Y’know, I’ve made it clear that I’m not a fan of Batman killing people. I just think that’s contrary to who the character is in the modern age. Batman should not kill people. However, let’s assume you’re whoever it was that decided Batman must be a killer in the current DC movies. Regardless of my own personal feelings on the matter, let’s go with that premise. However, beyond simply acclimating us to Batman killing people, as Confused Matthew recently pointed out in his own review of Batman v Superman, you need to make sure that there are no contradictory issues involving him killing people with his other actions and inactions. And, in the case of these movies, I think I may have found one.
Now, I know we all liked to think that the ending of Man of Steel, where Superman snaps Zod’s neck, would act as the catalyst for him deciding to never kill again, that being forced to do so and feeling so awful about it would, in turn, make Superman a better person. However, considering he kills at least two more times in BvS, I think it’s safe to say that was never the plan. Sorry, it just wasn’t. BUT, let’s give the benefit of the doubt and assume that, given Batman’s decision not to kill or brand Lex Luthor at the end of BvS, he’s decided to abandon his killing ways. That way, we can even craft character development around it, in that meeting Superman and Wonder Woman and saving Martha Kent’s life, something has changed inside of him, and he’s not going to kill anymore. That means that, whenever the situation comes up where he COULD kill someone and doesn’t, we know why and it makes at least some sort of sense. However, there’s still a problem that’s been nagging at me ever since the movie came out…and I think I finally figured out what it is. And ultimately, it comes down to three panels…
And that’s when I realized the biggest plot hole regarding Batman killing people: Given what we’ve seen and heard in these movies, we can infer that Batman started down this much darker road after Joker killed Jason Todd. And, as I’ve mentioned before, that actually makes sense when you consider what happened in the comics. The biggest difference between what happened there and what’s going on in the comics is that, apparently, in this universe, Tim Drake never stepped into Batman’s life, and he went down a route of killing his enemies. But, if all of that’s true, then why in the hell is the Joker still alive? Why wasn’t he the FIRST person Batman killed? And don’t give me any bull about how he hasn’t been able to catch him, because I refuse to believe that, in all of that time, he NEVER caught him. Hell, according to Suicide Squad, Harley Quinn was an accomplice in Robin’s murder. Why didn’t Batman kill HER when he fished her out of the bay? Honestly, I think the only reason he doesn’t kill Deadshot is because his daughter was there watching the whole thing go down. Now, admittedly, we don’t know EXACTLY when he caught both of these individuals, but I was under the assumption they were both just a little bit before BvS, since the Justice League trailers and the ending of BvS seems to indicate he immediately began putting all of his efforts into locating and bringing Flash, Cyborg, and Aquaman into the fold. So even if he DID decide not to kill anymore by the end of that movie, these events would’ve happened BEFORE then. Harley and the Joker should both be dead as shit. It makes no logical sense, if Batman kills people, and they’re the ones who sent him down this dark path, that he wouldn’t kill them. So yeah, add this to the LONG list of ways that the makers of these movies have failed hard… … …Though it’s hardly the worst way.
Are there any other plot holes you can think of regarding Batman killing people? Lemme know in the comments below. Ja né!
So, I think a lot of people probably know by now my general thoughts on Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice. Namely that I didn’t like it. However, it wasn’t until a video was posted online that the gears in my head started to REALLY turn as to one thing they could’ve done differently with relative ease to make the movie flow just a tiny bit better. That video was the following:
Now, when I first saw this video, I left the following comment: “Sounds epic as fuck, and would’ve guaranteed given boners to the crowd, but it doesn’t work for one reason: Bale Batman doesn’t kill, Affleck Batman does. Whatever your stance on whether Batman should or shouldn’t kill, that’s the major difference between the two”. However, the more I’ve sat and thought about it, the more I realized just how easily it would’ve been to have Affleck Batman be Bale Batman, only years after the events of The Dark Knight Rises. Let’s go through how the two film series line up, shall we?
So first off, let’s talk about how The Dark Knight Rises ends. Bruce faked his death so he could retire to a normal life with Selina Kyle, and Robin John Blake is given the coördinates to the Batcave, presumably so he could take over Bruce’s place as Gotham’s protector. Now, you may ask how that could transition to Batman V Superman, but let’s look at a few other details. Specifically, let’s look at the one major villain from The Dark Knight Trilogy who didn’t die and is now an important character in the new DC Cinematic Universe: The Joker. Now, granted, the Joker from the Dark Knight movies IS very different from the new one. Specifically, Ledger Joker was clearly wearing make-up and had a permanent smile due to the scars on his face, whereas Leto Joker is hinted at having the more traditional backstory of having fallen into a vat of chemicals. However, let’s say they didn’t go that route for a second and then look at what else we know about Leto’s Joker from details given to us strictly in Batman V Superman: He killed Robin.
