Edited to say, handwave on the part of the viewers, not the writers. I don't think they ever went into any length to explain why the aliens spoke English.

Depends on who you get on what day. Occasionally they try to say things like "no no, they're speaking other languages, it's just that we don't show it!" Which, you know, er, whatever.

When there's no garment there, it's harder to nitpick.

I dunno. When there's no garment there, I watch, gobsmacked, as they prance around in the altogether, cellulite jiggling. It's not like I can unfocus my eyes and ignore the minor infelicities. The whole thing is on display.

But YBMV. ::shrugs::

Occasionally they try to say things like "no no, they're speaking other languages, it's just that we don't show it!" Which, you know, er, whatever.

That's pretty funny. Almost acceptable, and yet, not.

Some things I can accept as convention. The omission of the entire deal is one of those.

But if you bring it into the story, I want something babelfish quality at the very least, otherwise I sit there wondering why we only get some Klingon words, or just really confused about what I'm hearing and if I'm supposed have microbes too.

It's either come up with a device you have to explain to everyone you meet or have everyone speak english. This isn't Stargate: Language Geek Technical Manual. The gate is a plot device for story. Every planet can't have language issues or every single episode would get bogged down dealing with language.

By not mentioning it, the show is easily syndicated and dubbed for any language on earth, like the original Trek was.

I did like the fact they brought up the language thing in Episode 100, "Wormhole Xtreme." (Along with a bunch of other stuff)

"Bigger! Big-er!"

I don't know as how this is the thread to discuss it, but would someone care to convince me why Batman has sidekicks?

It's something Oracle, Alfred and Nightwing have all called him on from time to time.

In the beginning, he took in Dick Grayson because of the parallel of both of them having seen their parents get murdered. Others have posited that he keeps taking on partners as a way of keeping touch with his humanity--keeping him from becoming too withdrawn from people.

Frequently, however, the partners really impose themselves on him--Dick Grayson discovered the batcave and convinced Batman to train him to be his partner. Oracle/Batgirl was never an official partner, but made such a nuisance of herself that he HAD to work with her. Tim Drake figured out Batman's identity all on his own, and then kind of blackmailed him into making him his partner, and so on.

I don't know as how this is the thread to discuss it, but would someone care to convince me why Batman has sidekicks?

In addition to what Plei and Victor have said... thing is, his partners, the people he works with -- Alfred, Dick, Tim, Jason, Barbara, Jim, Leslie, Cassandra -- they're his family.

And Batman? Very invested in the creation of family.

Devin Grayson asks the same question in Gotham Knights #7:

"The more that I examine his allies, the more I come to think of Batman as being as much of an enterprise as a single entity. Though I maintain that he could operate alone out of either necessity or choice -- I confess to being increasingly... impressed with both the loyalty and unity of his friends. He would never ask anyone to sacrifice anything for his cause -- and yet, many around him, of their own will and volition, appear to have renounced a great deal. Do they do so because they believe as greatly as he does, in the need to completely eradicate crime?

"Or is it more than that? Perhaps, partly, their bond with him. And partly their bond with one another... some of which go quite a ways back.

"What is it that moves someone to pledge loyalty to someone else? Do we bond together over tragedies -- or over hope? And when these bonds are forged, where does the final obligation lie? On the head of those making promises of assistance? Or on the shoulders of any man who would allow it?

"There's no shame in accepting aid from others -- but perhaps there is a responsibility. Could the Dark Knight be so certain of his actions if not for the trust of those rallying around him? Does he ever truly stop to doubt himself, and if so -- is he morally obligated to speak that doubt to his retinue? Or is he morally obligated simply never to doubt?

"It's probably best that he never shows it. Probably best that he never indluges his doubts the way I'm indulging them now. At this point, that has to be part of the deal. At this point, doubt has long since ceased to be a useful practice. At this point, he must make as many of his decisions because of his supporters as in spite of them.

"Batman himself knows that he is more than just a man in a mask. He has become a legend, a symbol, a force. He has made his priorities clear to those who would aid him -- and allowed them to make their own choices. And he doesn't have time to waste over wondering whether or not this is fair.

"Maybe, in the end, the best way for Batman to honor those in his inner circle -- is to cease resisting their inclination to honor him."

I'm having an easier and easier time mapping Wes to Dick (Robin I/Nightwing)

Uh-huh. Who brought this up first (albeit my comparison was to the animated Robin I)?? Huh? Say my name!

Ahem.

Dick Grayson discovered the batcave and convinced Batman to train him to be his partner.

Well, doesn't that depend upon which timeline you read? I mean, back in the original day, he was taken in and became Robin from day one.

Of course, alternate histories would explain why Dark Knight Strikes Back was so hated - having never followed any Dick Grayson comics I could be really amused by the ending to that series.

You *must* get Batgirl: Year One.

You know, I almost bought this in the bookstore yesterday. I called Plei's phone to ask her opinion but didn't get an answer; so I passed it by. Oops.

Well, doesn't that depend upon which timeline you read? I mean, back in the original day, he was taken in and became Robin from day one.

Yes, this.