry uses the suit as a crutch in my opinion.

Sorry, mate, but I don't think there really is a scrape of evidence that Terry relies on the suit. In fact, the writers seem to try and point out - as much as they can - that Terry's skill do not require the suit. The example at the nightclub in ROTJ being one - and certainly several series 2 episodes deal with Terry without the suit or Terry being hunted sans suit.

If you don't like the idea of the Batman Beyond concept, I can understand - each to their own. But Terry - as depicted in the cartoon (and it is unfair to compare a comic book harley to the CARTOON Terry - you should only compare comic to comic or cartoon to cartoon) is a good fighter, he is an intelligent kid and he is devoted to tha cause of the Batman. With the help of Bruce (actually having a fully fledged trainer, an option poor Bruce didn't really have - monks aside), Terry could be crafted into a better Batman that Bruce. Afterall, he has the best teacher he could ever wish for!!!

I think the reason Harley remains in the shadow of, say, the Joker is that - occasional storylines aside - she is not strong enough to be a main villian. I think if Terry can take out the likes of the Joker I think he'd probably take out Harley. I love the girl, but I think a bit of perspective is required here!

[Frozen]

I'm with SJJ and DarkAngel all the way here - just 'cos Harley is (very) easy on the eyes doesn't mean she can take on a major league hero like Terry (and he IS major league) - and no amount of good "edgication", as you put it, is going to make a damned difference when she can't even hit Terry. Just to put this into perspective, there was a recent thread debating who'd win between Spider-man and Terry, and the majority of the people went with Terry - are you telling me a guy who, in the opinion of the majority of those who responded to that thread, has the ability to take it to Spider Man couldn't take out Harley Quinn..?

[James]

The only way to settle this is with a console Batman Beyond beat-em-up, then, if you thought Terry was crap you could give him a good kickin'... however, if you felt that Bruce need a bit of a slap for his treatment of Terry then you could give him a seeing to!

Then everyone would be happy.... would they not...

Except Max who'd probably be the most - ahem - workied on character of them all :)

ahhhh... beat-em-up....

[mxyzptlk]

see harley could beat up joker batman beyonds tuffest villian without evan trying

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by mxyzptlk
see harley could beat up joker batman beyonds tuffest villian without evan trying

The Joker we saw in ROTJ knew "everything the original Batman and Robin" knew because he was in Drake's body. You saw what he was capable of when he fought Batman at the end. There's absolutely no way Harley could have beaten him then.

Even if you go back to the Joker in BTAS and TNBA, Harley wouldn't have been able to beat him. Remember Joker shoving her out the window in "Mad Love"? That's what happens "without evan trying." Where was Harley's great defense and awareness then?

Finally, in what sense was Joker the "tuffest" villian in BB? In terms of pure power and might, he's no where near the top of the list. Obviously, he's the great villain any Batman has ever faced. But in terms of toughest, I would choose Inque or Blight easy. Don't tell me Harley could beat either of them, because she couldn't.

Now let me ask you a question. Do you think Harley could beat the Dee Dees? Terry took on both at the same time at beat them. One Dee Dee can do what Harley could. Two is even better. If Terry can beat the Dee Dees he can beat Harley.

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by DarkAngel

Now let me ask you a question. Do you think Harley could beat the Dee Dees? Terry took on both at the same time at beat them. One Dee Dee can do what Harley could. Two is even better. If Terry can beat the Dee Dees he can beat Harley.

Maybe that's the real reason she was so p.o.'d at the Deeds afterwards. Not because they were in trouble with the law, but because they were too incompetent to finish a job she could have done in her prime! :D

[mxyzptlk]

Originally posted by DarkAngel


The Joker we saw in ROTJ knew "everything the original Batman and Robin" knew because he was in Drake's body. You saw what he was capable of when he fought Batman at the end. There's absolutely no way Harley could have beaten him then.

Even if you go back to the Joker in BTAS and TNBA, Harley wouldn't have been able to beat him. Remember Joker shoving her out the window in "Mad Love"? That's what happens "without evan trying." Where was Harley's great defense and awareness then?

