I can think of a source from probably the 1970s where three boys are at a campfire, explaining Batman's looks and tools with progressive unlikeliness, until Bruce Wayne quietly disappears and shows himself to them as Batman. (They laugh and say there's no way Batman could loko so mundane.) This is in The Greatest Batman Stories Ever Told, a compilation that came out in the middle 90s.

In that same volume, several instances of enjoying the fear of others, notably one story called something like "Midnight and Three" (a throwback, noir-style tale which I enjoyed immensely).

In Kingdom Come, Batman taunts the criminals who have been caught doing their bad things. (It's Lex Luthor, IIRC.)

Those are examples off the top of my head. I bet, going over 60+ years of comics, we'd find quite a few examples to support my cause. Not to the necessary detriment of any other interpretation, but I do think my interpretation has some merit.

Just because I think it'd be fun -- doesn't have any bearing on his character.

I think that does have bearing on his character. Assessing why the audience might wishfully cast themselves into a character's role can provide plenty of clues as to why the character has cast himself into that role. It's kind of a meta approach, but for so powerful a figure of wishing, I don't think it's inappropriate.

Also, Brad Pitt and Bono need my help.

What does Brad need your help doing?

I hope Nutty's not feeling attacked or anything

Ha ha ha! No fears on that front. For the record, I am enjoying this discussion too, and hope for it to continue (especially at such time that I have sources to actual hand, because my memory is so shitty).

What does Brad need your help doing?

If ita's seeing the same AIM ad I keep seeing, stopping poverty.

I hope Nutty's not feeling attacked or anything

Ha ha ha! No fears on that front.

Heh, cool. It was just that we recently had a guy on TWoP hop into the VM forum and rant about how he hated Veronica and all the characters except Duncan and how the show made him sick, and then when other people tried to argue with him and ask why he felt that way (he had some valid arguments (ones ita's made, actually) and some fairly ludicrous ones), rather than stay and defend himself, he decided he had desecrated the shrine of Rob Thomas and ran off.

I don't think it's inappropriate.

Again we disagree. I think the mere fact that I'd wish that upon myself, ever, highlights why he gets to do it and I don't, and why he probably wouldn't let me be Robin.

Aside from the fictional thing, of course.

I bet, going over 60+ years of comics, we'd find quite a few examples to support my cause.

Yeah, but that's the problem with comics, and why I'd never go back more than 15 years on any particular argument. Even 10 is tight, but still. It's a diffuse characterisation, with lots of hands in the pie, and can't stand up to one interpretation.

My appreciation of the movie comes from the last 10 or so years only (the big event TPBs have a longer lifespan than things that don't get collected, I deem).

Anything bigger than that is too unstable for me.

What does Brad need your help doing?

Dunno, really. But it doesn't matter.

I don't think I can jump into this conversation and remain rational about it, but I have to say Nutty that whatever Batman you were expecting to see in that movie was not the Batman I wanted and was expecting to see. I was blissfully happy with this Batman movie precisely because it presented the Batman I've long loved and wanted to see in a Batman movie.

I'm sorry you didn't like the movie.

Batman's got a long enough history that I'd guess one could make just about any statement about his psychology/motives/personality and have it supported somewhere in comics canon.

I like the direction the movie decided to go, and will take ita and Tep's word that it took its tone cues from current canon.

Batman's got a long enough history that I'd guess one could make just about any statement about his psychology/motives/personality and have it supported somewhere in comics canon.

Exactly. Which is why, when evaluating accuracy, I start from his major appearances today and work my way back.

In Kingdom Come, Batman taunts the criminals who have been caught doing their bad things. (It's Lex Luthor, IIRC.)

But Kingdom Come is AU. I mean, if we're trying to come up with a psychological profile of the "real" Batman (inasmuch as he's fictional), we have to use canon to do so.

I bet, going over 60+ years of comics, we'd find quite a few examples to support my cause.

Yeah, but that's the problem with comics, and why I'd never go back more than 15 years on any particular argument. Even 10 is tight, but still. It's a diffuse characterisation, with lots of hands in the pie, and can't stand up to one interpretation.

Again, I agree. It might not be fair to say that 60+ years of canon is unuseable, but then again, the DC universe is the one where you have to qualify time periods as "pre-Crisis" or "post-Crisis."