BvS Batman v Superman & The Dark Knight Returns - let's clear something up... [SPOILERS]

someone should link this thread to snyder and the writers of the dc films.

they ain't even really reading the source they said they were basing their story off of. shame on them!

 

Is that not blood splatter on the wall behind him?

and it'a policy, not an unbreakable rule.

Policy's are changed all the time to suit current conditions.

 

No it's not. He shot the wall by the mutant's head to scare him into dropping the kid.

But the policy itself isn't the point. People are allowed to change whatever they want when adapting comics (the fallout from those changes are on them). The point is that Snyder says he based Batman's no kill policy on this specific scene from TDKReturns, which he obviously read wrong. Or didn't research. If he'd looked it up because he felt the panel wasn't clear he'd find interviews with Frank Miller stating that Batman doesn't kill in the TDKReturns leading up to his confrontation with Joker.

 

I believe it's "her", but, yeah, it is. Whatever Miller said, Batman killed her in that panel.

As for him doing a similar thing in the

Spoiler

Martha's rescue scene

, it was more than justified, given the gravity of the situation.

There's no ambiguity whatsoever when you have a panel of a man shooting a gun and a next panel of a guy with blood splatter behind his/her head.

Besides, given that Snyder didn't have his Batman shoot the guy between the eyes, I don't see what's the point of this thread.

 

You're conveniently ignoring the blood spatter on the wall behind the mutant, which is NOT there in the previous panel. Good try, but...you're wrong. He shot him. Whether he lives or dies is ambiguous.

ETA Yes, there's a bullet hole in the wall. Machine guns can fire multiple rounds, and walls don't bleed.

 

If you're gonna argue he didn't kill anyone in that panel you could just as easily argue Batman didn't kill anyone in BvS -- while he clearly seems to no one is every confirmed killed. Just very badly burned. ;-)

 

this is the type of stuff that causes religious conflicts.
different interpretations of the bible - in this case, tdkr.

frank miller needs to release an official statement on this to clear the air. but i doubt even that will really settle the debate. haha

 

So first he CLEARLY didn't shoot the mutant? And once pointed out that you're wrong, it's open to interpretation?

This is why you can never please all of the fans.

 

Backtracking at its finest (or lowest, depending on how you look at it ). But seriously, when someone doesn't want to admit being wrong, there's no logic and reason in the world that will make him do so. What I found particularly funny is that he felt compelled to make an entire thread out of this.

 

but i did hear good things about dk3: the master race.
though i think its mainly brian azzarello really writing it. and miller is just either offering an outline or story ideas.
i have yet to read it.

seems like miller's health has declined in the last year or two though. hopefully the man gets better.

 

Oh, jeez. Sorry. Did you not type this in your OP?

"Notice the most important panel? You see how there's only one bullet hole in the wall? Also, notice the look of shock on the mutant's face, rather than pain?"

Did I read that wrong? We're you not saying that he didn't him there? Do you words not mean things anymore?

 

I was hoping this was a thread about the Dark Knight Returns references/homages in the film

 

So which is it? Did he not shoot him or is it ambiguous? You can't have both.

 

One thing I agree with. No way did he shoot the guy between the eyes. There's clearly no bullet hole in the mutant's head.

 

Then what's that stuff on the wall behind him?

 

Not your fault at all mate, mind for assuming