Dark Knight movie/plot discussion

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

jiffer

Senior member
Sep 14, 2007
375
54
91
Originally posted by: Ilmater
Originally posted by: eleison
So basically if a madman removes the rails from the tracks of a metro train, then goes and distracts the conductor so that the conductor would not be able to see the damaged tracks... than as its too late to stop the train, the madman jumps off leaving the conductor killed in the train wreck... You are saying he is not responsible for the death of the conductor????????? Yeaa... ok... whatever...
Wrong. Again, you're an idiot. Ra's put himself on the train. Batman's #1 goal was to stop the train from reaching its destination, and therefore save people. In order to do that, he had to distract Ra's so he wouldn't stop the train. If Ra's had just let the train go assuming/hoping it would make it safely, he wouldn't have to be involved, and Batman would have tried to capture him alive. Instead, he put his life in danger by being there. That's Ra's' choice.
I'm not sure I want to get involved in your argument, but Ra's did not know that Batman's comrade (Gordon) was going to blow up the train tracks when he boarded the train. So I don't think it's correct to say that Ra's made a deliberate choice to board a train that was going to crash. Of course, any criminal endeavor (especially one involving a high-speed train and an extremely destructive microwave transmitter) involves some degree of risk, and R'as was probably aware that it was possible that he could die, but he probably thought the odds against him were insignificant. He had no idea how much danger he was really in.

Ra's did not even know that he would have to deal with Batman once he was aboard the train, because it was very uncertain that Batman would even be able to follow him after R'as ordered four of his assassins to attack Batman. In the comic books, Bruce Wayne could defeat any single one of them after he had completed R'as's training program (some of them he could just barely defeat), but beating four of them would be practically impossible. (Did you hear the tone in R'as's voice when he said, "As you wish"?) To the best of my knowledge, I don't think the comic books ever put Batman in that situation. (There are tons of comics, though, so I could be wrong.) The assassins normally worked alone, and originally, if they failed to kill their target, R'as punished them by killing them, so only the best survived. They're not your ordinary thugs. Not by a longshot. I wish the movie had shown more of that particular fight, because it was actually one of the most impressive things that Batman did.

That's the real reason why I responded to your message--so I could gush over that particular fight. But I bet R'as was very surprised to see Batman on the train.
 

eleison

Golden Member
Mar 29, 2006
1,319
0
0
Originally posted by: Ilmater
Originally posted by: eleison
So basically if a madman removes the rails from the tracks of a metro train, then goes and distracts the conductor so that the conductor would not be able to see the damaged tracks... than as its too late to stop the train, the madman jumps off leaving the conductor killed in the train wreck... You are saying he is not responsible for the death of the conductor????????? Yeaa... ok... whatever...
Wrong. Again, you're an idiot. Ra's put himself on the train. Batman's #1 goal was to stop the train from reaching its destination, and therefore save people. In order to do that, he had to distract Ra's so he wouldn't stop the train. If Ra's had just let the train go assuming/hoping it would make it safely, he wouldn't have to be involved, and Batman would have tried to capture him alive. Instead, he put his life in danger by being there. That's Ra's' choice.

The statements above that are highlighted seem to contradict themselves. Obviously, you seem to think people like to kill themselves. I guess that was Ra's plan all along when he got on the train -- to die in a fiery train wreck mocked and taunted by his enemy, batman ;-)
 

jiffer

Senior member
Sep 14, 2007
375
54
91
Originally posted by: DigitalCancer
My question...what was up with the ScareCrow having such a tiny and in-significant part in the beginning of the movie and not to be seen again? He didn't become a good guy in the first movie did he?
That's called a cameo. The scene he was in was sort of just a teaser, like most opening scenes in the movies. At the end of Batman Begins, Crane was still on the loose, along with half of the inmates of Arkham. Batman and Gordon had a conversation about it on the roof of police headquarters, next to the Bat Signal. Anyway, it's obvious that Crane and his gang of loonies were up to no good; they were making some sort of deal with the gangster who had the dogs. After the fake Batman showed up, the real Batman showed up, beat them up, and tied them up so the cops could pick them up. Presumably, Crane was taken back to the asylum, and in accordance with the Batman tradition, he will probably break out again. Christopher Nolan would love to use Cillian Murphy (the actor) again whenever he gets the chance, but Murphy is pretty busy these days, so we have to take what we can get.
 

