Why do people say Zack Snyder doesn't respect comics?

[Restingvoice]

Ofcourse, ww stopped heroics the minute she realised humanity was the reason for war,Not some cosmic being. She was living in a dream world built of legends of her ancestors "heroic" battles. When the dream broke she had to wake up to smell the coffee with steve's death. As time went on she became more pessimistic about man.That's it. Clark's actions restored her faith in those specific dreams. But, this time with the knowledge of harsh realities.

Batman wasn't hunting clowns. They are yesterdays news and joker is a mere annoyance compared to death and destruction from the sky. He doesn't go out to shoot people. He just will shoot if need be. He doesn't consciously murder people . He view criminals as weeds. He just doesn't mind if some of them get plucked in the process. Besides, bruce has bigger target. He has a "god" to kill. His first fully conscious act of murder was on his mind. Ofcourse, he couldn't go through with it. Because "you are here for a reason, clark".

Since the story changed, it's kinda hard to imagine how that would go down. The movie ended with Wonder Woman still believing in human or still want to protect it despite the flaws, and I can't imagine it ending any other way.

So it's similar with Diana, Bruce lost hope? That where is the story going? They lost hope, just went day to day, until Clark died showing them hope and sacrifice, inspired, the heroes rise again.

[Pinsir]

Idk if he respects comic or not since I haven't watched them and I don't know the Millerverse that much... all I know is there's no way Joker should be alive if Batman starts shooting criminals and there's no way Diana should retire from superheroism just because Steve Trevor died. That's where I don't buy the concept.

I mean okay, Joker is slippery so maybe he hasn't been able to catch him yet. That's acceptable. The Wonder Woman part not so much. So glad they changed it.

Batman doesn't walk around with a gun on him. The guns are on the bat-mobile and prior incarnations of Batman have used guns and other such weaponry on their machines.

This scene from The Dark Knight Rises is pretty much the same as one from BvS, except it probably has a higher body count;

[manwhohaseverything]

Since the story changed, it's kinda hard to imagine how that would go down. The movie ended with Wonder Woman still believing in human or still want to protect it despite the flaws, and I can't imagine it ending any other way.

So it's similar with Diana, Bruce lost hope? That where is the story going? They lost hope, just went day to day, until Clark died showing them hope and sacrifice, inspired, the heroes rise again.

Yes, they both began losing hope and they were on the verge of losing themselves as well. Clark himself was losing hope with lex's schemes , the unintended destruction caused by the battle, the guilt of zod and the deaths due to black zero, public scrutiny and him being a controversial figure..etc. The difference is clark was brought up to focus on the good in this world. His mother was his island to swim towards in a big world. He found a person who accepts him for who he is really, in lois and she became his world. This is his world. Good or bad he can't leave it, unlike diana. He can't throw a fit about "death of inherent reason to life" either like bruce because that would just cause destruction . If you focus on the bad in life there will be a ton. Good might be a little. But, it's worth fighting for.

[Dboi2001]

... and with that crappy mullet, no less. Seriously, say what you want about the Silver Age, but the creators of that time would have had a robot Clark working at the Daily Planet to make things more believable.

I always see people essentially make claims that if it isn’t exactly their version it is wrong. Like I saw someone saying using TDKR as a basis early on was bad and he didn’t understand the story that it was about Batman and Superman having history with each other when Bvs isn’t an adaptation of TDKR or that Snyder should only use mainstream versions which I ask which main versions the Silver or Post Crisis or the New 52 or the early days when Batman used guns and superman couldn’t fly and wonder woman lost her powers when tied by a man. Really they mean it isn’t like the character i am use to. Even the MCU borrowed more from the Ultimates than from 616. Like people act like because Dick may be dead means we will never get anything related to Nightwing despite Titans existing

I’d say Luthor is a perfect example of this. He is essentially a blend between the old mad scientist Luthor and the modern businessman Luthor and yet people say he is inaccurate but again which version? It is fine to have favorite Clancy Brown was easily the best Luthor actor but complaining because something is different is irrational. Like someone said that Luthor’s entire character was the quirky sounds he makes which is blatantly wrong. I get it you were expecting a luthor like the animated series or you hate Jesse Esienberg and think he is a bad actor or just don’t like the way he is depicted that is all fine but he clearly does have a character arc and motives for hating superman which people claim he lacks

[The Darknight Detective]

I always see people essentially make claims that if it isn’t exactly their version it is wrong. Like I saw someone saying using TDKR as a basis early on was bad and he didn’t understand the story that it was about Batman and Superman having history with each other when Bvs isn’t an adaptation of TDKR or that Snyder should only use mainstream versions which I ask which main versions the Silver or Post Crisis or the New 52 or the early days when Batman used guns and superman couldn’t fly and wonder woman lost her powers when tied by a man. Really they mean it isn’t like the character i am use to. Even the MCU borrowed more from the Ultimates than from 616. Like people act like because Dick may be dead means we will never get anything related to Nightwing despite Titans existing

No disagreement from me. I have seen different versions of these characters over the years to wok myself up into a lather.

