BvS All Things Batman v Superman: An Open Discussion (TAG SPOILERS) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 295

[Gianakin_]

If you ARE asking me, I've been mugged twice, both times with a friend next to me. I gave the guy what he wanted and he left.

But if we're arguing that Thomas' terror that moment dictated him to jump at the mugger, then you know what? F**k this Batman, cos he's a little b**ch who couldn't handle that his dad cost him his and his wife's lives.

 

[Knightfall]

If you ARE asking me, I've been mugged twice, both times with a friend next to me. I gave the guy what he wanted.

I understand that, and I'm very sorry that it happened to you. However, not everyone reacts the same when their fight or flight instinct kicks in. I also understand why people are complaining about Thomas doing that. They feel that by him doing that then it could have been avoided, but we all know how the story ends Reguardless of his actions of defense for his family or his cooperation with said mugger. I think it was handled better in BB but it certainly wasn't bad here. The only thing that we should be pointing the finger at in this scene is Zack's rediculous slow-mo and color contrast.. Bleh!

 

[Urich Leeds]

In the context of the movie, Superman threatens Batman with death if he shows up again.

Total departure from the man Superman should be.

He never threatened him with death.

Stop reaching.

 

[Gianakin_]

I understand that, and I'm very sorry that it happened to you. However, not everyone reacts the same when their fight or flight instinct kicks in. I also understand why people are complaining about Thomas doing that. They feel that by him doing that then it could have been avoided, but we all know how the story ends Reguardless of his actions of defense for his family or his cooperation with said mugger.

The "regardless" part of your post is what I have a problem with. You can't blame Crime when the death of your parents wasn't clearly a criminal's fault. Once again, attempted murder and mugging are two entirely different situations.

I don't really care how Thomas dies, but I do care what Bruce takes away from that moment. It's one thing to say "My parents died for nothing, my dad gave him what he wanted and that f**ker killed them anyway" and another to say "All the guy wanted was money and my dad jumped at him".

 

[gdw]

If you ARE asking me, I've been mugged twice, both times with a friend next to me. I gave the guy what he wanted and he left.

But if we're arguing that Thomas' terror that moment dictated him to jump at the mugger, then you know what? F**k this Batman, cos he's a little b**ch who couldn't handle that his dad cost him his and his wife's lives.

You mean EXACTLY the message Nolan gave his Bruce?

 

[Gianakin_]

You mean EXACTLY the message Nolan gave his Bruce?

Are you talking about my first or my second paragraph? Cos Nolan's Thomas did what I did, aka the logical thing.

 

[Mjölnir]

I understand that, and I'm very sorry that it happened to you. However, not everyone reacts the same when their fight or flight instinct kicks in. I also understand why people are complaining about Thomas doing that. They feel that by him doing that then it could have been avoided, but we all know how the story ends Reguardless of his actions of defense for his family or his cooperation with said mugger.

When it comes to the movie I just think that the situation becomes a bit less tragic when Thomas provoked the violence. Even though we know that the point is that they are to get killed it played out like that he possibly got his wife (and himself) killed.

 

[Ultra Nolanite]

Are you guys seriously criticizing, and blaming, Thomas Wayne for attempting to defend his family?

Holy ****, seriously people are just looking for **** to ***** about now.

Guess what, people make mistakes, and do stupid stuff (like attacking "flaws" where they don't exist) in real life, so guess what, so do characters in movies.

Thomas was a good, but flawed, man. Bruce also made a LOT of mistakes in this movie, and that was the intent of the film makers, not their mistake.

Citing Nolan's depiction as what Thomas SHOULD have done is not only dumb, it's ignorant as ****; both of Snyder's scene, AND Nolan's films.

Nolan makes a point of "teaching" Bruce that his father SHOULD have acted. "The training is nothing! The will is everything! The will to act."
Now, that doesn't mean he ACTUALLY should have acted, nor that Nolan even thinks he should have acted, but Bruce thinks/is taught that he should have acted.

Both courses of action may have been mistakes for the characters, but they are not mistakes for the film.


Stop scrapping the bottom of the barrel for **** to fight about. Seriously. What. The. ****.

When someone points a gun at your wife or husband... I wonder if you will think so logically with your 10 year old son there.

Nonsense.

WRITERS WRITE this.

These aren't things that actually happened.

They can WRITE it a certain way to have whatever point they're trying to make come off as strong as possible.

This is a man that dresses up as a bat and goes out at night to be a vigilante. All of this was triggered by the brutal and senseless murder of his parents. The senselessness of his parents murder should be front and center.

It's already a tough sell that a man would do what Bruce does, why make it harder for yourself?

