It's all disingenuous to me when we give this much air to Batfleck killing bad guys but give no air to keaton, bale, or any other who donned the cape. Its just silly and tiresome at this point.
Keaton never had a no kill rule like Batfleck tho, and Bale’s kills were mostly unintentional. Also at least Keaton killed his Joker but Batfleck is so dumb that the killer of his son is still roaming
@@chibu3212 I'm going to pretend you're trolling, because this is a goofy reply to what i said. But if you're not, I'll entertain. BATMAN HAS A NO KILL RULE yet "keaton had no No Kill Rule like bat fleck..." and "bale's kills were unintentional." Its disingenuous. You can't have it both ways. If batman, as a character, had a no kill rule, then Keaton's and Bale's iterations NEED to follow that rule if you hold Affleck to the same standard. Otherwise, shut up about it. Keaton murders people. He literally murdered all kinds of goons and his rogues gallery. Bale's intent? bro, he blew up Talia Al Gaul and he killed Ra's in the first movie. He murdered Harvey Dent. He unintentionally killed some goons at the LoS headquarters among others. Be intellectually consistent. The no kill rule was standard back in the 80's so none of this backsliding. Either all apply or none do. If Keaton had no rule, then let Affleck who's rules obviously changed within the past 1 year of being batman (according to the film's logic) be. leave affleck alone if you won't hold the other men to the same standard.
@@mrbluesky4838 and you have every right to hate them. But don’t say they’re inherently wrong when there’s several iterations of the character. That’s intellectually dishonest. I absolutely hate Adam West Batman, but I still respect the fact he’s around.
At this point, I don't know why anyone cares. Snyder isn't going to change his mind on Batman and he's not working on any DC projects. Anyone getting worked up over his comments is just causing themselves undue stress. Frankly, both Superman and Batman fans would be a lot happier if they stopped caring about what other people think about their characters.
In my understanding, the reason they care what the filmmaker thinks about the character - is because of the influence their work and take on said character can have on the mythos, the story, & the character makeup. They don't want the person writing the character... to fundamentally misunderstand the character - because it dilutes the meaning of the character with undue & unnecessary "content" that no one asked for.
Why didn't Batfleck kill the joker then??Snyder's first mistake is putting an elseworlds batman story putting it into a main continuity which made fans angry especially bcuz it's the first time Batman and Superman appeared together in live action
@@Neethan3247 “They were all in hiding.” And you mean to tell me Batman…a character known as “the World’s Greatest Detective”…couldn’t hunt them down? Sounds like a lotta cope to justify Batman merc-ing thugs but not the man who literally is responsible for his adoptive son’s death
@@LeMeister that just supports my argument more. “I mean it’s the joker though…” Exactly…it is the joker. If Batman had a fall from grace story and killed like Snyder wanted to depict. The first person on his hitlist is the Joker…no questions. you think Batman would waste time to stop small crooks if the Joker was out there and he wanted to kill him? No…he’d probably waste most of his energy into making sure Joker is six feet under before focusing on other criminals.
@@wesstewart2677 I get what you mean bro. What I meant by that is, it isn’t that hard to believe that he couldn’t find the joker. Joker is a criminal mastermind (even tho it’s Jared Leto) that is consistently able to outwit Batman. The whole Jason Todd story arc hinges on the fact that Batman couldn’t find neither.
The nice thing about Batman is- he's like James Bond- he can be goofy, he can be brutal, he can be many different shades of the same character. Personally, at this time, my preference is Robert Pattinson in The Batman. Keep up the good work, pup!
I think Snyder’s Batman could’ve worked better if we got a full explanation on WHY he’s killing and if his kills were accidents more than intentional murder, if he punches you and you hit the ground wrong and die, he doesn’t care, he didn’t try to kill you, but he doesn’t care that it happened. The other issue is we never see WHY he’s killing, if they just said “Robin died, he didn’t have anyone like Superman in his personal life to bring him back to the light, so he doesn’t care about keeping them alive”
Show don’t tell. We see the Robin suit and we never see a robin. Also Batman never kills anyone directly, yeah he shoots down a car where people were mowing down him with machine guns, runs over a car, and shoots a gas tank that explodes when the guy tries to fire it, and repels a grenade back at someone but apart from superman he doesn’t go out of his way to kill, it’s just a byproduct of people being in his way. And the whole point is to give him a redemption arc. Yeah, normally Batman doesn’t kill, but if I open an elseworlds comic and Batman starts killing nobody bats an eye because it’s just one more adaptation. So is this.
@natereacts312 apparently most people don't use their imagination for specifically zack snyder movies no matter the circumstances which is sad really.
@@chimeron260Except when he carpet bombed the guys shooting at him while he was on his way to the warehouse in the Batplane. That was pretty direct and intentional.
@StopCallingMeShirley1180 where was your energy when Bale was killing guys during that chase scene in the movie where he crushed dudes through the ceiling.
@@RedHairShanks26 You’re barking up the wrong tree. I’ve been waiting for a Batman in film that actually sticks to his code and so far the closest we’ve gotten to that is The Batman, at least if you don’t count Batman & Robin. Perhaps if the Nolan trilogy was the subject of the video I would have brought it up.
Usually storylines where Batman breaks his No kill rule are placed in elseworlds multiverse categories by DC, Some Of The early Golden Age Batman Comics for example were retconned to take place on Earth-2 but if we’re being literal all the iconic superheroes have “killed”. Superman , Batman & Wonder Woman especially in old storylines, though all of that usually gets retconned in order to stay consistent with the moral principles set for the most iconic aspects established with these characters. I’m fine with versions of these characters existing that kill or aren’t as morally compassionate in side material but I do respect Dc for sometimes keeping these characters consistent with how they are well remembered in the main continuity.
I just feel like it’s weird for him to act like this situation is rare when he has been put in a situation where he has had to kill multiple times some of his most popular stories center around that and how he deals with that. Like in red hood where Jason forces him to either kill him or the joker and Batman finds a way through where no one dies. Or the Arkham franchise, where, even though Batman didn’t directly kill the joker, he still blames himself for the jokers, death and Arkham knight deals with that and his guilt after he feels like he is responsible for taking a life. Zack Snyder isn’t doing anything new with this deconstruction it’s a pretty common deconstruction and most fans are OK with it they aren’t against it. Most of these stories are beloved. Maybe it could’ve worked if we saw his version of Batman‘s breaking point, but we don’t were introduced to a Batman, who just kills and we don’t see what brought him to that point also, I’m sorry but saying “if you continue to disagree with me, you’re just gaslighting” even if it’s a joke is really close minded when there is actual discussion to be had on this topic
Look, I feel like Batfleck killing shouldn't be a huge deal. Even the point of the Snyder-verse is grappling with humanity. And even Zack said his universe is Elseworld. He's right, because Batman is human. Each of the characters have a human arc. Superman- People will find reasons to hate what they can't control. Show them how to believe again. Wonder Woman- The world will never be perfect. People will do bad things for no reason, believe that they can do better. Batfleck- Humans greatest flaw are their emotions. People are not infallible, but bad decisions can be absolved. I hope people don't find more reasons to hate on Snyder. It's old at this point. And DC lost my respect forever, so just stop. Sorry that Snyder is showing that fictional characters are imperfect and relatable. (No hate to you Pup)
I think we're on the same page more-or-less. Little details within it that I can chalk up to creative disagreement and there's nothing wrong with that. It's why I love what Snyder did even if I don't entirely agree with all the decisions made. It does make me sad that, now that these movies are done and over, and no longer "harming" anyone, that DC fans didn't take the opportunity to step back and appreciate the artistry of these films but instead use the newer depictions to dunk on them further. I mean for pete's sake, Batfleck killing kinda doesn't matter especially now that we've got Battinson who is literally page-perfect as far as I'm concerned.
I gotta be honest. I love the snyder cut and watchmen but snyder does infuriate me aswell. His whole speel sounded like the whole taika wattiti thing a few months ago. I dont think batman should kill, and its not just a "well you're ok with keato..." No i'm not. I'm not even ok with bale tackling two face off a building. I also think his logic is flawed. "What if batman was in that position".... I dont know if he worded it wrong but... He is... Red hood puts him a position where he is forced to and he puts the gun down anyway. And batman even if he did kill he shouldnt use a gun. He should be opposed to guns completely to me, not even in a dream. If mind controlled a gun should break through to him. The elseworlds explanation doesnt work as an excuse. Because this was the main dc universe to the public, pattinson is elseworlds yet hes closer?? And affleck fans always tout he is "the definitive" BECAUSE hes comic accurate. People can like what they like but its the outgoing disregard of "if you don't like affleck you misunderstood it" or a video essay why you're wrong. When someone doesn't like something very different its kind of expected. Under the red hood is appreciated for the presentation of his apathy towards killing. And affleck kind of goes against that and red hood as a concept
In the DCEU Batman only killed after the time Superman appeared for the first time. He just lost control of his punches. Because the Suicide Squad Flashbacks establish Batman had a no kill rule (no killing Deadshot and Harley Quinn). He comes back to the no kill rule after witnessing Superman's sacrifice
@@charlespuruncajas9663 wait so he... Didn't kill because of robin? That's much more of a valid reason than just "seeing superman's destruction" And he didn't just stop pulling punches he installed a gun on the batmobile. He blows several people up or intentionally kills them. After superman inspired him or he's "detested" from killing by learning he nearly killed someone simply trying to save their mother. Which ok fine. One problem, he kills people in the next scene like intentionally blowing up kg beast. This right here is what makes me feel like Snyder is just making batman "cOoLeR" because even when he learns he still kills people and it's shown in a positive badass way. Like the kg beast part and he makes a quip before and after. Because like I said, batman is always put in that position, but doesn't give in. Which... Isn't that better? I like the idea he didn't consider to kill until superman. So he doesn't kill but "was put in that position".
@@charlespuruncajas9663 that’s even worse as justification. By your logic. Batman in snyderverse: *doesn’t kill after losing his son to a villain he could’ve stopped years ago and now has to live with the guilt of that.” Also Snyder’s Batman: “starts killing because of an alien invasion and takes that anger out on the hero who stopped the aliens from terraforming our earth.” Why is Superman’s appearance the justification for him killing? Why not…you know…the death of his adoptive son?
@@wesstewart2677 two words. Power corrupts. Bruce knows that because his dark side has been drawing him in over his long career. If there's a chance Batman can be tempted, he's still a man. The worst he can do us nuke a city, Superman on the other hand can destroy the human race if there's a chance he becomes evil. If you know Batman, you know the only person he trusts is himself, and even that to an extent. Batman was in a battle with himself in BvS.
I swear it's been almost 10 Years and it's still like 2016 where YOU CAN'T SAY ANYTHING GOOD ABOUT ZACK SNYDER OR SNYDER VERSE BATMAN, without being called stupid, wrong, fake fan, and all of those creative words that people love to use. I also see BTAS and Arkham Batman as the definitive representation of Batman and his morality core, BUT I ADORE WHAT BEN AFFLECK AND ZACK SNYDER DID WITH THE CHARACTER, and I see Bat-Fleck as an AU Batman who snaped after his Robin's death, but got back into the light with him founding the Justice League inspired by Superman sacrifice. I also adore BVS UE and Zack Snyder's Justice League and I feel we never or at least for a long time we're not gonna get that kind of bold and unique superhero movie. Can't wait for replies after this comment, it's gonna be a doozy 😂
@@CharlesChristinaWH Yeah, Bat-Fleck suit is really accurate to the one in Dark Knight Returns (both normal and Armored version), iconic lines from this comic really sound good spoken by Affleck AND THAT FREAKING WAREHOUSE FIGHT SCENE IT'S STRAIT UP ARKHAM GAME IN LIVE ACTION 🤩
Yes ... people really know how to mis interpret Zack Snyder .. All he meant was that batman doesn't kill people but sometimes even he can't save lives without killing .. and that's the reality he wanted to show the people that sometimes its okay to break the moral code if it means saving innocent lives ... I mean he's fighting crime for 20 years and you want to believe that in those 20 years batman did not kill a single soul.. thats unrealistic and bullshit... see real life examples ... police also have to kill people to save lives and still they are considered heroes of the society ... and whats with this bullshit that batman shouldn't kill ... nobody lays a finger when Keaton kills Nobody says anything when Bale kills .. then why the hypocrisy... and why badmouth and misinterpret zack snyder always ? Is that the new trend .. let zack and his fans breathe for a moment ... u didn't like his vision its okay now wait for Gunn's DCU ...