Finally, in what sense was Joker the "tuffest" villian in BB? In terms of pure power and might, he's no where near the top of the list. Obviously, he's the great villain any Batman has ever faced. But in terms of toughest, I would choose Inque or Blight easy. Don't tell me Harley could beat either of them, because she couldn't.

Now let me ask you a question. Do you think Harley could beat the Dee Dees? Terry took on both at the same time at beat them. One Dee Dee can do what Harley could. Two is even better. If Terry can beat the Dee Dees he can beat Harley.


blah blah harly could still whip him

[Shriek]

DR. BELCH! You are awesome! I think you are funny as hell. Because you tell it like it is. And that's always funny.

And as for myxy. Terry would whomp Harley. SHe isn't anything without that sledgehammer

[James]

mxyzptlk:

Blah blah harly could still whip him

I've said this before Mxyz, I wish you wouldn't waste server space with pointless and vaguely insulting replies like this. DarkAngel brought some good points regarding Harley and I think if you disagree you should at least be courteous to respond with more than 'blah blah'.
You've brought up some good points on the subject before, but this is just lazy man, post scoring, man!

On the point of Terry's toughest villian - that is an interesting one. Afterall, from dialogue alone, Bruce and Barbara seemed to feel Joker was far worse than any Terry has encountered - or are they just 'blight'ed by personal tragedy?

On one side, Joker did do a HELL of a lot of damage in ROTJ, yet at the same time his plan didn't seem particularly complex and could have really been mustered by many of Terry's foes (Blight for example)... Was Barbara correct in saying that Joker was far worse than Terry's enemies? Or does she fear that Terry, like many before him, will fall for the trap of underestimating the Joker's skills....

Find out, same time, same bat.... etc etc

[Shriek]

Originally posted by SJJ



Find out, same time, same bat.... etc etc

You know what man? I really do miss seeing the old 60's version of batman. It was so corny and made you want to turn it off. But you always wanted to see how they got out of each trap. ONe that I remember really good is when they were in this giant ear drum and water would drip. And it echoed loud and would hurt their ear drum. And then I believe Batman squealed and the thing shattered.

Or who remembers walking up the building sideways? And what about the Bat shield? LMAO

[James Harvey]

I think Terry would beat Harley hands down, becuase sometimes he doesn't use force, but his brains. Like when he chopped up the Golem, electrified that dog in ACE IN THE HOLE and that suit in LOST SOUL. If if he did use foce, Terry could still take her. He held his ground taking on opver 30 Jokerz in ONCE BURNED. Went up against the Man of Steel in THE CVALL. Took on spliced dinos in CURS EOF THE KOBRA. Fought BIG TIME. He even beat a highly trained assassin, which is no easy feet. Terry would win, hands down.

[mxyzptlk]

Originally posted by Shriek
DR. BELCH! You are awesome! I think you are funny as hell. Because you tell it like it is. And that's always funny.

And as for myxy. Terry would whomp Harley. SHe isn't anything without that sledgehammer

and terry is hardley anything without the suit.

[Shriek]

Are you stupid or something? He has fought people off without the suit.

[mxyzptlk]

that does not matter how many major villians has he beaten without the suit. and how many people has harley beaten without the club very many including the joker.

[Shriek]

Would someone hold me back??????? I'm serious Mxy. Knock this stupid crap off and use your head for once. You'll never survive high school if you act like this.

[mxyzptlk]

sorry i am not trying to annoy you i really think harley could beet terry. its just a dumb argument about cartoon charecters.

[Maxie Zeus]

This thread has too much good stuff in it to see it degenerate into an empty ping-pong match of "Yes she can" "No she can't" exchanges. Disagreements are the lifeblood of these boards; they give us a chance to discover opinions different than our own, and reasons (perhaps) for changing ours. (I've lost count of the number of times I've changed my mind about important Batman issues because of the intelligent and well-laid out arguments of posters here.) But this requires more than just a lot of gainsaying: "Nuh-uh!" "Uh-huh!" "Nuh-uh!!" "Uh-huh!!!"

