Zack Snyder's Bold Defense: Challenging Batman's Timeless Code

Zack Snyder has defended his decision to break Batman's oldest rule in his DCEU movies, arguing that Batman would be "irrelevant" if he didn't. Batman's debut in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice back in 2016 was met with mixed reactions. Critics criticized the movie for its convoluted plot, forced integration of Batman into the DCEU timeline, and its dark tone. Many viewers were turned off by seeing Batman go against his cardinal rule.

In an interview with Joe Rogan on YouTube, Zack Snyder explained his choice to show Batman's willingness to kill. He believes that avoiding situations where Batman might have to kill someone actually makes the character less relevant. Drawing inspiration from DC Comics' Dark Knight Returns, Snyder pointed out that forcing Batman to make tough decisions in impossible situations adds depth to his character. This portrayal of Batman facing moral dilemmas is what makes the character more compelling and realistic.

When people say, "Don't put him in a position where he has to kill someone," it makes me think. It's like you're trying to shield your god in a strange way. By avoiding tough situations, are you making your god seem powerless? If he does have to face that choice, what does it say about him? Will he rise to the challenge?

Why Snyder's Batman Killing Was So Controversial

Ben Affleck's Batman killing people in Batman v Superman - Why Snyder's Batman Killing Was So Controversial

Snyder's conversation with Joe Rogan began with a discussion about how passionate fans can be when it comes to comic book characters. The backlash Snyder faced for changing Batman's no-kill rule was widespread but not surprising, considering how important this aspect is to the character. Even in the original Dark Knight Returns comic that Snyder mentions, there is debate over whether Batman actually killed a mutant, despite what the panel may show. The animated adaptation of The Dark Knight Returns changes this by having Batman knock out the character instead of shooting them.

Batman, a superhero without superpowers, relies on his intellect and awareness to face supernatural threats. Similar to Captain Kirk from Star Trek, whom Snyder also references, Batman is able to outsmart impossible situations through careful preparation and skill that surpasses that of a regular person. This is how he is able to uphold his no-kill rule in any circumstance. Snyder's decision to explore a more realistic interpretation of Batman may have been controversial, but it has its own merits.

Source: YouTube

Editor's P/S:

Zack Snyder's controversial decision to break Batman's no-kill rule has sparked a heated debate among fans. While some appreciate the added depth and realism it brings to the character, others argue that it undermines his core principles. Snyder's reasoning that Batman would be "irrelevant" if he didn't kill is debatable, as the character's intelligence and unwavering moral code have always been his defining traits.

Snyder's portrayal of Batman facing moral dilemmas is undoubtedly compelling, but it raises questions about the character's essence. Batman's refusal to kill is a fundamental aspect of his identity, symbolizing his belief in justice and the sanctity of life. By discarding this rule, Snyder may have sacrificed the character's integrity in favor of a more gritty and realistic portrayal. Ultimately, the question of whether Snyder's decision was justified remains subjective, leaving fans to decide if the added depth outweighs the loss of Batman's unwavering moral compass.