I think the biggest problem I have with Zack’s take on Batman is him taking inspiration from Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns and making that the main canonical version for his cinematic universe rather than treating it as an elseworld story, because that’s exactly what the graphic novel was in the ‘80s. TDKR was its own separate universe and had nothing to do with the mainline DC comics Batman and so it was free to be its own thing while still keeping the idealistic Batman with the no-kill rule intact. I’m not opposed to other iterations of Batman killing, but don’t try to make that the default for his character.
@@09Sayandeep that’s true but if you’re gonna do an whole cinematic universe based around iconic DC characters then it’s your responsibility to respect the source material. Let’s face it, the general public don’t read comic books and so they’ll take whatever they see in movies and assume that’s how things are supposed to be. The MCU didn’t ruin Iron Man or Captain America. Other Batman films are their own self-contained stories usually told from a vision of one director like Burton, Schumacher, Nolan and Reeves. That’s different from a cinematic universe where a character may appear in other films handled by different directors, but they should still feel like the same character.
@@XxHUNT3RN4T0RxX Once again, there is no such rule like you have to adapt certain comics if you are doing a "cinematic universe". That's just something you made up. Snyder was never doing a cinematic universe anyway, that was more WB's plan, Snyder just wanted to do his 5 movie arc with a beginning and end, just like Nolan did. He was doing his own vision and take on the characters, just like the other directors, and that you expected it to be something else is a YOU problem.
@@09Sayandeep why wouldn’t I expect anything other than a cinematic universe after BvS was announced? That’s not the audience’s fault, it was miscommunication and misdirection between Snyder and WB. Snyder wanted to do 5 films, WB wanted to do a cinematic universe to compete with the MCU. In addition to that, Man of Steel was built on a foundation that was never meant to be the start of the DCEU. The original idea was that Superman was to be the first and only super being to exist on Earth and something like that would be a world changing event. But obviously that was quickly undone in the sequel by establishing other superheroes like Wonder Woman and Aquaman who came before Superman for the sake of building a DCEU that was never meant to be. Snyder should have done his own Man of Steel trilogy based around that original concept. That’s a very interesting elseworld idea to me. Zack Snyder could have been the Christopher Nolan for Superman the same way he was for Batman.
@@XxHUNT3RN4T0RxX once again, it’s completely irrelevant if the movie is part of a “cinematic universe” or not. MCU has created a brain rot for you folks. I judge a movie by its own merits, not some imaginary set of rules depending on what some film executives at WB thinks. Auteur directors like Burton, Nolan and Snyder are always gonna put their own spin on the mythos, as is their right as a storyteller and adapting the material. Putting creative shackles on that for non art reasons is asinine.
To be fair, and this isn't me ragging on you or Snyder, but I feel that Snyder doesn't really articulate his words very well and I think he needs to work on that because it does some times come off as him not understanding the characters when I do think he has an idea of what the characters are like, but wants to push them to the limits of what he's good at.
My counterpoint for the Martha scene is this....what would happen if their moms didn't have the same name, or what if he didn't say "Martha" but rather "you're letting him kill my mother?" them having the same first name is way too specific
Batfleck was blinded by his hate for the alien menace that he blamed for the Black Zero Event. The whole point of the Martha scene was to trigger a PTSD event that, for the moment, stopped Batman from impaling him with the Kryptonite spear, so he could ask why he said that name. The point I am trying to make is that by saying "Martha" itself, didn't save Clark's life but delayed what was going to be the inevitable. It was until Lois entered and stated "it's his mother's name" that Bruce stopped. If Martha wouldn't have been mentioned, then Batman would have killed Clark, as Lois would have arrived too late to explain to him of the situation.
I'd say it would be the same outcome. I honestly think "They're gonna kill my mom!" would've maybe been a better line. At the same time, I think Superman knew what he was doing. He already knew Bruce's identity and had been researching Batman. He knew what he was tapping into.
@@ChannelPupi really don’t think Superman knew the Martha name would specifically trigger Batman- Cavill’s acting almost implies CONFUSION at Batman’s reaction, so confused he doesn’t know how to respond and Lois has to explain Martha is Clark’s mother’s name. Also if Clark expected Batman would react to the name I would hope he’d open with it at the top of the fight
@@ChannelPup fair enough. I guess the only possible conclusion I can think is for batman to have her name to identify what she looks like in order to save her.....but that's just a guess
@@Neethan3247 great analysis Clark knew Bruce's mom's name was Martha he's a freaking journalist who's already digging up info on Batman, Bruce and Gotham to begin with, eventually hes gonna find out Bruce's parents were killed in front of him and that their mom's have the same name That humanizes Clark to Bruce because even at his death Clark thinks about his mom's life over his and just prior Bruce mocks him for not being human
Sorry, I just don’t buy it. He explains it as if the movies actually explored what it means for Batman to kill when they blatantly did not. Neither Batman nor any of the people close to him contend with the fact that he’s a killer. Superman does a little but then just drops it after BvS. Batman himself shows no introspection about this.
The problem is not Batman kill. The problem is: 1- it doesn't have a background story about why batfkecks kills 2- he doesn't feel remorse or nothing 3- he is a character that the " no killing rule" is in his core of the character and snyder could not deconstruct in a good way . Snyder tried to do something new with the characters (that's cool) but he fails. And 4 BvS is a bad movie. Like c'mon, he had the 2 greatest Super heroes off all times and still couldn't beat Captain America 3 ( great movie by the way)
One very big failure of Batfleck’s arc imo is that in Justice League where he is supposed to have come back from this dark place he’s still killing and using guns. It’s hard for me to appreciate the arc when his attitude has changed but not his actions.
This right here is exactly why Channel Pup deserves his title as The Mascot for the Level-headed Fanboy. He's able to look past the hate and the hype and discuss the pure facts in a civilized manner.
A Story is what defines a Character. Not the other way around. Snyder's Batman is Cynic because of the Situations ( ie the Story ). If he is Fun, cool tonystraky batman there wouldn't be a DAWN OF JUSTICE Storyline.
“I love the snyder movies, but they go against my idea of what Batman should be, but other than that Snyder’s Batman is perfect except for that part.” ….what? Ok, Batman Beyond. You know what happened to Batman when he picked up a gun, not used, SIMPLY having to rely on it out of desperation. You know what happened? He quit. Because he broke his principles and in his eyes Batman died the moment he considered using a fire gun. Snyder wants to challenge that idea but does it with such a narrow view of what it would do to the character that we end up with a shallow take. “Yeah he kills but he gets over it later” That doesn’t work, he already did it he already broke his moral code you can’t just say bastardizing a character is a lesson he learns- whatever.
I think the issue was WB being so frantic and unfocused in their direction that no one ever got enough time to breathe and reach their full potential besides ZSJL. And even that might as well have needed the stars to align for that to come out as it did.
I'll start off by saying that I've never really been a fan of his Batman, but I don't think the idea of a Batman who kills is a bad one. It's just a matter of executing it properly, and that's where it falls flat for me. If it's meant to be a deconstruction, then we should be focusing on that. A movie featuring a broken Batman would be so much more impactful if we actually got to see him break. Which is why I think so many people have suggested Superman being the first time he's really considered breaking his rule, because that would be much more satisfying narratively speaking. Or if they'd had a solo Batman movie that showed his breaking point before BvS, that could've worked too. And if you're going to have a Batman who kills, you have to answer why Joker is still alive. BvS heavily implies the death of Jason Todd was what put him on this path, which only shines a spotlight on this glaring hole in the entire idea. I get why he's still alive, he's the most popular Batman villain, you can't just kill him off screen, but you HAVE to answer that question, because if Batman is gonna kill someone, Joker is at the top of the list. Is it a codependency thing, has Joker really stepped up his game to stay out of his grasp, how does Joker react to the fact that he finally broke the Batman??? These are the questions we should be asking, but the sad reality is that there just isn't any time. Not in BvS anyway. Because I don't think Zack Snyder is entirely to blame for BvS. He's just the fall guy for WB's mishandling of their cinematic universe by rushing to catch up with Marvel. Maybe he did want to do a Batman solo movie first, but he couldn't, so this is what we got instead? I don't know for sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case. It also doesn't help that the script for BvS is just... hot garbage. Granted, I haven't seen it in years, but from what I remember it's only enjoyable if you don't think too hard about anything happening. Kinda like the Venom movies. Just off the top of my head, there's Lex's nonsensical plan, the fact that most of the cast act like idiots, the "why doesn't Lex team up with Batman?" Thing, "how does Lex + Zodd = Doomsday?", "why can't anyone else use the kryptonite spear to kill Doomsday?", and of course, the infamous Martha scene. Yeah, I get that Bats doesn't just decide not to kill Superman because their Moms have the same name, but that general consensus doesn't come about from nowhere. Like I'm not asking for it to spelled out to the audience, but it'd be nice if such a crucial plot point wasn't so obscure that most people don't even consider that it could be anything other than the stupidest option. TL;DR, I think that Zack had a lot of good ideas, but for one reason or another, he couldn't execute them in the best way. Granted, I haven't seen his version of Justice League yet, so maybe he managed to actually pull it off there, but from where I'm sitting, it just seems like his deconstruction of Batman never got to actually deconstruct anything
Pup I’d honestly love to talk to you more officially about Snyder, Sonic, Spider-Man, interpretations of popular characters and stories, and fandom. I dunno if you’d be open to that but I think there’s a lot of value in discussing our respective experiences with those factors in a way available to our respective audiences.
I think the only problem was how we didnt get snyder batmans journey to killing, i get common knowledge of a characters back story and weve seen the robin suit and a bunch of lines from batfleck hinting us how and why he ended up like that but you still lose a lot of understanding by simply jumping the difference that made batfleck the way he was in bvs that was different from other batmen, if he was a fundamental batman then we could simply understand that his backstory is the most common one we know, but this batman is different, so i think that couldve made it all better
My problem with Snyder’s comments on the podcast is that it came off as smug and egotistical, as if he thinks he knows better and that people that disagree just don’t get it. Comments such as Batman being irrelevant if he didn’t kill, talk about not letting our gods change (which is something I am so sick hearing when it comes to DC characters thanks to his movies), and even his belief that Rebel Moon would’ve done better than Barbie. It comes off as pretentious to me.
That’s not what they are saying at all… There’s been several times where Batman has been challenged to kill and finds a way to not have to take a life. Ever played Arkham Origins? He literally “kills” bane for Joker in order to spare Gordon…and then resuscitates him before Bane could die out permanently. In Under The Red Hood, Jason Todd literally places Bruce in situation where he must decide to kill Jason in order to stop him from killing Joker. Once again, the scene plays out where Bruce figures out a way to not have to kill. Both scenes challenge the hero/protagonist, both scenes show him have to figure a way to not compromise his morals. If your best idea of challenging Batman is to have him kill someone, then frankly you’re not a creative writer.
While I agree deconstructing the characters and putting them in uncomfortable situations is ultimately a good thing, I think a big thing Snyder messed up were character reactions. It's been a long time since I've seen the films so I can't go over every example, but Clark just flying away from the courthouse in BvS was a big no-no in my opinion. He should have helped evacuate the building and done as much damage control as possible, and there could've even been a moment between him and a kid who just lost a parent where he comforts them. Characters should always react in a way that makes sense for them, they shouldn't just change the way they act for the story to go where the writer wants it. Like you said, he doesn't need to be happy. He just needs to be Superman.
I made a video about this topic back in 2022 where I tried to make a case about Batman's No Kill rule being updated into a No Murder rule. More or less, it would make it so that Batman would be allowed to kill in kill-or-be-killed situations where it would be absolutely necessary and all the other options have been exhausted. That would be more in line in keeping Batman as the same character he always was with the same morals we know he always has and not have him kill people as his first chosen, default action. TL;DR: Kill and Murder are not the same thing and Batman's rule should so be updated from former to the latter.
I still like the idea that to Batman, life is sacred, and he'll do everything in his power to avoid the loss of life. Otherwise that would cheapen a no murder rule per se'. However, I do agree that this would at least make sense of a lot of the quite obvious manslaughter committed by Batman in the movies and the games that writers have desperately tried to rationalize. It's just very difficult to make a guy who throws ninja stars at peoples' heads and drives a car that makes things explode not a murderer heheh.
after learning about the early years of batman and who he was changed to have the no kill you rule makes me not really caring about it, Bob and Bill didn't want that but yet DC forced it to and we are stuck with it forever.
If Snyder was really hell-bent on making Batman kill least he could've done was not have him use guns. As much as I hate the Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League portrayal at least they were creative with Batman's kills.
