ral's blog - Batman does kill

[Sandman]

Hummm well you are right he did say "im gonna kill you" but im still 100% sure. If you watch the start at chemical plant Batman saves one of Napier's men but as the movie goes on you see he gets more caught up in getting revenge which make's him and The Joker alot more personal enemies then in any other Batman movie to date.

And then there's the Batwing scene which is always going to be a arguable scene Batman does aim for the Joker but doesn't hit him, i always thought that he was trying to scare the Joker into giveing up so the poilce could get him???.

And finally the gargoyle bit yes Batman did hook him so he couldn't get away but if it didn't break off and Batman managed to pull himself back up would he have undone him and let him fall to his death, would he beat the crap out of him some more and hand him over to the police i don't know, but although he wanted to kill him i was never really sure he would but i could be wrong.

[batman89]

Hey there everyone, I am new to this site and I was just browsing around on the home page and saw raleagh's blog about Batman killing in the first film. Well, I wanted to post in the original topic but no one has posted anything for a while so I started a new one where I could put my opinion because my mind is itching to get these thoughts across.

Plus, don't forget to comment as well.

After reading the blog I noted that for Burton's Batman he was influenced by select material, and notably the Kane/Finger comics where Batman does kill.  I believe Burton's adaption is not an origin story like that of Begins but it is still a story that is focused on some beginning, some start, in fact Batman is treated as such in the film, no citizen in Gotham city has heard of him. If this film is offering  an image of the first appearance of Batman, and this appearance is being influenced by the actual first appearance of Batman in the 1940s where Batman did kill, then the film did an accurate job in staying true to the image of Batman as seen in his actual first appearance and encounters with thugs and crime.

My second point I'd like to discuss focuses Batman and the Joker.  During the film after Wayne discovers that the Joker had killed his parents, it appears a total change of thought, a sudden flash of thinking, overtook Bruce Wayne, and that thought was solely focused on his passion to destroy that which was not responsible for his creation but for murdering his parents. If you pay attention to entire sequence from the point where Bruce discovers Jack as the murderer through the death of the Joker you sense a great tenseness, in fact a feeling that one of these two men are going to die(before one actually does die). The Joker's terrorizing of Gotham City needs to be stopped but also his terrorizing of Bruce's psyche. He was going to end it, no matter what.

Rather than being seen as killing, I take it as starting point, where afterwards he will vow never to kill again after he attains some peace in killing the man who killed his parents. It cannot be taken as a "this one time" kind of deal because Batman is still new to this game he has created. Because the Batman in this film can be seen as a beginning we can note that he is finding himself after each fight, so the Batman mythos that everyone knows can't quite be established yet.  So after his first and intentional killing of the Joker and his henchmen maybe Batman went home and had another change of thought that found no merit in taking life and he could redeem himself of the lives he had taken that night by never killing again. In fact, we can credit this film for exploring what if Batman did kill, which could then lead to that familiar vow never to kill that batfans have bee accustomed to.

[The Dark Knight]

Full agreement. When Bruce finds out The Joker is the killer of his parents, the gloves are well and truly off. That's the precise moment he changed his crime fighting method.

Yes, Bruce did kill in Returns, but you can't expect him to be instantly at peace the second The Joker died. He would have been locked into that vengeful mindset, just switching it off is not an easy thing to do. It takes time. Pain like that doesn't go away overnight.

In the Returns finale when he says that Max is going to jail, Bruce appears to have changed his outlook. His bloodlust may have finally been sated and he may have wanted to move on. Personally, I don't think he ever would have. I think it was just a brief moment of wishful vulnerability. He may have wanted to, but he could not.

[thecolorsblend]

Full agreement. When Bruce finds out The Joker is the killer of his parents, the gloves are well and truly off. That's the precise moment he changed his crime fighting method.

Yep, we never see Batman intentionally take a life in B89 until after he realizes that the Joker is Jack Napier is the guy who killed his parents.  After that, all bets are off.

One might mention Johnny Gobs (the character, not the supercool BMO member).  Thing is, we don't know what happened there.  Maybe Gobbs "fell on his sword".  Maybe Batman wasn't directly responsible.  An argument either way is pure conjecture.

Yes, Bruce did kill in Returns, but you can't expect him to be instantly at peace the second The Joker died. He would have been locked into that vengeful mindset, just switching it off is not an easy thing to do. It takes time. Pain like that doesn't go away overnight.

