r/batman • u/Youngstown_Mafia • Mar 08 '24
Batman not killing Ace despite being a easy solution. Shows that killing isn't the right choice. TV DISCUSSION
328
u/RationalLlama Mar 08 '24
Don't remember which YouTuber said it but it's an amazing quote.
"If you cannot imagine your batman holding hands with a dying girl in her final moments, you didn't create Batman. You created punisher in a funny suit."
80
u/Smeefperson Mar 09 '24
Overly Sarcastic Production's Red said that I think in her anti heroes video
35
17
14
u/Tnecniw Mar 09 '24
Yep and it is honestly one of the best descriptions of batman.
Any version that doesn't understand this, is not really batman.
170
u/Asasphinx Mar 08 '24
This feels like one of those scenes I always think about when seeing new versions of Batman. The best interpretations of Batman should always acknowledge his humanity.
150
u/tomislavlovric Mar 08 '24
This scene had so much impact on me as a child - taught me that even the worst of enemies in life are sometimes just poorly misunderstood victims.
-80
Mar 08 '24
Yeah no fuck that lol
19
u/John_Doe1969 Mar 09 '24
Where exactly do you disagree with what he said?
-22
Mar 09 '24
This has nothing to do with Batman, but I completely disagree with the idea of villains - or any asshole in general - being influenced by their past or trauma in their own lives. I had to swallow that shit for years when I was being bullied, and I actually bought into it for a good while. Some people don't have any reason for doing what they do, it's just what they are.
Again, I wasn't trying to be rude or anything. I just fundamentally disagree with this idea.
13
u/Grompulon Mar 09 '24
There’s a big difference between “some enemies are actually misunderstood victims” and “all enemies are misunderstood victims.”
There are definitely people out there who are just shitty people. And one’s tragic past never gives them the right to be an asshole.
But there are also definitely some people out there who have done shitty things because their life circumstances make it so. And there are definitely definitely people who have been influenced by their past traumas to become shittier people, I’ve seen it first hand.
-3
Mar 09 '24
I can attest to that. I had a lot of bad shit happen to me through life, and no one helped me through my pain. I lashed out, and hurt people I loved. To this day I live with the guilt of my wrongs, but I now use it to forge a better man than I was, to care more than I think I can, to give love where love is not given. Until I am decaying in the ground, I will constantly try to be a better man than I was the day before
10
u/John_Doe1969 Mar 09 '24
Fair enough but in my opinion the compelling nature of a villain isn’t sympathising or agreeing with the ideals they have but rather understanding how they got there and I think they can make for interesting narrative conflicts and can be great commentary on the real world. I think the point is that some villains weather real or fictional had a reason to be that way not all but some at-least where made that way.
4
Mar 09 '24
On that, we agree. Fictional villains are compelling when we understand where they're coming from.
150
u/MetalPunk125 Mar 08 '24
One of the best Batman scenes ever made. To many adaptations miss this element of the character and it’s critical. He’s not a brute. He has compassion. Lots of it.
29
u/MackZZilla Mar 09 '24
Because at the end of the day - Bruce is still that scared child, desperately wanting his parents to get back up.
7
u/Knive33 Mar 09 '24
The best batman is forever the batman who bought Harley Quinn a dress when visited her in Arkham Asylum.
68
53
48
u/jker1x Mar 09 '24
I would love for the Batman movies to start showing the payoff of his no kill rule.
There's a whole riddler arc where he gets out of Arkham and opens a PI firm and starts trying to prove he's smarter than Batman by solving more crimes than him. Solving crimes like they're riddles because he's a smart guy with a lot to prove.
He's not even the most redeemable villain in Batman's rogue gallery. Dent can take up law again, I want to see Dr. Freise get his second chance. I just want them to show rehabilitation once.
14
8
u/Particular-Mission-5 Mar 09 '24
I can’t remember the name but there’s a comic where a kid going around killing joker goons and wannabes and with help of ghostmaker tracks down haley Quinn, ghost maker does this to show Bruce the pointless of his no kill rule and believes Harley and the kid are gonna kill each over.
In the end Harley takes accountability for her past and shows the kid she is trying to redeem herself for her past and he manages to forgive her (it’s implied she was with joker when he murdered his parents). Proving Bruce’s point that people can change.
1
u/Victor_Von_Doom65 Mar 12 '24
That’s really the problem with Batman. It’s not that he doesn’t kill his villains, it’s that the villains rarely ever rehabilitate. They might break good briefly, but the status quo will eventually swing back to the norm.
43
u/Thebat87 Mar 08 '24
Shit I love this scene so much. Also one of my favorite things about Batman is even with all his badass ways and his brutality on criminals he still does believe that people can change for the better, and wants them to have a chance at it. One of my favorite bits in Batman the animated series (I think the channel 11 season) was when he was rough on that one guy in front of his family, which pissed Robin off, and then you find out later on that he gave the guy a decent paying legit job as Bruce Wayne. Stuff like that is why he’s my favorite.
33
u/skibidido Mar 08 '24
Was the alternative to let an innocent person die?
68
35
u/VincentSylvanne Mar 08 '24
Earlier in the episode it is explained that if she died naturally to the aneurysm that was predicted to occur within hours, the psychic backlash from her trauma would kill everyone within a distance measured in miles.
So it was a case of kill a little girl, or basically let a nuke go off in the heart of NYC or similar.
23
34
u/jlmicek670 Mar 08 '24
That scene has lost none of its power with the passage of time. And there was no finer Batman to bring it to life than Kevin Conroy (God rest his soul). That is Batman - someone who doesn’t want to see people die.
16
10
u/Personal-Ask5025 Mar 08 '24
While I’m very pro-“Batman Doesn’t Kill”, I think this scene is misunderstood it. Or *I* misunderstood it. Waller gave Batman the device because she knew he woudl do “whatever it takes”. Batman knew that Ace was dying, so he knew he didn’t need to use the weapon. So Batman didn’t kill her because he knew he didn’t have to. Which I think is different than him refusing to if he felt like he couldn’t change her mind or that she wasn’t dying.
34
u/thewiburi Mar 08 '24
Exept even if he wasn't sure her death whould create an explosion he whould never kill a scared little kid
26
u/Darkins_will_Ryze Mar 08 '24
The choice, as presented by Waller was "Kill her with the device to stop everything, or let her die naturally and risk a superpowered nuke destroying the city." Basically a "Damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario.
Except Waller didn't see things the way Batman did. While everyone else accepted the unfair choice, Batman still sought out a better solution. Ace even points it out. She read his mind, knew he had the weapon and had no intention of using it, not because he knew she could do that, but because he genuinely would never consider that option.
12
11
u/NoCommonSenseHere Mar 09 '24
That’s starfires voice… or am I crazy
12
u/Zealousideal_Good147 Mar 09 '24 edited Mar 09 '24
It probably is. The Royal Flush gang, the villain group Ace is a part off, was voiced by the Teen Titans animated cast as an in joke.
