Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

How can a bad guy trick Clark into thinking a defenseless human is a Flying Brick villain? What if they just played dead?

So red son get a pass because he feel like a good guy? REALLY? well good to see the dictator have feeling after all......meh, Injustice dosent stop any punches to show what unfettered super CAN do, and at least this one show is path rather than give him and excuse of "well he just born or grow this way"

No, red son Superman is a good guy, considering be willingly surrendered when he realizes his methods were wrong, and was willing to sacrifice himself to save people from Braniac self-destruction. He was motivated into action by seeing the people in poverty. Even Luthor admitted his economic plans for the people was superior than his. When he saw the people happy under Luthor, he willingly lived a life of obscurity. He was taught the wrong methods by Soviet Russia, but he means and has done good.

edited 22nd May '17 2:32:41 AM by Ikedatakeshi

" He was taught the wrong methods by Soviet Russia, but he means and has done good."

yeah....not buying, aside for pretty much sidetepping the idea of a dictator as some misgided guy who want to do good and just happen to take almost half of the world....again, not buying even a little bit, injustice is a tyrant and they didnt pull any punch it about it but he was more than right of point out batman weird issue with taking people out.

Anyway, living this aside I just saw the movie in tv and I just have somet things to said:

when Luthor saw the bat signal, he contact KG Beast and said "the night is here" which made me laught because even luthor now batman is the night

Is a little bit weird in how Batman can sneak in smoke screen with armour, maybe is the sound of rain but it show how bats move.

I like when Doomsday shout that blast of energy at first, it really sell you the power of the guy, I wonder how Marvel is going to top that.

After what happen to Zack daughter the funeral and martha looking at is son....yeah, it kinda harsh in hindsight, poor sydner, he didnt deserve it.

I always wanted Snyder out, but not like this. He must be having a very shitty time.

Affleck's Batman and Affleck's Bale Batman.

You gotta get more Muppet in there, Ben. Think: I am the Night, and the Night loves cookies omnomnom.

Okay I want to engage in some serious ethical debates in my silly action movie.

Someone told me they didn't want to see BVS because Batman kills in it. Nevermind that Batman killed in the Burton movies, what really gets me is this completely arbitrry line at killing. Killing is bad and wrong. It's badong.

THIS though, this is pure justice and truth! https://youtu.be/RWgyKDfFC_U?t=50s

Look at out hero, heroically beating a helpless man. Heroic sadism is so much better than killing someone, right?

Only...homicide is justifiable. Self-defense, man. Torture? Uh, nope. It's a pure act of evil. It doesn't have any benefits, it can't be justified like homicide because people the person pretty much has to be helpless. Killing someone who is about to kill you is still "wrong" but breaking the legs of those who are no threat to you is a-okay.

By virtue of supporting any version of Batman, you have ceded to him the moral authority to use violence against anyone he pleases. So, why is killing a big no-no? You are the one who have accepted this vigilante as right and approved what he does. You can't just "stop." It' all or nothing.

It's not the moral line that's being crossed that's the real problem in and of itself. It's what the line represents, and how knowing it's there affects perception. People will go to certain extremes if they believe they're going to die that they won't if they think they're going to be beaten up and arrested. Bones heal, but death is permanent. The line is not as arbitrary as people seem to think.

For me, it's not so much that Superman and Batman can never kill because of the sacred cow that is canon. Rather it's just satisfying to see characters who do draw that line, and don't compromise on it even when they easily could. There's an excessive amount of value placed on expediency these days, at the price of actual values, of principles.

The slippery slope is real. Start killing everyone who's a danger to others and you're going to have a war on your hands.

I'm more disturbed by how awful Batman is at torturing.

Should have asked tips from Daredevil.

And torture has benefits, has long as it's fiction.

edited 2nd Jun '17 4:52:02 PM by RAlexa21th

I'm more disturbed by the fact that Batman tried to premeditate murder Superman.

Sure but the problem is how much the story can bend to maintain the line: batman can inflict enough damage to put someone in a coma? he didnt kill and that is alright, or the already talked joker dilema were NOTHING can be done to the joker EXCEPT killing him and yet nothing happen.

