EDITORIAL: Should Batman and Superman Kill?

EDITORIAL: Should Batman and Superman Kill?

With fervent debates over Man of Steel and Batman v. Superman, should Batman and Superman kill? Many opinions spark the internet aflame, and BatmanHeisenberg is here to throw another voice into that fire! Click the jump to read more!

Editorial Opinion
By BatmanHeisenberg - Apr 07, 2016 12:04 AM EST
Filed Under: Batman vs. Superman

Almost every comic book character in their history has killed, or had a dilemma about its ramifications. Some characters, like Batman, Superman, Daredevil and more have had strict no-kill codes. It’s a debate that plagues both comic lore and real life, as fans and characters grapple with its effects, or if you are the Punisher or Deadpool, you give zero [frick]s and kill anyone you want.
 

In Man of Steel and Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice, the first two entries in the newly forming “DCEU”, either Batman kills, Superman kills or lots of collateral damage is caused by one or both. Many strong opinions are held about their practices in the films, and many rather inaccurate arguments have been made. In case you’re wondering, I don’t like the fact that both Superman and Batman kill or cause TONS of collateral damage. Before we start breaking down the arguments in favor of Batman and Superman killing, let’s break down their characters first.
 

Batman is perhaps the greatest hero to have a no-kill rule. It is highlighted a number of times in his history, and is quite notable in Under the Red Hood and Batman: Hush. Batman, let’s be honest, is a bit of a nutjob. A orphan decides to train around the world for 15-20 years, then returns to Gotham to take down criminals brutally in a bat costume. If he existed in this real world, he’d be locked up in an insane asylum. But despite his crazy flair, the one thing that really helps him stay (somewhat) sane is his no-kill rule. It's what separates him from the likes of Two-Face. Two-Face is what Batman could turn into, taking justice into his own hands, and murdering criminals. Batman, despite a few slip-ups, has remained this way all his career. No killing.


 

Superman is very much the same, at least in that he doesn’t want to kill. He has killed a few times, but for the most part, it is because he wants to save the world. Superman always tries to protect innocents, and is a noble warrior. Superman is someone you want to look up to, someone who is everything a human would ever want to be, yet retains a sense of honesty, compassion and earnesty. Whenever Superman fights, he finds any way possible way to end it in a peacefully, and prevent civilian casualties. Despite appearing to be the most alien of any of the human race, as he is able to fly in the skies and lift buildings, Superman is the most human of us all.

So, like Zod and Superman crashing into buildings in Man of Steel, in comes the DCEU, in all it’s (in)glory. Superman kills in this universe, and allows for lots of collateral damage, and is generally just unfun. In Batman v. Superman, in a rather bizarre take on the character, Superman seems MORE brooding than Batman. Batman is a blatant killer in this. No mercy, no care in the world. And it’s not some decision that harkens on saving the world. Batman does it just because they are causing a temporary disturbance in his path of violence. This Batman is shoot first, and (maybe) ask questions later. He actually puts a tracker on the truck, but despite this, chases it anyway. Why, you ask? I genuinely thinks he just wants to kill people. In addition to killing criminals, Batman has a vendetta against Superman. Rather than questioning Superman and talking to him, he threatens him and attempts to kill him. This is something you would NEVER see in the comics.

Many arguments defending the takes on the characters have been seen over the years. I just happen to disagree with them completely. Let’s look at each of them individually. Let’s start with all the arguments defending the Superman in the universe.
 

DEFENSE NUMBER ONE: SUPERMAN HAS KILLED IN THE COMICS BEFORE!


 

This is an argument hard to argue with, because, frankly it IS fact. What it is missing, however, is Superman’s characterization surrounding the events in which he killed in the comics. Superman has killed Zod in the comics before, sure. But Superman did in fact, after Zod's death, go on self-exile. The few other incidents of his killing harken on Superman for much of his career afterwards. He kills Zod in Man of Steel, and to be fair, he does do it as a last resort. But despite a raging cry about the death, Superman appears rather gleeful in the next scene. Superman killed the last member of his race, but despite this, he moves on, and it becomes a non consequential event on his consciousness as far as we, the audience, can tell.
 

DEFENSE NUMBER TWO: SUPERMAN COULDN’T CONTROL ALL THE DAMAGE!


