Will Batman still be a killer in this film?

[The Guard]

And yet, the Daredevil tv show blows all of this out of the water by showing a man going through nearly the exact same struggles, struggling with taking the "necessary" action of crossing that line, and dealing with it FAR better, without EVER actually deliberately crossing that line.

They told a FAR better arc around the exact same themes and concerns.

So? That's also a TV show. There's more time to develop and explore concepts and themes in a TV show. Most good shows do a far better job exploring any character arcs and themes than a film can generally do. There are serious limitations to film.

Also, doesn't Daredevil rather intentionally throw a guy off the roof in Season 2? Not the guy he drops off the roof who he just magically knows will be fine...isn't there like a ninja he tosses off the roof toward the end of the season?

If Batman is going to address his killing ways, it will likely happen in a Batman solo film. It'd be like if we were going to see an arc about Aquaman struggling with his role as a monarch in a complete arc, you'd expect to see that in AQUAMAN.

 

[Tra-El]

Batman isn't Howdy Doody. Killing is okay for me as long as it has the correct repercussions of the conflict or the level of threat at hand. I like how fans are completely okay with Batman terrorizing villains to the point of physiologic warfare or brutally beating his rogues to a pulp with gadgets and sending paranoia through Gotham City with his mysterious presence but God forbid if the situation of death presents itself. If that is the case, Bruce is in the wrong profession he created as The Batman. He should be a lawyer or something if dressing up in rubber and dangling criminals off a ledge on a wire COULD somehow result in death or trauma that could potentially lead to death. I'm not saying Batman should kill, but givin' the danger zone he is constantly faced with when it comes to the scummiest place on Earth in Gotham City, yeah, killing shouldn't ALWAYS be off-limits, depending. I think it's unfair to the Batman character if killing somehow brings him down to the level of criminals. That's not the point. Justice is and sometimes, justice can be unclear. If Bruce would ever fault himself and compare himself to criminals in death, then just hang it up and allow the Gotham City Police Department handle the business no matter the level of corruption they find themselves in.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Batman isn't an executioner. And that's the difference between Nolan and Burton-Snyder. Schumacher is kind of a separate case, because Two-Face death felt more like involuntary manslaughter, rather than murder. But his films continue Burton's arc, so...

 

[gdw]

So? That's also a TV show. There's more time to develop and explore concepts and themes in a TV show. Most good shows do a far better job exploring any character arcs and themes than a film can generally do. There are serious limitations to film.

Also, doesn't Daredevil rather intentionally throw a guy off the roof in Season 2? Not the guy he drops off the roof who he just magically knows will be fine...isn't there like a ninja he tosses off the roof toward the end of the season?

If Batman is going to address his killing ways, it will likely happen in a Batman solo film. It'd be like if we were going to see an arc about Aquaman struggling with his role as a monarch in a complete arc, you'd expect to see that in AQUAMAN.

The arc showing him struggling with killing Fisk is largely dealt with over a handful of scenes. It is NOT something that requires 12 hours to cover. This EASILY could have been a driving force of the central character arc for Bruce in BvS. The framework is already there with everything he says regarding stopping Superman.

Even just removing where he kills random thugs, that alone re-contextualises his conversations with Alfred to be about Bruce crossing that line.
Suddenly, all of Bruce's sulking, et al, becomes heavier, and about him struggling with, and convincing himself to do, what is "necessary."

Daredevil's actions in season 2 have nothing to do with the discussion. If you want a better example, we can look at Matt technically taking out Nobu. Now, arguably, that was a desperate act of self defence, by a man backed into a corner. This kind of act is arguably in character for someone like Darredevil, or Spider-man. bad place, even Superman, arguably.

However, for Batman, even this would be a betrayal of his character, as one of Bruce's defining characteristics is his being prepared for every possibility. Any situation wherein Bruce has to resort to killing is, by definition, a failure in his eyes.

So, it's not so much that Batman cannot be shown to kill, it's that if, and when, he does, Bruce has failed.

 

[Tra-El]

Batman isn't an executioner. And that's the difference between Nolan and Burton-Snyder. Schumacher is kind of a separate case, because Two-Face death felt more like involuntary manslaughter, rather than murder. But his films continue Burton's arc, so...

Batman is not an executioner, true, but he is an enforcer. When an enforcer engages in such high rate of crime and danger, there are things at his disposal, like his gadgets, that can easily put an average goon in a harms way or even death. It all comes back to "Dancin' with the Devil in the Pale Moonlight." Batman finds himself dancing with the devil at a constant so wherever there is a devil, there's the potential for death. Even if the Batman plays all his cards right, givin' the circumstance, something can easily go wrong in Gotham or in high speed chase's in the Batmobile. bad place, a bullet from the goon himself can ricochet off of Batman's armor or gauntlets and kill him. Is that murder by the hands of Batman and does that make Batman a murderer? Hardly, but the moment Batman engages, the chances of death instantly rise. Personally, I never held such a thing against Batman when those things present itself.

 

[Patchwork Man]

Batman is not an executioner, true, but he is an enforcer. When an enforcer engages in such high rate of crime and danger, there are things at his disposal, like his gadgets, that can easily put an average goon in a harms way or even death. It all comes back to "Dancin' with the Devil in the Pale Moonlight." Batman finds himself dancing with the devil at a constant so wherever there is a devil, there's the potential for death. Even if the Batman plays all his cards right, givin' the circumstance, something can easily go wrong in Gotham or in high speed chase's in the Batmobile. bad place, a bullet from the goon himself can ricochet off of Batman's armor or gauntlets and kill him. Is that murder by the hands of Batman and does that make Batman a murderer? Hardly, but the moment Batman engages, the chances of death instantly rise.

"Batman should've found a way to take his gun from him before that happened!"

 

[shauner111]

The point is killing with intent. That's not Batman. Things happen, and he'll try to stop it if he can. But Batfleck was different. Keaton was too.

 

[Tra-El]

"Batman should've found a way to take his gun from him before that happened!"

"Why wasn't he wearing his bullet ricocheting suit in that instance?! Batman always plans ahead! DAMN YOU SNYDER AND DAMN MY CHILDHOOD!!11!!!1!!1!"

 

[Doctor Octopus]

The point is killing with intent. That's not Batman. Things happen, and he'll try to stop it if he can. But Batfleck was different. Keaton was too.

Agreed. They the two worst Batmen for it.

 

[Tra-El]

Wasn't that one of the themes and Batman's arc in BvS? Being so torn, broken and mentally abused in finding his inner hero once aga....forget it.

 

[Patchwork Man]

"Why wasn't he wearing his bullet ricocheting suit in that instance?! Batman always plans ahead! DAMN YOU SNYDER AND DAMN MY CHILDHOOD!!11!!!1!!1!"

The SPONGE suit! The one that absorbs shrapnel.

 

[gdw]

[YT]1byycwl8qgc[/YT]