Ilmater

Diamond Member
Jun 13, 2002
7,516
1
0
Originally posted by: anxi80
of course whats to stop the joker from screaming to high heaven to the cops/inmates/people in the courthouse that harvey dent was going around killing people. test the residue on his hands, test the gun, and so much for batman being the fall guy. with the exception of the blowing up of the boats, he had an exceptional track record of calling his shots. i guess thats where that whole suspension of disbelief thing comes in handy.
I don't know about that. That's not really the Joker's style to just blab things out like that. Look at how he handled the situation when he thought Dent was Batman. He didn't scream it, he just tried to force his hand.
 

DigitalCancer

Diamond Member
Apr 6, 2004
3,726
0
76
Cillian Murphy is an awesome actor. I try to watch anything with him in it since 28 Days and he was very good in Red Eye. ^_^ He?s a very interesting and upcoming actor and his eyes I think are just awesome.

I would hope that we do get to see him again as the scarecrow.

As far as him him being up to no good, weren?t the fake batman?s trying to catch bad people though? Citizens trying to take things into their own hands and help Batman out?




 

Ilmater

Diamond Member
Jun 13, 2002
7,516
1
0
Originally posted by: jiffer
I'm not sure I want to get involved in your argument, but Ra's did not know that Batman's comrade (Gordon) was going to blow up the train tracks when he boarded the train. So I don't think it's correct to say that Ra's made a deliberate choice to board a train that was going to crash. Of course, any criminal endeavor (especially one involving a high-speed train and an extremely destructive microwave transmitter) involves some degree of risk, and R'as was probably aware that it was possible that he could die, but he probably thought the odds against him were insignificant. He had no idea how much danger he was really in.

...

That's the real reason why I responded to your message--so I could gush over that particular fight. But I bet R'as was very surprised to see Batman on the train.
Ra's was surprised to see Batman on the train, no doubt, but killing Ra's was NOT the reason Batman was there. Batman was able to figure out only one way to stop the train from reaching its destination, and that was to blow up the tracks. No, Ra's didn't choose to die, but he could have sent the train along its merry way without him. He chose to get on the train, and he had to know - as you yourself admit - that there was at least a small chance the Batman was going to try and stop the train in a way that would endanger anyone on it.

But that's not the point. The point is that Batman wasn't there to kill Ra's, he was there to stop the train. He only fought with Ra's because he had to make sure the train didn't stop before it got to the spot where he was going to blow up the bridge. ARE YOU LISTENING ELEISON??? If Ra's had stopped the train, he could have figured out another way to use that microwave emitter to activate all the drugs in the water system.

The bottom line is - and I'm only arguing with eleison here - if you don't get that he didn't kill Ra's, he simply failed to save his life, then it's not worth arguing the point. I'm quite sure you understand how stupid your argument is, you just want to keep arguing. Sorry, but I'm done.
 

HannibalX

Diamond Member
May 12, 2000
9,359
2
0
I liked the Dark Knight but it should have been two separate movies. It was too long to be a single film but not long enough to be two films. The end felt rushed.

The first half of the film was amazing and I loved it. The film should have ended with the Joker's capture and the creation of Two Face.

The second half of the film should have been it's own film entirely. The escape of the Joker and the rampage of Two Face. Two face should have killed the Joker and taken over as being the main villian until he is finally killed at the end of that film.
 

anxi80

Lifer
Jul 7, 2002
12,294
2
0
Originally posted by: Ilmater
Originally posted by: anxi80
of course whats to stop the joker from screaming to high heaven to the cops/inmates/people in the courthouse that harvey dent was going around killing people. test the residue on his hands, test the gun, and so much for batman being the fall guy. with the exception of the blowing up of the boats, he had an exceptional track record of calling his shots. i guess thats where that whole suspension of disbelief thing comes in handy.
I don't know about that. That's not really the Joker's style to just blab things out like that. Look at how he handled the situation when he thought Dent was Batman. He didn't scream it, he just tried to force his hand.
i thought about that, considering he was trying to have reese killed for going on tv and trying to reveal that wayne is batman. but with dent dead and him being praised as a hero, he really has no other play than to discredit dent and the entire police force. then the public will get leery about the cover-up and just further push the chaos. but i do think that if the joker cant have a more active role in something, then he'll just bide his time until the opportunity presents itself again.
 

