Just saw The Batman for the first time. What does Cinemaphile think about this movie? I really fucking like it. I think It's up there with the Raimi Spiderman movies for me.
Just saw The Batman for the first time. What does?
Just saw The Batman for the first time. What does Cinemaphile think about this movie? I really fucking like it. I think It's up there with the Raimi Spiderman movies for me.
dunnnn dun-dun dun
dunnnn dun-dun dun
dunnnn dun-dun dun
DUNNNN DUN-DUN DUN
DUNNNN DUN-DUN DUN
DUNNNN DUN-DUN DUN
>walks slowly towards you
Underneath the dick
Taint has sprung a leak
And the big cocks I've tapped
Have all came in my butt
And I'm living off of cum
And it's dripping from my chin
It's okay to suck dick
Cause they don't have any foreskin
Something in my ass.
Mmmm-mmm
For me, I prefer Nolan
its decent but it was too long, wasted a lot of time fleshing out catwoman and marconi
It felt like two stories in one. The Falcone stuff and The Riddler stuff. It felt like the middle part compeltely forgot about The Riddler as it just diverted into Catwoman and Falcone stuff. They did try to tie both stories together well and it succeeded in the first half but the second half is just all Falcone and no Riddler then when Falcone dies all Riddler no Falcone.
The Batmobile scene got me giddy as fuck.
The plot is pretty much a copy of The Dark Knight, but it's a good copy.
When I first saw it I thought it was alright but reflecting about it now it's just another grounded and realistic Batman that we've seen with the Nolan trilogy and to me that's boring
I don't know why everyone calls The Batman "serious" and "realistic". It's definitely very gritty looking and small scale but the a lot of the action, dialogue, and performances come off as kinda campy to me.
don't be obtuse, he wears a fucking wingsuit.
I interpreted that whole scene and Bruce's general amateurishness as just Reeves telling the audience that Batman was still figuring things out and had a long way to go before he becomes the one we all know. I could totally see him finally gliding with just his regular cape in a potential 3rd movie or maybe even the end of the 2nd.
And that's what they mean by realistic. Batman can't just be expected to have a cape that lets him break his fall. You have to wait 8 years to see him descend with a cape. Maybe.
Its why I hope Brave and the Bold leans towards campy Batman, as it hasnt been done in a while and it'll be refreshing and different. Plus it will be balanced with this Batman so you get both a dark Batman and campy one at the same time.
My issue with Brave and the Bold is that they're going to be skipping over Tim and Dick by going straight to Damien. But no Dick Greyson means no Nightwing, and by extension no Teen Titans.
Nightwing is a given. The fact that Safran said he wants to see a Bat Family in live action gives me somewhat faith the Dick will be in it. The only one that we have to worry about is the possibility that Tim might get skipped.
They're trying to repeat the 'slow deliberate buildup' the MCU had. By skipping over several supporting characters formative years. Sure Batman himself has had more than enough movies and TV to inform the general audience of who he is, but the common masses have no idea who nightwing is or even that he used to be Robin.
I assume it means the Batfamily is already established. It's better than what we have now where Dick is dead by Jason's murder
Also no Jason means no Red Hood, which means no Under The Red hood.
In a world a of edgy realistic Batmen. He shall rise again when we need him most.
Not the hero we need but the hero we deserve
I think its something the movie makers, and perhaps the casual fans of Batman need to learn, the wacky aspects of Batman also make Batman weird and they don't have to be erased to make it gritty and grounded. It won't be realistic, sure, but its Batman, a DC property. Its like the fear that using Mr. Freeze or Clayface etc. would automatically make it campy.
I dont think its a live action Batman we've seen on screen yet that is sorely needed. A really pulpy and noir style Batman, Burton was close but not exact. I thought The Batman would be that noir pulpy style, and it was slightly noir, but it was just another dark and gritty Batman.
The Batman I am looking for is grounded and realistic, but still makes sense to have a Poison Ivy and Ra's Al Ghul and Clayface etc. and has that distinct Batman the Animated Series style.
Agreed, I still think WB should do a series of "Golden Age" spin-off movies like 'Batman: The Golden Age' and 'Superman: The Golden Age', really lean into the late-30's period setting and pulp roots of these characters. I think visually something like Warren Beatty's Dick Tracy is the closest to how I'd want a live action Batman movie to look.
I just really want an art deco Gotham, with The Joker wearing a purple fedora and trenchcoat hanging off the side of a Rolls-Royce Phantom II maniacally firing a Thompson machine gun, is that asking for too much?
My problem with it, is that like the Nolan movies it takes itself too seriously and that seriously kills any possibility for growth into other parts of the Batman mythos. I can't imagine any villain with superpowers existing in this universe. And if they did exist they'd be almost completely unrecognizable to the source material like Riddler was. I want to see Ras Al Ghul with his harem of sexy ninja girls, a clayface who's a walking pile of goop right out of the Fly or The Thing. But that's probably never happening with this version of Batman.