 

The thing is, he often can. He punched Zod through multiple things in Smallville, and did the same with Faora and the big Kryptonian muscle dude in Man of Steel, and throws a guy through four concrete walls in Batman v. Superman. But his role in it isn’t the big problem, it’s his REACTION to it all, or lack thereof, that’s the severe problem. In the battle of Metropolis we see a horrifying event that destroys a big portion of the city. But Superman arrives and decides to kill time by kissing Lois. When Zod pops up, they fight throughout the city, and to be fair, Superman does cause little damage, but he clumsily gets thrown by Zod through building and building. He and Zod end the fight, of course, but again, Superman shows little compassion for the innocent lives lost in the battle. During the battle, a parking garage falls and he just stands there. Ouch. While it isn’t as obvious in Batman v. Superman, one key scene is just awful, the courtroom scene. When several dozen people in the room die in front of his eyes, and he stands there, and looks a little sad. But then he just goes and whines to Lois, and then goes on self-exile until Lois is thrown off a building by Mark Zuckerlex. He doesn’t attempt to save anyone, or at least, no one we see. He just dips. It’s really dishonest to the character.
 

Now, let’s look at the defenses of Batman killing.
 

DEFENSE NUMBER ONE: BATMAN HAS KILLED IN THE COMICS BEFORE!


 

He sure has, all of what, four times? He did kill rampantly in his first year, but that has been retconned and forgotten a thousand times over. Now, for the times he has killed, selection is few and far between. He did technically kill KGBeast by leaving him in a room to die, however, this was retconned later, so that death doesn’t count. It could be argued that he killed in The Dark Knight Returns, but A.) It’s not considered canon to pre or post crisis, despite your headcanon, and B.) The “I believe you” bit is heavily debated and there is no definitive standing on it, and everything else is so minor that it holds no bearing on the story, and even then, it could be argued he never killed in the story at all. Not to mention he says no to both guns and killing throughout it. People say he killed at the end of The Killing Joke, but despite this, Joker shows up later in the same continuity, so Moore’s original intent is really irrelevant. The most famous, and recent example is Batman killing Darkseid in Final Crisis. But to be frank, this moment is a well calibrated move that shows Batman moving past his own rule to save the entire planet. So to sum it up, every time Batman has killed has either been retconned or is a major part of the story that Batman doesn’t take lightly.
 

In Batman v. Superman, this is not the Batman we get whatsoever. He kills criminals in a rampant, uncaring way. He blows people up, crashes into them and drives on with no care at all. He sees a threat in Superman, and instead of doing a classic Batman move and investigating him and talking to him, he sees violence and death as the only way of dealing with Superman. Batman acts more like the Punisher in this film, and it really isn’t true at all to the character whatsoever. Even if the times he did kill in the comics post-1941 were canon, his thirst for killing in this FAR supercedes those few outlying deaths. But the point is, those deaths aren’t canon. So stop acting like they are.
 

DEFENSE NUMBER TWO: BATMAN HAS KILLED IN THE MOVIES BEFORE!


 

First, when did we ever say we were okay with those instances? I frankly never liked the Burton movies, and hate that he killed in those movies. It wasn’t okay then, and it isn’t okay now. On top of that, this take on the character was heralded as some great, pure take on the character, when in reality, despite being a great visual treat, is different from the very core of Batman in every way.
 

People also look at the Nolan movies and claim that he killed in those movies, and in reality, he kind of didn’t. It could certainly be argued he killed Ra’s, but it is a CONTESTED matter, not a blatant fact. The other times he “killed” in it were merely unintentional deaths, if deaths at all. Plus it’s made clear throughout the trilogy he has a strict no-kill rule. Snyder's Batman just doesn’t care, he’ll brand you, ensuring a horrific prison death.
 

Now, let’s look at an argument that is just bizarre.
 

OTHER COMIC BOOK MOVIE HEROES KILL TOO!


 

Ugh. I mean, UGHHHHHH. This is truly just the dumbest argument I’ve seen defending this film. The thing is, let’s take Cap for example, has killed, A LOT in the comics. Like, A LOT. But guess what, he is a soldier. The same applies to the other heroes people point to. They kill in the comics, and don’t have a strict no-kill policy. And since when are we holding a character like Iron Man to the same standards we hold BATMAN AND SUPERMAN to? It's just bad. In the recent Movie Fight discussing BvS on Screen Junkies, one guy defends the choice for Batman to kill by saying “James Bond kills in his movies, why can’t Batman?” I mean, jesus christ. Holy shit, this is the most blatant misunderstanding of the characters EVER. When you’re comparing James Bond, a SPY who killed in his original source, to Batman, a guy who makes it consistently clear that he will NEVER kill, and calling them one and the same, it really stinks of desperation.
 

The problem with the renditions of these characters is they are blatantly clumsy, or kill with little to no remorse. The history of these characters don’t back up their motivations and characterizations in this universe, and it overall stinks. It sucks that the best adaption of Batman and Superman may remain Bruce Timm’s rendition of them, which ended almost a decade ago. If you think of these characters as a live action rendition of the Crime Syndicate, it makes it an easier pill to swallow.


 

Superman and Batman can be better. These have been the two mainstays of comics for years, and instead of making Superman dark and gloomy, or Batman a violent killer, let’s make them better. Let’s make Superman someone we aspire to be, or Batman a character we truly feel sadness and empathy for, not anger at for killing mercilessly. Instead of Superman threatening humans, or Batman killing them, let’s have some inspiration in these heroes again.
 

What do you think? Am I a crazy Marvel dickrider? Am I a DC nutjob? Sound off below!

 
James Gunn Reveals His Title For A (Hypothetical) BATMAN And SUPERMAN Team-Up Movie
Related:

James Gunn Reveals His Title For A (Hypothetical) BATMAN And SUPERMAN Team-Up Movie

BATMAN: Ben Affleck's DCEU Appearances Ranked From Worst To Best According To Rotten Tomatoes
Recommended For You:

BATMAN: Ben Affleck's DCEU Appearances Ranked From Worst To Best According To Rotten Tomatoes

DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

1 2
BatmanHeisenberg
BatmanHeisenberg - 4/7/2016, 12:37 AM
I look forward to the real Superman someday.

DudeOfSteel16
DudeOfSteel16 - 4/7/2016, 10:38 AM
@BatmanHeisenberg - Now that is the true Superman. The definitive version for me is the Superman from The Animated Series.
nikgrid
nikgrid - 4/7/2016, 11:41 PM
@BatmanHeisenberg - "But despite his crazy flair, the one thing that really helps him stay (somewhat) sane is his no-kill rule."
AND a Robin. In the comics when JT died Batman was getting darker and more brutal.

"But guess what, he is a soldier."
And so is Batman by the time the Dark Knight returns comes around, complete with his own army. And the Batman from BvS is closer to THAT Batman than he is Adam West's, Denny O'Neill's and Paul Dini's

As for Superman that is what a battle between two Kryptonians would look like...it just would, and this world is not a cartoon.

Watch Superman II again and see what Zod does in between throwing him into a bus, he waits for him....Zod in MOS doesn't give Superman time to catch a breath. It's a fight between a Kryptonian Special forces guy and the son of a Farmer with no fight training.
BatmanHeisenberg
BatmanHeisenberg - 4/7/2016, 12:40 AM
I can't wait for the real Batman someday.

BatmanHeisenberg
BatmanHeisenberg - 4/7/2016, 12:41 AM
Again, for those saying Batman killed Darkseid:

crawley
crawley - 4/7/2016, 5:51 AM
@BatmanHeisenberg - Darkseid isn't human. Saying Batman can't kill aliens and monsters is like saying he can't eat a chicken breast.

And as far as guns, he says everything he needs to right there. A ONCE-IN-A-LIFETIME EXCEPTION.

I saw him make that "exception" at least 4 times in that film. On humans.
BatmanHeisenberg
BatmanHeisenberg - 4/7/2016, 11:47 AM
@crawley - Exactly. Batman killed Darkseid because it was the ONE exception, to save the human race. In this he did it just ciz.
BatmanHeisenberg
BatmanHeisenberg - 4/7/2016, 12:49 AM
When Captain America is more inspirational than Superman, there is a problem.

SimplyAz
SimplyAz - 4/7/2016, 3:21 AM
Although I enjoy the darker Superman, I would like them to have Superman go and become more Boy Scout and go and go out of his way and save people.

Less Lois being shoehorned into the movie, reminds me of Arrow where it's hard to watch because of how badly the relationships are written.

Batman felt spot on to me in the movie.

Good article though and well written.
Odin
Odin - 4/7/2016, 7:56 AM
@BatmanHeisenberg
I guess the reason why I'm able to look pass Batman killing in movies (whether it's Affleck or Keaton) is because I know from the start that no movie is going to be my definitive version of the character, I already have that. Arkhamverse is already as perfect version of Batman-mythos as I can imagine, on your point in this article; just look at Batman and Joker's final conversation at end of Arkham City. In movie version everything else on character's portrayal is working, I can look pass that flaw.

