The Batman (2022)

[ruby24]

This was by far the dumbest Batman ever put on screen. He and Gordon were so stupid, like the two stooges, bumbling around not figuring anything out, failing to stop or solve or prevent anything. World's greatest detective my ass.

[shrewd.buddha]

It was ... underwhelming.  I was definitely not whelmed. 
The original trailer was incredible-- I watched it dozens of times.  Little did I know that the movie would be just those moments from the trailer -- but each one stretched out to the point of disinterest.  Whoever edited that trailer should have edited the movie.

When the Batman arrived at the first crime scene, it was novel, and the tension between the police, Gordon and the Batman was interesting.  But then the Batman continues to interact with the police -- he even visits a mob club -- and his shroud of mystery is lost.
By the end of the movie the Batman is just another rescue worker helping to load injured people onto stretchers - - - the Batman becomes just a regular guy who likes to dress up in a costume.

Personally, I think the movie should have ended with the capture of the Riddler.  Everything after that felt like padding -- as if the stakes needed to be higher -- even at the expense of the Batman's detective skills and his enigma status.  It was a low point when the Batman visited the Riddler in Arkham, beating on the glass partition and demanding to be told what clues he missed. 

Edited April 25, 2022 by shrewd.buddha

[Guest]

I find it interesting that the reaction to the theatrical release was really positive and the reaction to the streaming release as been generally negative (at least here). I wonder if that is because of different audiences or if the movies plays better in a theater.  

[rmontro]

7 hours ago, Dani said:

I find it interesting that the reaction to the theatrical release was really positive and the reaction to the streaming release as been generally negative (at least here). I wonder if that is because of different audiences or if the movies plays better in a theater.  

I saw this streaming earlier today, and I liked it.  Was it the best Batman movie ever?  No, but it was a worthy entry.  Patterson makes a good Batman.  I can't say I was thrilled with the portrayal of the Riddler here, but it was better than Jim Carrey's.

[Ms Blue Jay]

7 hours ago, Dani said:

I find it interesting that the reaction to the theatrical release was really positive and the reaction to the streaming release as been generally negative (at least here). I wonder if that is because of different audiences or if the movies plays better in a theater.  

People who would take the time to go to the theatre for this particular 3 full hour movie in a pandemic are already predisposed to like it, for one.  They went because they knew they wanted to see it and thought/knew that they would like it.

The rest of us are just watching it because we already have the channel to stream it.  

I didn't have a 'negative' reaction, but I feel kinda neutral about it.  

Edited April 25, 2022 by Ms Blue Jay

[Racj82]

As I keep learning more and more, most movies aren't as good as those who praise them or as bad as the ones people hate. On average, most films I will see are fine or pretty good. A movie that blows me away. Sticks with me forever are rare. I also rarely hate a movie unless I get nothing out of it.

This was one of many movies I've seen that looks great and is well acted but I didn't really care about the actual story and I didn't get invested in the characters.

I didn't do this on purpose but I just rewatched the first planet of the apes movie Reeves did. It was my first time since I saw it in theaters. I was blown away by that movie all over again. That is the Matt Reeves movie I will be thinking about for a while.

I don't really care about a standalone Batman movie at this point. He has reached that wolverine level where I rather just watch him in a ensemble. I don’t want him to be THE central character. I love Batman. But...yeah. pretty good is the best I can give this.

[Guest]

44 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

People who would take the time to go to the theatre for this particular 3 full hour movie in a pandemic are already predisposed to like it, for one.  They went because they knew they wanted to see it and thought/knew that they would like it.

 

The movie did too well in the box office to just be based on people who were predisposed to liking it. I went to see it purely out of boredom and curiosity and was not predisposed to liking it. I’ve never even made it through the Nolan trilogy. I usually don’t like this kind of take on Batman. I ended up loving it which surprised me. I thought based on my reaction and positive word of mouth that this would be better received on streaming than has been. DC fans alone are usually not enough to give a movie good word of mouth. All of that is way I was wondering if the movie does play differently on the big screen and if my opinion would change if I watched again on HBO Max. 

