New photo of the 'Batman v Superman' Batmobile is hot

June 6, 2016

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice gave us the best looking Batman costume in movie history, and a really cool Batmobile too. It's *this* close to being my favorite, though Michael Keaton's will be very hard to dethrone.

Regardless, set photographer Clay Enos shared a really cool behind-the-scenes photo of Ben Affleck's Batmobile today, and it's hot! Really hot.

Everything about the #BatmanvSuperman #Batmobile impressed me.Â #WBHomeEnt #BvSUltimateEdition pic.twitter.com/3sxdNTAILd
— Clay Enos: Photographer & Bitcoiner (@ClayEnos) June 6, 2016

That's a lot of fire! While director Zack Snyder is known for his CGI visuals, it's great to see he used some practical effects in that awesome Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice Batmobile chase scene in too.

This is an archive of Batman-News.com from 2010 to 2025. For the latest news, check out BatmanNews.com

117 comments

Alan
June 6, 2016
http://33.media.tumblr.com/...
https://67.media.tumblr.com...
Connor Potasse
June 6, 2016
It also felt forced. It's as if they HAD to have a batmobile scene so they shoe-horned this one in. Story wise, the movie would be just fine without it.
1. Schuyler Finley
  June 6, 2016
  But Batman was trying to get the Krytonite from the mercenaries. He had almost got it if Superman hadn't interfered.
  1. grayghost84
    June 6, 2016
    Ya it was an amazing introduction of batman to superman for the first time. It adds to the plot as superman threatens batman and also thwarts his plans. Pissing Bruce off even more. Superman tearing the doors off and taking out the bat mobile with a little bump really showed supermans power over humans.
    1. The Dark Knight
      June 7, 2016
      Yeah, Really showed Superdick trying to terrorise humans and issue death threats
      1. Schuyler Finley
        June 7, 2016
        The only death threat Superman made was towards Lex.
  2. rodo
    June 7, 2016
    he put a tracker to the truck and then tried to destroy it with the Batmobile... wtf?
    1. Schuyler Finley
      June 7, 2016
      He put the tracker so that he wouldn't lose the truck during the chase.
      1. rodo
        June 7, 2016
        Sure...
2. grayghost84
  June 6, 2016
  If they shoot first it's self defense???? Just like the knife. Batman won't stab you unless you stab him.
  1. Schuyler Finley
    June 6, 2016
    But during BvS, Batman gave up on his no-kill rule. He's stopped holding back against criminals.
    1. grayghost84
      June 6, 2016
      He totally just disabled the thugs guns and beat them up. It's like he can take on 25 guys with guns without killing them, give him a break for taking out the guys shooting anti aircraft weapons at him. I don't know another way he could stop them really?
      1. Schuyler Finley
        June 6, 2016
        And with KGBeast, Batman really had no choice but to kill him since the guy's finger was right on the flamethrower trigger.
      2. grayghost84
        June 6, 2016
        Batman could have shot him between the eyes, but instead he shot the tank, disabling the weapon, kind of just like the vehicles actually. It's like if you get murdered in the way of taking out the things your trying to murder him with its fair game.
    2. Schuyler Finley
      June 7, 2016
      He put the cowl back on because of Superman. The movie did its job. It gave us clues of why Batman is so bitter and brutal, and leaves it to us to figure it out. It's not even hard to figure out even if you have no idea who Batman even is. It's just that people can't accept seeing their hero fall so low or they want to see the fall themselves. And I believe that you can take him there. All it takes is a good writer and for the plot to make sense. You can still do Red Hood story with this Batman. You can have Jason call Batman out for killing criminals and branding them. You can have Batman teach his sons and daughters why they shouldn't kill since he has first-hands experience on the subject.
      1. Schuyler Finley
        June 7, 2016
        That's why I said that the plot has to make sense. Some writers have been able to get away with having their characters act out of character because the plot or conflict makes total sense for the characters to act differently.
        And the no-kill isn't removed. Just because Batman has killed doesn't mean that he can't say "No more killing". You can still have him experience internal conflicts where he's tempted to kill villains, but he doesn't want to become the monster that he once was. It's like a person trying to avoid their former addiction.