Now, lets look at Bale Batman vs Affleck Batman. Obviously, the biggest difference between the two (besides their age) is their methodology and the limits they’re willing to go to in the line of duty. As I said before, Affleck Batman has no problems killing criminals, while specifically not killing was a big thing for Bale Batman. Yes, the Batman of the Nolanverse movies did find loopholes he could exploit to get around that fact, but for the most part, that was Bale Batman’s biggest rule, so something pretty drastic would’ve had to have happened for him to go back on that to such a degree that he’d resemble Affleck Batman’s style of doing things. So, what would make him do such a thing? The answer again falls on one point: The dead Robin.
Anyone who knows anything about Batman in the comics likely knows that the dead Robin in the DC Cinematic Universe is more than likely Jason Todd. However, let’s instead think of Batman V Superman occurring in the same canonical universe as The Dark Knight Trilogy, and Robin is, in fact, John Blake, having used his first name that he mostly opted not to use as his codename while working as Batman’s replacement. Now, imagine if The Joker brutally killed Robin, then publicly taunted Batman (regardless of if he knows Batman is really alive or not) with this fact. Again, Jason Todd dying in the comics was a big deal for a long time, and still sort of is even after his return to the land of the living. It’s often regarded as Batman’s greatest failure. But now imagine this happening under these circumstances, with Bruce realizing that Robin would have never died if he hadn’t faked his death and enlisted him as his successor. Suddenly, not only do you have a great reason for Bruce to return to Gotham and continue his work as Batman, as well as coming up with a convincing excuse for how he, as Bruce Wayne, likewise was still alive (preferably not at the exact same time as to avoid arousing suspicion), but he would also have reason to go more than a little nuts. Remember, the only reason he didn’t in the comics after the death of Jason Todd was because Tim Drake stepped in and helped to keep him grounded. But in a world where that never happened, can we say with 100% certainty that he wouldn’t have lost it, even if we’d LIKE to think Bruce would never do that? It’s certainly a believable scenario to have presented. And all of the aesthetical changes to Batman (his suit, his equipment, his vehicles, etc.) could easily be explained by him changing with the times, especially since the vast majority of his tech was destroyed at the end of The Dark Knight Rises, specifically The Bat and his spare Tumblers. Hell, you can even explain away the voice modifier as him deciding he didn’t need to do the Bat voice himself anymore.
So, with all of that said, why didn’t DC and Warner Bros. decide to do this? Well, there’re a few reasons. For starters, there are characters who appeared and died during The Dark Knight Trilogy that they might be considering making use of later on. Second, all of the characters who would be returning would either have to be recast, or they’d have to convince the previous actors to return. In particular, The Joker would NEED to be recast due to the death of Heath Ledger, and honestly, I don’t know who I would have chosen to portray Ledger’s Joker. And, not to be too disrespectful, but suffice to say, Jared Leto is NOT Heath Ledger. Just saying. Third, while the details DO line up, there likely would still be plot holes created. One that comes to mind is the fact that we know Clark was wandering around and helping in (relative) secret wherever he could for several years before becoming Superman, and odds are good he would not have just sat around and did nothing about what was going on in Gotham during The Dark Knight Rises. And no, there’s NO way he couldn’t have known. And lastly, another big reason why they may have opted not to connect the new DC movies to the earlier ones in any way was so that they could build this whole new movie universe from the ground up. Don’t have to worry about past continuity, doing research to make sure everything lines up, or rehiring anyone that worked on the previous movies, they can just do everything over again. And, admittedly, while they COULD have found ways to iron out all those issues, I can’t really say as I blame them for not doing it. Plus, with the Arrowverse CW shows having established the existence of an infinitely-spanning Multiverse, it’s entirely possible that ALL of the live action interpretations of DC’s heroes are canonically part of it. Still, for what it’s worth, everything I’ve presented can still stand as a neat little idea of how things might have been. But hey, that’s just a theory…A FILM THEOR-Wait, what do you mean MatPat does theories for movies too???
…Anyway, let me know in the comments (or in the poll below) whether you think DC should or shouldn’t have connected the new Batman related movies to the previous ones, and I will see you guys the next time I decide to show my geekness…which’ll probably not be very long from now. lol Ja né!