Disagree with someone? Great. Explain why. Still don't agree after lots of discussion? Fine. Drop the subject, or agree to disagree. Look to DarkAngel, SJJ and Clayface for how it's done--no one does it better.

[mxyzptlk]

i am willing to drop it since it appears to be not really going any where and annoying people.

[James]

Maxie Zeus:
Disagreements are the lifeblood of these boards; they give us a chance to discover opinions different than our own, and reasons (perhaps) for changing ours. (I've lost count of the number of times I've changed my mind about important Batman issues because of the intelligent and well-laid out arguments of posters here.)

This is so true on all counts and the reason that I stay with this forum. There is some great stuff here and threads like this have been great and something as a forum to be proud of. The fact that threads here don't often resolve into 'yes it is'/'no it isn't' is proof that this is a place worth hanging around in.

On the bizarre subject of Harley Vs Terry, if Mxy is not trying to irritate people with his stance on Harley (to me it's like saying 'hey, that C3-PO dude, he could really knock the block off that Vader guy...'), then I am very disturbed - because that might mean Mxy actually BELIEVES that Harley could beat Terry...

I don't mean that to sound patronising - it justs shows how little value - rightly or wrongly - you place in Terry as Batman.

Is it really because you see Terry as being so incompentant and reliant on bat suit? Or is it that you (and of course, many others) are uncomfortable with having someone take the mantle from the only man to be considered THE Batman?

I, IMO, don't see much evidence in the series that Terry's skills are so poor that Harley could beat him, so I assume you don't like having a new Batman. In which case, I wonder if there is anyway Terry could have been presented that would make you think he was worthy of the role?

[mxyzptlk]

mabey in but i also like harley alot so that may have something to do with it.

[James]

Originally posted by mxyzptlk
mabey in but i also like harley alot so that may have something to do with it.

Your devotion to the lady is admirable. I imagine she'd be rather chuffed - if she wasn't entirely fictional, that is. ;)

[mxyzptlk]

thanx. she is probley my favorite comic book charecter.

[Shriek]

Why don't you just put posters of her all over the place and start worshiping her since you don't know anything about who would win in a fist fight.

[James]

Originally posted by Shriek
Why don't you just put posters of her all over the place and start worshiping her since you don't know anything about who would win in a fist fight.

I suppose we should leave the guy his dreams ;) - it's the only place she's going to beat Mr McGinnis and Mr Wayne....

To be honest, it wasn't until the subject of Harley rose it's ugly head that I realised how much I enjoyed her brief contribution to ROTJ. It was nice seeing her return for a small cameo - herself and Mr J do work really well together and it gives Joker someone to play against. Good stuff.

She is also one of the few villians to have definately made it to Terry's time period. One also - we assume - to lead a reasonably normal life.... She should be honoured....

Perhaps we should rename this thread Harley Vs Wayne...! :D

[mxyzptlk]

i am not attracted to her. i just like her charecter alot. its a comic charecter.

[DR. BELCH]

--Mxy's right to some degreee. Terry would have to have ice in his veins not to have some feelings for young Harley. He goes gaga for her for a while, but eventually realizes she's poison, and regretfully slaps the cuffs on her. I can see her slapping him across the face and catching the boy off-guard...but I think he'd eventually best her. Now...I never like to see a hero strike a dame. So what I would have him do is grab her by the scruff of the neck like a puppy and pinch hard to make her go limp, then make the arrest (maybe crying a liltle as he does so). "I could have loved you, you know," he might say, "if you weren't such a little brat." She replies with something vulgarly flippant. Terry turns his back and motions to the officer to take Harley away. Bruce would look on and think back to his days with Selina Kyle...or with Talia. I'd say it's high time Terry learned that a broken heart hurts far worse than a punch in the kisser.

[mxyzptlk]

to true about broken hearts.

[James Harvey]

Amazing how this topic morphed quickly fdrom one subject to the next. Anywho, while Terry is no match for Bruce, he could easily take Harley. But, is it the animated version or the toxin-enhanced version from the mainstream? To me, the only real version is the animated...

