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

[FunkMiller]

...not everyone believes in evolution...

Doesn't matter. Evolution believes in them.

 

[SuperAl]

Or stealth like taking on the strongest being in the world by standing by a bright spotlight?

.

wasnt that his intention? Getting him to show up in that exact location because he had set up traps for him. Or did you close your eyes during this part.

 

[shauner111]

The scene in the fight club was dope. One of the good scenes from the film. All 2 minutes of it.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

...

He could've done a bit more.

Bruce Wayne is a guy who pretends he can't fight, to be in that place as Bruce and gives the fighter he bets on tips on how to win the fight without a disguise are not Bruce Wayne like.

 

[The Guard]

And here we, once again, come back to the obvious.

This is not Bruce Wayne at the point that we usually see Bruce Wayne.

This is a Bruce Wayne who cares a lot less about his secret identity, and the trappings of said.

People keep looking at this portrayal of a character through the lens of what they wish he was, or what they think he should be and finding fault with the lack of certain classic elements of the character, which are intentionally subverted here.

 

[FunkMiller]

And here we, once again, come back to the obvious.

This is not Bruce Wayne at the point that we usually see Bruce Wayne.

This is a Bruce Wayne who cares a lot less about his secret identity, and the trappings of said.

So, do you think this was a wise decision at the outset of a DC cinematic universe? To feature an old, bitter broken Batman who has shunned his life? Or do you think it just happened because Zack Snyder (mis)read The Dark Knight Returns one too many times?

 

[Spider-Aziz]

This is a Bruce Wayne who cares a lot less about his secret identity, and the trappings of said.

And that decision made a lot of sense, yaaaah?

 

[Greens]

When Bruce sleeps with women, he wears the cowl.

 

[OcStat]

People keep looking at this portrayal of a character through the lens of what they wish he was, or what they think he should be and finding fault with the lack of certain classic elements of the character, which are intentionally subverted here.

Maybe it has less to do with the viewer's lens of what they think Batman was, or should be, and more to do with what they know Batman actually is.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

When Bruce sleeps with women, he wears the cowl.

Then this is true.

 

[Greens]

Then this is true.

Cage's Big Daddy is definitely a more efficient killer than Affleck's Batman.

 

[The Batman]

People keep looking at this portrayal of a character through the lens of what they wish he was, or what they think he should be and finding fault with the lack of certain classic elements of the character, which are intentionally subverted here.

Damn, Daniel, they're back at it again with the "preconceived notions" argument.

 

[MadVillainy]

Damn, Daniel, they're back at it again with the "preconceived notions" argument.

The meme is dead. Bury it...

 

[The Batman]

If "Damn Daniel" is a Has-been, the "The [insert whatever here] is dead. Bury it" is a never was.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

The meme is dead. Bury it...

Took me a while to get it.

 

[Boom]

The meme is dead. Bury it...

Tell that to Zod's snapped neck.

 

[MadVillainy]

If "Damn Daniel" is a Has-been, the "The [insert whatever here] is dead. Bury it" is a never was.

Tell that to Zod's snapped neck.

You guysssssssssss

 

[Bebop Cowboy]

So, do you think this was a wise decision at the outset of a DC cinematic universe? To feature an old, bitter broken Batman who has shunned his life? Or do you think it just happened because Zack Snyder (mis)read The Dark Knight Returns one too many times?

I do. I think it was refreshing to see a veteran Batman, instead of another "learning the ropes, making mistakes" Batman. Snyder-verse has a learning Superman, no need for both of them to be like that.

This also works, because Superman being new at it still has hope, where Batman has none due to waging "the never ending battle" for so long.

 

[Limonade]

And here we, once again, come back to the obvious.

This is not Bruce Wayne at the point that we usually see Bruce Wayne.

This is a Bruce Wayne who cares a lot less about his secret identity, and the trappings of said.

People keep looking at this portrayal of a character through the lens of what they wish he was, or what they think he should be and finding fault with the lack of certain classic elements of the character, which are intentionally subverted here.

Yunno what? Filters or not. People care about the character enough to put their two cents in. Is there a better way to portray Bruce Wayne? Absolutely. Where are we going to discuss this if not an open discussion.

