Movies The Batman (04 March 2022) - Information Thread, update: deleted Arkham Asylum scene released

[johnny]

yeah why would the police work with somebody who has killed another person. uhhhh, okay. 

[johnny]

i’m not saying he needs to kill every person he comes across but to me it seems ridiculous that there is a rule that he cannot kill 

 

if that’s what the people making the movie want to do, fine. if they want him to kill people, also fine. 

[Keyser_Soze]

2 minutes ago, johnny said:

yeah why would the police work with somebody who has killed another person. uhhhh, okay. 

 

If anything he should STOP working with the police

 

[skillzdadirecta]

2 minutes ago, johnny said:

i’m not saying he needs to kill every person he comes across but to me it seems ridiculous that there is a rule that he cannot kill 

 

if that’s what the people making the movie want to do, fine. if they want him to kill people, also fine. 

I mean he's killed people in pretty much every movie he's been in... I don't think you'll be disappointed with this one.

[Brick]

1 hour ago, johnny said:

why can’t batman kill people? i don’t get why people care so much about it. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Fizzzzle]

I think it's a dumb, arbitrary narrative rule that limits storytelling. How about Batman before he has adopted that rule? How about Batman who has become so scarred and broken that he doesn't care anymore? Those are all interesting narrative possibilities that get ignored because "bAtMaN dOeS nOt KiLl."

[skillzdadirecta]

6 minutes ago, Fizzzzle said:

I think it's a dumb, arbitrary narrative rule that limits storytelling. How about Batman before he has adopted that rule? How about Batman who has become so scarred and broken that he doesn't care anymore? Those are all interesting narrative possibilities that get ignored because "bAtMaN dOeS nOt KiLl."

It's not arbitrary... it's fundamental to his character.  Just like him refusing to use guns. You make Batman a killer then he's just The Punisher. What storytelling possibilities are being limited by him not being a killer? How does it make him a better character? How would his character even work if he's a killer? I'm legit curious.

[Brick]

45 minutes ago, Fizzzzle said:

I think it's a dumb, arbitrary narrative rule that limits storytelling. How about Batman before he has adopted that rule? How about Batman who has become so scarred and broken that he doesn't care anymore? Those are all interesting narrative possibilities that get ignored because "bAtMaN dOeS nOt KiLl."

 

Zack Snyder attempted that with Batman V Superman and it sucked ass. 

[Kamusha]

3 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

There were plenty of Terminator toys and video games back in the '90s.

 

The early 90's was a different time - that doesn't really happen today. LEGO doesn't make any sets based on R rated movies, for example.

[Keyser_Soze]

8 minutes ago, Komusha said:

 

The early 90's was a different time - that doesn't really happen today. LEGO doesn't make any sets based on R rated movies, for example.

 

Even with a rated R Batman. It's Batman. They'll make toys of him.

[Kamusha]

2 hours ago, silentbob said:

 

I said it limits the potential for toys and merchandise. Where are the LEGO Deadpool sets?

[Kamusha]

1 minute ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

Even with a rated R Batman. It's Batman. They'll make toys of him.

 

WB wants that LEGO money tho

 

I'm not say they wouldn't make toys at all, but there would be less of them.

[johnny]

1 hour ago, Brick said:

 

Zack Snyder attempted that with Batman V Superman and it sucked ass. 

it sucked because zack snyder made it. not because batman was like that. 

[skillzdadirecta]

20 minutes ago, johnny said:

it sucked because zack snyder made it. not because batman was like that. 

Read Frank Miller's All Star Batman who is pretty much what you seem to be looking for

 

It SUCKED. Zack Snyder had nothing to do with that one.

[Fizzzzle]

1 hour ago, Brick said:

 

Zack Snyder attempted that with Batman V Superman and it sucked ass. 

It could have been done so much better, though. That's what I*wanted* from that version of Batman. A twisted, bitter version of Batman that had all but given up on humanity. It's only supes, ironically an alien, that reminds Bruce Wayne why he's doing any of this to begin with. There was a lot of promise to that that never got delivered.

 

*That* is the Batman I want. The Batman that we've had has been done so many times that I can't possibly get excited for it anymore.

 

Batman's principle of never killing is a fucking boring narrative device if you never explore *why* it is that way. Give him a reason why he never kills. Otherwise it's fucking boring.

 

[Brick]

Did you watch the videos I posted? 

[Fizzzzle]

22 minutes ago, Brick said:

Did you watch the videos I posted? 

I did. It's all comic book nerd shit. I have never once read a Batman comic book in my life, and I probably never will. Saying "Batman never kills" in the context of a movie is fucking stupid if you never explore *why* he is that way. His initial motivation as a character is vengeance. He really is nothing more than a rich Punisher. Give Batman in the movies a REASON why he doesn't kill that is actually explored, otherwise it's just fan service for comic nerds.

[Keyser_Soze]

1 hour ago, Komusha said:

 

I said it limits the potential for toys and merchandise. Where are the LEGO Deadpool sets?

 

Not Lego but Hasbro makes Deadpool action figures

 

[Brick]

It was explored in Batman Begins. Bruce was going to murder Joe Chill before Falcone's woman beat him to the punch. Afterwards he talked to Rachel and she set him straight, and he realized the horror of what he almost did. 

 

Sure the idea of a Batman that snaps and loses everything and he starts killing criminals could be a good story, maybe as a one off, "what if"  kind of deal, but not when they're trying to start a new series. Take like the Knightmare sequence from BvS, but the whole story (and good), and sure maybe something like that could work where's there's been a huge catastrophe, there is no law and justice anymore, Batman decides it's not worth bothering to be careful not to kill anyone, and yeah it could maybe be a compelling and chilling tale even. Criminals new to the scene hear about the Batman lurking around, and they say, "it's no big deal, he doesn't kill anyone", but the other criminals who have been around longer are scared shitless, "you haven't heard" and tell how he does kill now,  Gordon's gone, there's no one to stop him, and Batman bursts in and unleashes his full might, no holding back, using all his skills and gadgets to brutalize them all, showing a stark contrast to what he's like when he is being careful not to kill anyone, and what he is capable of when he doesn't hold anything back. 

 

Here's the thing though, Fiz, you said those videos were just comic book nerd shit, but these movies are adaptations of that comic book nerd shit, so of course he's going to need to be a faithful adaptation, otherwise he's a different character. It's why you wouldn't just give him swords because they're cool, so whatever. Batman doesn't use swords as part of his arsenal of gadgets. It's like if you made Harry Potter a popular jock, who's a bully, but a ladies man,  and a sick guitarist who actually does want to dabble a bit with the dark arts...it's not his character. 

 

If you need to explain why he doesn't kill, then I'd say you'd also need to explain why he does kill, and is going against his established character from the source material. Maybe he finally kills The Joker because he was going to do something so unbelievably heinous that Batman had no other choice, leading to Gordon now having to hunt him down for breaking their trust. In one of the books Gordon says how if Batman ever did kill anyone, he would use every resource available to bring him in. Gordon is after all the one truly good cop. If Batman killed, he'd break their agreement, and would just be another law breaking vigilante needing to be caught. 

[Kamusha]

2 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

Not Lego but Hasbro makes Deadpool action figures

 

Right. But the Marvel Legends line is aimed more for adult collectors. And R movies do have toys, but its more aimed towards adults. So yes, a R rated Batman movie would have toys, which I have previously acknowledged, but not to the same extent that a PG-13 movie would have. I know that LEGO at least won’t make sets for R rated movies, and I’m not sure if other toy manufacturers have a similar policy but I wouldn’t be surprised if this were the case.

 

When a studio makes a movie this expensive they want as many open revenue steams as possible.

[Keyser_Soze]

15 minutes ago, Komusha said:

I know that LEGO at least won’t make sets for R rated movies

 

They won't make legos for companies with a Cosby room either.

[skillzdadirecta]

7 hours ago, Fizzzzle said:

I did. It's all comic book nerd shit. I have never once read a Batman comic book in my life, and I probably never will. Saying "Batman never kills" in the context of a movie is fucking stupid if you never explore *why* he is that way. His initial motivation as a character is vengeance. He really is nothing more than a rich Punisher. Give Batman in the movies a REASON why he doesn't kill that is actually explored, otherwise it's just fan service for comic nerds.

Batman isn't about vengeance.  He's about JUSTICE.  Huge difference.  Punisher is about vengeance.  @Brick explained it far better than I ever could but making him a wanton killer like the Punisher changes the character far beyond "comic nerd shit " (which is extremely ironic given we're talking about a comic book character in the first place).

Once Batman starts to wantonly kill, then he's a different character all together.  If you want "crazy Batman who kills and uses guns" you're in luck because Moon Knight is coming out soon and that's basically who he is. There are two things that define Batman as a character, hr doesn't kill and he doesn't use guns. Both have been explored outside of comic books.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

And Moon Knight/Marc Spector is batshit insane

 

[Kal-El814]

There are SO MANY comics characters and stories that feature bitter, broken heroes who kill their opponents. Literally so many. It’s not that there’s nothing to say about a Batman that kills a bunch of people, it’s not that it’s impossible to tell an interesting story about Batman who kills, it’s just that it has been and continues to get done so, so much.