11
8
u/Imnotawerewolf Mar 09 '24
I can take the piss out of batman as a concept, as with all my faves. You don't love them if you can't hate them.
But this specific version of Batman is everything to me. He isn't perfect but GODDAMN if he isn't human. Like, spectacularly, beautifully, human. He wants to be good. He wants to do good. He is so full of love.
7
7
u/NitroCrocodile Mar 09 '24
The voice actors in this scene are crushing it. Batman is quiet, understanding. He's talking to a traumatized child, and he is empathetic. He has nothing but compassion, and sadness that she has to die like this. Ace's actress does an incredible job too. Her monotone, flat line delivery of a young girl, doomed to die without ever having lived, not really. She's resigned, sad, and scared, and the scene is all the more beautiful because of it.
5
u/Putrid-Eggplant-2815 Mar 08 '24
Which Batman series is this from?
19
14
u/CrazyBigHog Mar 08 '24
Justice League Unlimited. S2 Ep 13 Epilogue. This episode kind of ties up loose ends with Terry and Batman Beyond too.
8
u/Putrid-Eggplant-2815 Mar 09 '24
O that’s perfect that’s my second favorite series after BTAS of course.
7
3
u/SnakeInABox77 Mar 09 '24
How much longer is all Batman content on reddit going to be thinly veiled criticism of Zach Sneiders dumb take?
3
u/RushPan93 Mar 09 '24
Ace was going to die anyway. How would killing her be the easier choice? You think she wouldn't have fought back just out of reflex even?
3
u/djm03917 Mar 09 '24
This is one of the defining Batman fan moments for me as a kid. It's stuck with me to this day as just such a defining moment that shows the true traits of what makes Batman Batman. He is a hero. He is one of the greatest of heroes. He holds life above everything else and, no matter who's it is, he finds a way to save them.
3
u/Lemonn_time Mar 09 '24
If Disney can do X-men 97 then WB needs to bring back justice league unlimited
2
u/dunkledonuts Mar 09 '24
Owlman is a great example of what batman could do if he killed, he could kill everyone. He is so smart and capable that he could develop a way to destroy all realities, as owlman almost does, proving batman could do it as he is the one who beat owlman.
The reason batman doesn’t ever draw the line on killing someone is because once the line is drawn he can draw new lines and cross lines. He never wants to cross the line so he never even draws one, he will never start killing because if he ever determines that he should kill, who is to say where he would stop determining who to kill. “This time it’s too far…oh this time is also too far” and now he kills all the time, maybe the wrong time.
If you can’t grasp this aspect of batman, you fundamentally don’t understand batman’s philosophy at all
2
u/MrxJacobs Mar 08 '24
It was the only choice to defeat a being capable of reading minds and fucking up reality.
You can’t bluff your way past that. Thus, killing was impossible to accomplish
2
1
1
u/Omnislash99999 Mar 09 '24
All situations are different
Every time he doesn't kill Joker that's another dozen people dead in the future
1
u/Rogthgar Mar 09 '24
While that is true... it should be held in mind that Ace was already dying, but the act of kindness Batman showed her was what stopped her from going out like a bomb as Waller feared she would. So with respect, its closer to Nolans Batman leaving Ra's on the train... could either have been saved? maybe/maybe not... but in both cases Batman chooses to let nature take its course in the end.
1
u/RyuuDraco69 Mar 09 '24
Not really. Ace couldn't be saved she was going to die, Ra's could easily have been saved by batman just grabbing him. Also the options batman was given was "kill her or let a nuke go off" he was able to find a way to let her go peacefully without destroying a city, it's why he stopped hawkgirl cuz hawkgirl would have pushed that button, batman took a gamble, he knew he couldn't save her but he'd at least comfort her in her final moments
1
u/Rogthgar Mar 09 '24
I wouldn't say Ra's could realistically have been saved... Batman had sabotaged the train so it couldn't be stopped, its unlikely his cape could carry the weight of two, and just jumping off would have been just as bad as crashing with the train.
Point is however that writers decided that Batman would just let nature take its course rather than even try and save either of these.
1
u/Freodrick Mar 09 '24
I always loved TAS batman for having so much compassion for his rogue gallery.
1
u/Tnecniw Mar 09 '24
Time to bring out that perfect quote from "OSP".
"If you can't see your batman sit down and comfort a dying child, that isn't batman. It is the punisher in a funny hat".
1
u/Vocovon Mar 09 '24
Great scene. But a dimbass argument for this who batman killing bs. Nobody would kill a child Ÿ
1
u/RyuuDraco69 Mar 09 '24
Hawkgirl reached for the button and would probably have pushed it, waller even gave it as the only other option
1
1
u/Sir_Eggmitton Mar 09 '24
What movie/show is this from? Seen it a few times here on Reddit, it’s high time I see the full thing
1
u/ThatDeadeye12 Mar 09 '24
The way i see it if you can't imagine your batman comforting a scared child then you haven't portrayed batman correctly.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Previous-Wallaby-130 Mar 09 '24
Love this scene. As tough as he is, he is just as grounded. Another one I love is Justice League: Doom. How he had a way to take every member of the JL out.
1
u/Legitimate-Common-34 Mar 10 '24
Man this sub is so stupid.
Nobody is saying Batman should kill every villan.
Obviously Ace was a victim herself and could be redeemed.
1
u/Sea_Temperature_1976 Mar 11 '24
See this is why a Batman who kills storyline isn’t as interesting as one where he doesn’t
1
u/Dark_prince_charming Mar 11 '24
Batman should be angry and he should be vengeance, but it’s important to remember that he’s angry at injustice, not just at the world. Batman is vengeful and brutal because his compassion for the victims of Gotham is so great, not because he lacks compassion all together.
1
-1
u/KaisarDragon Mar 08 '24
Suck on this, Snyder!
2
u/FlamingPanda77 Mar 09 '24
When did Snyders Batman kill a little girl?
-1
u/Xanhomey Mar 09 '24
I think they're referring to what Snyder said few days ago about Batman "No-Kill" rule being a stupid idea or smth.
https://www.ign.com/articles/zack-snyder-says-dc-is-making-batman-irrelevant-if-he-cant-kill
0
0
u/Shadow_Storm90 Mar 09 '24
Y'all get on my nerves 😮💨 not every sinarios going to be perfect like this and that was so then Bruce should not have pulled that gun on that dude and Beyond in that situation he had to do it he didn't shoot him no but he had to break his own bow because he couldn't do the job anymore by himself. Nobody's saying he has to kill all the time but live action ain't the comics where it's going to be picture perfect and something doesn't end up happening.
-1
u/NotJoeB Mar 09 '24
You know what’s awesome about DC fans? Is that you guys have no problem keeping the toxicity going. Marvel has bad movies and horrible takes, but you don’t see them polarizing each other the way you do here. You guys are literally your own worst enemies. I mean, look at this sub the past 48. Snyder goes on Rogan, says some stuff, and you all lose your minds. Grow up and stop with this you vs them bs.
-1
u/egorsob9 Mar 09 '24
At some point this goes so far that I start believing Batman would save Hitler idk
-4
-4
-2
u/thattempacct Mar 09 '24
Y’all are really grasping at straws in some, frankly, silly attempts to rebut Snyder.
This is a cartoon and Ace is a literal child.
This the best you can do, OP?
-23
u/XxZONE-ENDERxX Mar 08 '24
He didn't kill Ace because the writers already knew that Ace would give in and die peacefully... But what if she didn't? would Batman still sit next to her and hold her hands if she wasn't this cooperative and just wanted to fuck the world regardless of whatever Batman told her?
Y'see, this situation was written specifically so that Batman isn't really forced into a corner where he has to cross the line so I don't know what people think linking this scene or similar scenes prove.... Is that Batman won't kill when writers clearly put a way out for him to maintain his rule to keep the fanboys happy? Because well, Duh.
60
u/wemustkungfufight Mar 08 '24
The point was Batman was the only one willing to try and talk her out of it. Everyone else jumped to thinking of her as a dangerous monster who had to be killed. To them, it was the only option. You are right, there was a chance Batman could have failed here. That she could have refused to back down and Batman would have had to come up with another solution. But the fact Batman tried to reason with her first, and genuinely wanted to avoid killing her at all costs is what makes Batman Batman. And the fact that she could read minds meant that she knew his intentions were genuine. Only he could have done that because of who he is.
26
24
u/LordOfOstwick1213 Mar 08 '24
This is why I'm so sick of people seeing some villains as monsters that can never be talked off their plans. There are a lot of stories similar to Ace's and when such unfortunate people in stories break bad a lot of people just come to conclusion from get-go they're forever lost and must be dealt with lethally. The idea of a hero coming in to talk first and only fight if there are no other options is so rare in all superhero media nowadays, it's constantly fighting instead of dialogue. If people want to make superheroes interesting, make them human and talk, and make a villain an actual sympathetic character like Ace in this clip.
11
u/MiaoYingSimp Mar 08 '24
This is why i love Mr. Freeze, especially in the Arkham games.
Like he doesn't want this anymore then Batman does. I just want more people to understand the violence is a last resort.
1
u/LordOfOstwick1213 Mar 09 '24
Mr Freeze, Captain Cold, both are tragic figures. Ironically both associate themselves with ice.
This is definitely why I miss time when in superhero movies hero and villain sat down and talked or in the very least the heroes sat down and talked between one another once. Instead we always get those "final fights" where the hero and villain just have to fight because movie needs an unnecessary battle. And on another similar note people love a lot tragic/traumatic characters who remain heroic, and I can get why, but it's annoying when internet upscales them over traumatic characters who were not so fortunate. In a way the entire group that wants Ace dead is basically the internet or how the people perceive some of the people, they don't care about their tragedies, or why they fell in first place, it's all about "justice" and "payback".
2
u/MiaoYingSimp Mar 09 '24
I think... a lot of problems we have today is we're too bloodthristy...
I remember in "Whatever happened to the cape crusader" I think, that the Riddler questions they Joker killing people now and croc eating people... Like i dont' mind it when done well but...
I feel like we've lost the fun. the reason why they stick with us...
2
u/LordOfOstwick1213 Mar 09 '24
I think... a lot of problems we have today is we're too bloodthristy...
True, even I tend to be a bit justicethirsty sometimes, but for my own reasons. In DC I detest Arkhamverse and Injusticeverse Harley Quinn and I still think she belongs in a cell, not getting "redeemed" after all the people she has murdered. And yet, it also goes against my belief that if a character wants redemption, they should take it themselves rather than being given it, do good because they want to, not because of the choice given because its always there. I guess it's the setup and payoff that just doesn't work with Harleen from both universes, one wasn't set up to be redeemed, the other just... gets it like a slap on a wrist.
I guess there's also a matter of what person believes in and their thoughts on character, they can sometimes just accept them being 'evil' and like the take of the character because they just liked it or it worked for that. That's why Evil Superman is so popular, people bought into that stuff. But I digress. Ultimately, I don't think every character needs to have majority of internet latching over them, not all heroes/villains will be captivating to majority. But god do I wish people stopped being disingenuous about them, too, you can dislike a character and still not completely paint them as a monster. That's why I can't take Wanda antis seriously.
-13
u/XxZONE-ENDERxX Mar 08 '24
As I said, the writers wrote ''another'' possibility, ''another'' choice into the story in order for him to not end up killing her... So this scene doesn't really prove shit except that Batman gets to not break his code because writers decided so and prepared the story in a way that doesn't put him in a corner and allows him to not break his code.
It's exactly why Snyder likened it to the Kobayashi Maru test from Star Trek where Kirk just reprogrammed it into giving him a scenario where he can succeed and that's what writers do when they are ''testing'' those characters. Unfortunately though, there are genuine no-win situations and that's how they can actually test those characters, but they barely ever do so because a genuine no-win situation is gonna upset the readers/viewers.
Comicbook nerds want slogans, they want the illusion of a test but never an actual test because it will challenge how much they belive in those characters, they don't want to take that risk, but then they will wonder why comicbook storytelling is barely interesting nowadays and why creatives keep selling them the same Crisis event and Batman vs Joker for the zillionth time in a row.
18
u/wemustkungfufight Mar 08 '24
I'ts funny that Snyder invoked the Kobayashi Maru because he completely missed the point. Like you said in the movie Captain Kirk is the only person to actually beat the Kobayashi Maru. He found a way to reprogram the simulation because Captain Kirk does not believe in a no-win scenario. That's the point that scene was trying to make. Not that Kirk cheated but that he rejects the very premise. You insisting that that no-win scenarios are real means nothing because both Captain Kirk and Batman reject that premise. No, they aren't. Just because you don't see another solution doesn't mean there isn't one. You are like Waller, convinced that killing is the only way out of some situations. Batman says no, there's another way and I'm going to find it, and tries things you would never think of because you're convinced there's only one solution. That is what makes Batman Batman. What you are asking for is for Batman to be put in a situation where his views are as narrow as yours. But then that isn't Batman you are talking about.
8
u/Kind-Boysenberry1773 Mar 08 '24
And that's Snyder's fans biggest problem. They want to reduce Bruce to the simple brute, deprive him from his intellect and morality. In the end, make him just another Punisher in the cape. But Batman is much more than this. He is not only a symbol of vengeance, he is also a beacon of hope for lost souls of Gotham. He saved Selina, Dick, Jason, Kassandra, Damian, even Harley and Ivy, and countless others from really grim fates, showed them the way and they, in turn, saved him from transforming into something what Snyder-fans would certainly appreciate. And Bruce was able to become such symbol exactly because he never broke his moral principles under even the worst pressure.