I’d say Luthor is a perfect example of this. He is essentially a blend between the old mad scientist Luthor and the modern businessman Luthor and yet people say he is inaccurate but again which version? It is fine to have favorite Clancy Brown was easily the best Luthor actor but complaining because something is different is irrational. Like someone said that Luthor’s entire character was the quirky sounds he makes which is blatantly wrong. I get it you were expecting a luthor like the animated series or you hate Jesse Esienberg and think he is a bad actor or just don’t like the way he is depicted that is all fine but he clearly does have a character arc and motives for hating superman which people claim he lacks

I have posted this before, but whatever anybody think's of Eisenberg's interpretation, it's still closer to a CB version than Gene Hackman's ever was.

[Alan2099]

but he clearly does have a character arc and motives for hating superman which people claim he lacks

I wouldn't say it's clearly depicted.
If it was clear, so many people wouldn't have missed it.

Even then, while I kinda kinda quint and see something that might vaguely be considered a motivation, I'm not seeing anything that resembles a character arc.

[SiegePerilous02]

Lex's motivations are mentioned, but it's in the middle of one of his many tedious rantings, so i can't blame people for tuning him out and missing it at that point.

Also doesn't help that some of his traditional motivations were shifted onto Batman.

[Restingvoice]

Batman doesn't walk around with a gun on him. The guns are on the bat-mobile and prior incarnations of Batman have used guns and other such weaponry on their machines.

This scene from The Dark Knight Rises is pretty much the same as one from BvS, except it probably has a higher body count;

Oh, I didn't watch that one. By that time I already started reading comics and lore so I wasn't interested in adaptations that try to be its own thing (of course because of that I'm not interested in Joker either)

[Dboi2001]

Lex's motivations are mentioned, but it's in the middle of one of his many tedious rantings, so i can't blame people for tuning him out and missing it at that point.

Also doesn't help that some of his traditional motivations were shifted onto Batman.

And is Luthor not suppose to give tedious rants or drawn out speeches? That’s half of Luthor’s character. He also brings it up multiple times. When he is with the senator he says he wants a deterrent against Superman and talked about how demons came from the sky. Later on he also mentioned how his father abused him and it is paradoxical to have knowledge without power. Finally we see after he throws Lois off the rooftop that he sees Superman as a false god and has no right to be above anyone else. So we get three fairly clear times where he explains his motivations with the biggest one that he believes Superman is a fraud and is not all power and/or all good. Ironically enough he says that God never stopped the abomination of his father’s fist from striking him when he was a boy and when he creates an abomination of his own it almost kills him with Superman coming down from above to save him

What motivation was that? Batman hated Superman because he thought he was too dangerous and didn’t know who he was. that is half the times they fight each other in the comics is because Batman is paranoid like Earth One I think. Luthor’s motivations vary. Sometimes it’s because Superman simply gets in the way of his evil schemes, sometimes it’s because his ego can’t stand seeing someone else with that power but outside of else world stories where Luthor is the good guy it is almost never because he thinks Superman is too dangerous. Luthor generally doesn’t care about people unless they act as a means to boost his status. Even when he became a hero it was only because he saw it as a way to help his reputation hardly because he genuinely believes in justice

[Steel Inquisitor]

I’d argue that the mcu is more inspired by the Ultimates than 616 in most ways despite being an alternate universe

Why would you think that?

So what the x men animated series made them incredibly popular in the late 90s hence why fox bought the rights and by DoFP the X Men series was like 10 years old and was smack dab in the middle of the superhero wave. There is no reason why at least one of the x men movies should’ve made a billion dollars but instead gets outdone by Deadpool

But they didn't, they're a successful franchise but they weren't able to do that. It's not like they didn't try.

