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

[Predator jp]

it's neither "bad writing" nor "didn't pay attention", it's a typical case of “good idea, poorly executed.”

 

[shauner111]

I've read plenty of Batman comics but I am willing to grant some flexibility with these characters depending on the situation. I never bought into no killing no matter what situation.

He still doesn't kill thugs, because he's being shot at. It goes against his code.

I also don't agree with the "no killing no matter what". If he can find a way around it, great. If it's between a young kid and a mass murderer with a gun to their head, and Batman is in a tight spot, injured, whatever the case may be. Then yes, i think batman should take him out. It's not execution because it's a thrill for him, nor is it execution because it's the easiest option because some thug is shooting at him. That's what his gadgets, vehicles, armor is there for.

 

[The Joker]

I explained it this way to someone who was claiming all detractors simply couldn't understand the movie and if they could comprehend it properly, everyone would love it: it's not that the supporters see/understand something the rest of us don't. It's that the level of complexity and competence required of the filmmakers to pass your standard for the suspension of disbelief are lower than ours.
We understand it fine. We just think it's stupid. Because our standards are higher. Which is ironic, as their justification is that this film is meant to challenge us.
To take it further, a child may find basic arithmetic complex and confusing and believe they have discovered something profound when it clicks into place for them. Imagine them explaining the complexity of basic mathematics to someone well versed in calculus. They would be puzzled and angered by the bemusement apparent in their audience and likely decry it with "you just don't understand how deep and complex and profound this is".
There's nothing profound in the bizarre ghost dad scene. Jonathan is simply saying that every time you save something you love, you destroy something someone else loves. Like a city, or people for example. And the best way to deal with any guilt over collateral damage is to take lead from Peaches and **** the pain away.
They may think they were trying to be profound, but strip it down and that's as basic as it gets.
That's to be expected when you superficially explore concepts that have been fleshed out to far greater depths in the comics, such as what consequences ensue when Superman meddles in world affairs even with the best intentions. Such as when Azzarello took him to Africa. It's why trying to cram multiple works into one movie make it appear shallow and muddled.
Or Perhaps the best summation of this movies problems are this: ‘An intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius––and a lot of courage––to move in the opposite direction.’
Now we can hope WB can demonstrate a touch enough of courage and genius to save the JL

I wouldn't hold your breath. Not with Snyder at the helm again. Though maybe JL will be loaded with studio interference to keep him on a tight leash this time.

 

[Dopinder]

Thugs use Tumbler missiles at Batman and Batman plays "catch me if you can" and uses the same missile to take down the thugs. Batman uses the Bat's bullets and grenades to take down Talia's armored truck killing the driver and it was neither an accident or with an intention to save an innocent. I wonder what you feel about these scenes.



Oh come on, if Batman needs to kill a driver to stop a goddamn truck then Batfleck can kill the thugs shooting back at him with machine guns in order to gain entry into the warehouse. If you give a free pass to one of them, then it is only fair to give another free pass.

Actually, in the novelization of the The Dark Knight Rises (that I read, because I'm a nerd) Batman stops the truck driver because a piece of debris rams into the truck driver, knocking him out. The whole scene was just poorly shown by Nolan in TDKR.

 

[Vortigern99]

Superman can care for a family member, for their safety, well-being, and still put other lives in danger. Still kill other humans that aren't his mother.

This was also another fictional character. Superman is not even human. Which is why i compared this situation to other fictional characters. Characters that were written as human beings with flaws, but who care for other human beings in their life. They can still cause damage, still kill people, kill strangers, even have the ability to kill other family members. You can love your mother and kill your brother. This is fact. Batman doesn't know if Superman is a sociopath, a psychopath, he doesn't know anything other than he seems to care about his mother. An alien who STILL has the ability to directly or indirectly light the earth on fire.

You're mistaken. Batman's concern isn't that Superman is going to kill one person or even a group of them; it's that he is a destroyer of worlds. In the "Martha" moment, Batman does know that Superman is not a psychopath, for the reasons I've explained but which you've either ignored, misunderstood or didn't believe. If a person has empathy for one person, he is capable of love, which means that he is not a psychopath.

