"Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice" has finally arrived in theaters, and this past Thursday, when I sat in the movie theater, I can't even begin to describe to you my excitement at seeing Batman back on the silver screen. As a child, I was obsessed with everything related to the Caped-Crusader. When I was a three-year-old I would wear a Batman cape everywhere my parents took me. I can’t even begin to tell you how many comic books and toys I had, or how many times I would watch the cartoons and movies on VHS and TV. This should have been the apex of my inner child’s life. But over the course of 2 1/2 hours, what was supposed to be a dream come true became a nightmare, as I watched Batman, my childhood hero, viciously beat people, brand alleged criminals like cattle, and even kill dozens without any acknowledgment of the carnage whatsoever.

All I could think as I watched this catastrophe was, “How could they get it so wrong?”

Now let me be clear, this is not a review of the film, nor a critique of Ben Affleck as an actor. He was great and he did exactly what the movie required him to do. What I want to talk about is how the film doesn’t portray Batman as a hero, but as a psychotic vigilante. Seeing this Batman made me feel ill and embarrassed as a longtime fan. But that’s not what the issue is here. No, the problem is that in doing so, they made Batman boring.

If you break it down its most basic level, the story of Batman is a vigilante who dresses up in a costume and fights criminals. It’s pretty simple. But what makes Batman interesting and unique among the sea of costumed heroes isn’t what he does – almost every superhero does that – it’s how he does it. In almost all of his interpretations, Batman has one rule: No killing. And look, I’m not against the reinterpretation of the Batman mythos. There have been countless variations of the Batman character for over 75 years since his creation. There are no official “rules” when it comes to how an artist portrays a fictional character, and I sincerely believe that this version of the character is every bit as legitimate as the ones I grew up with. But just because you can portray Batman this way, doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. And it certainly doesn’t make it good.

It's not like Batman hasn't killed before. There are plenty of examples in all of his iterations – including in the past movies I watched as a child -- where Batman has taken a life. Hell, I would even venture to say that a Batman who kills might even make for an interesting look at the very essence of the character. But at what point does it go to far? There was never any moment in this film where I felt the filmmakers ever attempted at trying to add anything to what makes Batman character worth watching. There was no artistic vision behind these decisions.

There is a reason why Batman has lasted so long in American pop-culture; he’s a superhero with no powers who nevertheless tries to do the right thing by fighting against the darkest aspects of humanity. We want to cheer for him, and we want to see him succeed. If he should make a mistake or fail, we feel his pain, and that makes it all the more special to see him succeed and overcome the challenges he faces. But with this version of Batman, there is nothing likable about the character. We are shown the death of his parents at the hands of a criminal, and that provides his motivation, but motivation only provides the foundation for Batman’s plight. What makes Batman an interesting character is seeing him struggle to bring about justice in an unjust world, that’s what makes him a hero. To have Batman just kill people turns him into something closer to a villain.

In the 1989 movie by Tim Burton, we see Batman kill people as well, but here, we also see him struggle with his dual identity by way of his attempt to have a romance with reporter Vicky Vale, who knows him by his alter ego, Bruce Wayne. But is he Bruce Wayne? Or is he just pretending to be to protect his identity as Batman? The film explores what makes Batman/Bruce Wayne tick and how different both of these personas are. Here, there really is no discernible difference between either side, so there might as well not be a Bruce Wayne since he’s basically just batman without a mask or voice modulator. If Bruce Wayne is given no personality traits that contradict with his identity as Batman what’s the point of having it?

That's what makes this movie so boring, it goes through all the traditional Batman tropes without really explaining why they matter within the context of this film. There's no emotional pull, no real soul to any of it. Try this: pretend that this is your first time ever seeing Batman. You know absolutely nothing about him outside of what is in the film. Now ask yourself this question: Why does Batman dress like a bat? The movie has a scene where a young Bruce Wayne falls into a cave full of bats that fly past him. This same scene was in the 2006 film Batman Begins. In that film, Bruce Wayne is asked by his butler Alfred why he chose a bat as his symbol, he explains that he wants to strike fear into his enemies and bats scare him most of all. We know this because we've seen how he responds to them. Here, that same concept exists, but it's only assumed. The movie relies on the viewer already knowing all this. I knew it going in, but by not justifying the why itself, it gives the impression that this movie doesn't really care about batman as a character. It just wants to see him do Batman stuff without putting in any work to earn it.

And maybe that's what people want. Nobody wants to see the same thing over and over again. But if you don't want to show people what they've seen before, why not give them something new? Instead, the film takes the easy route and just makes viewers justify everything themselves. Maybe it saves time between fight scenes, but in the long term, this is not a Batman movie that is going to be remembered for anything other than stealing from better, superior Batman movies.

And what exactly is the point of his even having the signature Batman gadgets and equipment? Here he has the standard batarangs, tracing devices, grappling hook, and even hacking devices. But if he’s okay with just killing criminals then why even bother with special equipment; why not just give him a tank and gun? Isn’t that all “this” Batman really needs? Seeing Batman solve his problems and use his skills, as “The World’s Greatest Detective” is what makes his struggle interesting. It’s like making a Sherlock Holmes story where instead of doing any detective work, he becomes a boxer. Is he really Sherlock Holmes at that point?

In “The Dark Knight Returns” – the graphic novel that "Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice" takes much of its inspiration from – we do see Batman act more violently and even basically murder his arch-nemesis, The Joker. However, this story is a lot of ways a satire of the Batman mythos, and this confrontation with the Joker is treated as the conclusion to a years-long battle between the two. The consequences of Batman’s actions are explored, as well as how they affect Gotham City and the long-term effects on his villains and allies. This is, in many ways, the “End” of Batman’s journey as a hero. A conclusion to a journey we had all been on with him for years. But in this movie, we are only meeting this version of Batman for the first time. While it’s said that he’s been in action for over twenty-years, we never saw him during that time. All we have to go on is his actions within the context of this film, and in this context, his disregard for human life comes off with no explanation other than he simply doesn’t care. That doesn’t make him an interesting hero or anti-hero. He’s just a psychopath.

I have been in love with superheroes my entire life. Since the moment, I could read I’ve been devouring comic books, and although my taste in sequential art and literature have grown more eclectic over the years, I still visit my local comic book store and pick up graphic novels at the Barnes & Noble every once in a while. There’s a reason I keep coming back to them, and especially Batman, after all these years. He continues to compel me with his struggle with straddling the law. It is that balance between heroism and villainy and the gray places in between that makes Batman interesting. And it is his refusal to take a life that separates him from his villains. Once you take away what makes Batman a superhero, all your left with is a rich guy who dresses up like a bat at night and murders people. That might make for an interesting story, but not a superhero. And that's not a character that people will still be making stories about 75 years from now.