[James]

May I also bring forth the rather pedantic point that, from a chronolgical point of view, would really be a no contest between Harley and Terry. Terry being 17 and Harley being very old and not very attractive anymore. I don't think swing a varicose veined leg in Terry's direction is going to get his hormones going.

[mxyzptlk]

Originally posted by DickGrayson
Amazing how this topic morphed quickly fdrom one subject to the next. Anywho, while Terry is no match for Bruce, he could easily take Harley. But, is it the animated version or the toxin-enhanced version from the mainstream? To me, the only real version is the animated...

to me only the comics really matter.

[James]

Originally posted by mxyzptlk


to me only the comics really matter.

Interesting, I prefer the TV series. Mainly because I don't have the time to keep up with the comics as I would like. Plus I like to have a beginning and an end. It makes it far easier to study a title if you can define it in those parameters. The comic books will never stop and the characters will give evolving and changing not just in themselves, but their pasts too (how much has Batgirl been changed in the comics - or Jason Todd!!?). I like an beginning and an end - like a story. That's what the TV series gives me.

[James Harvey]

Comics can be complex, for sure. Some titles ar eimpossible to jump on. Anyways, I just prefer the animated version to the comic. The animated version is more fleshed out and believable than the comic version.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by mxyzptlk


to me only the comics really matter.

But in Harley's case, she was created in the animated show. So, I would tend to say the animated Harley is the "real" Harley.

[James]

Originally posted by DarkAngel


But in Harley's case, she was created in the animated show. So, I would tend to say the animated Harley is the "real" Harley.

Good point, and one I agree with. In this case - as general discussions go - I think when we debate about Harley and her abilities it has to be in regards to her animated appearences (unless otherwise specified).

I certainly wouldn't judge Bane by his animated or - ahem - film debuts....

[mxyzptlk]

i am argueing from the comics standpoint. comics harley and animated harley are very different comics harley is alot stronger than the animated one.

[Frozen]

But why would the 'comics' Harley be fighting Terry anyway? 'Comics' Harley fighting Terry is even morer implausible than 'animated' Harley fighting him. If there were to be a Harley vs Terry fight, it's be the cartoon Harley, surely..?

And to return to your previous statement 'terry is nothing without the suit' - Myx, are you blind? I'm sorry to labour this point, but sit down and watch ROTJ again, and see Terry take the Joker's gang apart WITHOUT THE SUIT. Also, don't you think it's insulting to Bruce's judgement to rubbish his choice of successor? If Bruce has declared Terry good enough to bear the mantle of Batman, then he's good enough, end of story. Bruce would never endanger somebody's life by putting them in the Batman suit if they weren't up to the job...

[James]

Glad to see we're getting back to the Terry Vs someone debate. Personally, I think this argument about Harley is stupid. Mxy, you have some issues about Terry to get over as your arguments are just full of holes. Except that there is no way Harley would be able to take on Terry.

If they did - somehow - bring the two together despite the difference in chronology, Terry would still kick Harley. Your love for Harley and disapproval for Terry is blinding you to simple facts.

If they even brought Terry into the main Batman continuity, I think they would certainly make him a more powerful character than Harley.

What all the Batmen have in common, is the ability to solve battles through cold judgement. I think this is often to juxtapose the villian who is normally clouded by some hell bent desire of meglomania.

Harley would be beaten because she isn't as bright as Terry (IMO - does anyone agree?)... he is a smart cookie, which is why I think Bruce risked training him...

[Frozen]

Not sure if Harley isn't as bright as Terry (she is, after all, an 'edjicated' [sic] psychiatrist (how DO you spell that..?), and she has bags full of low cunning, not to mention tricks learnt from 'Mr. J' - but she isn't as tactically astute, nor experienced, nor DRIVEN as much as Terry. Besides, academic smarts aren't going to get you anywhere when a guy like Terry has the martial ability to counter EVERY move you make...