The writing of the fictional characters of King Joffrey, Walter White and Tony Soprano might be flawed. I don't recommend using them as some kind of model of human psychology and behavior.

 

[shauner111]

I am not saying Batman should kill those thugs, I just don't see much difference between that and what we get in other cinematic Batman iterations.

Just like you are having a laugh, I am also having a laugh about why you think Batman needs to kill someone to stop a goddamn truck. The bomb is ticking, we get it. You see, I don't have a problem with any of it. I just don't get why one gets a free pass. He didn't need to kill the driver just like he didn't need to kill those thugs.

I feel really bad for these truck drivers. They have a family, you know, just like those thugs. I feel especially bad for the garbage truck driver in the underpass in The DARK KNIGHT.

Like Joker said, is he supposed to ask Talia to politely pull over? How are you confused about that?

They have a family? There's millions, billions of people about to die. You're really not getting it. 7 thugs may have family members, and Batman is going to gun them down just because they're shooting at him in his million dollar batwing where he can dodge bullets and shoot rubber bullets at them. You can't even compare. You're being silly.

You dont seem to understand intentional murder for the sake of making it easy for himself or because it's fun...versus...killing to save a life or death by accident. There is no accident with Batfleck's killings.

Batman is shot at all the time. He doesn't need to kill them. What he went through at that warehouse, or in that batmobile chase, was a normal night for Batman. It SHOULD be. I urge you to watch Batman's first scene in TDK with the Scarecrow & copy-cats and you'll see who this character is and how it's done.

 

[Corko]

If we're going by kill counts as to whether an actor is a good batman then Bale sucks as much as Affleck in the role and neither did justice to the character.

 

[Sleiek]

Actually, in the novelization of the The Dark Knight Rises (that I read, because I'm a nerd) Batman stops the truck driver because a piece of debris rams into the truck driver, knocking him out. The whole scene was just poorly shown by Nolan in TDKR.

Yeah it all comes down to the director. Nolan had it in such a way all the bullets and grenades fired by the BAT doesn't make a dent on the armored truck. Realistically speaking, even if it is armored, there will be damage and the people sitting behind the windshield will be dead. But Nolan doesn't show it much and people are tricked into believing Batman isn't brutal from his actions.

Nolan is smarter than Snyder.

Like Joker said, is he supposed to ask Talia to politely pull over? How are you confused about that?

They have a family? There's millions, billions of people about to die. You're really not getting it. 7 thugs may have family members, and Batman is going to gun them down just because they're shooting at him in his million dollar batwing where he can dodge bullets and shoot rubber bullets at them. You can't even compare. You're being silly.

You dont seem to understand intentional murder for the sake of making it easy for himself or because it's fun...versus...killing to save a life or death by accident. There is no accident with Batfleck's killings.

Batman is shot at all the time. He doesn't need to kill them. What he went through at that warehouse, or in that batmobile chase, was a normal night for Batman. It SHOULD be. I urge you to watch Batman's first scene in TDK with the Scarecrow & copy-cats and you'll see who this character is and how it's done.

You are killing me. I suppose Batfleck should have tried asking the thugs politely to surrender their 50 cals. I bet it would have worked. The timer would freeze and Batman will have plenty of time to save Martha.

I am not confused about anything if you are just willing to understand my point. I am not criticizing one or the other. I am just saying if one get criticized the other one should be as well for making a similar mistake.

 

[Luane]

Come on, another Snyder bashing story?

 

[shauner111]

If we're going by kill counts as to whether an actor is a good batman then Bale sucks as much as Affleck in the role and neither did justice to the character.

That's if you only pay attention to the surface (like Snyder's entire filmography) and not care to look at the details. Then yes, you can say that. But it's obviously a ridiculous way to look at anything.

 

[Sleiek]

Come on, another Snyder bashing story?

It goes on 24/7, my friend. It goes on 24/7.