[Racj82]

18 hours ago, Dani said:

The movie did too well in the box office to just be based on people who were predisposed to liking it. I went to see it purely out of boredom and curiosity and was not predisposed to liking it. I’ve never even made it through the Nolan trilogy. I usually don’t like this kind of take on Batman. I ended up loving it which surprised me. I thought based on my reaction and positive word of mouth that this would be better received on streaming than has been. DC fans alone are usually not enough to give a movie good word of mouth. All of that is way I was wondering if the movie does play differently on the big screen and if my opinion would change if I watched again on HBO Max. 

People in general terms, who ran out to see it as soon as they, are probably more predisposed to liking it.

But, there are a lot reasons why someone likes something or doesn't. It's never one thing.

I'm glad this movie exists. It just didn't hit me well on any real level outside of story choices that engaged me and that riddler/batman scene.

[rmontro]

20 hours ago, Racj82 said:

I don't really care about a standalone Batman movie at this point. He has reached that wolverine level where I rather just watch him in a ensemble. I don’t want him to be THE central character.

Interesting.  I see Batman as more like James Bond, he needs a solo movie every so often.  Wolverine definitely works better on a team IMO.  Batman's more versatile, he can do either.

[Racj82]

2 hours ago, rmontro said:

Interesting.  I see Batman as more like James Bond, he needs a solo movie every so often.  Wolverine definitely works better on a team IMO.  Batman's more versatile, he can do either.

We have gotten tons of batman solo movies. Him bouncing off of other heroes in live action, at this point, is more interesting to me. That is something we haven't gotten as much of in live action. Batman and Bruce Wayne had had so many examinations on their psyche at this point. I've realized with this movie that I could do without it for a while longer. 

Even if it's not a justice league situation, let me see him actual assemble his bat family. Something different. Batman is known as a loner but he usually isn't actually alone.

[rmontro]

28 minutes ago, Racj82 said:

Even if it's not a justice league situation, let me see him actual assemble his bat family. Something different. Batman is known as a loner but he usually isn't actually alone.

We're due for another version of Robin.

[Tenshinhan]

Yes, they should have had Batman/Bruce working with a young Robin instead of the troubled loner stuff.  Maybe ditch Alfred altogether.

[millennium]

Atomic batteries to power, turbines to speed.

 

[Racj82]

1 hour ago, rmontro said:

We're due for another version of Robin.

Yeah that whiny brat they turned him into in batman and Robin was not it. I've grown a great deal of respect for Dick Grayson through Titans, Teen Titans and Young Justice among other things. He's a truly great character and leader in his own right.

 

[methodwriter85]

On 4/24/2022 at 7:22 AM, shrewd.buddha said:

Personally, I think the movie should have ended with the capture of the Riddler.  Everything after that felt like padding -- as if the stakes needed to be higher -- even at the expense of the Batman's detective skills and his enigma status.  It was a low point when the Batman visited the Riddler in Arkham, beating on the glass partition and demanding to be told what clues he missed. 

I lean towards thinking the movie should have cut out the water flooding entirely and focused on the assassination attempt on Real. Batman saves her, then we cut to the end with Catwoman leaving the city and Batman looking up at the signal as Real gives a speech about believing in Gotham again in her hospital bed.

That Arkham scene felt like a "Well, we need to use Paul Dano more" moment more than anything else The misdirect was interesting but I don't think it was necessary. We already get that the Riddler was an orphan who resented Bruce Wayne.

[Avabelle]

This was just… terrible. The performances were underwhelming but I feel the writing of this was just bad and in certain scenes it felt like that actors were feeling the cringe. 
 

How has this 85% on rotten tomatoes?!

[Lantern7]

Honest Trailer will take on The Batman tomorrow. This is what they put out today. It's . . . disturbing.

 

[BetterButter]

 

[Hiyo]

Quote

How has this 85% on rotten tomatoes?!

Not even the World's Greatest Detective can figure that one out...

[Spartan Girl]

I’m so glad I waited til Watchathon to watch this for free instead of renting it for $24.99. 

This was just dull and dark. Grotesque at times. I get some people liked it, but I did not. Pattinson did better than I thought he would, but nowhere near as good as Bale or Conroy or Keaton.

Zoe was cool though. And my jaw dropped at how unrecognizable Colin Farrell was.

