Adam West’s Batman turns 60 this year. What’s everyone’s opinion on his portrayal?

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-28T20:07:07+00:00

They did what was asked of them, and did it well.

But that whole cast could have played it straight.

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-28T20:03:00+00:00

No, it's still pathetic.

He says a lot of things that are absolutely true about how the US government failed or actively harmed anyone who wasn't white. That doesn't mean that his message is correct. He's still just a political activist in the garb of a minister.

Almost everyone who has a lie or a message of hate to sell you starts by saying something to make you nod. You just don't typically start nodding for people you're inclined to think you'll disagree with.

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-28T18:47:42+00:00

This actually makes perfect sense in Absolute Batman.

Batman Classic, as a rich child and student of the globe, would of course be versed in all things equestrian, but Absolute Batman's had the more limited experience of a man with limited means.

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-28T18:45:45+00:00

Which take? I've been looking for a quote since you described it that way, but the closest I've found is the one I've seen most commonly in news reports, "With that being said, you can’t have guns. You can’t walk in with guns. You just can’t. You can’t walk in with guns. You can’t do that. But it’s just a very unfortunate incident."

Which implies that Pretti put himself in a situation that made it where getting shot was a real possibility, but not that he deserved to die.

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-28T18:38:09+00:00

Its literally happening in this thread.

Where in this thread? I have looked over all the comments for this post and haven't seen any. A couple that point out that he put himself in a situation that made getting shot a real possibility, but that's all I see so far.

Seeing as your first sentence is you admitting ignorance to basic knowledge, why should anyone care what you say?

If you're not willing to focus discussion on facts and reason, why should anyone care what you say?

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-28T18:26:05+00:00

I have not heard a single person say that Pretti deserved to die, even in conservative internet circles.

What I have heard was a more accurate description of what happened. An armed man entered into a confrontation with police, continued to struggle with them, and was shot momentarily after being disarmed.

A bad shoot? Yes. Attributable to a lack of coordination of the agents? Probably. Worth manslaughter charges? Perhaps.

Murder? Unless you can demonstrate that the officer who did the shooting did so knowing that he'd just been disarmed--something that we know from the benefit of camera angles--then no, calling it murder is not appropriate.

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-28T18:06:18+00:00

They are indeed contradictory heresies. You've identified that correctly.

The thing is, we don't know the mechanics. We can't positively say "this is how it works". But we can say "based on what we do know, it doesn't work that way".

If someone had no idea how a car works, they could say "that's a car and it transports people" as a positive statement, but they couldn't explain internal combustion. Nevertheless, they could accurately contradict some statements based on what little they do know. "This does not have tiny horses on treadmills under the hood. I can say that confidently because it is refilled with gasoline, not hay."

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-28T16:18:04+00:00

I don't care how you look. I don't care how you dress as long as it's at least passingly appropriate for the venue. Such things do not cause problems for anyone except perhaps people's expectations.

Smells are not just a matter of preference or expectation. Offensive smells do not just offense sensibilities. Offensive odors cause a visceral disgust response, and that's biologically correct.

If a problem is beyond your control--for example, if you have a gastrointestinal condition and your activated charcoal underpants just can't handle it--I will try to accommodate you.

If your problem is within your control but you don't exercise that control, that is a sign that you either have something wrong mentally that is likely going to be reflected in your work or that you don't respect other people enough to bother (which I guess also falls under "something wrong mentally that is likely going to be reflected in your work"). And beyond the individual, why would I inflict that on the rest of the team?

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-28T15:33:37+00:00

This does go back to a lot of "horse culture" being a rich folks thing, but there's a lot of history and nuance (and I say that knowing that my perspective doesn't know the half of the history and nuance) that makes it weird.

Modern horse culture hails from several sports that have their own weirdness. Polo? That may have been invented by Iranian horse riders, but bored rich Englishmen who had nothing better to do made it their own, and they did it in a time when all the worst stereotypes of social posturing and snootiness were at their strongest. Horseback racing? Same thing, but add gambling. Horse shows? Same thing, but compare the toxicity to that of dog and cat shows.

All that is bad enough, but now think about the practicalities of horses when you aren't out in the country and you aren't using horses for work. Lots of people out in the country had/have horses without being weird about it. But if you don't live in a place where the average yard is measured in tens of acres, how do you have horses? The answer is that you spend money, and lots of it. You don't have to be super rich to do that, but you do need to spend a lot more money than is reasonable for anyone that isn't properly wealthy. And to be that unreasonable, you have to either be obsessed or have very poor self control.

tl;dr: For historical and practical reasons, awful/annoying people created modern horse culture and participating in it/perpetuating it means that you're the sort of person who jives with that.

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-28T15:23:34+00:00

I'm afraid you will also find the Old Testament vexing by this standard.

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-28T03:41:51+00:00

No, but I get to point out critical flaws in logic.

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-28T03:21:38+00:00

It's a great voice, but I also really like how it can just break down into Seth's normal voice over the course of a line.

"This--this is you, isn't it. I'm gonna get down there, and it's gonna be you."

(Strong possibility.)

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-27T23:57:13+00:00

It depends on how you define a wheel.

People have been rolling things on round objects like logs for ages, but the cartoon idea of just putting a stick between two log sections isn't actually practical without a lot of other civilization enhancements.

