>>83699562

>Yeah, Batman being a killer was completely due to Snyder's direction. The story makes a big deal out of Batman branding people who later get killed in prison, which doesn't make sense at all if he'd already been going around turning people into paste.

> So Goyer and Terrio at least kinda tried to do a story where Batman indirectly kills people, and then Snyder went "Fuck that, imma have him DIRECTLY kill people."

Can someone give me a logical reason as to why EVERYONE likes to pretend that BVS was the first and only movie where Batman directly kills someone and that a killer Batman is solely the invention of Zack Snyder?

Before you answer please watch this.
youtube.com/watch?v=psVIG7YvdjM

Not muh MCU

The majority of Sup Forums's knowledge of batman begins and ends at Snyder's run/Morrison's run and TAS.

And even Morrison said Batman killed at the start of his career

>>Can someone give me a logical reason as to why EVERYONE likes to pretend that BVS was the first and only movie where Batman directly kills someone and that a killer Batman is solely the invention of Zack Snyder?
The problem with this is that alot of people were looking for these movies to be a film representation of their favorite characters and more than just an elseworld
Since the Justice League and DCU was being built we wanted to see our heroes and villians portrayed accurately
Also the movie does a poor job of letting the viewer know that Manslaughter is a recent Batman trait and wasn't always his M.O.

>batman kills now
>joker is still alive

I don't think people would mind if he was at least consistent.

I have a question, why the fuck would you make a thread to defend Snyder?

He's basically a high functioning retard and both his DC movies were shit, not to mention making practically a 1:1 recreation of Watchmen and not only missing the point but somehow making a bad movie.

Like someone stated before, just because Batman did it in the past doesn't make it okay now.

However, I've never been completely against Batman killing.

Morrison is a retard

I don't think it does a poor job at all. Especially with those heavy handed conversations he has with Alfred about people turning bad/his obvious alcoholism and mental issues. People just don't like this version of Batman and/or are too lazy to comprehend shit that is presented right before their eyes.

>The problem with this is that alot of people were looking for these movies to be a film representation of their favorite characters and more than just an elseworld
Since the Justice League and DCU was being built we wanted to see our heroes and villians portrayed accurately

Fair enough

>Also the movie does a poor job of letting the viewer know that Manslaughter is a recent Batman trait and wasn't always his M.O.

Well Alfred himself pretty much acknowledges this in his "cruel men" speach to Bruce. Also say what you will about the killing, at least this movie actually acknowledges that he lost his was and that what he is doing is wrong. The other movies pretty much just ignore it completely. Batman is throwing motherfuckers of clock towers and shit and the Gotham PD are just fine with it.

>I have a question, why the fuck would you make a thread to defend Snyder?

>Introducing a logical argument= defending Snyder

It's funny how emotionally involved people are about Snyder where you can pose a simple argument or question and this is construed as a "defense", even when everything in the OP is a fact with proof right there in the vid.

BVS isn't the first time on screen Batman has offed people, FACT.

Snyder wasn't the first director to do this, FACT.

Snyder however is the only one to actually get called on it, FACT.

But he did kill at the start of his career.

Plus, he killed KGBeast in the comics.

Thing is nobody is saying it's ok now. But it makes no sense to me why it was ignored or seldom brought up before and now it's an issue. Before BVS even came out, people were going on and on about how Keaton was the best Batman, never once mentioning he killed a lot of people, so obviously it didn't bother people all that much before. But it does now all of a sudden

>Can someone give me a logical reason as to why EVERYONE likes to pretend that BVS was the first and only movie where Batman directly kills someone and that a killer Batman is solely the invention of Zack Snyder?
We don't. People complained just as hard about the "I don't have to save you" bit in Begins.

With BvS the complaints are because of the failure of context. It's hard to buy Batman taking issue with Superman's destructive methods when he gives no shits about collateral or killing and vice versa.

>Snyder however is the only one to actually get called on it, FACT.
This is where you're wrong but keep telling yourself that.

THE BAT BRAND OF JUSTICE: HAS THE BATMAN GONE TOO FAR!?

Reports from Gotham Penitentiaries claim the Bat Brand is the equivalent of a death sentence inside!

Also, fighting Batman in his car or plane is not the equivalent, it is an absolute death sentence. His moral code only applies when he's on foot so be on the lookout criminals!