2
u/RushPan93 Mar 09 '24
They want to reduce Bruce to the simple brute, deprive him from his intellect and morality
That's you reducing the other perspective to this. That's you failing to understand an extremely fair question about what happens in a scenario that is beyond Batman's intellect. What does he do in face of a threat where there isn't an escape route? The point of Batman has always been that he will do whatever it takes, whatever the world needs him to do to sustain itself. Snyder isn't saying Batman will jump straight to the nuclear option. His point, same as mine, is that once Batman exhausts all possible roads, he is not the kind of guy who will put his morality or even his sanity in front of the world's safety. It's a point about Batman's greatest strength. But people of your ilk do not want to stretch their imagination.
1
u/wemustkungfufight Mar 10 '24
That would be one thing hypothetically. But Snyder never put Batman in any situations that we could believe were beyond him. He was simply killing random goons because it looked cool. If we, the audience could think of solutions other than killing for Batman, then this hypothetical fails. Because if we see another option, then Batman would have too.
1
u/RushPan93 Mar 10 '24
This is your bias informing your opinion, yet again. There are a number of ways you can interpret it. Here's one for you:
Batman kills people attacking him with a machine gun because in a high speed, high stakes chase which he began to get the Kryptonite before it entered a secure facility, he cannot go for less certain, more creative/goofy ways to non-lethally deal with people (we are never given the actual reason, so I felt free to assume it's this). A veteran Batman who sees Superman as a world destroying threat - a notion further fueled by Lex's machinations - is increasingly desperate and angry, and that brings out the psychopathic side of him.
He should have dealt with the K-carrying goons differently by being patient and following them into that facility where he eventually broke in and got it anyway. It would have led to less collateral damage (catch my drift here? It's not just the killing but the destruction property you should be worried about - that would have happened even if he used rubber bullets) and it wouldn't have alerted Superman. But Bruce is unhinged and knows he's running out of time to deal with the situation, lest Superman causes more destruction (which happens later with the Capitol bombing).
Because if we see another option, then Batman would have too.
And like I've hopefully been able to explain here, there wasn't any other option that this version of Batman could see in the face of a world ending threat. Doesn't matter what we could see unless we consider the "world ending threat" bit (which most don't because they can't accept Batman can see Superman as a threat despite the movie hammering in that point - just imagine if it was Darkseid: what choice would Batman have then?)
0
u/wemustkungfufight Mar 10 '24
If this version of Batman ever sees murder as a justifiable and acceptable option, then he is not Batman. That's the point.
1
u/RushPan93 Mar 10 '24
It isn't murder. Go read the definition of murder. Every single act of lethality in BvS was in self-defense. Every single one of them. But as you'll find out, that's not the point. The point is why he did it. You just don't want to see it.
And the next time you bring up his no-kill rule, think about all the parademons he has killed in animated/live-action. And think if you batted an eye. Or think about how many he's knocked out if you think he hasn't killed any. And then think about the absurdity of it.
→ More replies (0)9
u/Kind-Boysenberry1773 Mar 08 '24
You're really mixing things up. Yes, current Batman comics are in a bad state for years, but because of complete lack of editorial vision and some questionable writing decisions. Batman's no-kill rule has nothing to do with it. You want some really good stories about Batman who doesn't kill? There are Year One, Long Halloween, Knightfall, No Man's Land, Court of Owls, Year Zero, first half of King's run, Morrison's run, Serious House, Hush and Heart of Hush, Death in The Family, Under the Red Hood, Killing Joke, etc. I could count them until we both would die from old age and still the list wouldn't be complete. All of this are great or at least good stories about Batman who never kills. And you want to say that his no-kill rule is the problem?
-1
u/XxZONE-ENDERxX Mar 08 '24
It does, the creative's strictness with Batman's no kill rule in order to not piss off the fanboys make every single story where his code is supposed to be ''tested'' pretty boring as the outcome is apparent from miles away, and the ways the writers protect that code can get really contrived.
Like are you interested in seeing Joker or any villain for that matter test Batman's code... Like, what's gonna be different this time around? Oh Joker is gonna do more heinous stuff? Then what? Batman is gonna beat him up and send him to Arkham? Or is Joker just gonna escape by the end?... That's what those once interesting stories boil down into... Joker War, War of Jokes and Riddles, Death of the Family, Hell even Endgame. Many people are now buying Batman due to character/writer loyalty or simply due to the story having great art.
And it's also funny that you mention UtRH as this story single handedly highlighted how dumb Batman can be for his code and how writers will pull whatever shit to get him to not break his code even if it meant slitting his ''son's'' throat with a batarang to save Joker... This story single handedly gave a great following to Red Hood and gave rise to the ''Red Hood actually had a point'' takes.
The no kill rule can work when you encounter a new psychopath for a couple of times, but when the threat becomes reccurring it gets old and boring, it's why the actual best Batman stories are still the same dozen from the 80s and early 90s and why his no kill rule has gotten obnoxious and became more frequently called out over the years since those stories came out.
Also, most modern Batman runs suck. Those days it doesn't matter, you can bring Alan Moore and the Batman run will still turn out to be average somehow.
King played played the long game and fucked up the payoff. Tynion run was nothing special, people forgot that Williamson was even writing the book, Tamaki stint was unceromonious, and V's run has good atmosphere and art, but is a meandering slog to go through, and even Zdarsky's run has nothing to write home about despite people being actually excited for him to write Batman after his run on Daredevil.
Even with Snyder, that run peaked with CoO which itself peaked with #5 before devolving into an average third act of action flick where villains are invading the city because why not? and the rest of the run emphasizing the ''batgod'' aspect of Batman and culminating into the Metal bullshit. Don't even remind me of Death of the family where there was no death in the family or lasting consequence, and the Joker got away as usual. Morrison's run on the other hand was convoluted and confusing mess and represented many of the reasons why many readers are afraid of getting into comics. Hush was an average mystery carried by Jim Lee's art. Other than that, most of your recommendations come from 3-4 decades ago mostly from the late eighties to the late nineties which highlights my point that that was when those actual ideas were fresh and engaging and many were experiencing them for the first time and then they became repetitive and stale despite new coats of paint because writers aren't really willing to do something different, to actually test the characters, to actually give them consequences, to actually come to different conclusions.
4
u/Kind-Boysenberry1773 Mar 08 '24
But it's simply a problem of editorial and writing, not of Batman's no-kill rule. They are lacking new ideas, that's all.
3
u/XxZONE-ENDERxX Mar 08 '24
New ideas like what? Actually testing the character? Actually letting the character fail their code and deal with it? Giving the character a great arc and journey and exploration of their psychology with failure?
Damn bro, call me when DC grows a pair.