 

[Nemeres]

Because Batman now sees that Superman has a human mother, for whom he expressly cares, and whom he wishes to save even as he is about to die. For Batman the revelation is "This Superman is capable of compassion; he's not a heartless enemy of the human species." People either have a conscience, and care about others, or they do not. If Superman cares about his human mother, then it follows through understanding of the human mind that he cares about other human beings, too.

That realization dawning, coupled with Bruce's own feelings of failure
for not being able to make much difference after all, leads him to see that at least he can save this Martha.

A coincidence in a name doing what common sense and hours/days of planning (methodical consideration of possibilities) didn't. And Superman's altruistic acts have been in the news for years at this point, trivial details wouldn't make him notice his compassion if nothing else had by then. There's nothing to not get. Everyone gets it, not everyone does the backflips to make sense of it. You're forcing it to.

 

[The Joker]

It goes on 24/7, my friends. It goes on 24/7.

When there's so much ammunition that's only natural

 

[AndrewGilkison]

The Martha scene is dumb as ****. Batman turns a 180 and goes from "I am going to kill Superman because if there is even a ONE PERCENT CHANCE that he is our enemy blah blah blah" to "OH MY GOD YOUR MOM AND MY MOM HAVE THE SAME FIRST NAME!! I AM GOING TO BE YOUR FIEND NOW!!!"

There is absolutely no logic to this whatsoever. It is contrived and lazy ********. Unconvincing ********. You mean to tell me that Batman wouldn't be smart enough to figure out that Superman was raised on earth by an earth woman? That that revelation would be so shocking to him that it would automatically change his hardened cynical worldview of Superman as fast as it does in Batman V. Superman? That is complete ********.

If ****ing Lois Lane could figure out that Superman was raised by an earth woman in Man of Steel I am pretty sure the Worlds Greatest Detective could figure it out. And why would it suddenly invalidate every concern Batman has about Superman? Why would it even matter?

You can't say this movie is "too smart for Marvel fanboys" when it has that kind of crap in it.

 

[Corko]

That's if you only pay attention to the surface (like Snyder's entire filmography) and not care to look at the details. Then yes, you can say that. But it's obviously a ridiculous way to look at anything.

Can't we just say its up to interpretation. You might see a difference between Bale killing those ninjas and Affleck killing the men in the warehouse. I personally don't.

 

[AndrewOz]

The Martha moment was one of the best things about the film. If you don't understand how it's beyond a name coincidence that ends the fight, please don't comment. It sucked the life out of my body when that moment happened, because it's not only something I had never pieced together, but the understanding in how it relates to Batman's journey from childhood to the pending execution of a Superman was perfect.

Also, great connection someone made about Lex saying how god never saved him from his father's fist, and Superman blocked Doomsday's punch. Seriously, awesome insight.

It all hinges on just a name coincidence.
It's utterly farcical to believe that that the "Batman" presented here could be stopped dead in his tracks by a mumbled word. The whole movie is turgid, hamfisted, forced allegory and doesn't pass the most basic test of suspension of disbelief. I get it, but I laugh at it. When I'm not wincing.
This isn't Game if Thrones with capes. It's Days of our Lives with capes. It may seem deep and complex to you, but to myself and many others, it is an insult to our intelligence.
So don't presume those of us who think it's ridiculous don't get it.
If you don't want to debate, guess what-don't put your ideas on a board that only exists for the purpose of debate.
If you just want a conversation with people who agree with you, invite your friends over to your Mothers basement and stay out of here.
Otherwise, prepare for a close examination of what it actually says that "Martha" sucked the life out of you....

 

[Corko]

It all hinges on just a name coincidence.
It's utterly farcical to believe that that the "Batman" presented here could be stopped dead in his tracks by a mumbled word. The whole movie is turgid, hamfisted, forced allegory and doesn't pass the most basic test of suspension of disbelief. I get it, but I laugh at it. When I'm not wincing.
This isn't Game if Thrones with capes. It's Days of our Lives with capes. It may seem deep and complex to you, but to myself and many others, it is an insult to our intelligence.
So don't presume those of us who think it's ridiculous don't get it.
If you don't want to debate, guess what-don't put your ideas on a board that only exists for the purpose of debate.
If you just want a conversation with people who agree with you, invite your friends over to your Mothers basement and stay out of here.
Otherwise, prepare for a close examination of what it actually says that "Martha" sucked the life out of you....