Just because you can separate the film from the lore doesn't mean that's the only way to view the movie.

 

[Cats]

Most of those people are wanting that because we want him to have the opportunity to finally be done right in this series, though.

Yeah, for good or ill, it would still be an error to claim that nobody wants to see Cav-El come back. Cavil/Snyder's Superman presents a much bigger potential to be everyone's favourite Superman than Routh/Singer's Superman. If WB handles his return well, I bet everyone will be willing to forgive.

 

[flickchick85]

I didn't like BvS, but I absolutely want Henry to come back. Just...in a movie made by someone who loves and appreciates the character and doesn't turn up his nose at the qualities that made the masses love him in the first place.

 

[Jaxon]

So, do you think this was a wise decision at the outset of a DC cinematic universe? To feature an old, bitter broken Batman who has shunned his life? Or do you think it just happened because Zack Snyder (mis)read The Dark Knight Returns one too many times?

Batman has got universal acclaim in BvS. He was so well received they're pushing his appearances in Suicide Squad and already announced the solo film.

You're way off the mark here.

 

[metaphysician]

It's called putting things into context.

A fireman carries an axe on the job because it is needed to chop through obstacles (such as doors and walls) and to clear debris out of his path (such as fallen roof material and furniture) as they look for people to rescue.

A crime fighter carries an axe on the job because it is needed to chop through obstacles (such as murders and terrorists) and to clear debris out of his path (such as thieves and those who park in handicapped parking spaces when they aren't really handicapped) as they roam the city.

Okay, you've convinced me. I'm now totally okay with the halberd.

 

[MadVillainy]

I really think Cavill could bring it if you give him the proper material.

Had the urge to rewatch this. Was so hyped the first time I saw it especially since I didn't know it was coming.

 

[TripleJ]

Turning a character into something that goes against the morality of who they are is always wrong.


Come again? Only WB can say what's the right way to portray Batman? No offense, but if you want to think that way and be a fan who accepts what ever he's given just because the movie people decided that's what was best, then that's up to you.

I, and anyone else, have the ability to think for myself, and the god given right to say what we think is right or wrong for these characters. The only thing WB has final say on is the choice of interpretation to use because it's their movie. Them having final say on that doesn't make their choice right.


I've no idea what you're talking about. I am factually showing you that killer Batman has always gotten a backlash from fans because it's a bad characterization.

You trying to say it's just a different version is a weak attempt to white wash a bad characterization into simply being something different. You could call an awful characterization something different, but it's still wrong and awful.



Nolan's Batman didn't go around needlessly slaughtering criminals. He didn't brand them for death in jail. He didn't hospitalize innocent security guards.


If they didn't think their original versions were wrong, they would have spoken about it being unnecessary to change Batman's code. When you think it was a total around for the character, it's not a minor change that was made. The character is saying killing is wrong, which means what the character originally was is wrong. Finger had no apparent issue with that.

I don't see how it's debatable considering that's who the character is and has been for over 75 years. You turn the character into something they are not, that goes against a moral value that defines them as heroes and people, there's no grey area here. That is wrong.

Then all versions of Batman with "no kill code" are also wrong by definition - since that goes against the original creation.

No need to be condescending. No one is forcing you to watch these. If you don't like it, vote it with your wallet...just like people do it with comic books (Granted, fans don't always support quality products - they would rather invest in big name books, like Batman).

Awful - subjective. Wrong - no. You keep insisting that it's "wrong". According to what? WB/DC decides what's right and wrong for these characters. It's their IPO, their property. They decided to implement the no kill code. Not fans. Or anyone else. They could have easily chosen not to (back then). Although I suspect the comics code authority that came a few years later would have probably prompted it anyways.

You keep using the word "wrong" again and again - don't think it means what you think it means. It's just as bad as saying New 52 is "wrong" because it made changes to the character.

The character has changed over 75 years - and even the no kill code - well, he has played fast and loose with it.

(An earlier example of how he stood upto Punisher to save Joker is an example. Him locking up KGBeast is another. And it's not like he hasn't tried to kill folks in comics).