[QUOTE=Xenomoose;50969499]This makes me wonder. Since Deathstroke is usually portrayed as an Assassin/Mercenary, chances are whatever he's doing in the movie is being done on someone else's dime, which would make him just one antagonist in the movie. So the question is: Who's paying him? Who's the real antagonist of the movie?
This is actually getting me a little interested. And as someone who hasn't cared for this cinematic universe, that's kind of a good sign, I think.[/QUOTE]
It's more likely this is a Justice League appearance since the Batman film hasn't even started filming yet and I doubt Affleck has the time to do anything for his film when JL is in the middle of principal photography.
Wrap is saying he will be the main villain in the Batman solo film, so this is probably just a JL cameo.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50969248]So, ignoring the dead people, you can't/won't/wouldn't, want to see action that looks as good as that and as Batman-esque as that?
You're entitled to your opinion, but that's all it is.[/QUOTE]
I'm mainly referring to Batman overall in the movie. That scene is good aside from him killing people in it. I just couldn't stand the first Batmobile sequence. Coming off of Arkham Knight I was wondering how he would handle that situation. Would he use bean bag guns? Stun guns? Nope just twin Vulcans.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;50969352]Batman in BVS operates on Comic Book logic where even the average human being can literally get flung into a wall and have their ribcage cave in and still survive because the hero isn't supposed to kill.
It doesn't excuse some shit like him literally making a man [I]explode[/I] but Batman breaking people in half is really common and generally accepted as suspension of disbelief.[/QUOTE]
That makes sense until you actually see him kill people. You can also count the dream sequence since that was a flash-forward.
In BvS Batman has been jaded after decades of crime fighting, seeing his family and friends die. He calls criminals 'weeds'. It's safe to assume he stopped caring long ago.
[QUOTE=Novangel;50969701]In BvS Batman has been jaded after decades of crime fighting, calling criminals 'weeds'. It's safe to assume he stopped caring long ago.[/QUOTE]
You can have a jaded Batman without him killing people just make him more brutal with his methods.
Why are people defending BvS?
[QUOTE=Novangel;50969701]In BvS Batman has been jaded after decades of crime fighting, seeing his family and friends die. He calls criminals 'weeds'. It's safe to assume he stopped caring long ago.[/QUOTE]
There was absolutely nothing referring to his past and no one questions his methods nor does anyone bring up the fact he's killing people.
If they aren't addressing it in the film then this argument is merely headcanon. You don't get to make drastic changes to a character, who is famous for one simple rule, without addressing said changes.
[QUOTE=Xenomoose;50969499]This makes me wonder. Since Deathstroke is usually portrayed as an Assassin/Mercenary, chances are whatever he's doing in the movie is being done on someone else's dime, which would make him just one antagonist in the movie. So the question is: Who's paying him? Who's the real antagonist of the movie?
This is actually getting me a little interested. And as someone who hasn't cared for this cinematic universe, that's kind of a good sign, I think.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=spekter;50969517]It's more likely this is a Justice League appearance since the Batman film hasn't even started filming yet and I doubt Affleck has the time to do anything for his film when JL is in the middle of principal photography.
Wrap is saying he will be the main villain in the Batman solo film, so this is probably just a JL cameo.[/QUOTE]
You have to understand that Deathstroke is more than just another villain, he's essentially the Anti-Batman, a character who could easily hold his own series (he's had his own comic runs multiple times and he's had his own ongoing since the New 52 reboot.)
In all likelihood he'll be a recurring character and im positive he'll get his own solo film, and it'd be smart for them to do that. He's flexible in that he can run anywhere a Jason Voorhees style role, to a Punisher style role, and anywhere in between depending on who he's being contracted to kill, or protect, and why.
[QUOTE=SpartanXC9;50969709]You can have a jaded Batman without him killing people just make him more brutal with his methods.
Why are people defending BvS?[/QUOTE]
Because not every opinion of the film is the same?
I enjoyed a terrible film with tons of plot holes and other failings. I enjoyed it. Does that make me inferior or something or does it mean I can just distance my enjoyment from my critical break down of something?
[editline]29th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=SpartanXC9;50969666]I'm mainly referring to Batman overall in the movie. That scene is good aside from him killing people in it. I just couldn't stand the first Batmobile sequence. Coming off of Arkham Knight I was wondering how he would handle that situation. Would he use bean bag guns? Stun guns? Nope just twin Vulcans.
That makes sense until you actually see him kill people. You can also count the dream sequence since that was a flash-forward.[/QUOTE]
That was a dream sequence, not a flash forward, at least not based off of what we have to go on in that film.
Yeah they honestly should have just looked at Knights concepts when they were both in development.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50969235]Batmans not going to save a guy with a grenade. I don't get why anyones upset about that death. He's let people die before, there's a difference between killing a person and letting them die.[/QUOTE]
it's not a choice between "save grenade guy" or "don't save grenade guy", though. there didn't have to be a grenade in the scene at all, they chose to write it into the script. there's plenty of other things they could've included to convey batman's morally questionable brutality
Batman killing makes more sense if you imagine it in the Captain America explanation they used in the comics, where he's fighting a war for the fate of the planet vs. what amounts to caped policework.
