BvS Batman v Superman - Reviews Thread [TAG SPOILERS] - Part 2

[The Shape]

2. Makes gigantic leap of logic that if someone has a 1% chance of "going bad" they probably need to be killed.

This, in particular, is something that has basis in reality in terms of the real-world counter-terrorism policies of the Bush Administration and specifically Dick Cheney's "1% Doctrine", which was about how the US should confront low-probability but high impact "events".

"If there's a 1% chance that Pakistani scientists are helping al-Qaeda build or develop a nuclear weapon, we have to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response."

Many people were critical of such a policy/strategy, just as people are critical of Bruce's view on Superman and feel he was wrong to think that way. The film goes on to show that he was wrong to have that mindset.

 

[javonstokess]

This, in particular, is something that has basis in reality in terms of the real-world counter-terrorism policies of the Bush Administration and specifically Dick Cheney's "1% Doctrine", which was about how the US should confront low-probability but high impact "events".

"If there's a 1% chance that Pakistani scientists are helping al-Qaeda build or develop a nuclear weapon, we have to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response."

Many people were critical of such a policy/strategy, just as people are critical of Bruce's view on Superman and feel he was wrong to think that way. The film goes on to show that he was wrong to have that mindset.

Which I would have had no issue with if, say, Bruce felt the need to create contingencies to just neutralize Superman's abilities, but he's trying to outright murder him.

It would be like "oh, there's a 1% chance Pakistani scientists are building a nucelar weapon. Let's just nuke the entire middle east and be done with it."

 

[FunkMiller]

This, in particular, is something that has basis in reality in terms of the real-world counter-terrorism policies of the Bush Administration and specifically Dick Cheney's "1% Doctrine", which was about how the US should confront low-probability but high impact "events".

"If there's a 1% chance that Pakistani scientists are helping al-Qaeda build or develop a nuclear weapon, we have to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response."

Many people were critical of such a policy/strategy, just as people are critical of Bruce's view on Superman and feel he was wrong to think that way. The film goes on to show that he was wrong to have that mindset.

Yes indeed everyone, Snyder's Batman essentially starts this movie as the Bush Administration.

And people wonder why so many fans don't like this...

 

[The Shape]

Yes indeed everyone, Snyder's Batman essentially starts this movie as the Bush Administration.

And people wonder why so many fans don't like this...

Yep, and like some Bush administration policies, the film is pretty explicit in showing a Bruce's early attitude and actions to be undesirable, misguided, and even illegitimate.

 

[FunkMiller]

Yep, and like some Bush administration policies, the film is pretty explicit in showing a Bruce's early attitude and actions to be undesirable, misguided, and even illegitimate.

Completely agree, but a Batman who's actions are undesirable, misguided and illegitimate really should never be put on screen - unless it's an elseworld's take, and not the core universe.

 

[The Shape]

Which I would have had no issue with if, say, Bruce felt the need to create contingencies to just neutralize Superman's abilities, but he's trying to outright murder him.

It would be like "oh, there's a 1% chance Pakistani scientists are building a nucelar weapon. Let's just nuke the entire middle east and be done with it."

Uh, no, it's not like that at all. To my knowledge, Bruce's stategy wasn't to commit mass genocide in order to neutralize a singular perceived threat, which wasn't Cheney's strategy either.

And I'm not defending the Bush administration here, btw.

 

[javonstokess]

Yep, and like some Bush administration policies, the film is pretty explicit in showing a Bruce's early attitude and actions to be undesirable, misguided, and even illegitimate.

Soooo, you're saying his actions were "un-Batman-like"?

 

[FunkMiller]

Soooo, you're saying his actions were "un-Batman-like"?

 

[OutOfBoose]

to javonstokess

Spoiler

2. It's related to the Kryptonian ship because he clearly didn't trust the government (hence him destroying the drone) so why leave the last vestige of his heritage LAYING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE CITY.

You're inventing something, that isn't there. He didn't want the government to know where he "hangs his cape", that's all. He doesn't want to be spied on. Kryptonian ship has nothing to do with it.