  2. grayghost84
    June 6, 2016
    Lol, it was so weird when batman stabbed that guy haha, but I did love it. Bad batman was pretty cool. Like we forget Batman is an antagonist, in this movie. I feel like it's pretty clear he used to be the batman we all know, but he's lost his shit basically. Then he gains it back with supes sacrifice. I really felt like he was half trying not to kill people in his bat vehicles but didn't really care so much anymore he had lost sight focused on his mission.
3. man_you_fear_19
  June 7, 2016
  And a rule that some fans have blown out of proportion, which has been broken multiple times in comics, and in nearly every movie, shouldn't still be this big of a deal.
  1. ernest schoenmakers
    June 7, 2016
    Snyder is a lazy filmmaker cause he crams everything in in such a way that if you miss some minor detail you would miss the whole point of the scene, you cannot expect from everyone to see every detail. This movie is a parallel to Sucker Punch, it's multi-layered but in comparison to BvS it was executed better.
    1. rodo
      June 7, 2016
      Na... he's not lazy, the guy it's a pretentious pseudogenious. All that about BvS... well.. is a simple movie... is not difficult to understand anything on it. Snyder tried so hard to make it complex but no... It's not.
      1. ernest schoenmakers
        June 7, 2016
        The main plot was simple i got that but with so many subplots crammed in was so distracting and i hope to see the Ultimate Edition to fix that.
      2. rodo
        June 7, 2016
        the first viewers of that version says that it's not going to change the haters opinion... I prefer to call them "people with common sense" but whatever...
      3. ernest schoenmakers
        June 7, 2016
        Well there are haters for sure but i´m not one of them cause i want this movie to be good.
    2. ernest schoenmakers
      June 7, 2016
      There was the question mark from The Riddler on a column and what about these Superhero emblems conceived by Lexcorp didn't make sense, why should Lex invent these symbols, oh yeah someone said that there were more metahumans and yes we saw them appear in the movie but they had no real relevance to the main plot, blablabla. The knightmare sequence, i would've loved to see Supes in that scene cause that's what a movie is all about, SHOWING things that matter. I can go on but i don't feel like to do that.
  2. man_you_fear_19
    June 7, 2016
    How is that not true? I'll admit I don't know comics as well as some people but I've seen people give proof that he has killed before in the comics, and I'm pretty sure one of those was the first one. So I guess you know more than the actual creators of the character too. And I've seen every movie and the only movies he didn't kill someone, directly or indirectly, was B&R and 69 Batman, if you want to go back that far.
4. ernest schoenmakers
  June 7, 2016
  You have a point cause you cannot set fire to material with rubber bullets and though it happened, he killed KGBeast with it or those were real bullets, something doesn't match with what's been said and what's been shown.
5. Popc247365
  June 7, 2016
  http://comicsalliance.com/f...
hauntedknight55
June 6, 2016
I'm partial to the original Arkham Asylum car.
GaboPSN
June 6, 2016
CAN'T WAIT! https://media.giphy.com/med...
1. OmegaCorleone
  June 6, 2016
  https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/r...
  1. larva
    June 6, 2016
    Awesome how the camera SUV dissapears.
    1. Mediator
      June 7, 2016
      I was also wondering! lol
2. OGmacrazy
  June 7, 2016
  Now that looks like an awesome chase scenes. There's actually civillian cars, so Bats will have to get out of the Batmobile to stop Joker most likely, hence the part where he is on the rooftop, maybe. Anyways, it is good to see a chase scene that has cars and looks realistic,instead of the convenient and devoid of stakes chase scenes from many other movies, like Fast and Furious,where the streets are always fucking empty for some reason.
  1. OGmacrazy
    June 7, 2016
    Absolutely. Ayer is a much better storyteller than Zack Snyder (see: Training Day, End of Watch, Fury), and a better director as well. I really hope he did a good job with Suicide Squad. If it delivers, it will introduce a bunch of actually important villains, with roles to be actually played out in this universe (as opposed to what Marvel has been making, which is more of one off under developed villains, which are always the worst part of their movies), and hopefully, they'll be developed in this movie.
krampe1995
June 6, 2016
kinda agree with you on that. It wasnt a real chase scene in my opinion, its like they were trying to do it to much on empty streets.
1. TØM
  June 7, 2016
  Wasn't it like, a harbour?
  1. krampe1995
    June 7, 2016
    yeah apparently the entire harbour in gotham is abandoned. All we see about gotham actually only takes place in the harbour
Ravager
June 6, 2016
I guess you could say that Batman was in...the hot seat.
