BvS Ben Affleck IS Batman - - - - - - - - - - - Part 38

[TDKR1977]

That Batmobile crush-fetish scene... sorry, but that's mass murder. He was stealing from Lex so that he could do what Lex already planned on doing.

Not murder.

 

[The Guard]

That Batmobile crush-fetish scene... sorry, but that's mass murder. He was stealing from Lex so that he could do what Lex already planned on doing.

What are you referring to?

 

[BattleAngel]

What are you referring to?

The scene where he murders the mercenaries transporting kryptonite to Lex Luthor. So that he can use it to murder Superman.

 

[Drifting]

OH BOY HERE WE GO

This film wraps you slowly in tendrils of darkness before you even realize it. I loved everything about Ben Affleck. Even my knee jerk fanboy reaction to the killing once thought about made perfect sense - more on that later. This is a HORROR film. Whether they intended it to be or not, that's what it is. This Batman obviously didn't start his career as a killer, a boozer or a womanizer but this is the LOGICAL place you would be after two decades of a life spent in utter darkness. I loved the frightened police rookie and the victims. I loved the reason for the bat brand. I loved that they showed him obviously over the hill and getting too upward in years to CLEANLY dispatch a warehouse of armed men. Ben Affleck put his heart and soul into this performance, right down to the microsecond expression when he hands Alfred a cup of coffee. It was a horror film. It was Batman. I loved every minute of it and I will make no apologies.

 

[Mrs. Wayne]

I feel like if we were given more insight to the reason for his new and more brutal ways aside from Alfred's "New Rules" small talk, it wouldn't come off so casual how reckless he was being. That's what bothered me the most.

 

[Cobblepot]

I feel like if we were given more insight to the reason for his new and more brutal ways aside from Alfred's "New Rules" small talk, it wouldn't come off so casual how reckless he was being. That's what bothered me the most.

Then some other critic would have yelled "spoonfed".
The stakes were too high with this movie and the so called critics just love deconstructing it to tear it down.

 

[Drifting]

I feel like if we were given more insight to the reason for his new and more brutal ways aside from Alfred's "New Rules" small talk, it wouldn't come off so casual how reckless he was being. That's what bothered me the most.

"Not for lack of trying" seemed to sum it up. This guy, at least to me, was looking for a good death. Everything in the performance spelled out why he was reckless IMO.

 

[BattleAngel]

OH BOY HERE WE GO

This film wraps you slowly in tendrils of darkness before you even realize it. I loved everything about Ben Affleck. Even my knee jerk fanboy reaction to the killing once thought about made perfect sense - more on that later. This is a HORROR film. Whether they intended it to be or not, that's what it is. This Batman obviously didn't start his career as a killer, a boozer or a womanizer but this is the LOGICAL place you would be after two decades of a life spent in utter darkness. I loved the frightened police rookie and the victims. I loved the reason for the bat brand. I loved that they showed him obviously over the hill and getting too upward in years to CLEANLY dispatch a warehouse of armed men. Ben Affleck put his heart and soul into this performance, right down to the microsecond expression when he hands Alfred a cup of coffee. It was a horror film. It was Batman. I loved every minute of it and I will make no apologies.

I can get behind the idea that this is a horror movie in which the villain is Batman, a once virtuous crime fighter whose origin story as a villain is that he crossed the line and no longer can think rationally or keep himself from killing, sure.

 

[BattleAngel]

What kills me the most is how the killing scenes seemed to be written in just to show off the cool vehicle designs. The kryptonite heist could have been much more effective if Batman stealth-steals it from the boat before its ever loaded onto the truck, they bring it back to an anxiously eager lex, only to open it and find Batman's shuriken...

Why this is is better: 1) doesn't invite fans of moral Batman to hate this take 2) gives lex extra reason to be mad at Bats and pit BvS in battle to the death and 3) BatStealth is at least as cool as BatMobile. 4) we barely get any scenes of batman in action in his regular suit

I can get behind batman being so unhinged that he's branding people... I can follow Batman right up to that line... But once you cross it, what makes him special is lost. He's just Punisher or Wolverine or Deadshot or any number of the vigilante/likable bad-guys, he just has a goofier suit.

I feel like Batman gets away with evoking a demon because he is not one. He does not play God with peoples' lives...

If that had been another Superman villain killing the mercenaries to steal kryptonite from Lex Luthor, or Joker stealing from Penguin, we wouldn't call those deaths "justifiable homicide."