3. I have no problem with Batman being tricked, but how was he tricked? His issue with Superman had to do with a lack of research, not anything Luthor did (and really what did he do? Send him some scrawled on checks? Really...). At least with Bane/Catwoman/Talia you could make the arguement that he was rusty from being out of action for years, with the Joker he was at least using detective work and Ra's was the mentor tricking the mentee, but Luthor did NOTHING to sway him to fight Superman. Less than nothing actually.

Alright, it probably doesn't convince you. Whatever, different strokes... But I felt it was a really nicely constructed arc for Batman. Deep personal crisis due to lack of progress in his crusade, feeling of powerlessness and guilt, that had deep roots since murder of his parents, then death of his employees and crippling of Keefe. Keefe also blames Superman. He doesn't receive money from Bruce, because Lex intercepted it. I like how those scrawled checks fueled guilt and rage of Bruce. At the same time, he wanted to deal with Superman on his own, Lex just stimulated Bruce's emotional state just a tiny bit. So yeah, I buy his lack of sense due to his emotional condition.

4. Lies for you. They were blaming the deaths on Superman, not other people killing because of Superman, hence why Lois was investigating the bullet and giving it to the General to clear Superman's name.

Blaming the deaths on Superman isn't the same as thinking he killed everyone. Superman goes to another country, does something, that leads to mass bloodshed, according to the witness. There's no details about what happened exactly.

5. Once again, you are not explaining what Wonder Woman's actual purpose was in THIS movie outside of "come in at the end and fight Doomsday". She served no purpose but to set up the Justice League movie. She was essentially "Hawkeye in Thor".

Ultimately, all major characters go through crisis - Lex, Bruce, Diana and Clark. Superman ties them all together. I believe, they choose the wrong title for the film. Because it's not about conflict between Batman and Superman.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Soooo, you're saying his actions were "un-Batman-like"?

Like it's a problem. Yes, it's a broken Batman. I understand some people won't accept it, but I perfectly accept this arc. He was Batman, he lost his way, he restored it by the end of the film.

 

[Timebomb]

I think everyone is reading way more into this than what was portrayed on screen. This is what I saw and correct me if I am wrong. Bruce witnesses the destruction of Metropolis and his building by Superman fighting Zod. Because of the death and destruction a blind hatred builds for Superman and the power he wields. Bruce now feels that he must destroy Superman for the good of mankind. I think I got it all and I am not missing anything. This is what I saw play out on screen.
Now here are the problems. Why would any of this make Bruce want to kill Superman? Really, what is the motivation. What I described above is in no way any sort of justification. Superman destroyed Metropolis while trying to save mankind. Yes it was poorly done but if Batman did any sort of investigation he would see that Superman does help people and is a good guy. (Poorly executed again) why kill him? Because he has power? Sorry but I don't buy any of it and I don't buy that this is what sends Batman over the edge. It's grasping at straws.

I would say that this would send Batman on a mission to find a way to stop Superman or someone like him in the future. I would buy that motivation. I would even buy the Batman and Superman fight if it was Batman's sole purpose to prove to Batman that he could stop him if he ever got out of line. But that's not what happened.
Could you imagine if Batman beat Superman and then told him that he did it just to show him that he could be stopped if it ever came to that. He could also tell him that the world needs a hero like him but the Batman would always be watching.
But we didn't get that. We got murderous rampage.

 

[OutOfBoose]

javonstokess

Spoiler

Example of Batman's stupidity:

1. Stealthly puts a tracker on truck carrying kryptonite. Then proceeds to chase after said truck in the loudest possible Batmobile imaginable, all the while doing everything he can to destroy the truck (and essentially his tracker).

It's not stupidity, it's thinking two steps ahead. What if the batmobile is damaged enough, so Batman can't continue pursuit? What if Batman loses the sight of the truck during chase? It's perfectly fine move. What if he doesn't chase the convoy, but they put the rock under HEAVY security, it will be impossible to get it? Unless you believe he's Batgod and can do ANYTHING.

2. Makes gigantic leap of logic that if someone has a 1% chance of "going bad" they probably need to be killed.

It's a paranoid logic. **** happens.

3. Makes another gigantic leap of logic in thinking that Superman had anything to do with the destruction of the Congress building just because he got a few scribbled on checks.

Who said he makes that leap of logic? It looked like Keefe attempted to kill Superman. Nothing indicates Bruce thought Superman did that. I think it's more related to his guilt and that he clearly see how anywhere Superman goes, there's death around him.