Turning Riddler into some incel Jigsaw/Se7en serial killer? Didn’t love it. And I swear to God if I have to see one more rehash of fucking Joker I’ll scream.

Seriously, Warner Brothers, why oh why can’t we just have a Lego Batman Movie 2 instead?! 

Edited May 7, 2022 by Spartan Girl

[Spartan Girl]

On 4/24/2022 at 2:37 AM, ruby24 said:

This was by far the dumbest Batman ever put on screen. He and Gordon were so stupid, like the two stooges, bumbling around not figuring anything out, failing to stop or solve or prevent anything. World's greatest detective my ass.

I couldn’t believe it took them so long to guess the “rat with wings” clue. I kept screaming “It’s a bat, STUPID!” at my screen. Of course, it also applied to Falcone, but still.

After sleeping on it, I still think that this was more or less the same elements as The Dark Knight only obviously not done as well. And yeah, they could have easily shaved off an hour instead of dragging out certain sequences. Paul Dano hammed it up to such a ridiculous degree. 

The only stuff I liked was The Bat and the Cat. I would have liked more of that and less of the Saw/Se7ven Riddler shit.

[rmontro]

On 5/6/2022 at 10:32 PM, Spartan Girl said:

Pattinson did better than I thought he would, but nowhere near as good as Bale or Conroy or Keaton.

I thought Pattinson made a good Batman, but his Bruce Wayne left much to be desired.  I don't blame this on him though, it's the way the writers conceive the character.  I was listening to a podcast review (Hollywood Hogwash) where they said Pattinson's Bruce Wayne is basically emo Peter Parker from Spider-Man 3.  I thought that was funny and fairly accurate.

I agree I didn't care for this take on the Riddler either.  Make fun if you want, but Frank Gorshin was the only onscreen Riddler that I've liked.

[GHScorpiosRule]

1 hour ago, rmontro said:

Make fun if you want, but Frank Gorshin was the only onscreen Riddler that I've liked.

John Glover’s portrayal in Batman: The Animated Series was also very good.

[ribboninthesky1]

I'm grateful I waited until the HBOMax release.  I got to break it up my viewing into 2 chunks.  Still felt long. Agreed with others in that it should have ended with Riddler's arrest.  

I was confused by Robert Pattinson's casting when it was announced, and nothing I saw in the film alleviated said confusion.  I developed more sympathy for him once I heard/read that Matt Reeves used Kurt Cobain as inspiration for Bruce Wayne. I realized that he didn't have much to work with. He gives a mean side-eye though! Given that he couldn't crane his neck at all while in the suit. 

Zoe Kravitz was okay, but this version of Selina Kyle was rather dumb. 

Colin Farrell was wasted, as was Jeffrey Wright.   

The score bugged me immensely. 

On 3/24/2022 at 1:50 PM, BetterButter said:

 

 

I am amused that a 3 hour film even has deleted scenes.  And even this deleted scene drags on and on.  I lost interest after 2.5 minutes.  

 

[Avabelle]

Yeah while I didn’t think any of the performances were stellar my blame is directed more towards the writing. The actors weren’t given much to deal with other than to be emo.

[Spartan Girl]

The part that really annoyed me was when Riddler more or less told Batman/Bruce that he wasn’t a “real orphan” like he and the others in the orphanage were because he hadn’t suffered like he did.

Wow. Okay, losing your parents at a young age sucks no matter who you are. And at the risk of sounding out of touch while Bruce arguably had it better off than the kids in the orphanage, there’s no amount of privilege that can compensate for that emotional trauma—especially when you watch them get murdered in front of you like Bruce or stumble across their bodies like the mayor’s kid. So you can miss me with that shit, asshole!

[Chyromaniac]

On 5/12/2022 at 7:31 AM, Spartan Girl said:

The part that really annoyed me was when Riddler more or less told Batman/Bruce that he wasn’t a “real orphan” like he and the others in the orphanage were because he hadn’t suffered like he did.

