We see Batman shoot a bunch of Lex Luthor's goons. Okay. If he's willing to kill in this universe...

We see Batman shoot a bunch of Lex Luthor's goons. Okay. If he's willing to kill in this universe, why doesn't he kill the Joker?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=I3_GPqwkGco
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

attempting to apply logic to shitty pleb comic movies.
sigh

Tactical Murder, user. You can't easily just knock out every mook with a punch. Especially that one flamer guy. With Joker it's more of the "Do it to end the suffering" type deals, so that's at least comic accurate.

Wans't Batman "broken" in that movie?That he abandoned his ideals somewhere before the movie?

That movie would only make sense after an entire superman and batman dceu trilogy

The problem with showing a broken Batman here is that we have next to no idea what he was like before in this universe so its not as effective. So naturally seeing Bat of Murder is a bit jarring as an introduction, especially to the causal audience. While there isnt necessarily wrong with showing Bruce going through this arc, its weird not seeing the before, just the during and aftermath

>Goons

Why would Lexcorp use goons to transport a piece of rock legally aquired from the US Government? Those were likely just a security company that Batman Massacred in his batmobile.

It clearly showed Lex's head goon as part of the group that transported the kryptonite.

His willingness to kill was a recent thing that started when Superman triggered him.

There is a theory that the Joker used to be Robin, as he has some scars that line up with the damage on the suit. It does give a good reason as to why Batman wouldn't just kill him.

You are the first user to ever point this flaw out! Aren't you clever!

God just shut the fuck up about this nonsensical fan theory already

Kinda forced but at least this could save the real joker so they could try to make the real one closer to the comic one.

Jokers a mian event and mentally ill. Goons
Ike cillivians don't matter. They're wallpaper.

Normally this would be true but in the DCEU we're supposed to look at the net gains/loss; the needs of the many and all that. That's why Superman is a "hero".

>so they could try to make the real one closer to the comic one.

There is no singular interpretation of the Joker, casual.

There's a difference between killing as execution and killing in self defense.

When goons are shooting at you, and you protect yourself, it's ok if those people die as a result of you using a shield or firing back. They know what they're getting into. That's war.

In TDK he kills Two-Face because he's about to kill another boy. That's defense. Same reason Superman killed Zod.

He was going to outright murder Superman for things he "could" do but had shown no intention of committing. That's wrong.

He doesn't kill the Joker *after* he kills Robin because it's too late. It wouldn't bring Jason back. It's just revenge.

But his official look never changed in 77 years, sometimes he wear some funny costume but he never changed his main style

Eh, more likely Batman just paid some special attention there after force feeding Joker his teeth.

In movies, Superheroes are generally more bloodthirsty than in the comics.

Hollywood just likes that kind of closure.

There's some interesting mental gymnastics to explain it.
People came to the conclusion since Bruce is going through some kind of midlife PTSD crisis combo he's only started to kill recently and Joker and several villains are conveniently on vacation in Gotham. Fair enough.
And we can assume the morality reset he gets from fighting with Superman makes him reluctant to kill after, so he spares Lex. Sure.
Thing is with what he learns of Luthor before that there's no real reason from either of those two cases on why he didn't just kill him as well.

We can't even suggest his obsession with Superman is distracting him because he has just enough time to kill those goons. Subsequently after wasting precious seconds of our lives going through this unimportant nonsense we come to the obvious conclusion anyone with a life could in that it's an "adult" move so people are going to die but at the end of the day it's also a superhero movie so the characters who make sales and sequels can't die. At least not for very long in Clark's case.

Shame about Mercy though.

There's FOUR of them and one of them is a Cenobite from another universe.

Try it yourself and see how it goes.

You forgot the part that he doesn't even need to kill the goons. He attacks them to get a thing he steals later with no violence at all.

Was with you 100% until the end. It's explained online (which could be total BS) and hinted throughout the movie that this Batman abandoned his code only 2 years ago (during the Man of Steel events). Jason died before that and so it's just likely Batman and Joker haven't encountered each other at all in those years, I'd say.

He can't kill the Joker because then he'd be just as bad as him, user

But yeah, he had a moral code in this universe and abandoned it after like 16 years (which I would say is comic accurate as f. We're basically just seeing what would have happened to Bruce is he didn't find his Tim Drake and kept getting darker and darker. Then an alien comes out of the sky and destroys a city).

Bruce: "20 years in Gotham, Alfred, how many good guys are left? How many stayed that way?"

Alfred: "The fever sets in...the rage...the feeling of helplessness...that turns some men...cruel."