 

Also, I’m far from puritanical or precious about heroes or what kids consume, but Batman is so wildly popular with children that I think it’s adjacent to irresponsible to make Batman grimdark to the point where he’s going around killing people.

 

7 hours ago, Fizzzzle said:

I did. It's all comic book nerd shit. I have never once read a Batman comic book in my life, and I probably never will. Saying "Batman never kills" in the context of a movie is fucking stupid if you never explore *why* he is that way. His initial motivation as a character is vengeance. He really is nothing more than a rich Punisher. Give Batman in the movies a REASON why he doesn't kill that is actually explored, otherwise it's just fan service for comic nerds.

 

Batman is specifically NOT about vengeance, which is why he DOESN’T go around killing people.

[skillzdadirecta]

6 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

And Moon Knight/Marc Spector is batshit insane

I'm wondering how far they'll lean into that in his series... given that it's on Disney Plus, I'm guessing not much?

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

(Even though in the first trailer for the new film, Batman's response to a thug who asks him "Who the hell are you supposed to be?" is "I'm vengeance" while he proceeds to punch a dude's face into an unrecognizable bloody pulp)

[Kal-El814]

19 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

(Even though in the first trailer for the new film, Batman's response to a thug who asks him "Who the hell are you supposed to be?" is "I'm vengeance" while he proceeds to punch a dude's face into an unrecognizable bloody pulp)

 

Obviously within the comics, R Patt’s Batman is clearly interested in eye shadow and vengeance.

[Chris-]

I’m kind of surprised some of you are so down on this, it feels completely different from a tonal perspective (even if it borrows a lot of Nolan’s cinematography). A noir inspired Batman? Sign me the fuck up. 

[skillzdadirecta]

Sure Feels Like 'The Batman's Just Redoing 'Dark Knight Rises'

WWW.CRACKED.COM

---

In Hollywood’s defense, only like four Batman stories were created during the … 83 years of the character’s existence.

Lol!

[Jason]

If Batman kills the bad guys, then who will pray to him? 

[SuperSpreader]

Batman is supposed to have some of the best judgement and understand that killing and guns are bad. The new movie versions are Alt Right rich guy fantasy. He's supposed to be a limo liberal who does shit in the dark. I always thought he could see the bigger picture where Superman who can literally see the whole world and hear it at the same time, can't. 

[Guest]

Tell an interesting story and I legitimately could not care less about whether Batman adheres to any historical aspects of his character. There are plenty of different takes on the character, find one you like  

 

This flick has me excited because Matt Reeves may understand big budget filmmaking with genuine emotion better than anybody in the industry today. Maybe he misses the mark here, but at this point I would take a well intentioned miss from somebody like Reeves or Villeneuve over boring makes from the Marvel factory.

[johnny]

2 hours ago, sblfilms said:

Tell an interesting story and I legitimately could not care less about whether Batman adheres to any historical aspects of his character. There are plenty of different takes on the character, find one you like  

 

This flick has me excited because Matt Reeves may understand big budget filmmaking with genuine emotion better than anybody in the industry today. Maybe he misses the mark here, but at this point I would take a well intentioned miss from somebody like Reeves or Villeneuve over boring makes from the Marvel factory.

this. and most of the people who go and see this will not have read a single comic or even seen the cartoon. people on the internet are the only ones who would care if batman killed somebody. 

[johnny]

7 hours ago, Kal-El814 said:

 

Also, I’m far from puritanical or precious about heroes or what kids consume, but Batman is so wildly popular with children that I think it’s adjacent to irresponsible to make Batman grimdark to the point where he’s going around killing people.

 

 

i feel like one half of this discussion is thinking we are saying he is going to be some version of batman going around killing everybody he fights. what if a couple people get killed in the movie by him because they’re fucking fighting? the kiddos will be fine. i’m not saying show batman beat their face in with a baseball bat. 

[Kal-El814]

13 hours ago, johnny said:

i feel like one half of this discussion is thinking we are saying he is going to be some version of batman going around killing everybody he fights. what if a couple people get killed in the movie by him because they’re fucking fighting? the kiddos will be fine. i’m not saying show batman beat their face in with a baseball bat. 

 

Batman goes out of his way to make sure this doesn't happen in the comics, sometimes to pretty extreme lengths. Yes it's a contrivance, he's friends with people who can think / move much faster than the speed of light, who wear magical jewelry that lets them do whatever they want, both of whom regularly get their asses beat.

 

Again, I'm not saying it's impossible to tell a good story about Batman where he kills people, to a story about Spider-Man where he doesn't think, "with great power comes great responsibility," and so on. I just personally prefer movies about characters to have a focus on what makes them unique in the first place.