Snyder’s point was accurate but I still hate how casually he made Batman kill. Without the backstory, Batman’s arch feels more like a response to criticism than something planned out.
wasnt there gonna be a solo batman movie that couldve explored robins death in the works? the one that ben affleck was going to direct. so yeah we never got to see anything get realized probably because studio wanted their own mcu asap. idk couldve seen his backstory there.
What exactly is the difference between "You're making Batman irrelevant if he can't kill" and "You're making Batman irrelevant if you can't put him in a situation where he has to kill". By definition, if he is in a situation where he truly, literally HAS TO kill, then he will kill. So it's the same thing.
@@ConstantineAlexanderSoelaiman honestly bro the fandom it's so toxic that they make a video of how you don't understand their characters and talk about why batman should not kill someone even though in all honesty it's just hypocrite and it's just proving Zack Snyder point about making these characters irrelevant like spiderman
My problem with his batman is how disconnected his batman feels he wanted to make a more adult superhero movie yet batman doesnt feel like batman, but superman still feels like superman same with wonderwoman. Yet with batman i feel like idk who he is
Superman tampoco se siente como Superman no me importa que haya matado a zod pero simplemente luego de su muerte se puso las gafas y hizo como que nada paso
For me its not the fact that he crosses that line, its the way it was handled. Its like youre trying to defend zack snyder when the guys just yappin jibberish like he doesnt understand these characters. He set up batman wanting to kill superman real nice in the beginning but then he goes on a rampage with a whole bunch of guns and stuff which isnt like batman even the slightest, he had a good point tho about batman being in that situation but he said it as if he didnt make his batman casually kill hundreds of people like nothing ever happened. And he says it like in the snyderverse the rule is even established in which its not. Just stop trying to defend this guy pup 😔✋
When it comes to the issue of Batman being prepared to kill, my issue can be summed up thus: Batman's no-kill rule I think is meant as more than just a question of whether he has the fortitude *not* to kill; but should he as a vigilante, as a superhero who operates outside the law and *above* it, have the AUTHORITY to kill? That's the thing that I think is very often missed over why Batman swears off killing, and what separates him from the likes of Ra's al Ghul or Red Hood, he understands how much power he has and, with such life-altering trauma having warped his worldview, he understands just how easy it can be to think himself above reproach and take the law into his own hands. Especially when his rogues gallery includes people who are so without shame, without a hint of contrition, with ZERO restraint that should be on death row if it weren't for the likes of Arkham and Blackgate being just revolving doors for supervillains. So putting him in a life-or-death situation where he has to make that call, where he is FORCED to assume that kind of authority just to save his own life or even all of Gotham? I'm not opposed to exploring that, and I think Snyder's got plenty good reason to offer the perspective that because Batman might have to cross that line, that doesn't mean he isn't without the fortitude to reflect on that and come back wiser for it. What bugs me is that I'm not altogether convinced that Snyder's considered the implications of that with regard to not just Bruce's own personal struggles, but how Batman has (for the certainly the past two decades) been declared the unexpected moral bedrock of the Justice League. It's not helped with Snyder's preoccupation with the kind of darker violence embodied in The Dark Knight Returns that it seems to just get in the way of seeing Batman come out of this more brutal mindset. It's a similar problem to Man of Steel: I think that the prospect of Superman killing Zod is a worthy one. Indeed if I was to argue that Clark should kill ANY one villain in his own rogues gallery, it'd probably be him. But that preoccupation with a darker tone makes it feel flimsy to me. Zod COULD have been a great counter to the kind of altruism and kindness that Clark embodies: a crusader just like him, but dedicated to control and absolute authority who would accept nothing less than death. But with how much Clark is told explicitly *not* to act on his kinder instincts beyond just vague Jesus allegories about what he COULD do, combined with a showdown that may as well be Invincible vs. Omni-Man without the bloodshed... it feels unearned. Tons of potential that just isn't given the time it demands.
I never really got what is so inspiring about this superman since he honestly looks likes he hates being a hero like it's just a job. Like in universe they make him sound like he's something all good but he sure doesn't seem like it
I am a fan of foth DC and SONIC THE HEDGEHOG and I can tell that both fandoms are not too away from each other. just compare batman`s no kill rule deabate with sonic`s green eyes debate.
I kinda like the idea of saying Batman can come back even if he’s crossed the line but I feel like that also ignores part of his reason for his no-kill rule, yes part of it is if he crosses that line, he’ll never come back from it, but the other reason is because he values life, he believes criminals should be given a chance to rehabilitate, he’s even given the offer to freaking Joker to help him with that in the past but not only does he value life, he also doesn’t want anyone to go through the same pain he did from losing his family, not even if it’s a criminal, and that’s where I think the problem comes in, by having Batman kill, no matter if it’s for people who may deserve it, he’s effectively becoming someone else’s Joe Chill, he’s becoming the person in the alley who take away family from a kid or any type of relative, regardless of if he comes back from crossing that line, he still crossed the line, he can’t take that back, he’s still taken a relative from someone which is the exact opposite of what Batman wants and stands for. I’m fine with at least trying to put characters in new situations because god knows characters like Spider-Man in the comics need that, but by having Batman kill, sure having him push past it for Justice League I think does a good job at showing Batman’s resilience or whatever and even serves Superman well by having him be the person who inspired Batman to stop, but if he already killed which we saw like several times in BVS, it doesn’t matter if that side was shown because the other was already disrespected by having Batman no doubt cause at least one person out there even a bit of similar pain he went through when his whole mission, literally his life, revolves around making sure that if he can help it, no one will go through that pain again, and that’s where I think Snyder messed up with Batman, he put him in a new situation to keep him relevant, he showed his action perfectly, he showed his resilience well, but he also, regardless of if it was for one movie to see him push past it, made him become everything he swore to fight against and cause what he swore would never happen again
It's pretty insane to me how many videos I've seen about this topic just because Snyder went on a podcast to chat, but I'm happy there's at least one rational video that isn't just saying the same stuff we've heard for nearly a decade. With how much people love to hate on the DCEU and Snyder, they also just can't let go of it.
I agree with this video. I don’t agree that Zach Snyder’s execution of his vision was flawless, but I do love it irregardless. He challenged the status quo, but it just wasn’t able to get fully realized. Just goes to show that people don’t really want change when it comes to stuff like this, they simply want more of the same.
the thing is at this point we know it takes something WAAAAAY more extreme than what Snyder hat come up with to get him to KILL, he's just been through crazier shit and kept it together which makes snyder's batman hard to take serious and why people consider it better as an elseworld story🤷♂
I think there’s legitimate and unreasonable criticisms with this take. To me in my opinion what he said really tells me that certain stories are creatively risky and sometimes people might take it the wrong way or enjoy it, but it’s not necessarily objectively true in that statement. Sometimes you don’t have to take creatively risky choices for a good story and vice versa. You can’t really control what people are gonna think of your work. That’s the nature of the beast. All I can say is my own opinions on the matter, tbf I’m kinda tired of seeing Zack Snyder on the internet and I can take him or leave him when it comes to his movies. There’s probably only two movies I liked from him and the rest were either meh or bad. That’s just my take on it. I can forgive the killing in his movies but when you start making Batman say things like “The world only makes sense when you force it to” it starts to lose the core meaning of the character and he starts not becoming that character anymore. You make him a killer but then you border on the line of making him a villain with that line. I guess Harvey Dent was right, you either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.
I do find it funny how these folks were also just cool with Michael Keaton going onto become the main DCEU Batman during the Hamada regime when he's literally a killer just cuz.
@@ChannelPupnot sure which DC fans you interact with cause most DC fans I saw on Twitter agreed that Keaton was a stupid desperate decision by WB to score nostalgia points by making him the main Batman after Affleck
I mean in Arkham origins batman is put in a situation by joker where he has to kill bane, he kills Bane and tricks joker and re-starts Bane's heart again
Snyder only understoods the character in the sense that he doesn’t want his character to be the comic book one and we just have to accept that. He’s talking out of his ass. It doesn’t matter anymore. His Batman “killing” doesn’t mean anything in his movies. He never used it to say anything. What changed Batman was Superman, that’s it. I actually really like Snyder’s trilogy but its characters are off. And Joe Rogan understands everything even less than Snyder 😂
So basically we need to realize that even if the execution of his universe wasn’t great, we should at least give respect to Zack Snyder on the story he was trying to tell (which was deconstructing these characters in a way that questions and challenges the core character’s morals/views on the world).
Channel Pup is cooking absolutely nothing with this one. I dont mind stories that take risks. But this was a 30 minute yap, because you LIKE Snyder. Chill. BvS is servicable at best, given you like Snyder's direction. But he doesnt get these characters and its not because he mad Batman kill. Using IGN as a source for a bad faith take? I mean.....yea.....its IGN. Stop using the word "Gaslighting". It Doesnt mean what you think it means pup.
Tbf, I don't think anyone in Hollywood gets Batman, and neither will anyone that takes over the writing for the character in the future. Pattison's Batman was waaay more "unBatman" than even Batfleck's based off the look alone. The comics and the DCAU are still the goats.
Here's what made me realize Zack knew Bruce Wayne The first scene we see Bruce in he's running in the smoke, saves a little girl with no regards to himself and asks her where her mother is and she points up to the building zod destroyed with his heat vision and procceded to hug her That's Batman to a T , he's dark and brooding but he isn't gonna beat down a criminal and then not go comfort that same criminal's victims That's something I admired about Matt Reeves' , Zack Snyder's and Christopher Nolan's Batmans And the Arkham games and batman cartoons get that spot on too Rip Kevin Conroy
Totally disagree with the notion of not having batfleck kill goons and having Superman be the first kill. It doesn't work in the context of the movie and it weakens afflecks batmans position. If we are to believe supermans life is truly in danger, we need to show batman crossing that line and how he's not afraid to kill now. It doesn't make any sense to have batman not kill anyone throughout the whole movie because now we have no reason to believe he'll magically just go through it for Superman.
I mean, I wouldn't say there's anything magical about that decision. Superman being Batman's first kill would make sense in that context because Superman isn't human in Batman's eyes at that stage.
Zack Snyder could’ve made a Justice League Flashpoint Paradox live action movie since he wants to make Batman a killer, a Flashpoint Batman (Thomas Wayne not Bruce Wayne).
Also mfs be complaining about Batfleck killing people ( which he later stopped and had kind of a redemption arc ) but no one talks about how Michael Keaton always killed everyone he fought and didnt even care
1:42 I didn't like his take on either character. His Man of Steel felt like a Batman movie, and his Batman felt like a burnout. I saw his movies and was disappointed by them. That's it. I only have a problem with fans who keep spitting misinformation about Zack. That's it. I moved on from his dumb ideas as he's stuck in the mindset of a 14 year old when it comes to making movies anymore.
I wonder if trying to redeem Batman after he killed would've been better if he took on a successor (like the guy from Batman Beyond) who he could teach not to go down the same path as him.
Certainly an interesting route. Not dissimilar to Batman Beyond where Batman almost shot someone. Could that story still go ahead if Bruce actually went through with it? Food for thought.
@@ChannelPup if they ever get around to making a Batman beyond movie, they're going to have to come up with a much stronger reason for Batman retiring other than almost killing somebody. Batman is killed multiple people several times in previous movies, so it really isn't that much of a shock anymore. Some other route must be taken.
@@theunknowncommenter725 how bout…ya know…literally what they do the show? Bruce has a heart attack one day as Batman and is forced to break his rule and use a gun to defend himself. He then decides to give up being Batman. Plus the combination of old age. It’s that simple.
This interview proves he was the wrong person to do these characters . He’s a 50 year old edgelord who cares more about being edgy than making good movies .
Second time listening to this video, and I think had we gotten the solo Batman movie before BVS showing him getting that dark. Would’ve help in the long wrong. I’m not the biggest fan of the Snyder verse but I get why some people are.
I do like Snyder as a action director but he has a habit of muddying his movie's themes because he also wants to do cool s*hit. Are Batman and Watchmen's Rorschach sad deconstructions or badass antiheroes? Trying to do both is hard and can make the movie annoying and confusing.