Instead of that I'm left thinking whether or not Bruce shouldn't just be blaming his father for trying to punch a mugger and escalating the situation instead of dressing up as a bat at night looking for justice.

I know you guys enjoyed the movie and I'm happy for you. But do you really wanna defend this? Why not just admit when something didn't work?

I'll openly admit what I think DID work in BvS.

 

[Knightfall]

The "regardless" part of your post is what I have a problem with. You can't blame Crime when the death of your parents wasn't clearly a criminal's fault. Once again, attempted murder and mugging are two entirely different situations.

I don't really care how Thomas dies, but I do care what Bruce takes away from that moment. It's one thing to say "My parents died for nothing, my dad gave him what he wanted and that f**ker killed them anyway" and another to say "All the guy wanted was money and my dad jumped at him".

The second someone points a gun at you, it is attempted murder in my book as well as many others. Thomas might not have reacted intelligently but he was dealing with a swirl of emotions to protect both his son and wife. And this Batman is still the product of a criminal ending his parents lives. That hasn't changed and the whole thing could have been avoided with the mugger not coming up to them in the first place, so it is the mugger's fault anyway you slice it.

 

[gdw]

I'm sorry, pointing a gun at you and demanding something from you IS threatening your life. Period.

That's the entire ****ing point of having the gun.

Unbelievable victim blaming *******s around here.

Also, Maybe Thomas realized/knew the guy was going to kill them no matter what. You know, like in SO MANY of the versions of the Wayne's deaths, where it's a hit meant to look like a mugging.

I'm so sick of defending this against the most ignorant of "criticisms."

There's a LOT to LEGITIMATELY criticize in this film. This is NOT one of them, and it's ****ing insulting as all hell, as you are implicitly blaming all victims who actually attempted to stand up for themselves when they were attacked.

"It's your fault, you should have just given him what he wanted." **** you. Period.

 

[Gianakin_]

The second someone points a gun at you, it is attempted murder in my book as well as many others. Thomas might not have reacted intelligently but he was dealing with a swirl of emotions to protect both his son and wife. And this Batman is still the product of a criminal ending his parents lives. That hasn't changed and the whole thing could have been avoided with the mugger not coming up to them in the first place, so it is the mugger's fault anyway you slice it.

I'm not saying it's not the mugger's fault, I'm saying that Thomas escalated an already dangerous situation. Before I go on, do you really disagree with that?

 

[gdw]

Are you talking about my first or my second paragraph? Cos Nolan's Thomas did what I did, aka the logical thing.

Yes, he did, and Nolan's script shoves that in Bruce's face, and blames Thomas' lack of action for their deaths.

 

[Lucellit]

People react differently, especially in dangerous situation with people they care. Some people would act calm, others wouldn't.

The utmost thing in real life is, we cannot blame the victims/ survivors regardless how they act in that situation.

And in Batman origin story, whatever Thomas Wayne did, cooperating or not, he would still be shot. And it and all of 'if onlys' will impact Bruce.

At the end of day, well it is a fiction.

 

[Mjölnir]

Nonsense.

WRITERS WRITE this.

These aren't things that actually happened.

They can WRITE it a certain way to have whatever point they're trying to make come off as strong as possible.

This is a man that dresses up as a bat and goes out at night to be a vigilante. All of this was triggered by the brutal and senseless murder of his parents. The senselessness of his parents murder should be front and center.

It's already a tough sell that a man would do what Bruce does, why make it harder for yourself?

Instead of that I'm left thinking whether or not Bruce shouldn't just be blaming his father for trying to punch a mugger and escalating the situation instead of dressing up as a bat at night looking for justice.

I know you guys enjoyed the movie and I'm happy for you. But do you really wanna defend this? Why not just admit when something didn't work?

I'll openly admit what I think DID work in BvS.

I agree, and I've said similar things in discussions on other parts of the forum before. I don't understand defending writing by assuming the writer doesn't have control over which situations he puts characters in in the first place. The writer controls everything so any aspect of a scene can be criticized or praised.

If a character has to do something then it is because the writer put him in that situation in the first place.

 

[gdw]

When it comes to the movie I just think that the situation becomes a bit less tragic when Thomas provoked the violence. Even though we know that the point is that they are to get killed it played out like that he possibly got his wife (and himself) killed.

I'm sorry, when someone points a gun at you, no matter how you react, YOU are NOT the one provoking anything. The guy who pulled the ****ing gun is.

 

[gdw]

I agree, and I've said similar things in discussions on other parts of the forum before. I don't understand defending writing by assuming the writer doesn't have control over which situations he puts characters in in the first place. The writer controls everything so any aspect of a scene can be criticized or praised.

