The Batman | March 4, 2022 | Warner Bros. | Certified Fresh on RT | 7th Most Profitable Movie of 2023

[ddddeeee]

Honestly, I couldn't care less if I never saw Pattinson or Kravitz in these roles again. I'd happily revisit Gotham, but I really wasn't slightly invested or connected to anything that happened. It feels so empty to me. Incidentally, I had the same disconnect from War for the Planet of the Apes, despite loving the first two movies in that franchise.

[Spidey Freak]

14 hours ago, TheDude391 said:

The movie has the same problem that Joker did where it's just a pastiche of other filmmakers and is tackling these complex sociopolitical issues but ultimately has nothing meaningful to actually say about any of it.

 

This had a lot more to say than Joker like c'mon. It dared to broach the topic of conglomerate IP darling Batman's shtick of vengeance

Spoiler

being a toxic message and how an influential heroic figure HAS to be better than that. It's the anti-Joker in that the film forces its central character to actually introspect, come to a realization and grow, instead of just doing a shallow, harmful job of glorifying him.

 

For that alone, it deserves a lot of credit.

 

I don't think ALL of what it had to say was woven together very well though. Speaking of conglomerate IPs, doesn't help that it was crafted to unleash several sequels and spin-offs in mind, developing a case of too many characters with open-ended fates and incomplete arcs to be continued later in said sequels and spin-offs. Penguin is not even a character here but an elevator pitch for an HBO Max show. My man CF having a good time notwithstanding.

Edited April 19, 2022 by Spidey Freak

[CoolioD1]

i generally agree that this is underwhelming, with distance i feel like i was a little too nice to it in my initial reaction. the intro of batman is capital G Great but it's all down hill from there. none of the characters in here are my favorite cinematic interpretation of their character. it's all... fine.

 

oh but i do have love for giacchino's theme as well. probably the first instantly iconic movie theme since Avengers a decade ago.

[BestPicturePlutoNash]

3 hours ago, TheDude391 said:

Wholeheartedly agree, an hour too long with an overly expository script but the performances and the world they create are fantastic. But now that the set up is out of the way, hopefully the sequel is a lot better. The movie has the same problem that Joker did where it's just a pastiche of other filmmakers and is tackling these complex sociopolitical issues but ultimately has nothing meaningful to actually say about any of it.

This is a million times better than Joker lol

[Menor the Destroyer]

2 hours ago, Spidey Freak said:

 

This had a lot more to say than Joker like c'mon. It dared to broach the topic of conglomerate IP darling Batman's shtick of vengeance

  Hide contents

being a toxic message and how an influential heroic figure HAS to be better than that. It's the anti-Joker in that the film forces its central character to actually introspect, come to a realization and grow, instead of just doing a shallow, harmful job of glorifying him.

 

For that alone, it deserves a lot of credit.

 

I don't think ALL of what it had to say was woven together very well though. Speaking of conglomerate IPs, doesn't help that it was crafted to unleash several sequels and spin-offs in mind, developing a case of too many characters with open-ended fates and incomplete arcs to be continued later in said sequels and spin-offs. Penguin is not even a character here but an elevator pitch for an HBO Max show. My man CF having a good time notwithstanding.

"Vengeance is toxic" is not some kind of daring and revolutionary message for a blockbuster, it's been done a lot before, and much more convincingly than in this movie. 

 

Penguin had a perfectly fine role in the film, I don't see what the issue is here? Would it have been better if they just used some no-name mobster in his role, just because it wouldn't be "conglomerate?"

[WittyUsername]

18 minutes ago, Menor Reborn said:

"Vengeance is toxic" is not some kind of daring and revolutionary message for a blockbuster, it's been done a lot before, and much more convincingly than in this movie. 

 

Penguin had a perfectly fine role in the film, I don't see what the issue is here? Would it have been better if they just used some no-name mobster in his role, just because it wouldn't be "conglomerate?"

What is a “daring and revolutionary message” supposed to entail? Every kind of story has been done before. 

Edited April 19, 2022 by WittyUsername

[Menor the Destroyer]

7 minutes ago, WittyUsername said:

What is a “daring and revolutionary message” supposed to entail? Every kind of story has been done before. 

I was responding to the post saying it was "daring" to challenge the idea that vengeance is good. 

 

And yes, every kind of story has been done before, but it's all about how well you do it. Though I enjoyed the film for the most part, I don't think the idea of Batman being vengeful and needing to grow from that point was depicted well. Even in situations where it would have made sense for him to be bloodthirsty or seek revenge, he doesn't. 

[BestPicturePlutoNash]

Just now, Menor Reborn said:

Even in situations where it would have made sense for him to be bloodthirsty or seek revenge, he doesn't. 

Yes, that was the point

[WittyUsername]

1 minute ago, Menor Reborn said:

I was responding to the post saying it was "daring" to challenge the idea that vengeance is good. 

