Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

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.

great post

Originally posted by Firefly218
It seems like you're twisting the 89 bats to fit a pro BvS agenda.

Oh yes someone puts the criticisms against this film into context, and God forbid even defends the film, then it must be someone with a"Pro-BvS agenda".

Originally posted by Firefly218
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.

I suggest you actually go watch the Keaton films again, because right now it seems like you're the one twisting the Keaton movies.

The clip Golgo posted from Batman Returns was certainly not out of desperation or necessity. He also flat out told Joker he was going to kill him, and just prior was shooting machine gun fire from his Batwing aiming directly at the Joker.

The Keaton and Batfleck versions were similar in that they didn't go out with a mission to kill like the Punisher does, but they also don't give it a second thought if they do end up killing goons who are in their way.

Originally posted by Firefly218
Not killing people is the fine line bats walks in order to stay one of the good guys.

You're talking about certain versions of Batman including the recent Nolan interpretation. You're certainly not talking about the Keaton Batman for the most part.

This Batman however was based on The Dark Knight Returns being an older Batman and the most brutal version yet.

Originally posted by Firefly218
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.

Again Keaton Batman had his Batmobile shooting in the factory then blowing up the chemical plant full of Jokers goons.

Using machine gun fire in a place filled with people just to try and kill the Joker.

At least Batfleck was more systematic and only put dangerous Mobsters in his killing range.

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.

Firstly we don't need to justify anything about this film, because it's its own thing. But with all the hate, we are free to put the criticisms into a bit of context. Point was Batman killing was nothing new to the big screen. You can make all the excuses you want about campiness, but fact is Burtons Batman despite a bit of campiness here and there, was the most serious big screen rendition of a superhero at the time.

Secondly the film doesn't need to be exactly like the comics and nor do the characters. They are just based on them and will make changes to fit what suits them. That's how it's always worked. Just look at how different the X-Men movies and characters are to the comics. So Snyder has every right to make those changes and make the film more "edgy" as you put it.

Third you're completely ignoring the context of the story, that this is an older Batman whose clearly been through some s***. There's a back story there. He may have abandoned his no kill rule at some point. The solo Batman films may explore that further. Plus he had a character arc in the film, in which it seems he went back to his no kill rule at the end, by not even branding Luthor.

Now all that said, do I think it was a Wise move to have Batman killing right after the Nolan trilogy made his one rule pretty crystal clear? No. But let's not pretend like Batman killing Mobsters that were in his way has just completely destroyed the character now, turned him into the Punisher or that it's something we've never seen before.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Firstly we don't need to justify anything about this film, because it's its own thing. But with all the hate, we are free to put the criticisms into a bit of context. Point was Batman killing was nothing new to the big screen. You can make all the excuses you want about campiness, but fact is Burtons Batman despite a bit of campiness here and there, was the most serious big screen rendition of a superhero at the time.

Secondly the film doesn't need to be exactly like the comics and nor do the characters. They are just based on them and will make changes to fit what suits them. That's how it's always worked. Just look at how different the X-Men movies and characters are to the comics. So Snyder has every right to make those changes and make the film more "edgy" as you put it.

Third you're completely ignoring the context of the story, that this is an older Batman whose clearly been through some s***. There's a back story there. He may have abandoned his no kill rule at some point. The solo Batman films may explore that further. Plus he had a character arc in the film, in which it seems he went back to his no kill rule at the end, by not even branding Luthor.

Now all that said, do I think it was a Wise move to have Batman killing right after the Nolan trilogy made his one rule pretty crystal clear? No. But let's not pretend like Batman killing Mobsters that were in his way has just completely destroyed the character now, turned him into the Punisher or that it's something we've never seen before.

Great post. 😉

Seriously, I don't mind Batman killing. It's something I'd actually want him to do.

Originally posted by Zack M
Great post. 😉

Seriously, I don't mind Batman killing. It's something I'd actually want him to do.

I did like the way the no killing rule was set up in Batman Begins, and how it was implemented in the animated series.

But honestly, I just enjoyed that Batmobile action scene so much I wasn't even thinking about the number of deaths.

The no killing rule was had in comics and the varies animated shows and films before Batman Begins. But even in BB Wayne didn't completely shy away from death, he could have saved Ra's from the train, but decided to leave him to his fate.