What are you talking about? It’s about he used the fear not the fear itself? Batman did this by hospitalizing criminals, fighting in the dark and becoming a myth. And again Batman was nothing like the punisher. Punisher only kills murderers and rapists Batman in BvS only killed militia. The reason Batman killed was because he has fallen. The dialogue makes it more than clear as day that Batman has fallen. Not to mention Nolan Batman killed just as much as Snyder Batman. Need I remind you of I won’t kill you but I won’t save you? Not to mention the Tumbler and the Bat had guns on them and he killed Talia in TDKR. It’s that mentality in BvS on display. He wasn’t trying to kill those mercenaries he was aiming for their guns and they happened to be in the cross fire. Snyder doesn’t portray this Batman as heroic but as scary like dark knight returns

Exactly, it's how he uses fear that he has fear isn't a sign he's doing it correctly. Snyder does get this sometimes, like when he's freeing the girls or even rescuing Martha (except he goes too far into "realism" so unlike the comics the tone is that he's killing everyone). Batman shouldn't be a myth in Snyder's movies, he makes huge spectacles which can't be ignored - like when he uses there Batwing or when he was chasing the criminals in the Batmobile. Batman weaponized another criminal's car to flatten criminals to death, in another car. That's the sort of thing the Punisher would smile at. Batman's shouldn't kill at all, and unlike with Nolan's he didn't do it with restraint he did on propose. He loved that power. No, Nolan Batman didn't. He didn't do anything like those scenes. He killed passively (Ra's), accidentally (Harvey) or because he had no choice (Talia). All of those are very rare exceptions. He wasn't killing people with those guns, though, he did things like intimidate criminals passively with them, he wasn't dropping cars on them. Affleck Batman was very intent on killing those criminals, there's no other way to look at that scene. Again, dropping cars on criminals and bumping a criminal's car into a truck - which blew up. No remorse or restraint to be had. Dark Knight Returns Batman wasn't this kill happy, either. Snyder unintentionally also made this batman more sympathetic than Superman! That's how badly it was written.

First off no Batman is only gentler with Diana in the animated series and even that is contentious.

That's inspired by their relationship in the comics. They get snarky with each other but they do respect each other very highly.

He is just as tough on her as the others considering she is the second strongest member.

Batman has the closest relationship with her in JL, and she's essentially his second in command. Her physical strength has no connection to her having to "tough" with her, she's Wonder Woman one of the nicest leaguers they have. There's more to convincing people than being "tough" with them, Wonder Woman does this with everyone and gains their trust.

When does Whedon make him look like a fool? How about when he’s getting messaged by Diana or when Diana says they can’t bring Superman back and Bruce just gets silenced by her?

She didn't "message" him, she snapped his shoulder back into place. Batman should be able to get help from other people, it's come up more than once when he doesn't do this, it's a big reason why Bane won in Knightfall and AzBats was wrong to be antisocial.

It’s almost like they reversed their characters Diana should be the hopeful and optimistic one considering she is from a world with Greek gods and magic with Batman being the pragmatic one. Or when he stutters asking Arthur if he talks to fish in the bat cave. Basically Batman is a clueless idiot in Justice League who gets his ass kicked every time

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yp3mUWcu26k

A wonderful moment where Batman and Wonder Woman share a moment to inspire each other and let their guards down around each other. I don't see why this scene should be a problem.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fpbm0t8kOi4

Batman's "idealism" is influenced by seeing everything in extremes, so much so he goes into Tony Stark territory of ignoring the risks Wonder Woman knows and should be accounted for. They're both right, really. These are the circumstances that made Ultron and the Vision. She may be inspiring but that isn't the same thing as having to agree with those ideas and the fact she's still not fully activated yet. She has doubts, and worthwhile ones Bruce was silly to dismiss.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqcT-_HBHSo

A montage which tries to prove that only "tough" means right, when Batman is more than that. He has a softer side, that's not weakness. It's this 'toughness" attitude which turned off the audience to Snyder's Batman and Superman.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwRePaYsuzc

There's barely any change between those scenes.

Ok hints don’t cut it how about Alfred outright saying Batman has changed?

It’s obvious we aren’t going to agree so how about agree to disagree?

The problem is we don't have enough material to know what Batman changed from, changed from what? We've never shown in any detail. It's all hints which could have been cut from the movie because they add nothing to the character or the story arc for Batman.

[Pinsir]

Oh, I didn't watch that one. By that time I already started reading comics and lore so I wasn't interested in adaptations that try to be its own thing (of course because of that I'm not interested in Joker either)

Most comic book runs try to do their own thing though. I'm not sure why this is an issue.

