Tired of cinematic Batman being indirectly responsible for (all movie spoilers)

[Nite-Wing]

I liked how Bruce kicked the gun out of selina's hands yelling no guns in DKR but still has no problem using a batpod with rpg's and a batcopter with machine guns.
What the hell
Just say Movie Batman can't do some of the things he does without guns

[Judge-Dredd]

The one in Batman Forever pissed me off the most. I mean what was the message there for Robin, murderous vengeance is a good way to deal with your grief. But then again its a Schumacher film what did I expect.

[listenuscrewheads]

The one in Batman Forever pissed me off the most. I mean what was the message there for Robin, murderous vengeance is a good way to deal with your grief. But then again its a Schumacher film what did I expect.

Two-Face's death was a result of Batman defending himself as well as Chase Meridian and Robin, he did not break his no kills rule there, you are legally allowed to defend yourself in that manner if your life is threatened.
The only super-villan death that could be classed as murder was with the Joker in Batman89.

[AiyokuSama]

Bruce/batman HAS killed in the comics. Shaman is the first one the comes to mind, but I know there are many others as well. He may not have set out to kill anyone, but a death results just the same.

As for Batman letting Ra's die in Begins, I loved that scene. The thing I adore most about Batman is that while he TALKS about black and white rules, his world is ALL about shades of grey; there is no black and white. It's that constant struggle to balance his reality with his idealism that makes the character interesting to me.

[Jay Dogg]

This isn't the comics, therefore I have no problem with the villains dying, especially if they're not going to be used again. I'm sure if they took everything about Batman or his stories directly from the comics, people wouldn't enjoy it as much because they'll spend most of their time complaining about how unoriginal the film is.

[Guglio08]

If I give you a taser to use in self defense and you overload a dude to death, is that considered me killing that guy?

Because that's the analogy to your argument about Catwoman and Bane in TDKR. Batman gave her weapons to create an escape tunnel and she uses it to kill Bane. That's not Batman killing anyone.

Incidentally, leaving Ra's to perish in his own weapon of mass destruction is not murder. Murder implies intent. Did he intend to kill Ra's? I don't think you could ever say that. Harvey Dent in TDK would be manslaughter.

[Mr. Holmes]

Yeah i'm tired of the "OMG he killed Ra's" crap. Ra's died out of what was essentially the most sensible plan to stop him from destroying the city.

[maxpower00044]

If I give you a taser to use in self defense and you overload a dude to death, is that considered me killing that guy?

Because that's the analogy to your argument about Catwoman and Bane in TDKR. Batman gave her weapons to create an escape tunnel and she uses it to kill Bane. That's not Batman killing anyone.

Incidentally, leaving Ra's to perish in his own weapon of mass destruction is not murder. Murder implies intent. Did he intend to kill Ra's? I don't think you could ever say that. Harvey Dent in TDK would be manslaughter.

Yeah i'm tired of the "OMG he killed Ra's" crap. Ra's died out of what was essentially the most sensible plan to stop him from destroying the city.

We don't always agree, but I'm 100% behind these statements. Although, Batman did shoot up the driver of the truck with the Bat in DKR, causing the truck to crash and kill Talia. But, I'm going to give Bats a pass on that one, since there's a Nuke on said truck.

[bat39]

Well, firstly, the Burton Batman had no code against killing. Not that he was an all-out Punisher-styled serial killer, but he didn't have any qualms about killing when necessary (in keeping in line with the original Kane/Finger conception of the character). And the Schumacher Batman in Forever was meant to be a continuation of Burton's Batman so the same applies to him (though by now, he has started to show some regret over his decision to kill the Joker).

As far as Nolan's Batman goes-yes, not killing IS his 'one rule'. But one has to examine the circumstances and be realistic about things (pretty much how the Nolanverse IS realistic in other aspects as well). In the case of Ras, yes Batman DID NOT technically kill Ras. He simply left Ras on the train and bailed out, saving his own life. Did he know that Ras would most likely die? Probably. Did he ALSO know that Ras DID have a chance of survival? Yes. I agree this is one of the most morally ambiguous decisions Batman's made on film, but its not like he hasn't made plenty of them in the comics. If Batman did this to Ras or anyone in the comics, we'd probably have a few issues with him haunted by his decision and grappling with his morality. Maybe, in his own eyes, Batman would consider himself a murderer even though he knows he hasn't technically broken his 'one rule'. There's no simple answer to this, given Batman's complex characterization. Interesting in TDKR, when Talia says that he murdered her father, Bruce doesn't really deny it and goes on to justify his actions by saying that Ras was trying to murder millions of innocents. So it would seem that over the years, Bruce, in retrospect believed that he DID kill Ras in some way, despite the rationale he utilized way back then. Again, its part of his character development.