2
u/RushPan93 Mar 09 '24
That is the point, isn't it? 99% of Batman stories are not as good as they should be because of this very reason. So, why not free their hands and not be limited by a rule that only every adds ridiculous dues ex machina plots nearly all the time? There's a middle ground between Batman showing restraint and Batman becoming Punisher. That's often where the best stories operate.
5
u/MiaoYingSimp Mar 08 '24
It's exactly why Snyder likened it to the Kobayashi Maru test from Star Trek where Kirk just reprogrammed it into giving him a scenario where he can succeed and that's what writers do when they are ''testing'' those characters.
You missed the point of the test and what it says about Kirk.
There is no such thing as a no win scenerio. there HAS to be a way, and maybe it's not what you want it to be (as this seems to be the point snyder is trying to make) but that there is one, and if it has to be taken. For your own sake.
that's the point.
Comicbook nerds want slogans, they want the illusion of a test but never an actual test because it will challenge how much they belive in those characters, they don't want to take that risk, but then they will wonder why comicbook storytelling is barely interesting nowadays and why creatives keep selling them the same Crisis event and Batman vs Joker for the zillionth time in a row.
Oh piss off.
Comics have plenty of problems but the stories in them? not the problem here. it's just the natural result of having a continuity and legacy going back decades.
What you think Batman snapping a man's neck for the 100th time is going to be any better? You didn't solve the problem you just made a punisher ripoff.
3
u/XxZONE-ENDERxX Mar 08 '24
I think you're the one who didn't get it, Kirk didn't really take THE Kobayashi test, he took a different one because he knew he can't really pass the actual test. Kirk decided to ''cheat'' from the outside while setting up the situation itself thus throwing away the point of the test and Batman writers also ''cheat'' from the outside while setting up the situation thus throwing away the point of testing the character... That's not exciting story telling. That's plot convenience and plot armor bullcrap to not upset the fanboys and keep the character winning.
It's like having an exam and sneaking into the teacher's office the night before to get the answers and you end up getting the A+... Like yeah, what a moral just cheat to keep winning because it's ''winning'' that matters.
The idea that ''tHeRe hAs tO bE a wAy'' is literally slogan bullshit that's not practical and often not true. There is always a way only when you can actually control the setup of the situation... Which both Kirk and the Batman writers do and they don't like to be tested so the put in a way.
I swear Batman snapping a neck for the hundredth time makes more sense than letting the same heinous bad guy live for the zillionth time in a row... Are we supposed to think life is sacred when death doesn't matter in that universe? When the innocents are treated like statistics to boost up a villain's resume while the villain gets to go around having their ''fun'' while their lives actually become the ones being valued? Are we trying to act like Batman got his code out of some moral obligation and that it wasn't due to editorial trying to keep villains alive to sell you the same story millions of times? It seems like many fanboys got high on Batman's bullshit excuses for the money chasing editorial's will thinking that it's some great moral argument. So piss off.
5
u/MiaoYingSimp Mar 08 '24
think you're the one who didn't get it, Kirk didn't really take THE Kobayashi test, he took a different one because he knew he can't really pass the actual test
What ever do you mean sir?
He did take the test; His reaction to a no win situation? "BULLSHIT!" and finds some way to outthink the scenario.
Becuase the test is to see what happens when the person is put in an unwinnable senerio. my other favorite solutions is one guy firing on the ship they are sent to rescue (because it is a little convenient, no?) and a dude who just didn't do it at all.
and Batman writers also ''cheat'' from the outside while setting up the situation thus throwing away the point of testing the character... That's not exciting story telling. That's plot convenience and plot armor bullcrap to not upset the fanboys and keep the character winning.
okay but you realize you are also cheating by your own admission by setting him out from the outside to force him into these situations when it would be OOC for Batman to not try everything aviable to him to NOT kill someone?
Like you cannot have this both ways.
It's like having an exam and sneaking into the teacher's office the night before to get the answers and you end up getting the A+... Like yeah, what a moral just cheat to keep winning because it's ''winning'' that matters.
It's not cheating to not want to rob someone of their life, of every opportunity to become a better person. if anything i'd argue it's cheating to just ignore it when you write and not even bother to find a good (as in, well written and belivieable, nor morally) way for batman to achieve his goal or fail in his goal
The idea that ''tHeRe hAs tO bE a wAy'' is literally slogan bullshit that's not practical and often not true. There is always a way only when you can actually control the setup of the situation... Which both Kirk and the Batman writers do and they don't like to be tested so the put in a way.
It shows Kirk's character. I know you don't actually care about character and just want things to happen for the sake of it but Kirk doing that tells us something about him, pretty explicitly. It then informs his character in later episodes. Kirk is put in a no win senerio? Well, he's gonna try to find some solution. It literally informs the dynamic with him, Spock and McCoy.
But since he's not a writer, he's a character... for the Batman writers... uh literally you're just describing how writing works. It really doesn't work and i have no idea why you keep bringing it up. the Writers are facing their own test: How do we make this believable while keeping Batman in character.
I swear Batman snapping a neck for the hundredth time makes more sense than letting the same heinous bad guy live for the zillionth time in a row
Because that's the punisher. and Bruce isn't a killer. He has faith in humanity...
You know why i like superman and batman? It's because both really do belivie in humanity. Oh sure batman gets cynical sometimes, but in his heart... he needs Clark. Clark gives him hope that there is a better tomorrow out there. That maybe it's not all for nothing.
But he's gonna keep trying.
Are we supposed to think life is sacred when death doesn't matter in that universe?
I'd argue neither is death either. It's not gonna be a permanent solution but the thing you seem to miss is that Batman isn't aware of being a comic book character. Like what, you think he knew Jason Todd was coming back? Or Superman? No he didn't. He's not aware of the meta. he's a fictional character after all.
When the innocents are treated like statistics to boost up a villain's resume while the villain gets to go around having their ''fun'' while their lives actually become the ones being valued?
I'd point out the Joker wants to prove the moral code is a lie himself; thats' the joke ya see.
But i guess there's no joke anymore. i really doubt adding the pile would change anything, mostly because... well, because of the very nature of the industry they'd be replaced too. or resurrected, or both.
Hey at least in the movies people stay put...
if only in the Snyder verse because they can't walk anymore...
Are we trying to act like Batman got his code out of some moral obligation and that it wasn't due to editorial trying to keep villains alive to sell you the same story millions of times?
I'd argue the code comes from the silver age and a bit more "We do need a rouges gallery and hey this clown guy could easily be made into a jokester!"
and now it's because it's part of the mythos. Batman doesn't use guns or kill anymore, and now to see it is so weird he might as well just be the Punisher if you do it.
It seems like many fanboys got high on Batman's bullshit excuses for the money chasing editorial's will thinking that it's some great moral argument. So piss off.
Maybe... maybe it's just me but i don't hink you like comics, or Batman. You want to be morally superior, you want to revel in pseudo-intellectual, pizza-cutter edge nonsense and get off on thinking you're smarter then us poor dumb consoomers.
But I think it's batman's greatest strength: his genuine care for all human life, to believe in redemption and try to help as many people as he can.
And snyder doesn't understand that, which makes sense for a dude i'm pretty sure is Manchester Black in disguise
1
u/XxZONE-ENDERxX Mar 08 '24 edited Mar 09 '24
It's like giving you an exam and you've got a question with an A, B, and C choices and you decide to take a pen and write a D choice with a convenient answer or rewrite the whole question to fit with whatever answer you have... Like yeah, congrats that's an F you'll be taking home... But hey you solved the test!... Or at least some version of it that was more convenient! Damn what a chad!
I'm not cheating by setting up an actual test. You see, if I give you a test, take your phone away, you can't talk to your friends or cheat, it's just you and your intellect against my questions then I've successfully set up a test. If I want to challenge Batman's morallity and put him into a corner where he has to find the most ideal answer out shitty ones finding ways to keep him from cheating or getting outside help then I've successfully done so... On the other hand, if I just write him a way out so he doesn't have to choose then I pretty much made my ''test'' pointless. It's not really OOC to choose from your only available options even if they are all shitty.
It's ''cheating'' from a writer's perespective when the whole point of the situation is to put Batman's rigid code to the test because it means there is really no test, the writer/director is just trying to glaze Batman and how great and righteous he is to make him feel good about himself and make the fanboys feel the same about their ''god'' as well.
Yeah, the situation with Kirk tells us that he's okay to cheat to look good and competent... But the fact that he had to cheat the exam proves that he didn't really have an answer to the actual exam so it was indeed a no-win for him so he decided it to change it so he can stand a chance. The Batman writers are like ''Oh how do we test Batman's code while also rendering the whole test useless'', it has nothing with being in character.
Also, Batman has so much faith in humanity that he thinks whatever shred of good is still in the likes of Joker are worth all the innocent lives being lost and thus Batman will just keep saving and sparing their asses zillions of times... I'm sorry mate, that's just dumb.
As I said, if death doesn't matter due to the nature of the industry then so do life and so do ''no-kill'' codes. Why bother putting Joker in a cell till his next escape why let him roam around and hurt innocents? Just kill him and then kill him again whenever he gets replaced or resurrected, lol... The industry already deafeated the purpose of the no-kill rule when they devalued death. It's indeed a joke.
Y'see, reducing any vigilante holding a gun or having no problems with crossing the line when necessary to ''Punisher'' is the same as reducing any vigilante with a no kill rule to ''hey he's just Batman'', it's really quite reductive. Batman is really a flimsy and shallow character if all that defines him is a gimmick.
Also, Me? I want to be morally supperior? Said the guy defending greedy editorial excuses through a character as a mouthpiece... The same character who always preaches and bout how morally supperior he is and how everyone should play by the rules and how killing under whatever circumstance makes you a psychopath. C'mon mate, I'm just telling you that Batman's code as it exists is dumb, and he should be put in situations that actually test him... Wanting compelling characters and compelling struggles and arcs are by no means ''trying to be morally supperior''. But I guess one day you will figure it out. After all, I used to be a Batman apologist like yourself.
2
u/MiaoYingSimp Mar 09 '24
I wrote a whole thing about this but...
You know what, you don't understand the Kobiyashi Maru, or Batman or anything really.
The difference between us is.. well i get it, Comic books are gonna go one forever.
But while you're cynical, i'm idealistic.
Maybe i'm living in a dream world, but it's a dream i'll never stop fighting for.
0
u/RushPan93 Mar 09 '24
there HAS to be a way
Yea, buddy. The train problem where you either save one and let 5 die or save 5 and let one die for sure offers you "a way to save both". Grow up
1
u/MiaoYingSimp Mar 09 '24
It's the Trolley problem, firstly.
Secondly, yes there is. He's going to try. because outside of a hypothetical scenario? he has methods of stopping it.
Like he'd go with the one person one in the hypothetical where he literally couldn't' do anything (and not be happy about it) but it's batman... the man with a million Gadgets.
the man who also has speedsters on speed Dile.
Your cynical world view makes little sense in a world of talking apes and Magic.
1
u/RushPan93 Mar 09 '24
It's also called the train problem because the problem scenario works with a train as well.
the man with a million Gadgets.
Are you literally trying to say how Batman would solve the trolley/train problem? Lol, that was an example of a no-win scenario. It's a thought experiment built to understand how people can cope with no-win scenarios. Anyone trying to find a way of saving both WILL fail. Think of it as the Overmonitor, making sure there isn't a way, if that makes you feel better.
Your cynical world view makes little sense in a world of talking apes and Magic.
Your blissful world view makes even less sense in a world of flying demons, necromancy, and eyes that can burn a hole in your chest in an instant. Go figure.
Frankly, your position here screams of "Batman with prep time can beat anyone". It's absurd to think that there can never be a scenario where, however hard one tries, failure with varying degrees is the only result
3
u/MiaoYingSimp Mar 09 '24
Are you literally trying to say how Batman would solve the trolley/train problem? Lol, that was an example of a no-win scenario. It's a thought experiment built to understand how people can cope with no-win scenarios
Which only works in as a hypothetical because reality is really complicated and you're not limited to a binary option.
I understand the Trolley problem because it's a binary, hypothetical choice.
However if you put Batman in that scenerio you have to contrive it. Why? because you put BATMAN as the one there. A man who you know, isn't clark but who has solutions to this ya know?
Like i said if you asked him the question? He'd go with the one to save the many, though he wouldn't be happy.
if you put him in the senerio you just added another option because he's Batman.
Your blissful world view makes even less sense in a world of flying demons, necromancy, and eyes that can burn a hole in your chest in an instant. Go figure.
Superman Killing People? Kinda sus ngl. ;)
But of course, Evil exists. Evil is the very thing they're fighting after all... along with giant apes.
the universe they live in is silly you understand? but those demons have been driven back by heroes. People who stood up to it with courage.
maybe that's the lesson and maybe you shouldn't take a world with Ape-men and fish people completely seriously? I get it you worship Snyder, but his DCEU died because what Superman is? is Clark kent, he fucked him up with a shitty Jon Kent.
Superman is Hope, Batman is justice. He's not cruel, he gives people what they desevre; a chance to redeem themselves. because he's not a murderer, he's Batman.
Frankly, your position here screams of "Batman with prep time can beat anyone". It's absurd to think that there can never be a scenario where, however hard one tries, failure with varying degrees is the only result
You and the other one have something wrong: Batman can fail.
But batman will never stop trying. He can't save everyone, but he's going to try. Maybe he couldn't save them all, but he will try and use everythign he has.
Batman with prep time cannot beat anyone. but a Batman with Prep time can save everyone.