Wow. Okay, losing your parents at a young age sucks no matter who you are. And at the risk of sounding out of touch while Bruce arguably had it better off than the kids in the orphanage, there’s no amount of privilege that can compensate for that emotional trauma—especially when you watch them get murdered in front of you like Bruce or stumble across their bodies like the mayor’s kid. So you can miss me with that shit, asshole!

I had a similar reaction to that scene- to me, that makes it an effective villain moment.  Too often, it feels like filmmakers think that for a bad guy to be realistic, that the audience should somehow agree with their motivation (just not their actions).  And in some cases- Killmonger for example- it works.  More often than not though, it seems like we get the mom from Godzilla KotM, who unleashed Kaiju on the planet because “humanity is the virus.”  Instead of being a concerned do-gooder who’s just been pushed too far, she just comes off like an idiot.  Here, we don’t need to sympathize with the Riddler- we just have to understand that his plan makes sense to him, which this scene accomplished pretty well.

Edited May 14, 2022 by Chyromaniac

[Trini]

Finally saw this; I generally liked it, though I had a few issues.

Wow, Bruce Wayne is a sad, angry emo goth boy -- and I'm not mad about it. I'm not saying it's the best take on Bruce/Batman, but I think it's a valid one. (Then again, I do think most versions of the character are valid.) But there's also room for growth, and I think they showed hope for that by the end. Hopefully, in the sequel, Bruce (and the overall tone) is less somber.

There were some great visuals; and I thought the use of repetition and parallels was interesting; and the way Batman, Riddler, and Bruce were connected to the overall story of corruption. I liked how much Selina and Gordon we got, but I also wanted more of Alfred, even though he was great in the few scenes he had.

I liked the Batman and Selina parts and that relationship, but surprisingly, I wasn't really feeling the romance aspect. They had chemistry, but I thought it was too soon for them to kiss at that point -- at the end might have worked better for me.

Riddler was effectively creepy. But it's like they mixed him with aspects of the Joker.

One thing I thought was odd was how much Batman was out there in public. Like shrewd.buddha mentioned above, he didn't have his "shroud of mystery"; it was just weird having him around and seen by so many people, and so soon into his vigilante 'career'.

My biggest issue with the plot was that, the Riddler won -- he accomplished his whole plan (except for killing Bruce Wayne, but only because Bruce is Batman) and Batman wasn't able to stop any of that. Maybe the point was that he'd do better in the future? Of course Batman had heroic moments, but I think he needed a bigger 'win' at the end. Maybe if he had stopped most of the bombs.

[Racj82]

On 5/23/2022 at 2:19 AM, Trini said:

Finally saw this; I generally liked it, though I had a few issues.

Wow, Bruce Wayne is a sad, angry emo goth boy -- and I'm not mad about it. I'm not saying it's the best take on Bruce/Batman, but I think it's a valid one. (Then again, I do think most versions of the character are valid.) But there's also room for growth, and I think they showed hope for that by the end. Hopefully, in the sequel, Bruce (and the overall tone) is less somber.

There were some great visuals; and I thought the use of repetition and parallels was interesting; and the way Batman, Riddler, and Bruce were connected to the overall story of corruption. I liked how much Selina and Gordon we got, but I also wanted more of Alfred, even though he was great in the few scenes he had.

I liked the Batman and Selina parts and that relationship, but surprisingly, I wasn't really feeling the romance aspect. They had chemistry, but I thought it was too soon for them to kiss at that point -- at the end might have worked better for me.

Riddler was effectively creepy. But it's like they mixed him with aspects of the Joker.

One thing I thought was odd was how much Batman was out there in public. Like shrewd.buddha mentioned above, he didn't have his "shroud of mystery"; it was just weird having him around and seen by so many people, and so soon into his vigilante 'career'.

My biggest issue with the plot was that, the Riddler won -- he accomplished his whole plan (except for killing Bruce Wayne, but only because Bruce is Batman) and Batman wasn't able to stop any of that. Maybe the point was that he'd do better in the future? Of course Batman had heroic moments, but I think he needed a bigger 'win' at the end. Maybe if he had stopped most of the bombs.

Riddler didn't win. Him gathering all those people together to commit assassination did not work. The bomb were to drive everyone together for his ultimate plot which failed. 