Dude
June 6, 2016
Yeah well, I'd say the batmobiles lake entrance into the batcave was pretty fucking badass!
1. Dude
  June 6, 2016
  Fine. Pout all you want then I guess.
Knight Radiant
June 6, 2016
I wonder why Batman has not murdered Joker yet? He is ready to murder a hero as a precautionary measure but will not go ahead and off the Prince of Crime? https://media.giphy.com/med...
1. attentionisattention
  June 6, 2016
  Because his morals used to be intact before the Superman incident, hence a whole surviving rogues gallery.
  1. grayghost84
    June 6, 2016
    This
  2. Kerk Lastnameless
    June 6, 2016
    A very weak explanation. How many years passed since Metropolis? 2-3? So you want to tell me that in those 2-3 years he only focused on killing human traffickers and common thugs, but never once came across Bane or Freeze.
    1. Virgil Scott
      June 6, 2016
      18 months.
    2. attentionisattention
      June 7, 2016
      Not really. He didn't *focus* on killing anyone (except for Superman). He would've have been sniping people left and right in the chase scene instead of shooting tracking devices onto trucks if that was the case. And that's 18 months out of his 20 year crime fighting career so they both are likely locked up.
  3. The Dark Knight
    June 7, 2016
    It's rather unbelievable that Batman would give up his rule just because two aliens rampaged around a city and laid waste to it
    1. Schuyler Finley
      June 7, 2016
      He most likely gave up after losing Robin. Seeing Superman and Zod fight made Bruce put the cowl back on.
2. Knight Radiant
  June 6, 2016
  I never said he killed everyone. He kills people he deems a threat. I think Joker would fall under that category.
  1. Schuyler Finley
    June 6, 2016
    Maybe the Joker's been hiding or he was already locked in Arkham during BvS.
    1. Knight Radiant
      June 6, 2016
      https://media3.giphy.com/me... Good explanation.
    2. Mediator
      June 7, 2016
      That's exactly what I was trying to explain to people. Joker was probably locked up in Arkham, so he didn't have any reason to go after him.
  2. Knight Radiant
    June 6, 2016
    Joker has threatened the world on multiple occasions in his history.
    1. :D
      June 6, 2016
      1. Or The Joker is one of the robins. Making Batman extremely hesitant to kill him.
      2. Or the Joker is already dead.
      1. ernest schoenmakers
        June 7, 2016
        The Joker can't be killed and btw BvS is not a full adaptation of BTDKR.
  3. OGDickGrayson
    June 6, 2016
    He's killed hundreds
    1. Schuyler Finley
      June 6, 2016
      It would take either years of planning or a super weapon for Joker to become a threat to the world. Superman on the other hand, can destroy the world anytime he wants to.
      1. OGDickGrayson
        June 6, 2016
        Except Superman never would. And Batman, rather than investigating him and getting to know Superman, decides to kill him anyways. That's the most unBatman thing to do.
      2. Schuyler Finley
        June 6, 2016
        Except Batman doesn't know that. He's seen allies become villains so he expects the same thing to happen to Superman. To him, it's only a matter of time before Superman goes bad, and rather than wait, Batman decides to kill him before that happens. He's clearly not in his right mind after 20 years of crime-fighting, and then seeing lives destroyed by the events in MoS.
      3. OGDickGrayson
        June 6, 2016
        He doesn't know that because he didn't even investigate him. He just watches him on TV as if that's where he gets his information from. Superman was revealed to be living among humans for decades to everyone on the planet and Batman didn't even attempt to look for him, even when that would give him an advantage.
        If he's seen allies become villains then why doesn't that 1% chance apply to Alfred?
      4. Schuyler Finley
        June 6, 2016
        Probably because he's had that talk with Alfred before or he's trust Alfred since the guy freaking raised him. Also other than telling the world Batman's secret identity, what could Alfred possibly do to endanger lives?
        But Superman has only been Supermaning for only 18 months. I'm sure Batman didn't know that aliens existed before and during MoS. Again, his experiences has made him believe that people can and will go bad after crimefighting.
      5. TØM
        June 7, 2016
        But who invites an alien around for coffee, y'know?
3. Knight Radiant
  June 6, 2016
  What is a weird hability?
  1. ernest schoenmakers
    June 7, 2016
    I think he means ''weird habit''.
4. grayghost84
  June 6, 2016
  Also this.
5. Scott Peterson
  June 6, 2016
  I know right? My favorite scene with the BatPunisher was when he left everyone in the warehouse stabbed and bloody and dead.