DigitalCancer

Diamond Member
Apr 6, 2004
3,726
0
76
Originally posted by: Ilmater
Originally posted by: jiffer
I'm not sure I want to get involved in your argument, but Ra's did not know that Batman's comrade (Gordon) was going to blow up the train tracks when he boarded the train. So I don't think it's correct to say that Ra's made a deliberate choice to board a train that was going to crash. Of course, any criminal endeavor (especially one involving a high-speed train and an extremely destructive microwave transmitter) involves some degree of risk, and R'as was probably aware that it was possible that he could die, but he probably thought the odds against him were insignificant. He had no idea how much danger he was really in.

...

That's the real reason why I responded to your message--so I could gush over that particular fight. But I bet R'as was very surprised to see Batman on the train.
Ra's was surprised to see Batman on the train, no doubt, but killing Ra's was NOT the reason Batman was there. Batman was able to figure out only one way to stop the train from reaching its destination, and that was to blow up the tracks. No, Ra's didn't choose to die, but he could have sent the train along its merry way without him. He chose to get on the train, and he had to know - as you yourself admit - that there was at least a small chance the Batman was going to try and stop the train in a way that would endanger anyone on it.

But that's not the point. The point is that Batman wasn't there to kill Ra's, he was there to stop the train. He only fought with Ra's because he had to make sure the train didn't stop before it got to the spot where he was going to blow up the bridge. ARE YOU LISTENING ELEISON??? If Ra's had stopped the train, he could have figured out another way to use that microwave emitter to activate all the drugs in the water system.

The bottom line is - and I'm only arguing with eleison here - if you don't get that he didn't kill Ra's, he simply failed to save his life, then it's not worth arguing the point. I'm quite sure you understand how stupid your argument is, you just want to keep arguing. Sorry, but I'm done.


Much agreed...I'm with you IlMater...on this one.
 

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
Originally posted by: DigitalCancer
As far as him him being up to no good, weren?t the fake batman?s trying to catch bad people though? Citizens trying to take things into their own hands and help Batman out?

Yes, but they were wearing hockey pads.

 

eleison

Golden Member
Mar 29, 2006
1,319
0
0
The bottom line is - and I'm only arguing with eleison here - if you don't get that he didn't kill Ra's, he simply failed to save his life, then it's not worth arguing the point. I'm quite sure you understand how stupid your argument is, you just want to keep arguing. Sorry, but I'm done.

Fine have it your way. Batman did not kill anyone in the first movie. I guess if I put poison in somebody's drink and then I didn't tell him about it.. I guess I "simply failed to save his life"... Whatever.. I just don't understand how people can have such a harddonn for batman making him out to be such a boyscout. He's the "Dark knight" for a reason. He's a vigilante himself. Maybe its just that people have recently seen the latest movie and totally forgot what Batman was really about. Batman was about being the judge, jury, and executioner -- its about being dark and gloomy; a loner. Heck, its kinda weird how even in this latest movie he's now part of the establishment.. in a way, in the beginning of the movie, it felt like he was part of the Gotham police department.

I guess in a couple of more installments of this batman franchise, we will start seeing the return of nipple suits and outlandish quips. Heres hoping not.

We've gotten away from the original idea of this reboot which was to make it more real. In the previous movie, there was a sense of realism... now, that is all but gone with the weird sonar cell computer thingie that spied on everyone and the over the top action... Heck in the first movie, when batman fell a couple of stories he was hurt and had to be looked over by his butler.. but now, IIRC, when he falls off of tall builds, it doesn't even seem to faze him.

So yea.. whatever man... I guess some people like their batman's to be straight and narrow. To follow a moral compass. In a way.... like superman.. I guess thats what sells tickets.. moves the batman toys and sells those batman happy meals... I like my batman to be the vigilante that he is.. someone's whos a little crazy... after all you have to be a little crazy to wear a freakin bat suit in the middle of the city to fight crime. My batman would be the judge, jury and executioner.. a creature that is willing to "fail to save a life".. Or as I see it.. a creature that is willing to take a life. That is the bat man....
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
48,131
37,424
136
Originally posted by: eleison
The bottom line is - and I'm only arguing with eleison here - if you don't get that he didn't kill Ra's, he simply failed to save his life, then it's not worth arguing the point. I'm quite sure you understand how stupid your argument is, you just want to keep arguing. Sorry, but I'm done.

