Askye--But, given the post-parole scene, and the couple of Bruce as playboy scenes, it makes sense that she would see more of the Bruce she knows in Batman than in the public performance of Bruce. I think we're also given to understand that at the party.

---

Me, I'd be more scared if I never saw my assailent. When I woke up, I'd know that something really frightening had taken me out, and all my gun-toting homies, without me ever getting a look or hearing a sound, except for the rustling of something that sounded just a bit like wings.

I like the idea of the criminals not being sure if batman is a man or a creature, at least at first. Speaking to a criminal, not the best way to maintain that mystique. I don't necessarily think this movie wanted to maintain that idea, but it still seems that silent action would be both safer and equally as scary - a better tactical judgment, if nothing else.

I'd do it the way he did it, because I'd get a thrill out of the startled reaction, and my ability to not get shot despite my giving an opening. But I'm not a master strategist in life; in a video game, I'd use a sniper there every time.

---

(Also, I keep misreading Batman as Bateman. I blame Christian Bale.)

Oh good, it's not just me.

I have nothing to really add to the discussion, because Teppy and ita have been saying everything I would want to say.

---

If it means Blue Mountain coffee every morning, hell yes I will!

For you, I will do this.

My mom will be SO pleased that I've landed a spouse, much less one with a good job AND one who can protect me from all harm.

Marvy.

---

But, given the post-parole scene, and the couple of [spoiler omitted], it makes sense that she would

Also, if their ages are to make any sense, she apparently graduated law school around age 15. So she's smart enough to make that leap.

---

I like the idea of the criminals not being sure if batman is a man or a creature, at least at first. Speaking to a criminal, not the best way to maintain that mystique. I don't necessarily think this movie wanted to maintain that idea, but it still seems that silent action would be both safer and equally as scary - a better tactical judgment, if nothing else.

I have to agree, but in the end, you really have to chalk that up to it being a movie. You need more face-to-face-like interaction for these scenes to work in a film. If there were a real Batman in the real world, your route would be the preferred one, but concessions have to be made for film structure.

---

But he's not doing it to be all theatrical and faaaaabulous; he's doing it because he knows a little theatricality will leave an impression.

Oh, you know what I realized? I can't divorce the one from the other. In real life, I don't believe that you can use tools of manipulation without getting a charge out of being able to manipulate. There is no "I do this because I must" without ego; ego inheres automatically to that sentence.

This may be what is causing the confusion.

Edited to prove I kan spel.

---

It is possible, but only if you actually hate the theatrics, in which case they become a necessary evil, though even here you could make a case that eventually you'd start to enjoy them despite yourself. So really, I'm not adding a lot to the discussion with this post. Away!

---

In real life, I don't believe that you can use tools of manipulation without getting a charge out of being able to manipulate.

Really? When I taught, I did it all the time. Sometimes, as a matter of fact, I was annoyed I had to manipulate, but it was necessary to break up a bad dynamic or goose a kid into particpating or whatever.

---

I have to agree, but in the end, you really have to chalk that up to it being a movie. You need more face-to-face-like interaction for these scenes to work in a film.

I agree. Totally. Like I said, scene cool.

---