-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Batman v Superman Spoiler Thread: Don't believe everything you read, Son
- Thread starter N7Commander95
- Start date
- Status
I just thought you'd already read the previous pages in this thread. I can be open now, I guess. Unless you want all the nitty and gritty details, there's not much left to search for.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Gift us.
Could you expand on his death? Is Superman and Clark both dead? are we never going to have a MoS2 with Clark Kent?
Superman is obviously alive. As for how they rework all this in, I have no idea. Your guess would be as good as mine.
I mean, does he die at all? Or is there only a funeral for Clark?
Or is that synopsis pretty much true. He sacrificed himself on Doomsday, both get buried, then the final shot of the grave?
It's his funeral. That post pretty much got it spot on, friend. I mean, I don't remember Batman setting anyone on fire, but then I didn't see the movie two days ago.
beyond_death
Member
Ahh confirmed. Good because it sounded great minus Batman killing people.
Damn, was hoping if anything they would have Clark missing in action in Africa or something so they could bring him back.
I'm pretty sure Clark Kent isn't going anywhere.
I'm just curious about one thing. The Rock, and when they intend on bringing him into this universe. I figure that one poster was most likely right about Justice League being that Aquaman story, because I hope I'm wrong in thinking Darkseid is next. I feel like he can wait a movie. I don't know. I figure this will be more interesting when more folks have seen it, and the more comic knowledgeable ones start coming up with their theories.
Wait but how? He's dead. He's not like Superman where he can come back to life without people giving it a second thought
Which Aquaman story? Throne of Atlantis? I'm watching that now..
Could be. The Thanos approach is the right move.
Imperfected
Member
If you want to have Batman kill people, I'm willing to hear you out on what you want to do that requires that interpretation and why you think it's a good idea.
However: he should be snapping necks, not exercising the sort of extreme moral cowardice exemplified by "branding" people in such a way to get others to kill them for him. That's obviously the sort of logic a
Hollywood producer would come up with thinking they're "having their cake and eating it too" by having Batman kill people without killing.
The reality is that it just makes him a childish coward. And hey, if that's your vision of Batman--that he has a child-like grasp on ethics because he never grew up properly--that's potentially cool. I get the feeling that isn't the artistic intent, though, and that it's rather a blaring insult to the audience.
However: he should be snapping necks, not exercising the sort of extreme moral cowardice exemplified by "branding" people in such a way to get others to kill them for him. That's obviously the sort of logic a
complete sociopath
The reality is that it just makes him a childish coward. And hey, if that's your vision of Batman--that he has a child-like grasp on ethics because he never grew up properly--that's potentially cool. I get the feeling that isn't the artistic intent, though, and that it's rather a blaring insult to the audience.
generic_username
I switched to an alt account to ditch my embarrassing tag so I could be an embarrassing Naughty Dog fanboy in peace. Ask me anything!
I do not like the idea of Batman killing people. There is a difference between Batman and say a guy like Punisher. Having said that I am curious to see what that controversial scene is. I am cool with bones being broken but killing seems to be taking it too far. All in all though this already seems more interesting than the average comic book movie. Soo many shocking events seem to be taking place.
Where there's a will, there's a way. So they say.
I think that's the one. I was asking about comic precedents for the Justice League coming together a couple weeks ago since Buttman is obviously taking the next step. I think it was Polaburr who mentioned an Aquaman story where they invade the surface and the Justice League fights them. The other one was Darkseid.
I figure they're probably not going to outright copy these stories so maybe they adapt the Aquaman one to bring the Justice League together, and then we move on to Darkseid. It's probably a terrible guess but I'm really hoping it's not Darkseid since it feels too obvious. But then I don't want Aquaman's story either.
So really, I'm just hoping they come out with something good. That's where I'm at.
generic_username
I switched to an alt account to ditch my embarrassing tag so I could be an embarrassing Naughty Dog fanboy in peace. Ask me anything!
Quick question - I still dont get how the Knightmare sequence is triggered. Is it Flash somehow taking Bruce to another timeline?
Hm interesting. Thanks for clarifying! Now I can rest easy without worrying about being spoiled on accident. I hope it has the same emotional impact on me.
I believe Aquaman has a solo film before JL so I'm not sure how that'd work out
Tell that to this Guy
I'm confused. I thought we were talking about Batman and Superman.
