Originally posted by Firefly218
He didn't go around guns blazing though
No he just went around dropping factory destroying bombs instead.
Originally posted by Firefly218
If I remember correctly Batman actually carried guns in his own two hands and manually pressed the trigger aiming at Lex Luthor's henchmen...
That was a flame thrower IIRC.
Aside from the Batmobile The only time he used actual guns shooting people straight up, was in the dream sequence.
Originally posted by Darth ThorYou might be right my memory is a bit hazy but I feel like bats actually used guns on foot once. I could be wrong. The point is he shot lots of ppl but that's not even really my biggest gripe. I def remember the dumb fuking dream sequence though
No he just went around dropping factory destroying bombs instead.That was a flame thrower IIRC.
Aside from the Batmobile The only time he used actual guns shooting people straight up, was in the dream sequence.
About the batmobile. Bats generally uses his weapons strategically maybe to collapse a bolder or shoot out a vehicles tires, not to go on a killing rampage amiright or what
Originally posted by Darth Thor
No he just went around dropping factory destroying bombs instead.That was a flame thrower IIRC.
Aside from the Batmobile The only time he used actual guns shooting people straight up, was in the dream sequence.
Yea but he was stabbing people in the heart. the sequence with the bat mobile can't be defended any easier than the dream sequence where he was shooting people in the face. I like the fact that we got to see a more ruthless batman but if you're going to blame collateral damage on superman, collateral damage he had no control over...,you have to call out batman because he was more calculating in his actions. Superman had to deal with a machine and enemies that were hours away from destroying all human life. Batman actively sought out his enemies and still chose to murder them
Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
Yea but he was stabbing people in the heart. the sequence with the bat mobile can't be defended any easier than the dream sequence where he was shooting people in the face. I like the fact that we got to see a more ruthless batman but if you're going to blame collateral damage on superman, collateral damage he had no control over...,you have to call out batman because he was more calculating in his actions. Superman had to deal with a machine and enemies that were hours away from destroying all human life. Batman actively sought out his enemies and still chose to murder them
👆
Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
Yea but he was stabbing people in the heart. the sequence with the bat mobile can't be defended any easier than the dream sequence where he was shooting people in the face. I like the fact that we got to see a more ruthless batman but if you're going to blame collateral damage on superman, collateral damage he had no control over...,you have to call out batman because he was more calculating in his actions. Superman had to deal with a machine and enemies that were hours away from destroying all human life. Batman actively sought out his enemies and still chose to murder them
I don't blame Supes for the collateral damage. Point I was making is Bats didn't give a second thought to killing Criminal Gangsters in his way. Much like Keaton Batman.
I still wouldn't put them in the same bracket as the Punisher though who is specifically out to kill all those same kind of people.
You can definitely blame MOS superman for the all of the damage. Unlike Reeve's superman who saw the damage that was occurring and lured battle to a location where he would not only have the advantage but less damage.
MOS superman and movie was just stupid. He cause all of that damage becuase he wasn't trained in this powers like Reeve's. I think he learned how to fly during the fight. Beside the special effects it is one of the worse superman movies.
As for Keaton's Batman, yes the was willing to kill. However the whole premise of the movie was that he and the Joker were at war. Unlike TDK, were we have no idea where the Joker got his resources in the 1989 Batman the Joker control all of the gangs and had ample resources to wage a full war. Batman was going to be able to take him in quietly it was a war.
Originally posted by Kotor3
You can definitely blame MOS superman for the all of the damage. Unlike Reeve's superman who saw the damage that was occurring and lured battle to a location where he would not only have the advantage but less damage.MOS superman and movie was just stupid. He cause all of that damage becuase he wasn't trained in this powers like Reeve's. I think he learned how to fly during the fight. Beside the special effects it is one of the worse superman movies.
Reeves smashed Nom right through a skyscraper. There was tons of damage before Reevs fled, so if no one got killed it was just dumb 80's PIS.
And yeah like you said Reeves had the advantage of proper training in his powers, which MOS had just begun.