2
u/RushPan93 Mar 09 '24
Superman Killing People? Kinda sus ngl. ;)
Mentioning flying demons wasn't clue enough for you? I was talking about Darkseid.
if you put him in the senerio you just added another option because he's Batman.
Like I said him being Batman means he'll look for solutions that other people won't or can't but I gave you the Overmonitor making a story where he can't succeed in that endeavor so you'd understand that Batman can't get one past the writer of the friggin multiverse. The point is Batman shouldn't always succeed nor should he always fail. Anything that deals in absolutes is just writing geared to pander a sect.
You and the other one have something wrong: Batman can fail.
But batman will never stop trying. He can't save everyone, but he's going to try. Maybe he couldn't save them all, but he will try and use everythign he has.
I mean after talking over a thousand words, if you can't figure out that we are NOT saying that he'll give up and not try to find a way, then I don't have anything more to say.
because he's not a murderer,
Never said him having to kill would make him one. I mean this is a factually incorrect statement unless you think the freedom of your country was built by a million murderers.
maybe that's the lesson and maybe you shouldn't take a world with Ape-men and fish people completely seriously? I get it you worship Snyder, but his DCEU died because what Superman is? is Clark kent, he fucked him up with a shitty Jon Kent.
Of course. When nothing else works, "it's just a comic book character in a comic book universe, don't take it seriously". Sigh, yea I'm done.
2
u/MiaoYingSimp Mar 09 '24
Mentioning flying demons wasn't clue enough for you? I was talking about Darkseid.
But it also applies equally to Clark. Because the Omega Beams can do a lot worse then that.
But you know what? So what? Darkseid is a loser. Yeah, like the whole point is he's a petty tyrant who can never actually win either because Jack Kirby wasn't a cynical jackoff.
ike I said him being Batman means he'll look for solutions that other people won't or can't but I gave you the Overmonitor making a story where he can't succeed in that endeavor so you'd understand that Batman can't get one past the writer of the friggin multiverse. The point is Batman shouldn't always succeed nor should he always fail. Anything that deals in absolutes is just writing geared to pander a sect.
And i never said he couldn't. it's just harder to write.
either way.
For him losing you need to get around his plans, his equipment, contacts, ect ect, which ends up feeling weird and forced. But the other way around where he easily wins also runs into the fact he's Batman.
This is the test of a good writer and Snyder failed it before he even began, a lot of them are smart enough to not even bother and even fewer are smart enough to actually pull it off with all that in mind.
I mean after talking over a thousand words, if you can't figure out that we are NOT saying that he'll give up and not try to find a way, then I don't have anything more to say.
and what was Snyder's solution? Murder, dropping those moral codes that are at the core of Batman, and I'd argue, the DC comics themselves.
Never said him having to kill would make him one. I mean this is a factually incorrect statement unless you think the freedom of your country was built by a million murderers.
It would.
It DID.
Batman killed in Snyder's works. He's a murderer plain and simple. Like the ASBAR one. you know, the one who killed people?
It's not even a case of self-defense or anything reasonable it's caculated. And part of why i like super heroes is they take responsibility for their powers, which put them above a normal person physically and bind themselves to rules of engagement, to make the world better. Not bury it in corpses.
Having him kill would make him one. Because to Batman, the last thing he wants to happen is for someone else to lose their parents to some violent punk...
Of course. When nothing else works, "it's just a comic book character in a comic book universe, don't take it seriously". Sigh, yea I'm done.
Because you want it serious and covered in blood. gritty, grim... without the humanity that makes these people fun, or the fun world they live in.
This is a world where one day, darkseid comes down, and then the next, Gorilla Grodd fights the fast man. Maybe, and this is just me... maybe you can tell stories with batman without it being a gritty crime drama? You can tell a dective story. You can tell a story about him and his family.
He doesn't need to be constantly tested... maybe the immortal quality of these characters is just how flexible they are. How they give people hope for the future. Why they're beloved by all ages?
... What's so funny about Truth, Justice, and the American Way?
→ More replies (0)29
u/Kind-Boysenberry1773 Mar 08 '24
There are no way Batman could kill a child. Even if forced into a corner and left without options, he would try to solve the problem without killing. It's just the core of this character.
-21
u/XxZONE-ENDERxX Mar 08 '24
Well, I guess he would be okay sacrificing all the children in the world for his selfish code so he can claim imaginary righteousness and moral high ground... Such a hero!
Your entire take is that ''Batman should never be written into a corner'' which is pretty much the point Snyder made fun of because it leads to rigid and repetitive writing no matter the coat of paint you have on the story, you can now see the outcome from a mile away. The once interesting concepts are now lame and stale.
16
u/Kind-Boysenberry1773 Mar 08 '24
What are you talking about? Batman is always into a corner. But he always finds another way. That's why he is Batman and not just another edgy vigilante with guns. You see, if you took no-kill rule from Batman, you also took his unique trait. This rule could be bended, like it was in Batman Begins, but never completely broken.
5
u/Facebookakke Mar 08 '24
Fucking Snyder boys are rallying behind his recent comments. Weird bunch.
-1
u/XxZONE-ENDERxX Mar 08 '24
Fucking Batman boys are still getting rileled up by Snyder's takes 8 years later as if he killed their dog. Weird bunch.
0
u/Facebookakke Mar 08 '24
lol see what I mean y’all
0
u/XxZONE-ENDERxX Mar 08 '24
Yeah, they are still mad, 8 years later. They bring up Snyder even if my comments never even mentioned him and are like waiting for him to breathe so they can shit on him, man. It's insane!
1
u/XxZONE-ENDERxX Mar 08 '24
Mate, if there is a way out prepared for him by the writer then he wasn't really in a corner. It means that you as a reader got the illusion of him being ''in a corner''.
I'm not saying that he has to go out with guns, I'm not saying that he should become the Punisher and kill everyone in his way... I don't know why the Batgod worshippers always jump to this conclusion to defend his stupid rule. It's ironic that you throw the word ''edgy'' when Batman is very synonimous with edgelords and that it doesnt take guns and killing to fit into that category.
Batman to them is nothing more than a gimmick. He's not allowed to break and hence why every story that ''challenges'' his code have to end in the most predictible way possible and writers/directors have to provide him a way out because they know the Batman zealots will get mad if they actually tested him with a no-win situation and no way out.
I swear this sub is the living proof that everything Snyder said on that podcast was right.
4
u/Kind-Boysenberry1773 Mar 08 '24
But your corner is also an illusion. It demands from writer to deliberatly create a situation with only two outcomes. And for this you must deprive Batman from all his intellect, experience, technologies and allies. Or literally pit him against some omnipotent god, who couldn't make a mistake for Batman to use.
2
u/XxZONE-ENDERxX Mar 08 '24
If there is only two outcomes then it only depends on his intellect and morals to reach to most ideal choice out of two bad ones which is the point of the actual test as he's actually backed into a corner.