[Dboi2001]

Well here are some brief examples:

616 Stark is kidnapped by the VietCong but in the movie he is kidnapped by the 10 ring sin the Middle East similar to 1610 being updated to be the Middle East instead of Vietnam. Also 616 iron man had a secret identity

Banner in the mcu is trying to recreate the super soldier formula which is what 1610 Banner was doing. In 616 there was no connection between Hulk and Captain America

In 616 Captain America did not found the Avengers but did create the Ultimates in 1610 (also the frozen in ice was a retcon in 616 but a major part in 1610)

Falcon in 616 was from Harlem and got stranded on an island and developed a psychic connection with a red falcon. In 1610 he is a soldier who tested experimental wings and drones

In 616 Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver were Gypsies raised in a circus but in the mcu and 1610 they’re vague Slavs and not circus Gypsies

In 1610 Hawkeye is an agent for Shield while in 616 he was a deaf circus performer who was initially a villain

In 616 Nick Fury was white and fought in WW2 while in 1610 he was black and a Vietnam veteran

Ultron acts more like Ultimates 2 Ultron than 616 Ultron and also the fact YellowJacket was evil in ant man and not hank Pym

Most of the mcu designs are based on the Ultimates

Ultimates Thor was exiled to earth and lost his powers initially. His powers also came from himself instead of his hammer and did not have an alter ego

Now obviously the mcu combines 1610 and 616 aspects but so does Zack Snyder. Superman is a combination of John Bryne’s Man of Steel, Birthright and even partially Alan Moore’s man of tomorrow slightly. Batman in BvS is a much darker and colder take on Miller’s Batman along with a small bit of Batman’s early pulp detective days and the Oneil-Adams run in the 70s

Now for your criticisms of Batman killing. Snyder never portrays Batman as being morally right in those situations. And who says Batman is a myth? I don’t remember anyone in the movie saying Batman was a myth. You are also giving Nolan a pass. Accidental? I don’t think tackling someone off a ledge is accidental. And no it wasn’t passive Bruce was the one who caused the train to crash. During the chase what do you expect Batman to do with the militia firing rockets at him? There really isn’t anything Batman can do to deal with vehicle chases. Even if he modifies the gun to shoot out the tires they could still easily die from the crash. But again this is a Batman who is much colder and much more broken

Look up “Batman Kill Count” and go tell me how many people Nolan Batman kills. And during the car chase Batman didn’t knock the car into the gas truck Batman just turned away and the driver wasn’t paying attention. That’s not even unintentional killing. And no Batman didn’t go in intending to kill anyone he wanted the Kryptonite he only began using his guns when necessary. Why did he leave the human trafficker alive at the start or why does he leave the LexCorp guards alive? But again you miss the idea that this is a fallen Batman and the movie makes it very clear. We see Alfred saying how he’s become cruel, how he has new rules, we see Bruce heavily drinking and taking pills, we see him staring at his suit like an addict or insisting to Alfred Batman is the answer to getting Luthor’s intel instead of Bruce Wayne.

It is one thing for Batman to get help but it is another thing to make him look like an incompetent idiot. Literally all the scenes you’re linking me everyone is commenting how Batman was ruined and from from scary to being a joke. He went toe to toe with Superman and yet gets thrown around by parademons. Like please remind me of just one scene where Batman does something proactive and successful because all I remember is him getting his ass beat for every fight

And that “I didn’t bring a sword” line was awful

Batman and idealism? Please do not tell me you seriously used those two words in the same sentence. Yes the man who creates a contingency plan to incapacitate his teammates and friends just in case they turn evil is an idealist. Batman is pragmatic and always has been. Originally Wonder Woman was suppose to discover the motherboxes and bring back Superman not Batman why because it makes sense for the 2000 year old amazon princess to believe in ancient technology that can raise the dead. Batman never lets his guard down around anybody and he just stutters like an idiot like “you can talk to fish right?” Idk Bruce you answer me you’ve only been tracking and studying this guy for what 2 years? The point is I get Whedon was trying it show Batman as being human but forgot what makes Batman Batman. Whedon Batman acted nothing like any Batman ever. Even Adam West Batman had more common sense and was more pragmatic than this Batman

It is obvious you have a different expectation of Batman so I will leave it at that. Have a good day sir or madam

[Restingvoice]

Most comic book runs try to do their own thing though. I'm not sure why this is an issue.

It's not. Just personal preference.

Well, that did whitewash the Al Ghul, so there's one issue

[Steel Inquisitor]

Most comic book runs try to do their own thing though. I'm not sure why this is an issue.

The majority keep continuity consistent, not every writer just does whatever they usually gets ignored when a new writer comes aboard or retconned into prior continuity since canon remains a high priority for serial comic books. The popular changes become the new status quo for the next writer.

[Steel Inquisitor]

Well here are some brief examples:

616 Stark is kidnapped by the VietCong but in the movie he is kidnapped by the 10 ring sin the Middle East similar to 1610 being updated to be the Middle East instead of Vietnam. Also 616 iron man had a secret identity

Marvel has a sliding timeline, and retcons occur frequently. 616 Marvel's not going to retain the fact he got his shrapnel from Vietnam, and they do this with other characters like the FF. They update it with current wars. True, that was a big change.

Banner in the mcu is trying to recreate the super soldier formula which is what 1610 Banner was doing. In 616 there was no connection between Hulk and Captain America

In the Ultimate universe he's a nervous wreck who became the Hulk once to impress Betty, who thought he was weak and ate people.

In 616 Captain America did not found the Avengers but did create the Ultimates in 1610 (also the frozen in ice was a retcon in 616 but a major part in 1610)

Falcon in 616 was from Harlem and got stranded on an island and developed a psychic connection with a red falcon. In 1610 he is a soldier who tested experimental wings and drones

In 616 Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver were Gypsies raised in a circus but in the mcu and 1610 they’re vague Slavs and not circus Gypsies

They were originally super-villains, MCU switched the Brotherhood of Mutants to HYDRA and Ultron. They weren't sleeping with each other like in Ultimates, either.

In 1610 Hawkeye is an agent for Shield while in 616 he was a deaf circus performer who was initially a villain

Hawkeye being brainwashed into a minion for Loki was a callback for when he was a villain in the comics.

In 616 Nick Fury was white and fought in WW2 while in 1610 he was black and a Vietnam veteran

The only change from the Ultimates they kept was that he looked like Samuel L. Jackson, who got the role because Millar wanted his likeness in the comics. Ultimate Fury has more in common with MCU Alexander Pierce, he did things like use the Ultimates to take over countries and blackmail to get his position back when he was fired as director.

Ultron acts more like Ultimates 2 Ultron than 616 Ultron and also the fact YellowJacket was evil in ant man and not hank Pym

MCU Ultron wasn't hexed to fall in love with Wanda like in the Ultimates, and he's more like from Heroes Reborn. True.

Most of the mcu designs are based on the Ultimates

That's just aesthetic.

Ultimates Thor was exiled to earth and lost his powers initially. His powers also came from himself instead of his hammer and did not have an alter ego

OG Thor, by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby, initially had Odin exile him to Earth to learn humility and he only got his powers back by finding Mjolnir. All the MCU did was get rid of the human guise.

Now obviously the mcu combines 1610 and 616 aspects but so does Zack Snyder. Superman is a combination of John Bryne’s Man of Steel, Birthright and even partially Alan Moore’s man of tomorrow slightly. Batman in BvS is a much darker and colder take on Miller’s Batman along with a small bit of Batman’s early pulp detective days and the Oneil-Adams run in the 70s

Byrne's Superman ideas isn't that big of an influence, all they took from Lex was that he ran Luthor Corp. Smallville had a more faithful Lex.

Now for your criticisms of Batman killing. Snyder never portrays Batman as being morally right in those situations. And who says Batman is a myth? I don’t remember anyone in the movie saying Batman was a myth. You are also giving Nolan a pass. Accidental? I don’t think tackling someone off a ledge is accidental. And no it wasn’t passive Bruce was the one who caused the train to crash. During the chase what do you expect Batman to do with the militia firing rockets at him? There really isn’t anything Batman can do to deal with vehicle chases. Even if he modifies the gun to shoot out the tires they could still easily die from the crash. But again this is a Batman who is much colder and much more broken

Snyder presents what Batman does as being awesome spectacles. How Snyder portrayed his Batman was inconsistent, and what made matters worse is how unclear why Superman wouldn’t like him when he does the same things. He never even mentions why he hates batman when they first meet, just death threats because Batman exists then he leaves since investigating the other party who were firing rockets is no concern to him. OK, on the myth part. Sure it was, Nolan’s Batman didn’t intend to kill him he was trying to save Gordon’s son. “Passive” as in he let Ra’s die and flew off, if he actively wanted to kill Ra’s he’s just throw him off the train himself. I expect him not to crush everything in his path, the Tumbler was a tank but it wasn’t half as destructive as Affleck’s batmobile, it destroyed everything in its wake including boats! Nolan’s Batman fought villains with ordinance like that before, he didn’t try to kill them. He could have tried leaping onto their vehicle, he’s more physical than Nolan’s was. Dying is a risk Batman takes every time he puts on the mask. True, which is why Snyder should have put more effort into comparing his current state to the previous status quo.