I can get the idea that this is a horror film where Batman has become something other than Batman, but this was supposed to be a franchise starter and I do not believe for a second they meant you to read anything into Batman's killing. They were just as indifferent about those lives as Batman, and they expected you to be as well.

 

[Mrs. Wayne]

"Not for lack of trying" seemed to sum it up. This guy, at least to me, was looking for a good death. Everything in the performance spelled out why he was reckless IMO.

I understand he didn't care for his well being but it's weird how (even while they were bad guys) he was almost carelessly putting the people (human beings) he was supposedly protecting from Superman (The Alien) in harm's way. There was a hypocrisy there that couldn't be missed. Maybe that was purposly done but it's weird.

 

[The Guard]

The scene where he murders the mercenaries transporting kryptonite to Lex Luthor. So that he can use it to murder Superman.

That's not murder.

 

[Drifting]

What kills me the most is how the killing scenes seemed to be written in just to show off the cool vehicle designs. The kryptonite heist could have been much more effective if Batman stealth-steals it from the boat before its ever loaded onto the truck, they bring it back to an anxiously eager lex, only to open it and find Batman's shuriken...

Why this is is better: 1) doesn't invite fans of moral Batman to hate this take 2) gives lex extra reason to be mad at Bats and pit BvS in battle to the death and 3) BatStealth is at least as cool as BatMobile. 4) we barely get any scenes of batman in action in his regular suit

I can get behind batman being so unhinged that he's branding people... I can follow Batman right up to that line... But once you cross it, what makes him special is lost. He's just Punisher or Wolverine or Deadshot or any number of the vigilante/likable bad-guys, he just has a goofier suit.

I feel like Batman gets away with evoking a demon because he is not one. He does not play God with peoples' lives...

If that had been another Superman villain killing the mercenaries to steal kryptonite from Lex Luthor, or Joker stealing from Penguin, we wouldn't call those deaths "justifiable homicide."

I can get the idea that this is a horror film where Batman has become something other than Batman, but this was supposed to be a franchise starter and I do not believe for a second they meant you to read anything into Batman's killing. They were just as indifferent about those lives as Batman, and they expected you to be as well.

That comparison seems a bit unfair though... He spares way more than he kills. It's not as though he lit up that warehouse with a machine gun. I see your point but all I'm saying is that the idea that he started out as the Batman we know and after two decades arrived at this Batman makes complete sense to me. Was there a time in the 90's when he would have used a forward grapple to rip that mounted machine gun from the truck and spare the driver? Probably.

 

[BattleAngel]

That's not murder.

it's not first degree, but it's murder. If you break into a person's house to steal something and they try to protect themselves or their property with lethal force, and you kill them with a gun... You're getting written up for murder...

But that's being too sweet. He was stealing something intended for one purpose: murdering superman, with the intention of using it for one purpose: murdering superman.

So back to the analogy...

Batman (a criminal) breaks into the "home" of another criminal to steal a murder weapon because he wants to be the one who gets to use it, and kills several people whose job it is to protect that property...

That's not justifiable homicide. It's not manslaughter. It's murder.

 

[Maximus 36]

Loved the movie. Full IMAX was glorious. Were there some things about the movie I wasn't a fan of? Of course...there is with every movie I watch. No movie is perfect. Except for Shawshank Redemption...that's a perfect movie.

I'm blown away by the "critics" with this one. Normally nowadays I don't pay much attention to what they say and the only one I ever really took stock in was Ebert. I miss that man.

Regarding Batman being a killer, I get it with this particular narrative for Bruce/Batman. The discovery of an all powerful being from another planet was a game changer for him. Add that on top of the fact that he's been doing this for 20 years or so, and the people he's lost, and the number of villains he has faced, he's on the very verge of being a broken man. He said it himself when he was speaking to Alfred about Superman, that this might be the only thing he does that matters.

I would prefer if WB and DC would stick with Batman not killing in the movieverse but it's obvious that they've been pretty comfortable with it for years now:

Batman 1989 Kill Count - 18
Batman Returns Kill Count - 5
Batman Forever Kill Count - 7
Batman Begins Kill Count - 6
The Dark Knight Kill Count - 1
The Dark Knight Rises Kill Count - 2

I've learned to deal with it. Going again in IMAX tonight!

 

[Drifting]

it's not first degree, but it's murder. If you break into a person's house to steal something and they try to protect themselves or their property with lethal force, and you kill them with a gun... You're getting written up for murder...

But that's being too sweet. He was stealing something intended for one purpose: murdering superman, with the intention of using it for one purpose: murdering superman.