If a character has to do something then it is because the writer put him in that situation in the first place.

Yes, that's absolutely true. And sometimes, good writers write characters who act like people do in real life. Wow, what a concept.

 

[Gianakin_]

I'm sorry, pointing a gun at you and demanding something from you IS threatening your life. Period.

That's the entire ****ing point of having the gun.

Unbelievable victim blaming *******s around here.

Also, Maybe Thomas realized/knew the guy was going to kill them no matter what. You know, like in SO MANY of the versions of the Wayne's deaths, where it's a hit meant to look like a mugging.

I'm so sick of defending this against the most ignorant of "criticisms."

There's a LOT to LEGITIMATELY criticize in this film. This is NOT one of them, and it's ****ing insulting as all hell, as you are implicitly blaming all victims who actually attempted to stand up for themselves when they were attacked.

"It's your fault, you should have just given him what he wanted." **** you. Period.

1.You stand up for yourself when it's possible to do so, aka when you listen to a little thing called survival instinct. As the outcome of the mugging proved, he was wrong to do it.

2.Show me a single shot or frame where Thomas knew they were going to die, or that it was a hit meant to look like a mugging. Cos I agree that such a context would make sense. Go ahead.

3.Say "f**k you" again and I'm reporting the crap out of you. F**k me for being calm enough to know my place when I'm on the wrong side of a gun.

 

[Ultra Nolanite]

I understand that, and I'm very sorry that it happened to you. However, not everyone reacts the same when their fight or flight instinct kicks in. I also understand why people are complaining about Thomas doing that. They feel that by him doing that then it could have been avoided, but we all know how the story ends Reguardless of his actions of defense for his family or his cooperation with said mugger. I think it was handled better in BB but it certainly wasn't bad here. The only thing that we should be pointing the finger at in this scene is Zack's rediculous slow-mo and color contrast.. Bleh!

This is what Snyder must've thought also and I'm sorry to say you're both wrong.

A huge part of the problem with this entire movie is that it was built on the assumption that people already know anyway so lets just halfa$$ it there.

If you're deadset on telling Batmans origin again then sell it to me, don't halfa$$ it because "people know anyway"

Why not leave it out entirely then since people already know he becomes Batman regardless?

 

[jae7702]

Holy ****, are we seriously going to nitpick about every single thing possible now. It's getting to the ridiculous levels now, I mean you can basically deconstruct almost any movie like this.

 

[Gianakin_]

Yes, he did, and Nolan's script shoves that in Bruce's face, and blames Thomas' lack of action for their deaths.

GOYER's script has the villain tell him a bunch of crap that Bruce disproves.

 

[Knightfall]

I'm not saying it's not the mugger's fault, I'm saying that Thomas escalated an already dangerous situation. Before I go on, do you really disagree with that?

I agree, however my thing is.. It would have happened either way in this scene and we've already had 2 live action scenes in the past depicting his parents death so I was fine with the minor tweak. I do have to say I was initially shocked that they took it that route and maybe they shouldn't have. The average movie goer will probably think it's Thomas's fault for not cooperating but like I said.. Anyway you cut it, the Wayne's get shot.

 

[Gianakin_]

And in Batman origin story, whatever Thomas Wayne did, cooperating or not, he would still be shot.

At the end of day, well it is a fiction.

And that's where the notion of "good" or "bad" fiction comes in.

 

[Zarex]

Defend his family against... what? Losing a wallet?

Yeah, but then he's got to spend the night cancelling his credit cards and waste a personal day standing in line at the DMV. Thomas made the right call.

 

[Gianakin_]

I agree, however my thing is.. It would have happened either way in this scene and we've already had 2 live action scenes in the past depicting his parents death so I was fine with the minor tweak. I do have to say I was initially shocked that they took it that route and maybe they shouldn't have. The average movie goer will probably think it's Thomas's fault for not cooperating but like I said.. Anyway you cut it, the Wayne's get shot.

Ok, the "shouldn't have" is my entire point.

Since you agree, all I'm saying is... do you see Bruce having a point when he wages war on crime based on THAT origin? Do you see him standing there, in the big hall of Wayne Manor, flashing back to that night... and ignoring the fact that his dad acted how he acted?

 

[Poni_Boy]

I'm sorry, when someone points a gun at you, no matter how you react, YOU are NOT the one provoking anything. The guy who pulled the ****ing gun is.

So if a guy high on meth threatens a cop with a knife and the cop shoots him it's not the cop's fault at all for escalating the situation?

Some of y'all seem to be making absolute statements based on pop culture knowledge.