|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Apr 20, 2022 6:58:12 GMT -5
I just watched this movie and what I found most surprising is how much of the Pre-Crisis Batman is in this. Totally contrary to what I expected given the tone and R-rating, but this Batman might be the most normal Batman we've seen in a movie in a long time. Yes he's tortured and all that... but he works hand-in-hand with Gordon and feels a lot like an amateur detective helping police than a snarling vigilante striking at criminals from the shadows. And I think this is the first time I've seen Batman actually help people, rather than just beating criminals up. The relationship with Gordon was definitely one of the highlights for me, and the end where he's helping the National Guard relief effors in broad day light was fantastic. That's my kind of Batman. |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Apr 22, 2022 22:29:46 GMT -5
HISHE has added their stamp to things.....
|
|
Milo
Junior Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by Milo on Apr 23, 2022 9:22:57 GMT -5
As a huge Batman fan, I was waiting for this movie with bated breath. I sat through the whole DC Fandome to see the trailer, and can't remember how many times I rewatched it. But the movie ended up greatly disappointing me. I thought it completely fell flat as an interpretation of the character. Ditching the Bruce Wayne persona, which gives the character depth, was one of the most glaring problems. This was the first Batman movie, aside from the Schumacher ones, where I thought Batman looked and felt ridiculous. He felt like just a guy in a Bat-costume. Pattinson's acting was all wrong, but I think it stems from the director's misunderstanding of the character. Batman is and has never been Kurt Cobain. So there was a fundamental error in the conception of this version.
|
|
|
|
Post by Graphic Autist on Apr 29, 2022 13:24:31 GMT -5
It was OK. Loved his car.
|
|
|
|
Post by EdoBosnar on May 1, 2022 2:47:58 GMT -5
Just watched this last night and I liked it way more than I thought I would. Pattinson pleasantly surprised me. One of the main things I liked is that Batman is actually a detective, and I found this take on the Riddler really interesting. However, I did not love it; as others mentioned, it's way too long - about 45 minutes could have easily been cut out of its total run time and it probably would have been a better movie. Also, I didn't like how everyone, meaning their pasts, are so connected - I won't say anything more to avoid spoilers.
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on May 14, 2022 6:53:26 GMT -5
Why does this look so good? There are some crazy talented people out there. |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on May 20, 2022 22:32:13 GMT -5
Number 3 son wanted to watch it so we streamed it on HBOMax over two nights.
It was…okay. It’s the first Batman movie that I didn’t actively hate since Batman Begins (and I’ve only seen that one once so I’m not sure how it would hold up). Which isn’t to say I particularly liked it. Pattinson was marginal as Batman and awful as Bruce Wayne, though a fair bit of that is probably on the director and writer. Riddler was…not really Riddler, but was okay for whatever he was. I rather like Catwoman, so that’s something. And Gordon was pretty okay.
I keep seeing it said that Batman is more of a detective in this one. And I guess anything more than zero is more. But he’s not a very good detective. It’s nice it wasn’t another bloody origin.
But overall it was mostly three plus hours of MEH.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,197 
|
Post by Confessor on May 21, 2022 8:57:17 GMT -5
Why does this look so good? Holy re-cut, Batman! I really want to see this whole movie.  |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Nov 17, 2022 17:30:33 GMT -5
I finally went ahead and bought the Best Buy steelbook of this so I could watch it. For the most part I liked it. Even though he was very off-model it was great to have a serious Riddler who actually riddles and clues the Batman along, with Batman actually being a detective. Though how "bat" as "rat with wings" wasn't the first thing that occurred to him I don't know (even though that wasn't the correct answer.)
The cast was okay. Besides Dano as Riddler, the only one who really impressed me was John Turturro as Falcone. I didn't recognise him but I kept feeling he was familiar.
Once again Bats puts civilians in danger chasing down a bad guy. At least in Nolan's films he was racing against time (IIRC) but why was it so important he catch Cobblepot? How many people died in that highway disaster? Afterwards, they all acted as if nothing happened! That was probably my biggest problem with the film.
I'm not particularly excited to see that character again, but the last scene in Arkham was well-done.
I really liked the music. (I'm streaming the soundtrack now.)
