Thanks for mentioning that! I was tired.
Spoilers The Batman (2022) - Review and Discussion Thread
- Thread starter thribs
- Start date
Started watching this afternoon. Only halfway through, but so far... yeah. Bored would be putting it mildly.
I give them points for making a noir crime thriller with superhero trappings rather than a superhero movie. It at least feels different. Problem is, so far it's a bad crime thriller.
Pattinson is solid, though I question having him be Batman at all times. Kravitz has charisma for days, but it's only her performance saving a character that is a bad stereotype so far. Jeffrey Wright is there, though I can't say much more than that. And the Riddler is the least compelling crime thriller villain I've ever seen. He's a bad rip off of the killer from Seven, or a completely disinteresting take on Zodiac, depending on how you want to look it.
Lovely film, though. Really well shot.
I'm hoping the back half pulls this one out when I get to it later. But I'm not feeling hopeful at the moment. Probably won't bother finishing it until Thursday or Friday. Was hoping I'd enjoy this more.
I give them points for making a noir crime thriller with superhero trappings rather than a superhero movie. It at least feels different. Problem is, so far it's a bad crime thriller.
Pattinson is solid, though I question having him be Batman at all times. Kravitz has charisma for days, but it's only her performance saving a character that is a bad stereotype so far. Jeffrey Wright is there, though I can't say much more than that. And the Riddler is the least compelling crime thriller villain I've ever seen. He's a bad rip off of the killer from Seven, or a completely disinteresting take on Zodiac, depending on how you want to look it.
Lovely film, though. Really well shot.
I'm hoping the back half pulls this one out when I get to it later. But I'm not feeling hopeful at the moment. Probably won't bother finishing it until Thursday or Friday. Was hoping I'd enjoy this more.
HBO Max put the first ten minutes on YouTube:
I watched it last night.
Now I know how the horse in Neverending Story felt.
Now I know how the horse in Neverending Story felt.
Pretentious much?
Nah, not me.
I absolutely love the look of this movie, from the cinematography to set design (especially Wayne Manor). But sound design... let's just say I got goosebumps and hair stood up on my arms when Batman fires up the Batmobile after the shootout with Oz and Gordon and Selina
Yeah, even discounting the whole story, the movie is a technical masterpiece.I absolutely love the look of this movie, from the cinematography to set design (especially Wayne Manor). But sound design... let's just say I got goosebumps and hair stood up on my arms when Batman fires up the Batmobile after the shootout with Oz and Gordon and Selina
Now let me add that I personally prefer Marvel's look. It's simple, and IMO closer to reality. Shadows don't really work like they do in these artful movies. Still, I appreciate the work and effort.
For the first time, the Batmobile REALLY sounded like the beast of a car that it is!I absolutely love the look of this movie, from the cinematography to set design (especially Wayne Manor). But sound design... let's just say I got goosebumps and hair stood up on my arms when Batman fires up the Batmobile after the shootout with Oz and Gordon and Selina
Because anybody with different tastes than you must be some sort of artless heathen, right? You must be such a fun person to be around.
Seriously, you people suck. Why even come to a discussion board to dismiss discussion and treat people like this?
Forget it, y'all can have it. I'm refusing to watch the rest of this movie just to spite it's fans, now.
What a clownish post... I am actually one of those people that like Saturday morning cartoons, but go jump on your high horse.
Just watched it. Loved the film noir take on it, and pretty sure this is the most Batman we've ever gotten in a Batman movie before. The reclusive rock star take on Bruce Wayne is interesting, as is whether he keeps that persona as he strives to be a symbol of hope for Gotham, or evolves into the more traditional playboy image we all know.
The third act however felt like one giant studio note mandating an epic setpiece and fight. Looked cool, but not sure how Riddler went from wanting to take down Gotham's corrupt, to just kill everyone with a flood 'n guns happened.