NEXT TIME THEY SHINE YOUR LIGHT IN THE SKY, DON'T GO TO IT. THE BAT IS DEAD! CONSIDER THIS MERCY, because you see in the original script I would have confronted you due to your vigilantism and rampant brutalization of Gotham's citizens but given you the benefit of the doubt since many of your pursuits lead to criminal convictions. Now, me telling you this here, right after you just acted as judge, jury and executioner against what looked like a peaceful shipment of a rock, doesn't make any sense, almost as if this scene and previous branding concept belong to a different script - one where Batman doesn't kill.

Consider this mercy for those murders you just committed! Next time, I will bring you in!

>fucking up 19 times means fucking up the 20th is okay

Shut up retard

Snyder made versions of the heroes that nobody likes, who cares about the reasons, they're just not enjoyable to watch.

If the movies were good, people would forgive the batman killing stuff.

>It's hard to buy Batman taking issue with Superman's destructive methods when he gives no shits about collateral or killing and vice versa.

It's not about Superman's detructive methods during Man of Steel. There's a bit of that, yes, but it's mostly Batman wanting to die doing something great and thinking - Well, i didn't managed to do shit and now i want to kill myself while offing people. What will happen when Superman come to the same conclusion?"

You're either 1.jpgfag or a retard, but people shit on Nolan all the time in just about any board for NOT MUH BATMAN so enjoy your denial I guess

>but given you the benefit of the doubt since many of your pursuits lead to criminal convictions.

Why? Why would Superman give Batman the benefit of doubt when he knows what Batman does and is currently doing?

That pic would be a lot better if you weren't using Bale's Batman. He sounded stupid whenever he talked.

>when an Avenger kills people in the movies it's ok
>when batman does it it's not

>Hey you crazy person beating criminals half to death, stop doing that I can save everyone, they dont need you anymore k thanks bye!

vs

>Hey you crazy person I know I just saw you shoot at a harmless security convoy and murder several people but Im gonna let you off with a warning this time while the bodies of the men you just murdered burn in the street okay pal?

B-but user all ornate MCU movies are actually GOOD. I loved all the jokes in Civil War's airport fight! Everything Marvel does is so comfy!

So why does getting branded get you killed in prison. Makes little sense to me.

You mean saving people? Like those women from the human trafficker?

Too bad they weren't called Lois, otherwise maybe Superman would have bothered saving them.

>>when an Avenger kills people in the movies it's ok
they never said they wouldnt kill but lets gets some thing straight if we got a spider man movie where peter started snapping necks left and right, all hell would brake lose.

>it's ok when Marvel does it
I bet you also think the blatant product placement in the MCU is fine but Sears and IHOP in MoS was awful

the killing itself isnt what bothers me about it.. Its that in BvS batman was just slaughtering people without and care for the consequences.. he was pretty much a serial killer at the rate the movie was going. Batman was never a character that killed hench men..id understand it if it was a villian who committed an unspeakable crime.. but this batman killed ANYONE who got in his way.

to add on to the point.. The core structure of why bruce wayne turned into batman was because he didnt want anyone elses parents dying etc... and he basically threw all that morality out the window for the sake of convenience. And if batman is one thing its a moral fag

I'm amazed that anyone still uses this as an argument.

Heroes killing isn't a deal breaker, most of them do kill. But the big three pop icons, Superman, Batman and Spider-man, should have strict no killing rules. It's integral to their characters, especially Batman.

Was anyone else upset that they wasted this completely badass shot near the end, where it's just Batman coming up to see Superman's corpse?

Like, holy fuck. That is such a badass shot. It's probably the most 'Batman' shot to ever grace any live-action movie. In the trailers, it LOOKED like Batman rising out of the flames to kick some ass, and then it turned out to be nothing.

I hope they give us more shots like that for the solo Batman movies.

wow, look at this guy who doesn't read comics. Son, Superman and Batman were all killing left and right in the golden age. Even post crisis, Batman killed KGBeast and Superman killed Zod and all his friends. And Spider-Man kills all the time, don't even get me started.

He directly kills something like six people in the movie, giving him a lower body count than pretty much any other Batman.

It wasn't sake of convenience. Its laid out pretty much, he's turned into a bigger dark force after Robin's death and the Metropolis disaster was the last straw.
He put his guilt over one death into another pursuit.

>If the movies were good, people would forgive the batman killing stuff.

So you admit to being hypocrites then. At least you're honest

The worst thing is that some people really like these movies.

I know right? It's ridiculous, there weren't even any jokes.

>The worst thing is people having a different opinion than i

That's a symptom of Asperger's right?

The old movies hardly count. They were basically live action cartoons; if you don't see the body they aren't dead.

...

Batman didn't kill Penguin. Two-Face "died" by accident.