4. Attacks and attempts to kill a Superman who is casually walking towards him LOUDLY asking for his help.

Superman was interrupted before he was able to finish the line. But even if he did, I don't think Batman would listen to him. Not until Superman is at his mercy, at least.

5. When attempting to save Martha Kent who's being held hostage in a building full of bad guys, instead of using stealth and guile to infiltrate and save this woman, he decides it's best to empty hundreds of bullets into the building basically hoping she doesn't get hit with a stray. THEN when faced with Martha being threatened by a man holding a flame thrower HE SHOOTS THE FLAME THROWER'S TANK which is about less than a foot away from her.

At least it worked. It's still MUCH smarter than Batman in TDK trilogy, jumping bare-fisted against crowds of armed to teeth guys without any attempt to disable their weapons.

 

[javonstokess]

Like it's a problem. Yes, it's a broken Batman. I understand some people won't accept it, but I perfectly accept this arc. He was Batman, he lost his way, he restored it by the end of the film.

For the love of...

Even the "broken Batman" Snyder's basing his version on (TDKR) wasn't as flat out moronic & murderous as Affleckman.

 

[The Shape]

Soooo, you're saying his actions were "un-Batman-like"?

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying, and that was the point -- that he was wrong and not acting like the Batman we know and love.

I'd be completely against this if there hadn't been a pretty clearly displayed character arc for Batman in the film which showed that he was wrong and needed to realize the error in his ways, change, somehow leave this dark, misguided period behind him, and go back to being the more hopeful, heroic, and level-headed person he should be.

 

[Charlatan]

Supes really should have destroyed or at the very least made the spaceship inaccessible to humans. That's akin to leaving a loaded gun around where children can get to it.

 

[javonstokess]

javonstokess

Spoiler

Example of Batman's stupidity:
It's not stupidity, it's thinking two steps ahead. What if the batmobile is damaged enough, so Batman can't continue pursuit? What if Batman loses the sight of the truck during chase? It's perfectly fine move. What if he doesn't chase the convoy, but they put the rock under HEAVY security, it will be impossible to get it? Unless you believe he's Batgod and can do ANYTHING.
It's a paranoid logic. **** happens.
Who said he makes that leap of logic? It looked like Keefe attempted to kill Superman. Nothing indicates Bruce thought Superman did that. I think it's more related to his guilt and that he clearly see how anywhere Superman goes, there's death around him.
Superman was interrupted before he was able to finish the line. But even if he did, I don't think Batman would listen to him. Not until Superman is at his mercy, at least.
At least it worked. It's still MUCH smarter than Batman in TDK trilogy, jumping bare-fisted against crowds of armed to teeth guys without any attempt to disable their weapons.

Spoiler

1. I'd say putting a tracker on a truck and than ramming your car through said truck, possibly damaging the tracker isn't the smartest course of action.

2. So instead of a leap of logic, it's blind stupidity? Gotcha.

3. Soooooo stupidity?

4. Or he could have used some form of stealth...y'know, the kinda of stealth that's been associated with his character for 70+ years.

 

[Predator jp]

javonstokess

Spoiler

It's not stupidity, it's thinking two steps ahead. What if the batmobile is damaged enough, so Batman can't continue pursuit? What if Batman loses the sight of the truck during chase? It's perfectly fine move. What if he doesn't chase the convoy, but they put the rock under HEAVY security, it will be impossible to get it? Unless you believe he's Batgod and can do ANYTHING.

Spoiler

he almost destroyed his own tracker during the chase. i really don't think it was a smart move.

 

[OutOfBoose]

I think everyone is reading way more into this than what was portrayed on screen. This is what I saw and correct me if I am wrong. Bruce witnesses the destruction of Metropolis and his building by Superman fighting Zod. Because of the death and destruction a blind hatred builds for Superman and the power he wields. Bruce now feels that he must destroy Superman for the good of mankind. I think I got it all and I am not missing anything. This is what I saw play out on screen.

You described very basic outline, but missed a lot of stuff too.

Now here are the problems. Why would any of this make Bruce want to kill Superman? Really, what is the motivation. What I described above is in no way any sort of justification.