Fine have it your way. Batman did not kill anyone in the first movie. I guess if I put poison in somebody's drink and then I didn't tell him about it.. I guess I "simply failed to save his life"... Whatever.. I just don't understand how people can have such a harddonn for batman making him out to be such a boyscout. He's the "Dark knight" for a reason. He's a vigilante himself. Maybe its just that people have recently seen the latest movie and totally forgot what Batman was really about. Batman was about being the judge, jury, and executioner -- its about being dark and gloomy; a loner. Heck, its kinda weird how even in this latest movie he's now part of the establishment.. in a way, in the beginning of the movie, it felt like he was part of the Gotham police department.

I guess in a couple of more installments of this batman franchise, we will start seeing the return of nipple suits and outlandish quips. Heres hoping not.

We'll gotten away from the original idea of this reboot which was to make it more real. In the previous movie, there was a sense of realism... now, that is all but gone with the weird sonar cell computer thingie that spied on everyone and the over the top action... Heck in the first movie, when batman fell a couple of stories he was hurt and had to be looked over by his butler.. but now, IIRC, when he falls off of tall builds, it doesn't even seem to faze him.

So yea.. whatever man... I guess some people like their batman's to be straight and narrow. To follow a moral compass. In a way.... like superman.. I guess thats what sells tickets.. moves the batman toys and sells those batman happy meals... I like my batman to be the vigilante that he is.. someone's whos a little crazy... after all you have to be a little crazy to wear a freakin bat suit in the middle of the city to fight crime. My batman would be the judge, jury and executioner.. a creature that is willing to "fail to save a life".. Or as I see it.. a creature that is willing to take a life. That is the bat man....

I'll have some of whatever you're smoking because it has to be some great sh!t.

Batman isn't about killing people. Nothing in the first movie supports him being "judge, jury, and executioner". He turns everyone (except Ra's) over to the police.

He gets hurt a lot. Did you not watch the beginning of Dark Knight or the part where he was stitching himself up (and shows numerous scars)? He wasn't exactly in prime shape at the end of the movie either.

The theme that he doesn't want to become what he is fighting has been ever present. I'm not sure how you've missed this the entire time.


 

Fritzo

Lifer
Jan 3, 2001
41,912
2,146
126
Fine have it your way. Batman did not kill anyone in the first movie. I guess if I put poison in somebody's drink and then I didn't tell him about it.. I guess I "simply failed to save his life"... Whatever.. I just don't understand how people can have such a harddonn for batman making him out to be such a boyscout. He's the "Dark knight" for a reason. He's a vigilante himself. Maybe its just that people have recently seen the latest movie and totally forgot what Batman was really about. Batman was about being the judge, jury, and executioner -- its about being dark and gloomy; a loner. Heck, its kinda weird how even in this latest movie he's now part of the establishment.. in a way, in the beginning of the movie, it felt like he was part of the Gotham police department.

Umm:

Bruce Wayne: I will go back to Gotham and I will fight men like this, but I will not become an executioner.
Henri Ducard: Bruce, please! For your own sake. There is no turning back.
 

eleison

Golden Member
Mar 29, 2006
1,319
0
0
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: eleison
The bottom line is - and I'm only arguing with eleison here - if you don't get that he didn't kill Ra's, he simply failed to save his life, then it's not worth arguing the point. I'm quite sure you understand how stupid your argument is, you just want to keep arguing. Sorry, but I'm done.

Fine have it your way. Batman did not kill anyone in the first movie. I guess if I put poison in somebody's drink and then I didn't tell him about it.. I guess I "simply failed to save his life"... Whatever.. I just don't understand how people can have such a harddonn for batman making him out to be such a boyscout. He's the "Dark knight" for a reason. He's a vigilante himself. Maybe its just that people have recently seen the latest movie and totally forgot what Batman was really about. Batman was about being the judge, jury, and executioner -- its about being dark and gloomy; a loner. Heck, its kinda weird how even in this latest movie he's now part of the establishment.. in a way, in the beginning of the movie, it felt like he was part of the Gotham police department.

