Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) DEUX YOU BLEED?

All non-Nolan related film, tv, and streaming discussions.
Posts: 3728
Joined: June 2011
Batman was creating a distraction. It wasn't a planned murder, and those ninjas had time to escape. Bruce was also 29 years old and not Batman yet. Ben is an experienced Batman of 20 years and he's branding criminals knowing full well what happens to them in prison when seen with that symbol on their skin. He's killing folks left and right because it makes his job easier and he's carefully planning the murder of someone who saved the entire planet all because there's a 1 percent chance he might go pure evil on the world.

The point is that Nolans Batman never murdered people intentionally. Well that's the definition of murder now isn't it lol. Snyder deserves all the hate because he's never read a single comic about this character or Superman for that matter. He claims he knows Millers work yet he makes an ass of himself when he says that Batman shoots someone in the face. That doesn't happen and even if it did, it would be because Bats was saving a child like Bats did at the end of TDK.

Nolan got the essence down, then he rearranged some things here and there to fit his story and a more real world without superpowers. Ras was actually an amalgamation of Ras Al Ghul and Ducard. So it shouldn't be about white-washing.

User avatar
Posts: 8881
Joined: December 2011
shauner111 wrote:Ben is an experienced Batman of 20 years and he's branding criminals knowing full well what happens to them in prison when seen with that symbol on their skin. He's killing folks left and right because it makes his job easier and he's carefully planning the murder of someone who saved the entire planet all because there's a 1 percent chance he might go pure evil on the world.
"20 years of fighting criminals, all for nothing?"
"Criminals are like weeds Alfred...."

It's clear (to me anyway) that Batman after 20 years has grown disillusioned over it all, couple that with whatever happened to Robin, not to mention the battle between Supes and Zod destroying his Metropolis building....add his implied mental state as well, he's not far from cracking. Sure, in comparison to the comics or whatever it may seem out of character for the BvS Batman to be an anti-hero in this way, but with the context presented there it's not that far off for him.

That line in the UC trailer - "there's a new kind of mean in him" - good chance the new cut makes it clearer that his "xenophobic murderer" thing is a 'phase' for him, and shines a better light on the why he's become this way.
the ending implies as such he's moved past this phase now, as do reports on how he's portrayed in Skwad
Last edited by antovolk on June 4th, 2016, 5:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Posts: 163
Joined: May 2016
Within this film, it is actively acknowledged multiple times that Batman has taken a severe turn for the worse at this point in his life and is in the wrong. They don't justify his behavior beyond trying to show he wasn't always this way and bad things have happened to him. Alfred, Superman, and Bruce Wayne himself all point out his failings multiple times at some point.

Burton's Batman avoids addressing the killing issue entirely. Nolan's Batman actively deludes himself into thinking he hasn't and doesn't kill people for three movies. If you want to bend over backwards to say killing a farmer and a temple of ninjas, letting Ra's die when he has the power to save him, or killing Talia and her henchmen didn't actually happen or is 100% peachy and true to the character in the comics, that's up to you, but those people die and it's because of the calculated choices Batman makes. For me it's like Nolan says: "the source material is irrelevant" so I don't feel the need to justify it in reference to something from another medium that is full of its own conflicting ideas from 100s of writers and artists.

I'm not even saying Snyder's Batman is better. The movie itself is not good. That doesn't mean Nolan's Batman isn't a walking contradiction when it comes to this killing/murdering thing -- even Jonah Nolan can take the fanboy glasses off and acknowledge this.
Last edited by Chrolan on June 4th, 2016, 5:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Posts: 8881
Joined: December 2011
I wonder if this film wasn't part of the shared universe and more of an obviously Snyder thing as opposed to "DC's answer to the MCU", people would take as much issue with Snyder's interpretation of the characters and the universe.

Then again, there are the reactions to MoS.....

User avatar
Forum Patron
Posts: 7184
Joined: January 2014
This laugher doesn't deserve any of this discussion. Please go do something more worthwhile with your time.

User avatar
Posts: 12728
Joined: February 2011
Chrolan wrote:I can only imagine the reaction if Snyder had Batman blow up a temple of murderous ninjas to avoid killing a murderous farmer who gets blown up anyway and to save a murderous ninja ('white-washed' from the source material) who gets to live because he's a friend. Instead of being treated like a Nazi sex offender on the internet as he is now, Snyder would probably be deported to Pluto.
Ah this again, how can people possibly not understand this? Intention is what matters, not the unpredictable consequence‎. If you are trying to save your life and someone else gets unintentionally hurt it's not your fault. I mean if you dodge an arrow and it hits another person behind you, are you to blame?

Snyder's Batman is a self proclaimed judge, jury and executioner, that's something morally unexplainable. There is no argument. Justifying Nolan's Batman killing Harvey Dent in order to prevent him from killing an entire family right before it happens, unintentionally killing a bunch of murderers to save his own life, or letting Ra's die instead of risking his own life again by hugging him and carrying him out off the train unrestrained or shooting down a vehicle who carries a mass murdering weapon who does not stop in any other way, killing the people helming it in the process, now there are arguments there to be had.

I'm honestly baffled you don't understand this simple point.£

User avatar
Posts: 163
Joined: May 2016
Master Virgo wrote:Ah this again, how can people possibly not understand this? Intention is what matters, not the unpredictable consequence‎. If you are trying to save your life and someone else gets unintentionally hurt it's not your fault. I mean if you dodge an arrow and it hits another person behind you, are you to blame?