[Trini]

5 hours ago, Racj82 said:

Riddler didn't win. Him gathering all those people together to commit assassination did not work. The bomb were to drive everyone together for his ultimate plot which failed. 

So 80% of his plan, then? That's still a passing grade.

----

About the deleted Joker scene: I take it that Batman has already defeated the Joker in this version; so does that mean that they're not going back to him with this version of Batman? I get that he's Batman's most popular villain, but I wouldn't mind a break from him to let other villains be featured.

[Racj82]

4 hours ago, Trini said:

So 80% of his plan, then? That's still a passing grade.

----

About the deleted Joker scene: I take it that Batman has already defeated the Joker in this version; so does that mean that they're not going back to him with this version of Batman? I get that he's Batman's most popular villain, but I wouldn't mind a break from him to let other villains be featured.

If the end goal of your plan fails...it failed.

I doubt they have thought out how much they want to use Joker going forward. They wanted a bunch of villains ready existing in the universe for basically cameos. And according to Matt Reeves Mr. Freeze is who he wants to tackle next time.

[Trini]

We might have to agree to disagree. Yes, Batman helped to stop the gunmen at the very end, but I wouldn't count all the destruction and murders before then that he didn't stop as a loss for The Riddler.

[Trini]

Want more Riddler backstory? DC has a comic for that: https://www.dccomics.com/blog/2022/07/22/sdcc-more-big-news-from-jim-lee-and-his-friends

Quote

Teased earlier in the day on social media, Golden Globe Award Nominated Actor Paul Dano (The Batman) joined Lee to provide fans with a first look at his upcoming six-issue DC Black Label limited series, The Riddler: Year One. Dano’s story provides an in-depth look at how the unknown forensic accountant Edward Nashton evolved into the menace known as the Riddler and came so close to bringing down the entire city. Working with acclaimed artist Stevan Subic, Dano showed of an incredible assortment of covers and interior art for the debut issue hitting comic book stores on October 25. ...

[MarkHB]

On 6/30/2016 at 10:00 AM, MarkHB said:

DARKNESS!  NO PARENTS!*

You know, when I wrote this, I had no idea how much darkness there would actually be.

FWIW, I really liked the movie.

[tv echo]

Saturn Awards Nominations: ‘The Batman’, ‘Nightmare Alley’, ‘Spider-Man’, ‘Better Call Saul’ Top List
By Armando Tinoco   August 12, 2022
https://deadline.com/2022/08/saturn-awards-2022-nominations-list-movies-tv-1235089636/ 

Quote

EXCLUSIVE: The Saturn Awards have unveiled nominations for their 50th anniversary edition, with organizer the Academy of Science Fiction, Fantasy & Horror Films saying that the ceremony to reveal winners is set for October 25 in an event that will be livestreamed on ElectricNOW.

Warner Bros/DC’s The Batman, directed by Matt Reeves, is the top-nominated film with 12, featuring in categories including Best Superhero Film, and acting noms for Robert Pattinson, Zoe Kravitz, Paul Dano and Colin Farrell. Guillermo del Toro’s Nightmare Alley from Searchlight Pictures is close behind with 10 nominations including Best Thriller Film, Best Direction (del Toro), and Writing (del Toro and Kim Morgan).

[Trini]

Chase scene recreated with Legos for Batman Day:

[tv echo]

[Trini]

A few quotes from Paul Dano and Matt Reeves in the 'trailer' for The Riddler: Year One comic:

[tv echo]

[Kel Varnsen]

Finally got around to watching this. It had some interesting ideas, but like others have said, it went on at least half an hour longer than it should. There were so many scenes, especially with Gordon and Batman where they were like silently pondering things that could have been edited down. The fact that no one noticed that Riddler assembled an army of goons was also kind of dumb.

I did like the idea of Thomas Wayne being a politician and the Waynes getting killed for an actual reason, not by a random mugger because they decide to take a shortcut through crime alley. And I liked how the one cop at the beginning who wouldn't let Batman into the crime scene was practically friendly with him by the end. 

Also I was a bit confused. Did Batman shoot himself up with that drop drug at the end so he could save Selina? That was weird. Why did he have some, and did they ever establish that it can help recover from injuries?