They love each other

Accidentally reaching for his coin amidst all the coins batman threw at him.
By that logic KGBeast died when hus flamethrower tank accidentally exploded

>Batman was willing to bust into Lex's cell and consider branding him despite everyone saying Supes restored his faith in humanity
>hasn't flat out killed the Joker
How do they justify this?

He didn't brand Lex though

I said consider.

he wa just fucking with Lex, he never considered it

>after Robin's death
The problem is that we see Robin's suit for one shot, and they never mention him or the Joker verbally. Hell, I talked to some of my non comic reading friends, and they couldn't tell it was Robin until I told them (it's brown, not red and green, and covered in spray paint). They should have made the factor much more important.

a·venge
verb
inflict harm in return for (an injury or wrong done to oneself or another).
synonyms: requite, punish, repay, pay back, revenge, take revenge for, take vengeance for, exact

jus·tice
noun
just behavior or treatment.
"a concern for justice, peace, and genuine respect for people"
>Gee, why do people hold the JUSTICE League to different standards than the AVENGERS

Killing is justice too, fuckwad.

au·tism/ˈôˌtizəm/
noun

a mental condition, present from early childhood, characterized by difficulty in communicating and forming relationships with other people and in using language and abstract concepts.

So you wanted to be spoonfed?

Not the kind of justice most people associate with DC.

What is your point here? Isn't the guy I'm replying to autistic for not understanding why people treat DC characters and Marvel characters differently?

But Bruce doesn't give a shit about Jason. I don't get it.

The Avengers were created in the 60s when nobody killed in the comics, you're being autistic saying it's ok for The Avengers to kill because of the definition of the word avenge.

And there was a time that Batman killed a lot but nowadays one of the things he's most known for is not killing.

What's your point?

Don't forget

>And there was a time that Batman killed a lot
yeah it was for less than a year in 1939
He's killed more people in the movies since 1989 than he ever did in the comics.
Please show me an example of Iron Man blowing a hole in somebody's chest and calmly walking away in the comics

>But Bruce doesn't give a shit about Jason

that's not true tho
unless they retconned it

Batman didn't kill because of Robin's death, although that served an influence.
Batman didn't kill because of Gotham never changing, although that served an influence.
Batman didn't kill because of the Metropolis attack, although that served an influence.

Batman felt such an utter feeling of powerlessness and inadequacy that who he was, the values he upheld, his whole crusade... felt meaningless. He had no sense of identity anymore, no purpose left. He felt small, weak and lost.

The only thing he could do, the only thing he felt he could do to give him a sense of self, a sense of purpose, was to kill Superman. He didn't had a good reason. He just felt threatened by Superman. His bullshit reason, that he gave Alfred, was that the same would end up happening with Superman eventually and if that happened Superman could very well obliterate everyone, so he was pretty much saving the world or something., but in truth that was just his rationalization. He wanted to kill Superman because Superman made him feel even more powerless.

So once he decided to cross that like: kill Superman, the whole code didn't mattered anymore. Nothing mattered anymore. He told Alfred this. They were always criminals.

The whole movie is about three dudes coming to blows because their sense of masculinity was threatened. The fact that most people somehow didn't managed to get that surprises me a lot. I mean, even in the trailers you've the characters going on and on about how weak and inadequate feel and how they just feel like punching one another.

...

No, dipshit, I wanted them to go more in depth with arguably the most important event between Batman and Joker.

...

That's literally what the Batfleck solo movie is going to be

I agree with you but Iron man doesn't exactly have a no kill code or anything.

How is that relevant?

In two year.

BVS was nearly 3 hours long, yet Snyder and the editors decided the minute long piss scene was worth it instead of explaining Robin.

So you need to be spoonfed?

>No argument, just insults
If your audience has to have prior knowledge of the comics to explain your story, than you've fucked up.

Now I need some sleep, but keep on suckin Snyder's dick.

>Robin suit with HAHA JOKES ON YOU BATMAN spray painted on it

It's not my fault your friends can't read

I just want to know why he won't kill the Joker now?

But who could it be it says hahaha and jokes on you that could be anybody.is it gordon?

Because this fuck it just murder em thing supposed to be somehow a new thing and he just hasnt seen him since he said fuck it and who knows where the fuck is joker right?He just lost his way and got on track after his interaction with murderman(superman)

fuck you
fuck bvs
fuck zack

/thread

Remember how Batman just outright killed Two Face in TDK? No one remember that?

Or how he was an outright killer in Batman 1989?

