geomon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,008
Miami, FL
Given that Final Crisis and Multiversity were written by Grant Morrison, it's more likely that Darkseid was never going to truly die.

I'm not a fan of "Batman forced to pick up a gun" scenes either way.
I'm not either but it is what it is. As for Final Crisis, the intent was to create new New Gods in place of the old ones. That's why Darkseid was literally obliterated along with the entire universe and Superman had to rebuild it...then New 52 happened.


Ha!

Didn't Morrison set-up his 'Doom-Bot' style concept of Darkseid avatars in Seven Soldiers? Can't recall off the top of my head.
I'm gonna go ahead and say Yes because I'm not that knowledgeable about Seven Soldiers.
 

NiallGGlynn

Member
Apr 16, 2019
509
Nah. The scene in the Adam West Batman movie where he won't even kill a family of ducks to get rid of a bomb is the best.
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,486
I always wonder when watching this scene - that's touted as so amazing - why that dude who breaks through the door at 1:23 doesn't shoot, takes like 5 seconds, and then goes through a convoluted grenade process.

Does feel basically like an Arkham game, just with more explicit killy killy.
 

Yossarian

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
13,289
I feel like Batman's no kill policy is especially pointless in the comics universe specifically. Like, in movies, it's just a sort of adaptation appendix they have to deal with somehow, but in the comics it's just absurd because it's not like anyone major he kills is gonna stay dead. If he went and shot the joker in the head, he wouldn't have time to get lunch before it was revealed that it was actually a Jokerbot or that Joker cloned himself or a new Joker jumped in from a different dimension, or maybe even the Joker he actually killed will simply walk back to Gotham from the gates of literal Hell.

Comics Batman lives in a universe where certain characters are immortal even if he does kill them, so....who cares.

He probably has an aversion to killing people; he doesn't want to relive his transformative and traumatising experience - his parents' murder - every time he foils a scheme. Not sure anyone's broached that in the comics, but that's always seemed to make sense to me.

Dan Turpin, the cop that was Supermans biggest fanboy, somehow becomes Darkseid?

Comics.

He gets possessed, yeah.

It's a pretty cool analogy for depression. In fact, a lot of Morrison's bad guys are analogies of depression.

I'm gonna go ahead and say Yes because I'm not that knowledgeable about Seven Soldiers.

It's good!
 

Weiss

User requested ban
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
64,265
He probably has an aversion to killing people; he doesn't want to relive his transformative and traumatising experience - his parents' murder - every time he foils a scheme. Not sure anyone's broached that in the comics, but that's always seemed to make sense to me.

Yeah exactly. He's eternally defined by an act of traumatic violence randomly heaped onto him. Why would he ever inflict that onto anyone else?
 

Yossarian

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
13,289
Yeah exactly. He's eternally defined by an act of traumatic violence randomly heaped onto him. Why would he ever inflict that onto anyone else?

It seems obvious, but I've never seen anyone mention it in comics (I could've missed it) or 'Why doesn't Batman just kill the Joker?' threads. šŸ˜„
 

Firemind

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,620
Yeah exactly. He's eternally defined by an act of traumatic violence randomly heaped onto him. Why would he ever inflict that onto anyone else?
That doesn't make any sense. Why not be a pacifist and humanitarian like his father then instead of a vigilante who beats up people?
 

Yams

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,950
People here love Batman and Batman Returns. Two films Batman straight up kills in. He straps a bomb to someone and smiles about it

In Batman Begins Bruce blows up a building with a shit load of people inside of it. Then he lets RAG die by not saving him. In The Dark Knight he crushes a truck with people still inside of it.

in the extended cut of BvS some of those dudes are seen moving around on the floor. Pretty sure the only one he outright kills is the flame thrower dude.

it's so weird how you guys are hung up on this while Ignoring the other movies
 

Veelk

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,757
He probably has an aversion to killing people; he doesn't want to relive his transformative and traumatising experience - his parents' murder - every time he foils a scheme. Not sure anyone's broached that in the comics, but that's always seemed to make sense to me.
I mean, sure, but the key difference here is that the very concept of death would be different in a universe that not only has a confirmed after life, but multi-verse and cloning and so forth. Part of the trauma is the sheer violence of it, sure...but also the fact that once a person is dead, that's it, they're gone. But, in comics...they're not. So, while I understand it as a human trauma, batman would also have to re-evaluate what his parents deaths mean on an existential level and how it relates to the villains around him.
 

Firemind

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,620
Because if he didn't then a murder clown would have blown up Gotham about 30 times over.
I'm talking about his psyche. Batman as a morally upstanding hero is a silly and contradictory concept, especially during these times of police brutality where it's explicitely shown you don't need guns to kill people.
 

