Batman and the Watchmen have revised the image of what a superhero is by being described as a vigilante. Superman works with the government and stay invisible and abides by their every rule. While Batman argues, “You gave them the power that should’ve been ours” (32). Batman is motivated to fight law breakers because of the death of his parents. Dressed in a costume he’d go looking for crime to stop. Though he is fighting crime for the greater good he is still breaking the law. All other superheroes before Batman were supported by the community and praised for all they have done but, in Batman’s case he is questioned by society if what he is doing is the “right” thing to really do. At one point Superman is sent to get rid of Batman, in all
…show more content…
He does this by explaining that in questioning the superheroes humans should be really questioning themselves. That it’s not if humans can do and make the same ultimate decisions that the superheroes can make but, if the humans are prepared to take action into their own hands in a non-super way. If all humans would take the responsibility for justice they would not need someone to make those big decisions for them, if only humans were not so dependent on others. The humans wouldn’t have needed Ozymandias to make the decision to murder three million in order to restore and assure peace on earth. If from the beginning humans were watching and keeping a close eye out for any negativity those three million would not have needed to die. Because humans are acting immoral it is up to the superheroes to make the moral decisions humans couldn’t make. Unlike Superman, Batman and Watchmen are humans, unique humans? Yes, but humans none the less. Batman was a revenge filled vigilante that would avoid killing his advisories not because it was legal thing to do but because it was the right thing to do morally. Skoble argues, “He has refused to cross certain line” (33). Batman has stronger morals than the average human, he knows right from wrong behavior. Though he is not technically a law-abiding citizen of Gotham he knows how far to push his limits. He knew that when he first had the chance to kill
He does this by explaining that in questioning the superheroes humans should be really questioning themselves. That it’s not if humans can do and make the same ultimate decisions that the superheroes can make but, if the humans are prepared to take action into their own hands in a non-super way. If all humans would take the responsibility for justice they would not need someone to make those big decisions for them, if only humans were not so dependent on others. The humans wouldn’t have needed Ozymandias to make the decision to murder three million in order to restore and assure peace on earth. If from the beginning humans were watching and keeping a close eye out for any negativity those three million would not have needed to die. Because humans are acting immoral it is up to the superheroes to make the moral decisions humans couldn’t make. Unlike Superman, Batman and Watchmen are humans, unique humans? Yes, but humans none the less. Batman was a revenge filled vigilante that would avoid killing his advisories not because it was legal thing to do but because it was the right thing to do morally. Skoble argues, “He has refused to cross certain line” (33). Batman has stronger morals than the average human, he knows right from wrong behavior. Though he is not technically a law-abiding citizen of Gotham he knows how far to push his limits. He knew that when he first had the chance to kill