[editline]29th August 2016[/editline]
It was not portrayed as well as it should have been but the logic is still there in the "1% Chance" speech.
[editline]29th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50969878]it's not a choice between "save grenade guy" or "don't save grenade guy", though. there didn't have to be a grenade in the scene at all, they chose to write it into the script. there's plenty of other things they could've included to convey batman's morally questionable brutality[/QUOTE]
Batman does not murder the grenade guy. He causes his death, but Batman has caused the deaths of many people in the comics. The grenade death is actually very in line with something TDKR Batman would do. The gunning down the SUV guys and the car grinding dont, but that one is fine.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50969878]it's not a choice between "save grenade guy" or "don't save grenade guy", though. there didn't have to be a grenade in the scene at all, they chose to write it into the script. there's plenty of other things they could've included to convey batman's morally questionable brutality[/QUOTE]
Yeah of course you could just write it a different way but I don't think that's as interesting.
A guy wants to use a grenade against batman in the heat of battle. What should Bats do? Ultimately, it's a question and the answer depends on the tone you're going for. Batman could somehow batarang it so that it doesn't blow up. He could have some crazy bomb shield tech, he could just disable the grenade with some tech wizardy, or he could be limited by his lack of powers and have to make the tough choice to let a murderer wielding a grenade die to his own choices.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50969878]it's not a choice between "save grenade guy" or "don't save grenade guy", though. there didn't have to be a grenade in the scene at all, they chose to write it into the script. there's plenty of other things they could've included to convey batman's morally questionable brutality[/QUOTE]
That line of thinking is so lame; it was brought up for Man of Steel also with how they handled Zod. It's lazy and useless writing to keep a protagonist's scenario always in line with his morals. If he's never challenged, forced to make a hard decision, or otherwise leave his comfort zone then that character never grows.
Besides, the guy was an idiot to try and go towards the grenade, he could've crawled in the opposite direction and probably lived.
[QUOTE=Gar;50969920]That line of thinking is so lame; it was brought up for Man of Steel also with how they handled Zod. It's lazy and useless writing to keep a protagonist's scenario always in line with his morals. If he's never challenged, forced to make a hard decision, or otherwise leave his comfort zone then that character never grows.
Besides, the guy was an idiot to try and go towards the grenade, he could've crawled in the opposite direction and probably lived.[/QUOTE]
i just said i'm ok with morally questionable actions though??
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;50969930]i just said i'm ok with morally questionable actions though??[/QUOTE]
Then whats wrong with the grenade scene?
[QUOTE=AaronM202;50969936]Then whats wrong with the grenade scene?[/QUOTE]
it didn't resonate with me, it just wasn't the kind of morally questionable violence i felt should've been used on a random henchman. if that's what happened to the flamethrower guy, i'd probably have been ok with it. though it's probably made worse by the fact that it's part of the sequence where most of the not-as-questionable stuff happens
I get the sense from Ben's Bat that he doesn't out of his way to kill people but is willing to let them die if need be. He's still using hand to hand, he'll probably just use guns if he didn't give any fucks at all. Or a sword like Slade or Ghul.
I'm just looking at all these current versions of Batmans as version of the Dark Knight Returns where his morality is at it's end essentially. It's a version of Batman who can look back at his work and see his mistakes and his victories, what went right and what didn't. In the films, he's got the history of having seen Metropolis destroyed by gods that before that moment, there was never an indication that there was world ending evil out there, just shit like the Joker. Seeing that broke Batman is my guess and made him come back from retirement or whatever, in a much more brutal way to get prepared/to get to the bottom of whatever is coming next.
His rule is never what attracted me to Batman. Batmans an interesting character because of his drive, willpower, and his origins leading to the character we get, in whatever variation that comes in generally.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50969851]Because not every opinion of the film is the same?
I enjoyed a terrible film with tons of plot holes and other failings. I enjoyed it. Does that make me inferior or something or does it mean I can just distance my enjoyment from my critical break down of something?
[editline]29th August 2016[/editline]
That was a dream sequence, not a flash forward, at least not based off of what we have to go on in that film.
Yeah they honestly should have just looked at Knights concepts when they were both in development.[/QUOTE]
Actually since the Flash shows up afterwards that was the future if Lois died.
[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;50969985]I get the sense from Ben's Bat that he doesn't out of his way to kill people but is willing to let them die if need be. He's still using hand to hand, he'll probably just use guns if he didn't give any fucks at all. Or a sword like Slade or Ghul.[/QUOTE]
"doesn't go out of his way to kill people"
Did you miss the Batmobile scenes?
Also Suicide Squad doesn't address this [sp] but Deadshot, Harley and the Joker should be dead, especially in how he arrests Harley so the DCEU now has consistency errors[/sp]
[QUOTE=Butthurter;50970026]example of a cycle that repeats itself[/QUOTE]
Except Ben is a good filmmaker.