If anything, this is the first time I can belive batman when he said killing someone would pull him over the edge rather that being excuse to save joker pale ass.

Indeed! That's my entire point. It's fiction. Therefore, torture and murder can both become good things thanks to the magic of the narrative.

There's no real moral boundary. You can justify anything in fiction.

Of course the ultimate barrier is the public who decide that of course, but even them they are way to trick the public, superhero movies kinda does that all the time.

Batman's style torture is temporary, murder is permanent.

You can, and it's actually because of that that I like it when Superman and Batman retain their code against killing, Superman effortlessly and Batman with much wringing of hands. Most heroes, super or otherwise, don't kill indiscriminately but will still kill when push comes to shove. Not crossing that line sets S&B apart. It doesn't make them better or anything, but it sets up conflicts you don't get otherwise.

edited 2nd Jun '17 5:38:11 PM by Unsung

Daredevil is also a bad example. The fact he has supernatural abilities to be a Living Lie Detector (something no man or machine can do in our world) means he can make torture work. The main problem of torture is the victim telling you random shit to just stop the pain. Daredevil knows when it's random shit, so his torture works entirely.

The problem with that, however, is that in real life, when someone gets tortured, their heartbeat goes wild, so by torturing someone, Daredevil would actually not be able to tell of they were lying.

That's basically one way to pass a lie detector test: overexert yourself so much so that every answer is off, so the machine can't get a baseline on you.

edited 2nd Jun '17 7:47:40 PM by alliterator

It's clear DD's lie-detecting skills work on a far deeper level and he can identify the veracity of statements even when his subject is on the verge of a heart attack. In fact, we've been shown the only way to fool his senses is the other way around, by keeping it supernaturally slow (like Nobu) or unnaturally steady (like with a pacemaker).

It's not particularly realistic, but given how enhanced his senses are (man can hear electricity through a wall), it's not a surprise things like fast heartbeats don't fool him at all.

But we've seen how he detects lies: in the courtroom scene, we can hear him hearing heartbeats and when the heartbeat goes faster, he knows it's a lie. How else can he detect lies? I mean, newer lie detection machines can track eye movements, but that's not something Matt can do obviously, but then they also have EEG machines to track brain activity and voice stress analysis. I'd say that the first isn't an option, but the second is — and yet it's subject to the same stresses as the heart is during torture, thus rendering it useless when torturing someone.

If you have hearing that is so sensitive that you can detective a person's heartbeat, sweat glands, and voice stress pattern to tell when they are definitively lying, you don't need to torture them.

edited 2nd Jun '17 8:07:01 PM by alliterator

How the hell does that logic work?

What logic? The fact that if you have a foolproof way of detecting lies, you don't need to torture someone? That means all you need to do is ask them questions and see what their response is and use your magical lie detecting powers to see which one is the truth.

How does he do it? I do not have the faintest clue. The show does not deliberate on that, but it's evident Matt can. Maybe his hearing is so sensitive he can pick up on minor microscopic fluctuations of a heartbeat that machines cannot, thus being able to discern lie from truth even when the man is about to have a heart attack. Maybe heartbeat is only one way to detect lies for Matt and he has many other super ninja magical powers that aid him, maybe he can detect it via the sound equivalent of a laser scan in every single aspect of a person's biology and how it adds up somehow tells him if he's lying and heartbeat's only one factor.

In either case this is a premise the show has never faltered on: Matt's hearing can impeccably discern lie from truth even when he's beating someone up (unless you're a ninja), but he cannot read people's minds, so torture it is.

He could try just asking criminals, which he often does but A) They're highly uncooperative. B) He's a raging Blood Knight.

edited 2nd Jun '17 8:14:32 PM by Gaon

What if they keep their mouths shut? What if they keep telling lies until Marvel acquire X-Men movies rights?

edited 2nd Jun '17 8:17:20 PM by RAlexa21th

Also, it's comic book (movie, I know) universe. I'm sure there is a criminal who can control their heartbeat (or just control their own biology)

edited 2nd Jun '17 8:27:40 PM by kaalban