BvS Is Batman justified when he refuses to kill? Do you wish he was more like Superman?

[bes628]

Batman really at most would be justified in killing of the Joker, but even then the Joker is at least containable as opposed to Zod.

Just my POV.

 

[Krumm]

Um, my guess is that Batman will "educate" Superman in that killing is a no-no. Because honestly Superman is not a killer. Snyder went for a profound ending by having him break his rule at the end of MOS, but that was bad/lazy writing because the rule was never established to begin with. If you want to see that ending done right, watch TDK where Batman has to kill a friend he once admired (Harvey Dent) to save a child of another friend, while he lets something as repugnant as the Joker live.

Now there is a moral quagmire. Snyder's Superman killed someone because Snyder is infatuated with physical violence. It is the same reason for his speed ramping in 300 and the added gore and severed limbs and bone-through-skin injuries put into Watchmen.

So, I am sure they will both kill the joint villain at the end of the movie.

But the rule is now established. As the above quoted post by Shikamaru points out, Batman doesn't kill for a reason while most others don't kill because they are good guys. MOS has now created a motivation behind why Superman does not kill.

And I would not consider the writing to be lazy. If it were, they wouldn't have debated about the decision and would have no understanding of the ramifications that come with Superman commuting such an act, which is simply not true. People can not like the choice but it was a brave choice because of the controversy and conversations it has started. There's nothing lazy about that.

Also, I don't think Superman needs anymore education on the subject because he now knows that killing is not the way. If anything, and big if at that, Superman is in more of a position to teach Batman because Bats is pushed to that brink more often and Superman has been there and done that. Obviously, that contradicts what I said above a little bit hence why I said it is a big "if." It wouldn't be the route I would go but I wouldn't be bothered by it.

 

[Marvin]

If this was most any other heroic origin most people might see this decision for legitimate establishment for an aversion to killing as credible.

With superman, it appears it's not so good.
Again, I'll say it, just about all other cbm heroes killed their enemies this summer, I'm glad this isn't being swept under the rug.

 

[Krumm]

How do you find it not a legitimate basis for a "no-killing" rule?

 

[Marvin]

How do you find it not a legitimate basis for a "no-killing" rule?

That's just it, I do.
I'm also curious why others don't seem too. Outside of the idea that it's just not part of the what they see as the 80 year tradition.

 

[BH/HHH]

The funny thing is super heroes have been killing villains in the films for decades, Superman in Superman II and III, Batman on '89, Returns, Forever, Spider-Man in Spider-Man's 1, 2 and 3 (well sort of), and so on.

 

[Krumm]

That's just it, I do.
I'm also curious why others don't seem too. Outside of the idea that it's just not part of the what they see as the 80 year tradition.

Gotcha, I was misreading it and I agree.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

The funny thing is super heroes have been killing villains in the films for decades, Superman in Superman II and III, Batman on '89, Returns, Forever, Spider-Man in Spider-Man's 1, 2 and 3 (well sort of), and so on.

Spider-Man didn't kill GG. He just dodged him.

He didn't QUITE kill the person who murdered Uncle Ben. He just didn't bother to save him as he backed off of the building.

PS. Supes totally killed Nuclear Man in 4.

 

[BH/HHH]

Spider-Man didn't kill GG. He just dodged him.

He didn't QUITE kill the person who murdered Uncle Ben. He just didn't bother to save him as he backed off of the building.

PS. Supes totally killed Nuclear Man in 4.

Yeah I was on about the guy who "killed" his Uncle Ben. It's the same situation as Batman with Ra's.

Oh yeah I knew about Nuclear Man, I just have several examples

 

[The Guard]

Personally, I see Batman not killing and his cherishing of all life as his most beautiful and powerful character element.

But I also see it as his biggest character/heroic flaw.

Is he justified? There are two sides to that argument.

Let's face it, while Batman is not responsible for the actions of his supervillains or evil men, if he killed them, he could prevent a catastrophic loss of innocent life. THE DARK KNIGHT sort of got to this point, but I still don't think that any movie has quite captured the crux of the issue. I don't think Chris Nolan quite understood why Batman doesn't kill, beyond the basic moral issue, and the idea that "It seperates us from them". He certainly didn't explore it very well after THE DARK KNIGHT, and it was sort of forgotten about when he finally did kill (Dent, the events in TDKR), which is a shame.

Batman, in my mind, doesn't kill because it's become a complex of sorts for him. Almost a meta-commentary on the character's portrayal over the years, and the inherent flaws within. The modern portrayal of Batman has a sort of psychological inability to kill, in the end. And I don't know that he realizes this, because at the same time, he also recognizes how easy it would be for him to do so, logically speaking, and holds the belief that it's a slippery slope, and fears becoming like those he fights. It's another type of duality within the character, and I love it. At least that's the take I prefer. It encompasses pretty much all his thoughts on killing over the decades.

 

[Marvin]

There's an argument to be made that Spiderman did Kill GG actually.

Especially given all the talk of good vs bad writing around these parts. That spider sense is a hell of a plot device if you catch my drift.