[Racj82]

On 10/29/2022 at 12:48 AM, Kel Varnsen said:

Finally got around to watching this. It had some interesting ideas, but like others have said, it went on at least half an hour longer than it should. There were so many scenes, especially with Gordon and Batman where they were like silently pondering things that could have been edited down. The fact that no one noticed that Riddler assembled an army of goons was also kind of dumb.

I did like the idea of Thomas Wayne being a politician and the Waynes getting killed for an actual reason, not by a random mugger because they decide to take a shortcut through crime alley. And I liked how the one cop at the beginning who wouldn't let Batman into the crime scene was practically friendly with him by the end. 

Also I was a bit confused. Did Batman shoot himself up with that drop drug at the end so he could save Selina? That was weird. Why did he have some, and did they ever establish that it can help recover from injuries?

He basically shot up adrenaline. It didn't fix anything. Just helped him shoot through the pain. Batman is a human being. It stands to reason that he would have something that would help him push through pain in a battle.

[Kel Varnsen]

2 hours ago, Racj82 said:

He basically shot up adrenaline. It didn't fix anything. Just helped him shoot through the pain. Batman is a human being. It stands to reason that he would have something that would help him push through pain in a battle.

Well that is kind of dumb. You would think in the almost 3 previous hours worth of movie they could have established that he had something like that. Instead it just becomes some magic potion he uses at the end.

One thing I did like though was how Bruce was rich but he wasn't like insane richest person ever rich. Like his motorcycle seemed like something a person could buy (or at least a modified version of a standard motorcycle) and the Batmobile looked almost close to something he could build (other than the jet engine). You even saw earlier in the movie car parts scattered around the batcave. Once you make the Batmobile an experimental tank, it really narrows down who Batman could be.

[Racj82]

4 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Well that is kind of dumb. You would think in the almost 3 previous hours worth of movie they could have established that he had something like that. Instead it just becomes some magic potion he uses at the end.

I don't really need things like this spelled out for me. And it wasn't a magic potion. Drugs like that gave existed for years. My one and only thought during that scene was oh, he has some type of adrenaline and...that was it. I don't everything he uses to have an origin or explanation.

[Trini]

9 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

One thing I did like though was how Bruce was rich but he wasn't like insane richest person ever rich. Like his motorcycle seemed like something a person could buy (or at least a modified version of a standard motorcycle) and the Batmobile looked almost close to something he could build (other than the jet engine). You even saw earlier in the movie car parts scattered around the batcave. Once you make the Batmobile an experimental tank, it really narrows down who Batman could be.

I did notice and appreciate that. The filmmakers seemed to have made a decided effort to make Bruce/Batman more 'down to earth' in this.

[Kel Varnsen]

5 hours ago, Racj82 said:

I don't really need things like this spelled out for me. And it wasn't a magic potion. Drugs like that gave existed for years. My one and only thought during that scene was oh, he has some type of adrenaline and...that was it. I don't everything he uses to have an origin or explanation.

I get that, but to me it still felt like lazy writing, especially since what happened when Batman got shot wasn't really consistently. I mean sure drugs like that exist, but so do robots and I would also be annoyed if when Batman was down he pressed a button on his belt and the Batbot (that we had never seen before) suddenly showed up and saved him.

[Tenshinhan]

I too appreciate the more down-to-earth Batman stuff.  It aligns closer with the comic books more than the super hi-tech stuff from the previous film series.

[Hiyo]

Quote

It aligns closer with the comic books more than the super hi-tech stuff from the previous film series

Depends which Batman you are reading.

[Tenshinhan]

16 hours ago, Hiyo said:

Depends which Batman you are reading.

That's somewhat true, but I think that the lower-tech aspects and eras of the comics outnumbers the higher-tech stuff.

[Hiyo]

I think the only time we see a Batman that is this low-tech is when they are doing Year One era stories.

[Tenshinhan]

14 hours ago, Hiyo said:

I think the only time we see a Batman that is this low-tech is when they are doing Year One era stories.

I would argue that most of the pre-1990s stories are relatively low-tech compared to what we see in the Nolan/Burton/Schumacher films.  Maybe somewhat more high tech than in this particular film, but not hugely so in my view.