Batman is 'irrelevant' if he can't kill, insists director who fundamentally misunderstands Batman

Yikes. It's more than a little worrying when the director of several DC films doesn't grasp the essence of what makes Batman the character fans adore.

We won't claim that Zack Snyder's remarks are surprising – Snyder has a track record of upsetting fans, seemingly deliberately despite what he claims. Preferring to refer to himself as a "deconstructivist", Snyder hasn't been able to avoid the backlash to his latest mistake, and rightly so.

We prefer to think of Bats in fitting adaptations, like in Batman: The Animated Series

During a Joe Rogan podcast, the DC director mentioned often getting "in trouble" with the fandom, before continuing by suggesting that Batman is "irrelevant" if he can't kill. And Snyder is... confused... by the angry fans?

"Batman can't kill is canon. And I'm like, 'Okay, the first thing I wanna do when you say that is I wanna see what happens'. And they go, 'Well don't put him in a situation where he has to kill someone'," Snyder explained.

"You're protecting your god in a weird way, right? You're making your god irrelevant if he can't be in that situation. He has to now deal with that. If he does do that what does that mean? What does it tell you, does he stand up to it? Does he survive that as a god? As your god, can Batman survive that?"

There's so much to unpack there. Still, Reddit has tried; needless to say, they're not impressed by Snyder's ignorance.

"He [Batman] has to deal with it… all the time. That’s like a central theme of the character, that his severe objection towards any sort of killing might actually have negative ramifications (in the DC world with the likes of Joker and otherwise super-powered villains, not the real one)."

Not that any amount of reasoning will have an impact on Snyder as he powers on, ignoring all those who cast doubt on his disconnected vision of what DCEU should look like.

Topics: Batman, DC, TV And Film, Real Life