Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 34 of 34
  1. #31
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    22,990

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by babyblob View Post
    Why is Batman the only hero we debate the no kill rule with? Other heroes have mass murdering villains. Some of those villains are world or even cosmic threats yet we dont debate the no kill rule with them.
    He isn't the only one. Superman gets this almost as much. A few other heroes are better at handling this by either not having a no killing rule (Wonder Woman, Captain America, the Punisher) or toning down how violent their villains are (Spider-Man, the Flash, Blue Beetle).

    My problem with heroes killing is it is lazy writing more often then not. Cant find a way to beat a villain? Just kill him. Need a cheap hook for an emotional story, have a hero who has a no kill rule struggle with the idea of killing a foe.
    Lazy writing is how we got the umpteenth "will Batman break his code THIS time, psych no he won't story".
    Last edited by Agent Z; 05-31-2020 at 07:56 AM.

  2. #32
    Astonishing Member Restingvoice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    4,757

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by babyblob View Post
    Why is Batman the only hero we debate the no kill rule with? Other heroes have mass murdering villains. Some of those villains are world or even cosmic threats yet we dont debate the no kill rule with them.

    My problem with heroes killing is it is lazy writing more often then not. Cant find a way to beat a villain? Just kill him. Need a cheap hook for an emotional story, have a hero who has a no kill rule struggle with the idea of killing a foe.
    It's the villains. Batman's villains are among the most popular in DC/Marvel and the damage they cause both physically and psychologically stands out more. The number of civilians getting killed in just one story arc involving one villain, the number of times Gotham gets burned, and how many Robins were killed.

    Also since Batman stories are street level full of non powered humans, and the approach taken to handle his stories are more down to earth sometimes, it feels more real and closer to home compared to a galactic epic and alien invasions. A lot of them are regular day to day crime, and hey, that's why Batman stories appeal to a lot of people.

    All of that and Batman's own insistence on taking things on his own, refusing help both from his own family and the superhero community.

  3. #33
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    9,786

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Uh, you're killing me man. You know DC could never do something like that and make it anything other than terrible.

    Why not just have writers stop handling Bruce like the worst human ever and pretend everything else didn't happen?

    I gotta say, I'd rather have Nightwing than a rebooted, nicer Batman. If my choices are "Bruce is a douche but we have Nightwing" or "Bruce is back to his Bronze Age coolness and Dick is de-aged" I'll suffer the Bat-ass and keep adult Nightwing.
    Oh yeah, they would definitely screw it up.

    I would love writers to not write Bruce that way and keep going forward, but I also know fans and certain writers would pick at the scab and refuse to let older storylines go. I wouldn't entirely be able to blame them either, but a clean break is favorable in comparison for Bruce himself.

    ....As a fan of both characters and their dynamic, I'm not sure which of those last two choices I would actually pick if forced to lol. I think Dick would get a slightly better deal if he was de-aged and got his iconic role back with a nicer Batman at his side, but ideally we should have Nightwing with a properly written Batman to go with him. Basically, their pre-COIE dynamic as if it was never interrupted/altered.

  4. #34
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    118

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    We wouldn't need a Year One retread. We all know the origins by now, they could take a BTAS approach and just set it somewhat early on in Batman's career and go forward. No origins necessary.

    Batman being written as a jerk would still be a problem, so we ultimately need to make sure writers are on board with not writing him that way. But doing that in mainstream canon as is does require ignoring a lot of terrible OOC moments for him that added up, and some fans and writers simply don't want to let that go. I'd prefer no baggage at all.

    I personally don't care about ditching the various spin-off characters since I don't care for most of them anyway, but thankfully I have no power to do that. I'm just bitching
    I mean, ignoring what you don't like is what the writers do anyway. Geoff Johns ditching Barrance for Bartholomew springs to mind. Over-reliance on continuity will drive you crazy.

    I don't think there is such thing as a tabula rasa either. You reset it back to early career and you all but guarantee that before long Robins are getting beaten to death by crowbars and somebody is blowing the bridges to turn Gotham into a no man's land. These big stories are an enormous pressure on the overall narrative. Look at how Paul Dini is bending over backwards to unnecessarily squeeze Jason, Deathstroke and Azrael into DCAU.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •