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

[matt47]

Exactly.

Batman's no killing isn't even a limitation, so much as it is him being beyond the limitation of needing to resort to killing.

While I understand what they were aiming for with including it to be part of how Bruce has strayed too far from his original mission, to me it is exactly the same as the way the Daredevil movie tackled to notion of crossing that line, vs the Daredevil Season 1.

They could have made Bruce's entire struggle about whether or not to cross that line, and actually kill Superman.
They still could have kept the "he's gone too far" arc without any of the killing, especially considering the main way they show it, and how he, maybe, changes at the end, via the branding.

The fact that you could cut almost every single Bat-kill from this film, and it wouldn't change thing, just goes to prove how pointless it was.

That's a great idea.

 

[FunkMiller]

They could have made Bruce's entire struggle about whether or not to cross that line, and actually kill Superman.
They still could have kept the "he's gone too far" arc without any of the killing, especially considering the main way they show it, and how he, maybe, changes at the end, via the branding.

That's marvellous.

Use the Dark Knight Returns Joker arc but apply it to Superman in this context.

 

[Poni_Boy]

That's marvellous.

Use the Dark Knight Returns Joker arc but apply it to Superman in this context.

You'd have to actually read TDKR to understand and adapt its themes. Not just look at a few awesome splash pages

 

[FunkMiller]

You'd have to actually read TDKR to understand and adapt its themes. Not just look at a few awesome splash pages

Sadly true. The litany of his errors when adapting aspects of the story to BvS is long and depressing. He throws in dialogue, imagery and mise en scene* from the novel, but uses them entirely out of context. TDKR is such a complex, meditative piece when you drill down into it properly, it's so frustrating when a ham-fisted idiot like Snyder gets hold of it, misses the point by a country mile, and spends $250 million in the process.

*apologies for the use of such a pretentious term. I seriously couldn't think of anything less New York Conservatory.

 

[souperman]

So then what is the argument about now?

In BvS Batman shoots the flamethrower tank not KGBeast.
KGBeast tries to fire the flamethrower and blows himself up.

Blows himself up! Because he was bent on killing Martha. He could have surrendered, and lived. But he was intent on killing her.

This type of indirect killing was perfectly acceptable in Tim Burton's Batman and also Nolans in fact Keaton does it with a smile!

But that's OK? Because Bertons Batman with campy and funny ? Keaton Took himself pretty damn seriously for a goofy looking bat.

AND they are terrorists and mercenaries! EF them! Come on now.

 

[FunkMiller]

This type of indirect killing was perfectly acceptable in Tim Burton's Batman and also Nolans in fact Keaton does it with a smile!

But that's OK? Because Bertons Batman with campy and funny ? Keaton Took himself pretty damn seriously for a goofy looking bat.

No, it wasn't. Burton's Batman was wrong as well, and so was Nolan's (although to a far, far, far lesser extent). So what exactly is your point pertaining to The Dark Knight Returns, comic book depictions of Batman, and Zack Synder's idiocy when adapting them, which is what we're talking about here?

 

[souperman]

No, it wasn't. Burton's Batman was wrong as well, and so was Nolan's (although to a far, far, far lesser extent). So what exactly is your point pertaining to The Dark Knight Returns, comic book depictions of Batman, and Zack Synder's idiocy when adapting them, which is what we're talking about here?

My point is that some fail to notice or accept that first, this is a movie adaptation. It should not really be compared to anything. It is its own animal.
BvS is an older disillusioned Batman who is not trying to kill but is not afraid to either... When necessary.

Whether or not Millers comic shows a dead or scared mutant doesn't matter.
The scene is "inspired by" the comic. Not a copy.

 

[FunkMiller]

My point is that some fail to notice or accept that first, this is a movie adaptation. It should not really be compared to anything. It is its own animal.

A poor movie adaptation, that falls into the same tired inaccuracies that Burton was wallowing in 20 years ago.

And if the director is going to spend months and months banging on about how influential TDKR is to him, and how much he loves it, and how much it will inform his movie, and how he intends to put a comics accurate Batman on screen, then I'm sure as hell going to complain like a whiny little b**** when he f***s it up completely, like the ham-fisted fool he is.

 

[Shikamaru]

Batman never killed anyone in The Dark Knight Returns. We know for a fact he never killed the guy Snyder was referring to because:

1. Batman himself later states in his fight with the Mutant leader that he has yet to ever cross that line. The fight with the Mutant Leader took place after he supposedly shot that Mutant in the head.
2. The news media states Batman hasn't killed anyone up until they believe him to have killed the Joker.
3. The GCPD doesn't officially recognize him as a murderer until they believe him to have killed the Joker.

I don't even see how this is up for debate. It's crystal clear he never killed anyone in the book.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Batman never killed anyone in The Dark Knight Returns. We know for a fact he never killed the guy Snyder was referring to because:

1. Batman himself later states in his fight with the Mutant leader that he has yet to ever cross that line. The fight with the Mutant Leader took place after he supposedly shot that Mutant in the head.
2. The news media states Batman hasn't killed anyone up until they believe him to have killed the Joker.
3. The GCPD doesn't officially recognize him as a murderer until they believe him to have killed the Joker.

I don't even see how this is up for debate. It's crystal clear he never killed anyone in the book.

Because some people will do anything to defend poor choices made in BvS

 

[FunkMiller]

Batman never killed anyone in The Dark Knight Returns. We know for a fact he never killed the guy Snyder was referring to because:

1. Batman himself later states in his fight with the Mutant leader that he has yet to ever cross that line. The fight with the Mutant Leader took place after he supposedly shot that Mutant in the head.
2. The news media states Batman hasn't killed anyone up until they believe him to have killed the Joker.
3. The GCPD doesn't officially recognize him as a murderer until they believe him to have killed the Joker.

I don't even see how this is up for debate. It's crystal clear he never killed anyone in the book.

Oh look. Somebody else who's actually read The Dark Knight Returns properly.

 

[souperman]

A poor movie adaptation, that falls into the same tired inaccuracies that Burton was wallowing in 20 years ago.

And if the director is going to spend months and months banging on about how influential TDKR is to him, and how much he loves it, and how much it will inform his movie, and how he intends to put a comics accurate Batman on screen, then I'm sure as hell going to complain like a whiny little b**** when he f***s it up completely, like the ham-fisted fool he is.

Cry on McDuff !
Your argument proves it's self wrong.
You cannot have the inaccuracies you are complaining about, when something is merely inspired by the idea and concept. It cannot be in accurate.

This is not a direct translation of the comic book. It only uses certain aspects and imagery to tell the story.

So cry cry cry.

 

[FunkMiller]

Cry on McDuff !
Your argument proves it's self wrong.
You cannot have the inaccuracies you are complaining about, when something is merely inspired by the idea and concept. It cannot be in accurate.

This is not a direct translation of the comic book. It only uses certain aspects and imagery to tell the story.

So cry cry cry.

Well, there you go. Zack Snyder cannot be inaccurate, people!

 

[souperman]

Well, there you go. Zack Snyder cannot be inaccurate, people!

Now you just sound foolish and desperate

You cannot be inaccurate when you're not copying something verbatim.

 

[The Guard]

Snyder has said this himself. He never intended to wholesale copy THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, the themes of the comic, the actual events of it, or its central message. The film simply takes some inspiration from the book, and then puts its own twist on things, relevant to this universe and its take on characters.

Snyder utilizes elements of TDKR as an homage to a genre defining work that inspired him, but with a different twist. Many comics creators have done this with aspects like the "power armor", putting their own spin on it, etc.

He speaks more to this in his latest interview with Mark Hughes.

Even the Batman/Superman conflict takes on a whole different meaning and form.

 

[FunkMiller]

Souperman has a point.

In many respects, Snyder never intended to wholesale copy THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, the themes of the comic, the actual events of it, or its message.

He utilizes elements of TDKR as an homage to a defining work that inspired him, but with a different twist.

Yes, that's very true. But he does it really, really badly.

 

[FunkMiller]

Now you just sound foolish and desperate

You cannot be inaccurate when you're not copying something verbatim.

