Renny The Spaceman Posted October 25 Posted October 25 I've said this before but the big issue with a superhero who kills is 9 times out of 10 it makes them seem way more incompetent because the worst offenders they always non-lethaly detain but the generic goons get massacred. Like in what world does thief #3 die but Batman doesn't snap the Joker!s neck and free us all from further Leto performances? I wonder if subconsciously that's the issue, when your villains are one and dones like in the pre-DCEU films, sure have Batman kill them, but in a case where you're trying to do an endless cinematic universe where these villains stick around forever it makes the audience more aware of the artificiality of the world because, like when you do tons of fake out deaths it conditions the audience to know there's no stakes, when we know a billion sequels are planned and these characters are too profitable to go it makes us more aware the drama is forced. Making the no kill rule so prominent was to keep around villains but it winds up masking that because it's done by introducing unique drama. Also it unintentionally validates the "Batman just beats up poor people" schtick because all the prominent, well off mob boss villains get sent to Arkham but the goons get their brains splattered against the wall. So in short Batfleck should have killed more people Quote
BrickBob Studpants Posted October 25 Posted October 25 20 minutes ago, Renny The Spaceman said: So in short Batfleck should have killed more people I have no issue with villains getting killed off, in fact I usually prefer it! I would’ve loved for Discount Riddler to die in BvS Keeping a villain alive just so they can kill innocents again in the next instalment always irks me, unless there’s an overarching story and the villain eventually gets their just desserts in the final part. Quote
Mandalorianknight Posted October 25 Posted October 25 (edited) 3 hours ago, BrickBob Studpants said: Him not using guns is far more vital than him not killing. That's insane to me (Guns are the weapon used, killing people is the, you know, murdery part. Batman doesn't have issues with Jason because he uses guns, he has issues with jason because he kills people with those guns), but it's once again not something BvS batman specifically is guilty of, which kind of proves my point that it's hypocritical for people to hyperfocus on the one who the movie actively shows us is in the wrong. 1989 batman sends his batmobile to shoot up a factory- with guns, I might add- and kills a room full of henchmen, there's no problem there? Edited October 25 by Mandalorianknight Quote
psqidexslizer Posted October 25 Posted October 25 4 hours ago, Renny The Spaceman said: I've said this before but the big issue with a superhero who kills is 9 times out of 10 it makes them seem way more incompetent because the worst offenders they always non-lethaly detain but the generic goons get massacred. Like in what world does thief #3 die but Batman doesn't snap the Joker!s neck and free us all from further Leto performances? I wonder if subconsciously that's the issue, when your villains are one and dones like in the pre-DCEU films, sure have Batman kill them, but in a case where you're trying to do an endless cinematic universe where these villains stick around forever it makes the audience more aware of the artificiality of the world because, like when you do tons of fake out deaths it conditions the audience to know there's no stakes, when we know a billion sequels are planned and these characters are too profitable to go it makes us more aware the drama is forced. Making the no kill rule so prominent was to keep around villains but it winds up masking that because it's done by introducing unique drama. Also it unintentionally validates the "Batman just beats up poor people" schtick because all the prominent, well off mob boss villains get sent to Arkham but the goons get their brains splattered against the wall. So in short Batfleck should have killed more people Yeah, Joker still being alive while Batman is perfectly fine with bulldozing criminals never made sense to me. Especially a Joker who has brutally murdered Robin. He should have been the first one to die (and given how much TDKR inspired this time, I’m surprised he wasn’t). Quote
Dolor Posted October 25 Posted October 25 Batman did not use fire weapons in Batman v Superman. What is the problem here? Batman does not use guns because of his parents. Quote
BrickBob Studpants Posted October 25 Posted October 25 22 minutes ago, Dolor said: Batman did not use fire weapons in Batman v Superman. What is the problem here? Batman does not use guns because of his parents. What’s this then? A funnily shaped batarang? I get it, the Knightmare scene showcases the worst-possible future where Soup turns evilllllll and they may specifically have depicted Man using guns to show how bad things have gotten, but still. I have two issues with that: 1) While Snyder clearly likes symbolism, he probably just thought it looked cool and that’s it 2) How do guns help in this situation? Unless he has kryptonite bullets, they’re useless anyway Quote
Coryo Posted October 25 Posted October 25 On 10/25/2025 at 3:13 AM, psqidexslizer said: 4) Probably a psychopath. This group includes Punisher, Hulk, and Wolverine. These guys have filled entire graveyards. Hulk doesn't necessarily belong in the same category as Punisher or Wolverine, it isn't that common for him to purposely commit murder when he's in control. Quote
psqidexslizer Posted October 25 Posted October 25 24 minutes ago, Coryo said: Hulk doesn't necessarily belong in the same category as Punisher or Wolverine, it isn't that common for him to purposely commit murder when he's in control. I don’t know that “he only kills people when he gets really angry” is the argument you think it is. Quote
Coryo Posted October 26 Posted October 26 1 hour ago, psqidexslizer said: I don’t know that “he only kills people when he gets really angry” is the argument you think it is. This is probably a retcon meant to absolve him of any implied deaths due to collateral damage, but World War Hulk does establish that part of his subconscious does make sure to avoid casualties. Spoiler The line "as long as your brain hasn't been tampered with" is meant to get around the instances of mind control or induced hallucinations, which were at play in most of his deadlier rampages. Although this rule probably wasn't the case in the earlier MCU or some other adaptations. Quote
Mandalorianknight Posted October 26 Posted October 26 (edited) 3 hours ago, psqidexslizer said: Yeah, Joker still being alive while Batman is perfectly fine with bulldozing criminals never made sense to me. Especially a Joker who has brutally murdered Robin. He should have been the first one to die (and given how much TDKR inspired this time, I’m surprised he wasn’t). Obviously we never got to actually see this, but the theory I'd heard for awhile is that batman did in fact kill the original joker, and Jared Leto's joker is a robin who was tortured into becoming like Joker a la Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker. There's that BvS line about "how many good guys are left, how many stayed that way?", for example, which heavily implies that someone batman worked with turned evil. Most DC heroes haven't shown up yet at that point, so the only one we know was around before BvS that it could apply to was robin, who we know something horrible happened to. And again, he's not the first movie batman who's killed plenty of goons but let his big-name opponents live. 2 hours ago, BrickBob Studpants said: What’s this then? A funnily shaped batarang? I get it, the Knightmare scene showcases the worst-possible future where Soup turns evilllllll and they may specifically have depicted Man using guns to show how bad things have gotten, but still. I have two issues with that: 1) While Snyder clearly likes symbolism, he probably just thought it looked cool and that’s it 2) How do guns help in this situation? Unless he has kryptonite bullets, they’re useless anyway No no no, hold on, how are you dunking on Batfleck for him using guns in what even you state is a nightmare sequence about how far they've fallen and ignoring Keaton Batman in not-alternate-reality-future sending the batmobile to shoot up a factory and blowing it up, explicitly killing a whole batch of goons? That's not exactly logically consistent, is it? Is the argument that batman killing a bunch of guys by essentially drone strike not as bad as alternate-future batman? Does the gun have to be in batman's hand for him killing people to be an issue? Edited October 26 by Mandalorianknight Quote
psqidexslizer Posted October 26 Posted October 26 (edited) 1 hour ago, Mandalorianknight said: Obviously we never got to actually see this, but the theory I'd heard for awhile is that batman did in fact kill the original joker, and Jared Leto's joker is a robin who was tortured into becoming like Joker a la Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker. There's that BvS line about "how many good guys are left, how many stayed that way?", for example, which heavily implies that someone batman worked with turned evil. Most DC heroes haven't shown up yet at that point, so the only one we know was around before BvS that it could apply to was robin, who we know something horrible happened to. Yeah, I remember that theory. The early DCEU theories were hilarious: Aquaman is being held captive in a tank in LexCorp, Deathstroke and King Shark are Amanda Waller’s secret body guards, Jimmy Olsen had his legs crushed by rubble during the Black Zero event, Lex Luthor has a tattoo of the Metropolis skyline on his back from his days in a street gang, Ben Affleck’s Batman is actually Slade Wilson and the ‘v’ in BvS is actually a Roman numeral denoting it being the 5th film in the saga (TDKT were 1-3), just to name a few. I always assumed the “how many stayed that way” line was a reference to Two Face. Edited October 26 by psqidexslizer Quote