So back to the analogy...

Batman (a criminal) breaks into the "home" of another criminal to steal a murder weapon because he wants to be the one who gets to use it, and kills several people whose job it is to protect that property...

That's not justifiable homicide. It's not manslaughter. It's murder.

But if you imagine Adam West's Batman doing it it's more than a good chuckle.. lol

 

[BattleAngel]

That comparison seems a bit unfair though... He spares way more than he kills. It's not as though he lit up that warehouse with a machine gun. I see your point but all I'm saying is that the idea that he started out as the Batman we know and after two decades arrived at this Batman makes complete sense to me. Was there a time in the 90's when he would have used a forward grapple to rip that mounted machine gun from the truck and spare the driver? Probably.

Thank you for actually debating the points with me and not saying I am just bashing Batman to be cool

This is my honest takeaway from the film- I really don't see the evidence that this particular batman was ever a non-lethal Batman. I get the sense that he's always been a lethal vigilante. Like "Mrs Kent" says, we need more evidence... If that's how they meant it, then I can get behind your points... But I did not feel they were clear enough about it. I got that they had reverted back to 1989 killer Batman, where the "one rule" isn't even part of the conversation.

 

[BattleAngel]

But if you imagine Adam West's Batman doing it it's more than a good chuckle.. lol

HAhaha amazing

 

[Drifting]

Thank you for actually debating the points with me and not saying I am just bashing Batman to be cool

This is my honest takeaway from the film- I really don't see the evidence that this particular batman was ever a non-lethal Batman. I get the sense that he's always been a lethal vigilante. Like "Mrs Kent" says, we need more evidence... If that's how they meant it, then I can get behind your points... But I did not feel they were clear enough about it. I got that they had reverted back to 1989 killer Batman, where the "one rule" isn't even part of the conversation.

Hey this is the fun part man, we all get to have cool discussions on our takes of the film. If I had the same impression as you then I would be mad too. My side though? When Bruce says to Alfred "They're still criminals, nothing has changed." and Alfred responds with "Everything has changed." along with his expression and intonation told me that Bruce wasn't always a killer. This is the reason why the whole idea didn't anger me. I just see this guy who probably within the last few years just sort of gave up on his honor. It's poignant and bittersweet to me. But I see your side too for sure.

 

[CFE]

People are condemning the film's portrayal of Batman for his "controversial methods" when it comes to fighting criminals, saying it's a betrayal of the character and it's not true to who Batman is.

I agree. It isn't true to who Batman is...or, rather, to who he was.

Who he was twenty years prior. When his intentions were noble and his outlook was optimistic.

But that's the point the movie is making.

It's an intentional departure necessary to facilitate the story that's being told.

Like "Mask of the Phantasm." The only way that story can be told is with the creation of Andrea Beaumont and the inclusion into the origin of the concept of Bruce contemplating walking away from his obligations for love. This doesn't happen in the comics but, for the sake of that story, it happens there.

In "Dawn of Justice," the narrative conceit is that decades of conflict and tragedy have led him astray from his moral path. A side effect of his war on crime which is exacerbated by Superman's presence.

"The feeling of powerlessness that turns good men cruel."

Bruce is a good man gone cruel. He's bitter. He's disenfranchised. He's brutal. He brands criminals.

His penance for staring too long into the abyss is to become consumed by it. Blinded by it. So much so that he doesn't see the hope Superman represents until a critical juncture. And then recognizes it. And he witnesses first hand the example Superman sets.

And in doing so, I think, he's inspired to come back from the brink he was standing on from the outset of the film...to become a semblance of the hero he once was when he first donned cape and cowl.

This culminates in a realization that men can still be good...that HE can still be good. And a moment where he has an opportunity to brand Lex...and chooses not to.

Is Batman taking life a departure from the source material? Yes. And that's the point.

Both he and Wonder Woman are disillusioned, abandoning the crusades they once took part in. But through meeting with and fighting alongside Superman, they answer a call of redemption, returning to their true selves...Batman with his morals and Wonder Woman with her choosing to resume her mantle after initially abandoning the world of man.

I believe that's what's referred to as a character arc.

 

[kedrell]

Sad affleck is getting popular on youtube. Hitting almost 9 million views already.

I can see why though.

Should pass 15 million views by the end of today. Wow, has that taken off like a rocket or what?

#Sadfleck

 

[BattleAngel]

People are condemning the film's portrayal of Batman for his "controversial methods" when it comes to fighting criminals, saying it's a betrayal of the character and it's not true to who Batman is.