Yossarian

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
13,289
I mean, sure, but the key difference here is that the very concept of death would be different in a universe that not only has a confirmed after life, but multi-verse and cloning and so forth. Part of the trauma is the sheer violence of it, sure...but also the fact that once a person is dead, that's it, they're gone. But, in comics...they're not. So, while I understand it as a human trauma, batman would also have to re-evaluate what his parents deaths mean on an existential level and how it relates to the villains around him.

I completely get what you mean.

I guess what we're talking here seems to exist in a weird space between 'why doesn't Batman recognise and react to comic tropes' and 'why doesn't Batman recognise and react to the in-universe justifications for those tropes', if that makes sense?

It'd be interesting to read him ponder all the philosophical and existential questions that comic book deaths imply, but in the long run I think it would break the character if he was aware that he's effectively in a comic. That's Joker's patch. šŸ˜„

Come to think of it, I think the Waynes are, along with Unky Ben, one of the only comic book characters not to come back, in the main continuity at least. I'm sure I'll be corrected.

Why a villain hasn't resurrected them or gone into the past and brought them back, I'll never know. Kills Batman's mission stone dead.
 

Veelk

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,757
I completely get what you mean.

I guess what we're talking here seems to exist in a weird space between 'why doesn't Batman recognise and react to comic tropes' and 'why doesn't Batman recognise and react to the in-universe justifications for those tropes', if that makes sense?

It'd be interesting to read him ponder all the philosophical and existential questions that comic book deaths imply, but in the long run I think it would break the character if he was aware that he's effectively in a comic. That's Joker's patch. šŸ˜„

Come to think of it, I think the Waynes are, along with Unky Ben, one of the only comic book characters not to come back, in the main continuity at least. I'm sure I'll be corrected.

Why a villain hasn't resurrected them or gone into the past and brought them back, I'll never know. Kills Batman's mission stone dead.
Well...sort of. It's more of a world building thing. I would expect any character in a fantasy or supernatural book to ruminate on the implications of death if they discovered that there is an after life and that there are numerous ways to return from it. It's not something every story does, but any story that has a curious protagonist is going to eventually ask how the thing they're interacting works. So in that sense, I don't know if Batman acknowledging that he can confirm an afterlife and even interact with it to an extent is the same as him acknowledging his medium....

But the bigger problem here is with superheroes, it actually is a bit different because the nature of mutliple writers writing one character at once and across spans of decades means that comics can never achieve the kind of consistent worldbuilding and story arcs that, for example, books with a single author can. Whatever one author does another can undo, so while Batman can acknowledge that death doesn't really stick in this world, writers are going to have different takes on how death does work, so his understanding of death can't actually be complete, and acknowledging THAT might be acknowledging his medium.

Either way, any resurrection of Thomas and Martha Wayne should be met with "Hey, so, billionaire parents. Whats with the illegal child labor?"
 

Yossarian

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
13,289
I'm talking about his psyche. Batman as a morally upstanding hero is a silly and contradictory concept, especially during these times of police brutality where it's explicitely shown you don't need guns to kill people.

I'm not sure Batman is a 'morally upstanding hero' though. He's been more of an anti-hero for, what, decades now?

He uses violence (how much force depends on the writer) but he never kills, and it's specifically the killing that is central to his trauma. Like, if he had the physical capabilities he has as Batman when he was a kid, his parents wouldn't be dead, right? He effectively overcompensated. Waaaaay overcompensated.

Just to be clear, Batman isn't a concept that should be taken too seriously. It does NOT stand up to scrutiny. šŸ˜„
 

Yossarian

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
13,289
Well...sort of. It's more of a world building thing. I would expect any character in a fantasy or supernatural book to ruminate on the implications of death if they discovered that there is an after life and that there are numerous ways to return from it. It's not something every story does, but any story that has a curious protagonist is going to eventually ask how the thing they're interacting works. So in that sense, I don't know if Batman acknowledging that he can confirm an afterlife and even interact with it to an extent is the same as him acknowledging his medium....

But the bigger problem here is with superheroes, it actually is a bit different because the nature of mutliple writers writing one character at once and across spans of decades means that comics can never achieve the kind of consistent worldbuilding and story arcs that, for example, books with a single author can. Whatever one author does another can undo, so while Batman can acknowledge that death doesn't really stick in this world, writers are going to have different takes on how death does work, so his understanding of death can't actually be complete, and acknowledging THAT might be acknowledging his medium.