Frank Miller wrote DKR without compromising things that make Batman, well, Batman. Yes, it was grim, dark, cynical but it wasn't antithetical to the character. He arguably kills in only one moment, and it's one of the most impactful moments in the book. Snyder's interpretation seems cheap by comparison when he's branding criminals and blasting them with a machine gun on his batwing or whatever (the common interpretation of the M60 page from DKR is that he shot the mutant's hand). The themes you mentioned have already been explored successfully in DKR and BvS seems to be stripping any poignancy in favor of an even darker tone. I'm just simply predicting that such "experimentation" will result in garbage, especially in a movie that is supposed to be introductory to a whole cinematic universe.
And, I'm not arguing against "experimentation" as you put it, I'm disparaging things that have already been done with batman in the comics (such as making him a murderer) that simply don't work.
generic_username
I switched to an alt account to ditch my embarrassing tag so I could be an embarrassing Naughty Dog fanboy in peace. Ask me anything!
Batman straight up kills a guy when saving Carrie Kelley. While I prefer Batman not to kill I am very curious to see this interpretation. To be fair I am currently watching Daredevil season 2 and hearing this constant no kill moaning that Matt keeps spouting is getting soo tiring.
All I can say is Snyder sure has some balls to make Batman kill after receiving a ton of criticism on Superman killing. Like how did WB agree? lol
BossDarkseid
Member
I feel like if the bat brand is ineterpreted as him killing paedophiles and rapists by leaving them to be killed in prison we see by the end...after Clark has "died" that he doesnt brand Lex, he brands his cell so something of a sea change/evolution/arc for his ideology could be interesting. Especially since this version seems slightly unhinged.
I dont know or cant remember if in the comics there was a catalyst other than a new writer who gave him a no kill rule but i will leave yu up to a justice systen that perpetually fails. Considering Joker etc get sent to Arkham it wouldnt create this weird...divids i guess...esp if in SS or something we see that Joker has been branded.
Not sure i believe the mexican person on twitter saying theres a credits scene of Desaad and Darkseid...i want to but...
I dont know or cant remember if in the comics there was a catalyst other than a new writer who gave him a no kill rule but i will leave yu up to a justice systen that perpetually fails. Considering Joker etc get sent to Arkham it wouldnt create this weird...divids i guess...esp if in SS or something we see that Joker has been branded.
Not sure i believe the mexican person on twitter saying theres a credits scene of Desaad and Darkseid...i want to but...
Batman killing can't counter his mission - to prove the system can work. That criminals face Justice in the eyes of the law, and the structures put in place can stand on their own. That he won't just take vengeance as sees fit.
But when Darkseid starts suddenly attacking Earth, he's not putting parademons in sleeper holds.
The League of Assassins? Supervillains? Those can be arrested, tried, and convicted. Once their out of his hands, they're not his concern. If they're going to die in prison, that's not up to him.
But the Nolan movies added a bit of nuance to his actions as to not be this hard line rule. Bane and Ra's Al Ghul are warlords who exist more or less outside all structures. Gotham is more or less literally at war in that scenario. And I'd imagine killing Harvey in saving Gordon's kid would be viewed as far more understandable if the courts knew what really happened in what was more or less a "no way out" scenario.
But as far as this movie goes, I'd imagine his "branding" is more or less representative of his increased brutality after losing Jason. It may not always have been like that, and it seems the arc here is Superman pulling Bats out of that hole.
But when Darkseid starts suddenly attacking Earth, he's not putting parademons in sleeper holds.
The League of Assassins? Supervillains? Those can be arrested, tried, and convicted. Once their out of his hands, they're not his concern. If they're going to die in prison, that's not up to him.
But the Nolan movies added a bit of nuance to his actions as to not be this hard line rule. Bane and Ra's Al Ghul are warlords who exist more or less outside all structures. Gotham is more or less literally at war in that scenario. And I'd imagine killing Harvey in saving Gordon's kid would be viewed as far more understandable if the courts knew what really happened in what was more or less a "no way out" scenario.
But as far as this movie goes, I'd imagine his "branding" is more or less representative of his increased brutality after losing Jason. It may not always have been like that, and it seems the arc here is Superman pulling Bats out of that hole.
Which part was that? I'm trying to find an image of it since I don't have my copy of DKR with me. How does he kill the mutant? Is this in the arcade scene? He throws Spike into the sign but It's far from implied that Spike died as a result.
No Darkseid when I saw it for what it's worth. There was no credits scene at all.