Yeah I agree that Storytelling and Changing the Narrative has been done before for Decades especially in Comics, hell Batman had Guns and Killed in the Past until they changed it, everything can Evolve into something New, however i can’t understand Zack’s Vision that it makes me wonder if he doesn’t understand Batman, It’s not like I’m saying Snyder Fans are Suckers who thinks Zach is the Second Coming of Jesus, but I’m just saying that his Direction and Tone that doesn’t fit DC, BVS is one of my least favorite Movies for a lot of reasons but 2 of them I will talk about Now is that the Snyderverse is the biggest reason why the Popularity of Injustice went too far as Zach confirmed that his Vision was inspired by the Game and the Other Side of this is that while I believe him being a Comic Fan at heart and having vision, his execution of Storytelling is a Awful Messthat he forgot the most important thing about Batman is his Humanity and don’t get me started on what he did to the First Robin and the disgusting idea of a Batman and Lois Lane Romance, seriously Screw BVS and the Snyderverse.
You started your comment with "Yeah I agree" and then said the complete opposite of what the video says. A video that funnily enough, talks about listening comprehension...
There is absolutely nothing wrong with batman killing someone because if its a problem for batman to kill someone then superman should be the last person would ever kill, hell the whole reason bruce became batman is because of vengeance. Holy hell these crazy people hate Snyder more than they hate the mustache man himself back in world war 2
Batman’s no kill rule is what makes him interesting. Joker kills anyone he can and Batman saves anyone he can. Bruce being disgusted by guns and values life because of witnessing his parent’s murder. And you are not even a superhero if you constantly murder people.
@@petermj1098 a no kill rule does not make him interesting at all. He's just as bad as the joker when he cripples people and projects his delusional morals onto others. This is part of the reason why I care about the movie versions and especially Zack's take because it's refreshing. Batman isn't even a superhero but a cave dwelling dude who is self righteous
@@bossmine3997 The Joker and Batman are literally the opposite of each other. Batman is depression and Joker is mania. They relate to one another mentally. Batman wants to help the Joker and Joker wants to ruin him because they know they have similar traumas that changed them to become who they are. Like Joker said in the dark knight Batman is an immovable object and he is an unstoppable force. Batman is a boogeyman for criminals. The boogeyman scares children the same way Batman scares criminals. In the dark knight The Joker exposes how the mob is afraid to go out at night cause of Batman. And in the Batman we literally see criminals scared of the Dark because of Batman even if he’s not there. Batman psychologically scares criminals away and doesn’t need them to kill them to do it.
@@bossmine3997 No Joker had a bad day and Joker decided to devote his life make bad days for other people. Batman had a bad and decided to devote his life to make good days for other people.
if the streak no kill rule is what prominent about the nolan batman, and nolan produce man of steel and the DCEU or snyderverse was meant as a continuation to the dark knight trilogy than zack snyder argument really make no sense, his so full of shit, his like the ryan johnson of DC
Batman only kills NPC henchmen and the occasional supervillain. Not civilians and not the innocent. And most of the time it's just him being sloppy and careless. Just like he was in the Golden Age. Zack Snyder's Batman was no different than the previous versions on film. What a lot of people fail to realize is that BvS showed Batman killing as a negative thing and that he was slowly becoming the thing he was trying to fight. He became a better person again after a Superman self-sacrifice. Post-apocalyptic future where everything is trying to kill him. He's justified and using guns and killing everything around him. Excellent video like always channel pup.
Batman doesn't kill civilians and innocent ppl? Why is this worth highlighting. Was this ever in question? At the end of the movie he was about to brand lex. He only changes his mind coz lex said he's insane.
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?
Is there room to tell a story where Batman is caught off guard by a situation where he has to kill someone, and then does, and we see what he becomes? Absolutely. Maybe that should happen closer to a mainstream canon story of some kind. But Batman vs Superman is not really that story. Who does Batman kill? Nameless goons. Some of them are just guarding kyrptonite that he needs to kill Superman with. Does it matter in-story? No. They just breeze right past it. In the movie, if we found out that Batman always killed people, it would barely change anything about the story. So, Batman is back to not killing after Superman dies. Great. How different is that from the idea that Batman just stops killing forever to be more like the kind of symbol that Superman was? Not very. Who is later confirmed to still be alive in the Snyderverse? The Joker. The absolute #1 person Batman would want to find and kill. So, we have to ask why. Why, with all the mercs that Batman thoughtlessly kills, is Joker still alive? How about gang leaders in Gotham? Why aren't they dead? Why does Batman even bother branding criminals instead of just leaving their bodies for the cops? Even in the canon comics, Batman has made a gun specifically to kill Darkseid. And that was, rightfully, a big deal. His decision to kill Superman should have been an exception to his rule. Sure, having him torture people after Robin's death was a good way to show how far he'd fallen. But the movie made it so that it barely has any reason for us to believe that Batman ever had a no-killing rule. If a story had Batman kill someone, and then wrestle with whether or not he can still be Batman at all, that would be a story worth exploring. But Batfleck killing just feels like him doing what all the other Snyderverse heroes would be doing going forward. "Our superheroes kill, because that's gritty realism. Don't worry about why Joker or any other rogues are still alive."
Meh if u make him kill u do u but know he doesn’t kill cuz someone killed his parents and despite him bein put in that situation he’ll never fold he stands on business everytime but how u gonna make the Robin that joker killed the first Robin💀 that’s why the whole DCEU was a flop n his Justice league was only begged for cuz the justice league that was already out were worse then the films that were out, bro messed w too much cannon it’s alright breh ima chalk that weird universe to earth 304🤣🤣🤣
Batman killing someone is not a problem. Batman is basically a religion at this point. Last time I checked Batman was human not a God. Batman can and has killed before, people need to grow up. Also Spider-man has nearly killed people and they deserved it. Venom screwed with his family just like Kingpin. They fucked around and found. Spider-man doesn't even have a "no kill" rule he just generally doesn't kill. Andrew's Spider-Man never even attempted murder and everyone hates his movies and his Spider-man.
@@petermj1098 You mean the movie that people hate? Not every "superhero" needs to be merciful to every villain or criminal. Some people need to go, I don't understand why that's a problem. There are few exceptions to make like the Joker.
@@IamQuietKrys Every human being is broken and evil. It is not one or the other it is both. The Joker is both. Batman relates to the Joker’s trauma. Batman has depression and Joker has mania. Depression and mania go hand to hand.
@@petermj1098 Wtf does that even mean? I have depression and I can't relate to either characters. Not every human is broken and evil, now you're just trippin.
You kidding right? Batman has a no kill rule that he has applied since day freaking 1. His parents died during a robbery he himself witnessed, the last thing he would do is take another life.
Bro yall are acting like pup is wrong about this take. Its based as hell. Because this is the most morally bamkrupt batman, this is the scariest batman in live action, this is the most poweful batman in live action. Hes not our wanted image but appreciate we even got a truly griddy version of batman. Legi this batman to me is every person on this planet that would do the same thing if they were in his sjoes. Especially if you have the ability to do so. This batman is kill or be killed. And its okay for this batman to be a thing. What you guys dont recognize is that this batman suffers from writing issues. Not because this variant is an issue. Yes he killed mercilessly but again if it was in a more sever scenario, it would have been peak "Dark batman"
Snyder should have never made the most morally bankrupt, scariest Batman to begin with. No, the most powerful Batman is the one who stands by his ethics. Also, Batman's not supposed to be like the rest of us. He's supposed to be one of the pillar of DC, an example for people to strive for in terms of morality. No, it's not alright for Batman to be this thing, because that's just The Punisher in a silly costume. No, the variant is an issue as much as the writing is an issue. What severe scenario? Superman beat the bad guys a year before, and now he just murders goons without even caring if they've actually done anything to deserve it. "Dark Batman" shouldn't be a thing, and there is no peak, because Dark Batman is not peak Batman.
Batman killed before Martha, still killed after Martha, he’s a born killer, never stopped killing in that universe. He had absolute zero development, nothing but a murderer. His parents would’ve been ashamed of him.
@@theunknowncommenter725The murder of his parents made him value life more. Batman is a boogeyman for criminals. Batman scares criminals the same way the boogeyman scares children. He psychologically scares them from doing crimes. The Batman movie did a great job showing how criminals are scared of the dark even if Batman isn’t there.
@@petermj1098you’re applying knowledge from another iteration of a character (The Batman 2022) to justify a completely separate take. Whatever the 2022 shows about Batman is not applicable to the Snyder version because they aren’t the same Batman.
@@wesstewart2677 People who say Snyder follows The Dark Knight Returns yet ignore the fact Dark Knight returns Batman’s doesn’t kill and outright breaks a gun. Snyder thinks Batman holding a gun when doing the Batman Superman Wonder Woman trinity shot is some reason a good idea. Snyder is style over substance. He only likes the aesthetic but doesn’t actually get the essence of the characters.
Batman is the worst superhero ever. He's soft on crime and his no-killing rule has ironically caused more deaths. The villains he defeats can plead insanity, go to Arkham and breakout because Arkham has the worst security to keep doing what they were doing. He even tried to save the Joker even when his death wouldn't have been his fault. He puts his morals above the lives of innocents, which makes him selfish. Gotham would actually be better off without Batman. He contributes to the cycle of deaths and he's no better than Gotham's corrupt law. And he's also the most useless "hero" in the Justice League.
I thought "marksman" meant combatant, ignore when I said Batman is an expert marksman.
L
To be fair to you, the statement that "Batman is an expert marksman" is not incorrect.
@@DamashiTheKaotic yeah he's got his little grapple gun and stuff.
No lol more so is got great aim with his batarangs and all. So yeah you’re definitely not wrong
I mean, he uses a gun that disrupts guns and looks through a scope with it, so... Technically... You weren't wrong...
It's all disingenuous to me when we give this much air to Batfleck killing bad guys but give no air to keaton, bale, or any other who donned the cape. Its just silly and tiresome at this point.
Facts, and fans really are something else
Keaton never had a no kill rule like Batfleck tho, and Bale’s kills were mostly unintentional. Also at least Keaton killed his Joker but Batfleck is so dumb that the killer of his son is still roaming
@@chibu3212 I'm going to pretend you're trolling, because this is a goofy reply to what i said. But if you're not, I'll entertain. BATMAN HAS A NO KILL RULE yet "keaton had no No Kill Rule like bat fleck..." and "bale's kills were unintentional." Its disingenuous. You can't have it both ways. If batman, as a character, had a no kill rule, then Keaton's and Bale's iterations NEED to follow that rule if you hold Affleck to the same standard. Otherwise, shut up about it. Keaton murders people. He literally murdered all kinds of goons and his rogues gallery. Bale's intent? bro, he blew up Talia Al Gaul and he killed Ra's in the first movie. He murdered Harvey Dent. He unintentionally killed some goons at the LoS headquarters among others. Be intellectually consistent. The no kill rule was standard back in the 80's so none of this backsliding. Either all apply or none do. If Keaton had no rule, then let Affleck who's rules obviously changed within the past 1 year of being batman (according to the film's logic) be. leave affleck alone if you won't hold the other men to the same standard.
Well can you argue with me? I hate that those other versions of the character killed equally as Affleck
@@mrbluesky4838 and you have every right to hate them. But don’t say they’re inherently wrong when there’s several iterations of the character. That’s intellectually dishonest. I absolutely hate Adam West Batman, but I still respect the fact he’s around.
I'm tired of talking about it and I'm an S Class "Snyder Cultist". Good job covering it bro 🔥
Long time no see, Tex! How are you doing?
@ChannelPup living the dream 😂
At this point, I don't know why anyone cares. Snyder isn't going to change his mind on Batman and he's not working on any DC projects. Anyone getting worked up over his comments is just causing themselves undue stress. Frankly, both Superman and Batman fans would be a lot happier if they stopped caring about what other people think about their characters.
In my understanding, the reason they care what the filmmaker thinks about the character - is because of the influence their work and take on said character can have on the mythos, the story, & the character makeup. They don't want the person writing the character... to fundamentally misunderstand the character - because it dilutes the meaning of the character with undue & unnecessary "content" that no one asked for.
If people on the internet had that sort of thinking on most subjects, everyone would be a lot happier.
Ok, you might be a loser.
Why didn't Batfleck kill the joker then??Snyder's first mistake is putting an elseworlds batman story putting it into a main continuity which made fans angry especially bcuz it's the first time Batman and Superman appeared together in live action
Because Joker never confronted Batman in his BvS days. All the main rogue gallery villains were in hiding.
@@Neethan3247
“They were all in hiding.”
And you mean to tell me Batman…a character known as “the World’s Greatest Detective”…couldn’t hunt them down?
Sounds like a lotta cope to justify Batman merc-ing thugs but not the man who literally is responsible for his adoptive son’s death
@@wesstewart2677 I mean, It’s the Joker though…
@@LeMeister that just supports my argument more.
“I mean it’s the joker though…”
Exactly…it is the joker. If Batman had a fall from grace story and killed like Snyder wanted to depict. The first person on his hitlist is the Joker…no questions. you think Batman would waste time to stop small crooks if the Joker was out there and he wanted to kill him?
No…he’d probably waste most of his energy into making sure Joker is six feet under before focusing on other criminals.
@@wesstewart2677 I get what you mean bro. What I meant by that is, it isn’t that hard to believe that he couldn’t find the joker. Joker is a criminal mastermind (even tho it’s Jared Leto) that is consistently able to outwit Batman. The whole Jason Todd story arc hinges on the fact that Batman couldn’t find neither.
I am vengeance, I am the night, I am BATMAN!
Hi Batman, I'm a big fan.
@@ChannelPup Same here 🤩
@@ChannelPupHi big fan
The nice thing about Batman is- he's like James Bond- he can be goofy, he can be brutal, he can be many different shades of the same character. Personally, at this time, my preference is Robert Pattinson in The Batman.
Keep up the good work, pup!
Matt Reeves' take on Batman is page-perfect. It's Batman as I always dreamt, but with all the sauce of Matt Reeve's style. I adore The Batman.
But Bond is nevertheless a misogynisitc dino, and Batman has lost a lot of his identity.
I think Snyder’s Batman could’ve worked better if we got a full explanation on WHY he’s killing and if his kills were accidents more than intentional murder, if he punches you and you hit the ground wrong and die, he doesn’t care, he didn’t try to kill you, but he doesn’t care that it happened. The other issue is we never see WHY he’s killing, if they just said “Robin died, he didn’t have anyone like Superman in his personal life to bring him back to the light, so he doesn’t care about keeping them alive”
Show don’t tell. We see the Robin suit and we never see a robin. Also Batman never kills anyone directly, yeah he shoots down a car where people were mowing down him with machine guns, runs over a car, and shoots a gas tank that explodes when the guy tries to fire it, and repels a grenade back at someone but apart from superman he doesn’t go out of his way to kill, it’s just a byproduct of people being in his way. And the whole point is to give him a redemption arc. Yeah, normally Batman doesn’t kill, but if I open an elseworlds comic and Batman starts killing nobody bats an eye because it’s just one more adaptation. So is this.
@natereacts312 apparently most people don't use their imagination for specifically zack snyder movies no matter the circumstances which is sad really.
@@chimeron260Except when he carpet bombed the guys shooting at him while he was on his way to the warehouse in the Batplane. That was pretty direct and intentional.
@StopCallingMeShirley1180 where was your energy when Bale was killing guys during that chase scene in the movie where he crushed dudes through the ceiling.
@@RedHairShanks26 You’re barking up the wrong tree. I’ve been waiting for a Batman in film that actually sticks to his code and so far the closest we’ve gotten to that is The Batman, at least if you don’t count Batman & Robin. Perhaps if the Nolan trilogy was the subject of the video I would have brought it up.
Usually storylines where Batman breaks his No kill rule are placed in elseworlds multiverse categories by DC, Some Of The early Golden Age Batman Comics for example were retconned to take place on Earth-2 but if we’re being literal all the iconic superheroes have “killed”. Superman , Batman & Wonder Woman especially in old storylines, though all of that usually gets retconned in order to stay consistent with the moral principles set for the most iconic aspects established with these characters. I’m fine with versions of these characters existing that kill or aren’t as morally compassionate in side material but I do respect Dc for sometimes keeping these characters consistent with how they are well remembered in the main continuity.
I just feel like it’s weird for him to act like this situation is rare when he has been put in a situation where he has had to kill multiple times some of his most popular stories center around that and how he deals with that. Like in red hood where Jason forces him to either kill him or the joker and Batman finds a way through where no one dies. Or the Arkham franchise, where, even though Batman didn’t directly kill the joker, he still blames himself for the jokers, death and Arkham knight deals with that and his guilt after he feels like he is responsible for taking a life. Zack Snyder isn’t doing anything new with this deconstruction it’s a pretty common deconstruction and most fans are OK with it they aren’t against it. Most of these stories are beloved. Maybe it could’ve worked if we saw his version of Batman‘s breaking point, but we don’t were introduced to a Batman, who just kills and we don’t see what brought him to that point
also, I’m sorry but saying “if you continue to disagree with me, you’re just gaslighting” even if it’s a joke is really close minded when there is actual discussion to be had on this topic
Bro you are completely right
Look, I feel like Batfleck killing shouldn't be a huge deal. Even the point of the Snyder-verse is grappling with humanity. And even Zack said his universe is Elseworld. He's right, because Batman is human. Each of the characters have a human arc.
Superman- People will find reasons to hate what they can't control. Show them how to believe again.
Wonder Woman- The world will never be perfect. People will do bad things for no reason, believe that they can do better.
Batfleck- Humans greatest flaw are their emotions. People are not infallible, but bad decisions can be absolved.
I hope people don't find more reasons to hate on Snyder. It's old at this point. And DC lost my respect forever, so just stop. Sorry that Snyder is showing that fictional characters are imperfect and relatable.
(No hate to you Pup)
I think we're on the same page more-or-less. Little details within it that I can chalk up to creative disagreement and there's nothing wrong with that.
It's why I love what Snyder did even if I don't entirely agree with all the decisions made.
It does make me sad that, now that these movies are done and over, and no longer "harming" anyone, that DC fans didn't take the opportunity to step back and appreciate the artistry of these films but instead use the newer depictions to dunk on them further.
I mean for pete's sake, Batfleck killing kinda doesn't matter especially now that we've got Battinson who is literally page-perfect as far as I'm concerned.
Tbf, "relatable" isn't exactly the word I would use, but I totally get your point. I honestly kind of agree
@@ChannelPup It's why I love characters like Batman and Spider-man. There are different versions of them that work for different people
Not sure if it being elseworlds matters when you are the main showings of the characters in the public eye
How can Snyder's universe be an Elseworld when it was the main cinematic representation of the characters for the 2010s?
I gotta be honest. I love the snyder cut and watchmen but snyder does infuriate me aswell.
His whole speel sounded like the whole taika wattiti thing a few months ago.
I dont think batman should kill, and its not just a "well you're ok with keato..." No i'm not. I'm not even ok with bale tackling two face off a building.
I also think his logic is flawed. "What if batman was in that position".... I dont know if he worded it wrong but... He is... Red hood puts him a position where he is forced to and he puts the gun down anyway.
And batman even if he did kill he shouldnt use a gun. He should be opposed to guns completely to me, not even in a dream. If mind controlled a gun should break through to him.
The elseworlds explanation doesnt work as an excuse. Because this was the main dc universe to the public, pattinson is elseworlds yet hes closer?? And affleck fans always tout he is "the definitive" BECAUSE hes comic accurate.
People can like what they like but its the outgoing disregard of "if you don't like affleck you misunderstood it" or a video essay why you're wrong. When someone doesn't like something very different its kind of expected.
Under the red hood is appreciated for the presentation of his apathy towards killing. And affleck kind of goes against that and red hood as a concept
In the DCEU Batman only killed after the time Superman appeared for the first time. He just lost control of his punches.
Because the Suicide Squad Flashbacks establish Batman had a no kill rule (no killing Deadshot and Harley Quinn).
He comes back to the no kill rule after witnessing Superman's sacrifice
@@charlespuruncajas9663 wait so he... Didn't kill because of robin? That's much more of a valid reason than just "seeing superman's destruction"
And he didn't just stop pulling punches he installed a gun on the batmobile. He blows several people up or intentionally kills them.
After superman inspired him or he's "detested" from killing by learning he nearly killed someone simply trying to save their mother. Which ok fine. One problem, he kills people in the next scene like intentionally blowing up kg beast.
This right here is what makes me feel like Snyder is just making batman "cOoLeR" because even when he learns he still kills people and it's shown in a positive badass way.
Like the kg beast part and he makes a quip before and after. Because like I said, batman is always put in that position, but doesn't give in. Which... Isn't that better?
I like the idea he didn't consider to kill until superman. So he doesn't kill but "was put in that position".
@@charlespuruncajas9663 that’s even worse as justification. By your logic.
Batman in snyderverse: *doesn’t kill after losing his son to a villain he could’ve stopped years ago and now has to live with the guilt of that.”
Also Snyder’s Batman: “starts killing because of an alien invasion and takes that anger out on the hero who stopped the aliens from terraforming our earth.”
Why is Superman’s appearance the justification for him killing? Why not…you know…the death of his adoptive son?
@@wesstewart2677 two words. Power corrupts.
Bruce knows that because his dark side has been drawing him in over his long career. If there's a chance Batman can be tempted, he's still a man. The worst he can do us nuke a city, Superman on the other hand can destroy the human race if there's a chance he becomes evil. If you know Batman, you know the only person he trusts is himself, and even that to an extent. Batman was in a battle with himself in BvS.
I made my peace with Batman v. Superman a while ago, so seeing this video in my recommended really brought me back ngl.
I swear it's been almost 10 Years and it's still like 2016 where YOU CAN'T SAY ANYTHING GOOD ABOUT ZACK SNYDER OR SNYDER VERSE BATMAN, without being called stupid, wrong, fake fan, and all of those creative words that people love to use. I also see BTAS and Arkham Batman as the definitive representation of Batman and his morality core, BUT I ADORE WHAT BEN AFFLECK AND ZACK SNYDER DID WITH THE CHARACTER, and I see Bat-Fleck as an AU Batman who snaped after his Robin's death, but got back into the light with him founding the Justice League inspired by Superman sacrifice. I also adore BVS UE and Zack Snyder's Justice League and I feel we never or at least for a long time we're not gonna get that kind of bold and unique superhero movie.
Can't wait for replies after this comment, it's gonna be a doozy 😂
Finally, I found my soulmate . Someone who also loves Zack Snyderverse while also growing up with kevin conroy batman in 2000s Media.
@@ConstantineAlexanderSoelaiman Yeah same here 🤩. I'm glad we understand each other on this 🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩
As a Batman fan, Zack got batman pretty good , I think he's someone who can direct a very faithful adaptation to batman
@@CharlesChristinaWH Yeah, Bat-Fleck suit is really accurate to the one in Dark Knight Returns (both normal and Armored version), iconic lines from this comic really sound good spoken by Affleck AND THAT FREAKING WAREHOUSE FIGHT SCENE IT'S STRAIT UP ARKHAM GAME IN LIVE ACTION 🤩
Yes ... people really know how to mis interpret Zack Snyder .. All he meant was that batman doesn't kill people but sometimes even he can't save lives without killing .. and that's the reality he wanted to show the people that sometimes its okay to break the moral code if it means saving innocent lives ... I mean he's fighting crime for 20 years and you want to believe that in those 20 years batman did not kill a single soul.. thats unrealistic and bullshit... see real life examples ... police also have to kill people to save lives and still they are considered heroes of the society ... and whats with this bullshit that batman shouldn't kill ... nobody lays a finger when Keaton kills Nobody says anything when Bale kills .. then why the hypocrisy... and why badmouth and misinterpret zack snyder always ? Is that the new trend .. let zack and his fans breathe for a moment ... u didn't like his vision its okay now wait for Gunn's DCU ...
I think the biggest problem I have with Zack’s take on Batman is him taking inspiration from Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns and making that the main canonical version for his cinematic universe rather than treating it as an elseworld story, because that’s exactly what the graphic novel was in the ‘80s. TDKR was its own separate universe and had nothing to do with the mainline DC comics Batman and so it was free to be its own thing while still keeping the idealistic Batman with the no-kill rule intact.
I’m not opposed to other iterations of Batman killing, but don’t try to make that the default for his character.
All movies are elseworlds. Nolan, Reeves, Burton they are all elseworlds, because they are all adaptations. The only mainline DC is comics.
@@09Sayandeep that’s true but if you’re gonna do an whole cinematic universe based around iconic DC characters then it’s your responsibility to respect the source material. Let’s face it, the general public don’t read comic books and so they’ll take whatever they see in movies and assume that’s how things are supposed to be. The MCU didn’t ruin Iron Man or Captain America.
Other Batman films are their own self-contained stories usually told from a vision of one director like Burton, Schumacher, Nolan and Reeves. That’s different from a cinematic universe where a character may appear in other films handled by different directors, but they should still feel like the same character.
@@XxHUNT3RN4T0RxX Once again, there is no such rule like you have to adapt certain comics if you are doing a "cinematic universe". That's just something you made up. Snyder was never doing a cinematic universe anyway, that was more WB's plan, Snyder just wanted to do his 5 movie arc with a beginning and end, just like Nolan did. He was doing his own vision and take on the characters, just like the other directors, and that you expected it to be something else is a YOU problem.