Originally posted by Darth ThorNo said there was not damage but if you are trying compare the damage in Reeve's movie to that of MOS then you need to re-watch the scenes. Reeve's was actively fighting and saving people which minimizing the damage. So much that Zod was able to see it as a weakness to exploit.
Reeves smashed Nom right through a skyscraper. There was tons of damage before Reevs fled, so if no one got killed it was just dumb 80's PIS.And yeah like you said Reeves had the advantage of proper training in his powers, which MOS had just begun.
Truly comparing those two fights in terms of damage is laughable. Reeves experience and training is why he was able to take on all three and save people. We still don't know how Zod lost to a farm boy with no training and who was able to magically break Zod's neck.
Come on dude.
Originally posted by Darth ThorIt seems like you're twisting the 89 bats to fit a pro BvS agenda. Sure Tim Burton probably didn't give a shit about batman's anti kill stance in the comics and completely disregarded the lore, but Keaton's batman at least tried not to kill people and only did it out of necessity or desperation. Not killing people is the fine line bats walks in order to stay one of the good guys. In BvS batman was straight up given rapid fire guns to go on a reckless killing rampage. Keatons's bats was much much milder in comparison.
I don't blame Supes for the collateral damage. Point I was making is Bats didn't give a second thought to killing Criminal Gangsters in his way. Much like Keaton Batman.I still wouldn't put them in the same bracket as the Punisher though who is specifically out to kill all those same kind of people.
Once again batman killing people wasn't one of my biggest gripes of the movie, but you have to admit it didn't feel like batman a little. I mean bats is supposed to be more of a detective and less of a punisher. It would be much better IMO if bats caved in a thugs ribcage or severely physically fuks them up rather than shoot them.
Originally posted by Kotor3There was that thing about Zod not being accustomed to his powers on earth yet or something
No said there was not damage but if you are trying compare the damage in Reeve's movie to that of MOS then you need to re-watch the scenes. Reeve's was actively fighting and saving people which minimizing the damage. So much that Zod was able to see it as a weakness to exploit.Truly comparing those two fights in terms of damage is laughable. Reeves experience and training is why he was able to take on all three and save people. We still don't know how Zod lost to a farm boy with no training and who was able to magically break Zod's neck.
Come on dude.
Comparing Burtons Batman to BvS's Batman is dumb to try to justify Batman murdering. Batman 89 was dark but it was also campy and a bit silly like all Burtons films. The way Batman kills was more akin to cartoon deaths than real life. Dynamite down pants with a smirk. That's like Coyote vs Roadrunner tier.
Same thing for the original superman movies.
BvS's whole thing is that they are going super realistic. Having Batman and Superman kill with no fun tone just seriousness has a different impact. They just look like cold blooded killers.
Another cop out ,is that Batman used to kill in the comics. That was before they established what type of character Batman going to be.
Anyone who understands Batman knows that the no kill rule is something he takes seriously. So does Superman.
Snyder just does things to be edgy tbh.
Originally posted by Inhuman👆
Comparing Burtons Batman to BvS's Batman is dumb to try to justify Batman murdering. Batman 89 was dark but it was also campy and a bit silly like all Burtons films. The way Batman kills was more akin to cartoon deaths than real life. Dynamite down pants with a smirk. That's like Coyote vs Roadrunner tier.
Same thing for the original superman movies.
BvS's whole thing is that they are going super realistic. Having Batman and Superman kill with no fun tone just seriousness has a different impact. They just look like cold blooded killers.
Another cop out ,is that Batman used to kill in the comics. That was before they established what type of character Batman going to be.
Anyone who understands Batman knows that the no kill rule is something he takes seriously. So does Superman.
Snyder just does things to be edgy tbh.
Originally posted by Firefly218When the fight ended Zod was already flying. So there really wasn't much of a difference. Zod showed no skills in fighting. It still doesn't explain how farm boy knew how to break a neck.
There was that thing about Zod not being accustomed to his powers on earth yet or something