Snyder's Batman is a self proclaimed judge, jury and executioner, that's something morally unexplainable. There is no argument. Justifying Nolan's Batman killing Harvey Dent in order to prevent him from killing an entire family right before it happens, unintentionally killing a bunch of murderers to save his own life, or letting Ra's die instead of risking his own life again by hugging him and carrying him out off the train unrestrained or shooting down a vehicle who carries a mass murdering weapon who does not stop in any other way, killing the people helming it in the process, now there are arguments there to be had.£
It's all killing. His rule for three movies is "no killing." He kills. Batman from the comics supposedly isn't "supposed" to kill. End of story.

Again -- this movie acknowledges that this Batman is wrong. Multiple times by multiple characters including Bruce Wayne himself. I agree that he's fucked up morally.

User avatar
Posts: 26235
Joined: February 2010
Location: Texas
but Bale's Batman is nearly as fucked up too

the hypocrisy inherent in his Bruce Wayne is, I believe, intended to be part of it.

Family was killed by a gun? I don't like guns. Let's put giant guns on the tumbler and batpod.

Gotham is a shithole with no hope? We need a hero. Actually let's dress up like a monstrous black bat creature and terrorize the streets.

Justice can be achieved without killing? Okay, no killing. Except all of these people over there and those people, and that guy.

Ra's is a hypocrite, destroying so many lives in the name of renewal and justice. Dent is a hypocrite, wanting to be selfless and heroic and ending up selfish and out for revenge. Joker is a hypocrite, declaring himself an unstoppable constant, and an agent of chaos without any plans, yet everything he does is meticulously planned out with the goal of revealing the "dark side" of human nature. Bane is a hypocrite, starting a revolution against those in power in the name of the innocent, imprisoned, and the plebeians, yet taking advantage of those who follow him in an effort to do essentially the same things as Ra's.

No reason Batman wouldn't share in such hypocrisy, after all he's on the "same level" as Joker and the others. He just tries to justify what he does differently. It's the eternal moral conflict in the character.



Considering that theatrical representations of Bats need to be different from each other and refreshing, and therefore interesting, Batfleck's radical morality is the natural progression of that.

In other words, I have no idea why I'm posting this anymore.

Posts: 3728
Joined: June 2011
antovolk wrote:
shauner111 wrote:Ben is an experienced Batman of 20 years and he's branding criminals knowing full well what happens to them in prison when seen with that symbol on their skin. He's killing folks left and right because it makes his job easier and he's carefully planning the murder of someone who saved the entire planet all because there's a 1 percent chance he might go pure evil on the world.
"20 years of fighting criminals, all for nothing?"
"Criminals are like weeds Alfred...."

It's clear (to me anyway) that Batman after 20 years has grown disillusioned over it all, couple that with whatever happened to Robin, not to mention the battle between Supes and Zod destroying his Metropolis building....add his implied mental state as well, he's not far from cracking. Sure, in comparison to the comics or whatever it may seem out of character for the BvS Batman to be an anti-hero in this way, but with the context presented there it's not that far off for him.

That line in the UC trailer - "there's a new kind of mean in him" - good chance the new cut makes it clearer that his "xenophobic murderer" thing is a 'phase' for him, and shines a better light on the why he's become this way.
the ending implies as such he's moved past this phase now, as do reports on how he's portrayed in Skwad
Batman has been through more in the comics and never became a dumb, pigheaded, killer.

This version was incredibly weak minded. A total lunatic. He almost had a nervous breakdown because his enemy's mother had the same name. What if Joker yelled THOMAS?

User avatar
Posts: 19791
Joined: June 2012
It is stated in BvS that Batman's cruel behavior is something new. The bat brand even gets in the news and is then called a death mark (or threat don't remember). Alfred knows this is not good and Bruce just isn't having that. It does hit him when he sees the man he marked dead, Luthor sent him those images and Clark those with "judge, jury, executioner". Yes I am a bit baffled that people don't see that not only was Bruce cruel but that he simply wasn't a psychotic murderer. Yes he's cruel and others call him out on that, Clark also sees that what Batman is doing is wrong and calls him out on that and yes, more people die in battle with Batman than usual. Since he wasn't this cruel before. But now we were dealing with a cruel Batman who believed he had all the reasons to take out Superman. It was rather insane what happened in Metropolis and it affected Bruce in a huge way.
The people that were directly killed by Batman were those in the cars when he shot the cars from the jet, how else was he supposed to take them out then? They were shooting at him with whatever huge guns. The men he fought in the warehouse got serious injuries but none of them died directly from him. The only one who did was Anatoli who threatened to burn Martha and the only way to prevent that from happening was by shooting the tank he was holding. Same goes for Bale/Batman pushing Dent to save Gordon's son. It was the situation. Just like Affleck/Batman fought off a guy with a grenade who then tried to grab the grenade again and died.

You know, it is the hardest Batman on screen because he's become so disillusioned over the decades and Superman's presence pushed him over the edge. The only time he's cruel is in BvS. All the reasons for him to be like that were explained in the film. It doesn't make him look good because he was a villain for some time because he wanted to end Superman because that was the only outcome he thought there was to such a godlike being.

Post Reply