@@09Sayandeep why wouldn’t I expect anything other than a cinematic universe after BvS was announced? That’s not the audience’s fault, it was miscommunication and misdirection between Snyder and WB. Snyder wanted to do 5 films, WB wanted to do a cinematic universe to compete with the MCU.
In addition to that, Man of Steel was built on a foundation that was never meant to be the start of the DCEU. The original idea was that Superman was to be the first and only super being to exist on Earth and something like that would be a world changing event. But obviously that was quickly undone in the sequel by establishing other superheroes like Wonder Woman and Aquaman who came before Superman for the sake of building a DCEU that was never meant to be. Snyder should have done his own Man of Steel trilogy based around that original concept. That’s a very interesting elseworld idea to me. Zack Snyder could have been the Christopher Nolan for Superman the same way he was for Batman.
@@XxHUNT3RN4T0RxX once again, it’s completely irrelevant if the movie is part of a “cinematic universe” or not. MCU has created a brain rot for you folks. I judge a movie by its own merits, not some imaginary set of rules depending on what some film executives at WB thinks. Auteur directors like Burton, Nolan and Snyder are always gonna put their own spin on the mythos, as is their right as a storyteller and adapting the material. Putting creative shackles on that for non art reasons is asinine.
To be fair, and this isn't me ragging on you or Snyder, but I feel that Snyder doesn't really articulate his words very well and I think he needs to work on that because it does some times come off as him not understanding the characters when I do think he has an idea of what the characters are like, but wants to push them to the limits of what he's good at.
Completely fair. There's a lot of great qualities to Zack Snyder from what I've seen but being totally succinct isn't one of them.
I think Snyder didn't care about the philosophy of Batman. He just wanted to shoot some cool scenes.
Watch some interviews during the BvS press run. Also did you not understand the arcs in BvS and ZSJL?
@@yeetcity2704 He doesn't really care or want to understand Snyder's Batman. He's just hating.
@@SaltHuman My thing is, it's not that difficult to understand. It's a redemption arc
@@yeetcity2704 I know, and its insanely obvious. But these people allow the popular opinion to influence their thought process
@@SaltHuman true
My counterpoint for the Martha scene is this....what would happen if their moms didn't have the same name, or what if he didn't say "Martha" but rather "you're letting him kill my mother?" them having the same first name is way too specific
Batfleck was blinded by his hate for the alien menace that he blamed for the Black Zero Event. The whole point of the Martha scene was to trigger a PTSD event that, for the moment, stopped Batman from impaling him with the Kryptonite spear, so he could ask why he said that name. The point I am trying to make is that by saying "Martha" itself, didn't save Clark's life but delayed what was going to be the inevitable. It was until Lois entered and stated "it's his mother's name" that Bruce stopped. If Martha wouldn't have been mentioned, then Batman would have killed Clark, as Lois would have arrived too late to explain to him of the situation.
I'd say it would be the same outcome. I honestly think "They're gonna kill my mom!" would've maybe been a better line. At the same time, I think Superman knew what he was doing. He already knew Bruce's identity and had been researching Batman. He knew what he was tapping into.
@@ChannelPupi really don’t think Superman knew the Martha name would specifically trigger Batman- Cavill’s acting almost implies CONFUSION at Batman’s reaction, so confused he doesn’t know how to respond and Lois has to explain Martha is Clark’s mother’s name.
Also if Clark expected Batman would react to the name I would hope he’d open with it at the top of the fight
@@ChannelPup fair enough. I guess the only possible conclusion I can think is for batman to have her name to identify what she looks like in order to save her.....but that's just a guess
@@Neethan3247 great analysis
Clark knew Bruce's mom's name was Martha he's a freaking journalist who's already digging up info on Batman, Bruce and Gotham to begin with, eventually hes gonna find out Bruce's parents were killed in front of him and that their mom's have the same name
That humanizes Clark to Bruce because even at his death Clark thinks about his mom's life over his and just prior Bruce mocks him for not being human
Sorry, I just don’t buy it. He explains it as if the movies actually explored what it means for Batman to kill when they blatantly did not. Neither Batman nor any of the people close to him contend with the fact that he’s a killer. Superman does a little but then just drops it after BvS. Batman himself shows no introspection about this.
The problem is not Batman kill. The problem is:
1- it doesn't have a background story about why batfkecks kills
2- he doesn't feel remorse or nothing
3- he is a character that the " no killing rule" is in his core of the character and snyder could not deconstruct in a good way .
Snyder tried to do something new with the characters (that's cool) but he fails.
And 4 BvS is a bad movie. Like c'mon, he had the 2 greatest Super heroes off all times and still couldn't beat Captain America 3 ( great movie by the way)
True
BvS had boycott both from Warner execs who deleted 30 minutes of scenes and critics who only care for Marvel comedies
One very big failure of Batfleck’s arc imo is that in Justice League where he is supposed to have come back from this dark place he’s still killing and using guns. It’s hard for me to appreciate the arc when his attitude has changed but not his actions.
Bro he killed parademons they're mindless beings
This right here is exactly why Channel Pup deserves his title as The Mascot for the Level-headed Fanboy. He's able to look past the hate and the hype and discuss the pure facts in a civilized manner.
He goes on to call people who domt agree with him gas lighters then goes onto gas light 💀
A Story is what defines a Character.
Not the other way around.
Snyder's Batman is Cynic because of the Situations ( ie the Story ).
If he is Fun, cool tonystraky batman there wouldn't be a DAWN OF JUSTICE Storyline.
“I love the snyder movies, but they go against my idea of what Batman should be, but other than that Snyder’s Batman is perfect except for that part.”
….what?
Ok, Batman Beyond.
You know what happened to Batman when he picked up a gun, not used, SIMPLY having to rely on it out of desperation.
You know what happened? He quit.
Because he broke his principles and in his eyes Batman died the moment he considered using a fire gun.
Snyder wants to challenge that idea but does it with such a narrow view of what it would do to the character that we end up with a shallow take.
“Yeah he kills but he gets over it later”
That doesn’t work, he already did it he already broke his moral code you can’t just say bastardizing a character is a lesson he learns- whatever.
I think the issue was WB being so frantic and unfocused in their direction that no one ever got enough time to breathe and reach their full potential besides ZSJL. And even that might as well have needed the stars to align for that to come out as it did.
I'll start off by saying that I've never really been a fan of his Batman, but I don't think the idea of a Batman who kills is a bad one. It's just a matter of executing it properly, and that's where it falls flat for me.
If it's meant to be a deconstruction, then we should be focusing on that. A movie featuring a broken Batman would be so much more impactful if we actually got to see him break. Which is why I think so many people have suggested Superman being the first time he's really considered breaking his rule, because that would be much more satisfying narratively speaking. Or if they'd had a solo Batman movie that showed his breaking point before BvS, that could've worked too.
And if you're going to have a Batman who kills, you have to answer why Joker is still alive. BvS heavily implies the death of Jason Todd was what put him on this path, which only shines a spotlight on this glaring hole in the entire idea. I get why he's still alive, he's the most popular Batman villain, you can't just kill him off screen, but you HAVE to answer that question, because if Batman is gonna kill someone, Joker is at the top of the list. Is it a codependency thing, has Joker really stepped up his game to stay out of his grasp, how does Joker react to the fact that he finally broke the Batman??? These are the questions we should be asking, but the sad reality is that there just isn't any time. Not in BvS anyway.
Because I don't think Zack Snyder is entirely to blame for BvS. He's just the fall guy for WB's mishandling of their cinematic universe by rushing to catch up with Marvel. Maybe he did want to do a Batman solo movie first, but he couldn't, so this is what we got instead? I don't know for sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case.
It also doesn't help that the script for BvS is just... hot garbage. Granted, I haven't seen it in years, but from what I remember it's only enjoyable if you don't think too hard about anything happening. Kinda like the Venom movies.
Just off the top of my head, there's Lex's nonsensical plan, the fact that most of the cast act like idiots, the "why doesn't Lex team up with Batman?" Thing, "how does Lex + Zodd = Doomsday?", "why can't anyone else use the kryptonite spear to kill Doomsday?", and of course, the infamous Martha scene.
Yeah, I get that Bats doesn't just decide not to kill Superman because their Moms have the same name, but that general consensus doesn't come about from nowhere. Like I'm not asking for it to spelled out to the audience, but it'd be nice if such a crucial plot point wasn't so obscure that most people don't even consider that it could be anything other than the stupidest option.
TL;DR, I think that Zack had a lot of good ideas, but for one reason or another, he couldn't execute them in the best way. Granted, I haven't seen his version of Justice League yet, so maybe he managed to actually pull it off there, but from where I'm sitting, it just seems like his deconstruction of Batman never got to actually deconstruct anything
Batfleck isn’t Bruce Wayne, he’s Broots Waymb
Pup I’d honestly love to talk to you more officially about Snyder, Sonic, Spider-Man, interpretations of popular characters and stories, and fandom. I dunno if you’d be open to that but I think there’s a lot of value in discussing our respective experiences with those factors in a way available to our respective audiences.
I think the only problem was how we didnt get snyder batmans journey to killing, i get common knowledge of a characters back story and weve seen the robin suit and a bunch of lines from batfleck hinting us how and why he ended up like that but you still lose a lot of understanding by simply jumping the difference that made batfleck the way he was in bvs that was different from other batmen, if he was a fundamental batman then we could simply understand that his backstory is the most common one we know, but this batman is different, so i think that couldve made it all better
My problem with Snyder’s comments on the podcast is that it came off as smug and egotistical, as if he thinks he knows better and that people that disagree just don’t get it. Comments such as Batman being irrelevant if he didn’t kill, talk about not letting our gods change (which is something I am so sick hearing when it comes to DC characters thanks to his movies), and even his belief that Rebel Moon would’ve done better than Barbie. It comes off as pretentious to me.
Are we gonna ignored that Batkeaton and Batbale been killing villains all this time..and ffs.. Batkeaton was smilling while doing it😂
“Batman shouldn’t be in a position where he has to kill someone” so a hero can’t be challenged???
That’s not what they are saying at all…
There’s been several times where Batman has been challenged to kill and finds a way to not have to take a life.
Ever played Arkham Origins? He literally “kills” bane for Joker in order to spare Gordon…and then resuscitates him before Bane could die out permanently.
In Under The Red Hood, Jason Todd literally places Bruce in situation where he must decide to kill Jason in order to stop him from killing Joker. Once again, the scene plays out where Bruce figures out a way to not have to kill.
Both scenes challenge the hero/protagonist, both scenes show him have to figure a way to not compromise his morals.
If your best idea of challenging Batman is to have him kill someone, then frankly you’re not a creative writer.
While I agree deconstructing the characters and putting them in uncomfortable situations is ultimately a good thing, I think a big thing Snyder messed up were character reactions. It's been a long time since I've seen the films so I can't go over every example, but Clark just flying away from the courthouse in BvS was a big no-no in my opinion. He should have helped evacuate the building and done as much damage control as possible, and there could've even been a moment between him and a kid who just lost a parent where he comforts them. Characters should always react in a way that makes sense for them, they shouldn't just change the way they act for the story to go where the writer wants it. Like you said, he doesn't need to be happy. He just needs to be Superman.
I made a video about this topic back in 2022 where I tried to make a case about Batman's No Kill rule being updated into a No Murder rule. More or less, it would make it so that Batman would be allowed to kill in kill-or-be-killed situations where it would be absolutely necessary and all the other options have been exhausted. That would be more in line in keeping Batman as the same character he always was with the same morals we know he always has and not have him kill people as his first chosen, default action.
TL;DR: Kill and Murder are not the same thing and Batman's rule should so be updated from former to the latter.
I still like the idea that to Batman, life is sacred, and he'll do everything in his power to avoid the loss of life. Otherwise that would cheapen a no murder rule per se'. However, I do agree that this would at least make sense of a lot of the quite obvious manslaughter committed by Batman in the movies and the games that writers have desperately tried to rationalize.
It's just very difficult to make a guy who throws ninja stars at peoples' heads and drives a car that makes things explode not a murderer heheh.
after learning about the early years of batman and who he was changed to have the no kill you rule makes me not really caring about it, Bob and Bill didn't want that but yet DC forced it to and we are stuck with it forever.
If Snyder was really hell-bent on making Batman kill least he could've done was not have him use guns. As much as I hate the Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League portrayal at least they were creative with Batman's kills.
What's the music playing in the background? (I know it's from Sonic Frontiers)
Ouranos Island. :)
Snyder’s point was accurate but I still hate how casually he made Batman kill. Without the backstory, Batman’s arch feels more like a response to criticism than something planned out.
That's a completely fair take.
wasnt there gonna be a solo batman movie that couldve explored robins death in the works? the one that ben affleck was going to direct. so yeah we never got to see anything get realized probably because studio wanted their own mcu asap. idk couldve seen his backstory there.
Superman is not a god he is just a person with powers
What exactly is the difference between "You're making Batman irrelevant if he can't kill" and "You're making Batman irrelevant if you can't put him in a situation where he has to kill". By definition, if he is in a situation where he truly, literally HAS TO kill, then he will kill. So it's the same thing.
hypocrisy and some bias will do that to every batman fan most of the time.
@@ConstantineAlexanderSoelaiman honestly bro the fandom it's so toxic that they make a video of how you don't understand their characters and talk about why batman should not kill someone even though in all honesty it's just hypocrite and it's just proving Zack Snyder point about making these characters irrelevant like spiderman
My problem with his batman is how disconnected his batman feels he wanted to make a more adult superhero movie yet batman doesnt feel like batman, but superman still feels like superman same with wonderwoman. Yet with batman i feel like idk who he is
Fair play honestly, I can completely understand that.
Superman tampoco se siente como Superman no me importa que haya matado a zod pero simplemente luego de su muerte se puso las gafas y hizo como que nada paso
For me its not the fact that he crosses that line, its the way it was handled. Its like youre trying to defend zack snyder when the guys just yappin jibberish like he doesnt understand these characters. He set up batman wanting to kill superman real nice in the beginning but then he goes on a rampage with a whole bunch of guns and stuff which isnt like batman even the slightest, he had a good point tho about batman being in that situation but he said it as if he didnt make his batman casually kill hundreds of people like nothing ever happened. And he says it like in the snyderverse the rule is even established in which its not. Just stop trying to defend this guy pup 😔✋
When it comes to the issue of Batman being prepared to kill, my issue can be summed up thus: Batman's no-kill rule I think is meant as more than just a question of whether he has the fortitude *not* to kill; but should he as a vigilante, as a superhero who operates outside the law and *above* it, have the AUTHORITY to kill?
That's the thing that I think is very often missed over why Batman swears off killing, and what separates him from the likes of Ra's al Ghul or Red Hood, he understands how much power he has and, with such life-altering trauma having warped his worldview, he understands just how easy it can be to think himself above reproach and take the law into his own hands. Especially when his rogues gallery includes people who are so without shame, without a hint of contrition, with ZERO restraint that should be on death row if it weren't for the likes of Arkham and Blackgate being just revolving doors for supervillains.
So putting him in a life-or-death situation where he has to make that call, where he is FORCED to assume that kind of authority just to save his own life or even all of Gotham? I'm not opposed to exploring that, and I think Snyder's got plenty good reason to offer the perspective that because Batman might have to cross that line, that doesn't mean he isn't without the fortitude to reflect on that and come back wiser for it.
What bugs me is that I'm not altogether convinced that Snyder's considered the implications of that with regard to not just Bruce's own personal struggles, but how Batman has (for the certainly the past two decades) been declared the unexpected moral bedrock of the Justice League. It's not helped with Snyder's preoccupation with the kind of darker violence embodied in The Dark Knight Returns that it seems to just get in the way of seeing Batman come out of this more brutal mindset.
It's a similar problem to Man of Steel: I think that the prospect of Superman killing Zod is a worthy one. Indeed if I was to argue that Clark should kill ANY one villain in his own rogues gallery, it'd probably be him. But that preoccupation with a darker tone makes it feel flimsy to me. Zod COULD have been a great counter to the kind of altruism and kindness that Clark embodies: a crusader just like him, but dedicated to control and absolute authority who would accept nothing less than death. But with how much Clark is told explicitly *not* to act on his kinder instincts beyond just vague Jesus allegories about what he COULD do, combined with a showdown that may as well be Invincible vs. Omni-Man without the bloodshed... it feels unearned. Tons of potential that just isn't given the time it demands.
I never really got what is so inspiring about this superman since he honestly looks likes he hates being a hero like it's just a job. Like in universe they make him sound like he's something all good but he sure doesn't seem like it
I think part of it is also the branding where Batman is trying to kill off people in prison, that’s a very calculated move to get people killed off
I am a fan of foth DC and SONIC THE HEDGEHOG and I can tell that both fandoms are not too away from each other.
just compare batman`s no kill rule deabate with sonic`s green eyes debate.
Good and fair points, i appreciate this Video.
I kinda like the idea of saying Batman can come back even if he’s crossed the line but I feel like that also ignores part of his reason for his no-kill rule, yes part of it is if he crosses that line, he’ll never come back from it, but the other reason is because he values life, he believes criminals should be given a chance to rehabilitate, he’s even given the offer to freaking Joker to help him with that in the past but not only does he value life, he also doesn’t want anyone to go through the same pain he did from losing his family, not even if it’s a criminal, and that’s where I think the problem comes in, by having Batman kill, no matter if it’s for people who may deserve it, he’s effectively becoming someone else’s Joe Chill, he’s becoming the person in the alley who take away family from a kid or any type of relative, regardless of if he comes back from crossing that line, he still crossed the line, he can’t take that back, he’s still taken a relative from someone which is the exact opposite of what Batman wants and stands for. I’m fine with at least trying to put characters in new situations because god knows characters like Spider-Man in the comics need that, but by having Batman kill, sure having him push past it for Justice League I think does a good job at showing Batman’s resilience or whatever and even serves Superman well by having him be the person who inspired Batman to stop, but if he already killed which we saw like several times in BVS, it doesn’t matter if that side was shown because the other was already disrespected by having Batman no doubt cause at least one person out there even a bit of similar pain he went through when his whole mission, literally his life, revolves around making sure that if he can help it, no one will go through that pain again, and that’s where I think Snyder messed up with Batman, he put him in a new situation to keep him relevant, he showed his action perfectly, he showed his resilience well, but he also, regardless of if it was for one movie to see him push past it, made him become everything he swore to fight against and cause what he swore would never happen again
It's pretty insane to me how many videos I've seen about this topic just because Snyder went on a podcast to chat, but I'm happy there's at least one rational video that isn't just saying the same stuff we've heard for nearly a decade. With how much people love to hate on the DCEU and Snyder, they also just can't let go of it.
i guess they just care about making money off of it
I agree with this video. I don’t agree that Zach Snyder’s execution of his vision was flawless, but I do love it irregardless. He challenged the status quo, but it just wasn’t able to get fully realized. Just goes to show that people don’t really want change when it comes to stuff like this, they simply want more of the same.
the thing is at this point we know it takes something WAAAAAY more extreme than what Snyder hat come up with to get him to KILL, he's just been through crazier shit and kept it together which makes snyder's batman hard to take serious and why people consider it better as an elseworld story🤷♂
The only thing I am going to say is that I love this fucking movie.
lol. me too
level headed people dislike Zack Snyder. Quit backing the wrong horse Pup.
I think there’s legitimate and unreasonable criticisms with this take. To me in my opinion what he said really tells me that certain stories are creatively risky and sometimes people might take it the wrong way or enjoy it, but it’s not necessarily objectively true in that statement. Sometimes you don’t have to take creatively risky choices for a good story and vice versa. You can’t really control what people are gonna think of your work. That’s the nature of the beast. All I can say is my own opinions on the matter, tbf I’m kinda tired of seeing Zack Snyder on the internet and I can take him or leave him when it comes to his movies. There’s probably only two movies I liked from him and the rest were either meh or bad. That’s just my take on it. I can forgive the killing in his movies but when you start making Batman say things like “The world only makes sense when you force it to” it starts to lose the core meaning of the character and he starts not becoming that character anymore. You make him a killer but then you border on the line of making him a villain with that line. I guess Harvey Dent was right, you either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.
Snyder the goat. And the real DC fans on twitter are just trying to make him look bad
I do find it funny how these folks were also just cool with Michael Keaton going onto become the main DCEU Batman during the Hamada regime when he's literally a killer just cuz.
@@ChannelPup because Keaton was the nostalgia hit and one the fans were eager to come back and wash away the Snyder garbage you like lol
@@JoeChilltonso yall are hypocrites like batman? Cool
@@ChannelPupnot sure which DC fans you interact with cause most DC fans I saw on Twitter agreed that Keaton was a stupid desperate decision by WB to score nostalgia points by making him the main Batman after Affleck
Hey, could you review the Batman Who Laughs's stories ?
I mean in Arkham origins batman is put in a situation by joker where he has to kill bane, he kills Bane and tricks joker and re-starts Bane's heart again
Snyder only understoods the character in the sense that he doesn’t want his character to be the comic book one and we just have to accept that. He’s talking out of his ass. It doesn’t matter anymore. His Batman “killing” doesn’t mean anything in his movies. He never used it to say anything. What changed Batman was Superman, that’s it. I actually really like Snyder’s trilogy but its characters are off. And Joe Rogan understands everything even less than Snyder 😂
I find it funny that fans will love Keaton's Batman even though he also kills but "everyone loses their minds" when Batfleck kills.
So basically we need to realize that even if the execution of his universe wasn’t great, we should at least give respect to Zack Snyder on the story he was trying to tell (which was deconstructing these characters in a way that questions and challenges the core character’s morals/views on the world).
Channel Pup is cooking absolutely nothing with this one. I dont mind stories that take risks. But this was a 30 minute yap, because you LIKE Snyder. Chill. BvS is servicable at best, given you like Snyder's direction. But he doesnt get these characters and its not because he mad Batman kill. Using IGN as a source for a bad faith take? I mean.....yea.....its IGN. Stop using the word "Gaslighting". It Doesnt mean what you think it means pup.
People using their term gaslighting for things like this really annoys me, I think a lot people think it just means lying.
Tbf, I don't think anyone in Hollywood gets Batman, and neither will anyone that takes over the writing for the character in the future. Pattison's Batman was waaay more "unBatman" than even Batfleck's based off the look alone. The comics and the DCAU are still the goats.
His Snyder video’s always put a bad taste in my mouth
Bro saw that someone had a different opinion than him on a movie and took that personally. YOU chill…
Lol, just proving him right. You people are nuts.
Zack totally doesn't understand these characters, he's petty, and immature
I respect Zack for defending his version of Batman and not bending the knee for mentally ill batman fans
Here's what made me realize Zack knew Bruce Wayne
The first scene we see Bruce in he's running in the smoke, saves a little girl with no regards to himself and asks her where her mother is and she points up to the building zod destroyed with his heat vision and procceded to hug her
That's Batman to a T , he's dark and brooding but he isn't gonna beat down a criminal and then not go comfort that same criminal's victims
That's something I admired about Matt Reeves' , Zack Snyder's and Christopher Nolan's Batmans
And the Arkham games and batman cartoons get that spot on too
Rip Kevin Conroy
Totally disagree with the notion of not having batfleck kill goons and having Superman be the first kill. It doesn't work in the context of the movie and it weakens afflecks batmans position. If we are to believe supermans life is truly in danger, we need to show batman crossing that line and how he's not afraid to kill now. It doesn't make any sense to have batman not kill anyone throughout the whole movie because now we have no reason to believe he'll magically just go through it for Superman.
I mean, I wouldn't say there's anything magical about that decision. Superman being Batman's first kill would make sense in that context because Superman isn't human in Batman's eyes at that stage.
Maybe tackle a more violent Batman that still doesn't cross that line, like... The Dark Knight Returns?
Zack Snyder could’ve made a Justice League Flashpoint Paradox live action movie since he wants to make Batman a killer, a Flashpoint Batman (Thomas Wayne not Bruce Wayne).
Love this video, hope for moore
Also mfs be complaining about Batfleck killing people ( which he later stopped and had kind of a redemption arc ) but no one talks about how Michael Keaton always killed everyone he fought and didnt even care
People have their nostalgia glasses on too tight.
1:42 I didn't like his take on either character. His Man of Steel felt like a Batman movie, and his Batman felt like a burnout. I saw his movies and was disappointed by them. That's it. I only have a problem with fans who keep spitting misinformation about Zack. That's it. I moved on from his dumb ideas as he's stuck in the mindset of a 14 year old when it comes to making movies anymore.
Snyder must Finnish just 3 more movies and Finnish the Universe
I wonder if trying to redeem Batman after he killed would've been better if he took on a successor (like the guy from Batman Beyond) who he could teach not to go down the same path as him.