If you wanted to extrapolate an arc between the two films, that one works as well as any (and better than most).  However...

In the Returns finale when he says that Max is going to jail, Bruce appears to have changed his outlook. His bloodlust may have finally been sated and he may have wanted to move on. Personally, I don't think he ever would have. I think it was just a brief moment of wishful vulnerability. He may have wanted to, but he could not.

I could more easily buy this based upon the clear Kane/Finger influence.  That Batman felt no remorse.

Still, going back to the arc idea you (and, with respect, others) have suggested, I would argue that Bruce wasn't entirely aware of his downward spiral.  He slowly became more and more detached, more and more a recluse.  He wasn't the man about town that B89 implied... but he obviously had a relationship with Shreck and they were used to dealing with one another.  Bottom line, Bruce hadn't quite hit rock bottom yet.

Even so, he sees a funhouse mirror version of himself in Selina.  By the mid-point of BR, we see Bruce and Selina battling the same demons... and they're both losing.

Bruce, however, sees Selina's issues for what they are (ie, self destruction) and then recognizes those same tendencies in himself.  If he can find a new way, she can too.  He has to believe that he can change if he stands any chance of helping her.

Batman landing in the Penguin's hideout and declaring that Shreck is going to prison is not hypocrisy, it's Batman at least attempting to reclaim his sense of law and order (rather than pure justice).

But Shreck now knows Catwoman's real identity.  She's facing exposure should Shreck be handed over to the authorities.  Batman, recognizing that he has to reach Selina (not Catwoman), removes his mask to stoke their connection and simultaneously expose himself to Shreck.

He is, in effect, making the same sacrifice he's asking her to make.  He's willing to take this as far as she is.  Shreck will go into custody knowing who both Batman and Catwoman really are.

Maskless in front of their enemy, they truly are the same now.  Split right down the center.

Unfortunately, Selina either can't or won't make the same decision.  Her thirst for vengeance has taken her too far.  She's going to see this thing through, even if it kills her.

I don't know if Burton brought all this out to intentionally create an arc through the movies... but if he did, it would've been interesting to see how it would've played out in Batman 3.

[The Dark Knight]

Good post, colors. You highlight the deep themes Returns has going on very well indeed.

[Paul (ral)]

merged topics

[GuedesGothamKnight]

Good article, ral. You really got deep in Batman's character in 89.
Well, for me, when Bruce discovers that Joker is his parents killer, he changes his methods. He wants revenge. It makes sense that he kills Joker in the movie.

[batman89]

I have personally not seen Returns for quite some time, in fact I still have the VHS copy, and everything in our house is DVD now. But now from the issues that have been mentioned in this topic it makes me wan to eagerly explore and analyze these themes in Returns.

I guess I never appreciated Returns as I should have. I never found it on par with Batman, but then again I have not seen in it in ages. This film must be a much deeper film than I thought it to be. At one time I thought the whole Christmas time background was silly but it is actually quite dark; it brings up the fact even in a time where there is widespread joy, there can be no such joy Batman, even during Christmas he still must fight evil.

So, I definitely need to watch the film, I just hope it is available separate from the anthology because I think its kind of pricy.

[The Dark Knight]

I have personally not seen Returns for quite some time, in fact I still have the VHS copy, and everything in our house is DVD now. But now from the issues that have been mentioned in this topic it makes me wan to eagerly explore and analyze these themes in Returns.

I recommend that you do.

If we're going to talk about Batman films here, I think it's essential for members to watch them (the Burton films especially) every so often to keep the material fresh in our minds.

[thecolorsblend]

I guess I never appreciated Returns as I should have. I never found it on par with Batman, but then again I have not seen in it in ages. This film must be a much deeper film than I thought it to be. At one time I thought the whole Christmas time background was silly but it is actually quite dark; it brings up the fact even in a time where there is widespread joy, there can be no such joy Batman, even during Christmas he still must fight evil.

To me, BR is one of those movies that improves once it gets away from it's premiere window.  It's difficult to appreciate the various nuances and stuff without the benefit of hindsight.  I didn't really dig on BR until about 2004, when a friend went on and on and on about how awesome it is, how visual the film as a whole is, the symbolism, the (underappreciated) comics influences, the cinematic influences, etc.  Good stuff all around, I think.