What Did The Dream Sequence In Dawn Of Justice Mean? (NOTE – SPOILERS AND SPECULATION AHEAD) + Thoughts On Post-Rebirth Costumes
Before you ask, no, I haven’t seen the full movie of Batman v Superman. I do not intend to go see it, at least not in theaters. Now, if I see it on Netflix in a few months, I might very well decide to check it out. But, for now, I’m not going to go see it. That said, I DO know all the details of what happened in the movie, and given the overall tone of it that’s been relayed, I can safely say I was right to skip it. That said, I WILL admit to liking what I’ve seen and heard of Wonder Woman in the movie, and am actually a little interested to see how her own movie turns out. In fact, most people I’ve talked to about the movie claim that she’s the best part of it, although that could simply be because she doesn’t have top billing, and therefore Zack Snyder was less focused on draining the joy and fun from her character along with Superman and Batman…but that’s a story for another day.
Instead, there’s something else I wanna speculate about from the movie: The dream sequence. Even if you’ve only seen the trailers, you probably know what I’m talking about. Basically, Batman has a dream of a dystopian future where the world’s gone to hell and Superman is evil. Now, when images relating to the scene came out, particularly one revealing a giant omega symbol in the ground and Parademons flying about, what I figured was going on was that Batman was getting visions of a future where Darkseid had invaded and taken over, but that his mind was getting the message mixed up, his paranoia instead painting Superman as the alien menace that will unleash this terror. However, it’s instead revealed in the movie that Batman is getting these visions from a time travelling Flash, who tells him that he was “right about him” and that “Lois is the key”, which indicates that Superman really WILL turn evil at some point…which might confuse some due to the ending, but trust me, it shouldn’t, at least if you know anything about Superman’s comic book history.
So, what does it all mean? Well, remember this is all purely speculation on my part, based on my own theories, as well as those proposed by others who have seen the movie. Basically, they’re doing an odd hybrid of Injustice: Gods Among Us and Earth 2. What that means is that, at some point in the future, Lois Lane dies and it drives Superman to turn evil, but instead of being the evil dictator he is in Injustice, he’s instead an instrument of destruction under the control of Darkseid, albeit with his own lackey soldiers working for him. Clark’s continued remarks about how Lois is his world during DoJ seem to reinforce this theory. If I’m right, then what’ll happen is that Batman will realize that he needs to keep Lois from getting killed at some point in order to prevent Superman’s heel turn.
So yeah, that’s where I think this is going. Now, is this a good idea or not? Honestly, I’m a little sick of stories where Superman turns heel, but what about all of you? Lemme know what you think about this and the movie in general in the comments below, and we’ll see if I’m right in where this goes. Ja né!
…It sucks. Ja né!
Actually, that’s not really fair, especially because I can look at everyone in the trailer and can instantly tell they are trying so hard to make us care and like this. It’s failing epically, but they’re trying so hard that it’s actually kinda tragic. And then I see a remake of the trailer with Christopher Reeve and Adam West in place of Henry Cavill and Ben Affleck. And I don’t know if that edit was done because the person just wanted to do it for fun, or they legitimately thought that Reeve and West would look better than Cavill and Affleck. Well, if it’s the latter, and I really hope it isn’t, I have this to say: You’re failing to miss the bigger problem. Yes, Reeve and West are legendary as those characters, and the more bright and shining costume for Superman DEFINITELY looks better than the one Cavill’s wearing. However, you can stick all the Reeve and West you want in this trailer, but it will not improve it so long as the overall tone is kept intact, and THAT is where the problem lies. And what’s funny is that I was actually gonna skip out on giving my thoughts and opinions on this trailer, but seeing that edit made me realize all the problems with it all over again, and I had to get it out.
First off, before I go too deep in what’s wrong with the trailer, I’ll go one step better than some people are willing to go in terms of what’s good: I thought Ben Affleck looked AWESOME in this trailer. He looks dark and wounded, not just from the usual standpoint of Bruce Wayne’s tragic past, but as someone who, if we can trust background info on this movie, has been operating as Batman for years now. And he looks great in both of the Batsuits, which also look AWESOME. The main one he wears looks dark and gritty, which Batman works well with, and having the shorter ears was definitely a plus. The armoured suit also looks pretty cool, and I gotta say, it’s nice to see a live-action Batsuit that has default lens built into the cowl.
So, yes, Batman looks awesome in this, as I knew he would………and therein lies a big part of the problem: Batman looks great and very faithful to the character, Superman doesn’t. And here’s where I KNEW they were gonna screw this up. Superman still looks dark as shit, when you have these two characters who, in appearance, should be polar opposites look like they both get their costumes from the same shop, that’s a problem. Do I even need to bring THIS up?
