Obviously, this movie is going to make money, but I bet it drops off steeply after this weekend. If they didn't presell the tickets, I imagine people who didn't see it at the midnight might have heard reviews and been more wary. Fortunately, the presale guaranteed a good amount of people in the theaters. Also, production budget was 250 mil and marketing was at 150 mil. So it's got to make double that to be considered a "success" let alone a smash hit. Not that I think it won't do well, but it does have a high benchmark, and this weekend was mostly guaranteed. We can see.
I'm going to be honest though; people liking a Punisher type Batman I think just don't like Batman. Say what you want about the Nolan movies, but I think they address some of the biggest reasons why Batman doesn't and cannot kill. That he's a stone throw from being a villain himself, that not crossing a line allows the actual "good" guys like Gordon to work with and advocate for him. And the biggest reason, to me, is the "balance". Kind of like power rangers "Don't escalate unless Rita forces you to."
A Batman who kills would require a new caliber of villain. Batman either directly (unintentionally) leads to the creation of his foes, or his very presence causes them to gravitate toward him. There's tons of examples in comics where Batman's unwillingness to cross that line either stays someones hand or leads to an arrogance that is a net win.
If Batman starts killing people, and I mean intentionally killing like he did in this movie, that balance is lost.
The Batman universe has always been my favorite because what we deal with is like, the "basics" of man being their "superpower". The biggest dudes represent mortal flaws - Joker, insanity, (albeit an often calculated one). Quinn, obsession. Cobblepot, greed. And almost all can fall into the vengeance category.
You make Batman kill, and instead of being a force of good, you would just lump him into the "vengeance" or "rage" categories. Is Dexter less of a monster because he only kills bad dudes? Fucking no.
The Batman we love is a damaged dude who uses his wits, money and skills to channel his rage into protecting the city. Take that away, and he becomes a dude who let one bad day drive him to lunacy. Make him kill people, viciously and personally, and people are going to find it hard to be sympathetic to Batman. And that is so important. It's part of why I dislike Superman as a hero. He is not compelling, he is not sympathetic. Dude has the best powers, living parents, a world who thinks he is a god, etc. What the fuck is compelling about that? Not to mention most every scenario involving Superman being "weak" or "dying" feels ridiculously contrived.
As far as Flashpoint, I very much enjoyed the Batman part of it, and I gotta say, when Flash hands Bruce the note from his dad, yea I misted a little. I would be totally down with a Thomas Wayne, but even a Death in the Family Batman (hell, even a Death of the Family Batman) and the flashpoint one were not crazy killing machines. They certainly cared LESS, but deaths were not personal, not always accidental, but it was more like, "I got what I wanted, I don't care about you."
Instead of the shit with Affleck which is like, "Thanks for the info, die anyways."
I think ghostbusters has me more upset, but it's getting close.