[James]

Originally posted by Frozen
Not sure if Harley isn't as bright as Terry (she is, after all, an 'edjicated' [sic] psychiatrist (how DO you spell that..?), and she has bags full of low cunning, not to mention tricks learnt from 'Mr. J' - but she isn't as tactically astute, nor experienced, nor DRIVEN as much as Terry. Besides, academic smarts aren't going to get you anywhere when a guy like Terry has the martial ability to counter EVERY move you make...

Do you mean 'educated'? As for Harley, I must confess to not being too hot on her background. I was refering to sensibilty when I referred to intelligence - that's my fault for not making that clear as Terry isn't very well educated at all!

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by Frozen
Not sure if Harley isn't as bright as Terry (she is, after all, an 'edjicated' [sic] psychiatrist (how DO you spell that..?),

Besides, academic smarts aren't going to get you anywhere when a guy like Terry has the martial ability to counter EVERY move you make...

Well, the "Mad Love" comic makes it pretty clear that Harley was pretty low-powered in the brain dept., and slept her way to the degree. She also originally went to college on a gymnastics scholarship, so she comes by her physical prowess honestly, and her academics dishonestly.

But I agree with you totally on the Harley vs. Terry thing. Give Harley all her props, and give Terry nothing, and I still think he could knock her cold without breaking a sweat. As a character Harley was not designed to be a fighter, and it takes nothing away from her to admit as much.

[Frozen]

Maxie Zeus wrote:

Well, the "Mad Love" comic makes it pretty clear that Harley was pretty low-powered in the brain dept., and slept her way to the degree. She also originally went to college on a
gymnastics scholarship, so she comes by her physical prowess honestly, and her academics dishonestly.

I stand corrected, Maxie. I'll admit that it's some time since I read 'Mad Love', and I'd kinda forotten that bit... Dang, ya got me pardner!


SJJ wrote:

Do you mean 'educated'?

That's exactly what I meant- I was quoting Myx's singular spelling...

[James]

Originally posted by Frozen


That's exactly what I meant- I was quoting Myx's singular spelling...

Whoops - missed that one.. hee hee :D

[mxyzptlk]

Originally posted by Frozen
But why would the 'comics' Harley be fighting Terry anyway? 'Comics' Harley fighting Terry is even morer implausible than 'animated' Harley fighting him. If there were to be a Harley vs Terry fight, it's be the cartoon Harley, surely..?

And to return to your previous statement 'terry is nothing without the suit' - Myx, are you blind? I'm sorry to labour this point, but sit down and watch ROTJ again, and see Terry take the Joker's gang apart WITHOUT THE SUIT. Also, don't you think it's insulting to Bruce's judgement to rubbish his choice of successor? If Bruce has declared Terry good enough to bear the mantle of Batman, then he's good enough, end of story. Bruce would never endanger somebody's life by putting them in the Batman suit if they weren't up to the job...

i could care less whether or not in my opinion heat up a small time gang without the suit. arguing tht he beat the jokers wihtout the suit does change my me at all in the first episde he beat up the jokers without the suit.

[James]

Originally posted by mxyzptlk


i could care less whether or not in my opinion heat up a small time gang without the suit. arguing tht he beat the jokers wihtout the suit does change my me at all in the first episde he beat up the jokers without the suit.

You really need to develop your points here. Surely the whole point of the forum is to learn from each other and to develop our views and opinions.

Frozen had some good evidence here. I think replying 'well it's my opinion' doesn't justify your remarks. I agree, it is your opinion, and you are entitled to it - but if you are willing to make your thoughts known in a post, and people question those ideas, I think you are obliged to explain why you posted those beliefs in the first place. Who knows, you may explain a POV that Frozen here hadn't thought of and change his opinion, or - if you are truely honest to yourself - you may find he offers something that changes yours.

I think in reference to your answer, Frozen is refering to the actions that Terry makes while fighting the Jokers in both 'Rebirth' and ROTJ. His fighting skills are identical to those when he uses the suit. Frozen's point (and mine - I'll back him on this one!) is that it's clear that the tactics and methods that Terry uses in the suit are extension of his own skills. He uses the suit occasionally to make beyond human attacks (rocket boots, batarangs) but his basic fighting skills are Terry's - not the suits.