The third act however felt like one giant studio note mandating an epic setpiece and fight. Looked cool, but not sure how Riddler went from wanting to take down Gotham's corrupt, to just kill everyone with a flood 'n guns happened.
Watched The Batman on HBO Max. Overall, I thought it was great. It felt more like a gritty crime thriller than a comic book movie. Love the reveal of Batman when he beats up the thugs at the beginning. The score is outstanding. The acting from all the main characters is fantastic. There is a real sense that this Batman is Gotham's criminals worse nightmare. The mystery of Riddler's motives and who the Rat is was well done. There was also some strong themes of Batman coming to terms with his family legacy. Batman has a real character arc from just wanting to vengeance against criminals to becoming Gotham's hope. The only real weakness in the movie is the ending. I understand how people feel like the big action sequence felt tacked on. I heard the studio wanted a big action ending like other comic book movies have. I can give it a pass though. While it did feel a little tacked on, it still fit and provided a nice resolution to Batman's arc. I love the sequence of Batman leading the people to safety through the flooded street and the monologue. But that is where the movie should have ended IMO. I definitely feel like the scene between Joker and Riddler in Arkham and the motorcycle ride with Catwman and Batman were unnecessary. They felt like epilogues that just dragged the movie on past where the movie should have ended.
What is interesting is how Batman is the main character and Bruce is like an after thought. Batman is his real identity. He is more comfortable as the Batman than being Bruce Wayne. And we see him as Batman through most of the movie but we only see Bruce Wayne a couple of times. And Bruce immediately changes into Batman whenever he needs to do something. Alfred even makes a comment like "Is Bruce finally going to make an appearance?". There is another comment about how Bruce Wayne is rarely seen. The mayoral candidate even asks Bruce to do more, which is ironic if she is knew Bruce was the Batman.
If there is a sequel, I wonder if we will see a progression where Bruce becomes more comfortable as Bruce Wayne and develops that part of his character more, going forward?
Just got around to watching it. I doubt I'll have anything new to offer to the discussion, but in brief: -
The Good: I liked it overall. Great cinematography. Selina done right, finally! Colin Farrell is giving Oldman a run for his money when it comes to chameleon performances, and clearly having a ball doing so. Tone felt very 'Long Halloween'. A little too sombre at times, but nice to see a filmmaker referencing literally anyone other than Frank for a change.
The Bad: As usual, (for both comic book movies in general and Batman in particular) it stumbled quite badly in the third (fourth?!) act. The movie was over once Riddler and Batman were face to face in Arkham. Everything about the seawall (not at all well set up BTW) the bombings, the shooters, and whatever that business with the flare was supposed to be positively reeks of "studio notes." Totally unnecessary; I look forward to the Director's Cut that lops out a good 20 mins from the runtime. Hell, the bombings themselves all happened so perfunctorily I wasn't sure what I was seeing was actually happening in the moment, or it was merely illustrating what was about to happen.
The Batty: I think the movie came to the wrong conclusion about what Batman is supposed to be. He's not a symbol of hope (that's Clark's wheelhouse), he's a symbol of fear. They also missed a trick with the Bruce Wayne side of the story; it feels like the central conflict for his should have been learning how to balance Bruce and the Bat, because it'll take BOTH of them to save the city. Which feels extra odd since it seems like this was what the first two acts were setting up what with the (at the time) mayoral candidate lady pressing Wayne to do more for the city, and the fact that the river of dirty money that was at the centre of this whole thing was flowing right from the Wayne Foundation.
Speaking of the ending; are they setting up for No Man's Land as the sequel or Arkham City? Shades of both given the state of Gotham.
Also kind of disappointed they're already putting Joker in the mix. They really ought to leave that character alone for a while and give some other underserved villain a chance to shine. I mean Batsy has bar none THE most iconic rogue's gallery in all of comicdom. For example; Ivy and Freeze both deserves another shot, and Hugo Strange would be a perfect fit for this world (to name but a few.)