Renny The Spaceman Posted October 26 Posted October 26 8 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said: Obviously we never got to actually see this, but the theory I'd heard for awhile is that batman did in fact kill the original joker, and Jared Leto's joker is a robin who was tortured into becoming like Joker a la Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker. There's that BvS line about "how many good guys are left, how many stayed that way?", for example, which heavily implies that someone batman worked with turned evil. Most DC heroes haven't shown up yet at that point, so the only one we know was around before BvS that it could apply to was robin, who we know something horrible happened to. And again, he's not the first movie batman who's killed plenty of goons but let his big-name opponents live. Is he? If memory serves: Kilmer murders Two-Face and no-one else, Bale kills Liam Nieson and Two-Face again, doesn't Keaton engineer the circumstances that kill Penguin and Joker? I think Batfleck is the only Murderman to keep it to the unnamed mooks. Which is a natural issue of "cinematic universe" storytelling. 15 hours ago, BrickBob Studpants said: I have no issue with villains getting killed off, in fact I usually prefer it! I would’ve loved for Discount Riddler to die in BvS Keeping a villain alive just so they can kill innocents again in the next instalment always irks me, unless there’s an overarching story and the villain eventually gets their just desserts in the final part. I think (though this is biased by me being more a film fan rather than a Superhero fan) the Raimi Spider-Man films get the balance the best, like he gives all the villains a chance at redemption, he tries talking all of them down or subduing them non-lethaly but like he's not gonna lose sleep that the evil billionaire who murders for fun or the weird Incel goo monster get themselves killed. Quote
Mandalorianknight Posted October 26 Posted October 26 (edited) 14 hours ago, psqidexslizer said: I always assumed the “how many stayed that way” line was a reference to Two Face. Correct me if I'm wrong here but we never saw Two-Face in the DCEU, though. 7 hours ago, Renny The Spaceman said: Is he? If memory serves: Kilmer murders Two-Face and no-one else, Bale kills Liam Nieson and Two-Face again, doesn't Keaton engineer the circumstances that kill Penguin and Joker? I think Batfleck is the only Murderman to keep it to the unnamed mooks. Which is a natural issue of "cinematic universe" storytelling. I think (though this is biased by me being more a film fan rather than a Superhero fan) the Raimi Spider-Man films get the balance the best, like he gives all the villains a chance at redemption, he tries talking all of them down or subduing them non-lethaly but like he's not gonna lose sleep that the evil billionaire who murders for fun or the weird Incel goo monster get themselves killed. A number of the batmen you mentioned also kill generic goons, but as for batfleck I'll point out the main final-battle antagonists of his movies were Doomsday- who he's definitely trying to kill, and Darkseid/Steppenwolf, who he obviously has no chance to actually murder but you can't tell me with a straight face he would have stopped the other leagures from doing so. The literal only thing you can get him on is, what, not killing joker in suicide squad? And plenty of other batmen have let some of their costumed foes live as well. Raimi Goblin's more "man with severe DID who clearly doesn't want his evil half to go around killing people", but yeah, no, Venom was literally praying for god to kill who he believed to be just... some guy, he absolutely deserved it. Edited October 26 by Mandalorianknight Quote
Renny The Spaceman Posted October 26 Posted October 26 18 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said: Raimi Goblin's more "man with severe DID who clearly doesn't want his evil half to go around killing people", but yeah, no, Venom was literally praying for god to kill who he believed to be just... some guy, he absolutely deserved it. That's the NWH interpretation, the original film does a Jekyll and Hyde thing where he genuinely wants what the Goblin does but is only held back by repression (which unlike in the literary classic he's won over by his alter ego and only kills himself by accident) you could make broader points about like even with him choosing to be this way it thematically perpetuates stereotypes but that's a different conversation. 