Look up “Batman Kill Count” and go tell me how many people Nolan Batman kills. And during the car chase Batman didn’t knock the car into the gas truck Batman just turned away and the driver wasn’t paying attention. That’s not even unintentional killing. And no Batman didn’t go in intending to kill anyone he wanted the Kryptonite he only began using his guns when necessary. Why did he leave the human trafficker alive at the start or why does he leave the LexCorp guards alive? But again you miss the idea that this is a fallen Batman and the movie makes it very clear. We see Alfred saying how he’s become cruel, how he has new rules, we see Bruce heavily drinking and taking pills, we see him staring at his suit like an addict or insisting to Alfred Batman is the answer to getting Luthor’s intel instead of Bruce Wayne.

I didn’t say Nolan’s Batman didn’t kill, I said he does it rarely and he’s not doing anything like Affleck’s doing. He’s not dropping cars on people. Watch it again, Batman just knocks him into the truck and moves on. Affleck’s is the opposite with killing people to Nolan’s, it’s the exception when he doesn’t kill people. It’s very blatant. Why did he make a huge spectacle with the Lex minions when he could have just planted the bug, found their location then steal the Kryptonite – the latter is what Batman would do. You keep ignoring that all that is what we get, there is no depth there about what came before. The status quo for us is the present Batman, we know next to nothing about how he was like. Nobody goes into it. All that is hints, not depth. No long conversations or flashbacks comparing his behavior and tactics to the present.

It is one thing for Batman to get help but it is another thing to make him look like an incompetent idiot. Literally all the scenes you’re linking me everyone is commenting how Batman was ruined and from from scary to being a joke. He went toe to toe with Superman and yet gets thrown around by parademons. Like please remind me of just one scene where Batman does something proactive and successful because all I remember is him getting his ass beat for every fight

I didn’t say he was an idiot, it’s ok for other characters to disagree with him. Batman wasn’t wearing his Superman suit after B vs S, he’s not invincible. Having trouble with Parademons in character for him. He’s not an untouchable god of combat, even Morrison’s Batgod relied more on his wits than brute force. Who is ‘everyone’?

And that “I didn’t bring a sword” line was awful

Ok.

Batman and idealism? Please do not tell me you seriously used those two words in the same sentence.

Nolan’s Batman was defined by his idealism as much as his pragmatism. It’s a consistent theme through the movies. He’s like that in the Young Justice and Batman TAS cartoons, as well.

Yes the man who creates a contingency plan to incapacitate his teammates and friends just in case they turn evil is an idealist.

Sure. He’s an idealist, he’s also paranoid and has a good reason to do that in the comics since his team mates are brainwashed every Thursday.

Batman is pragmatic and always has been.

Batman’s able to be both, Snyder didn’t have to choose. Nolan’s did.

Originally Wonder Woman was suppose to discover the motherboxes and bring back Superman not Batman why because it makes sense for the 2000 year old amazon princess to believe in ancient technology that can raise the dead. Batman never lets his guard down around anybody and he just stutters like an idiot like “you can talk to fish right?” Idk Bruce you answer me you’ve only been tracking and studying this guy for what 2 years? The point is I get Whedon was trying it show Batman as being human but forgot what makes Batman Batman. Whedon Batman acted nothing like any Batman ever. Even Adam West Batman had more common sense and was more pragmatic than this Batman

I’m going by what was shown in the movie. She’s allowed to have doubts and she was half right. Sure he does, he did in a clip where Diana fixes his shoulder and when he banters with the other Leaguers. He lets his guard down around Superman and Wonder Woman when they team up to stop Doomsday. I’m ok with Batman making silly jokes, it humanizes him. Just because he’s monitoring someone isn’t the same thing as knowing everything about them. Whedon gets Batman, he just made a Batman which wasn’t the Batman from B vs S.