 

[BH/HHH]

There's an argument to be made that Spiderman did Kill GG actually.

Especially given all the talk of good vs bad writing around these parts. That spider sense is a hell of a plot device if you catch my drift.

Yeah good point

 

[Lencho01]

[YT]l1lhom8N72w[/YT]

 

[Marvin]

I'll raise you

[YT]dmTg7ROPssc[/YT]
Pay particular attention to superman's intent here.

Moreover, the debate rages as to what exactly was Batman's motivation in pulling superman out. Bruce Tim is sort of the man around forums, so I'm sure it was something swell.

 

[Lencho01]

I didn't like that line and I didn't like they way Superman acted in that episode in general anyway.

 

[MANOFSTEELtrilogy]

Are you trolling?

You watched MOS right? What makes you think Supes is going to choose to kill again after his reaction to killing Zod?

Superman isn't stupid enough to let Zod live and watch the world be destroyed. He knows killing is the only option when faced with a threat like this.

Um, my guess is that Batman will "educate" Superman in that killing is a no-no.

Is Batman really stupid enough to rather let Zod live and watch the world be destroyed? And its not like Batman can tie Zod up in his little ropes and wait for the little police to arrive. Superman needs to educate Batman if Batman is under the impression than the law can save the world....

 

[Herolee10]

Honestly, if Batman had been in the same situation that Superman was in MOS, with no way out, he would have done the same. The only difference is that we wouldn't have as nearly as much people complaining about it? How do I know? The fact that not many complained about how Batman killed a truck driver during the final chase in TDKR.

People defend that by saying that given the situation, he had no choice, well it was the same thing for Superman in MOS and yet the red caped hero gets more trouble about it.

 

[BH/HHH]

Tbh I always thought to me that the no kill rule was more a Superman thing than a Batman thing so I couldn't give a **** if Batman killed people. Superman though is another story BUT in MOS he had no choice whatsoever and I loved it in that.

 

[Lord]

It's a sad day when a thread is made about how Batman would never kill but Superman would

 

[hopefuldreamer]

It's a sad day when a thread is made about how Batman would never kill but Superman would

This. Just this.

 

[BH/HHH]

Well tbh this thread is stupid for that anyway cause on film Batman's killed many times, much more than Superman has. Yes Supnan dud kill Zod on MOS, and people mon about it yet give no other way that Superman could have stopped Zod because there wasn't one.

At the same time I think people need to differentiate in their minds stuff like this when it comes to movies. These are not adaptations of the comics we read, they're inspired by them so they are going to make changes from time to time. When you have a series of comic based films sometimes you have to figure out ways to end the story, and sometimes killing the villain makes the most sense for the story. These movies are not made directly for us, we don't make these films millions/billions of dollas the GA does and not one person I know who isn't a comic fan is bothered when the hero kills. I'm not saying I want to see my heroes kill but if its necessary like it was in MOS them I'm all for it but just remember these are films not comic books.

 

[Marvin]

It's a sad day when a thread is made about how Batman would never kill but Superman would

The only sad thing about is that Batman has killed in all three of his films and we are having this debate now. It's even sadder that we've already been given our answer to the superman question on several different occasions thought his book and cinematic cannon.
Sad is the only way to describe it.

More over.
Problem is we don't often see these particular heroes put into the situation, not truly.

What would batman do if he was strapped to a chair and given to buttons. One destroys the world, the other kills the joker....and for once their isn't a way out. People are avoiding the debate of what batman would do.

We know what superman would do, we also know what superman would do when given a way out. What would batman do, anyone that thinks Bruce would let the world blow up is perhaps beyond reasoning with on this issue.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

It's a sad day when a thread is made about how Batman would never kill but Superman would

In a way. But in another way, it shows that Superman cares more for humanity than his personal feelings. Doomsday/Zod in MOS had the capability of wiping out mankind as we know it, and needed to be stopped.

 

[BH/HHH]

The only sad thing about is that Batman has killed in all three of his films and we are having this debate now. It's even sadder that we've already been given our answer to the superman question on several different occasions thought his book and cinematic cannon.
Sad is the only way to describe it.

More over.
Problem is we don't often see these particular heroes put into the situation, not truly.

What would batman do if he was strapped to a chair and given to buttons. One destroys the world, the other kills the joker....and for once their isn't a way out. People are avoiding the debate of what batman would do.

We know what superman would do, we also know what superman would do when given a way out. What would batman do, anyone that thinks Bruce would let the world blow up is perhaps beyond reasoning with on this issue.

You know people's bigger argument against Superman killing Zod was he shouldn't have been out in that situation. Which I always thought was laughable, if they're doing a realistic take on Superheroes then it makes sense they'd be out into that type of situation at least once.

 

[Marvin]

I didn't like that line and I didn't like they way Superman acted in that episode in general anyway.

Of course you don't. However that doesn't mean it's not in Tim's characterization. It begins to beg the question of:
If you like the character as he has been written over the years vs If you like the character as you see him.

That's Bruce Tim's superman, period. He has his good moments and his bad, as most heroes do.