  Oh right, that didn't happen.
  1. Knight Radiant
    June 6, 2016
    People were stabbed, blown up, and set on fire lol.
6. BatmanNewsChris
  June 6, 2016
  We address that very issue on this week's Batman News podcast! http://batman-news.com/2016...
7. ernest schoenmakers
  June 7, 2016
  And Ben as Executive Producer for a better execution.
Tres Swygert
June 6, 2016
Just don't wreck his ride - he'll come after you.....
Jesse Hernandez
June 6, 2016
Nothing can beat the Tumblr chase scene in Batman Begins
1. The Dark Knight
  June 7, 2016
  The TDK chase got interesting after the batpod came to play. BB takes the cake
  1. The Dark Knight
    June 7, 2016
    Yes but the tumbler didn't do much except getting blown up.
    Tumbler jumping over rooftops is still more interesting
Milo Yiannopoulos
June 6, 2016
Zack used more practical visuals and fewer CGI shots than either Age of Dultron or Avengers. It was way more organic
1. grayghost84
  June 6, 2016
  Agreed. Was cool to see jump scare man-bat was a real consume.
  1. AquaCthulhu
    June 7, 2016
    I'm inclined to believe that wasn't the Man-bat. It was more of a metaphor and how during the 'You're letting him kill Martha' scene we get a shot of that scene (the beginning of it where he's outside the Wayne crypt holding flowers).
Queef Police
June 6, 2016
which is on screen for a total of 2 minutes
OmegaCorleone
June 6, 2016
It was both stylish and a beast. Nothing could stop it but the man of steel himself.
http://static3.techinsider....
grayghost84
June 6, 2016
Hard to argue, maybe animated series or batman returns. I kind of like a cheesy really Bat-like bat mobile. The Nolan-tumbler was never a real bat mobile. BvS is one of the best chase scenes IMO period.
1. The Dark Knight
  June 7, 2016
  It was a batmobile, even if it was never called Batmobile in any film
That1Guy
June 6, 2016
This is soooo hawt ;D
Six By Six
June 6, 2016
I can see why, and it's my second fav.
I think this is the most complete monster of a Batmobile to have ever been designed:
grayghost84
June 6, 2016
Well they were in the abandoned warehouse district so there isn't going to be a lot of traffic. I thought there were a lot of neat things in the BvS chase. The force field that blew up the rocket missle was different. How about when he crashed into that building and then crashed out ONTO the semi, that was awesome. The ship thing was cool. Personal fav bat mobile scene, but I totally get people who prefer the Nolan chase. Was also amazing.
Andrew
June 6, 2016
Wow a picture of the batmobile we've already seen in the actual movie 2 months ago! Yay. Wow. Congratulations.
1. BatmanNewsChris
  June 6, 2016
  ZZZZzzzzzzz
  1. Andrew
    June 7, 2016
    How's the forums going?
Mediator
June 7, 2016
C.G.I They said....
YourGrace
June 7, 2016
The only critiques i have about the new batmobile is it didn't seem that fast lol. It sounded fast but the sleek/formula 1design would have u believe it would be alot faster. There shoulda been a firing wench in the front of the car like in the Arkham game.The one in the back was cool ( sorry if dragging criminals around causing manslaughter offended you but it was badass) but with a front one he could've attached it directly to the truck. Also why stop at bulletts? Why not go all out with some missiles? And maybe stealth mode? Idk i just thought it would do some cooler shit. Coulda made the chase scene a little cooler.
The Dark Knight
June 7, 2016
Am I the only one who thinks the tumbler is still the best batmobile? This one looks too much like a f1 car
1. Matthew Bishop
  June 7, 2016
  Yes, you're the only one.
  1. The Dark Knight
    June 7, 2016
    And you represent everyone? *Chuckles*
Sheev Palpatine
June 7, 2016
I miss the Burtonmobile...
Seb
June 7, 2016
You know what I missed in this scene? Frankly... all the action scenes... As cool as this car is, there is absolutely no connection with the people whatsoever. I get it, they didn't want to have "collateral damage" but they went overboard to the point that there aren't any stakes. In Batman Begins, when the cops are chasing him, there are civilians everywhere. Here, it just looks like a movie set (I know it was a real location, it just didn't feel alive). With Doomsday, it's the exact same thing. NO civilians whatsoever, which is probably the reason why it felt so lifeless. There was nothing at stake. I know people "hated" the destruction is MoS and all the dead civilians and whatnot. But that doesn't mean you should do the polar opposite and remove any suspense. I'm hoping in JL, there's more of a connection with the people and the world. There is no reason for a massive movie like BvS to feel so small and contained.