With Harvey...again, you need to look at the circumstances. Harvey was threatening to kill an innocent child. Batman had no choice but to do what he did. And even then, he did not intend to kill Harvey...he just acted instinctively and on the spur of the moment, doing whatever he could to save James Jr. But, as someone else mentioned before, Harvey's death would definitely fall into the category of manslaughter legally. But it wasn't murder.

As for Bane...Bruce isn't really responsible for that one AT ALL. It was Selina, who has no code against killing. In the comics, Batman would be outraged by what she did. But in the Nolanverse, its not realistic for him to expect his allies to NOT use lethal force in what is essentially a time of WAR. Again, with Talia, he didn't intend to kill her per se, but he was just doing whatever he could to try and save Gotham from a NUCLEAR BOMB and he just wasn't bothered about collateral damage. Again, a war situation. (Did anyone notice the similarity between Ras death and Talia's death incidentially?!)

[Kensei]

Could it be that when Batman referred to the conflict at hand as "war," he was essentially saying that the gloves were off and his one rule was now officially suspended because killing during war is acceptable?

I also wanted to say something about Michael Keaton's Batman. It wasn't only the major super villaiins who died. The guy was a virtual killing machine. In "Batman," the unmanned Batmobile attacks the Joker's factory with machine guns blazing and then drops an explosive device right in the middle of a crowd of henchmen, which then explodes and takes out much of the building. Then Batman tries to kill the Joker very deliberately with machine guns and missiles from the Batplane prior to actually killing him atop the cathedral. There was also talk between the two muggers in the first scene about how "the bat" had dropped Johnny Gobbs off a roof. In "Batman Returns," there was that one really big guy in the Penguin's circus gang who smiled and said, "Yeah, go ahead, hit me." Batman stuffed burning dynamite into his pants and dropped him down a manhole, where he blew up. No ambiguity about it.

[bat39]

Could it be that when Batman referred to the conflict at hand as "war," he was essentially saying that the gloves were off and his one rule was now officially suspended because killing during war is acceptable?

I also wanted to say something about Michael Keaton's Batman. It wasn't only the major super villaiins who died. The guy was a virtual killing machine. In "Batman," the unmanned Batmobile attacks the Joker's factory with machine guns blazing and then drops an explosive device right in the middle of a crowd of henchmen, which then explodes and takes out much of the building. Then Batman tries to kill the Joker very deliberately with machine guns and missiles from the Batplane prior to actually killing him atop the cathedral. There was also talk between the two muggers in the first scene about how "the bat" had dropped Johnny Gobbs off a roof. In "Batman Returns," there was that one really big guy in the Penguin's circus gang who smiled and said, "Yeah, go ahead, hit me." Batman stuffed burning dynamite into his pants and dropped him down a manhole, where he blew up. No ambiguity about it.

Yeah, that could be one interpretation of the 'war' statement. This is no longer about fighting injustice and restoring the justice system. This is about survival now.

As for Keaton's Batman...it's true, as I've said before. Batman had absolutely no code against killing. In Forever, he tries to dissuade Dick from killing Two Face, but ultimately, he just goes ahead and does it anyway.

[Fate's Faith]

The general audience loves killing. They can't accept a hero with a non-killing code because then he's not a hero.

[Alan2099]

I also wanted to say something about Michael Keaton's Batman. It wasn't only the major super villaiins who died. The guy was a virtual killing machine. In "Batman," the unmanned Batmobile attacks the Joker's factory with machine guns blazing and then drops an explosive device right in the middle of a crowd of henchmen, which then explodes and takes out much of the building. Then Batman tries to kill the Joker very deliberately with machine guns and missiles from the Batplane prior to actually killing him atop the cathedral. There was also talk between the two muggers in the first scene about how "the bat" had dropped Johnny Gobbs off a roof. In "Batman Returns," there was that one really big guy in the Penguin's circus gang who smiled and said, "Yeah, go ahead, hit me." Batman stuffed burning dynamite into his pants and dropped him down a manhole, where he blew up. No ambiguity about it.

Comic Batman would have approved.

[Statham]

Yeah i'm tired of the "OMG he killed Ra's" crap. Ra's died out of what was essentially the most sensible plan to stop him from destroying the city.

I could've done without the 'I won't kill you, but I don't have to save you' line. People can make up excuses, but that line makes it seem like a choice that Bruce left him to die, rather than 'maybe he couldn't carry the weight of two whilst gliding' or whatever. Besides, Ra's plot was already foiled. The train line was already destroyed, the microwave emitter was already going to be trashed. Bruce killed him, just indirectly. Frankly, I don't really care, but I just think it's funny that people make excuses for it.

[AiyokuSama]

I could've done without the 'I won't kill you, but I don't have to save you' line. People can make up excuses, but that line makes it seem like a choice that Bruce left him to die, rather than 'maybe he couldn't carry the weight of two whilst gliding' or whatever.

OR that line could be a philosophical point about leaving people to their own devices and the results of their own choices. After all, the idea that Batman HAS to SAVE everyone is untenable.

Personally I loved that line.