FSM Discussion

by **Rainswept** on Fri May 23, 2008 8:30 am

One good EMP and Ironman's a sad little drunk stuck in a can.

Batman's the world's greatest detective, and besides which we all know how good Tony stark is at keeping secrets. It'd take Bats like 3 minutes to figure out a way to disable that suit, and without the suit Tony's about as good in a fight as Zankou.

by **farfalla** on Fri May 23, 2008 11:09 am

never trust a man that is all about the suit

in a pinch give me someone that has some angst with creativity and flexibility over the braggadocio

by **Mad Willyum Bonney** on Fri May 23, 2008 2:40 pm

Batman , because he is smarter , not subject to hangovers and never gets the DT's .

by **Detective TurtleHolmes** on Fri May 23, 2008 7:44 pm

Mad Willyum Bonney wrote:Batman , because he is smarter

Smarter? Tony Stark is a super genius! Batman can only find things out. Heck, in the movie, some other guy made his suit!

Tony Stark made Iron Man with his own two hands. He even managed to make the Ironmonger suit in the midst of terrorists!

Now who's smarter?

by **ChowMein** on Fri May 23, 2008 7:48 pm

I used to have the run of Iron man comics, as well as over 400 Batman books , Batman is smarter .

I haven't seen the movies though , I stand by the books not the movies .

by **Taidje Khan** on Fri May 23, 2008 11:24 pm

What a retarded question. CLEARLY it would depend upon the nature of the fight. I mean, are we talking about a surprise attack, a prolonged war, a cage-match, what?

Batman would win a war. If he has enough time to set his shit up the way he wants it, I think he could defeat Superman, let alone Iron Man.

But you can't get around the fact that Iron Man can walk up to him out of the blue and crack his skull like a walnut. Seriously, you cannot dance around that fact.

Without sufficient information, I have to side with Iron Man. Because Batman would require a certain set of conditions to defeat him. Iron Man's good to go as is. He could throw down right now. Batman would have to spend a bunch of time strategizing just to give him a fighting chance.

But there's no question who has the better movie this year. Iron Man was okay. It had it's moments. Solid movie. Worth the price of admission. Sure.

The Dark Knight is going to completely ruin everybody's shit. It will fucking. SLAY. Total domination by any and all standards. History will forever after be divided into pre-TDK and post-TDK. No argument is possible.

by **Detective TurtleHolmes** on Fri May 23, 2008 11:37 pm

Taidje Khan wrote:But there's no question who has the better movie this year. Iron Man was okay. It had it's moments. Solid movie. Worth the price of admission. Sure.

The Dark Knight is going to completely ruin everybody's shit. It will fucking. SLAY. Total domination by any and all standards. History will forever after be divided into pre-TDK and post-TDK. No argument is possible.

I'll put it like this, in relation to the movies.
Iron Man scored a 93% on www.rottentomatoes.com
How is TDK going to compete with that? Two +90% movies in one season? I don't think so. I reckon it's going to be around an 80%.

by **Mad Willyum Bonney** on Fri May 23, 2008 11:55 pm

Taidje Khan wrote:What a retarded question. CLEARLY it would depend upon the nature of the fight. I mean, are we talking about a surprise attack, a prolonged war, a cage-match, what?

Batman would win a war. If he has enough time to set his shit up the way he wants it, I think he could defeat Superman, let alone Iron Man.

But you can't get around the fact that Iron Man can walk up to him out of the blue and crack his skull like a walnut. Seriously, you cannot dance around that fact.

Without sufficient information, I have to side with Iron Man. Because Batman would require a certain set of conditions to defeat him. Iron Man's good to go as is. He could throw down right now. Batman would have to spend a bunch of time strategizing just to give him a fighting chance.

But there's no question who has the better movie this year. Iron Man was okay. It had it's moments. Solid movie. Worth the price of admission. Sure.

The Dark Knight is going to completely ruin everybody's shit. It will fucking. SLAY. Total domination by any and all standards. History will forever after be divided into pre-TDK and post-TDK. No argument is possible.

He kicked the shit out of Supes in The Dark Knight graphic novel .

by **Taidje Khan** on Sat May 24, 2008 12:13 am

Detective TurtleHolmes wrote:I'll put it like this, in relation to the movies.
Iron Man scored a 93% on www.rottentomatoes.com
How is TDK going to compete with that? Two +90% movies in one season? I don't think so. I reckon it's going to be around an 80%.

You're a fool, dude. Seriously, reread what you just wrote, look at how stupid that sounds.

The Heath Ledger angle alone is going to push this movie over the top, and that's completely unrelated to the actual movie itself. The preview is incredible, it's a HEAVILY anticipated sequel of a critically acclaimed film that has virtually the same cast and crew as the original, it's an installment of an established franchise with an immense fanbase . . .

Your post is an absurdism.

by **Rainswept** on Sat May 24, 2008 12:45 am

Taidje Khan wrote:The Dark Knight is going to completely ruin everybody's shit. It will fucking. SLAY. Total domination by any and all standards. History will forever after be divided into pre-TDK and post-TDK. No argument is possible.

See, I've been dying for this movie since the end of Begins, and I really expect it to kick ass. My biggest worry tho, is that it's going to be too overhyped to live up to.

by **Taidje Khan** on Sat May 24, 2008 1:20 am

Hype used to ruin movies for me all the time. Just take a few moments to adjust your mindset before the film starts. Deep breathing also helps.

I'm not kidding even a little bit, I always take the time to center myself before any movie-watching experience. It has increased my enjoyment about ten-fold.

by **Mad Willyum Bonney** on Sat May 24, 2008 1:25 am

I'm just glad they stopped with those god awful stinkers of previous years , Bats was never intended for young children in the first place .

by **Hqrsie** on Sat May 24, 2008 2:08 am

Are we basing the success of these movies on how well they gross in theaters or on the virtues of the actual movies? Because the money they pull in doesn't necessarily reflect the second. It just reflects the opinions of the masses. The same masses who re-elected GWB.

by **Taidje Khan** on Sat May 24, 2008 2:25 am

I consider both aspects when judging a movie.

A good movie EITHER has artistic merit, or makes money.

A great movie does both.

by **Detective TurtleHolmes** on Sat May 24, 2008 2:39 am

Taidje Khan wrote:The Heath Ledger angle alone is going to push this movie over the top, and that's completely unrelated to the actual movie itself.

Just because it was Heath Ledger's last movie doesn't mean it's going to be rated any better.

Yes, the preview was awesome. That doesn't mean anything though. Normally, for trailers, they just cram all the best bits from the movie together. That's the way it's always been for me, anyway.

Just look at Spider Man 3. Awesome trailer, suck ass movie.

FSM Discussion

Batman v/s Iron Man

Who would win a fight?

Who is online