I feel like, no matter how you feel about the rest of the movie (I didn't love it) this is actually explained really well, in my opinion. The only downside to this Batman for me is the possible feeling of hypocrisy after he stops killing again, which should be Justice League.

Was tim burton's Batman "Broken" too? Cause he murdered more crooks than Batfleck. Just sayin

No it doesn't give any "good reasons" to anyone who isn't retarded. It's a dumb "theory" that autists came up with.

>Hey Jason became "The Joker" because um...uh.....REASONS!!!!!

That's not a "theory" that's a retarded being retarded.

The explenation was hinted in the movie and outright stated in the comic-prequels to the movie. He started going rough on villians after the events of man of steel, goons even talk about how he is not pulling punches anymore before he appears and breaks some goons knee. During that time the Joker was in Arkham as stated in suicide squad.

>nonsensical
>literally the only good reason that he hasn't killed the joker

why don't you explain it, mr smarty pants?

What about the time he cut off his own face?

Also you DO know that Leto Joker was heavily based on Morrison's and Azzerello's takes, right down to Johnny Frost being his main henchman

Right, because Robin has never become the Joker before

Do you even read comics?

Purple suit

If you can't see why that fan theory is seven kinds of retarded, i don't know what to say to you other than get yourself a helmet and Juicebox.

I think people turn a blind eye to Keaton's murders and the random Burton weirdness because of everything else that was done right. Hard to say, but the point still stands regarding BvS's broken Batman

Yeah, and i never seen that in it, i have seen it happen in Batman beyond. But in Batman beyond there was an actual reason behind it. Unlike your retarded "fan theory" which rely's on "he became The Joker, just cause..."

>literally the only good reason that he hasn't killed the joker

see

No one is defending the hypocrisy, we're just pointing out how fucking stupid the twist is and unnecessary

>Was tim burton's Batman "Broken" too?
Yes. actually.
youtube.com/watch?v=I3_GPqwkGco

or...

>There's a difference between killing as execution and killing in self defense.
What about those goons that he got brutalised and likely murdered in prison because he branded them?
And what about when he moved out of the line of fire with his Batmobile, only to come back to crash his car in the back of the truck, killing those guys?
None of those are self defense.

Not only that, he sticks one of his tracking devices, only to chase after them anyway, and then he smashes the back of the truck, not blowing away the tracking device just by stupid chance.
But hey, there's some Jesus imagery!

>Was tim burton's Batman "Broken" too? Cause he murdered more crooks than Batfleck. Just sayin
But he also kills the Joker, so at least it's consistent. You might not like that version of Batman, but it makes sense.

You just don't get it. He was angry, so he was retarded.

>why don't you explain it, mr smarty pants?

The Joker is money so he can't be killed right away. Snyder is retarded so he made a murderous Batman even though it was gonna lead to contradictions like this because you can't start building a universe from the ending point.

Ever heard of having a... plan B..?
Clearly he needed one since his chase didn't work. Also, it could have just been a way, like in the Arkham games, to ensure they get to where they're supposed to be going as quickly as possible, and giving them a false sense of safe when really he's right around the corner.

>He was angry, so he was retarded.
Are you talking about Batman or Snyder?

dark knight strikes again, mother fucker

older dick grayson kills other heroes dressed as the joker

Your logic makes no sense becuase his plan B is his plan A.

the tracking device was also there for him to know where the truck is at avery time during the chase, which allowed him to do the stunt he did at the end where he took another route. Also better take them down now instead to having to deal with them in a possibly more secure place in which he has to deal with more goons.

>waahhh I don't like this joker
>wait he's not actually the real joker? waaahhhh I wanted him to be the joker

you guys are completely fucking retarded, I gotta say.

>instead to having to deal with them in a possibly more secure place in which he has to deal with more goons.
Which is what he does with so little effort it wasn't even worth seeing on screen.
Snyder just wanted a big car chase and explosions. The man's not deep. Why do you keep trying to overthink it.

I wanted to see that.

Not really.
Plan A - take down the truck and see what they're smuggling inside.
Plan B - if I don't take it down (which he didn't) go back to the Batcave to track the truck to it's destination.

or it was something completely different which
states...

But he fucking smashes his car right where he had stuck the tracking device, and it only works because the plot needed it, because all logic would said that he would've fucking wrecked the device along the rest of the back of the truck.
It's specially stupid since it was very easily fixed by having him attach the device once they start getting away, but then Snyder wouldn't have been able to shove in the rifle reference to DKR so fuck proper writing!

That shit was stupid as fuck. Also that "Joker" was shown to clearly have fighting prowess being trained by Batman and all. Yet your so called "Jason/Joker" has not shown any fighting skill. Furthermore Leto is actually OLDER than Afleck , furthermore the "fan theory" is buttfuck retarded. Get over it.