As for Superman...as you said, in the end he may kill. To him not killing is an ideal, not a rule.
01928401
01928401 - 4/7/2016, 10:15 AM
One of the biggest problems with Batman killing is the fact that he's a retired hero with a shitload of villains in prison. If he's cool with killing a couple thugs, Joker should be dead as [frick] right now.
Forthas
Forthas - 4/7/2016, 10:56 AM
@PietroJaximoff - Maybe Joker has a mother named Martha... Sorry ...I could not help it!
FlyntCoal
FlyntCoal - 4/7/2016, 10:58 AM
@PietroJaximoff - His methods have clearly changed. He's more brutal now. Alfred even mentions that Bruce is changing his rules.
01928401
01928401 - 4/7/2016, 11:05 AM
@FlyntCoal - So we should automatically assume that means Bruce just gave up his strict no-kill rule for the sake of taking out a couple henchmen? Oh okay.
FlyntCoal
FlyntCoal - 4/7/2016, 11:19 AM
@PietroJaximoff - Yep. Just for taking out those henchmen. That's what I said.
01928401
01928401 - 4/7/2016, 12:03 PM
@FlyntCoal - You couldn't exactly have implied anything else seeing as that's all we've seen and know about the current Batman. If he came out and said it, cool. But he didn't. There was an implication from a suit in a cave and his butler that possibly maybe he felt like killing was cool now. And seeing as he only killed some henchmen, that's kinda where we end up.
FlyntCoal
FlyntCoal - 4/7/2016, 12:09 PM
@PietroJaximoff - I see where you're coming from but also almost killed Superman.

He also is branding his enemies which is new.
01928401
01928401 - 4/7/2016, 12:45 PM
@FlyntCoal - The branding is brutal, yeah, but not killing. It's honestly one of the things I appreciated more than most as I could actually see Bats doing something like that. As for killing Superman, I also would have been fine with it. Bats would have essentially been doing what Supes did to Zod in MOS. Just trying to protect his home from someone he feels couldn't be stopped otherwise. It's the seemingly needless killing of powerless thugs that I can't get behind. I get that it's a divisive plotpoint, but I see at as a plothole at the very least.
FlyntCoal
FlyntCoal - 4/7/2016, 1:49 PM
@PietroJaximoff - I don't necessarily disagree but at the same time, but didn't Bruce think that the men were carrying a dirty bomb that could potentially destroy Gotham?
01928401
01928401 - 4/7/2016, 2:24 PM
@FlyntCoal - Possibly. I need to watch it again for sure. But I'm sure at least one of Batman's former villains he had incarcerated attempted to destroy Gotham. It just seems a bit strange to me to start this new Batman's story post-career. Now we have to ask all these questions about his past that probably won't get answered. We just have to assume he never killed anyone, and if he did, why not the majorly violent ones like Joker, Harley, Croc, etc.
FlyntCoal
FlyntCoal - 4/7/2016, 2:31 PM
@PietroJaximoff - I suppose.
nasamutalisk
nasamutalisk - 4/8/2016, 2:40 AM
@FlyntCoal - I might remember it wrong, but I think Bruce was lying to Alfred about the bomb. It was that huge rock of kryptonite instead
FlyntCoal
FlyntCoal - 4/9/2016, 2:12 PM
@nasamutalisk - Hmmm, that might be the case.
Forthas
Forthas - 4/7/2016, 11:15 AM
Excellent article BTW. Great job!
Forthas
Forthas - 4/7/2016, 11:18 AM
I am so sick and tired of people bringing up the Nolan films as an excuse to show that it is OK that Batman kills. He did not kill except in only one justified case.

It is FALSE that he killed Ras Al Ghul because of the simple fact that people assume that he could have saved him. Re-watch the scene. Was Batman supposed to carry Ras Al Ghul away as he glided to safety. He would have actually killed him and himself since it is unlikely that his extended cape could support both their weight and they both would have fell to their death.

Virtually every other instance is clearly not directly killing anyone but is rather accidental.

The only instance in which you could argue he directly killed someone is the driver transporting the bomb at the end of the Dark Knight Rises. But even in that instance it is ridiculous to ignore the context. The driver and Talia Al Ghul were on a suicide mission. So Batman's calculus is... no matter what he does (or does not do) the two of them would die either the way they wanted (bomb explodes) or in Batman's attempts to stop them...the outcome is the same as far as Talia and the driver are concerned making killing them essentially inconsequential.
BarnaclePete
BarnaclePete - 4/7/2016, 12:35 PM
@Forthas - How about all of the League of Assassins guys he killed in Batman Beings when he blew up their base including the impostor Ras Al Ghul?
Forthas
Forthas - 4/7/2016, 12:51 PM
@BarnaclePete - Do you really believe he planned it that way? He made a split second decision when faced with the prospect of having to fight his way out of the building. He obviously ignited the explosives as a diversion. If he thought the building would explode, why do it ...he was in the building!

So you can mark that as accidental...assuming they are dead since only one person is shown to have died in what was clearly an unplanned accident.
nasamutalisk
nasamutalisk - 4/8/2016, 4:44 AM
@Forthas - what about tossing Harvey Dent to his death?
1 2
View Recorder