Current Bat-punisher is just a straight up serial killer.

I honestly don't mind Batman killing again, aside from how it made him look like a hypocrite in BvS due to the writing. He can be interpreted in different ways and shouldn't always have to have some forced no-kill rule, IMO.

Its like taking away Spidermans "With great power comes great responsibility" thing away from the character. Pretty much killing what the character is about.
In that case why call the character Spiderman.
Same thing with Batman with his no kill rule.
These are things you cant just alter or ignore like they are minor aspects of these characters.

Meh. I like a killing Batman on occasion if I feel it's justified enough. Not saying he should just kill because he can, like with the example of this movie.

It's just hard to take Batman as seriously when he goes as far as to protect like the Joker from someone or from dying, knowing he'll get out and kill again if he lives. That's always been part of the problem with the no-kill thing for me and plenty people. 😬

Well lets ignore the no kill rule for a second.

So this Batman kills, great. Why is Joker alive and all the guys from Suicide Squad still alive too?

Keatons Batman killed on occasion, what did he do in the end to the Joker? Killed his ass.
Penguin? Also dead.

This Snyder Batman doesnt make sense either way. barker

Originally posted by Inhuman
Well lets ignore the no kill rule for a second.

So this Batman kills, great. Why is Joker alive and all the guys from Suicide Squad still alive too?

Keatons Batman killed on occasion, what did he do in the end to the Joker? Killed his ass.
Penguin? Also dead.

This Snyder Batman doesnt make sense either way. barker

👆

The disturbing thing about Snyder Batman is that he was portrayed judge,jury and executioner in this film. Batman killed criminals in jail when they are branded with the Batmark. And that Batmark is like saying your time is up. Again Snyder Batman is judge,jury and executioner. You might as well call him Bat-punisher. And using guns. While its true Keaton Batman did kill, he didn't use guns or went after and killed criminals in jail the way Snyder Batman did. Keaton Batman isn't bloodthirsty. The prequel comic to this film doesn't help either on why this Batman kills. The only thing we get in the prequel comic was 2 henchmen of Firefly talking about what Batman used to be. One of them stated Batman was all about finesse and catching criminals. He goes on to say that the incident in Metropolis is what changed Batman. So Superman and Zod is blamed for why Batman changed into his murderous self in BVS 😬

Snyder should just do a Judge Dredd movie......actually better not i'm sure he'll change something about the character.

Keatons Batman killed willingly and also had weapons on his vehicles that fired bullets...different interpretations of batman come and go with the times. There is no one "true" Batman, just the one that you relate with and thats the beauty of the character, he has been able to mould to fit any time and reflect the zeitgeist of said time period seamlessly.

People said Batman would never quit, actually thats one of my biggest problems with TDKR because MY Batman would never abandon his war on crime. But that is somebody Batman out there and thats cool.

So for all of you up in arms about him killing realize two things:

1. Batman is open to many different interpretations, this one kills...not your cup of tea? cool.

2. This is known as a character arc; where a character moves from one state of mind to another based on the events that happen to him over the course of a story. By the end of BvS he seemed to have changed his ways a bit, not branding Lex and all.

If context is applied, I'd like to think Batfleck gave up the no-kill rule the moment Joker killed Robin.

Looking at Robin's graffitied costume just reminds him that villains don't follow a code so why should he.

Originally posted by Inhuman
So this Batman kills, great. Why is Joker alive and all the guys from Suicide Squad still alive too?

This Snyder Batman doesnt make sense either way. barker

Originally posted by Inhuman

So this Batman kills, great. Why is Joker alive and all the guys from Suicide Squad still alive too?

Well we see The Joker on the loose in the SS trailer so it's obvious Bats never caught/killed him.

And as far as the rest of the Squad is concerned, maybe the cops were already at the scene so Bats either didn't get a chance to kill or deemed it unnecessary knowing the law was already there to incarcerate them.

If Batman jails up all the suicide squad villains at the beginning of the movie yet kills grunts it'll make Batman appear very stupid.

Well if Waller's involved maybe Batman was simply unable to get to them. Either that or the SS members were doing stuff while Batman was in retirement thus avoiding him all together.

Did Lex get permission to bring in the Kryptonite into the country or did he have it smuggled in? I don't recall.