Anyway, my last thoughts are this. The movie was really good. It still doesn't top The Dark Knight trilogy in my eyes, but I'm aware this is a subjective thing. It's still better than the rest of the superhero movies. I just hope Spike-Hulk gets the respect he deserves. My man rising from the grave Superbald put him in, and is like this isn't even my final form, goes Super Saiyan 3 in a clearly unfair handicap match, and makes Supersauce the Superjobber. So when you're all getting moved by Superman's sacrifice, don't forget this Man of Murder tried to murder the same entity two movies in a row, but Spike-Hulk wasn't going to stand for that shit.
Balee dat.
Anyway, my last thoughts are this. The movie was really good. It still doesn't top The Dark Knight trilogy in my eyes, but I'm aware this is a subjective thing. It's still better than the rest of the superhero movies. I just hope Spike-Hulk gets the respect he deserves. My man rising from the grave Superbald put him in, and is like this isn't even my final form, goes Super Saiyan 3 in a clearly unfair handicap match, and makes Supersauce the Superjobber. So when you're all getting moved by Superman's sacrifice, don't forget this Man of Murder tried to murder the same entity two movies in a row, but Spike-Hulk wasn't going to stand for that shit.
Balee dat.
I can't remember if it was that scene, but in the scene with the other kid being held hostage by the mutant going "I'LL DO IT, MAN! YOU DON'T BELIEVE ME?!" Batman shoots him (?) and says "I believe you."
Again, less of a hard line and more of a "there's no way out of this."
L
Lord Virgin
Unconfirmed Member
So when he tried to kill him the second time...neck snap or no? If not: Boooo.
Yeah, but the common interpretation of that is that he shot to wound, and not to kill. In the animated adaptation he shot the mutant's hand. It's also deliberately ambiguous, so who knows.
Also not the part where he saves Carrie in the Arcade.
LMFAO. What I find disturbing is I actually understood everything here.
generic_username
I switched to an alt account to ditch my embarrassing tag so I could be an embarrassing Naughty Dog fanboy in peace. Ask me anything!
Well they dont show his body. If we want to believe Batman's no kill rule we have to assume he survived. I do not know how the mutant would have survived that electrocution but whatever. In that case we may probably be able to give the same benefit of doubt to BVS batman's victims. Again I do not know how the entire scene is depicted but it is too early to judge the incorrectness of the decision without seeing how it plays out.
The batman lighting someone on fire rumor could theoretically be no different than this scene
If they do not show the body assume he survives
page 64
fwiw, in the movie version, the person survives. The comic is ambiguous - he shoots him with a gun, and they show bullet holes and blood splatter, but don't say if he's dead or just injured.
They do, they show the guy leaning against a wall with a bullet hole beside his head with a huge blood splatter behind him, and his mouth open. But it's not agape, it's in an "oooooh" expression.
I'm pretty sure he doesn't kill Spike, but those blurred lines are obviously make DKR what it is. Between that and the scene with the M60 I like to think that it's just shades of him losing control before the Joker scene. These are thematic choices though, not choices made to make Batman edgier for the sake of tonality, which is the vibe I get from BvS.
The SHH synopsis says he pretty clearly kills criminals, and I think the branding counts as Batman handing down a death sentence.
You're right though. I'm just going off the synopsis as if it were true, but it could be a load of shit of course. A distaste for Batman killing is just a matter of opinion. I just prefer that he not do it.
BossDarkseid
Member
I understood nothing.
Well they dont show his body. If we want to believe Batman's no kill rule we have to assume he survived. I do not know how the mutant would have survived that electrocution but whatever. In that case we may probably be able to give the same benefit of doubt to BVS batman's victims. Again I do not know how the entire scene is depicted but it is too early to judge the incorrectness of the decision without seeing how it plays out.
The batman lighting someone on fire rumor could theoretically be no different than this scene
If they do not show the body assume he survives
He's talking about the scene with the hostage where batman breaks through the wall, the guy he shoots isn't named.
Spike, the guy in the gif you posted above, obviously lives because he shows up again later. He's the "Chicken legs, licken chegs" guy that carrie tricks into going to the meeting.
generic_username
I switched to an alt account to ditch my embarrassing tag so I could be an embarrassing Naughty Dog fanboy in peace. Ask me anything!
Does anyone know how the nightmare sequence is triggered? Is it Flash?
That is a fair point. It totally slipped my mind.