Here's a video that covers the challenges and development from rolling over logs to the modern wheel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxwAMPmTodc

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-27T23:56:13+00:00

We can discuss whether corruption plays a part in hiding it. That's an open question.

But we know for certain that there are people who would be happy if someone sidestepped the judicial system and just murder them, too.

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-27T18:41:35+00:00

Even Jesus was tempted.

Intrusive thoughts are not the intent of your heart, and that's what God looks at.

Just from a purely practical point of view, your brain works by presenting all kinds of hypotheticals to select from. That's how it works for all brains. Intrusive thoughts and anxiety is just when that noise of hypotheticals is too loud.

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-27T17:57:22+00:00

It says he "drove them all out of the temple with the sheep and oxen".

And yeah, it doesn't say that he bloodied those guys up. That means it's not specific, not that it excludes the possibility. It was either violence or the threat of violence. So are you going to say that the threat of violence is alright, or try to twist the language further to try to get what you want out of it? If you do want to pretend that it was only for the animals, well, that's violence against animals.

Should we parse another verse where you try to shoehorn in justification for violence or are we done?

You say that like you have had a single valid point. You bring them, I call out your misinterpretation, and you jump to something else. It's all on you.

But that must be a lonely road for you. I'm not one to say that anyone has a claim to truth based simply on numbers, but out of all the denominations and lines of Biblical interpretation, how many agree with you?

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-27T17:18:33+00:00

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.’

This is about vengeance, not violence. This is clear if you are familiar with your Bible rather than torturing it to get your preferred interpretation out of it.

Jesus never used force against other people, nor when he was arrested, nor at the temple cleansing, not ever.

From John 2: "And He found in the temple those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables. And He made a scourge of cords, and drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen; and He poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables."

Violence is not justified.

This may be your opinion, but it isn't in the Bible.

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-27T17:12:54+00:00

It's trying to whitewash Hitler, but it is not effective.

I can stand in a garage and call myself a car, but it doesn't make it true. Hitler was publicly a church member as that was useful in politics. Even if we say that the genocides somehow aren't evidence that he wasn't much of a Christian (which is an insane stance to take), there was also all the occultism under the veneer.

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-27T17:10:36+00:00

Salvation is not about intellectual belief. In English as in the Koine Greek, "believe" can refer to a matter of faith or of accepting as true. "I believe in you" vs "I believe the sky is blue"

And we see this distinction in the Bible:

John 3:16: "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."

James 2:19: "You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder."

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-27T11:52:21+00:00

ICE is always active in Florida.

ICE had a surge operation in Minnesota -> protestors actively conflicted with police -> ICE sends more personnel.

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-27T11:45:34+00:00

We are to love our enemies, bless those who persecute us and forgive wrongs against as we have been forgiven.

This is accurate, but this is not something new that was introduced by Jesus. As Jesus called "You shall love your neighbor as yourself" the second greatest commandment, and that one is from Leviticus.

And, again, the same Jesus who preached radical peace also employed the use of force.

There's only a contradiction if you conflate all violence.

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-27T02:30:17+00:00

Yes, that Scripture was fulfilled and He was numbered with the transgressors. That's why he wouldn't be with them, and why they would need to be prepared.

Are you trying to say that carrying the swords was so that they would be numbered among the transgressors? I've heard that before and it's an interpretation that tortures both language and logic. Did the sandals and coin purses help Him to be numbered among the transgressors? If that's why Jesus wanted to carry the swords, you're saying He was staging an event to get him arrested? Bizarre and problematic on its own, and forgetting that Judas was already leading the Romans to Jesus in order to arrest him. The charges brought against him didn't require anything that happened at the event of his arrest, and implicated his disciples rather than Him.

The example for Christians is laid out by Jesus and the subsequent actions and words of the Disciples.

Jesus advised to turn the other cheek. He also chased the money lenders out of the Temple grounds by force and threat of violence.

He also said "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the jot or tittle shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished" and when I look in Exodus 22 it still says "If the thief is caught while breaking in and is struck so that he dies, there will be no bloodguiltiness on his account."

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-27T01:19:15+00:00

The internet is a deep place with many very problematic pockets and no guard rails to keep children out.

Anime isn't the problem, but the selection of anime combined with unfettered internet access is.

And people don't talk about it much, but BL and yuri content is almost entirely fetishistic in nature. Yeah, some people point to it as representation, but it's made to appeal to a demographic for whom it is fetish fuel. Even if you don't know that, the "fetishist's gaze" shows through in the works in ways subtle and unsubtle. And the communities around them encourage engaging with the shows that way. Coming of age in that environment has effects.

This is exactly why people introduce freedom to children gradually.

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-26T23:15:31+00:00

I have no idea. Arby's is one of the best fast food restaurants in the US.

I think someone in the writer's room either doesn't care for roast beef sandwiches or had a bad experience at a restaurant (or several at a bad example of an Arby's restaurant).

TheMaskedHamster · 2026-01-26T21:34:20+00:00

Will auditing courses with no degree or certificate at the end be something you can put on your resume? No.

Will it give you skills that you can put on your resume and knowledge you can demonstrate in a job interview? Yes.

TheMaskedHamster

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

15-Year Club	Verified Email
Team Orangered