[editline]29th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=SpartanXC9;50970045]Actually since the Flash shows up afterwards that was the future if Lois died.[/QUOTE]
Speedforce.
On a topic other than the DCEU kill rule, current rumor is Joe Manganiello will be playing him as he recently visited London where JL is being filmed, Snyder and him started following each other on Twitter very recently, his wife started following Affleck on Twitter and grew a goatee for reasons.
[img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cq0y5uZWAAA29z3.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Butthurter;50970060]so is david ayer, whats your point
at the end of the day, producers and studio meddling are all that counts
[img]http://i.imgur.com/BaD6hUd.jpg[/img]
are we really going to ignore this?[/QUOTE]
No, David Ayer is hit or miss.
Affleck is good.
Affleck also has a producer role on his movie, not Snyder. Him and Johns are producing it.
Affleck is Writing, Directing, Starring, and Producing it. He has a fuckton more room and sway.
Also i dont get your point about Snyders credits.
[editline]29th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Takuat;50970064]On a topic other than the DCEU kill rule, current rumor is Joe Manganiello will be playing him as he recently visited London where JL is being filmed, Snyder and him started following each other on Twitter very recently, his wife started following Affleck on Twitter and grew a goatee for reasons.
[img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cq0y5uZWAAA29z3.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
The DCEU is literally a haven for Spider-Man trilogy actors.
[QUOTE=Takuat;50970064]On a topic other than the DCEU kill rule, current rumor is Joe Manganiello will be playing him as he recently visited London where JL is being filmed, Snyder and him started following each other on Twitter very recently, [b]his wife started following Affleck on Twitter and grew a goatee for reasons.[/b]
[/QUOTE]
that one was a headscratcher
[QUOTE=Demeschik;50970115]that one was a headscratcher[/QUOTE]
[t]http://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-15/sh0.08/e35/p640x640/13398446_124966734594990_739755251_n.jpg?ig_cache_key=MTI3NTgyOTQ5MTY3MTI4OTg3NA%3D%3D.2[/t]
[QUOTE=SpartanXC9;50969158]So you want to see Batman not be Batman and kill tons of people?[/QUOTE]
He was talking about Deathstroke.
[editline]29th August 2016[/editline]
Spartan, he was talking about fucking Deathstroke.
[QUOTE=lonefirewarrior;50968187]I just want to see [B]him[/B] [Deathstroke] fucking shit up the same way [B]Batman[/B][Batman] was in BvS.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=lonefirewarrior;50968187]I just want to see him fucking shit up the same way Batman was in BvS.
[video=youtube;MyVPh3Usrho]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyVPh3Usrho[/video]
I need more of this in my life.[/QUOTE]
nice thrustmaster warthog, alfred
I have wanted to see deathstroke in a live action movie for a long time defiantly an underused and underrated character.
Honestly deathstroke should have been the villain in dark knight rises he would have been a great fit without having to butcher an existing villain imo.
[QUOTE=yodaman888;50970375]I have wanted to see deathstroke in a live action movie for a long time defiantly an underused and underrated character.
Honestly deathstroke should have been the villain in dark knight rises he would have been a great fit without having to butcher an existing villain imo.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but Deathstrokeposting doesn't have the same ring to it.
[QUOTE=Water-Marine;50970460]Yeah, but Deathstrokeposting doesn't have the same ring to it.[/QUOTE]
you could call it stroking
[QUOTE=Tudd;50967678]The character had a whole season on Archer (**Arrow*** slip up) as the main villain and was arguably the best part of that? That's quite alot in terms of live-action comic shows.
Not to mention his appearances in the Batman games or Teen Titan.[/QUOTE]
He was the best part of the Arrow
Now the arrow is just tween garbage and most serious DC fans have stopped watching it
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50969899]Yeah of course you could just write it a different way but I don't think that's as interesting.
A guy wants to use a grenade against batman in the heat of battle. What should Bats do? Ultimately, it's a question and the answer depends on the tone you're going for. Batman could somehow batarang it so that it doesn't blow up. He could have some crazy bomb shield tech, he could just disable the grenade with some tech wizardy, or he could be limited by his lack of powers and have to make the tough choice to let a murderer wielding a grenade die to his own choices.[/QUOTE]
As much as someone who really enjoyed the middle of the film despite its major flaws, its a freaking [I]grenade.[/I] Batman or no someone's gonna blow up in about 3 seconds and reflexes kick in when a scenario like this is presented. It's hard the question Batman's thinking when he's fighting nearly 8+ people all at once.
[QUOTE=spekter;50969750]There was absolutely nothing referring to his past and no one questions his methods nor does anyone bring up the fact he's killing people.
If they aren't addressing it in the film then this argument is merely headcanon. You don't get to make drastic changes to a character, who is famous for one simple rule, without addressing said changes.[/QUOTE]
does robin's outfit with graffiti implying he's dead not count
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