TØM
June 7, 2016
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/...
AquaCthulhu
June 7, 2016
The streets of an abandoned port wouldn't probably be bustling with people and neon signs
The chase in BB was in midtown Gotham.
1. AquaCthulhu
  June 7, 2016
  I don't know but Lex smuggled the Kryptonite into the States and using an abandoned port and driving discretely without attracting much attention is more logical plot-wise.
  And Batman, even as tippy as he's become, doesn't want innocents getting caught in his plan to eliminate Superman (for the people). He literally set-up the fight so doing it in a populated area would go against his depiction of how he felt early on in the movie about the Metropolis destruction. Batman would've 'actually' broken character if he fought Superman amongst civilians.
  The Doomsday-fight was pretty much in reaction to the criticisms and it's clearly done on the studio's insistence.
  Or maybe they were always going to address the destruction just maybe not through Batman. The same way they were planning for BvS to have the darkest tone and JL to have a lighter one (Chris Terio having had completed the script before BvS even released), but I guess most people would assume it was done as a reaction.
  1. ernest schoenmakers
    June 7, 2016
    Man maybe this maybe that, is this how you wanna watch a movie?
    1. AquaCthulhu
      June 7, 2016
      The only 'maybes' in my comment were regarding what happens behind-the-scenes of the movie. When I say they were always going to address the destruction it's just as certain as someone who says it was worked into the plot of BvS. There is no absolute certainty with these things except for the movie.
      I don't care about what happens behind the scenes of a movie because I watch it for what it is. That's how I wanna (and do) watch a movie.
      (Notice I'm not ambiguous when I'm talking about the film itself.)
      1. ernest schoenmakers
        June 7, 2016
        You should care cause those people are responsible for the way you watch a movie, that's what i was talking about.
      2. AquaCthulhu
        June 7, 2016
        That's what's wrong with so many people. You think people always knew these things about an upcoming movie? Before Internet was a thing do you think people enjoyed movies a lot less than now? Just because they couldn't access a dozen interviews and other promotional material? In fact, it's the opposite. You enjoy a movie more the less you know about what went into making it.
        People obsess over minute things these days and sometimes even fail to see the movie as it is. It's the end-product that matters, not who produced it. (You know I loved BvS.)
        Those people aren't responsible for the 'way I watch a movie'. They're responsible for the movie. They have nothing to do with me, really.
      3. ernest schoenmakers
        June 7, 2016
        Fair enough i loved it too for what it was but it could've been so much better with the material they had, i'm so pissed that they wanna play catch-up with Marvel cause it's got nothing to do with Marvel. DC Comics is a completely different setup of a Superhero universe which is darker and deeper storywise and that's a good thing, so competing with Marvel is pointless. DC Comics should do a better job for sure, i hope with Justice League and the other DC movies its gonna change and maybe the Ultimate Edition will bring me more.
      4. AquaCthulhu
        June 8, 2016
        Well, whatever problems you had with it, I hope they'll be resolved (at least to some extent) in the Ultimate Edition. I mean if you liked the theatrical cut and wished they did more with the material an extended cut just could be the answer.
        And I hope the next time they don't compromise on the running-time, especially when it hurts the experience for so many viewers.
      5. ernest schoenmakers
        June 8, 2016
        Admit you had problems with it too cause that's a common experience, the choppy editing and this can be fixed with the Ultimate Edition.
      6. AquaCthulhu
        June 8, 2016
        No, not me, I swear.
        The editing is very unorthodox but I loved it all the more for it.
        I love how some of the scenes transitioned and brought a new subtext to the dialogue. Right after Lex acquires the Kryptonite we have a voice-over of Senator Finch addressing the press. She says, 'How do we determine what's good?' and we see Lex opening the case with Kryptonite inside.
        Cuts to the senator standing beside Wallace at the podium.
        Then we see Lex approaching the mineral now in its case and the senator says '... does he act by our will? Or by his own?'.
        We know she's talking about Superman but it is juxtaposed with everything Lex is doing right under her nose.
