I just re-read this again early this year, and each time I’ve read it, the person he comes closest to actually killing (i.e. his direct actions (as opposed to indirect or inaction) is the Joker. He laments the people he can’t save, and he watches with glee as the Mutants take each other out by the riccochets off the Batmobile. In the Dark Knight Strikes Again he kills Dick Grayson. However, I thankfully only read that once. Once was more than enough. Don’t even get me started on a comparrison between these two.
Been years since I read it, but wasn’t there a scene where he machinegunned a mutant who had kidnapped a baby?
Thanks everybody for answering about canon. I mostly read Marvel books in any case, and things did change rather often there. I always just figured that since they were fictional characters, anything could be changed as long as the story was fun. Although I do remember some fan rancor over minor points like cyclops firing his optic blast without having his hand on his visor. “Jean Grey used her TK to do it for him!” “No she didn’t, how could she know!” “Well maybe Cyclops’ visor responds to mental commands?” “You’re an idiot!” etc…
It is interesting to know that DC did some actual canonization throughout the years. Who knew?
Dr. Rieux: I was really looking forward to seeing that, but couldn’t find it in their schedule… how’d you find out about the showtime?
IIRC, he outlines the mutant with bullets. The petrified bad-guy then just stands there as Batman takes the child from him. It’s been years since I read it, too, so I could be totally off.
He could just have a button in his glove somewhere unobtrusive. It’s how I’ve always seen it explained.
If he killed people, he would destoy his standing as Karl Varnsen’s perfect form of justice.
Per an interview I read at the time, it gave an excuse to make Batman more “edgy”. By not capturing Joe Chill, he could be more brutal to the crooks he caught since any of them could potentially be his parent’s killer.
Feh. Seems like a half-baked idea to me.
Assuming we’re still talking about The Dark Knight Returns, Bats definitely blows away a mutant or two in that scene. IIRC:
Mutant: (holding a gun to the baby hostage’s head) “Don’t come closer! I’ll kill the little shit! I will! Believe me!”
(Batman pulls out a big gun, blows mutant through a wall)
Batman: “I believe you.”
(Batman picks up baby, brings him home)
Thanks rjung, that certainly does jog my memory. I think you may be right, and I am simply putting too much emphasis on the point/counter-point sequence between Lana Lang and that old dude. Lana claims that the Batman never actually did kill anyone. I’ll look it up tonight.
Oh, and Candid Gamera’s other thread titled “Many Faces of the Batman” reminded me of Four Faces of the Batman (with an awesome cover of Batman faces by Neal Adams.) In that issue, Batman is investigating some terrorists who are all factioned against each other in a sort of Mexican standoff at the end of the story (I’m pretty sure Batman had something to do with that). The one detail I do remember clearly is that Batman sets off a fire cracker and one of the terrorists thinks he being shot at by one of his compadres and a gunfight ensues, presumably everyone killed each other.
Frank Miller’s Batman in {b]The Dark Knight Returns** makes a positive fetish of not killing anyone, despite his badass ways. It’s repeated several times in the series — Habving the leader of The Mutant Gang in his gunsight, he says it would be the easiest thing to do, “…but that means crossing a line I drew for myself long ago.” He muses similarly on killing THe Joker (and not doing it), and elsewhere. And, as noted, the chubby TV commentator Lana Lang of Miller’s series points out that Batman has never killed anyone.
I recall that the original cinematic Batman, from the serials in the 1940’s, carried a gun and used it on a few bad guys. Is this true, or just a foggy memory?
I thought in TDKR, he did kill the mutant leader, thus gaining their loyalty.
He defeats the mutant leader, but he does not kill him.
I was reading an early Batman series the other day and in the space of a few panels Batman machine guns down a gang of hoods from his bat plane, then (from the plane) swings al lasso over the neck of a man who has been turned inot a huge violent juggernaut by the criminals , and deliberately hangs him from the neck until dead. Old Batman didn’t play and had the body count to prove it.
I’ll see if I can post a link to the panels tonight.
I came across it while channel surfing–it wasn’t in the listings.
I missed the beginning, and kept dozing off (long day) but I did like what I saw. Penguin as Renfield was pretty funny.
Actually, as I recall, he didn’t machine gun the henchmen…though he did blow them up, seconds later. I don’t recall him actually trying to save the Joker—in fact, he makes at least one deliberate attempt to kill him with the Batwing (which fails), before succeeding in killing him near the end scene.
Marvel and DC are equal opportunity offenders when it comes to continuity. DC largely gets a pass, and Marvel gets called to the carpet over every discrepency. It’s flat out impossible to have a series of monthly titles, all in the same universe, where characters never age, and to maintain continuity. A good writer shouldn’t really worry too much about continuity, just try not to make any glaring contradictions, IMHO. Obsessing over continuity and canon leads to nonsense like Hypertime.
It’s not definite. The first time through I was sure he killed him, but afterwards I changed my mind.
I have the page right in front of me and I can’t tell one way or the other. In one frame Batman has the huge gun pointed and fires a single shot - BRAKKK. In the next frame we see the thug stunned, with his mouth open in an “o”. There’s a splashy kind of design on the wall behind him which could be a blood splatter but could also be some other stain – it’s a very messy apartment. The top half of the frame is shaded so you can’t distinguish the colors. There’s also a small black smudge on the wall above the thug’s shoulder. It could be a bullet hole or, again, just schmutz.
The fact that the kid is easily retrieved afterwards doesn’t necessarily mean the thug is dead; he could be in shock from having his bluff called and feeling a bullet whiz past his face.
After several re-readings and noticing all the emphasis on the no-killing motif that CalMeacham observed, I’m pretty well convinced that it was just a very close warning shot. It isn’t clear-cut as drawn though.