"Any of this" just aligns with his personal crisis. He was powerless to save his parents, he was powerless to save his employees, he was powerless to save his friends, including Robin. According to Bruce, good guys turned bad and caused enough grief. He sees this super-being with absurd amount of power, when even his good deeds can cause so much suffering and pain. What if he turns bad? "You know what promises are worth". Good cocktail of paranoia, fear, anger and guilt. He's a heavy drinker as well. It's a broken Bat.

Superman destroyed Metropolis while trying to save mankind. Yes it was poorly done but if Batman did any sort of investigation he would see that Superman does help people and is a good guy. (Poorly executed again) why kill him? Because he has power? Sorry but I don't buy any of it and I don't buy that this is what sends Batman over the edge. It's grasping at straws.

Power is just one of many elements. Bruce is getting older. He thinks about his legacy. He doesn't believe fighting crime was worth it. Hence comparison of criminals to weeds. His legacy is symbolized by his destroyed mansion. His legacy - dead friends in a shape of Robin's suit. He recalls his ancestors, who were hunters, and thinks, that hunting down that wannabe god would be his true legacy. He thinks future of the world is in danger. I don't know if it's important for his arc, but maybe stuff, that he saw in Knightmare vision, added to his decision.

I would say that this would send Batman on a mission to find a way to stop Superman or someone like him in the future. I would buy that motivation. I would even buy the Batman and Superman fight if it was Batman's sole purpose to prove to Batman that he could stop him if he ever got out of line. But that's not what happened.

Normally, I would agree with you. But this is a broken Bat.

Could you imagine if Batman beat Superman and then told him that he did it just to show him that he could be stopped if it ever came to that. He could also tell him that the world needs a hero like him but the Batman would always be watching.
But we didn't get that. We got murderous rampage.

He doesn't believe the world needs a hero like him.

 

[OutOfBoose]

For the love of...

Even the "broken Batman" Snyder's basing his version on (TDKR) wasn't as flat out moronic & murderous as Affleckman.

There was nothing broken about Miller's Batman. Batman, who got out of retirement and perfectly follows his code isn't broken Batman. Entirely different stories, entirely different takes. Despite some homages.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Spoiler

he almost destroyed his own tracker during the chase. i really don't think it was a smart move.

He didn't in the end. So I don't see the point of arguing over that.

 

[The Joker]

For the love of...

Even the "broken Batman" Snyder's basing his version on (TDKR) wasn't as flat out moronic & murderous as Affleckman.

That's the thing. There is no "broken Batman" in the comics. The characterization Snyder offered up was nearly everything Batman is not.

Anything he took from DKR was just shallow visual stuff. Nothing meaty from the story.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Spoiler

1. I'd say putting a tracker on a truck and than ramming your car through said truck, possibly damaging the tracker isn't the smartest course of action.

2. So instead of a leap of logic, it's blind stupidity? Gotcha.

3. Soooooo stupidity?

4. Or he could have used some form of stealth...y'know, the kinda of stealth that's been associated with his character for 70+ years.

You don't hear what I'm saying. Whatever.

 

[Lily Adler]

http://io9.gizmodo.com/batman-v-superman-spoiler-faq-of-justice-1767720335

LMAO!!

Spoiler

This whole scene exists solely so the movie can have the government ask if maybe Superman should be regulated, which exists solely so the government can get involved with Lex Luthor’s attempt to build an anti-Superman weapon, which itself exists solely so the government can say “Hey, stop making that anti-Superman weapon,” which exists solely so Lex can illegally important a big hunk of kryptonite, which exists so Batman can try to steal it in a giant action set piece (where he murders so many people).

It's like a minefield.

 

[javonstokess]

There was nothing broken about Miller's Batman. Batman, who got out of retirement and perfectly follows his code isn't broken Batman. Entirely different stories, entirely different takes. Despite some homages.

Of course the "TDKR" version is broken. He essentially broke and quit when Jason Todd died! That's the whole point of the book is that Batman rebuilds himself and comes out of retirement.

Forget homages when the director literally says that that's the Batman he was using.

 

[Predator jp]

He didn't in the end. So I don't see the point of arguing over that.

Spoiler

well, Batman could get the rock under heavy security in the end so i don't see the point of arguing over that either...