21 minutes ago, Mandalorianknight said: Correct me if I'm wrong here but we never saw Two-Face in the DCEU, though. A number of the batmen you mentioned also kill generic goons, but as for batfleck I'll point out the main final-battle antagonists of his movies were Doomsday- who he's definitely trying to kill, and Darkseid/Steppenwolf, who he obviously has no chance to actually murder but you can't tell me with a straight face he would have stopped the other leagures from doing so. The literal only thing you can get him on is, what, not killing joker in suicide squad? And plenty of other batmen have let some of their costumed foes live as well. I feel like you don't get what I'm saying, I never said Two-face was in the DCEU, and I never said that if you're gonna make a murder Batman he only can kill the named villains, but if he only kills the goons (always in over the top, gratuitous ways) while never bothering with his marketable villains (Harley, and most notoriously Joker but worth noting many others are hinted at or appear depending on where you're cut off point for that continuity is) that unintentionally tells a story. Like he tried to kill a monster man but like that's pretty clearly a separate case to the years he spent as the Punisher in a silly hat before changing. Quote
Mandalorianknight Posted October 26 Posted October 26 2 hours ago, Renny The Spaceman said: I feel like you don't get what I'm saying, I never said Two-face was in the DCEU, and I never said that if you're gonna make a murder Batman he only can kill the named villains, but if he only kills the goons (always in over the top, gratuitous ways) while never bothering with his marketable villains (Harley, and most notoriously Joker but worth noting many others are hinted at or appear depending on where you're cut off point for that continuity is) that unintentionally tells a story. Like he tried to kill a monster man but like that's pretty clearly a separate case to the years he spent as the Punisher in a silly hat before changing. I mean, I was responding to a completely different guy when I said two-face wasn't in the DCEU- namely the guy the response was under the quote "I thought that was referencing two-face" of, so I'm not sure why you think I was saying you said Two-face was present. My point is that you were saying Batfleck kills goons but lets the named villains go, when in both the films he's actually a star of he does try to help kill the named villains. The only time we see him lock them up instead is, what, one flashback scene in suicide squad? We don't even know at what point he started killing, so at that point "well it's possible he was killing goons at the same time that he was letting the joker go a bunch" might as well be answered with "there's a theory joker is robin so therefore he just couldn't bring himself to kill him", because I don't believe we ever actually see proof of either onscreen. IIRC BvS even states that some of the more murdery and tortury stuff batman's up to is a pretty recent development. Quote
psqidexslizer Posted October 26 Posted October 26 5 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said: Correct me if I'm wrong here but we never saw Two-Face in the DCEU, though. Correct. But we got hints to other Batman villains like Penguin, Scarecrow, and Riddler so I always just assumed Batman had a fully formed rogues gallery at this point (especially since he was 20 years into his career) and Two Face was probably among them. Quote
psqidexslizer Posted October 31 Posted October 31 13 hours ago, Renny The Spaceman said: “Together we can do this!” Lego minifigures have seggs confirmed? Quote
Dolor Posted October 31 Posted October 31 Should we have own topic for this LEGO game or is this good topic or DC Superhero topic? https://legobatmangame.com Very nice website, like a animation... Quote
Renny The Spaceman Posted October 31 Posted October 31 55 minutes ago, psqidexslizer said: “Together we can do this!” Lego minifigures have seggs confirmed? Yes, of course, the Complete Saga showed as much 33 minutes ago, Dolor said: Very nice website, like a animation... It reminds me of old DVD menus Quote
psqidexslizer Posted November 1 Posted November 1 On 10/31/2025 at 10:22 AM, Dolor said: But in a GOOD way... right? @Renny The Spaceman Don’t be rude. Answer the question. Quote
Dolor Posted November 1 Posted November 1 Yes please answer this is very important... they put so much effort in that game. You can see that from the official website. Probably biggest LEGO game ever! Quote
Renny The Spaceman Posted November 2 Posted November 2 10 hours ago, Dolor said: Yes please answer this is very important... they put so much effort in that game. You can see that from the official website. Probably biggest LEGO game ever! Yes, it is in a good way, sorry. I love old DVD menus, as a kid I'd leave the Spider-Man 2 one on for so long my DVD player started to get dangerously hot (not kidding) 10 hours ago, psqidexslizer said: @Renny The Spaceman Don’t be rude. Answer the question. Sorry, terrible manners on my part, I shouldn't have had you begging like a turtle 🐢 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.