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!
So, with the news breaking that Melissa Benoist has been cast in the lead for CBS’ upcoming Supergirl TV series, as well as news that Vixen is apparently getting an animated web mini-series with ties to Arrow and Flash that could result in a full television series (or Vixen being cast on either show), both of those series being renewed for another season, Agents of SHIELD still doing good, the Marvel Netflix exclusive series coming up, and with Agent Carter apparently doing well right off the bat, it’s becoming clear that more heroes of various walks of life in the DC and Marvel universes are hitting it off well with television audiences. We’re seeing a much greater variety than just Superman, Batman, or Spider-Man for the umpteenth time. People want more and the various networks and companies are giving them what they want.
Having said that, and it brings me joy to be able to say this, there’s STILL a bunch of untapped characters and settings that could be adapted into their own TV shows. Granted, some of these characters have appeared in previous series before, but not on their own. And I’m not gonna get into casting and whatnot either, since everyone’s opinion on that is different. I’m just going to make my cases for each character or characters and let people decide if they agree or disagree with the idea of them getting their own show. So, let’s start off with probably the most logical choice after Supergirl…
Okay, I’m aware of the fact that there IS apparently a Titans live action series in the works, which would probably involve some incarnation of Dick Grayson, but since I haven’t heard anything about it in a while, I’m just gonna put this here for the heck of it. Like what I hope they do with Supergirl, they should keep Batman out of Nightwing’s story, save for his obvious existence in his back-story. In fact, with that in mind, one thing I would love to see is for CBS to do Nightwing as well and have him cross-over with Supergirl from time to time. As for setting, the obvious choice is Blüdhaven, though in the absence of that, Chicago would also work, as Nightwing has operated out of there as well.
I still can’t believe that when selecting the various heroes to be in Marvel’s Netflix series, they didn’t go with She-Hulk. Look at it this way: She’s the Hulk’s cousin, which means more potential use of that character since he apparently doesn’t have his own movie coming up, and she’s also a lawyer, meaning the show would effectively be a superhero show meets a Law & Order-esque series, and you know how well shows like that do. Plus, there’s just the nature of Jennifer and the She-Hulk’s duality and how it works in a way that’s very different from the Hulk’s. Plenty of potential exploration and analysis that can be made there.
Seeing as how Captain America did so well, how about a show about a whole team of superheroes that operated during World War II? I think I’d want the emphasis placed on the lesser known heroes, excluding the trinity of Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman in favour of the likes of Mister Terrific, Wildcat, Black Canary, Sandman, The Atom, Doctor Fate, The Spectre, and Hawkgirl. Also, I’d probably include Alan Scott, but under his Sentinel alias (as to avoid confusing fans more familiar with the Green Lantern Corps), and one of the other speedsters in favour of Jay Garrick (again, to avoid confusing fans of the modern Flashes). And lastly, while she didn’t exist in the comics back then, I’m sure Aquawoman from the New 52 Earth 2 comics would be a welcome addition.
Yeah, this would get confusing while Supergirl is on the air, so perhaps an idea best kept on the back-burner until Supergirl’s run was over. Rather than involve the existence of Earth 2, I would just play it straight, with the daughter of Batman and the cousin of Superman having to carve out their own legacies while working as a team. And much like with She-Hulk, I would introduce plenty of court show drama elements with Helena Wayne being a lawyer.
This one would be tricky, since I’m not sure who owns the rights to Spider-Woman. If she’s owned by Marvel Studios, Jessica Drew would be a welcome series set in the MCU as a former HYDRA agent turned SHIELD. If she’s owned by Sony, it’s Gwen Stacy or bust. Either one would be welcome, honestly. Also, while I said I wouldn’t talk casting, with Spider-Gwen, she’d HAVE to be played by Emma Stone. She IS Gwen Stacy, in my opinion.
Probably the biggest name in DC Comics right now to NOT be involved in the DC Cinematic Universe, likely because DC and WB are basing that Justice League off of the New 52 version…which is a bad sign right off the bat. It’s not even that I have a problem with Cyborg, either. I love Cyborg. But they’ve kinda been amping him up a bit, whereas Martian Manhunter’s been kinda put down a few pegs. And J’onn could hold a show on his own, as the alien brought to Earth by accident and becoming a private investigator/superhero. And again, I know I said I wouldn’t talk casting, but here, I have to. I’m just gonna say five words and walk away: Morgan Freeman as Martian Manhunter. Goodbye. lol
Anyway, that’s it for the shows I can think of, but what about you? Leave me a comment letting me know which comic book heroes you’d like to see get their own shows, and we’ll see if any of them ever materialize. Ja né!