But he wasn't given the opportunity to do so
Certainly an interesting route. Not dissimilar to Batman Beyond where Batman almost shot someone. Could that story still go ahead if Bruce actually went through with it? Food for thought.
@@ChannelPup if they ever get around to making a Batman beyond movie, they're going to have to come up with a much stronger reason for Batman retiring other than almost killing somebody. Batman is killed multiple people several times in previous movies, so it really isn't that much of a shock anymore. Some other route must be taken.
@@theunknowncommenter725 how bout…ya know…literally what they do the show?
Bruce has a heart attack one day as Batman and is forced to break his rule and use a gun to defend himself. He then decides to give up being Batman. Plus the combination of old age. It’s that simple.
Always will be my favorite batman
This interview proves he was the wrong person to do these characters . He’s a 50 year old edgelord who cares more about being edgy than making good movies .
At the end of the day, its a movie.
Second time listening to this video, and I think had we gotten the solo Batman movie before BVS showing him getting that dark. Would’ve help in the long wrong. I’m not the biggest fan of the Snyder verse but I get why some people are.
I do like Snyder as a action director but he has a habit of muddying his movie's themes because he also wants to do cool s*hit.
Are Batman and Watchmen's Rorschach sad deconstructions or badass antiheroes? Trying to do both is hard and can make the movie annoying and confusing.
He's right after all iven if you like it or not,why no One question this in other movies or in the some of the comics... hipocrisy at his best...
Ill never understand the people who hate Batfleck because he kills love Keaton shoving dynamite down peoples pants. Hypocrisy, look it up
Nostalgia rosed colored glasses
@@CharlesChristinaWH exactly man
Yeah I agree that Storytelling and Changing the Narrative has been done before for Decades especially in Comics, hell Batman had Guns and Killed in the Past until they changed it, everything can Evolve into something New, however i can’t understand Zack’s Vision that it makes me wonder if he doesn’t understand Batman, It’s not like I’m saying Snyder Fans are Suckers who thinks Zach is the Second Coming of Jesus, but I’m just saying that his Direction and Tone that doesn’t fit DC, BVS is one of my least favorite Movies for a lot of reasons but 2 of them I will talk about Now is that the Snyderverse is the biggest reason why the Popularity of Injustice went too far as Zach confirmed that his Vision was inspired by the Game and the Other Side of this is that while I believe him being a Comic Fan at heart and having vision, his execution of Storytelling is a Awful Messthat he forgot the most important thing about Batman is his Humanity and don’t get me started on what he did to the First Robin and the disgusting idea of a Batman and Lois Lane Romance, seriously Screw BVS and the Snyderverse.
You started your comment with "Yeah I agree" and then said the complete opposite of what the video says. A video that funnily enough, talks about listening comprehension...
@ChannelPup I think he's stupid
You know nobody cares about your opinion dude?
@@ChannelPupTypical "dC fAn". Their hate for Snyder is bigger than love for DC
@@theta38 I myself am a very big fan of DC and Snyder is one of my favorite directors of all time
There is absolutely nothing wrong with batman killing someone because if its a problem for batman to kill someone then superman should be the last person would ever kill, hell the whole reason bruce became batman is because of vengeance. Holy hell these crazy people hate Snyder more than they hate the mustache man himself back in world war 2
Batman’s no kill rule is what makes him interesting. Joker kills anyone he can and Batman saves anyone he can. Bruce being disgusted by guns and values life because of witnessing his parent’s murder.
And you are not even a superhero if you constantly murder people.
@@petermj1098 a no kill rule does not make him interesting at all. He's just as bad as the joker when he cripples people and projects his delusional morals onto others. This is part of the reason why I care about the movie versions and especially Zack's take because it's refreshing. Batman isn't even a superhero but a cave dwelling dude who is self righteous
@@bossmine3997 The Joker and Batman are literally the opposite of each other. Batman is depression and Joker is mania. They relate to one another mentally. Batman wants to help the Joker and Joker wants to ruin him because they know they have similar traumas that changed them to become who they are.
Like Joker said in the dark knight Batman is an immovable object and he is an unstoppable force.
Batman is a boogeyman for criminals. The boogeyman scares children the same way Batman scares criminals. In the dark knight The Joker exposes how the mob is afraid to go out at night cause of Batman. And in the Batman we literally see criminals scared of the Dark because of Batman even if he’s not there. Batman psychologically scares criminals away and doesn’t need them to kill them to do it.
@@petermj1098 joker and batman are basically the same but the difference is that batman doesn't kill but even that's not true
@@bossmine3997 No Joker had a bad day and Joker decided to devote his life make bad days for other people. Batman had a bad and decided to devote his life to make good days for other people.
Of Course “Batman DOES NOT KILL!”
He’s a billionaire Democrat
Even though he's the embodiment of american capitalism? Ok bud😂😂
Hello channel pup
If I help you hit 100k, would you help me overcome my shyness with a Hearted comment? ❤️👀
I can vouch that overcoming shyness is a pain in the butt, so by all means.
22:10 Yea but who are you catering to then😂
Analytics
28:57 fin.
if the streak no kill rule is what prominent about the nolan batman, and nolan produce man of steel and the DCEU or snyderverse was meant as a continuation to the dark knight trilogy than zack snyder argument really make no sense, his so full of shit, his like the ryan johnson of DC
Batman only kills NPC henchmen and the occasional supervillain. Not civilians and not the innocent. And most of the time it's just him being sloppy and careless. Just like he was in the Golden Age. Zack Snyder's Batman was no different than the previous versions on film.
What a lot of people fail to realize is that BvS showed Batman killing as a negative thing and that he was slowly becoming the thing he was trying to fight. He became a better person again after a Superman self-sacrifice.
Post-apocalyptic future where everything is trying to kill him. He's justified and using guns and killing everything around him.
Excellent video like always channel pup.
You hit the nail on the head bravo 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾
Batman doesn't kill civilians and innocent ppl? Why is this worth highlighting. Was this ever in question?
At the end of the movie he was about to brand lex. He only changes his mind coz lex said he's insane.
@@WL1264 no it was just to intimidate him you really think he believed he was insane
@@elishawilson5342 he was about to brand him
@thatmovienitpicker8070 they did it to themselves too as they shot at him first he fired back that's self defense not murder
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?
Batman should have never used guns period in these movies and I’m glad Zach is gone
Ironically, Batman did use guns in very early issues.
@@ChristianFrates1997 and they got rid of those
Is there room to tell a story where Batman is caught off guard by a situation where he has to kill someone, and then does, and we see what he becomes? Absolutely. Maybe that should happen closer to a mainstream canon story of some kind. But Batman vs Superman is not really that story.
Who does Batman kill? Nameless goons. Some of them are just guarding kyrptonite that he needs to kill Superman with. Does it matter in-story? No. They just breeze right past it. In the movie, if we found out that Batman always killed people, it would barely change anything about the story. So, Batman is back to not killing after Superman dies. Great. How different is that from the idea that Batman just stops killing forever to be more like the kind of symbol that Superman was? Not very.
Who is later confirmed to still be alive in the Snyderverse? The Joker. The absolute #1 person Batman would want to find and kill. So, we have to ask why. Why, with all the mercs that Batman thoughtlessly kills, is Joker still alive? How about gang leaders in Gotham? Why aren't they dead? Why does Batman even bother branding criminals instead of just leaving their bodies for the cops?
Even in the canon comics, Batman has made a gun specifically to kill Darkseid. And that was, rightfully, a big deal. His decision to kill Superman should have been an exception to his rule. Sure, having him torture people after Robin's death was a good way to show how far he'd fallen. But the movie made it so that it barely has any reason for us to believe that Batman ever had a no-killing rule.
If a story had Batman kill someone, and then wrestle with whether or not he can still be Batman at all, that would be a story worth exploring. But Batfleck killing just feels like him doing what all the other Snyderverse heroes would be doing going forward. "Our superheroes kill, because that's gritty realism. Don't worry about why Joker or any other rogues are still alive."
Yes, it matters that Batman kills goons. We don't even know if they've ever done anything worse than purse-snatching prior to this.
Meh if u make him kill u do u but know he doesn’t kill cuz someone killed his parents and despite him bein put in that situation he’ll never fold he stands on business everytime but how u gonna make the Robin that joker killed the first Robin💀 that’s why the whole DCEU was a flop n his Justice league was only begged for cuz the justice league that was already out were worse then the films that were out, bro messed w too much cannon it’s alright breh ima chalk that weird universe to earth 304🤣🤣🤣
Batman killing someone is not a problem. Batman is basically a religion at this point. Last time I checked Batman was human not a God. Batman can and has killed before, people need to grow up.
Also Spider-man has nearly killed people and they deserved it. Venom screwed with his family just like Kingpin. They fucked around and found. Spider-man doesn't even have a "no kill" rule he just generally doesn't kill.
Andrew's Spider-Man never even attempted murder and everyone hates his movies and his Spider-man.
Spider-Man 3 Sandamn is a perfect example why Superheroes need to be forgiving and merciful attitude towards criminals.
@@petermj1098 You mean the movie that people hate? Not every "superhero" needs to be merciful to every villain or criminal. Some people need to go, I don't understand why that's a problem. There are few exceptions to make like the Joker.
@@IamQuietKrys Every human being is broken and evil. It is not one or the other it is both. The Joker is both. Batman relates to the Joker’s trauma. Batman has depression and Joker has mania. Depression and mania go hand to hand.
@@petermj1098 Wtf does that even mean? I have depression and I can't relate to either characters. Not every human is broken and evil, now you're just trippin.
You kidding right? Batman has a no kill rule that he has applied since day freaking 1. His parents died during a robbery he himself witnessed, the last thing he would do is take another life.
At least some1 has a brain !
So happy Zack is gone, he didn’t understand any of his characters. In James we trust
Bro yall are acting like pup is wrong about this take. Its based as hell. Because this is the most morally bamkrupt batman, this is the scariest batman in live action, this is the most poweful batman in live action. Hes not our wanted image but appreciate we even got a truly griddy version of batman. Legi this batman to me is every person on this planet that would do the same thing if they were in his sjoes. Especially if you have the ability to do so. This batman is kill or be killed. And its okay for this batman to be a thing.
What you guys dont recognize is that this batman suffers from writing issues. Not because this variant is an issue. Yes he killed mercilessly but again if it was in a more sever scenario, it would have been peak "Dark batman"
Snyder should have never made the most morally bankrupt, scariest Batman to begin with. No, the most powerful Batman is the one who stands by his ethics. Also, Batman's not supposed to be like the rest of us. He's supposed to be one of the pillar of DC, an example for people to strive for in terms of morality. No, it's not alright for Batman to be this thing, because that's just The Punisher in a silly costume.
No, the variant is an issue as much as the writing is an issue. What severe scenario? Superman beat the bad guys a year before, and now he just murders goons without even caring if they've actually done anything to deserve it. "Dark Batman" shouldn't be a thing, and there is no peak, because Dark Batman is not peak Batman.
Batman killed before Martha, still killed after Martha, he’s a born killer, never stopped killing in that universe. He had absolute zero development, nothing but a murderer. His parents would’ve been ashamed of him.
NPC henchmen, and parademons are not people.
@@theunknowncommenter725The murder of his parents made him value life more. Batman is a boogeyman for criminals. Batman scares criminals the same way the boogeyman scares children. He psychologically scares them from doing crimes.
The Batman movie did a great job showing how criminals are scared of the dark even if Batman isn’t there.
@@petermj1098you’re applying knowledge from another iteration of a character (The Batman 2022) to justify a completely separate take.
Whatever the 2022 shows about Batman is not applicable to the Snyder version because they aren’t the same Batman.
@@wesstewart2677 People who say Snyder follows The Dark Knight Returns yet ignore the fact Dark Knight returns Batman’s doesn’t kill and outright breaks a gun. Snyder thinks Batman holding a gun when doing the Batman Superman Wonder Woman trinity shot is some reason a good idea.
Snyder is style over substance. He only likes the aesthetic but doesn’t actually get the essence of the characters.
You're no @hitop
That's right, I'm Channel Pup.
Batman is the worst superhero ever. He's soft on crime and his no-killing rule has ironically caused more deaths. The villains he defeats can plead insanity, go to Arkham and breakout because Arkham has the worst security to keep doing what they were doing. He even tried to save the Joker even when his death wouldn't have been his fault. He puts his morals above the lives of innocents, which makes him selfish. Gotham would actually be better off without Batman. He contributes to the cycle of deaths and he's no better than Gotham's corrupt law. And he's also the most useless "hero" in the Justice League.
My main problem is Zach Snyder overrall did not understand the character or his lore