BvS Ben Affleck IS Batman - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 39

[The Shape]

i think Snyder didnt think about this. he just thought about a weapon that would look cool in Robin hands. thats all. it looked cool

i do not think that Snyder is uneducated and stupid. but he does not think about when directing movies IMO.

This seems to be the most plausible explanation so far, and one that I actually believe.

 

[Saint]

It wasn't "included". You are seeking an opportunity to procure its "inclusion" by consensus in order to maintain your enjoyment of the faux outrage it apparently engendered. Fine, whatever. Either by complacent appreciation or by the delighted invective aimed at it, this movie seems to have entertained everyone.

There's also the possibility that it was specifically not included because it was determined to be stupid. I won't lie: I personally doubt that's the case, given that we're talking about Zack, but it would be foolish not to at least acknowledge the possibility.

Lots of stupid things, mercifully, almost make it into movies.

 

[The Guard]

I think what we've established is that people have unique experiences with fiction and as a result have their own ideas about what is or is not important within those worlds or characters.

If one is not bothered by the depiction of Batman and Robin as lethal fighters in a film, that is quite reasonable. However, if that person feels it is unreasonable for another to be disappointed when the character is depicted in a way that is not consistent with what that other feels is important, that would be absurd.

I can't fault anyone for liking a movie where a Bruce Wayne takes on the guise of the incredible Sharkman after visiting an aquarium, but any person who would portray me as unreasonable for disliking that film would be a ridiculous person.

...

No one said you were unreasonable for being disappointed.

 

[Boy Scout]

I love definitive statements like these, about something which none of us truly know.

Fine. Consider this me retroactively adding in an "I think."

Let's remember that we've seen Robin's weapon for roughly a year now and in the film itself. No one had made the connection that he supposedly used the weapon to maim and/or kill until a day or so ago.

That's because we didn't know that the weapon was a halberd until then. Hard to make connections when you don't have all of the information in front of you.

You could probably say the same thing about the weapon, its history, and the circumstances under which Robin used the weapon, but I'm not personally willing to give Snyder the benefit of the doubt on this one.

But now that a click-bait article used a page from to tech manual which featured designs for this weapon (which do not appear in the film and do not refer to it as a "halberd") to speculate as much, it has suddenly become a certainty? Now there's no doubt that Batman trained him to be a killer?

I said he used the weapon to maim or kill. So, yeah, one of those. I think.

 

[Eggyman]

It's a silly weapon for someone we hope used non-lethal force to use, but really, there's enough stupid sh** that is actually present in this film to discuss.

 

[Saint]

This seems to be the most plausible explanation so far, and one that I actually believe.

Sure. Same logic behind Nite-Owl's design in Watchmen: Snyder thought it should look more intimidating. He also thought it would be cool if the human heroes were depicted as punching people through the air and crap in superheroic action scenes.

My experience was always that Nite-Owl looking like a schlub was an important illustrative part of his character and narrative, and that Watchmen's grounded, unfanciful, unheroic violence was influential in communicating it's tone and setting.

Watchmen was still pretty okay though. Certainly a better experience for me than BVS.

 

[Saint]

...

No one said you were unreasonable for being disappointed.

Fine, I really don't want to play the "Let's debate precisely what was implied by these comments" game right now.

 

[The Guard]

Fine, I really don't want to play the "Let's debate precisely what was implied by these comments" game right now.

Nor should you. If you can't handle some sarcasm, best stay off these boards.

Of late, there's some half-ass sarcastic, snarky remark attempting to be clever from at least one poster every time I say anything.

And Nite Owl did look like a schlub. The point of his costume, even in the books, was that it made him feel less impotent, even though it was over the top and sily.

He still looked ridiculous in the movie. He just looked more high-tech ridiculous.

 

[regwec]

You two mustn't fall out. The Bat Boards are the shield between your lion and unicorn.

 

[The Guard]

Anyway, reading up on halberds, it seems actual warriors in the 14th and 15th centuries used them to slice through armor, deflect spears and other bladed weapons, and the thing on the opposite end of the blade was used to leverage men off their horses.

Also an effective part of the Halberd was the metal wrapping of much of the handle. This made it an effective tool for blocking an enemy's weapons, particulary swords. Many halberds also had hooks opposite the blade side. This allowed the wielder to hook into the armor of a mounted knight and pull him to the ground.