The Good: I liked it overall. Great cinematography. Selina done right, finally! Colin Farrell is giving Oldman a run for his money when it comes to chameleon performances, and clearly having a ball doing so. Tone felt very 'Long Halloween'. A little too sombre at times, but nice to see a filmmaker referencing literally anyone other than Frank for a change.
The Bad: As usual, (for both comic book movies in general and Batman in particular) it stumbled quite badly in the third (fourth?!) act. The movie was over once Riddler and Batman were face to face in Arkham. Everything about the seawall (not at all well set up BTW) the bombings, the shooters, and whatever that business with the flare was supposed to be positively reeks of "studio notes." Totally unnecessary; I look forward to the Director's Cut that lops out a good 20 mins from the runtime. Hell, the bombings themselves all happened so perfunctorily I wasn't sure what I was seeing was actually happening in the moment, or it was merely illustrating what was about to happen.
The Batty: I think the movie came to the wrong conclusion about what Batman is supposed to be. He's not a symbol of hope (that's Clark's wheelhouse), he's a symbol of fear. They also missed a trick with the Bruce Wayne side of the story; it feels like the central conflict for his should have been learning how to balance Bruce and the Bat, because it'll take BOTH of them to save the city. Which feels extra odd since it seems like this was what the first two acts were setting up what with the (at the time) mayoral candidate lady pressing Wayne to do more for the city, and the fact that the river of dirty money that was at the centre of this whole thing was flowing right from the Wayne Foundation.
Speaking of the ending; are they setting up for No Man's Land as the sequel or Arkham City? Shades of both given the state of Gotham.
Also kind of disappointed they're already putting Joker in the mix. They really ought to leave that character alone for a while and give some other underserved villain a chance to shine. I mean Batsy has bar none THE most iconic rogue's gallery in all of comicdom. For example; Ivy and Freeze both deserves another shot, and Hugo Strange would be a perfect fit for this world (to name but a few.)
Last edited:
I found it interesting that Batman basically failed at nearly every step of the movie, but in the end found himself, and gave the movie meaning. I'd say Reeves showed a better understanding of the Batman character here than Snyder ever could. Hell, maybe even a better understanding than Nolan...
@Bold
I agree the movie was over after Batman and the Gotham PD collared Riddler. My first time watching the film, I was stunned there was another intricate, 30 minute climax on top of the one we just watched with Carmine Falcone.
The Riddler having a secret entourage of supporters and anarchists, who were armed to the teeth, I believe. Bombing the levees around the city to flood it after Riddler was arrested and Batman was supposed to have pieced this plan together prior to his conversation with Riddler in Arkham. Is a Plastic Man level stretch.
I could believe studio meddling wanting a more punchy/shoot'em up finale. That's the trope now. All action movies end with big CGI nightmare battles. I said in my initial post about the movie, that when the levees were bombed, the city started to flood and when the anarchist shooters arrived to massacre the convention center attendees. Myself and the group I were all thinking, "this would be a REALLY good time to call the Justice League". Har Dee Har
With Batman moving into the light and being seen by the people of Gotham. I think Reeves is doing what Nolan did. Making Batman a symbol the city can believe in. Since Reeves' Gotham is following the trend of that city being the WORST place to live. Reminds me of what Dennis O'Neil (famous Batman, Green Arrow and Green Lantern writer and editor from the 70s-90s) said about Gotham and Metropolis.
“Gotham is Manhattan below Fourteenth Street at 3 a.m., November 28 in a cold year. Metropolis is Manhattan between Fourteenth and One Hundred and Tenth Streets on the brightest, sunniest July day of the year.”
Not to dissimilar to how there is a big difference between Spider-Man's NYC and Daredevil's NYC. And those two worlds are separated by 8 city blocks or 2 miles.
City needs hope. Have to motivate people to want to help themselves and stand up to crime and corruption.