        And then he's inches away from the mineral, completely mesmerized. There's another voice-over of Martha: 'People hate what they don't understand'. Martha is actually talking about everyone that's against Clarke and Lex stands first in that queue of people if not behind Bruce.
        This kind of editing could be unwelcome for many but it felt intuitive to me.
        The only problem I had is that more people didn't like it and if the U-Edition can fix that I'm all the merrier for it.
      7. ernest schoenmakers
        June 8, 2016
        Wasn't Lex putting a bucket of piss right under Finch's nose? Is that showing to Finch that Supes is an evil God? Lex's motivations to hate Supes are unclear to me or is it because he has Daddy issues? Demons come from the sky and not from hell (that painting). Bruce's motivations to hate Supes is plausible to a certain extent cause the Wayne building with his employees in it was destroyed but not to kill Supes or maybe he was manipulated by Lex to kill him, it's too far-fetched for me. That bullet of unknown metal (alien technology) Lois was having, was that a metaphor to show that Supes (an alien) was involved in the African killing of the villagers and he didn't care for them only for Lois?
      8. AquaCthulhu
        June 8, 2016
        The senator says Lex could take a bucket of piss and call it granny's peach tea, take a weapon of mass-destruction and call it deterrence all while blocking the import license. The jar of piss in the Capitol building was Lex completely revealing himself to her. It’s a fuck-you to her. He knows she doesn't hate Superman so she has to go. And the whole meeting and talking to Superman thing is counterproductive to his plan. If Superman spoke up (gave the monologue that many fans expected from the scene) and cleared his name then most people would be convinced Superman was innocent, instead of the doubt that everyone harbors for Supes. The jar was for the Senator to realize that her impending doom was Lex's doing, a last laugh if you will.
        Lex hates the idea of a God, especially how they make Him out to be all-powerful and all-good. The rooftop-scene cleared everything about Lex for me. It isn't the daddy issues but the fact that there was no God to save him then that fuels his hate for God-like beings. He thinks they're a fraud and anyone with super-powers (the metas) cannot stay good. The whole movie deals with how power corrupts (through Lex's, Senator's, and Bruce's arcs).
        It is kind of like Sam Jackson's role in Unbreakable. They're both powerless men with knowledge.
        Bruce's motives are momentary since they're solely rageful. Lex would never stop hating Superman the way Bruce does.
        Lex only manipulated Bruce with the bombing and the red-notes. That was the final nail in the coffin that made Batman steal the Kryptonite and go ahead with his plan to kill Superman. Lex has nothing to do with Bruce's hate. He only fanned the flames.
        I'll have to watch the extended desert-scene but here's what I got from the theatrical cut: Superman works at Daily Planet and knows every assignment Lois is on. He knew where she’s going is dangerous so he keeps an eye out for her. When things go south (thanks to Lex who knew Lois would be there and Clarke would follow if she was in trouble), Supes intervenes and saves her. Slamming the warlord into the walls was unnecessary, probably my only problem with the movie. :P
        The US gov doesn't have jurisdiction to set foot in that part of Africa so Lex used his prototype bullets. He's the kind of guy who'd use every opportunity and tries to get as many birds with a single shot as possible. The Capitol bombing achieved these things: 1. Got rid of the Senator who's onto him, 2. Got rid of Mercy who's the only evidence to link him to Wallace, 3. Prevented Superman from setting things straight and furthermore defaming him and crushing his soul (Hans Zimmer said the only way you can hurt Superman is by breaking his heart, which is true), 4. Tip Batman off the edge and make the final decision to kill Supes.
        The same way, he's got this remote place in Africa where no forensic investigations would take place and so he's free to test out whatever artillery he wants. His main goal in the desert was to frame Superman, the bullets were a bonus (I don't think it's alien tech, but it could be. It's just something Lex was testing). Because he knew they would blow away in the wind, like sand in the desert.
        Lois was his key to bringing Superman into the village, thereby revealing the location of the warlord that the villagers were protecting from their oppressive government. We see shots of aerial attacks on the village in the Ultimate edition trailer (A missile that Supes flies into?). Superman is being blamed for those attacks, not that he killed the men himself. But things get muddied and the media would prefer to report ‘Superman might have killed people to save a reporter’ because ‘stuff like this still shocks’. (Sorry for the long reply.) The Ultimate cut should make this clear for all of us, even if it plays out differently the purpose would be the same.