Basically the Swiss Army Knife of its time.

I guess if we assume Robin was a warrior in the 14th and 15th centuries or so...

 

[The Shape]

Anyway, reading up on halberds, it seems actual warriors in the 14th and 15th centuries used them to slice through armor, deflect spears and other bladed weapons, and the thing on the opposite end of the blade was used to leverage men off their horses.

Also an effective part of the Halberd was the metal wrapping of much of the handle. This made it an effective tool for blocking an enemy's weapons, particulary swords. Many halberds also had hooks opposite the blade side. This allowed the wielder to hook into the armor of a mounted knight and pull him to the ground.

Basically the Swiss Army Knife of its time.

I guess if we assume Robin was a warrior in the 14th and 15th centuries or so...

Cold-blooded murder doesn't require "mental gymnastics", so I'm guessing that'll be the explanation that sticks, despite the information you've provided.

 

[regwec]

Well, his motif is extrapolated from a legendary medieval bandit, robber, rebel and folk hero who killed plenty of people.

 

[The Guard]

Maybe someone thought it looked like bird claws or a beak or something.

(Shrugs)

 

[Eggyman]

Anyway, reading up on halberds, it seems actual warriors in the 14th and 15th centuries used them to slice through armor, deflect spears and other bladed weapons, and the thing on the opposite end of the blade was used to leverage men off their horses.

Also an effective part of the Halberd was the metal wrapping of much of the handle. This made it an effective tool for blocking an enemy's weapons, particulary swords. Many halberds also had hooks opposite the blade side. This allowed the wielder to hook into the armor of a mounted knight and pull him to the ground.

Basically the Swiss Army Knife of its time.

I guess if we assume Robin was a warrior in the 14th and 15th centuries or so...

I'm sorry but that doesn't fit with the timeline DC has established even a little bit.

 

[The Shape]

I'm sorry but that doesn't fit with the timeline DC has established even a little bit.

 

[Saint]

And Nite Owl did look like a schlub. The point of his costume, even in the books, was that it made him feel less impotent, even though it was over the top and sily.

Yes, and that is complimentary to my previously stated position.

He still looked ridiculous in the movie. He just looked more high-tech ridiculous.

If that was your experience with the costume, I'm glad it worked for you.

 

[Vaibow]

Jesus, he can use the weapon in other ways than just slicing people up!

A bo staff can kill, a rock can kill, robin's god damn tights can kill....

 

[hafizbat]

It baffles me to no end how far some of you will go to defend these Snyderisms...

Occam's razor, people. Snyder meant for Robin to be a killer too.

 

[LEVITIKUZ]

How does Robin carry the halberd when he's jumping off rooftops? He can't hang it on his belt with the short shorts he has on.

 

[batmanao23]

How does Robin carry the halberd when he's jumping off rooftops? He can't hang it on his belt with the short shorts he has on.

 

[LEVITIKUZ]

 

[Jekecy]

It baffles me to no end how far some of you will go to defend these Snyderisms...

Occam's razor, people. Snyder meant for Robin to be a killer too.

You think Zack’s above going with a weapon choice solely for the cool factor, and not necessarily with its historical functionality in mind?

If we’re going with the tech journal as gospel because it’s official merchandise, what of the prequel comic series where it’s explicit in defining Batman as decidedly NOT a killer? Are we to believe Batman had a sidekick who kills, while he doesn’t?

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ If only we had the comic writers doing the story for the movie..

But anyway, back to Ben. It seems like pretty much no-one is blaming him for this interpretation of Batman, as it should be. An actor can't help it if a script calls for a character to DO something.

 

[The Shape]

You think Zack’s above going with a weapon choice solely for the cool factor, and not necessarily with its historical functionality in mind?

If we’re going with the tech journal as gospel because it’s official merchandise, what of the prequel comic series where it’s explicit in defining Batman as decidedly NOT a killer? Are we to believe Batman had a sidekick who kills, while he doesn’t?

Careful, dude. You could be seen as defending a 'Snyderism'.

 

[Travesty]

Careful, dude. You could be seen as defending a 'Snyderism'.

Only people "under the age of 18" could do such a thing...due to dumb dumb mentalities and stuff.