Yeah I know the director has said he wants to do Mr Freeze for the sequel. I don't see how he can do it.
>I can't imagine any villain with superpowers existing in this universe.
I think thats the main reason they didn't implement this Batman into the new DC. I can't see Robert Pattinson's Batman with a Superman.
Last Minute Joker was Awful. I hope the second one drops him completely. I was fine with that one cringey cat woman line, she's dirt poor call girl who deals with scummy rich older guys all day. It fit her character.
If you combine Fight Club's terrorist methods with the Riddler's reasons and organization it would be literally me.
The actor for Joker is actually really good. Fortunately the scene between him and Batman was cut so they can still change his take a little
It's the only Batman movie other then Lego Batman to understand his character. How the biggest flaw this movie suffers from is it does the stupid bad guy doing a last minute extreme heal turn to make the hero automatically right in the ideological argument.
too long
it really wanted to be the dark knight.
Bruce Wayne is a privileged white male and has to check his privilege, I get it, movie. why does it take 3 hours to say this?
I think it's great at what it set out to do. In terms of overall quality, I think Nolan is marginally better, but this one has the more compelling Batman.
>but this one has the more compelling Batman.
How? He is one dimensional, he broods the entire movie. Unless you're an emo teen who's "he's so me"ing I don't see how this is compelling.
Keaton is still the most compelling Batman to me because it wasn't obvious about the duality of Bruce Wayne, it was left up to the audience to pick up on without being in-your-face about it. Just his first scene in Batman Returns where he's brooding in his study in the dark and alone until the Bat Signal shines into the room tells you so much without saying a single piece of dialogue.
I think the only thing it needed was a little bit more Bruce Wayne, specifically the Bruce Wayne persona.
I know, early days in his career as Batman etc. etc. but all other Batman mythos has Bruce Wayne the persona established VERY early. Like Batman Begins.
>I know, early days in his career as Batman etc. etc. but all other Batman mythos has Bruce Wayne the persona established VERY early. Like Batman Begins.
They wanted to do this whole thing where Bruce is totally submerged in the Batman persona and is losing himself, which is fine, but it feels a little late (year two into year three) for that to be an element in this story. This should be PRIME Batman, Batman at the peak of his abilities, and yet they play it like he's still figuring this shit out. They wanted to avoid the origin stuff, but still want him to be green and amateur, and it just doesn't work.
The first Burton movie avoided making it an "origin" film, but still set it in Batman's first year, and makes Bruce much more confident and competent than The Batman did.
Pretty much. Christian Bale's Batman has had a much shorter stint than Pattinson's Batman at that point and by the end if it learns what Pattinson's Batman half learned. I think Batman Begins did "becoming Batman" a lot better, with the learning who the Bruce Wayne playboy persona is, testing out different suits, the vehicles etc.
It should be:
>Year 1: The Year when he learns all this stuff, how to be Bruce, how to be Batman, what the suit should be like, Batmobile, what to do right or wrong
>Year 2: Fully established as Batman
>Year 3: Bat Signal established, has some allies like Gordon etc
>Year 4: Major villains start being established that aren't just gangsters
>Year 5: Robin comes in
Re-heated leftovers from the Nolan trilogy, lots of internal logic problems that nobody in the creative chain ever questioned, like if Gordon just found out how corrupt the DA and the Comissioner was, why is he even working with Batman? The core of their relationship is the Gotham City police are so corrupt that the only people Batman and Gordon can trust are each other.
Also we're supposed to buy that it's Batman second year going on third as Batman and he's still making rookie mistakes and not clinging to the shadows, I get not wanting to do the origin again, but you can't set it a few years into his war on crime and also have him making amateur mistakes just to give him a character arc.
Making The Riddler a mash-up of "John Doe" from Seven and Mark David Chapman isn't inspired, it's obvious and lazy. We only get a movie like this to define these chraracters for a new generation every 25 years if we're lucky, now a generation gets The Riddler as The Zodiac, joy.
Farrel's Penguin was great, and John Turturro was a great Falcone, felt like a waste to kill him in this movie and not keep him around for another movie or two.
Batman spying on Catwoman is cool
Riddler is a massive fucking misstep
Most of the Mafia plot is annoying.
Batman is a shitty detective in it
The Batmobile is neat
the final fight is pretty cool.
7/10. Bout the same Batman Begins
Why does everything look so red and orange?
The movie producers still think "Dark and Gritty" Batman is something that people want to see. They're living in the late 80s, ironically missing the point of what Miller was going for.
I want a comic booky Batman movie again.