I guess in a couple of more installments of this batman franchise, we will start seeing the return of nipple suits and outlandish quips. Heres hoping not.

We'll gotten away from the original idea of this reboot which was to make it more real. In the previous movie, there was a sense of realism... now, that is all but gone with the weird sonar cell computer thingie that spied on everyone and the over the top action... Heck in the first movie, when batman fell a couple of stories he was hurt and had to be looked over by his butler.. but now, IIRC, when he falls off of tall builds, it doesn't even seem to faze him.

So yea.. whatever man... I guess some people like their batman's to be straight and narrow. To follow a moral compass. In a way.... like superman.. I guess thats what sells tickets.. moves the batman toys and sells those batman happy meals... I like my batman to be the vigilante that he is.. someone's whos a little crazy... after all you have to be a little crazy to wear a freakin bat suit in the middle of the city to fight crime. My batman would be the judge, jury and executioner.. a creature that is willing to "fail to save a life".. Or as I see it.. a creature that is willing to take a life. That is the bat man....

I'll have some of whatever you're smoking because it has to be some great sh!t.

Batman isn't about killing people. Nothing in the first movie supports him being "judge, jury, and executioner". He turns everyone (except Ra's) over to the police.

I'm not saying Batman is all about killing people. I'm saying that batman is a character that is complex enough that he will be willing to simply "fail to save a life" like in the first movie. In the latest movie, Batman is faced by so many enemies that are so much more evil than Ras, but yet this batman is so castrated that he doesn't really do anything to them...

The criminal underground are not afraid of batman because he will turn them over to the police... Any old cop can turn them in. They are afraid of the bat man because he may "fail to save" their lives...

He gets hurt a lot. Did you not watch the beginning of Dark Knight or the part where he was stitching himself up (and shows numerous scars)? He wasn't exactly in prime shape at the end of the movie either.
True but these scars and injuries never really seem to stick... It always seem to get better by the next action sequence... It was like when the joker got beat up... By the next scene, the joker was all better.. Why even have these scenes when they don't even matter. For all practical purposes, its like the beating never happened.. or the scars and injuries never occurred... its like lip service so that the movie could look "more real"...

The theme that he doesn't want to become what he is fighting has been ever present. I'm not sure how you've missed this the entire time.

After much thinking.. I have come to a conclusion. The theme of the latest movie is about selling tickets, selling Domino's "Gotham" pizza and pushing action figures to young kids. Don't try to look for any real meaning. Its like trying to find meaning in a Die hard movie... you can probably find one.. buts its really stretching it...
 

Desturel

Senior member
Nov 25, 2001
553
3
81
Originally posted by: eleison
I like my batman to be the vigilante that he is.. someone's whos a little crazy... after all you have to be a little crazy to wear a freakin bat suit in the middle of the city to fight crime. My batman would be the judge, jury and executioner.. a creature that is willing to "fail to save a life".. Or as I see it.. a creature that is willing to take a life. That is the bat man....

Batman has never been a killer. I think you should at least read A Death in the Family and Killing Joke before you presume to claim any knowledge of any of the Batman characters. Reading something like Kingdom Come where Batman is more of a pacifist than superman might actually blow your mind.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
48,131
37,424
136
Originally posted by: eleison

Originally posted by: K1052
The theme that he doesn't want to become what he is fighting has been ever present. I'm not sure how you've missed this the entire time.

After much thinking.. I have come to a conclusion. The theme of the latest movie is about selling tickets, selling Domino's "Gotham" pizza and pushing action figures to young kids. Don't try to look for any real meaning. Its like trying to find meaning in a Die hard movie... you can probably find one.. buts its really stretching it...
[/quote]

I do believe you have Nolan's movies confused with the last couple films from the franchise that proceeded them. I cannot possibly fathom how you've come to that conclusion based on everything that's been said (in this thread even), but then again it is trendy to hate something popular/profitable even if it happens to be a great film.
 

eleison

Golden Member
Mar 29, 2006
1,319
0
0
Originally posted by: Desturel
Originally posted by: eleison
I like my batman to be the vigilante that he is.. someone's whos a little crazy... after all you have to be a little crazy to wear a freakin bat suit in the middle of the city to fight crime. My batman would be the judge, jury and executioner.. a creature that is willing to "fail to save a life".. Or as I see it.. a creature that is willing to take a life. That is the bat man....