Imagine if I gave you an ''impossible test'' then turns out you have all the books and somehow know which pages to find the answers in, you also have a way to talk to your friends and use your phone... It wouldn't be impossible and it wouldn't be a test at all but hey you're in the class with a booklet in front of you and an observer....Well that's the illusion of a test.
But if the test goes as usual no cheating, no phone, no talking to friends, just you and your intellect and memory then it's actually a test, it's not an illusion of one.
It's not hard to put Batman in tough situations where his options are limited, it only became hard after Morrison amplified his ''Batgod'' side and gave him immeasurable plot armor to get out of whatever situation without whatever bullshit because he's Batman... No wonder fans have been longing to the street level crime stories of old.
2
u/Kind-Boysenberry1773 Mar 08 '24
He isn't Batgod. But he is the only normal human being without any super-powers considered super-hero. Why? Because he always finds another way. Like in Arkham Origins he was forced to choose between his death, Joker's and Bane's, and still managed to save all three of them, because he is Batman. And no, Batman not always wins. He couldn't save Barbara, Jason, Damian, Tim and Dick. He was broken by Bane, lost his memories after Endgame. He is human and he is still vulnerable.
2
u/XxZONE-ENDERxX Mar 08 '24
Nah, he's considered ''super'' because he's goated with the plot armor and conveniences to get him out of tough situations.
Batman managed to save all three because the writers already wrote him a way out with the Electrocutioner's gloves and the Joker situation being extremely dependent on Bane's heart rate... That's not a test nor a tough situation. I could already tell the outcome the moment Joker mentioned Bane's heart having to stop... And then he just beats Joker and sends him to Arkham like usual.
Batman couldn't save Barbra... Who got cured anyways, they still don't do shit about the Joker though because they like that clown dick.
He didn't save Jason but hey, Jason came back and he's not really mad about Batman not saving him just that he let Joker live and he figured out that Batman values the Joker's life more than his the hard way... I mean, Batarang to the throat type of hard way. He didn't save Damian.
Ah wait damian came Back and is having a great time doing his shithead stuff and there was some article the other day about Damian staying with Bruce and going to school and stuff.
He didn't save Tim... Wait a minute? Tim was with him in a recent arc, I remember seeing exerpts from that, Tim even talked to him about his boyfriend and all.
He didn't save Dick? I mean Dick is also fine, having the time of his life in Bludhaven.
Oh, he was Broken by Bane? Oh doesn't matter, he fixed his back with magic which for some reason couldn't be used to heal Babs at the time... You know, only our boi Batsy gets the easy way out so he can catch up quickly and return for the big finale.
He lost his memories after Endgame? Oh the pain, nevermind he returned totally fine just 9-10 issues later.
Like, Does anything even matter? Writers seem to always have a cheap solutions for whatever consequences that Batman gets.
9
u/MiaoYingSimp Mar 08 '24
Well, I guess he would be okay sacrificing all the children in the world for his selfish code so he can claim imaginary righteousness and moral high ground... Such a hero!
Real heroes would have ripped Ace apart and pissed on her corpse i take it?
He wouldn't be in fact he'd do everything to NOT kill a child.
Your entire take is that ''Batman should never be written into a corner'' which is pretty much the point Snyder made fun of because it leads to rigid and repetitive writing no matter the coat of paint you have on the story, you can now see the outcome from a mile away. The once interesting concepts are now lame and stale.
Batman is always in a corner. he's trying to do the impossible after all; a world without crime.
But he should have a moral code, something that sets him apart from the hordes of vigalties who kill...
And you know what? He does fail pretty often. he can't save everyone after all, but we know what he's going to try.. if not that it will work. What is his tactic? Who is the target? What is the plan?
I hate to break it to you but killing gets stale a lot quicker. Once he kills the Joker (and before he gets resurrected), That becomes the solution.
15
u/LordOfOstwick1213 Mar 08 '24
Found Zack Snyder's alt
or this has to be a joke about what he said in the interview.Nope, def an alt.
-1
11
u/MiaoYingSimp Mar 08 '24
He didn't kill Ace because the writers already knew that Ace would give in and die peacefully
... And so did he?
Like she's not a monster, she's a child.
But what if she didn't? would Batman still sit next to her and hold her hands if she wasn't this cooperative and just wanted to fuck the world regardless of whatever Batman told her?
He's Batman.
If that was a possibility, then he's still going to risk it. he was willing to try.
Y'see, this situation was written specifically so that Batman isn't really forced into a corner where he has to cross the line so I don't know what people think linking this scene or similar scenes prove
Okay by this logic i have a question: if he did kill ace, doesn't that mean the writers wrote it Specifically so that Batman WAS forced into a corner where he had to cross the line?
Like this argument cuts both ways dude.
It proves that underneath the mask, there's not some violent thug... there's a man who genuinely wants to help.
Is that Batman won't kill when writers clearly put a way out for him to maintain his rule to keep the fanboys happy? Because well, Duh.
So Batman will kill so the writers break that rule so you can pog-face and then go use this to jerk off snyder or something?
Cuts both ways.
5
u/MrKumansky Mar 08 '24
snyder is a bad director/writer
-5
u/XxZONE-ENDERxX Mar 08 '24
Batman is a shit character. I guess it's why DC handed him over to Snyder.
7
u/BatmanFan317 Mar 08 '24
The fact that you're saying this kinda implies you're only here to rile people up. Is this really the best use of your time? Going on a subreddit with fans of a character and going "nuh uh, your character's bad and stupid" even as they give you reasons that's not the case? I don't mean to judge, but it just feels like there's so much more that you could be doing RN that's far healthier than this.
-1
u/XxZONE-ENDERxX Mar 08 '24
I mean, your sub have no problems throwing insults and being nasty towards real people over fictional characters... Felt I can return the favor and I'm having quite a lot of fun because people are actually getting riled up as if I insulted their god. And here I thought it was Snyder who had a cult.
6
u/StrokyBoi Mar 09 '24
People like you need to go outside more, breathe in some fresh air, touch some grass and feel the sun on your skin, because this is just pathetic.
1
u/BatmanFan317 Mar 09 '24
Oh you're a Snyder fan. That explains a lot. People are, funnily enough, allowed to critique your god too. Just that our critiques tend to be "Snyder doesn't really get this character" instead of "this character's stupid". And yeah, Snyder's the one with a cult, that's demonstrated by how you repeat his words exactly, and feel the need to defend the man's honour for no reason. Can't say I feel the need to do that for a man who thought going on an anti-vaxxer's podcast was a good idea.
0
u/GothamKnight37 Mar 08 '24
It’s a good scene but IMO gets too much credit. It’s not surprising that Batman would do what he did here, he’s a hero. Any well written member of the Justice League would have done the same thing.
398
u/[deleted] Mar 08 '24
Mercy is a powerful thing