I'd love a comic-book batman in a gritty world. None of this brooding stuff. I want him to be a Ray of sunshine in a dark city.
I don't need him to be Superman, but having Batman being the hyper capable, charismatic Byronic hero we all have in our heads is something that modern movies are sorely missing.
These movies want Batman to either be too old to do anything or too young to know how to do anything.
I like the Batman that wages a battle against his city's demons, as well as his own demons, and wins.
Actually yeah, you're right. A pulp fiction gothic-esque protagonist type would be superior. I was being hyperbolic about the like ray of sunshine comment. But what is sorely missed in modern comics is the fact Batman shouldn't be this despairing figure, he should inspire hope. He also happens to instill fear in criminals, but that shouldn't be "edgy and brooding 24/7."
>But what is sorely missed in modern comics is the fact Batman shouldn't be this despairing figure, he should inspire hope. He also happens to instill fear in criminals, but that shouldn't be "edgy and brooding 24/7."
It feels like that's what they were going for at the end of The Batman where hes saving civilians trapped in the flooding and his whole arc in the movie, but I'm just worried the next movie will just start at square one again and forget the note they left the last movie at.
Yeah probably, because character growth I'd dead in favour of character archetypes
The thing is the Nolan movies, The Batman, Arkham games, and Snyder movies have taught 2.5 generations that Gotham is essentialy Yharnam from Bloodborne and everyone, esspecially Batman, must always be in constant state of suffering and despair. He's never going back to being a beacon of hope or anything like that.
>he thing is the Nolan movies, The Batman, Arkham games, and Snyder movies have taught 2.5 generations that Gotham is essentialy Yharnam from Bloodborne and everyone, esspecially Batman, must always be in constant state of suffering and despair.
not sure I agree. I think Batman and Gotham in these modern stories is evocative of post 9/11 war on terror America where Batman almost doubles as a metaphor for CIA interventionism.I don't think the problem with those stories is that everything is presented in a nihilistic form, but rather that presenting Batman as the "rich white male" ruining the world is about as far from what he's about as it gets.
> He's never going back to being a beacon of hope or anything like that.
Disagree. Even in those examples you've shown Batman finds a way to be Batman. Those materials have lines like "a hero can be anyone", "men are still good," "faith, alfred, " "do the right thing. that's all that matters," etc etc.
Even in this modern German Nihilist echo chamber Batman still winds up Batmanning all over the place
>He's never going back to being a beacon of hope or anything like that.
Good, that's Superman's thing. Batman dresses up as a spooky bat because he intentionally wants to scare people. He may not be the Punisher or something, but he's called the DARK knight for a reason.
>I want a comic booky Batman movie again.
You're close, but I don't want "camp", I want "pulp". The older I get, the more I realize the closer Batman creators stick to his pulp roots, the better the Batman story is. That's why Matt Wagner is one of the best all-around Batman creators to me, and why BtAS is still so beloved.
Thats why Batman The Animated Series worked so well. It was very pulpy and noir.
I thought the Riddler was too corny. I get that he was supposed to be a pathetic turboautist in the end and that was the role he was playing but I feel like the Arkham scene where he's unmasked is meant to be unnerving but it just comes off as funny
The Riddler's explosions around the city were so stupid and so clearly the result of executive meddling because the climax wasn't "big" enough. It added absolutely nothing to the end and could've been left out entirely, just have the mayoral celebration with Riddler's cronies attempting to snipe the new mayor.
It's the worst Batman movie ever made.
My shitter gets shattered by audience visual aids that make no sense in-universe. Like the tiny lights highlighting the evil map hidden under the carpet. Can you imagine Riddler carefully installing all of those?
My autism flares right up.
In next week's episode: computer programs with seemingly no functions besides acting like power point presentations.
Marvel makes it look so easy. what's so difficult about forming the Justice League and have the rest of the universe react to that?
I love it, four act was amazing, batman doing heroic stuff.
Didn't buy Pattinson as Batman, he doesn't have the presence in the suit that Keaton, Bake and even Ben Affleck had. He just kind of walks around with his cape tucked behind his shoulders.
Just the opening scene alone is a distillation of my problem with the movie: He's in the shadows watching as that gang is about to beat that guy up, and he just walks out, cape tucked behind him, and just stands there until the one main gang member decides to have a go at him. A more"Batman" way of handling that scene should have been the gang hears something in the alley way, they send one of them in with a baseball bat or a crowbar, he wanders in, disappears into the shadows, we hear a few quick, decisive whacks, and we see the guy hurled back out in front of the gang, bloodied and beaten, and THEN Batman walks out of the shadows. It just didn't do enough to lean into the iconography of the character using the shadows as a tool, despite his whole "I AM THE SHADOWS" monologue at the beginning.