Batman is one of my favorite super heroes. With no special powers like Superman, and no mutant abilities like the X-Men, he’s one of the few comic book characters who has to get by on his training, intellect, and gadgets alone. Join this with his tragic past, and the moral code and strong sense of justice that was born because of it, he stands apart from the super hero crowd and no doubt this is part of what makes the character so popular.
I was anxious to get my hands on a copy of Batman: Arkham Asylum and when Gamefly finally cued it up for me, I couldn’t wait to give it a spin. However, Batman fell off his pedestal a little during this game. The writers where very true to the original character of the comic books. He behaved exactly how I would expect Batman to behave within the context of his dialog and the situations within the game. His strong sense of justice and moral code were kept well in tact, but the game one scenario in the game made me wonder if Batman is wrong keeping up with his code of conduct.
At one point, fairly early on in the game, the Joker presents Batman with a “free shot”. He’s positioned himself outside of the Caped Crusader’s immediate grasp, making it impossible for Batman to capture him, but leaves himself vulnerable to a situation in which a well placed ‘Batarang‘ would trigger a chain reaction that would end up killing him. Joker sees this, he knows Batman sees this, but he’s relying on Batman’s strict moral code of never taking a life to prevail. Of course it does. Batman doesn’t take the shot and stands helplessly as he watches the Joker vanish from site to continue on with his nefarious plans. The game plays out and (of course) the Joker is finally apprehended by the Dark Knight, but not before he kills people. A lot of people actually.
Thinking about the context of this situation I can’t help but think that Batman’s moral code is wrong. He’s never taken a life, and he didn’t take the Joker’s life, but at what cost? Maybe Bruce Wayne can sleep better at night knowing his moral code hasn’t been broken, but what happens to the families of all those people who lost loved ones at the hand of an maniacal villain who could have been stopped but wasn’t. It would almost be fair to say that because of Batman’s opportunity and inaction, he’s just as responsible for the loss of lives as the Joker is.
Or then again, maybe I just have to remind myself that this is just a video game based on a comic book character and I need to chillax. (A combination of “chilling” and relaxing”.)
January 17, 2010 at 7:48 pm
I’m going to have to disagree with you here. I think thats the whole point of Batman and really why the cops leave him alone (aside from they cant catch him anyway). If Batman began killing (like it appears he did in The Dark knight) the cops would be all over him. Thus ending his ability to work along side cops and save the countless (fake) lives … See Morehe no doubt will. Also, if he takes one life why not just walk through Arkham and take them all out? They’re gonna get out eventually and kill people, so why not prevent it? I don’t think the Psychologists of the Batman universe would agree and it would turn him into what he’s fighting…crazies in costumes.
January 17, 2010 at 7:49 pm
You raise a really good point. I guess this could just be a moral questions along the lines, “if you could kill hitler as a baby”. Now I don’t know how I feel about the situation. Part of my thinks he still should have taken the joker out, but you’re absolutely right — once you start down that road, you’re easily corruptible.
January 30, 2010 at 1:13 pm
I’ve thought about this a long time, and I totally disagree. Batman needs to kill the Joker and make it look like an accident. I think about Batman like I think about the Joker and the Riddler. Use a superhero archetype – all three are supermen with one limitation; Batman cannot break his moral code, Joker cannot kill without a reference to a … See Morejoke, and the Riddler can’t tell the world he knows who Batman is because that would ruin the riddle. If any of them were to overcome themselves, they would solve their problem. I don’t think it’s morality that keeps Batman from killing the Joker, I think it’s pride – it’s the fear of living with himself with the knowledge that he broke his own code. However, if you’re truly sacrificing yourself for a cause, I think you should be prepared to have to do that.
January 26, 2011 at 7:58 pm
I’m watching Batman since a was a kid, and I’ve been asking myself that same question over and over again until I realized that Batman and every other superhero that doesn’t kill (Spider-Man, Superman..) is right. Moral code isn’t something that Bruce Wayne made for him self, he just decided that he is going to follow the moral code of life that God gave to people (don’t kill, don’t swear, don’t smoke, use drugs…), you can do it too. And if he wants to be different that criminals he fight and make a difference, first he needs to be moral and then go out and uphold the law, if he ever crosses that line, every villain that Batman has ever faced will won, and all he trained and fought for his entire life will be gone.
December 20, 2011 at 6:43 pm
Some good points already made. I feel having witnessed evil and what it can do, in his youth, combined with his other experiences that Nolan’s Batman (and indeed, the more recent comic book Batman) is barking up entirely the wrong tree if “realism” is what they’re after. Bruce Wayne is very, very intelligent – which combined with these experiences – I’m pretty certain the intelligent and practical part of his brain would override any “moral” part, and he would kill the joker. As already mentioned above (and I agree), I think to protect his reputation he would just make it look like an accident or suicide.
Bob Kane (Batman’s creator) had him take life. As far as I’m concerned this is not only psychologically correct, but also canon; so far as the character’s personality is concerned. Batman actually says himself in the earlier days “Much as I hate to take human life, I’m afraid *this* time it’s necessary.” Now *that’s* a “disturbed” highly intelligent man talking right there…