PTSD which I assume he has is often triggered by a word

 

[Predator jp]

people gets what they intended with Martha scene, it's just that some people didn't feel it was convincing enough.
again, typical case of “good idea, poorly executed."
people tend to be more forgiving if they feel it's emotionally convincing.

 

[Vortigern99]

This Batman must be even more stupid than we gave him credit for. Or did he just conveniently miss the plethora of media documented examples of Superman saving lives all over the world all the time.

Batman doesn't know or understand the reason for those rescues. It might be a deception, part of some plan to dupe the citizens of the world into holding Superman up as a god on Earth. Until the "Martha" moment, uttered as ostensibly Superman's last words, Batman cannot know that Superman is capable of love.

Based on emotional response? You're not talking to Batfleck here It's based on factual evidence as presented in the movie. That's why it's so easy to rip apart. That's why it's ripped apart so much. It's not conjured out of thin air. But it's easier for you to think so many people just "didn't get it". The lowest common denominator of argument.

Well, then it's a good thing I didn't say or think any of that. What I was rebutting was your constant use of the word "stupid" to describe your interlocutors, the creative team behind the film, and the fictional characters we've been discussing. "That's stupid/they're stupid/you're stupid" is a subjective opinion. I never said people "didn't get it", never said your judgement was "conjured out of thin air".

I didn't say his movies was filled with sex and murder. I said that's what Snyder said about comics. That's what gravitated him to directing Watchmen, because it was in his own words more his scene. This is how the guy thinks. That's why he makes the moronically bad decisions he makes. From killing off Olsen, to making Batman Rorschach v2.0. only with even less intelligence.

Yes, it is murder to apply lethal force when you don't need to. Batman was not in any direct danger from the comfort zone of his Batmobile or Batwing. Nor is he when he's branding criminals to be killed in prison. Batman, as well as every hero, are always having their lives put in danger. That's routine. They don't need to stack up a body count to get the job done. None of the instances in this movie validated Batman having to take a life, except MAYBE the flamethrower guy about to roast Martha.

We'll just have to disagree here. Lex's thugs were pumping bullets at both 'plane and 'mobile. How long will the bulletproof glass last before it shatters and Batman is killed? How can you be so certain that he's in "the comfort zone" while inside those vehicles? The thugs themselves are inside armored vehicles; batarangs and rubber bullets are out of the question in these instances. They're trying to kill him; he has no other choice (apart from giving up and going home) but to apply potentially lethal force in response.

This is tiring. We disagree. I'm going to move on with my life now.

 

[LEVITIKUZ]

So I read Batman #51.

Goddamnit DC, you let the wrong Snyder go. Gonna miss Greg also.

This needs to be the poster for the Batfleck solo

 

[The Joker]

A coincidence in a name doing what common sense and hours/days of planning (methodical consideration of possibilities) didn't. And Superman's altruistic acts have been in the news for years at this point, trivial details wouldn't make him notice his compassion if nothing else had by then. There's nothing to not get. Everyone gets it, not everyone does the backflips to make sense of it. You're forcing it to.

Exactly.

The Martha scene is dumb as ****. Batman turns a 180 and goes from "I am going to kill Superman because if there is even a ONE PERCENT CHANCE that he is our enemy blah blah blah" to "OH MY GOD YOUR MOM AND MY MOM HAVE THE SAME FIRST NAME!! I AM GOING TO BE YOUR FIEND NOW!!!"

There is absolutely no logic to this whatsoever. It is contrived and lazy ********. Unconvincing ********. You mean to tell me that Batman wouldn't be smart enough to figure out that Superman was raised on earth by an earth woman? That that revelation would be so shocking to him that it would automatically change his hardened cynical worldview of Superman as fast as it does in Batman V. Superman? That is complete ********.