Batman is being made edgier because they are trying to differentiate the approaches of Superman and Batman to justice and hence creating a conflict. Having said that I agree that these differences can be shown without making Batman kill necessarily but I am going to wait it out and see how it plays when I watch the movie.
I really agree with this. The more I read these spoilers the more I feel this is really Superman pulling Batman out of that hole. They are really pushing Superman in this movie as the major hero here - sacrificing himself for the planet, showing Batman the right way to embrace justice and becoming the symbol of hope.
That is a fair point. It totally slipped my mind.
Batman is being made edgier because they are trying to differentiate the approaches of Superman and Batman to justice and hence creating a conflict. Having said that I agree that these differences can be shown without making Batman kill necessarily but I am going to wait it out and see how it plays when I watch the movie.
I really agree with this. The more I read these spoilers the more I feel this is really Superman pulling Batman out of that hole. They are really pushing Superman in this movie as the major hero here - sacrificing himself for the planet, showing Batman the right way to embrace justice and becoming the symbol of hope.
I agree that Spike lives, but I thought she tricked DON and ROB.
Wait, actually, I think you're right.
I could have sworn spike shows up later on, though.
generic_username
I switched to an alt account to ditch my embarrassing tag so I could be an embarrassing Naughty Dog fanboy in peace. Ask me anything!
Even I am confused. Do they actually show Spike coming back? I remember they dont quite show what happened to him and I just assumed he survived. Damn good excuse for me to read the novel again. It has been a few years anyways.
Also I know a lot of people hate Faraci and I frequently disagree with him, but he generally reflects my feelings in this editorial, especially the bit about DKR.
http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/02/24/r-rated-superhero-stories-are-inherently-revisionist
http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/02/24/r-rated-superhero-stories-are-inherently-revisionist
shira
Member
It's a solid article, but it looks like BvS isn't ignoring the fantastical or doing any kind of deconstruction so the point is kind of moot.
Again, The Avengers had an R rating at first. Only difference is that Marvel wasn't interested in releasing it (which is fair enough).
generic_username
I switched to an alt account to ditch my embarrassing tag so I could be an embarrassing Naughty Dog fanboy in peace. Ask me anything!
I still dont get how Snyder or WB had the balls to make Batman kill when they got such a backlash for showing Superman kill Zod. Like I am partly flabbergasted and partly in admiration of their courage to go through with this. At this point they have decided to go completely opposite of MCU in every way whether it is good or bad.
This is me walking down to the theater on release
MoS suit was one of the greats.
It's yet another article obsessed with what one cut of one movie got in one territory. In the US, everything above appropriate for 13-year-olds jumps to 17-year-olds, even if it's a few frames. In the UK, it jumps from 12-year-olds to 15-year-olds. So which one is the line we're drawing? We already know it's little bits here and there that were over the PG-13 line, not some Robocop-style gory deconstruction.
That's not inherently revisionist, it's a game that directors and editors play with the MPAA to toe the line without crossing it. A huge overreaction and incredibly myopic view of comic book cinema.
Was?
Schweinehund
Member
Glad I didn't read the play by play of the movie in that SSH post then.
So I'm guessing Spike-hulk grows Spikes?
Disappointed there's no Black Adam, seems utterly pointless that they casted him so early :|.
He could show up in the extended cut, but obviously I haven't see the movie so I don't know if there's even a part in the knightmare sequence where they could put him. The Knightmare sequence is in Khandaq though right? Or do they not even say.
Apparently they don't say he kills, but it's just like Arkham where bullshit happens and you're expected to believe that he didn't end up killing the guy.
Which is kind of dumb, especially if the Batwing doing a drive by where the truck literally explodes is him not killing...
So I'm guessing Spike-hulk grows Spikes?
Disappointed there's no Black Adam, seems utterly pointless that they casted him so early :|.
He could show up in the extended cut, but obviously I haven't see the movie so I don't know if there's even a part in the knightmare sequence where they could put him. The Knightmare sequence is in Khandaq though right? Or do they not even say.
Apparently they don't say he kills, but it's just like Arkham where bullshit happens and you're expected to believe that he didn't end up killing the guy.
Which is kind of dumb, especially if the Batwing doing a drive by where the truck literally explodes is him not killing...
I'm not a fan of the changes the costume got for BvS. I'm hoping it'll look good in the film, it looks so damn stiff in all the stills.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked