Zack always refers to "The Dark Knight Returns" as a source of inspiration...which tells me he's never read or understood the story or character. MULTIPLE times, Batman expresses his disdain for killing and guns throughout the four issues. Even referring to guns as tools for the weak. It's just baffling how much he talks so much about it and understood so little.
So according to Zack,Rebel Moon wouldve made 1billion if it had been released in theaters??...if that were true..people still loves barbie more than oppenheimer yet rebel moon wouldve made higher than both??😂😂🤡🤡 Thats a lot of assumption, fuzzy math and "what ifs" to defend a movie. Sometimes a bad film...is a bad film.
Batfleck puts a tracker on the truck yet he still rammed it along with the shooter inside killing him...does he have to?! Should have just let the Truck leading batman to their base of hideout wouldn't that been better?
I like how he's so convinced that Batman "kills all the time" in that story, specially that mutant moment he loves quoting, but then the story itself repeatedly states that he hasn't killed anyone, both Batman and third parties express it every now and then throughout the story, story that btw would NOT make any logical sense if Batman was killing left and right like Snyder claims, bc the final part of the comic is Batman being FRAMED of murdering the Joker and that being his FIRST kill is the trigger event for all that final stretch of the story bc the cops finally start hunting him down aggressively bc he's finally crossed the line of murder, which again would make no sense whatsoever had Batman killed left and right since the beggining
To be fair, Nolan addressed this in his trilogy and Batman was forced to kill and let his enemies die. It was justified. Snyder just turned Batman into the Punisher. That's how he didn't honor the character lore.
I have no problem with Batman killing, as long as it serves the story and there's a reason for it. Doing it just to be dark and edgy is the issue. Batman doesn't kill because he doesn't want to become the very thing that took his parents from him
My real problem with his batman killing is the fact that he apparently does not mind killing nameless thugs but the joker is still alive ? Miss me with that shit 😂
The only time I can approve and see his choice in killing being fine is in the context against a major criminal like pyg, or scarecrow or bane, instead he’s killing minor thugs and people like Joker is running around
The new spiderman ultimate issues are so good man. im glad that uncle ben is a mentor to peter and isn’t dead in this universe, and the art style and designs to the suits are all amazing
What annoys me about Batfleck or taking to people about Batfleck is that it’s actually a pretty decent character arc…for basically anybody that isn’t Batman. In Batman Beyond, Bruce literally scares himself into retirement because it became necessary after a point to use guns to he an effective crime fighter. Heck, in The Dark Knight Returns, the comic that his version of Batman is based on, he cracks a gun in half and literally says “these are the weapons of the enemy.” I’m not trying to deny that Snyder certainly had a creative vision, but when you take a core appeal of the character like this and then change it, it comes across as completely missing the point of the character, which Snyder seems to prove is the case with him time and time again
he also shoots a guy in head to save a baby in that same comic ,batfleck doesn't carry handguns he has turrets on the bat mobile and batwing that's it but guess what so does bale and keaton and most versions of batman
boohoo spiderman in the comics was nothing like he is in the mcu yet they took him made him Iron man Jr always havig to rely on soemthing or someone or tech to get through his battles and only until nwh did they kind of change that.
1st off, 'change' is an abstract or paradoxical concept by nature... it alludes to the 'idea of change' and how that gets determined but in actuality, that gets contradicted because of nature not being able to determine actual 'change' - so with Batmans case, his 'no-kill rule' was set in motion after his 1st debut where he killed criminals, but the thing is that, this rule is a deluded but paradoxical idea that was set to combat against the 'evil' that Batman has set against despite having exceptions throughout how he deals on with his crusade against crime or the 'evil' - and determines that as an actual Holy Grail that alludes to 'change' when in actuality, it doesn't at all... so both by nature in general especially Batmans character becomes paradoxical by nature itself considering that Batman doesn't always abide by his no-killing rule, and does break it or has exceptions and is hypocritical (by nature) such as TDKRs comic that Snyder takes very great inspirationa from, and for very good reason compared to any Batman story because it fits the notion of the paradox that is Batmans 'no-kill rule' the most out of any Batman story... so this is where Snyder takes a direct contrast against TDKR but still ending up the same, just in a different manner because Batfleck is done abiding by that rule that he used to have...
A perfekt example is in Batman Arkham origins game, bane had a heart monitor and joker is strapped to a electric chair. If the battery's are charged up joker dies or he kills bane and joker survives, either way someone has to die. The twist is that batman uses electric gloves to stop banes heart and when joker escapes he revives bane so both live in the end.
It's worse when you remember that canonically the reason why that Joker wears grills is bc Batman caught him after killing Robin and in a fit of rage started pummeling him, knocking off his teeth. So apparently this Batman kills random thugs but he catches the killer of Robin and only punches off his teeth and sends him to jail, yeah that makes a lot of sense. Don't forget Harley, Deadshot, Killer Croc, Slipknot are all still alive too.
Superman killing Zod worked for me. But what he did with batman was just bizarre. Dude was just killing people whenever without any rhyme or reason. There was no nuance, and if there was some thematic reasoning for it that suited the narrative, it wasn't communicated well at all. A lot of people interpreted it as this Batman losing his way due to Robin's death and the Metropolis destruction, but when Snyder starts saying stuff like this, I honestly don't think thats the case. Snyder himself has never once said that was the case. So it consistently just kind of exposes how he really feels about it all, and seems like he genuinely just doesn't actually understand batman and finds the idea of his moral code silly and childish. And so he kind of just handwaved the whole concept away for BvS because he thinks Batman killed people in TDKR, which isn't true, and the fact that he DOES think he kills in that comic is telling about why he only ever seems interested in that particular story. I think Zack just wanted Batman to be a killer in this world. Plain and simple.
it's not a 'moral code' to begin with, it's just a set of values based around Batmans perception against the 'evil' of Humanity and it's in the case that Batman makes it simpler by generalising the 'evil' as 'criminals' - his set of values or just a 'code' is stemmed from what is simple that is taken as a pedestal against crime...
and TDKR does indeed 'kill' here, something that you need to read sweetie... 1st off, 'change' is an abstract or paradoxical concept by nature... it alludes to the 'idea of change' and how that gets determined but in actuality, that gets contradicted because of nature not being able to determine actual 'change' - so with Batmans case, his 'no-kill rule' was set in motion after his 1st debut where he killed criminals, but the thing is that, this rule is a deluded but paradoxical idea that was set to combat against the 'evil' that Batman has set against despite having exceptions throughout how he deals on with his crusade against crime or the 'evil' - and determines that as an actual Holy Grail that alludes to 'change' when in actuality, it doesn't at all... so both by nature in general especially Batmans character becomes paradoxical by nature itself considering that Batman doesn't always abide by his no-killing rule, and does break it or has exceptions and is hypocritical (by nature) such as TDKRs comic that Snyder takes very great inspirationa from, and for very good reason compared to any Batman story because it fits the notion of the paradox that is Batmans 'no-kill rule' the most out of any Batman story... so this is where Snyder takes a direct contrast against TDKR but still ending up the same, just in a different manner because Batfleck is done abiding by that rule that he used to have...
@@donjon1179God, you're lucky that my @godzillazfriction account keeps getting shadowbanned from this video only... if i was commenting in response to you im any other platform that isn't reddit, RUclips or Instagram then you'll be crying how much i would be cyber-b___ying you...
A great example of a weak story that still understands Batman Batman Arkham Origins He has to kill Bane or the Joker will kill himself, so he makes Bane unresponsive as a distraction and then ended up Reviving him That shits awesome, I love when Batman has to think of things like that on his feet
So according to Zack,Rebel Moon wouldve made 1billion if it had been released in theaters??...if that were true..people still loves barbie more than oppenheimer yet rebel moon wouldve made higher than both??😂😂🤡🤡 Thats a lot of assumption, fuzzy math and "what ifs" to defend a movie. Sometimes a bad film...is a bad film.
@@syamilshazlan862 No, actually, that's not what he said at all. In fact he specifically goes into talking about how things that would never be popular in theaters are given exposure by Netflix.
The only thing I approve of Batman killing is to be apart of the story and having a reason for it, because if it's just a full on kill, then it's definitely not gonna work.
I agree plus i find it funny when you have an issue how a character is portrayed the excuse is "the writers can do whatever they want; the character has been around for decades or DC are the only ones who can approve it"
That's where people should know the difference between Reason and Revenge Christopher Nolan - Shows Reason Behind The Batman Zack Snyder - Revenge of Batman
@@G59METHit’s too late at that point lmfao it’s an apocalyptic world where superman is trying to kill them😂 at that point joker is an asset, the intelligence between batman deathstroke and the joker is insane
One of the points of BvS is that you see the heroes at their lowest. Superman is not accepted by humanity. WW has abandoned humanity. And Batman has abandoned his humanity. After Superman sacrifices himself killing Doomsday. WW and Batman see it as a selfless act. Superman gave his life for people that hated him.
I think that style only really works in elseworlds now; I see James Gunn’s being more like the animated series. Not afraid to let out intelligent quips while still maintaining a serious composure. I expect the typical jokes about how dark and brutish he is whenever he joins the justice league tho
I agree. We all know it's gonna be inspired by the Brave & The Bold comic of course, but I say they should take a few inspirations & influence from both comics & tv show. Like the Animated Series, Batman Hush, Death of the Family, & The long halloween.
I think Zack Synder was the worst thing to happen to D.C. He made Batman kill and made Superman gritty. I would have rather seen him do a deathstroke movie rather than what he did because his style would clash well with Deathstroke.
Snyder made the perfect Elseworlds story, but it should've just become an Elseworlds story. Imagine a version of the DCEU, where Snyder's story is the third major arc. Initially, every hero is as they are in the comics, but they see a Knightmare timeline and it's Snyder's universe (Not Snyder's Knightmare storyline, but the regular storyline.) Don't misunderstand me, I love Snyder's DC movies, the characters are just not as definitive as they probably should've been.
Keaton: Indirectly killed the Joker and Penguin, and also personally killed their supporters without hesitation (one even with a smile) Bale: Killed the fake Ra's Al Ghul along with a number of League of Shadows fighters and left the real Ra's Al Ghul to die: "I'm not going to kill you, but I don't have to save you." Then killed Two-Face saving Gordon's family and killed Talia to intercept the bomb. Ben Affleck: Killed and maimed many of Luthor's mercenaries. Robert Pattinson: During the pursuit of the Penguin, he had an accident that clearly did not go without victims. Also versions of Batman from the series Gotham, Titans and Batwoman: the first killed Ra's Al Ghul (although he was not yet Batman) the other two killed the Joker. And animation: JL: World of War Doom That Came To Gotham The Dark Knight Returns, Parts 1 and 2 Flashpoint Batman Batman vs. Dracula (and pretty much every undead or parademon in the comics or DCAMU) Red son of Batman After that, do you still care if he kills the rank and file?
Thats why I love the Killing Joke story. Its up to the reader to believe if Batman finally gave in and killed his archnemesis, or will the endless cycle continue.
I don't hate Zach but you can tell he doesn't read the comics and if he does it seems like he mostly just skims through the pictures so he can get images to recreate in his movies. It's sad that he can't also recreate the original intent behind the stories as well because of his obsession with making everything edgy all the time.
Youre probably right on the money. Instead of actually reading and understanding the story and intent he looks at the pictures and almost forms his own narrative. Its weird.
It baffles me that WB hired this man, when he has proven multiple times that he does not understand these characters. I just feel bad for Cavill and Affleck
You got Kingdom Come wrong just as Snyder got DKR wrong. Sups didn’t retire, the world chose Magog and revenge over Superman and Justice. Batman didn’t kill the mutant holding the girl hostage. Brian Lynch nailed it. Batman doesn’t kill, he’s able to get out of impossible situations because he’s that prepared. In fact Snyder kinda got there with the Star Trek reference to Kirk reprogramming the test but failed miserably in his interpretation because he’s more concerned about himself more than the characters. Couldn’t be happier that Snyder is done with DC. Looking forward to Gunns DCU.
“There’s no move, there’s no throwing the batarang, no dust ball to distract me. I pull the trigger and I kill this kid” -Snyder on JRE Podcast And that’s where Snyders inability to make use of the “suspense of disbelief” in comic films falls short. This is exactly the scenario Batman would pull off some million to 1 shit where he’s able to disarm the guy without the kid dying/without having to kill the gunman. That’s why Batman is great. Faced against a million to one odds and he figures it out. So glad this guy isn’t directing DC stuff anymore. I respect the efforts but Christ almighty the imagination is lacking on how to properly use the characters who exist in a world of make believe where you can break the rules of reality. This is quite literally quoted by the joker in Batman: Under the Red Hood. Jason has the Joker and Batman at gunpoint and he fires at Batman. Batman dodges the bullet and throws a batarang at the gun and hits it dead center in the barrel and disarms Jason without killing Joker. Joker says and I quote: “I can’t believe you got him! You expert, rootin-tootin, eagle eyed, goth-loving marksman! I love it! You managed to find a way to win…” Like any base level Batman fan would understand this but Snyder has never been a fan of anything he’s a deconstructionist like his fanbase. They love tearing down everything that’s great about a character or franchise and playing this stupid ill-advised game of “what if” with a character(s) that like he said are some peoples religion
Every Batman movie had Batman kill and that was my problem with Batman in all those movies The Batman was the only Batman movie where Batman did not kill anyone and went out of his way not to in the whole movie. Robert Pattenson is the only one to actually follow the no kill rule
Really good point there. A Batman who isn't living by a strict no kill code doesn't have the same power in a JL dynamic. It gives off more of a Wolverine or Huntress feeling. Snyder never understood the characters in a translatable way.
Batman should only resort to killing in three specific situations: 1) by accident or in self-defense, 2) when he must save innocent lives with no alternative option (similar to his actions with Harvey Dent in Nolan's trilogy), and 3) during times of war (such as facing Bane, who has captured the city, or Darkseid, attempting to conquer Earth). If Batman becomes a bloodthirsty killer in his city, wielding machine guns as depicted by Snyder, the police and Commissioner Gordon cannot overlook his actions, and they would be compelled to hunt him as a villain. Since he is a hero, not a villain, he must adhere to a moral code and avoid crossing certain lines. If he were to become the very evil he fights against, his purpose would lose meaning. Moreover, a proper role model for children is crucial, as they grow up with him just as we did. It's essential to recognize that not every criminal is the same. For instance, if someone is stealing to feed his family, should Batman kill him? No, he should intervene to stop the crime and then, as Bruce Wayne, later help him by, for example, assisting in finding him an honest job. This is the essence of Batman's character."
Here’s the thing, there’s nothing wrong with Batman killing if you actually do the work and make it believable that he would kill, Take Arkham Knight for example, during the second to last Joker Hallucinations Batman is fighting multiple fake Jokers and constantly fighting and beating them and every time he beat one he would get more violent and more brutal then ever before until he finally snaps the neck of the joker and he stops as in that moment Batman lost
it's not about killing or not killing it;s about having a moral compass, Synders problem is that he is so bad at optics. If he had just said "maybe batman went too hard in the movie" people wouldn't give him hate, it's just that he doubles down. It's just this attitude of being above critcism, hitting back at critics, thinking you get to be the one to decide who batman is when it's not up to you. Ben Afflecks batman has never felt like batman, it's always felt like a different characer.
I think the bigger issue behind Snyder's Batman is that when Batfleck kills, it doesn't weigh on him the way Snyder says he's curious about. Snyder asks what would happen if Batman kills, but in his movies Batman runs down goons in a car chase and he doesn't think much of it afterwards. The criminals he chooses not to kill get branded then get killed in prison, its in the news papers, he knows its a death sentence, why not stop. Its implied that he started killing after Robin's death but Snyder doesn't go further into the topic other than Joker did it. Also, in a world where Batman kills, why is Leto's joker still alive, why doesn't he let Harley drown in Suicide Squad when she was involved. This is the start of a new universe, how many of his villains would we have seen if he has no problem killing? I feel like Snyder makes Batman kill from a realism standpoint, but fiction doesn't have to or need to be realistic. Yes, put Batman in a situation where he might have to kill someone, having him find a way not to kill creates a compelling story. Snyder seems adamant about Batman killing because somehow that's what would make him flawed, and having a no kill code makes him some kind of pure saint. Batman is truly a flawed character, often times b/c of the no kill rule but having moral code makes the character compelling b/c the writer has to keep him from violating his morals. Yes you can write characters violating their morals, but we meet Batfleck as a killer so its unclear who this version of the character was before going through this "downward spiral".
i think zack is an amazing visonary i think it sounds cool that he lost so much he just doesent care and that superman reminding him that these people have families they are human with his mom martha and him accepting that is cool but he didint write that well cause immidietly after hes killing goons left and right, a problem with cinematic universes is that you need to set up the normal than make a solo arc and overall arc which is hard to do especially with making some heros older and weathered down and introducing them in another heros movie that just started
How is Batman irrelevant if he doesn't kill? How the hell does a character like Red Hood even work if Batman kills? "OH Bruce I'm back but you've always been into killing let's go kill Joker together." I don't even wanna get into the whole Zack just doesn't know what he's talking about thing (because I like the guy, decent director, seems like a good guy, I really liked Justice League, Watchmen, and Army of The Dead) but he is so obviously not an actual fan of these characters that it isn't even funny.
As a batman fanatic, Batfleck is my favorite because of the fact that he is comic accurate to the dark knight returns batman. He was older, bulkier, and downright brutal towards villians. He pulled no punches, and wavered in the lines of killing and not. I don't stand behind your opinion of making a more campy batman like west again, they kinda tried doing that in the josstice league. I'm thinking make a batman who isn't as dark as Pattinson, who's had atleast 6-10 years of experience and has a sidekick to mentor would be a nice balance that we haven't scene from batman yet would be awesome. If jensen ackles where yo take on the role, his darker more Sarcastic humor would fit well. Love the videos chris!!
Batfleck wasn't really anything like the Batman Returns Batman, though, except in the way he looked. Fundamentally, they couldn't be further apart. Batman Returns Batman did everything he could to not kill someone. That was his entire point of being. Affleck's Batman killed a dozen folks before lunch.
I see both sides of what Zack's saying. Side 1: It would be creative to tell an ELSEWORLDS story of Batman killing, like Flashpoint or something like that. Side 2: Batman shouldn't kill, under any circumstance, he must always find a way. "There's always a choice." Personally, I think the reason Batman doesn't kill and the Batman who never kills is the most compelling Batman and also the reason why he is relevant. Kevin Conroy said it better than anyone really. Batman is flawed. He's just a human being. And the fact that he always finds a way is what makes him so special. He's just like all of us.
Batman killing makes zero sense if The Joker is still alive. I don't mind Batman killing if it's done right. Personally I prefer a Batman that cares about his villains that's why DCAU Batman is my personal favorite. To me Batman shouldn't kill part of why I love Batman's character is because of his compassion. Batman cares for his villains and he wants them to get better to me that's more compelling than a Batman that kills.
Batman (this makes it sound like he's a real person lolmao) has said that if he kills once, he won't be able to stop killing. And if you kill a killer, the number of killers remain the same. I think it's more interesting if Batman (and probably otjer heroes outside of DC) is put in a situations where they should kill. But they refuse not to because they'll end up like their villain. Similar to what the minions writer said. I find that interesting that Batman refuses to kill. Plus he doesn't seem like the killing type. (Bruce at least).
Keaton: Indirectly killed the Joker and Penguin, and also personally killed their supporters without hesitation (one even with a smile) Bale: Killed the fake Ra's Al Ghul along with a number of League of Shadows fighters and left the real Ra's Al Ghul to die: "I'm not going to kill you, but I don't have to save you." Then killed Two-Face saving Gordon's family and killed Talia to intercept the bomb. Ben Affleck: Killed and maimed many of Luthor's mercenaries. Robert Pattinson: During the pursuit of the Penguin, he had an accident that clearly did not go without victims. Also versions of Batman from the series Gotham, Titans and Batwoman: the first killed Ra's Al Ghul (although he was not yet Batman) the other two killed the Joker. And animation: JL: World of War Doom That Came To Gotham The Dark Knight Returns, Parts 1 and 2 Flashpoint Batman Batman vs. Dracula (and pretty much every undead or parademon in the comics or DCAMU) Red son of Batman After that, do you still care if he kills the rank and file?
His no kill rule is an essential part of his character that he has morals and doesn’t kill so he doesn’t end up like the filth that killed his parents and those he puts away in jail. He’s expressed his disdain for killing and guns multiple times. Even refers to guns as tools for the weak (which we see Affleck Batman use) And two, I like how Batman can be in situations where he’s tempted but still upholds his rule. I view him as the ultimate form of human perseverance and sticking to your morals no matter how easy it is to break it. And most adaptations make that clear. Others choose to ignore it for some reason. If you’re gonna ignore or change an essential part of Batman’s character and make him start killing, than it’s gotta be an interesting story to tell. But it feels like Snyder just did it, cause it was edgy, which completely misses the character. And my criticism goes for others, like Keaton and Bale, not just Affleck (even though I still like all three). I thought Snyder had an interesting story of how he started killing after going through another tragic loss similar to his parents through losing Robin. Than I come to find out, that he really is only killing because of some obsession with Superman, which just made his “killing spree” way less interesting. It even opens a plot hole, like he’s willing to kill random criminals but not the psychotic lunatic clown who’s been terrorizing Gotham for years and took his son away from him? That’s odd.
Finally someone who understands where synder is coming from and acknowledges his faults. Most people are just butt hurt fans. The DC community is toxic bro, i just hope James gunn DCU will unite the fan base at least, i am gonna miss the synderverse though.
I totally agree with you, Chris. The problem is that doing a story where Batman acts out of character only means something because in the comics there are many years of history. This is the first time we have seen this Batman, since it's not related to any of the other cinematic versions.
I like to see a Batman movie where Batman got framed for killing someone and he was videotaped and he holding the person or the villain and they actually died in his hands but he who did in or did not know where it came from and has to find out who it is and everyone was after him if you get my meaning , can't wait to hear about the Mexico trip
Sound possible if they do that in Matt reeves the batman, maybe done by hush or a copycat who is professional cosplayer It could work and make it fun movie
Ngl, everybody in this comment section, ironically proved Zack right. Everybody in here is fighting over Batman like he’s a god or something. Living rent free.
I feel like the decision to start tour cinematic universe with a Batman vs Superman story was wrong. To me a Batman vs Superman story only works when one of them is weathered down and at their wits end. Perhaps this movie would have been better to have been a Batman and Superman team up movie, and then you do a vs movie years down the line with an "older batman". That veing said, I really hope Zack get to do a full on Dark Knight Returns elseworld movie
The Batman that Affleck's Batman is based off of doesn't kill but he notably has low tolerance for criminals. Also, criminals fear his unpredictability and he uses it to evoke fear. Source Frank Miller's: The Dark Knight Returns.
I had no problem with batfleck killing. I had a problem with us not knowing why he kills. They never explain or justify it. We got introduced to batman at his darkest. If we had a prequel movie of this batman where he decides he needs to kill, that would be interesting. Basically, they should have reversed his arc.
One thing I look at is. Batman doesn’t kill anyone in Zack’s justice league. So I always look at it as he stopped killing after Superman’s sacrifice. Made him realize who he was again.
So according to Zack,Rebel Moon wouldve made 1billion if it had been released in theaters??...if that were true..people still loves barbie more than oppenheimer yet rebel moon wouldve made higher than both??😂😂🤡🤡 Thats a lot of assumption, fuzzy math and "what ifs" to defend a movie. Sometimes a bad film...is a bad film.
Except we never saw him in a position to kill, he just is a murderer from start to end and there are only hints to why he kill but it’s was never explained, you wanna subvert expectations maybe show us a reason he kills and show us the ultimatum he has to make but nah, he’s just a murder and he does murder maybe I’ll tell you why in 5 movies
Bud doesn't understand batman at all, which is why I keep on saying to my friends that zacks batman is the best batman we ever got if you haven't read a batman comic
He did the same with superman; Superman doesn't kill .. lets see what happens if I make him kill … he murders zod Batman should have had his own movie where he is pushed to the brink of murder but CHOSES NOT TO bc he's batman!! Then BvS have been the rivalry with Clarke be based around the fact superman murdered someone and batman hates that he did that and superman arguing there was no other way. then the fight could end with batman choosing NOT to kill Clarke teaching superman the true morality of being a hero.. witch would have also hit more when in the alt universe superman turns evil for Darkside.
i don't care if batman kills, but that he has a line is what makes batman, batman. it's the struggle to keep his darker side a bay. i'm sure snyder understands this but he wanted his own interpretation of batman. and unfortunately it just sucked. not to mention the sub part acting from affleck.
This is why I dislike snyder. First, he tells fans that we are living a dream world, as if he's the one telling reality. And has zero knowledge to the dc characters.
@@Eternal_Sky_TardisHenry never lived to his full potential as Superman. Watch Man from U.N.C.L.E, he is great in that, lots of charisma which Snyder stripped out from the character in Superman.
@@kael3691 I dunno man, Superman stoping Steppenwolf's axe and saying "not impressed" with a smug face was charismatic Yeah, there are some questionable moments in the Snyder's movies as a whole like Supes killing Zod in Man of Steel or killing that one soldier who threatened to kill Lois in BvS but other than that, I don't get why this guy is saying That Zack specifically ruined Superman's character in JL because there wasn't a controversial moment with Superman in that movie
@@Dr._Mantis_Toboggan_Md. He looked like a douche for saving Cyborg while making a witty remark to his enemy? That is certainly an interesting take i guess
Bro I was the same I was trying to start a RUclips challenge just because I hated that movie Batman versus Superman because the way how they treat it Batman but I did start loving it over time
Exactly. Batman is one of the smartest minds and greatest martial arts experts in all of comics. He’s such a great hero that even he can find no just one but sometimes two ways out of an impossible situation, where other heroes would given to killing being the ONLY answer sometimes. Part of the people is they want to make Batman as realistic as they can. Which can be cool, but I think I speak for a lot of Batman fans who want to see him with a Lazarus Pit or Solomon Grundy. A world where Poision Ivy doesn’t need to be changed to fit the story. And so I’m that fantastically world, it still works to have him “not kill.” Because so many other things unrealistic are going on.
Does anyone else hate the batfleck suit? Or is that just me, like i think its the ugliest live action batman suit we've ever gotten, i hate how fat the batman logo is, cause its never looked like that before, n i feel they only did that to put the superman logo in the batman logo, which was still a stupid creative choice imo, my favorite live action batman suit is robert pattisons suit
My introduction to Batman in comics and in general was a hardback cover compilation of the original comics where he killed, and in film, my introduction was Michael Keaton, who also killed left and right. So I don't care about Batman killing if it's established he dropped his rule or never had it. What I mind is when you establish the rule but constantly break it, like Bale's Batman. Pattinson does a great job of showing the obsession a Batman with that rule established in the comics generally has, almost getting him killed because he refused to kill. Keaton and Affleck are my favorites though.
Yeah big fans both of them, but I enjoy all the Batmans for what they are. I honestly thought that Batfleck didn't start crossing the line until after the Metropolis events, but I could be wrong. I thought seeing all the destruction is what made him snap. Plus given his 20 years of fighting crime and losing Robin the way he did.
Keaton’s Batman to our knowledge never had a no-kill code unlike Batfleck. Plus Batfleck has no problem killing random small time thugs but he let his entire rouge’s gallery-including the very man responsible for his son’s death and the reason why he started killing- alive. A Batman that kills could work but Synder wasn’t a good enough writer/director to make it work.
@@chibu3212 But it was established Affleck dropped the rule. Robin's death was the point where he stopped caring. He told Joker he would kill him in the Snyder Cut's epilogue, so we see he wants to, but we also see in Suicide Squad he keeps evading Batman. He can't kill what he hasn't caught. He didn't kill Harley because he sees her as a victim of Joker's, which is true to how he's viewed her in the animated series and comics. And even when he stopped caring, we even see in BvS's warehouse scene he still doesn't just immediately kill anyone, he aims above their heads. Some of those people died, some of them lived. He isn't like the Punisher, he's just done caring if you die at that point. He still has some restraint, he just stopped putting their lives above innocent lives.
And with Superman,he had no choice,Zod said im going to kill or enslave every human,plus the family in front of them. What else could he have done then
chris nolan's batman is chris nolan's very own batman, while zack snyder's batman is frank miller's batman but crap, and his cult says his a "VISIONARY" its like seeing the manson family for the digital age
Zack snyder has said in the past or someone I can’t remember all of Snyder’s characters started off in a broken mindset they weren’t the norm of those characters yet. They had to grow and learn to become those recognizable characters and had people been patient we would have gotten that. But that was the whole point of Batman’s arc he wasn’t the good guy in BvS he was supposed to come to the realization that he was wrong and and then find his way back to the person he used to be
I definitely don’t want an Adam west like Batman for the DCU but something more in line with the Batman the animated series, the new Batman adventures, and Justice League unlimited in the DCAU
The thing is its so complex and probably one of the most complicated things in comics. Snyder is right and wrong he sees interesting paths the character can go down but doesn't handle it the correct way. i still like certain things in snyder but not his batman takes really. Look at batman ego or batman begins he handles it decently in those.
One thing I didn't like is that the Robin who got murdered by Joker and Harley it's Dick Grayson. I would have love Batfleck even more if he does the "No Kill Rule" and I much prefer that the Robin who got murdered is Jason Todd.
To be fair it wasn’t hard for Ultimate Spider-Man Peter to be better than main universe Peter. All the writers had to do was make him happy and we all would like it more. Main universe Peter has been getting treated like crap for the last couple years especially when it comes to MJ and self-insert Paul
I say it depends on the tone and it’s up to the writer whether to enforce or risk, it’s a win/lose situation. I mean Batman did have a history of using a gun and kills: the one shot comic The Killing Joke’s edit intended to have Joker choked to death after he made Batman laugh, Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns had Batman shoot a mutant member to save a kid only to be a hypocrite much more later about not using it, or with some of the movies that we probably forgot about, just ask Two Face, some goons, and Ras when he couldn’t get off the train. It’s okay if you prefer Batman to have no kill rule because we basically grew up of any variation who enforces it, ironically the late Kevin Conroy have said he liked Batfleck.
when I was a child back in the late 80's. French Government cancelled DRAGONBALLZ priming on TV cause Politics found that too violent for young audience, which were the only consumers of DBZ fr them at the time. Strictly the same with batman, the Guilde creating the Adam West version of the Batman who use to kill in his early ages of creation, before they created the narrativ of the orphan non killer making justice by himself. Until finally Burton allowing us to have a deep version of that, until they cancelled it again to make it Shoemaker, then bringing it back into Dark to fully embrasse it with this AMAZING Snyder version. I have no doubt that this is the character Snyder understood the most, psychologicaly, chronologically (cause this one has lost everything at this point), culturally (cause he embrassed the circle)
If he wanted a edgy Batman who killed, he should of done that with Thomas Wayne or Jason Todd, granted I give him props for trying but having Batman kill minor thugs instead of major villains like Professor Pyg, Scarecrow or you know Joker THE THE BASTARD THAT KILLED ROBIN (Even Harley), he really didn’t flesh out his journey and make it feel fulfilling, if we’re to compare Batman arc to Nebula’s arc from the mcu, we all know who has the better arc sadly
It would've been better if batman never had killed but he was willing to break that rule vs superman . This batman was one bad day away from it and we all know he chose not to kill superman so he dodged a bullet there
Yeah, but he doesn't just off every person he sees. Every time he kills someone in the comics, it's treated as a huge deal and even makes Batman in one issue turn himself in. It's fine to write a story where Batman kills ONCE and he has no other choice.
I believe the killkng should pmly be a thing if it serves the story, but that doesn't work at all if you simply jump to his journey at him already killing, there wasnt a build up to it, we didnt get to see batman slowly delve into killing, i get the dead robin easter eggs, but thats it, weve seen him tackle that before and not kill, show us what was different this time, show us the journey to him kiling so we can understand at least, history is important
Even Rim Burtons version of Batman killed people in a more non-shalant way but it was noticible. Batman tries his hardest to live by that code, but understood over time, especially with the Joker, how his own beliefs werent always right and why he aged to be more cutthroat than his younger days, knowing he wouldnt be able to keep coming back to subdue these villians. Snuders Batman plays off his seasoning over time and what hes had to learn and change.
I mean I’m not a huge Snyder fan or his universe but I do love DC and I think they should’ve left that killing thing for a little elsewhere story show on Netflix or something I never liked his dark universe I respect him tho.
Batfleck puts a tracker on the truck yet he still rammed it along with the shooter inside killing him...does he have to?! Should have just let the Truck leading batman to their base of hideout wouldn't that been better?
I don’t like that Batman won’t kill… if Batman won’t kill his villains, then the villains keep breaking out or getting released. So what the hell is Batman’s purpose at that point if he keeps having to beat up and lock away the same criminal over and over again.
That only applies to the comics because they keep the villains alive for sales. A live action Batman can get away with a no-kill rule because they don’t have to have toe villains always breaking out.
Zack always refers to "The Dark Knight Returns" as a source of inspiration...which tells me he's never read or understood the story or character. MULTIPLE times, Batman expresses his disdain for killing and guns throughout the four issues. Even referring to guns as tools for the weak. It's just baffling how much he talks so much about it and understood so little.
Facts 💯
preach
So according to Zack,Rebel Moon wouldve made 1billion if it had been released in theaters??...if that were true..people still loves barbie more than oppenheimer yet rebel moon wouldve made higher than both??😂😂🤡🤡
Thats a lot of assumption, fuzzy math and "what ifs" to defend a movie. Sometimes a bad film...is a bad film.
Batfleck puts a tracker on the truck yet he still rammed it along with the shooter inside killing him...does he have to?! Should have just let the Truck leading batman to their base of hideout wouldn't that been better?
I like how he's so convinced that Batman "kills all the time" in that story, specially that mutant moment he loves quoting, but then the story itself repeatedly states that he hasn't killed anyone, both Batman and third parties express it every now and then throughout the story, story that btw would NOT make any logical sense if Batman was killing left and right like Snyder claims, bc the final part of the comic is Batman being FRAMED of murdering the Joker and that being his FIRST kill is the trigger event for all that final stretch of the story bc the cops finally start hunting him down aggressively bc he's finally crossed the line of murder, which again would make no sense whatsoever had Batman killed left and right since the beggining
To be fair, Nolan addressed this in his trilogy and Batman was forced to kill and let his enemies die. It was justified. Snyder just turned Batman into the Punisher. That's how he didn't honor the character lore.
I have no problem with Batman killing, as long as it serves the story and there's a reason for it. Doing it just to be dark and edgy is the issue. Batman doesn't kill because he doesn't want to become the very thing that took his parents from him
You’re right
My real problem with his batman killing is the fact that he apparently does not mind killing nameless thugs but the joker is still alive ? Miss me with that shit 😂
The only time I can approve and see his choice in killing being fine is in the context against a major criminal like pyg, or scarecrow or bane, instead he’s killing minor thugs and people like Joker is running around
It's very annoying that people refuse to understand this...
Snyder such a wuss to take risk so his batman only kills npc goons 😭
The new spiderman ultimate issues are so good man. im glad that uncle ben is a mentor to peter and isn’t dead in this universe, and the art style and designs to the suits are all amazing
Issue 2 also points out things adult Spidey misses that young Spidey would solve with his experience and it's fascinating to see
What annoys me about Batfleck or taking to people about Batfleck is that it’s actually a pretty decent character arc…for basically anybody that isn’t Batman. In Batman Beyond, Bruce literally scares himself into retirement because it became necessary after a point to use guns to he an effective crime fighter. Heck, in The Dark Knight Returns, the comic that his version of Batman is based on, he cracks a gun in half and literally says “these are the weapons of the enemy.” I’m not trying to deny that Snyder certainly had a creative vision, but when you take a core appeal of the character like this and then change it, it comes across as completely missing the point of the character, which Snyder seems to prove is the case with him time and time again
he also shoots a guy in head to save a baby in that same comic ,batfleck doesn't carry handguns he has turrets on the bat mobile and batwing that's it but guess what so does bale and keaton and most versions of batman
Y’all really treat Batman like a prophet or something lmaooo
It would’ve been better if he never killed before trying too kill superman
boohoo spiderman in the comics was nothing like he is in the mcu yet they took him made him Iron man Jr always havig to rely on soemthing or someone or tech to get through his battles and only until nwh did they kind of change that.
1st off, 'change' is an abstract or paradoxical concept by nature... it alludes to the 'idea of change' and how that gets determined but in actuality, that gets contradicted because of nature not being able to determine actual 'change' - so with Batmans case, his 'no-kill rule' was set in motion after his 1st debut where he killed criminals, but the thing is that, this rule is a deluded but paradoxical idea that was set to combat against the 'evil' that Batman has set against despite having exceptions throughout how he deals on with his crusade against crime or the 'evil' - and determines that as an actual Holy Grail that alludes to 'change' when in actuality, it doesn't at all...
so both by nature in general especially Batmans character becomes paradoxical by nature itself considering that Batman doesn't always abide by his no-killing rule, and does break it or has exceptions and is hypocritical (by nature) such as TDKRs comic that Snyder takes very great inspirationa from, and for very good reason compared to any Batman story because it fits the notion of the paradox that is Batmans 'no-kill rule' the most out of any Batman story...
so this is where Snyder takes a direct contrast against TDKR but still ending up the same, just in a different manner because Batfleck is done abiding by that rule that he used to have...
I would've been interested in his take if his DC films weren't garbage
😂😂😂
None of them are. All three are masterpieces. Whatever you smokin I want it 😂
Fr
😂
I wouldn't go that far @@5678hu
Even in Arkham origins joker wanted Batman to kill bane but what he do stopped his heart and then brought him back
Snyder fundamentally misunderstands Batman. Also there is no “his version of Batman “. Just the character we know. Sherlock Holmes Chad.
A perfekt example is in Batman Arkham origins game, bane had a heart monitor and joker is strapped to a electric chair. If the battery's are charged up joker dies or he kills bane and joker survives, either way someone has to die. The twist is that batman uses electric gloves to stop banes heart and when joker escapes he revives bane so both live in the end.
so snyder and snyder fans, if batman can kill why is his joker alive still?
Or Harley. Remember she’s the one that killed Robin here.
@@tigerlord9302She helped I believe, but Joker still contributed in killing him
@@Orion-Pax_34 I don’t really bother watching anything DC made by Zach Snyder, so just read this online.
It's worse when you remember that canonically the reason why that Joker wears grills is bc Batman caught him after killing Robin and in a fit of rage started pummeling him, knocking off his teeth. So apparently this Batman kills random thugs but he catches the killer of Robin and only punches off his teeth and sends him to jail, yeah that makes a lot of sense. Don't forget Harley, Deadshot, Killer Croc, Slipknot are all still alive too.
The reason a lot of versions of the joker are still kicking ….they are weirdly bonded and both know one can’t exist without the other .
Superman killing Zod worked for me. But what he did with batman was just bizarre. Dude was just killing people whenever without any rhyme or reason. There was no nuance, and if there was some thematic reasoning for it that suited the narrative, it wasn't communicated well at all. A lot of people interpreted it as this Batman losing his way due to Robin's death and the Metropolis destruction, but when Snyder starts saying stuff like this, I honestly don't think thats the case. Snyder himself has never once said that was the case. So it consistently just kind of exposes how he really feels about it all, and seems like he genuinely just doesn't actually understand batman and finds the idea of his moral code silly and childish. And so he kind of just handwaved the whole concept away for BvS because he thinks Batman killed people in TDKR, which isn't true, and the fact that he DOES think he kills in that comic is telling about why he only ever seems interested in that particular story. I think Zack just wanted Batman to be a killer in this world. Plain and simple.
ok Hive-Minded Drone with zero ability to achieve the basic levels of 'independent, critical thinking skills'...
it's not a 'moral code' to begin with, it's just a set of values based around Batmans perception against the 'evil' of Humanity and it's in the case that Batman makes it simpler by generalising the 'evil' as 'criminals' - his set of values or just a 'code' is stemmed from what is simple that is taken as a pedestal against crime...
and TDKR does indeed 'kill' here, something that you need to read sweetie...
1st off, 'change' is an abstract or paradoxical concept by nature... it alludes to the 'idea of change' and how that gets determined but in actuality, that gets contradicted because of nature not being able to determine actual 'change' - so with Batmans case, his 'no-kill rule' was set in motion after his 1st debut where he killed criminals, but the thing is that, this rule is a deluded but paradoxical idea that was set to combat against the 'evil' that Batman has set against despite having exceptions throughout how he deals on with his crusade against crime or the 'evil' - and determines that as an actual Holy Grail that alludes to 'change' when in actuality, it doesn't at all...
so both by nature in general especially Batmans character becomes paradoxical by nature itself considering that Batman doesn't always abide by his no-killing rule, and does break it or has exceptions and is hypocritical (by nature) such as TDKRs comic that Snyder takes very great inspirationa from, and for very good reason compared to any Batman story because it fits the notion of the paradox that is Batmans 'no-kill rule' the most out of any Batman story...
so this is where Snyder takes a direct contrast against TDKR but still ending up the same, just in a different manner because Batfleck is done abiding by that rule that he used to have...
@@godzillazfrictionyou gunna cry now?😂
@@donjon1179God, you're lucky that my @godzillazfriction account keeps getting shadowbanned from this video only...
if i was commenting in response to you im any other platform that isn't reddit, RUclips or Instagram then you'll be crying how much i would be cyber-b___ying you...
A great example of a weak story that still understands Batman
Batman Arkham Origins
He has to kill Bane or the Joker will kill himself, so he makes Bane unresponsive as a distraction and then ended up Reviving him
That shits awesome, I love when Batman has to think of things like that on his feet
Arkham Origins ain’t a weak story 🤣
I never thought I would disrespect snyder again but please snyder shut up
So according to Zack,Rebel Moon wouldve made 1billion if it had been released in theaters??...if that were true..people still loves barbie more than oppenheimer yet rebel moon wouldve made higher than both??😂😂🤡🤡
Thats a lot of assumption, fuzzy math and "what ifs" to defend a movie. Sometimes a bad film...is a bad film.
@@syamilshazlan862well stupid people loves stupid movie that's why Barbie become a hit😂
@@syamilshazlan862 No, actually, that's not what he said at all. In fact he specifically goes into talking about how things that would never be popular in theaters are given exposure by Netflix.
The only thing I approve of Batman killing is to be apart of the story and having a reason for it, because if it's just a full on kill, then it's definitely not gonna work.
I agree plus i find it funny when you have an issue how a character is portrayed the excuse is "the writers can do whatever they want; the character has been around for decades or DC are the only ones who can approve it"
That's where people should know the difference between Reason and Revenge
Christopher Nolan - Shows Reason Behind The Batman
Zack Snyder - Revenge of Batman
What is the point of having batman killing people when he doesn't kill his villains💀
He said he swears he'll kill Joker at the end of ZSJL
@@G59METH Yea, after he supposedly stopped and turned his life around after BVS
@@G59METHit’s too late at that point lmfao it’s an apocalyptic world where superman is trying to kill them😂 at that point joker is an asset, the intelligence between batman deathstroke and the joker is insane
One of the points of BvS is that you see the heroes at their lowest. Superman is not accepted by humanity. WW has abandoned humanity. And Batman has abandoned his humanity. After Superman sacrifices himself killing Doomsday. WW and Batman see it as a selfless act. Superman gave his life for people that hated him.
B:TAS would have a word about facing villains in nonviolence
I don't know if the world's ready for another Adam West style Batman because that version of Batman is just too funny
Many people including me are too used to dark Batman it would be weird to see him happy and funny
I think that style only really works in elseworlds now; I see James Gunn’s being more like the animated series. Not afraid to let out intelligent quips while still maintaining a serious composure. I expect the typical jokes about how dark and brutish he is whenever he joins the justice league tho
I agree. We all know it's gonna be inspired by the Brave & The Bold comic of course, but I say they should take a few inspirations & influence from both comics & tv show. Like the Animated Series, Batman Hush, Death of the Family, & The long halloween.
I would love to see a batman in the movies who is like the arkham games where you get the best of both worlds as that would be cool
I think Zack Synder was the worst thing to happen to D.C. He made Batman kill and made Superman gritty. I would have rather seen him do a deathstroke movie rather than what he did because his style would clash well with Deathstroke.
Snyder made the perfect Elseworlds story, but it should've just become an Elseworlds story. Imagine a version of the DCEU, where Snyder's story is the third major arc. Initially, every hero is as they are in the comics, but they see a Knightmare timeline and it's Snyder's universe (Not Snyder's Knightmare storyline, but the regular storyline.) Don't misunderstand me, I love Snyder's DC movies, the characters are just not as definitive as they probably should've been.
Keaton: Indirectly killed the Joker and Penguin, and also personally killed their supporters without hesitation (one even with a smile)
Bale: Killed the fake Ra's Al Ghul along with a number of League of Shadows fighters and left the real Ra's Al Ghul to die: "I'm not going to kill you, but I don't have to save you."
Then killed Two-Face saving Gordon's family and killed Talia to intercept the bomb.
Ben Affleck: Killed and maimed many of Luthor's mercenaries.
Robert Pattinson: During the pursuit of the Penguin, he had an accident that clearly did not go without victims.
Also versions of Batman from the series Gotham, Titans and Batwoman: the first killed Ra's Al Ghul (although he was not yet Batman) the other two killed the Joker.
And animation:
JL: World of War
Doom That Came To Gotham
The Dark Knight Returns, Parts 1 and 2
Flashpoint Batman
Batman vs. Dracula (and pretty much every undead or parademon in the comics or DCAMU)
Red son of Batman
After that, do you still care if he kills the rank and file?
Thats why I love the Killing Joke story. Its up to the reader to believe if Batman finally gave in and killed his archnemesis, or will the endless cycle continue.
Pretty sure Moore ended that debate.
I don't hate Zach but you can tell he doesn't read the comics and if he does it seems like he mostly just skims through the pictures so he can get images to recreate in his movies. It's sad that he can't also recreate the original intent behind the stories as well because of his obsession with making everything edgy all the time.
Youre probably right on the money. Instead of actually reading and understanding the story and intent he looks at the pictures and almost forms his own narrative. Its weird.
It baffles me that WB hired this man, when he has proven multiple times that he does not understand these characters. I just feel bad for Cavill and Affleck
Didn't Cavil say he liked working with Josh because he understood the character?
@@theatlantean8036 Who's Josh?
All of the most beloved versions of Batman dont kill
You got Kingdom Come wrong just as Snyder got DKR wrong. Sups didn’t retire, the world chose Magog and revenge over Superman and Justice. Batman didn’t kill the mutant holding the girl hostage.
Brian Lynch nailed it. Batman doesn’t kill, he’s able to get out of impossible situations because he’s that prepared. In fact Snyder kinda got there with the Star Trek reference to Kirk reprogramming the test but failed miserably in his interpretation because he’s more concerned about himself more than the characters.
Couldn’t be happier that Snyder is done with DC. Looking forward to Gunns DCU.
“There’s no move, there’s no throwing the batarang, no dust ball to distract me. I pull the trigger and I kill this kid” -Snyder on JRE Podcast
And that’s where Snyders inability to make use of the “suspense of disbelief” in comic films falls short.
This is exactly the scenario Batman would pull off some million to 1 shit where he’s able to disarm the guy without the kid dying/without having to kill the gunman.
That’s why Batman is great. Faced against a million to one odds and he figures it out.
So glad this guy isn’t directing DC stuff anymore. I respect the efforts but Christ almighty the imagination is lacking on how to properly use the characters who exist in a world of make believe where you can break the rules of reality.
This is quite literally quoted by the joker in Batman: Under the Red Hood. Jason has the Joker and Batman at gunpoint and he fires at Batman. Batman dodges the bullet and throws a batarang at the gun and hits it dead center in the barrel and disarms Jason without killing Joker.
Joker says and I quote:
“I can’t believe you got him! You expert, rootin-tootin, eagle eyed, goth-loving marksman! I love it! You managed to find a way to win…”
Like any base level Batman fan would understand this but Snyder has never been a fan of anything he’s a deconstructionist like his fanbase. They love tearing down everything that’s great about a character or franchise and playing this stupid ill-advised game of “what if” with a character(s) that like he said are some peoples religion
Every Batman movie had Batman kill and that was my problem with Batman in all those movies The Batman was the only Batman movie where Batman did not kill anyone and went out of his way not to in the whole movie. Robert Pattenson is the only one to actually follow the no kill rule
Really good point there. A Batman who isn't living by a strict no kill code doesn't have the same power in a JL dynamic. It gives off more of a Wolverine or Huntress feeling. Snyder never understood the characters in a translatable way.
Batman should only resort to killing in three specific situations: 1) by accident or in self-defense, 2) when he must save innocent lives with no alternative option (similar to his actions with Harvey Dent in Nolan's trilogy), and 3) during times of war (such as facing Bane, who has captured the city, or Darkseid, attempting to conquer Earth).
If Batman becomes a bloodthirsty killer in his city, wielding machine guns as depicted by Snyder, the police and Commissioner Gordon cannot overlook his actions, and they would be compelled to hunt him as a villain. Since he is a hero, not a villain, he must adhere to a moral code and avoid crossing certain lines. If he were to become the very evil he fights against, his purpose would lose meaning. Moreover, a proper role model for children is crucial, as they grow up with him just as we did.
It's essential to recognize that not every criminal is the same. For instance, if someone is stealing to feed his family, should Batman kill him? No, he should intervene to stop the crime and then, as Bruce Wayne, later help him by, for example, assisting in finding him an honest job. This is the essence of Batman's character."
Here’s the thing, there’s nothing wrong with Batman killing if you actually do the work and make it believable that he would kill, Take Arkham Knight for example, during the second to last Joker Hallucinations Batman is fighting multiple fake Jokers and constantly fighting and beating them and every time he beat one he would get more violent and more brutal then ever before until he finally snaps the neck of the joker and he stops as in that moment Batman lost
it's not about killing or not killing it;s about having a moral compass, Synders problem is that he is so bad at optics. If he had just said "maybe batman went too hard in the movie" people wouldn't give him hate, it's just that he doubles down. It's just this attitude of being above critcism, hitting back at critics, thinking you get to be the one to decide who batman is when it's not up to you. Ben Afflecks batman has never felt like batman, it's always felt like a different characer.
I guess he was trusting people to be smart enough to realize that "Batman went too hard in the movie" is THE ENTIRE POINT OF THE MOVIE.
I hope dcu batman is like batman from the lego batman movie
Great abs and addicted to lobster? I'm cool with that.
Chris that’s not why the ultimate Spider-Man is popular 😂😂
They why is it?
@@edschelchang6123 Probably because they actually let Spider-Man be happy and have a steady relationship with children
I think the bigger issue behind Snyder's Batman is that when Batfleck kills, it doesn't weigh on him the way Snyder says he's curious about. Snyder asks what would happen if Batman kills, but in his movies Batman runs down goons in a car chase and he doesn't think much of it afterwards. The criminals he chooses not to kill get branded then get killed in prison, its in the news papers, he knows its a death sentence, why not stop.
Its implied that he started killing after Robin's death but Snyder doesn't go further into the topic other than Joker did it. Also, in a world where Batman kills, why is Leto's joker still alive, why doesn't he let Harley drown in Suicide Squad when she was involved. This is the start of a new universe, how many of his villains would we have seen if he has no problem killing? I feel like Snyder makes Batman kill from a realism standpoint, but fiction doesn't have to or need to be realistic. Yes, put Batman in a situation where he might have to kill someone, having him find a way not to kill creates a compelling story.
Snyder seems adamant about Batman killing because somehow that's what would make him flawed, and having a no kill code makes him some kind of pure saint. Batman is truly a flawed character, often times b/c of the no kill rule but having moral code makes the character compelling b/c the writer has to keep him from violating his morals. Yes you can write characters violating their morals, but we meet Batfleck as a killer so its unclear who this version of the character was before going through this "downward spiral".
i think zack is an amazing visonary i think it sounds cool that he lost so much he just doesent care and that superman reminding him that these people have families they are human with his mom martha and him accepting that is cool but he didint write that well cause immidietly after hes killing goons left and right, a problem with cinematic universes is that you need to set up the normal than make a solo arc and overall arc which is hard to do especially with making some heros older and weathered down and introducing them in another heros movie that just started
Aquaman has been cool since the Justice League Cartoon in the early 2000's where he cut off his hand and had a hook for a hand, from the DCAU
The Batman with Robert Pattinson should’ve been the start to the new DC Cinematic Universe and not this Batman tbh
If your going to have Batman kill, it has to be HUGE. It needs impact
How is Batman irrelevant if he doesn't kill? How the hell does a character like Red Hood even work if Batman kills? "OH Bruce I'm back but you've always been into killing let's go kill Joker together."
I don't even wanna get into the whole Zack just doesn't know what he's talking about thing (because I like the guy, decent director, seems like a good guy, I really liked Justice League, Watchmen, and Army of The Dead) but he is so obviously not an actual fan of these characters that it isn't even funny.
Thank god this man has nothing to do with DC anymore
As a batman fanatic, Batfleck is my favorite because of the fact that he is comic accurate to the dark knight returns batman. He was older, bulkier, and downright brutal towards villians. He pulled no punches, and wavered in the lines of killing and not. I don't stand behind your opinion of making a more campy batman like west again, they kinda tried doing that in the josstice league. I'm thinking make a batman who isn't as dark as Pattinson, who's had atleast 6-10 years of experience and has a sidekick to mentor would be a nice balance that we haven't scene from batman yet would be awesome. If jensen ackles where yo take on the role, his darker more Sarcastic humor would fit well. Love the videos chris!!
Or the guy from reacher
Batfleck wasn't really anything like the Batman Returns Batman, though, except in the way he looked. Fundamentally, they couldn't be further apart. Batman Returns Batman did everything he could to not kill someone. That was his entire point of being. Affleck's Batman killed a dozen folks before lunch.
If he kills and has no issue with killing, why are there any Batman villains alive in Zacks universe then lol? He'd just kill them
I see both sides of what Zack's saying. Side 1: It would be creative to tell an ELSEWORLDS story of Batman killing, like Flashpoint or something like that. Side 2: Batman shouldn't kill, under any circumstance, he must always find a way. "There's always a choice."
Personally, I think the reason Batman doesn't kill and the Batman who never kills is the most compelling Batman and also the reason why he is relevant. Kevin Conroy said it better than anyone really. Batman is flawed. He's just a human being. And the fact that he always finds a way is what makes him so special. He's just like all of us.
Batman killing makes zero sense if The Joker is still alive. I don't mind Batman killing if it's done right. Personally I prefer a Batman that cares about his villains that's why DCAU Batman is my personal favorite. To me Batman shouldn't kill part of why I love Batman's character is because of his compassion. Batman cares for his villains and he wants them to get better to me that's more compelling than a Batman that kills.
Batman (this makes it sound like he's a real person lolmao) has said that if he kills once, he won't be able to stop killing.
And if you kill a killer, the number of killers remain the same.
I think it's more interesting if Batman (and probably otjer heroes outside of DC) is put in a situations where they should kill. But they refuse not to because they'll end up like their villain. Similar to what the minions writer said.
I find that interesting that Batman refuses to kill. Plus he doesn't seem like the killing type. (Bruce at least).
Zack Snyder was the worst thing to happen to Batman in the last 10 years.
Keaton: Indirectly killed the Joker and Penguin, and also personally killed their supporters without hesitation (one even with a smile)
Bale: Killed the fake Ra's Al Ghul along with a number of League of Shadows fighters and left the real Ra's Al Ghul to die: "I'm not going to kill you, but I don't have to save you."
Then killed Two-Face saving Gordon's family and killed Talia to intercept the bomb.
Ben Affleck: Killed and maimed many of Luthor's mercenaries.
Robert Pattinson: During the pursuit of the Penguin, he had an accident that clearly did not go without victims.
Also versions of Batman from the series Gotham, Titans and Batwoman: the first killed Ra's Al Ghul (although he was not yet Batman) the other two killed the Joker.
And animation:
JL: World of War
Doom That Came To Gotham
The Dark Knight Returns, Parts 1 and 2
Flashpoint Batman
Batman vs. Dracula (and pretty much every undead or parademon in the comics or DCAMU)
Red son of Batman
After that, do you still care if he kills the rank and file?
His no kill rule is an essential part of his character that he has morals and doesn’t kill so he doesn’t end up like the filth that killed his parents and those he puts away in jail. He’s expressed his disdain for killing and guns multiple times. Even refers to guns as tools for the weak (which we see Affleck Batman use) And two, I like how Batman can be in situations where he’s tempted but still upholds his rule. I view him as the ultimate form of human perseverance and sticking to your morals no matter how easy it is to break it. And most adaptations make that clear. Others choose to ignore it for some reason. If you’re gonna ignore or change an essential part of Batman’s character and make him start killing, than it’s gotta be an interesting story to tell. But it feels like Snyder just did it, cause it was edgy, which completely misses the character.
And my criticism goes for others, like Keaton and Bale, not just Affleck (even though I still like all three). I thought Snyder had an interesting story of how he started killing after going through another tragic loss similar to his parents through losing Robin. Than I come to find out, that he really is only killing because of some obsession with Superman, which just made his “killing spree” way less interesting. It even opens a plot hole, like he’s willing to kill random criminals but not the psychotic lunatic clown who’s been terrorizing Gotham for years and took his son away from him? That’s odd.
Finally someone who understands where synder is coming from and acknowledges his faults. Most people are just butt hurt fans. The DC community is toxic bro, i just hope James gunn DCU will unite the fan base at least, i am gonna miss the synderverse though.
I totally agree with you, Chris. The problem is that doing a story where Batman acts out of character only means something because in the comics there are many years of history. This is the first time we have seen this Batman, since it's not related to any of the other cinematic versions.
I like to see a Batman movie where Batman got framed for killing someone and he was videotaped and he holding the person or the villain and they actually died in his hands but he who did in or did not know where it came from and has to find out who it is and everyone was after him if you get my meaning , can't wait to hear about the Mexico trip
Sound possible if they do that in Matt reeves the batman, maybe done by hush or a copycat who is professional cosplayer
It could work and make it fun movie
Zack Snyder creates conflict.. conflict is the essence of narration.. he’s completely right.
Ngl, everybody in this comment section, ironically proved Zack right. Everybody in here is fighting over Batman like he’s a god or something.
Living rent free.
I feel like the decision to start tour cinematic universe with a Batman vs Superman story was wrong. To me a Batman vs Superman story only works when one of them is weathered down and at their wits end. Perhaps this movie would have been better to have been a Batman and Superman team up movie, and then you do a vs movie years down the line with an "older batman". That veing said, I really hope Zack get to do a full on Dark Knight Returns elseworld movie
The Batman that Affleck's Batman is based off of doesn't kill but he notably has low tolerance for criminals. Also, criminals fear his unpredictability and he uses it to evoke fear. Source Frank Miller's: The Dark Knight Returns.
I had no problem with batfleck killing. I had a problem with us not knowing why he kills. They never explain or justify it. We got introduced to batman at his darkest. If we had a prequel movie of this batman where he decides he needs to kill, that would be interesting. Basically, they should have reversed his arc.
One thing I look at is. Batman doesn’t kill anyone in Zack’s justice league. So I always look at it as he stopped killing after Superman’s sacrifice. Made him realize who he was again.
Snyder wanted to make the Justice League feel like Justtice Lords.
So according to Zack,Rebel Moon wouldve made 1billion if it had been released in theaters??...if that were true..people still loves barbie more than oppenheimer yet rebel moon wouldve made higher than both??😂😂🤡🤡
Thats a lot of assumption, fuzzy math and "what ifs" to defend a movie. Sometimes a bad film...is a bad film.
I gotta admit a broken and morally corrupt Batman is a fucking scary thought
Except we never saw him in a position to kill, he just is a murderer from start to end and there are only hints to why he kill but it’s was never explained, you wanna subvert expectations maybe show us a reason he kills and show us the ultimatum he has to make but nah, he’s just a murder and he does murder maybe I’ll tell you why in 5 movies
The hype that was BVS and the Thursday night early showing was probably the most insane. The theater exploding for multiple scenes. Will never forget.
The hype before the movie was so insane. Then the movie came out and the hype immediately went away.
Bud doesn't understand batman at all, which is why I keep on saying to my friends that zacks batman is the best batman we ever got if you haven't read a batman comic
He did the same with superman;
Superman doesn't kill .. lets see what happens if I make him kill … he murders zod
Batman should have had his own movie where he is pushed to the brink of murder but CHOSES NOT TO bc he's batman!!
Then BvS have been the rivalry with Clarke be based around the fact superman murdered someone and batman hates that he did that and superman arguing there was no other way. then the fight could end with batman choosing NOT to kill Clarke teaching superman the true morality of being a hero.. witch would have also hit more when in the alt universe superman turns evil for Darkside.
I have a feeling that insomniac spider man 3 will take inspirations from the new ultimate Spider-Man comic’s
i don't care if batman kills, but that he has a line is what makes batman, batman. it's the struggle to keep his darker side a bay. i'm sure snyder understands this but he wanted his own interpretation of batman. and unfortunately it just sucked. not to mention the sub part acting from affleck.
Even Tim Burton's Batman killed people, in the first one he blew someone up and in Returns he burnt someone alive with the bat mobile.
This is why I dislike snyder. First, he tells fans that we are living a dream world, as if he's the one telling reality. And has zero knowledge to the dc characters.
This is the same person who ruined Henry Cavill's adaptation of Superman with BvS & JL. What did you expect?
How did he ruined his character in JL?
@@Eternal_Sky_TardisHenry never lived to his full potential as Superman. Watch Man from U.N.C.L.E, he is great in that, lots of charisma which Snyder stripped out from the character in Superman.
@@kael3691
I dunno man, Superman stoping Steppenwolf's axe and saying "not impressed" with a smug face was charismatic
Yeah, there are some questionable moments in the Snyder's movies as a whole like Supes killing Zod in Man of Steel or killing that one soldier who threatened to kill Lois in BvS but other than that, I don't get why this guy is saying That Zack specifically ruined Superman's character in JL because there wasn't a controversial moment with Superman in that movie
@@Eternal_Sky_Tardis that ain't charisma, that is unwarranted smugness which just made him look more like a douche.
@@Dr._Mantis_Toboggan_Md. He looked like a douche for saving Cyborg while making a witty remark to his enemy? That is certainly an interesting take i guess
Bro I was the same I was trying to start a RUclips challenge just because I hated that movie Batman versus Superman because the way how they treat it Batman but I did start loving it over time
Exactly. Batman is one of the smartest minds and greatest martial arts experts in all of comics. He’s such a great hero that even he can find no just one but sometimes two ways out of an impossible situation, where other heroes would given to killing being the ONLY answer sometimes.
Part of the people is they want to make Batman as realistic as they can. Which can be cool, but I think I speak for a lot of Batman fans who want to see him with a Lazarus Pit or Solomon Grundy. A world where Poision Ivy doesn’t need to be changed to fit the story. And so I’m that fantastically world, it still works to have him “not kill.” Because so many other things unrealistic are going on.
Does anyone else hate the batfleck suit? Or is that just me, like i think its the ugliest live action batman suit we've ever gotten, i hate how fat the batman logo is, cause its never looked like that before, n i feel they only did that to put the superman logo in the batman logo, which was still a stupid creative choice imo, my favorite live action batman suit is robert pattisons suit
My introduction to Batman in comics and in general was a hardback cover compilation of the original comics where he killed, and in film, my introduction was Michael Keaton, who also killed left and right. So I don't care about Batman killing if it's established he dropped his rule or never had it. What I mind is when you establish the rule but constantly break it, like Bale's Batman. Pattinson does a great job of showing the obsession a Batman with that rule established in the comics generally has, almost getting him killed because he refused to kill. Keaton and Affleck are my favorites though.
Yeah big fans both of them, but I enjoy all the Batmans for what they are. I honestly thought that Batfleck didn't start crossing the line until after the Metropolis events, but I could be wrong. I thought seeing all the destruction is what made him snap. Plus given his 20 years of fighting crime and losing Robin the way he did.
Keaton’s Batman to our knowledge never had a no-kill code unlike Batfleck. Plus Batfleck has no problem killing random small time thugs but he let his entire rouge’s gallery-including the very man responsible for his son’s death and the reason why he started killing- alive.
A Batman that kills could work but Synder wasn’t a good enough writer/director to make it work.
@@chibu3212 But it was established Affleck dropped the rule. Robin's death was the point where he stopped caring. He told Joker he would kill him in the Snyder Cut's epilogue, so we see he wants to, but we also see in Suicide Squad he keeps evading Batman. He can't kill what he hasn't caught. He didn't kill Harley because he sees her as a victim of Joker's, which is true to how he's viewed her in the animated series and comics. And even when he stopped caring, we even see in BvS's warehouse scene he still doesn't just immediately kill anyone, he aims above their heads. Some of those people died, some of them lived. He isn't like the Punisher, he's just done caring if you die at that point. He still has some restraint, he just stopped putting their lives above innocent lives.
If he wanted to have Batman kill so badly, he could’ve started off as the normal Batman and later on he’s about to be killed and force to take a life
And with Superman,he had no choice,Zod said im going to kill or enslave every human,plus the family in front of them. What else could he have done then
chris nolan's batman is chris nolan's very own batman, while zack snyder's batman is frank miller's batman but crap, and his cult says his a "VISIONARY" its like seeing the manson family for the digital age
Zack snyder has said in the past or someone I can’t remember all of Snyder’s characters started off in a broken mindset they weren’t the norm of those characters yet. They had to grow and learn to become those recognizable characters and had people been patient we would have gotten that. But that was the whole point of Batman’s arc he wasn’t the good guy in BvS he was supposed to come to the realization that he was wrong and and then find his way back to the person he used to be
I definitely don’t want an Adam west like Batman for the DCU but something more in line with the Batman the animated series, the new Batman adventures, and Justice League unlimited in the DCAU
Great Video Cris! 👍
The thing is its so complex and probably one of the most complicated things in comics. Snyder is right and wrong he sees interesting paths the character can go down but doesn't handle it the correct way. i still like certain things in snyder but not his batman takes really. Look at batman ego or batman begins he handles it decently in those.
One thing I didn't like is that the Robin who got murdered by Joker and Harley it's Dick Grayson. I would have love Batfleck even more if he does the "No Kill Rule" and I much prefer that the Robin who got murdered is Jason Todd.
Can’t remember, but what was Matt Reeves Batman reasons for not killing, or did they make it a big deal in The Batman?
He never killed
He never killed, in fact he was the first live action Batman since George Clooney to not actually kill
To be fair it wasn’t hard for Ultimate Spider-Man Peter to be better than main universe Peter. All the writers had to do was make him happy and we all would like it more. Main universe Peter has been getting treated like crap for the last couple years especially when it comes to MJ and self-insert Paul
I’m more offended by Zack Snyder’s overreliance on slow motion.
As I am that Matt Reeves take on Batman moves like he's in slow motion.
batman killed in his first comic appearance.
I say it depends on the tone and it’s up to the writer whether to enforce or risk, it’s a win/lose situation. I mean Batman did have a history of using a gun and kills: the one shot comic The Killing Joke’s edit intended to have Joker choked to death after he made Batman laugh, Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns had Batman shoot a mutant member to save a kid only to be a hypocrite much more later about not using it, or with some of the movies that we probably forgot about, just ask Two Face, some goons, and Ras when he couldn’t get off the train.
It’s okay if you prefer Batman to have no kill rule because we basically grew up of any variation who enforces it, ironically the late Kevin Conroy have said he liked Batfleck.
Kevin liked the duality of Batfleck he wasn't a fan of the killing
when I was a child back in the late 80's. French Government cancelled DRAGONBALLZ priming on TV cause Politics found that too violent for young audience, which were the only consumers of DBZ fr them at the time. Strictly the same with batman, the Guilde creating the Adam West version of the Batman who use to kill in his early ages of creation, before they created the narrativ of the orphan non killer making justice by himself. Until finally Burton allowing us to have a deep version of that, until they cancelled it again to make it Shoemaker, then bringing it back into Dark to fully embrasse it with this AMAZING Snyder version. I have no doubt that this is the character Snyder understood the most, psychologicaly, chronologically (cause this one has lost everything at this point), culturally (cause he embrassed the circle)
Key difference with Kingdom Come comics is it is else-world.
Bryan lynch perfectly put who Batman is into words
We got a smiling happier healed Batman and you shit on him to this day.
His name is George Clooney
If he wanted a edgy Batman who killed, he should of done that with Thomas Wayne or Jason Todd, granted I give him props for trying but having Batman kill minor thugs instead of major villains like Professor Pyg, Scarecrow or you know Joker THE THE BASTARD THAT KILLED ROBIN (Even Harley), he really didn’t flesh out his journey and make it feel fulfilling, if we’re to compare Batman arc to Nebula’s arc from the mcu, we all know who has the better arc sadly
Keaton Batman also killed without reason and no one gives his Batman this much flack for it
It would've been better if batman never had killed but he was willing to break that rule vs superman . This batman was one bad day away from it and we all know he chose not to kill superman so he dodged a bullet there
Why do people keep saying Batman doesn't kill. He's killed before Snyders version. Do your F'n research!!
It doesn’t make snyders any better
Yeah, but he doesn't just off every person he sees. Every time he kills someone in the comics, it's treated as a huge deal and even makes Batman in one issue turn himself in. It's fine to write a story where Batman kills ONCE and he has no other choice.
I believe the killkng should pmly be a thing if it serves the story, but that doesn't work at all if you simply jump to his journey at him already killing, there wasnt a build up to it, we didnt get to see batman slowly delve into killing, i get the dead robin easter eggs, but thats it, weve seen him tackle that before and not kill, show us what was different this time, show us the journey to him kiling so we can understand at least, history is important
Even Rim Burtons version of Batman killed people in a more non-shalant way but it was noticible. Batman tries his hardest to live by that code, but understood over time, especially with the Joker, how his own beliefs werent always right and why he aged to be more cutthroat than his younger days, knowing he wouldnt be able to keep coming back to subdue these villians. Snuders Batman plays off his seasoning over time and what hes had to learn and change.
I mean I’m not a huge Snyder fan or his universe but I do love DC and I think they should’ve left that killing thing for a little elsewhere story show on Netflix or something I never liked his dark universe I respect him tho.
The fact that Cris made his channel out of spite for BvS is the best 3C Lore 😂
Batfleck puts a tracker on the truck yet he still rammed it along with the shooter inside killing him...does he have to?! Should have just let the Truck leading batman to their base of hideout wouldn't that been better?
I don’t like that Batman won’t kill… if Batman won’t kill his villains, then the villains keep breaking out or getting released. So what the hell is Batman’s purpose at that point if he keeps having to beat up and lock away the same criminal over and over again.
That only applies to the comics because they keep the villains alive for sales. A live action Batman can get away with a no-kill rule because they don’t have to have toe villains always breaking out.