 

And yes, every kind of story has been done before, but it's all about how well you do it. Though I enjoyed the film for the most part, I don't think the idea of Batman being vengeful and needing to grow from that point was depicted well. Even in situations where it would have made sense for him to be bloodthirsty or seek revenge, he doesn't. 

He does come pretty close to killing someone near the end. 

[WittyUsername]

4 minutes ago, Menor Reborn said:

Was it? The end of the movie makes it seem like Batman was being "vengeance" through the whole film and needs to grow out of that. My problem is that him being "vengeance" is just a catchphrase and isn't reflected in his actions. 

 

That has nothing to do with vengeance, he just injected himself with adrenaline and so was really amped up. 

His priority at the beginning of the film is to strike fear in criminals and use vigilantism as an outlet for his rage. I thought his opening scene illustrated that fairly well. 

[Menor the Destroyer]

18 minutes ago, BestPicturePlutoNash said:

What? Lol. There's tons of scenes of that being more than a catchphrase. He scares the pedestrian he saves in the opening who begs "Don't hurt me", there's narration and voiceover about his regrets, etc. 

He scares the pedestrian but where is he actually taking vengeance? Is he going to be doing anything particularly differently at the end of the movie to the way he'd been doing it at the beginning, or is he just going to stop saying "I'm vengeance"? It seems like an incredibly superficial character arc. Once the flood recedes, he's going to be back in pretty much the exact same place in the sequel. 

 

15 minutes ago, WittyUsername said:

His priority at the beginning of the film is to strike fear in criminals and use vigilantism as an outlet for his rage. I thought his opening scene illustrated that fairly well. 

That's what the monologue tells you but it's not supported by his actions. Investigating the deaths of a bunch of shady officials hardly seems like the actions of a guy who really is only in it for his anger, otherwise why would he even care that these crooks are being murdered? Why would he care about not killing Falcone, who he just found out was almost certainly responsible for his father's death? The dude if anything is less vengeful than most people would be in that situation. 

Edited April 19, 2022 by Menor Reborn

[WittyUsername]

13 minutes ago, Menor Reborn said:

He scares the pedestrian but where is he actually taking vengeance? Is he going to be doing anything particularly differently at the end of the movie to the way he'd been doing it at the beginning, or is he just going to stop saying "I'm vengeance"? It seems like an incredibly superficial character arc. Once the flood recedes, he's going to be back in pretty much the exact same place in the sequel. 

 

That's what the monologue tells you but it's not supported by his actions. Investigating the deaths of a bunch of shady officials hardly seems like the actions of a guy who really is only in it for his anger, otherwise why would he even care that these crooks are being murdered? Why would he care about not killing Falcone, who he just found out was almost certainly responsible for his father's death? The dude if anything is less vengeful than most people would be in that situation. 

The movie establishes that he’s so obsessed with being Batman that he doesn’t bother having a life outside of that, to the point where he neglects using his wealth and resources to benefit the city. 

[TheBigYawn]

1 minute ago, BestPicturePlutoNash said:

NWH barely does, he punches Green Goblin and almost stabs him? lmao. Come on. This just sounds like MCU shilling. Again, if you think Batman is superficial, then NWH absolutely is too

 

As much as I love NWH, I'd be hard-pressed to make the argument that's it's a thematically deep movie. But it certainly has well thought out themes and I found it emotionally satisfying so I'm not sure why people want it to be something more than what it's aiming for. 

[Brainbug]

Just now, BestPicturePlutoNash said:

NWH isn't a deep movie at all (nor is Batman) so this argument is just silly to me. It's such a surface level movie! 

 

But ... that is not what our discussion is about? It is about covering the theme of Vengeance at all i thought or have i misunderstood @Menor Reborn? Because if i have understood him right, then yes, NWH certainly covers that theme. Superficial or not, that is not debatable.

 

And the deepness of covering such a theme is a strange argument for me. Take for example the Kill Bill movies: They are 100% covering the theme of Vengeance all the time but are they "deep" movies? Nope, they are very silly and thats not bad at all. Way deeper covering imo would be Oldboy (2003). Thats some deep shit right there. But in the end, Kill Bill, Oldboy and No Way Home all cover the theme of Vengeance, just in different ways.

[grim22]

Moderation: Knock it off, no Fanboy wars allowed. Both @Menor Rebornand @BestPicturePlutoNashhave been warned

[Dragoncaine]

I can understand this movie being 20 minutes shorter -- maybe even 25-30 if you cut down on the long takes, though I personally prefer that style -- but an hour? I feel like the thematic impact would be dulled by making this a shorter movie than...*checks notes* Ant-Man.

[excel1]

This is actually a very mixed bag for me. I do like and respect that they went a dramatically different route here than past few versions. It was totally needed to stand out from preexisting expectations, but I think the execution is still mixed.
 