But for plan B to work DON'T FUCKING CRASH YOUR CAR AGAINST THE FUCKING DEVICE YOU JUST STUCK IN THE FUCKING TRUCK.

>Which is what he does with so little effort it wasn't even worth seeing on screen.
>Which is what he does with so little effort

what the fuck are you talking about, we saw the aftermath of what it seem to have been a warzone. It was in no way any easier.

>>wait he's not actually the real joker? waaahhhh I wanted him to be the joker
What the fuck are you even talking about? We're pointing out that this "fan theory" is literally balls on head retarded. I have yet to see a logical argument made for it. It came from the same retards that made the Batman is really Deathstroke "fan theories" that also had no explanation to them.

Except the order of events is reversed for that.
If Plan B is to use a tracker then why are you shooting exploding missles and ramming at the tracker?
Inb4 >Oh his aim is just that good.

But he never uses it, because he just leaves for a few seconds and comes back to where it would logically be, without the help of any device.
You're just making up reasons to why he does that, when the movie should make it clear. And that doesn't mean some expository monologue, but simlpy show things in a way where it makes sense. Of course, that would need somebody who knows how to deal with narrative, and that certainly isn't Snyder.

Didn't someone say 'dumb luck' earlier? Do we actually even know he intentionally crashed his car into the back of the truck? Did he say so?

The chase would've ended there if it worked, also it wasn't over till superman appeared, which is something he couldn't obviously know.

What the fuck does this post of mine have to do with that strawman bullshit of yours?

It wasn't worth seeing on screen so there's no reason to believe they didn't just shoot at shadows while he stole the thing no problem.

he has several monitors in the cockpit of his vehicle, what the fuck do you think these things are for?

Again, you're making things up after the fact. The movie in no way establishes any of this. Snyder is an autist who doesn't know how to communicate a story. It's no surprise other autists are the only ones who "understand" it.

>legally aquired from the US Government?

It wasn't legally acquired. It illegally smuggled to the US because Lex didn't get the Senator to let him import it through normal channels.

>Those were likely just a security company that Batman Massacred in his batmobile.

Heavily armed mercenary mooks working directly under KGBeast were just innocent hired hands? Sure thing, buddy.

there were several broken walls and endless amounts of empty shells. Only because he managed to steal the kryptonite, doesn't mean it was easy. Also they probably didn't show it because they wanted the warehouse fight to be the first time we see Batman in action.

Here's a question. If Batman becoming more brutal and lethal was a recent development why was he okay with Robin running around with some kinda of goddamn halberd thing?
I mean, I think it was just Zack "Axes are cool" Snyder focusing on visuals even when they make no sense, but you DCEU guys think it's deeper than that so expect me to believe that a pre-fallen Batman would let his sidekick swing a round a dismembering weapon?

>The only downside to this Batman for me is the possible feeling of hypocrisy after he stops killing again

Sure, except Bruce admits he was wrong. Him stopping his murderous ways is part of him efforts to redeem himself after falling down and temporarily abandoning his code.

No, I completely understand that and I agree. It's just there will be a lot of people who don't think that way and will think of him as a bit of a hypoctrite.

Hell, if Jason comes back in the movies, he might think it too.

>H-hey guys what if Jason is really the Joker? Like that is totally why he has tattoos and why Batfleck wont kill him!

>Huh.. that's retarded, why would he be the joker? For one thing they show him being a part of Harley Quinn's Origin. Also it was explained quite thoroughly in BVS that Batman had only recently become more Brutal.

>In fact in Suicide Squad he is clearly shown catching criminals without killing them and even saves Harley's life.
>Yeah but it makes sense! Joker beat him up with a crowbar and blew him up! So he went crazy and Became the Joker!

>But he's clearly shown to be dead. Also Jason is younger than Bruce where Leto is older than Affleck

>B..but he looks young!

>Also how come the "Joker" can't fight when Jason is a trained fighter?

>Well...u-um maybe when he went crazy he forgot how to fight...yeah

>Also why would Jason go out and get a whole bunch of Tattoos, when was he ever shown to love tattoos?

>Also how do you explain the chalk white skin and green hair? You telling me that Jason went nuts and perfectly recreated Joker's origin? Despite not knowing how The Joker even came to be?

>Well...um

>You just made this crackpot theory because you don't like how he looks and because of that he can't be the real Joker and must be of all people "Jason Fucking Todd" because your autism couldn't handle it. Right?

>uh...um It totally makes sense because..uh. Fuck you and your strawman arguments , it's a great theory that totally makes sense!