      9. ernest schoenmakers
        June 8, 2016
        Well i do not agree with everything cause i think certain points are far-fetched like how would Finch know everything about Lex and what he's trying to do. Why would Lex blow up Mercy, she's his bodyguard all of his life, he wouldn't go that far because of a link to Wallace cause Wallace was blownup anyway. I don't think that Mercy is dead, she got away together with Lex.
        Btw. that line: ''Stuff like this still shocks'' is almost what Jena Malone's character said, it's very plausible that she's playing Cat Grant.
      10. AquaCthulhu
        June 8, 2016
        The senator doesn't know everything but she suspects and if she isn't removed from the equation she could be a problem later on. With Mercy it shows he takes no chances. In the Superman: Doomsday animated movie Lex shoots her in the head so Doomsday won't be traced back to him.
        The way she keeps looking for Lex means she has no idea about the bomb. From the little we see of her, she believes Lex is doing everything to protect the world. And no, we could pretty much see her as the explosion engulfs everyone. She's gone.
        I was quoting Jena Malone's line. I think she was talking about the desert incident too. If it isn't an undercover Barbara then it has to be Cat.
      11. ernest schoenmakers
        June 8, 2016
        Well i don't thiink that Mercy is dead cause Finch already knew that Mercy is his bodyguard and i don't think Mercy would talk. Mercy has nothing to do with Doomsday so there's no link.
        I would be highly disappointed if Jena was Cat Grant cause she's very good as an action actress (Sucker Punch) so hopefully she's a blonde wigged undercover Babs investigating the Africa incident.
      12. AquaCthulhu
        June 8, 2016
        Yeah, she could be alive.
        No, I meant Mercy was connected to Doomsday in the animated movie. So he shoots her straight in the head.
        I feel the same way about Barbara. Seeing as almost everything in BvS set something up for future films, Barbara is my bet. They're just trying to throw us off so it'd be a surprise in the U-cut (the opposite of Jimmy Olsen). She isn't Robin or Batgirl so ... an Oracle who can walk?
        After all, Bruce seems to be okay hacking random mobiles and Alfred seems to be the navigator of the team. So this Oracle does more hands-on work maybe. Pure speculation.
        How would you feel about a physically unchallenged Oracle?
      13. ernest schoenmakers
        June 8, 2016
        Because it was in the comics, there are multiple versions where Lex didn´t kill her so this is speculation but okay.
        It´s clear that she is in a sitting position if you take a close look at that scene in the trailer so she might be confined to a wheelchair. Thus yeah she might be Oracle too but i heard someone saying, look at those glasses it looks like they´re a bit too big for her face so she might be Carrie Kelley too from the New 52 Universe where she´s no Robin anymore but i think that´s quite unlikely.
      14. AquaCthulhu
        June 8, 2016
        Yeah.
        She could be anyone, and yes, seems to be sitting. An investigation would be a hard-sell if she's wheelchair-bound though.
        I don't think there's another Robin in the Films since Bats hasn't yet recovered from losing the previous one. There appeared to be a Nightwing costume in the JL set-photo but it could be anyone, even Black Manta. And someone with a face-bandana?
        http://cdn0.dailydot.com/up...
AquaCthulhu
June 7, 2016
To all the hopeless know-it-alls, 'breaking character' is a plot-hole that occurs within a single work. It is considered to be so when it happens without any character-development to substantiate the 'break'.
You can't claim Batman broke his character in BvS just because (most of) the previous depictions didn't kill like this Batman does (those depictions didn't even have a Batman this fucked up).
You can only claim this if Batman didn't kill and went out of his way to save a criminal early on in the movie and later on starts killing with no explanation whatsoever. That's when your suspension of disbelief would be disturbed, not because you have certain 'expectations' of the character.
As far as character-integrity goes, it's realistic that a man who's been fighting darkness both within and without for decades would only give into it at least once. What matters is if he stays there.
I just wish people understood the terms they keep throwing around.
1. ernest schoenmakers
  June 7, 2016
  That's why they're gonna change the whole organisation behind the camera for the Justice League movies.
  1. AquaCthulhu
    June 7, 2016
    Are you talking about the cinematographer? What organization?
    1. ernest schoenmakers
      June 7, 2016
      Man, i'm talking about Ben Afleck and Geoff Johns taking over storywise and productionwise. It's old news.
      1. AquaCthulhu
        June 7, 2016
        Oh.
        I don't believe they did that because some people thought Batman was depicted badly.