What I mean is, the tropes came first (as you said) because of multiple writers, market demands, and 75 years of continuity, Then the in-universe justifications were stapled on to cover them as readers became more savvy (too savvy!). So it's like - at least, I see it as - a kind of second-hand awareness of the medium.

Despite being completely different, the capes' world is meant to reflect our own. I think characters kind of need to be blind to certain things for it to all work smoothly along the series' continuity and to remain - and I wish I was joking - 'relatable'.

It feels stupid to write, but there's a weird tension between the reality and unreality of major cape stories that I'm not smart enough to pull apart, but if they followed the world building through fully as you suggest, this tension would break and the capes' world would begin to move away from its familiarness. Does that make sense? I dunno.

But that doesn't change the fact that this is the world he exists in and that's set up around him, as you said. Idefinitely read anything that addressed it. Someone page Dr Morrison!

Either way, any resurrection of Thomas and Martha Wayne should be met with "Hey, so, billionaire parents. Whats with the illegal child labor?"

šŸ˜‚

Tangentially, I wonder if the reason Robin is forced to wear bright colours is so criminals shoot at him instead of Batman.
 
Last edited:

Firemind

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,620
I'm not sure Batman is a 'morally upstanding hero' though. He's been more of an anti-hero for, what, decades now?

He uses violence (how much force depends on the writer) but he never kills, and it's specifically the killing that is central to his trauma. Like, if he had the physical capabilities he has as Batman when he was a kid, his parents wouldn't be dead, right? He effectively overcompensated. Waaaaay overcompensated.

Just to be clear, Batman isn't a concept that should be taken too seriously. It does NOT stand up to scrutiny. šŸ˜„
Batman media and merchandise are, unlike say the Punisher, Deadpool or Spawn, consumed by children though. There are probably tons of children who want to be Batman during Halloween. These different tones spanning all types of media is what makes him such an enduring and complex character for decades. Is that ultimately a good or bad thing? The idea of taking matters into one's own hands to face injustice could be a good lesson to teach children and teenagers, but he's also a rich white man with privileges the average person doesn't have.
 

Yossarian

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
13,289
Batman media and merchandise are, unlike say the Punisher, Deadpool or Spawn, consumed by children though. There are probably tons of children who want to be Batman during Halloween. These different tones spanning all types of media is what makes him such an enduring and complex character for decades. Is that ultimately a good or bad thing? The idea of taking matters into one's own hands to face injustice could be a good lesson to teach children and teenagers, but he's also a rich white man with privileges the average person doesn't have.

Adults tend to take comic book characters much, much more seriously than kids. They don't see them how we do and we don't see them the way we used to either.

Batman is obviously a power fantasy and I think his privileges are part of that. There's an aspirational quality to him: the fast cars, fetish chicks, illegal drugs (he was always getting drugs sprayed in his face in the 40s/50s and tripping balls), etc.

That two of the most popular superheroes are billionaires speaks volumes of our times, as does the fact that people have in recent years begun to question those aspects, as well as their efforts to reinforce the Neo-liberal flavoured status quo.

On that same token, that people actively hate - or are at least bored by the idea of a - hard working immigrant (Superman) and relate to a beleaguered working class teen (Spider-Man), also tells us something. I dunno what tho šŸ˜„
 

Weiss

User requested ban
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
64,265
I'm talking about his psyche. Batman as a morally upstanding hero is a silly and contradictory concept, especially during these times of police brutality where it's explicitely shown you don't need guns to kill people.

He fights bad guys and saves the day because he's a cartoon superhero for children.

Nothing complex about it.
 

Ruisu

Banned
Aug 1, 2019
5,535
Brasil
You know that line in Begins when Ducard said "You know how to fight six men. We can teach you how to engage six hundred." Nowhere in Nolan's trilogy was I ever convinced that his Batman could pull that off.

That warehouse scene in BvS definitely did. His split second decision-making skills in clearing a mob shows here; you actually believe him in his prime could have easily taken on a much bigger group. Probably one of the best live action batman scene for me simply because it was the first time someone did a batman v mob scene justice.
Wasn't that line more about using fear as a weapon rather than physically fighting six hundred guys?
 

Yggfk

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,675
Brazil
batman gets shot twice in the back of his head and doesn't even flinch... two seconds later a kick takes him down.

Huh.
 

BigMack

Member
Oct 27, 2017
566
Walt Disney Animation Studios kind did it with Big Hero Six (but in name only lol), on the other side I donĀ“t think Pixar is interested in working with outside franchises. My gold scenary is that they open a Marvel Animation Studios as a third arm so Disney and Pixar can keep doing their own thing
I forgot all about BH6. But yeah a specific Marvel animation division would be great.