Archive
James Gunn’s Peacemaker just pointed out the major flaw with Batman’s infamous “no kill” rule, and why Ben Affleck’s DCEU Dark Knight was right to break it. The latest episode of Gunn’s outrageous The Suicide Squad spin-off sees John Cena’s titular hero examining what it means to be a hero as the shadow of his own origin story made itself clear.
Peacemaker is a surprisingly complex take on heroism, presenting The Suicide Squad’s most hated character - largely for his murder of Rick Flag - as far more sympathetic than his first Task Force X appearance could get close to. The show has begun to explore more of Peacemaker’s unique take on justice and where his idea that the law can be broken and blood can be spilled in the name of the greater good comes from. Through a slightly different lens, without the influence of his white supremacist father, DC comics villain White Dragon, Peacemaker isn’t all that different to Batman himself. Both are vigilantes who take the law into their own hands, it’s just that Peacemaker gets whatever it takes done.
Peacemaker has already taken various shots at Batman, calling him a “p*ssy” in Smith’s estimation and indirectly insulting Batman’s use of the conspicuous Batmobile. But Peacemaker episode 4 offers the most overt Batman criticism yet as Peacemaker suggests that Batman refusing to kill criminals just gives them the chance to escape and kill victims, implicating Batman as an indirect killer. And he has a point, given the frequency with which villains typically reappear to reoffend, though it’s never been a huge issue in the movies as much as it was in the comics. Nolan's Scarecrow (Cillian Murphy) is the obvious exception, given his appearance in all three of the Dark Knight trilogy movies, which wouldn't have been possible if Batman had killed him off in Batman Begins.
While Batman’s “no kill” rule is a subject of considerable debate in the movie universe, given that there are several examples where he clearly breaks it or at best bends it terrible, it remains his most notorious principle. Batman believes that preventable deaths are a personal failure, no matter how much force he has to use. Ben Affleck’s Batman is something of an exception, of course, but his circumstances were vastly different and the stakes he faced were world-threatening, not just Gotham-level. Peacemaker’s mockery of Batman and assessment that he should adopt that full-throttle approach for every opponent may seem extreme, but it would theoretically achieve what always Batman sought, the eradication of crime in Gotham. At least by removing key re-offenders like Joker and Riddler. And the very fact that Affleck's Batman drops his commitment to the rule when faced with a higher level of threat suggests the problem with the rule in the first place: Batman simply doesn't count the murderers he takes down in Gotham as a big enough deal to kill them. Perhaps Peacemaker has a point, then.
The difference with Peacemaker, of course, is that his origin story was borne out of hatred, thanks to his father’s bigotry. His twisted sense of morality came from his father’s lack of value for human life, while Batman was created out of a traumatic loss of life. Batman’s "no kill" rule may seem like a weakness to Peacemaker, but that’s sort of the point, and the real difference between the pair that Cena's warped "hero" will probably come to explore himself a little more. And it’s James Gunn’s genius in Peacemaker that his criticism of Batman’s approach to justice actually holds some sway.