B-but those weren't directed by Hack Snyder

he fell with two face and did that to save a kid
he was also out of options

...

Bad writing then

>It was a lazy story convenience. Superman's single motivation for fighting Batman was aversion to Batman's vigilantism and bloodlust.

Lazy writing.

Why did you ignore his point? If Spider-Man started killing people left and right there would be fucking riots in the streets outside of Marvel HQ.

The point is nobody cared about batman killing in the movies until 2016 when he's been doing it since 1989. MCU movies come along with their heroes killing people left and right and all of of sudden it's bad for Batman to blow some shit up

Because he still has a "no-guns, no killing" mentality. He doesn't do it unless it's absolutely necessary or unless his life is threatened.

He doesn't act like the guy from Super, now does he?

Batman has killed people in every movie since 1989. Why start holding DC movies to comic accuracy now, and not Marvel movies which also veer widely from the source material

I would think it's because in the old movies they didn't make a huge deal about it, they didn't keep mentioning it in interviews and make a huge deal out of him killing people.

>Old movies
Batman kills when he needs to, otherwise he's a hero. Marketed as a hero.
>New movie
Marketing mentions he kills and is sick and tired of it all, still a hero but this time they talk about him like he's The Punisher.

How is Batman dropping the tire grenade on all those people in 89 any better than Batman blowing the guys shooting at him up from the air in current year?

>marketing mentions kills
Literally when?

I've seen Sup Forums always complain when batman kills people in all his movies. You have to remember mos Sup Forumsmrades grew up on BTAS and thats their version.

The logic appears to be that it outs the inmate as somebody ESPECIALLY bad to the point other inmates are disgusted and then kill that person.

I'm not really sure if it makes any sense but that appears to be the angle here.

Batman is one of the most uninteresting superhero characters, and is basically a gary stu. We joke about it with 'prep time' and bullshit like that but Batman is nigh unstoppable. Him not killing is the ONLY interesting thing about him, and it gave him a constant dilemma.

Otherwise, he's just grimdark.

Well, not the advertising which you're thinking of but almost all interviews with Zack talks about it when they focus on Batman.

Yeah, if you ignore the part where hes swing a car around, smash populated buildings

>Can someone give me a logical reason as to why EVERYONE likes to pretend that BVS was the first and only movie where Batman directly kills someone and that a killer Batman is solely the invention of Zack Snyder?

Dude you quoted from the previous thread here. There issue, like everything else in this movie, is in HOW the killing is presented.

1. Burton and Schumacher films don't explore the moral and socio-political implications of Batman. They're set in a whimsical cartoony world where Batman is a straight superhero who fights campy megalomaniacs with ridiculous evil plans, picks up cheers from the adoring crowd and then goes back home for tea. They never bring up the question of Batman's morality so we don't engage them on that level. BvS is ALL about Batman's morality and, like in so many other aspects, fails completely at tackling it. If the movie spends two hours hitting your over the head with the question "Is it right for Batman to do this?" Then naturally you're gonna view it through that lens. And unlike Nolan's movie, BvS fails to present even a tepid defense for Batman's actions in the movie.

2. Snyder is just so damn excessive. In the old movies the scenes of Batman killing someone are played as wacky hijinks with emphasis on camp rather than the brutality of Batman administering lethal force against someone. Snyder on the other hand is all about the brutal force. Every action scene in BvS it's like he's saying "LOOK AT BATMAN BREAKING BONES AND TURNING PEOPLE INTO ROADKILL. IS THAT NOT THE COOLEST SHIT EVER???" And naturally many people disagreed.

Now does that mean that Batman killing in the old movies was justified as opposed to BvS? No. What it means is that Snyder is a shitty director with a brutality boner who has no idea what the strengths and limitations of the tone he's working with are.

Don't bother, user, I think I've explained this at least a dozen of times in the last few months

But if I might add, Nolan contextualized the killings too. In those movies the no-kill rule is established and then broken with precise reasons or consequences (only exception being Bane's death, but Bats didn't do it and a bomb was about to explode, so there wasn't really time for a proper reaction or debate)

This.
Snyder tries to be thought provoking and then he and his fans whine whine the audience's thoughts are provoked. They laud the movie for "starting a discussion' and then chimp out when there's any actual disagreement present in that discussion.

>the Bat Brand is the equivalent of a death sentence inside!
This is dumb. Why being catch by the batman would be worse than by the police? And even if the brand says "I am a criminal" that's also so what gang tattoo does, so it doesn't matter in jail.

"This simple comic book writer is a moron, but I am a genius, I know all."