Originally posted by Esau Cairn
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 the cops are that good then Batman isn't needed.
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
Keaton's Batman also stopped CatWomsn killing Christopher Walken's character, telling her the law applies to both him and her.
Batman let the police take the criminal he branded at the beginning of BvS. So he's clearly not on a "I MUST Kill ALL Criminals" Punisher type mission. He's just there to stop criminals, by killing IF Necessary.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Keaton's Batman also stopped CatWomsn killing Christopher Walken's character, telling her the law applies to both him and her.Batman let the police take the criminal he branded at the beginning of BvS. So he's clearly not on a "I MUST Kill ALL Criminals" Punisher type mission. He's just there to stop criminals, by killing IF Necessary.
I'll admit, the killing thing was overblown in the media. The machine guns on the Batmobile was to stop the other vehicle he was pursuing; if some criminals got in the way, we wasn't losing any sleep over it. So it's comparable to the first Michael Keaton Batman.
It's still not Batman at his core, though. And it's not even Frank Miller's Dark Knight Returns Batman, who despite all the violence and mayhem didn't kill people, even the Joker not matter how much he wanted to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRq_rOVPF2s
This is a hilarious and insightful review from CBG19, an internet favourite, who trolls the film in an unexpected way - by making a pearl necklace while reviewing it. 😛
Originally posted by roughrider
I'll admit, the killing thing was overblown in the media. The machine guns on the Batmobile was to stop the other vehicle he was pursuing; if some criminals got in the way, we wasn't losing any sleep over it. So it's comparable to the first Michael Keaton Batman.p
Spot on 👆
Overblown by the media and a number of anti-DC internet trolls.
For the record I would also Prefer a Batman who doesn't kill, but it's not a deal breaker for me providing he doesn't turn into Punisher purposefully out to kill all Criminals of a certain level of bad/evilness.
Like I said Keatons Batman killed on occasion. His methods were questionable for Batman as a character BUT at least they were consistent. We see in the end Joker is killed. Penguin also is dead at the end of his movie.
So questionable methods by Keaton Batman BUT consistent. Also in a dark campy fun tone. Not in a ultra serious dark drama like tone.
Snyder Batman kills in a ruthless murderer way but surprisingly alot of his rogues are all alive and well just waiting to one day be out in the street causing mayhem again.
So NOT consistent with his killer methods at all. Doesnt really make sense. Snyder Batmans methods are inconsistent and full of holes and errors.
Im sure it makes sense to Snyder. To him he probably thought "Lets have batman be a total bad ass killing machine". "Everyone will lose their minds how hardcore and badass this Batman is" "It will make all other Batmen look like pansies in comparison"
Im sure this was his though process. To bad he didn't put much thought into it further than that.
Originally posted by Esau Cairn
@roughriderMiller's Batman did kill a mutie who was holding the baby for ransom by shooting him with a high powered rifle that they (Mutants) bought from the Army general.
And Bats also DID kill The Joker.
No. Look at the panels again. Batman shot right by the gang members head, and they dropped the child in shock, because it was so close. Where's the wound on them? You can't see any. The bullet hole is right there in the wall, and all we see is their dazed expression. If he did shoot them, it was only to wound.
It's possible the scene could be read a different way, but Batman's repeats his no killing philosophy in his mind later on. He has the opportunity to blow away the leader of the Mutants, but says that would be crossing a line he drew for himself thirty years earlier, and turns off the cannons on the Batmobile. He wants to finish breaking the Joker's neck at the carnival, but can't go all the way, wishing he could. The Joker teases him, saying the moment was perfect and he didn't have the nerve. Plus, Lana Lang was a media talking head defending Batman, repeating constantly Batman hasn't killed anyone.
Originally posted by Inhuman
Like I said Keatons Batman killed on occasion. His methods were questionable for Batman as a character BUT at least they were consistent. We see in the end Joker is killed. Penguin also is dead at the end of his movie.
So questionable methods by Keaton Batman BUT consistent.
Keaton wasn't very consistent at all. Penguins death was an accident, he couldn't have predicted the bat swarm would back ozzy through the window into the sewer water. Same with Joker, he wasn't trying to kill him when he strapped him to the gargoyle the damn thing just happenedd to come loose.
earlier however he killed a factory full of goons at axis chemicals on purpose and tried to kill Joker with the Batwing. And in Returns he set that one guy on fire and kicked a guy into a hole with a bomb strapped to him, all deliberate but when it came to the finale of both films the killing of the villain was accidental.
Originally posted by roughrider👆
I'll admit, the killing thing was overblown in the media. The machine guns on the Batmobile was to stop the other vehicle he was pursuing; if some criminals got in the way, we wasn't losing any sleep over it. So it's comparable to the first Michael Keaton Batman.It's still not Batman at his core, though. And it's not even Frank Miller's Dark Knight Returns Batman, who despite all the violence and mayhem didn't kill people, even the Joker not matter how much he wanted to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRq_rOVPF2s
This is a hilarious and insightful review from CBG19, an internet favourite, who trolls the film in an unexpected way - by making a pearl necklace while reviewing it. 😛
Agreed I don't think it's a huge deal batman kills people but I didn't like it, just felt brash and heavy handed.
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.
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.
You can't blame, Superman for the damage that occurred in MOS. that's like blaming the military when their jets crashed into metropolis buildings while trying to stop the kryptonians. Regardless whether or not superman had tried to lure zod away from the city, the world engine would still have destroyed hundreds of thousands of people and destroyed half of metropolis. Superman had nothing to do with that. MOS had problems but the collateral damage was not one of them.
Gawd the DC fans are so butthurt....now they're sending death threats to critics
http://movieweb.com/man-of-steel-hate-reporter-death-threats/