NINE! NINE OUT OF TEN! IT IS ALMOST PERFECT! I WENT INTO IT EXPECTING THE BLEAKEST GRIMMEST DARKEST BATMAN MOVIE AND IT HAD GOOD ACTION AND GOOD COMEDY AND IT TALKED ABOUT HOPE! IT WAS ALMOST PERFECT! IT HAD FLAWS, BUT IT WAS VERY VERY GOOD! NINE!
That's why they had to staple an entire half-hour onto the end of the movie where Riddler tries to flood the city and assassinate the new mayor.
To remind audiences that he's the bad guy.
>was right about everything >was also successful at everything and literally surrendered himself to the cops, he didn't even lose >they had to make him ape out and sing Ave Maria to show the audience "He's a wacky autist, don't be like him!"
>Make mystery movie where you are meant to deduce everything based on clues given to you >Build up to Riddlers plan and what his plans are made logical sense >Ridler was 100% correct about everything >Film had to introdouce out of left field evil scheme and random never established key aspect of the city that fricks with the whole mystery to make him unsympathetic
The movie was great until the reveal of Riddler's "true plan".
If you make a mystery story and the revelation is based on random factors you never at any point bothered to show to the audience, it's a objectivily shit mystery.
Doesn't help the reveal made no sense either. Where the hell in America would a city ever need a sea wall? When the frick did Gotham take place in the God damn Nertherlands?
Batman was an idiot in this and I expect the next one to be ass since Matt is also an idiot. But the movie looked cool enough. I’m curious if they do the same BS next time.
I really want them to introduce Dick Grayson and go far enough with it that he becomes Robin, and that they lean into it.
A big violent guy in an armored bat costume is scary, but an equally violent cackling little kid following him around in blood red and bright yellow body armor is fricking terrifying.
I liked this movie just because it felt like it tonally nailed Batman for me more than the others. The classics are campier than I personally like and the Nolan movies are too grand in scale with these huge philosophical battles. The Batman just had him fighting corruption and a wounded crazy person in a neo-noir setting and I'm all about that.
Also the ending monologue sequence, to me, is a better and more earned "superhero moment" than any cape movie I can think of from the past decade. It's a perfect capoff to the movie and the fact that it does the dumb little sequel tease with Joker instead of just ending there is a mark against it IMO
I agree. I went and rewatched it after seeing this thread and I liked it even more than the first time. And that monologue is like a repudiation of the the myopic "I am vengeance, I am the night" type of Batman and recognizing that to help people he needs to be a symbol of hope.
Funny, because I said long ago that it was the first mid Batman movie I ever saw. Batman movies are either really fricking good or really fricking awful. The Batman was just mid. Utterly inoffensive, unremarkable and forgettable.
too generous. 6/10, namegay
NINE! NINE OUT OF TEN! IT IS ALMOST PERFECT! I WENT INTO IT EXPECTING THE BLEAKEST GRIMMEST DARKEST BATMAN MOVIE AND IT HAD GOOD ACTION AND GOOD COMEDY AND IT TALKED ABOUT HOPE! IT WAS ALMOST PERFECT! IT HAD FLAWS, BUT IT WAS VERY VERY GOOD! NINE!
>The Batman thread
Hey Cinemaphile, do you consider this shit or good acting?
I think the character was acted well, it was just a bad interpretation. Not even the entire idea was bad, just a few details.
>crazy guy acts crazy
It's a batman movie you dumb shit
Shouting like a moron all the time is not good acting.
He'd make a good Chis Chan, so yeah, I guess it was good?
Does he know?
Aaavvveeee maaaarrrriiaaaaaa
No, the plot was dumb and the characters, especially Batman, were braindead.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAVVVVVVVVEEEEEEEE MAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Gratia plena
The film is a 9/10
>New tripgay is tempting the jannies to rangeban him with a shitty movie
Many Such cases.
also Wrong board
If the Riddle was evil why did they make him right about literally everything
That's why they had to staple an entire half-hour onto the end of the movie where Riddler tries to flood the city and assassinate the new mayor.
To remind audiences that he's the bad guy.
>was right about everything
>was also successful at everything and literally surrendered himself to the cops, he didn't even lose
>they had to make him ape out and sing Ave Maria to show the audience "He's a wacky autist, don't be like him!"
Maybe the fact that you agree with a cartoony evil character from a superhero movie is a wakeup call to review your choices.
Batman would never have discovered the Renewal conspiracy if it wasn't for the Riddler's autism
Shamless self-insert of the director
>Make mystery movie where you are meant to deduce everything based on clues given to you
>Build up to Riddlers plan and what his plans are made logical sense
>Ridler was 100% correct about everything
>Film had to introdouce out of left field evil scheme and random never established key aspect of the city that fricks with the whole mystery to make him unsympathetic
The movie was great until the reveal of Riddler's "true plan".
If you make a mystery story and the revelation is based on random factors you never at any point bothered to show to the audience, it's a objectivily shit mystery.
Doesn't help the reveal made no sense either. Where the hell in America would a city ever need a sea wall? When the frick did Gotham take place in the God damn Nertherlands?
Riddler is an accelerationist that believes the system itself is rotten to the core and needs to be uprooted by utilizing drastic societal pressures.
The first batman I saw and thought to myself "I could beat him up"
There's no comic book movie that's better than a 7/10.
I agree
The opening 10 minites were pure Batkino
?feature=shared
8/100
GAY/10
The story is very dumb.
Batman was an idiot in this and I expect the next one to be ass since Matt is also an idiot. But the movie looked cool enough. I’m curious if they do the same BS next time.
That's fair. Would've said 8.5/10 but that's fine.
66: A
89: C+
Returns: A-
MOTP: B
Forever: D+
& Robin: C-
Begins: B+
TDK: B
TDKR: C
The: B-
>forever & Robin that high
>The and TDK not in S
>89 not in B+
>MOTP not in A-
>TDKR not in B
dropped, don't ever do a tier list again.
>The Batman between TDK and TDKR
I really want them to introduce Dick Grayson and go far enough with it that he becomes Robin, and that they lean into it.
A big violent guy in an armored bat costume is scary, but an equally violent cackling little kid following him around in blood red and bright yellow body armor is fricking terrifying.
9/10 movie anyone who disagrees is wrong.
I didn't like it much other then penguin who was fantastic
I liked this movie just because it felt like it tonally nailed Batman for me more than the others. The classics are campier than I personally like and the Nolan movies are too grand in scale with these huge philosophical battles. The Batman just had him fighting corruption and a wounded crazy person in a neo-noir setting and I'm all about that.
Also the ending monologue sequence, to me, is a better and more earned "superhero moment" than any cape movie I can think of from the past decade. It's a perfect capoff to the movie and the fact that it does the dumb little sequel tease with Joker instead of just ending there is a mark against it IMO
I agree. I went and rewatched it after seeing this thread and I liked it even more than the first time. And that monologue is like a repudiation of the the myopic "I am vengeance, I am the night" type of Batman and recognizing that to help people he needs to be a symbol of hope.
>8/10
Funny, because I said long ago that it was the first mid Batman movie I ever saw. Batman movies are either really fricking good or really fricking awful. The Batman was just mid. Utterly inoffensive, unremarkable and forgettable.