Oh, but don’t think that they didn’t find a way to screw up Batman in this trailer just because Affleck looks awesome. What was that truly inspiring dialogue Batman had for Superman in this movie? “Do you bleed?…You WILL.” WOW, DC. WOW, Warner Bros. The ONE GUY you knew how to market, and you still found a way to fuck it up. Bravo, dear friends, you are truly the corn of the crap. And on top of that, there’s the voice. It’s just WRONG, in every conceivable way. Like, the reason I always bought it with Bale is because he’s supposed to be a younger, more inexperienced Batman who uses dark, growly voices and tries to sound more openly threatening than just being subtly intimidating because he’s still new to the job. Mind you, that only went as far as Dark Knight. Dark Knight Rises, it was eight years later, and he was still doing this shit. Affleck, however, is supposed to be an older Batman who has been doing this for many years, and yet he’s still doing THE VOICE. So, for those wondering who to blame the continuously worsening voice that Christian Bale used in the Dark Knight Trilogy on, I think you’ve got your answer.
And then there’s the bit of what I am assuming (I’m hoping to God I’m wrong for reasons I’ll make clear in a moment) to be the Batwing blowing up a car and presumably the guy standing next to it. Y’know, even ignoring the rule about how Batman shouldn’t kill people, because they clearly didn’t give a shit about that when Supes snapped Zod’s neck, there’s a problem at play: I was under the assumption that Batman was going up against Superman because he felt he was too dangerous, regardless of if his intentions are good or not. However, if that’s Batman, BATMAN, killing a man in an explosion, then clearly, they BOTH have the same reckless, dangerous approach! So why are they even fighting?!
Then there’s stuff about the statue of Superman with “FALSE GOD” spray painted onto it, analysts going into detail about what he is or should be doing with his powers, and the big one to me, the military guys with what appear to be Superman logos on their uniforms kneeling to the Man of Steel…I’m not gonna go into that too much, mainly because Angry Joe pretty much already said everything I could think to say about it, which you should totally go check out. It’s a really good analysis of the trailer, both good and bad points. Although, I DID consider that another possibility, besides this being extremists taking Superman’s status to levels beyond what he personally wants and then having what they do pinned on him by Lex Luthor and the media, is that this COULD be a dream sequence. This could be Batman having nightmares and worrying about where Superman is taking the world. And really, Batman DOES kinda have that paranoia about him where I could conceivably see him worrying over that. I’d need more than just that to justify a confrontation between the two, but it’d be a start at least.
Getting back to Angry Joe’s take on the trailer, though, I will say that, yes, it is possible that this trailer has been doctored up a bit to make this movie seem potentially darker than it could conceivably be. However, with all due love and respect for Joe Vargas, there’s one little problem I think you’ve kinda overlooked: That would imply that the people in charge of making this movie, as well as the cinematic universe they’re attempting to create from it, have any idea what they’re doing, and I think that they’ve conclusively proven that they don’t. I asked the question “Why are they even fighting?” if they apparently are so frigging similar in this movie. Is it because Superman’s a powerful figure and that extremists might be taking his persona, emblem, and status, and doing the wrong thing with them? Yeah, because no one has EVER done that with Batman’s. The Dark Knight, a movie that one can actually make argument for being the best Goddamn superhero movie of all time, which YOU, Warner Bros. and DC, were the ones that fucking MADE IT, had one of its first scenes feature Batman having to confront copycat vigilantes that were taking his attempt to inspire others to fight injustice and going the wrong way with it. Does Superman show up to put the beating on Batman for that? No. Why? Well, for one thing, Superman’s not that naive nor stupid. But for another, he wasn’t in that movie, because they decided to do more than a single movie to establish Batman. Gosh, kinda feels like they shoulda done that with Superman too, instead of making the sequel to Man of Steel be a launching pad for a cinematic universe because DC and Warner Bros. want to compete with Marvel Studios. And it’s COSTING THEM. It’s costing them, because they’re making these decisions without really thinking them out. They have, as the launching pad for their cinematic universe, a movie about Superman and Batman fighting for reasons I don’t totally get, while also having Wonder Woman as a supporting character, and featuring cameos by Aquaman and Cyborg, and at some point, we find out Lex Luthor’s the villain they need to fight. That’s a lot for one movie, especially one that’s just supposed to be the prologue for Justice League. THEY DON’T KNOW WHAT THEY’RE DOING.
So, in closing, this trailer sucked in all the ways I feared it would suck, which tells me that the movie is going to suck in all the ways I fear it will suck. And if WB and DC doesn’t figure that out, then their entire cinematic universe will suck. But hey, I suppose it could be a lot worse, right? I mean, we could have Superman without his cape with a military cut and shades of a beard alongside Jim Gordon with a mohawk and no mustache wearing an armoured GCPD Batsuit. But no one would ever be stupid enough to write a story like tha-
……..Y’know, I’m not 100% sure, but I think I kinda hate DC nowadays. -_-
Oh, and is anyone else sick to death of the Hans Zimmer horn yet? lol