I agree. It isn't true to who Batman is...or, rather, to who he was.

Who he was twenty years prior. When his intentions were noble and his outlook was optimistic.

But that's the point the movie is making.

It's an intentional departure necessary to facilitate the story that's being told.

Like "Mask of the Phantasm." The only way that story can be told is with the creation of Andrea Beaumont and the inclusion into the origin of the concept of Bruce contemplating walking away from his obligations for love. This doesn't happen in the comics but, for the sake of that story, it happens there.

In "Dawn of Justice," the narrative conceit is that decades of conflict and tragedy have led him astray from his moral path. A side effect of his war on crime which is exacerbated by Superman's presence.

"The feeling of powerlessness that turns good men cruel."

Bruce is a good man gone cruel. He's bitter. He's disenfranchised. He's brutal. He brands criminals.

His penance for staring too long into the abyss is to become consumed by it. Blinded by it. So much so that he doesn't see the hope Superman represents until a critical juncture. And then recognizes it. And he witnesses first hand the example Superman sets.

And in doing so, I think, he's inspired to come back from the brink he was standing on from the outset of the film...to become a semblance of the hero he once was when he first donned cape and cowl.

This culminates in a realization that men can still be good...that HE can still be good. And a moment where he has an opportunity to brand yet another criminal...and chooses not to.

Is Batman taking life a departure from the source material? Yes. And that's the point.

Both he and Wonder Woman are disillusioned, abandoning the crusades they once took part in. But through meeting with and fighting alongside Superman, they answer a call of redemption, returning to their true selves...Batman with his morals and Wonder Woman with her choosing to resume her mantle after nearly 100 years of abandoning the world of man.

I believe that's what's referred to as a character arc.

Well said. I hope that this is the trajectory the characters take... If so, they can have more of my money but as long as killer Batman is on the loose, I ain't watching.

 

[Neverender]

Regarding Batman being a killer, I get it with this particular narrative for Bruce/Batman. The discovery of an all powerful being from another planet was a game changer for him. Add that on top of the fact that he's been doing this for 20 years or so, and the people he's lost, and the number of villains he has faced, he's on the very verge of being a broken man. He said it himself when he was speaking to Alfred about Superman, that this might be the only thing he does that matters.

I would prefer if WB and DC would stick with Batman not killing in the movieverse but it's obvious that they've been pretty comfortable with it for years now:

Batman 1989 Kill Count - 18
Batman Returns Kill Count - 5
Batman Forever Kill Count - 7
Batman Begins Kill Count - 6
The Dark Knight Kill Count - 1
The Dark Knight Rises Kill Count - 2

I've learned to deal with it.

Sorry, but there's a world of difference between Zack's grasp of kills by "proxy" (*proximity) and reality.

Spoiler

Heck, Batman tries to murder someone trying to save their mother instead of simply hearing them out. He only stops because he hears his own mother's name.

Apparently even the possibility of a 1% chance is enough to send him off on a manic rampage with all reason thrown out the window. I'd go as far as calling him one of the villains of the movie due to his own sheer stupidity. Needless to say, it's by far the worst portrayal of Batman ever put to film and Affleck does absolutely nothing to save it. There's plenty more to the character than just a solid chin.

 

[LostSon88]

This isn't a Batman in his prime. This is an older and weary Batman who's at the end of his rope.

He's seen the destruction Superman can cause. He's older, he's pessimistic and paranoid so yeah if he believes there's a 1% chance he can turn against humanity then in his paranoia the only logical reproach is to end the threat.

Again, Batman and his focus was to "end the threat" by any means necessary. He didn't want to hear anything coming from Supermans mouth.

His 2 year obsession blinded him. It wasn't until he heard his mothers name that he began to come back to his senses.

 

[Slushy]

I'm assuming Affleck's performance is close to Keaton's?

 

[Resistance61513]

I kind of feel like Suicide Squad is where we might see the reasoning on why Batman's methods have changed. I'm assuming it's going to be because of The Joker. Honestly, I wasn't that upset by the methods of Batman in BvS. I embraced it because, in my eyes, it made sense. The guy has been doing it for 20 freakin' years...it's practically the same routine and he keeps losing/the stakes get higher.

He lost his side kick to a mad man. A side kick you have to think might still be alive had he just decided to kill The Joker all those years ago. That's why I love The Killing Joke...Batman knows it's going to come down to it one day where the line will be crossed. Either by Joker or by himself and he chose himself.