7/10
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2022 18:38:04 GMT -5
I was impressed with this. A lot. Not that there aren’t flaws.
I like the fact that, Adam West aside, we finally got a live-action Batman who did some detective work. Keaton’s Batman made some guesses about chemicals while Bale’s Batman did zero detective work; at least Pattinson’s Batman, who was very stoic and intense, got to use his brains, and it was good to see him work with Lt. Gordon.
I did enjoy the casting for the most part, and I actually thought Catwoman added something to the film, as did the Penguin. It did feel like someone had put a lot of thought into the plot, and I have to commend any film that requires you to think.
However, did it need to be the Riddler? For the purpose of leaving clues, I guess it did, but they could have used any villain, Batman could still have played detective. I feel the Riddler’s outfit, mannerisms and overall plot was a little bit like something from films such as Saw.
It did also feel like a Pyrrhic victory for Batman. He defeated the Riddler and his goons, but at a great cost to Gotham City. Yes, there was some hope at the end with the new mayor, but with the National Guard in Gotham City, and martial law declared, it did feel like Batman had only achieved a 95% success rate. The Riddler is in Arkham, but it still feels like a partial victory of sorts for him.
As I said, I do admire the film for making you concentrate, but I am not entirely sold on the Riddler’s origins being tied into Thomas Wayne, etc. I don’t know. Yes, the original origin (from 1948) might not have worked. Or would it?
That’s possibly a bit too simplistic and not suited for a bleak, live-action adaptation, but the nihilistic Riddler in this film, whose origins are tied into Thomas Wayne/Bruce Wayne, feels a bit too much “Blofeld Syndrome” for my liking, it is a bandwagon in recent years. I’m sure if they ever remake something such as Inspector Gadget (to name one example), Gadget will be Doctor Claw’s half-brother or nephew or something.
For future films, I do feel we need to see a Bruce Wayne with more of a desire to be a charming playboy. I believe contrast is important, and if Bruce Wayne wants to remain emotionally healthy, and prevent anyone from figuring out who he is, he needs to present a happy face to the world.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jul 20, 2023 20:20:17 GMT -5
**Contains spoilers because it's now an old film.** Just watched this last night and I liked it way more than I thought I would. My thoughts exactly. It's nice to be pleasantly surprised, and particularly so when one's initial impression was rather negative (another Batman movie? Another dark and gritty film? That vampire dude as Bruce Wayne? And that strange neck piece on the cape...) but all my doubts flew out the window pretty quickly.
Ditto. I can't say that I was overly fond of the concept of emo Bruce Wayne, but that was not due to Pattinson's work; he was very believable. I also liked his attitude as Batman: not arrogantly aloof, but very much in control; rarely saying anything unnecessary of manifesting any emotion. Someone in his line of work should never let his emotions dictate his words or actions, particularly when he's taunted.
It really surprised me (in a good way). That was a Riddler I could believe was real, and in fact I think the film did a truly bang up job with all of its threats, human and otherwise. The Penguin as a regular mobster, the Riddler as a man-child seeking redress over perceived slights by hurting others, a bunch of violent internet conspirationist losers, and even climate change (since Gotham now needs a sea wall not to be flooded): aren't they all real dangers that worry us today? Add to that corruption and economic inequalities. There were several social commentaries in there that didn't feel forced, and even Bruce is due for some soul-searching; while he was moping not caring about the family business, orphans he was supposed to look after were living in miserable conditions. (That echoed The Dark Knight Rises, but it's okay).
The flooding scene at the end did strike me as an unnecessary coda, although it would have been fine had it been foreshadowed a little more. I never looked at my watch, but yeah... it was pretty long. That car chase suffered from "been there done that" syndrome despite its spectacular end, and as badwolf said, it's not very heroic to put so many innocents at risk in such a way. We could have done without it. Overall, despite initial misgivings, I would rate it among the good Batman films, of which there are few. Special mentions- Selina Kyle was great. From Zoe Kravitz's interpretation to the cat mask, she was both believable and pretty true to some comic-book versions. Gordon was excellent. I keep seeing Jeffrey Wright as Felix Leighter, but I really enjoy his work. However - That scene at Arkham at the end... ugh. It was unnecessary, and suggests that in the near future two crazy bad guys will know who Batman is. |
|