Critically, this is a very good film and one can see why critics are into it. Commercially, the enjoyment level would have benefited from just a bit more action and humor. I am highly surprised that Warners allowed Reeves to make this film and release it. This is a truly adult Batman movie. Burton/Schumacher made kids Batman movies, Nolan made teen Batman movies, and now we have a true adult Batman. The cast and production values are universally good, but without question the pace is slower and more dour than it should be. 
 
Despite its epic length, a lot of the films core feels seriously half baked. The film needed less detective work and exposition and more action and development. Some big points in particular:

 

1. Riddler murders/scheme don't feel important because we are basically told to hate the people he is killing. Of course murder is terrible, but why is it so important to catch/stop the Riddler? This felt so underdeveloped. The "Riddler is the Zodiac" stuff does not really gel because we never see or feel society impact from him other a few glimpses of people outside of the funeral. 
 
2. The "twist" that will "shake Gotham to its core" and "disrupt the entire city to its core" comes in seriously half baked. I get it overall - the city leaders lied to everyone about the Maroni crime bust success when they really just took it over for their own personal enrichment - but we feel virtually none of the side effects. We feel zero societal breakdown. The detective stuff and maze of personal dynamics is interesting, but frankly, the film would have benefitted from slightly less detective work and "Your dad was bad/no he was good/he was actually mixed/falcone is the real bad guy" and more of "society is breaking down with each reveal" type of stuff.
 
3.. The "flood" was almost entirely shown in the trailers and isn't shown with nearly the impact that it would have had in real life. The entire ordeal feels rushed. Riddler only mentioned his "day of judgement" once before revealing the big thing to Bruce. They absolutely should have made that a larger part of his plan throughout the film to add a greater sense of urgency to stopping him.

 

It's is hard to believe these types of obvious errors in the eyes of general audiences aren't caught beforehand. 

Edited April 20, 2022 by excel1

[iHeartJames]

I enjoyed the movie for what it was but one thing that was in the back of my mind after it ended was that I couldn't recall a single scene that stuck with me in terms of impact. For me (my opinion) this doesn't have a single scene which made me go WHOA THAT IS THE SCENE OF THE ENTIRE MOVIE.

[Spidey Freak]

23 hours ago, Menor Reborn said:

"Vengeance is toxic" is not some kind of daring and revolutionary message for a blockbuster, it's been done a lot before, and much more convincingly than in this movie. 

 

21 hours ago, Brainbug the Dinosaur said:

And the deepness of covering such a theme is a strange argument for me. 

 

Why even reply to my post when ya'll can't even be bothered to read it fully? 🙄 The context is a lucrative IP like Batman who, especially over the last couple of decades, has increasingly become a glorification of "justified" violence stemming from a sense of injustice and entitlement. Batman's targets have increasingly become more street-level thugs and impoverished criminals, with the Big Bad as just the final boss of sorts. When that is the message being sold, it will attract a certain kind of angsty, similarly entitled, self-victimizing audience who are seeking validation for their own personal BS, something that I do feel the Joker film is somewhat guilty of even if I personally don't take the film and its messaging too seriously. Another terrible example is Punisher and the cops' co-opting the character's imagery.

 

For this movie to aggressively take a stance against that kind of message and against that audience (portrayed here as the Riddler and his followers) and to risk alienating them is daring, considering Reeves probably had to get this through multiple levels of frowning corporate big wigs. It's not the same as original stories like Oldboy and Kill Bill which have a finite tale to tell and not some cash cow agenda with multi-vertical streams of revenue. 

 

Quote

Penguin had a perfectly fine role in the film, I don't see what the issue is here? Would it have been better if they just used some no-name mobster in his role,

 

The problem is when you can replace him with a no-name mobster and it would make absolutely no difference. For all the comparisons between Pfeiffer and Kravitz, I think Farrell fares far worse when compared to DeVito. DeVito's Penguin had fleshed out pathos, the rejected child of aristocracy, who grew up to be a chilling sleazebag solely bent on exploiting the system that exploited him, as well as anyone and everyone caught in between, whether they deserved it or not.

 

Colin's Penguin is what... just there to make quips in this film?

[Hatebox]

I thought Pattinson was fine and I liked the Gotham he was put in, along with the general vibe.

 

What I'd worry about for future films is that Reeves shit the bed on all the non-Batman characters. His

 

Selina: boring

Riddler: boring

Arkham patient who shall not be named: boring

Alfred: boring

Falcone: boring

Penguin: actually good, but in a better ensemble wouldn't have stood out *that* much

 

It just makes it hard to get excited for sequels when it feels everyone's going to be lumbered with backstory info dumps that aren't even interesting in the first place. As a viewer I don't feel like I'm in great hands on that front - I should be anticipating what happens next in the series but I'm not because I've already been burnt by this style of storytelling.

 

(As an aside: I watched a bit of Batman Begins the other day, first time in about a decade, and I don't know if it was the aftertaste of this movie still on my palette but Begins felt like it moved at breakneck speed - to a fault. Nolan definitely finessed that pace in TDK, that propulsion serves the story better.)

 

 

Edited April 20, 2022 by Hatebox