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by mxyzptlk


i could care less whether or not in my opinion heat up a small time gang without the suit. arguing tht he beat the jokers wihtout the suit does change my me at all in the first episde he beat up the jokers without the suit.

I'm not sure I understand you at all. If you're saying that Terry beating the Jokerz is meaningless, why is that? I believe there were six Jokerz in ROTJ, including the twins who showed great ability. To beat them without the batsuit is incredible. I don't see how that can be ignored. I don't understand how that particular group of Jokerz can be described as "small time". We are talking about fighting, aren't we? Just from the physical perspective, it's six on one. Winning when outnumbered like that can't be passed off as a small time victory.

[mxyzptlk]

when he puts on the suit he is using something that ampliphies his abilities the second it comes on. because lets face it he does not use the sit for fashion. when its on he has enhanced strengh and to say he uses the other stuff only on occasion is just ludicrous. and when sjj said that his fighting skills are the same as when he had the suit on. well i dont know about you guys but if he has the same abilities with the suit on then i would think the show has some bad plot holes. cause it supposedley amplifies his reguler abilities. thats my arguement.:cool:

[Frozen]

OK, that's good, a cohesive argument...

BUT, and I'm open to persuasion here, I thought the suit didn't amplify ABILITIES but ATTRIBUTES - that is to say it enhances the wearers strength, speed etc (ATTRIBUTES), but it cannot amplify their fighting skills, driving etc (ABILITIES). The suit, I thought, but I could be wrong, does not have some sort of programming with a multitude of different combat styles encoded into it - that is up to the wearer. Bruce didn't need to the suit to improve his SKILLS, just his STRENGTH, surely..?

SO, to address your point, Myx, Terry doesn't require the suit to fight because the suit CAN'T fight, that's down to the skill and training of the wearer -and Terry, like Bruce, is a more than capable fighter, which is why Bruce chose him as his successor. Make sense? Any thoughts, Myx, SJJ, and DarkAngel?

[DarkAngel]

Originally posted by Frozen
OK, that's good, a cohesive argument...

SO, to address your point, Myx, Terry doesn't require the suit to fight because the suit CAN'T fight, that's down to the skill and training of the wearer -and Terry, like Bruce, is a more than capable fighter, which is why Bruce chose him as his successor. Make sense? Any thoughts, Myx, SJJ, and DarkAngel?

Frozen, that's exactly it. Mxy, what you're not understanding is that the suit is exactly that: a suit. If it worked on it's own, Terry wouldn't be needed. Watch the beginning of "Rebirth" again, in which Bruce wears the suit. Now watch any fight scene in which Terry wears the suit. The moves are completely different. Completely. Frozen's dead on when he says the suit amplifies strength/power, but NOT fighting skill. And that's exactly why I keep pointing to the ROTJ dance club fight scene. He's wearing NO batsuit, but still whips the Jokerz. If it was only the suit, the Jokerz would have wiped the floor with him. I'll tell you what's ludicrous: the idea that Terry isn't anything without the suit. Watch ROTJ. Watch that episode where Terry fights the batsuit. And when the suit is on, look at the MOVES Terry's using, which are, again, completely different from Bruce's. It's all right there staring you in the face. Terry can fight, and it has nothing at all to do with the batsuit.

[James]

I agree with all that Darkangel and Frozen have just said. They have done several episodes with Terry sans suit to prove this point. The suit is not the Bat it is the person beneath, both mentally and physically.

Take away Bruce's utility belt, batarangs, batmobiles, bat repellents, bat gapple, bat lipstick and bat sport fixtures (I think you can see where I am going) and you'll find Bruce, is STILL the bat. Bruce too, relies on utilities but I'm sure that doesn't diminish him in your eyes. Again, I think -IMO- you are justifying your denial in the idea of another Batman. I think that is where you're problem with Terry lies and not in the character. It is understandable, and a view that many people on the forum can empathise with.