>>Also how come the "Joker" can't fight when Jason is a trained fighter?
Jason's always been the weakest fighter. He gets by on ginger rage and guns.

>Thing is with what he learns of Luthor before that there's no real reason from either of those two cases on why he didn't just kill him as well.

Why would he need to specifically go after and murder Luthor? Luthor doesn't matter to him. He's using Luthor's resources and information to advance his agenda, beyond that he's nothing to Batman, since he's solely focused on Superman, and finding a way to kill him.

>We can't even suggest his obsession with Superman is distracting him because he has just enough time to kill those goons

The goons die because they are directly his way, trying to prevent him from obtaining the Kryptonite by attacking him. He doesn't roam around Gotham at night, murdering people in cold blood in the movie. Everything he does as Batman is done in preparation to murder Superman. That includes the sex trafficker he tortures at the beginning, since he's tied to the smuggling operation related to the KGBeast and the White Portuguese that he's trying to track down.

>He attacks them to get a thing he steals later with no violence at all.
>no violence at all.

So you slept through the part where Batman goes in guns blazing and basically wrecked Lexcorp's offices, beat up all the security guards, just to get the Kryptonite after his hijacking of the truck failed?

>Why would he need to specifically go after and murder Luthor?
Because he finds out while digging through his dirty laundry for the Kryptonite that there's a laundry list of things Luthor is orchestrating that are extremely dangerous and morally bankrupt?

We don't have any real context to the halberd. As far as we know, maybe Jason just loved training with it at the cave, but didn't use it on the field.

He's solely focused on killing Superman, anything else doesn't matter unless they specifically get in his way. It's not hard to understand. Bruce is obsessed, he doesn't give a flying fuck about Luthor's other shady dealings since he's just another corrupt rich asshole to him, which Gotham is already full of. He never even has the full picture of what Luthor is doing either, or he would have known Luthor knew his identity and was manipulating him.

No, I just meant to say 'no effort at all".

Harley is an accomplice in Robin's murder.
Even setting that aside, do you want what remains of the DCEU to rot away?

>goons

Goons don't bring normies into theaters.

Even a crappy Joker like Leto will bring normies into theaters.

I'm ready for 5 years of a single Vertigo inspired film a year until everyone forgets Snyder ever worked for WB.

Yes, but they do not have the time, or at least the suits don't think they do.

I would have loved to see BatFleck somewhere in the middle of his career, hunting criminals, having already lost Jason, maybe with Tim as Robin. One or two movies like this, then he breaks because of some other shit and we get to BvS.

The same can of course be said about Superman. E.g. I would have liked Cavill spending time at the Planet, because it's a non-place in BvS. That would have been essential to build the character.

The suits think that general audiences only like flashy explosions but I like to think that that's not true. This kind of thinking developed since the 80s, but it is still true that people care more about solid, relatable characters in the long-term, so they would keep engaged with the brand. Moreover, solid character development is cheaper than spectacle after spectacle.

Purely unfounded

I see what youre saying. Im also worried they might have bruce going forward be insensitive to people that are similar to how he was in bvs and how he probably still would be without clarks sacrifice. Just saying itd be nice to see a more sympathetic batman

Yeah, those fucking Fox executives fucking ruined X-Men out of the gate since they didn't give us origin movies for all of the characters first. I can't believe they expected anyone to care about some random guy at shitty bar in canada. or some fucking bald guy named wheels in a wheelchair. or some asshole wearing a visor. Or some black chick with white hair.

what the fuck were they thinking. How could I be expected to understand that Charles and Erik were friends without a movie about it?

>didn't watch the movie

Wow youre right. I forgot its impossible for an actor to play a character thats not their own age

There's also the fact that it's like a suit of armor (it literally is one). Suits of armor are always holding halberds and pikes and axes and shit.

Completely different beasts.

The histories of the X-Men are intertwined. Batman and Superman have basically nothing in common
>inb4 "MARTHA!"
and why they are the way they are would need not only need to be shown, but also illustrated. The X-movies do somewhat of a good job with this for key characters.

The problem Snyder has that he has all these epic moments in his mind he wants to have in these movies and the entire script has to conform to these expectations. It is so tightly knit that there isn't any room for actual scenes that expand the characters. So Batman has to act in this way and thus scenes are inserted "explaining" his behavior. But a good film would not only do this but also illustrate this during character scenes. It is not only about "this explains that", but how it is explained. Insert some more "boring" stuff that you can use as backdrop for the kewl moments and you're fine.

One movie is not at all enough for this, which is one reason why Batman v Superman was so irritating for many people.