But you can make a hash of it. And, as you may have noticed, that's what I believe Snyder has done when he's used elements of TDKR in his movie.

And he sure as hell is inaccurate when he talks about the book...

 

[gdw]

That's marvellous.

Use the Dark Knight Returns Joker arc but apply it to Superman in this context.

Exactly. . This was actually what I thought the film WAS going to do. Especially after reading the prequel comic which explicitly stated this Batman did NOT kill.

That, I think, is what made this particular killing Batman feel that much more egregious. I was not only hoping, but all but told, we were FINALLY getting an accurate, no killing, Batman.

That said, I can't really hold the killing against this version any more than I can the others, at least in terms of comparison and ranking.

In fact, IF the killing is meant to go the way of the branding, as part of Bruce's redemption, then I'll mind the killing a little less than the Burton films.
Again, still not necessary, exactly like with the Daredevil movie.

A much better version of the exact same character arc could have been told without the senseless killing.

 

[Bruce Malone]

Snyder reminds me of one of those people who read TDKR a long time ago and somehow remembers Batman as being the Punisher in it.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Snyder reminds me of one of those people who read TDKR a long time ago and somehow remembers Batman as being the Punisher in it.

Hah that's pretty much exactly what Kevin Smith said

 

[souperman]

But you can make a hash of it. And, as you may have noticed, that's what I believe Snyder has done when he's used elements of TDKR in his movie.

And he sure as hell is inaccurate when he talks about the book...

He doesn't do it THAT badly... Did you want Bruce to be 70 !

He only took the IDEA of the conflict and images of the comics to give us a thrill. If you look for too much accuracy of the story you already know, you miss the beauty of THIS story.

But I'll concede to you that Zack... does speak ...strangely sometimes...

( hope you know I was only teasing you. Everyone deserves their own opinion )

 

[Bruce Malone]

Hah that's pretty much exactly what Kevin Smith said

Haha I actually haven't heard his Fatman on Batman podcast in some time.

What exactly is his take on the film? He's a personal friend of Ben I know.

 

[gdw]

My point is that some fail to notice or accept that first, this is a movie adaptation. It should not really be compared to anything. It is its own animal.
BvS is an older disillusioned Batman who is not trying to kill but is not afraid to either... When necessary.

Whether or not Millers comic shows a dead or scared mutant doesn't matter.
The scene is "inspired by" the comic. Not a copy.

While absolutely true, the thing you're ignoring is Snyder's citation of the source as justification.

He's not defending it as a DEVIATION made in adaptation; he's defending it as STAYING TRUE to the source.
It's not us that's ignoring something.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Haha I actually haven't heard his Fatman on Batman podcast in some time.

What exactly is his take on the film? He's a personal friend of Ben I know.

Well there's a lot of profanity so I won't link it hah

Basically he reviewed it twice. After his first showing he blasted it and Snyder apart (but praised Ben). Second viewing, hm, was odd. Sounded forced. This quote really stood out though:

“There seems to be a fundamental lack of understanding of what those characters are about,” Smith explained in regard to one of his chief complaints. “It’s almost like Zack Snyder didn’t read a bunch of comics, he read one comic once, and it was Dark Knight Returns, and his favorite part was the last part where Batman and Superman fight. But… you get to do that in that book because you’ve got three books prior to that and 50 years at that point of comic book history to build on.”

 

[The Guard]

While absolutely true, the thing you're ignoring is Snyder's citation of the source as justification.

He's not defending it as a DEVIATION made in adaptation; he's defending it as STAYING TRUE to the source.
It's not us that's ignoring something.

But while he's wrong about the specifics (the guy getting shot right between the eyes), and I think we can excuse a mistake of memory, he's correct about the nature of the moment within the story, and he is correct regarding his justification for applying that type of moment into BVS.

That moment is there to show that with innocent life at stake, this version of Batman is going to go as far as he needs to, up to and including using lethal force. Which is exactly what happens in that sequence in THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS.

From Snyder's interview with Mark Hughes:
Because Frank was all about setting a scenario where there is no option. A guy’s going to kill a kid, what are you going to do? Like the Kobayashi Maru– there’s no way [to win], it’s designed to be that.