If ****ing Lois Lane could figure out that Superman was raised by an earth woman in Man of Steel I am pretty sure the Worlds Greatest Detective could figure it out. And why would it suddenly invalidate every concern Batman has about Superman? Why would it even matter?

You can't say this movie is "too smart for Marvel fanboys" when it has that kind of crap in it.

It all hinges on just a name coincidence.
It's utterly farcical to believe that that the "Batman" presented here could be stopped dead in his tracks by a mumbled word. The whole movie is turgid, hamfisted, forced allegory and doesn't pass the most basic test of suspension of disbelief. I get it, but I laugh at it. When I'm not wincing.
This isn't Game if Thrones with capes. It's Days of our Lives with capes. It may seem deep and complex to you, but to myself and many others, it is an insult to our intelligence.
So don't presume those of us who think it's ridiculous don't get it.
If you don't want to debate, guess what-don't put your ideas on a board that only exists for the purpose of debate.
If you just want a conversation with people who agree with you, invite your friends over to your Mothers basement and stay out of here.
Otherwise, prepare for a close examination of what it actually says that "Martha" sucked the life out of you....

Batman doesn't know or understand the reason for those rescues. It might be a deception, part of some plan to dupe the citizens of the world into holding Superman up as a god on Earth. Until the "Martha" moment, uttered as ostensibly Superman's last words, Batman cannot know that Superman is capable of love.

Nobody knows or understands the reasons behind Batman saving lives either. His private life and reasoning for being a hero is no more on public display than Superman's. So why would he think there is some sinister reason behind Superman spending all his time saving lives, just like he does?

This is what we're talking about. Batman acts like an idiot in this movie. He makes illogical leaps, and his whole "feud" with Superman was based on nothing, and could have easily been avoided with the simplest of investigation and common sense.

Well, then it's a good thing I didn't say or think any of that. What I was rebutting was your constant use of the word "stupid" to describe your interlocutors, the creative team behind the film, and the fictional characters we've been discussing. "That's stupid/they're stupid/you're stupid" is a subjective opinion. I never said people "didn't get it", never said your judgement was "conjured out of thin air".

Fair enough.

We'll just have to disagree here. Lex's thugs were pumping bullets at both 'plane and 'mobile. How long will the bulletproof glass last before it shatters and Batman is killed? How can you be so certain that he's in "the comfort zone" while inside those vehicles? The thugs themselves are inside armored vehicles; batarangs and rubber bullets are out of the question in these instances. They're trying to kill him; he has no other choice (apart from giving up and going home) but to apply potentially lethal force in response.

Batman getting shot at, whether it's in the Batmobile, or out in person, is like daily routine to him. Especially a supposed 20 year veteran Batman should be well used to dealing with gun fire coming his way by now. I say he's in a comfort zone because his vehicles are bullet proof. Even if he wasn't in the Batmobile or Batwing, Batman dealing with gun toting thugs is like second nature to him. He could do it with one hand tied behind his back. That's old hat.

I can't remember the last time I saw Batman in action where someone wasn't shooting at him. The day Batman can't take on some gun happy goons is the day he needs to hang up the cape and cowl.

This is tiring. We disagree. I'm going to move on with my life now.

Fair enough again.

 

[shauner111]

You are killing me. I suppose Batfleck should have tried asking the thugs politely to surrender their 50 cals. I bet it would have worked. The timer would freeze and Batman will have plenty of time to save Martha.

I am not confused about anything if you are just willing to understand my point. I am not criticizing one or the other. I am just saying if one get criticized the other one should be as well for making a similar mistake.

One woman was tied. Like i said, do you read Batman comics? This happens a lot. He doesn't need to kill them, have you read The Dark Knight Returns? He uses rubber bullets. Gets them out of his way, hurts them, but he's not shooting rubber bullets to kill.

