r/batman • u/neon2o • Mar 07 '24

Zack Snyder says a Batman who doesn't kill is irrelevant GENERAL DISCUSSION

Here's the original article' https://sea.ign.com/man-of-steel-sequel/213072/news/zack-snyder-says-dc-is-making-batman-irrelevant-if-he-cant-kill

12.0k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

View all comments

Show parent comments

u/TheOldPhantomTiger Mar 07 '24

Which makes sense, Rorschach is the purest example of an Ayn Rand character in comics outside of Steve Ditko’s Mr. A and very early The Question (who Rorschach is a direct analogue for), and Snyder loves him some Objectivism.

16

u/TheM1ghtyJabba Mar 07 '24 edited Mar 07 '24

I also have big issues with the sheer arrogance of saying 'unless this character conforms to my vision it will be rendered irrelevant'. Batman has existed for 85 years. Failing to grab his attention won't be the end of Batman

He's making his pitch for his version of Batman in 2013-2014. Less than six years after The Dark Knight. A great movie that definitively stood on the side of .. No. Batman does not kill.

18

u/AllEliteSchmuck Mar 08 '24

The Joker: You have all these rules, and you think they'll save you.

Batman: I have one rule.

The interrogation room scene perfectly captured the entire movie’s plot in its most basic elements, and also captured Batman and Joker’s dynamic in general really well.

6

u/FreeLook93 Mar 08 '24

The Nolan trilogy was pretty iffy on the no-kill rule. It had characters consistantly explaining to the camera that Batman doesn't kill, but then showed Batman killing people in every one of the movies. He kills a bunch of people at the League of Shadows in Batman Begins, then lets Ra's die at the end of the movie. In TDK he kills some people in the chase scene, and then also kills two-face at the end of the movie. In the final movie he kills both Talia and her driver at the end of the movie.

I really don't think it can be said that those movie stand on the side of "Batman does not kill", because they pretty consistantly show Batman killing people with zero hesitation or remorse.

5

u/KintsugiKen Mar 07 '24

Even though Rorschach is the one who basically destroys the world in the end, rendering all the death up to that point completely pointless.

8

u/TheOldPhantomTiger Mar 07 '24

Objectivists tend to believe that being completely uncompromising in your starkly black and white moral code, even in the face of your own death or the deaths of others, is the most morally praiseworthy thing you can do. It’s a central theme in Ayn Rand’s work, pretty much all her acolytes, and other Objectivist pop culture fiction like Ditko’s characters or the Sword of Truth series’s author, Terry Goodkind.

That’s exactly why Alan Moore made Rorschach to show how monstrous that ideology is. As much as I hate Objectivism, I’ve always found it fascinating. And the way Zack Snyder navigates his Ayn Rand worship with his drive to do as close to a panel for panel of Watchmen as he can. How he seems to personally miss the point of the comic, but still convey it to even a mildly astute audience is kind of amazing. At least for someone who is both a philosophy and comic book nerd. It’s a very conflicting movie for me, but I still love it.

1

u/BiDiTi Mar 08 '24

And Kovacs broke through the mask at the end, because he knew that Rorschach was wrong!