Why did media and critics act like The Batman was some big success?
>box office wise underperformed massively. Made 750 million when a billion minimum was expected
>plot felt extremely contrived and had like four different endings
>movie couldn’t decide whether it wanted to be gritty, realistic and dark, or more whimsical and fantastic. As a result it has this bizarre Se7en rip off story, except nothing particularly violent or shocking is ever seen. The fricking mayor gets shot in the head and is absolutely fine afterwards.
>likewise, Batman is treated as if he’s more realistic than ever (he isn’t even allowed a fricking cape to glide) yet his suit is more laughably invincible than ever, and he’s able to fly at speed into a bridge and hit a bus, with not so much as a bruise afterwards
Shame because I was really looking forward to it from the trailers. And don’t even get me started on the dumb looking elephant man joker
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
Because it made a good amount of profit ($170M).
>>box office wise underperformed massively. Made 750 million
frick off moron
>if it makes any profit at alll.. that’s a huge success!
That’s not how movie studios work. It takes years of work and huge budgets for production and marketing for these movies. They don’t make them so after 5 years of work they can make a profit that’s only a fraction of the initial cost they put in.
In the mean time they could have invested in making 20 much cheaper movies and made way more money.
Movie studios answer to their stock holders after all.
good morning sirs
TPBP this thread just another snyder pajeet seething because theyll never get their shit universe back
>this thread just another
You're the pajeet here, shitskin.
Not an argument.
Cinemaphile prides itself on being monumentally stupid, thinking it's as good as being smart.
The movie sucked. A whole ass month to itself and it only made that much?
Imagine with competition. I can only see this movie making 400-500m max.
Who the frick thought it would make a billion?
it had great legs, it made back almost 4x budget with half that on the domestic
>box office wise underperformed massively. Made 750 million when a billion minimum was expected
that may have been your expectation
underperforming Batman movies include Returns, which did better than Begins but didn't get a sequel with the same director, and Begins, which did because WB had stopped caring after Batman and Robin, the worst Batman flop to date
>movie couldn’t decide whether it wanted to be gritty, realistic and dark, or more whimsical and fantastic.
ah, well they've never had that problem before with the movies about the guy who dresses up as a bat after training as a ninja because his parents were shot by some bum in an alley in crime City
>Batman is treated as if he’s more realistic than ever
this is a thing tired old franchises that really should just end have to do
remember Casino Royale? gritty, realistic bond, no more invisible cars or space lasers (a promise they make every time they recast Bond)
yet in that same movie he gets in a serious car wreck, restarts his own heart with a defibrillator (which isn't how defibrillators work) that fits in a little case in his glove box (also not how defibrillators work, or electrical storage and discharge), then gets captured, beaten and tortured, escapes, and goes on to finish the movie without even getting an ECG for his heart, which after all that is almost certainly fricked, or a head and neck xray to make sure he hasn't fractured his skull or spine (he probably has)
Batman Begins did it; marketed as a serious gritty movie, but watch it back and it's all quips and preposterous warehouses and tanks that can drive over old tile rooftops in the obvious model city district without falling through, and of course Batman is trained by actual ninjas who don't realize they can just ransom this billionaire who's wandered into their evil den, so they train him to defeat them
it's shit
You didn’t debunk anything he said.
>when a billion minimum was expected
Any Batman movie making below a billion is a failure.
> movie couldn’t decide whether it wanted to be gritty, realistic and dark, or more whimsical and fantastic.
Why are these mutually exclusive? You can be dark and fantastical at the same time, and you can have goofy stuff like video recording contacts and super strong bat armor while still treating it seriously
>As a result it has this bizarre Se7en rip off story, except nothing particularly violent or shocking is ever seen
This sounds exactly like the comics lol
>The fricking mayor gets shot in the head and is absolutely fine afterwards.
What? She got shot in the torso, why did you think she got shot in the head?
>it needs to make 3 trillion to break even
Wrong board
Still mad about that "white men" line, huh?
Hahaha fricking this. White incel chuds need to sit down and be humble.
>box office wise underperformed massively. Made 750 million when a billion minimum was expected
They never expected that for the first movie of a new franchise, and after the character was tainted with BvS.
DC needed a critical hit, which they got and will translate to better ticket sales for the next movie. Literally what happened between Batman Begins and The Dark Knight.
>Darkest Knight
No one gave a frick about Batman in the that movie. Joker was the one who attracted people.
Ok?
Sure thing history revisionist
No one gave a frick about Batman there. People cared more about everything around him and the world than himself. He was a boring nothing burger.
Were you not born when TDK was out? The Joker stole the show, attention to the role elevated by Ledger's death. Bale's Batman was always viewed as a lowpoint in those films.
>Bale's Batman was always viewed as a lowpoint in those films.
Is that why I always see people saying they prefer Begins to TDK?
Holy shit the historical revisionism is insane, don't you have anything better to do than to spread bullshit?
Except they’re right? Joker was the stand out. Were you a toddler when the movie came out?
Joker was the stand out but acting like people only care about the Joker is ridiculous, who has their title as the franchise, him? No it's fricking Batman, people come for Batman even if they ended up enjoying the Joker more.
Lol
Lmao even
No one cared about Batman in that film. People went for the Joker and the setting. All people talked about was the buzz of his performance.
Because Pattinson is hot. He carried that boring Daredevil clone of a movie.
Pattinson isn't hot, he looks like he smells bad
post a mirror pic of yourself
>dumb looking elephant man joker
Yeah that shit was cringe.
If this took place in the Jokerverse it would have made 2 billion easy
This movie was monumentally bad. I think only zoomers who watch those sigma edits on Youtube liked it. The movie tried so hard to be gritty and realistic, it came off as unintentionally funny.
Why are anons so moronic about box office?