It is not a similar mistake. It's not even close to the same thing. Batman is saving an entire city with minutes left. The only similarity is a ticking clock. Two completely different scenarios. If Batman doesn't shoot these people outside the warehouse, he has options. Go another way? Drop em' with rubber bullets? If Martha dies while he tries to stop them, it's one person who dies. This would be terrible for Batman. But how about killing or not killing the driver of a bombtruck? Batman wouldn't feel terrible, because he would be dead, so would millions of other people.

Apples and oranges.

I know it sounds like a *****e thing to say, but i really do wonder if people know much about this character beyond a couple of live-action films they've seen. It shouldn't be baffling to hear a fan defending the actions of a Batman who is forced to kill a driver in order to stop a bomb from destroying a whole city filled with people. There's no other option in that case. Versus a common scenario that Batman faces, like saving a hostage from a dozen criminals who are waiting outside. This is BATMAN we're talking about. Nobody is in danger but that hostage. They have guns and they're using those guns to attack Batman who is sitting in a friggin Bat-Jet for crying out loud. What was Batman's excuse during the batmobile chase? Are you going to ask me what's the difference with that? Are you going to ask me why it's bad that Batman shot at those cars and blew people up, drove his car full speed into the side of a car packed with thugs, drove his car full speed onto the back of a truck where people are, drags a car full of half dead or dead people around the block and drops it on top of another car? Ask away. And ill continue answer you by saying it's ridiculous. And completely different from Bale's behavior. That batmobile scene wasn't even about saving a hostage or stopping a bomb. It was about getting access to a rock. When Batman could have let his tracker do the work, waited and broke into Lexcorp to steal the rock without killing anyone.

It all hinges on just a name coincidence.
It's utterly farcical to believe that that the "Batman" presented here could be stopped dead in his tracks by a mumbled word. The whole movie is turgid, hamfisted, forced allegory and doesn't pass the most basic test of suspension of disbelief. I get it, but I laugh at it. When I'm not wincing.
This isn't Game if Thrones with capes. It's Days of our Lives with capes. It may seem deep and complex to you, but to myself and many others, it is an insult to our intelligence.
So don't presume those of us who think it's ridiculous don't get it.
If you don't want to debate, guess what-don't put your ideas on a board that only exists for the purpose of debate.
If you just want a conversation with people who agree with you, invite your friends over to your Mothers basement and stay out of here.
Otherwise, prepare for a close examination of what it actually says that "Martha" sucked the life out of you....

Phenomenal. And true.

 

[Corko]

 

[Sleiek]

I think it is condescending to ask me if I read Batman comics when I clearly didn't endorse any killing. You should pay more attention to my comments. I don't know how many times I have to explain this.

Apples and Oranges? Hhmm. Agree to disagree. So you say it is okay for Batman to kill when millions of lives are at risk. Fine. But still killing. Kill = Kill not Apples and Oranges. smh.

Carry on.

 

[I Am The Knight]

The Martha scene is dumb as ****. Batman turns a 180 and goes from "I am going to kill Superman because if there is even a ONE PERCENT CHANCE that he is our enemy blah blah blah" to "OH MY GOD YOUR MOM AND MY MOM HAVE THE SAME FIRST NAME!! I AM GOING TO BE YOUR FIEND NOW!!!"

There is absolutely no logic to this whatsoever. It is contrived and lazy ********. Unconvincing ********. You mean to tell me that Batman wouldn't be smart enough to figure out that Superman was raised on earth by an earth woman? That that revelation would be so shocking to him that it would automatically change his hardened cynical worldview of Superman as fast as it does in Batman V. Superman? That is complete ********.

If ****ing Lois Lane could figure out that Superman was raised by an earth woman in Man of Steel I am pretty sure the Worlds Greatest Detective could figure it out. And why would it suddenly invalidate every concern Batman has about Superman? Why would it even matter?

You can't say this movie is "too smart for Marvel fanboys" when it has that kind of crap in it.

Great post. The Martha reveal is ridiculous. The lowest point of the movie.