Batman has never been a killer. I think you should at least read A Death in the Family and Killing Joke before you presume to claim any knowledge of any of the Batman characters. Reading something like Kingdom Come where Batman is more of a pacifist than superman might actually blow your mind.



In this sequel to the "rebooting" of the batman franchised, I expected the same batman as the one in the the first that was willing to "fail to save a life"... In this re-imagining, I expected a darker batman. If I wanted to see a pacifist action hero, I'll watch a superman movie ;-P


The comic book batman is different than the movie one.. People were upset that the movie batman "failed to save a life".. but thats the batman that I enjoyed watching and that was the batman in the first movie.

http://forums.comicbookresourc...ad.php?t=223149&page=3

 

Mo0o

Lifer
Jul 31, 2001
24,227
3
76
Why doesn't batman arm his fists with tranquilizer darts. That way every punch puts a bad guy to sleep so he has to fight less
 

bunnyfubbles

Lifer
Sep 3, 2001
12,248
3
0
Originally posted by: Mo0o
Why doesn't batman arm his fists with tranquilizer darts. That way every punch puts a bad guy to sleep so he has to fight less

probably because it would be too dangerous

If you overdose someone with a tranquilizer, you can easily kill them. If you want to put them down fast you need a dangerously high amount and you would usually only use it on a target you would be likely to closely attend to in case you need to provide an antidote to prevent death. Otherwise, if you're shooting safe doses you might not put the guy down at all or it might be way too slow to act to be of any use anyways.
 

WickidBatman

Banned
Jul 22, 2008
13
0
0
It wasent all that it was hyped up to be I mean its GREAT and worth a watch but i dident like some of the actors like the leading lady.It was GREAT but not better than the best movie ever.TRANSOFRMERS!
 

Q

Lifer
Jul 21, 2005
12,042
4
81
Originally posted by: Mo0o
Why doesn't batman arm his fists with tranquilizer darts. That way every punch puts a bad guy to sleep so he has to fight less

lol!
 

TecHNooB

Diamond Member
Sep 10, 2005
7,458
1
76
I've read parts of the discussion and noticed that some of you have forgotten that this is a movie.
 

gorcorps

aka Brandon
Jul 18, 2004
30,739
452
126
Originally posted by: WickidBatman
It wasent all that it was hyped up to be I mean its GREAT and worth a watch but i dident like some of the actors like the leading lady.It was GREAT but not better than the best movie ever.TRANSOFRMERS!

Get the hell out of ATOT before you hurt yourself little one
 

NFS4

No Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
72,636
46
91
Just came back from watching it with my dad. He took me to see the 1989 Batman (I was 9, and it is STILL my favorite movie ever). He took me to see Batman Forever, and I took him to see Batman Begins. So I returned the favor again today with The Dark Knight.

Loved the movie, loved Ledger's performance, and especially loved the whole blowing up the hospital/Joker dance in drag. The only problem I really had with the movie was with Maggie's performance:

1) I don't really find her to be that great of an actress to begin with.
2) She is not that attractive. Her face is all droopy and she looked damn near 50 in some shots.

When the Joker exclaimed how beautiful she was at the fundraiser, I just LOL'd

Oh yeah, and the Batman voice was a little hard to swallow this time around.
 

UberNeuman

Lifer
Nov 4, 1999
16,937
3,087
126
Originally posted by: NFS4
Just came back from watching it with my dad. He took me to see the 1989 Batman (I was 9, and it is STILL my favorite movie ever). He took me to see Batman Forever, and I took him to see Batman Begins. So I returned the favor again today with The Dark Knight.

Loved the movie, loved Ledger's performance, and especially loved the whole blowing up the hospital/Joker dance in drag. The only problem I really had with the movie was with Maggie's performance:

1) I don't really find her to be that great of an actress to begin with.
2) She is not that attractive. Her face is all droopy and she looked damn near 50 in some shots.

When the Joker exclaimed how beautiful she was at the fundraiser, I just LOL'd

Oh yeah, and the Batman voice was a little hard to swallow this time around.

This time around? I hated the voice back in Batman Begins.

SWEAR TO MEEEE!!!!!!! AND THE WWE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! RRGH!!!!

 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |