Better than The Dark Knight
Way, way better
sharelol, no.
share
MovieChat Forums > The Batman (2022) Discussion > Better than The Dark Knight
The caliber of discussion on moviechat never ceases to amaze me.
shareLOL
shareLegit LOL'd.
It really is amazing how many people start threads or post comments that provide virtually nothing in the way of thoughts, and that provide no real path forward for an actual conversation.
I truly don't know why they do it. Does it enrich their lives at all? Is it a satisfying use of their time?
They're such different films.
This for me has to be the Batman film that looks and sounds the best though, although I do love Hans Zimmer's score even if Nolan decides to blast it insanely loud and often throughout the films.
not even close
shareThe Batman is a much better movie than The Dark Knight. The plot holds together better, the pacing is better, and in nearly every way it's simply better. The Dark Knight has the single best performance of either film, in Heath Ledger's Joker, but beyond that, The Batman wins out by a wide margin.
shareWhy do you choose to reply to my comment rather than the OP's post?
shareMaybe I misinterpreted your response. It can be read either way, but since you responded to the original post I thought you were disagreeing with him. I was offering my response to what you wrote. If you meant "not even close" to mean The Dark Knight is not even close to as good as The Batman, then it seems we all three agree.
shareYou're right, my comment is worded poorly. I am of the opinion that The Dark Knight is better, but if you disagree with that I just thought commenting under OP made the most sense.
shareAlthough I agree that the new one is an entertaining batman movie and I do like the focus on Bruce Wayne and Batman as a detective. I have to say that both Batman begins and the dark knight are better movies to me.
The new one is a bit "tropeish" in its cinematic style and story telling. Also the new one is merely rehashing what made Nolan trilogy so original. Dark and gritty. Begins is more of a complete story. Dark Knight has an amazing Heath Ledger, and both have a bit more depth than the new one. By depth I mean Nolan type of depth that can at times seem a bit shoehorned in.
See I think is tough to say. I would say The Dark Knight is overall better but I feel it is a toss up between Batman Begins and The Batman. I think the Batman has better music, cinematography, editing and much better fight choreography. I feel Batman Begins has better pacing, originality and a better balance of Bruce and Batman. In terms of Batman this is tough. I think Pattinson is a better Batman while Bale is the better Bruce.
shareHmmm. perhaps its some nostalgia on my part as well. It's funny how both the 89 version, the 05 reboot and this new reboot, where all promoted as a darker and grittier Batman movie. How dark and gritty is the next reboot going to be?
shareI wouldn't call Nolan's version necessarily darker than Burton's. I think it's more grounded, and realistic not necessarily darker. I feel this Batman is kind of like a fusion of Nolan's and Burton's. It probably can be seen as darker because it's got the gothic atomsphere which Nolan's didn't really have. It's gothic like Burton's but more grounded than that version. I feel this Batman is closest in spirit to the animated series in the 90s and the Arkham games. I feel those are the definitive Batman.
shareIt will be just a black screen with *KAPOW* sounds all around.
shareNOT THAT HARD...BALE SUCKS AS BATMAN.
shareKeaton > Pattinson > Bale> Kilmer > Clooney
shareFUCK😐
shareThere's no way Bale is the worst.
shareKEATON>WEST>PATTINSON>AFFLECK>CLOONEY>KILMER>BALE
shareAny actor who plays Batman that smirks when he tells someone that Alfred is dying, deserves to be last. It doesn't get worse than George.
shareGOOD BATMAN...BAD FILM AND DIRECTION.
shareI didn't think Clooney did to a good job. He doesn't seem to be as good at the send-up as West was, but he doesn't hit any depth. Frankly, a lot of the time he seems like he's sleepwalking a bit - which is the last thing to do on a movie as bombastic as Batman & Robin.
The script and the direction are big faults here, yes, but the performance itself doesn't seem special to me.
CLOONEY IS A SOLID ACTOR...WHEN A SOLID ACTOR GIVES A WEAK PERORMANCE IT IS NORMALLY THE DIRECTION'S FAULT.
shareIt's still a weak performance, though. Yes, there are causes external to Clooney himself, but it's still a limp performance.
I'd argue that he didn't give the best performance for an ideal Batman because the deck was stacked against him. But I also don't think that he gave a great performance within the parameters of the Batman movie he did make.
Compare Clooney to West. West is dynamic and fun, over the top, and enjoyable. Clooney's just kinda "there".
I can picture other actors who could have made a much better campy Batman & Robin than Clooney. Whereas difficult to picture improving Burton's films by replacing Keaton.
So, if we're talking "Batman Potential" or "Who is the best actor to take on the role of Batman" I might rank Clooney higher. As-is, he was given a bad hand, but he didn't even try to bluff, as it were.
Actual performances: Keaton, Pattinson, Conroy, Bale, West, Kilmer, Clooney
Potential/best actors: Keaton, Pattinson (saw The Lighthouse, have mad respect for this dude), Clooney, Conroy, Bale, Kilmer, West
I never felt that George Clooney was Bruce Wayne, whenever he was onscreen I just felt like I was watching George Clooney being George Clooney. Its a toss-up for me who is the better Bruce Wayne, Bale or Keaton and I go back and fourth.
I dare say Pattison might have been the best Batman but one of the weakest Bruce Wayne's.
I've never been clear on what people mean when they say that an actor is a great Bruce Wayne but bad Batman (or vice versa). I see it as presenting different aspects of the same character. The way Wayne is presented has more to do with the director and writer taking them in a different direction rather than an actor's portrayal.
I know that they are masks of one another, I know that a big theme of the Batman mythos is how Bruce balances his twin personae, but I see them as images of one another.
In The Batman, Bruce Wayne is portrayed as a much more wounded individual, his trauma much more on the surface. As such, he won't go out in public and pours himself entirely into his crusade. So we get "emo Bruce", which Pattinson did a great job with. We see his pain and vulnerability. He's very much depressed. He doesn't want to do anything or go anywhere (very much like clinical depression).
On the other hand, The Dark Knight Trilogy gives us a Bruce who is more methodical and schooled in deception by ninjas. He hides in plain sight with the playboy persona and we get to see that version. We also get to see his non-Batman, non-public Bruce persona in the cave or with Alfred: austere and internal.
Burton's films had Batman as an outsider, withdrawn and alone. So his Bruce Wayne is quirkier and more eccentric and unknown. Keaton delivers on all points.
I prefer how he's portrayed in the Burton films, but I'm not sure that's a measurement of Pattinson's performance, nor Keaton's, both of which I consider exemplary.
Not even close
shareNo I thought it was better. Then again I prefer Mat Reeves as a director to Cristopher Nolan. I thought the apes trilogy was better than TDK trilogy so nope I have to disagree.
shareOK, I still think every single Nolan film was better, hell I might actually think both Burton films were better. It was still pretty good though, my biggest issue was Catwoman (didn't like her one bit), but the Riddler was awesome.
shareYou have the right to think whatever you want. I do not think The Dark Knight Rises is that good of a film. The only film I see being close to this one is The Dark Knight. I found the Batman to be far superior to Batman Begins and The Dark Knight Rises. I think this Catwoman was the best Catwoman we have seen on screen. For me Matt Reeves>>>Christopher Nolan.
shareWell I think you need to get over your hatred for Nolan and see a therapist. The Dark Knight Rises is a great film and I think it’s sad you spend so much time on line bashing a movie that you hate.
shareWhere did I say I hated Nolan? I said I prefer Matt Reeves as a director to Nolan. Also I do not hate The Dark Knight Rises I just do not find it to be that good of a film.
shareI searched your post history, just about every post you’ve made has been about how much you hate TDKR. First of all your hatred isn’t rational, secondly isn’t there something better you could be doing? You’re nothing but an overly emotional hater.
shareNumber 1 that is not true. I discuss many other things other than that film. Overall I thought the film was competent but nothing amazing. Number two even if that were true you do the same thing for films you dislike. Do not be a hypocrite now.
shareI’m not being a hypocrite, I’m just saying it doesn’t make sense that you would put so much time and effort into bashing a movie you don’t even like. And BTW you are completely wrong about it not being amazing, it was, you literally have the worst opinion I have ever heard of. Hell, the parallels to A Tale of Two Cities (one of my favorite novels of all time) is enough to elevate this film to greatness.
shareYou are because I can point to countless threads you have made about Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. Drawing a parallel to something does not make your film great. The execution of it does. If a film that was awful or mediocre throughout the whole thing drew a parallel to a classic book in to Kill a Mockingbird it would not make it any better. I think your opinion is way off the film is far from amazing in my book. The Batman was better in every way in my book. Now that is an amazing film.
shareNot only was the parallel there but it was also very well executed and the thing is the movie doesn't throw this in your face. If you are smart and you know the story then you are able to figure it out, it was very subtle which is what I love about TDKR. Batman was Sydney Carton while Bruce Wayne was Charles Darnay, Batman died so Bruce could live, one of the most satisfying conclusions I have ever seen.
I am not hating on The Batman, in fact I liked it, but it's nowhere up to the level of any of the Nolan films.
Disagree. I thought the film was incredibly sloppy in many areas. You never even were able to explain away how Bruce was able to get back to Gotham in such a short time. Passports take a while to get and without many and resources he could not get onto a plane to fly back to Gotham.
Nope the Batman was on another level. Far better than The Dark Knight rises.
We don’t need to know how he gets back, we have seen his abilities throughout the previous two films (and the third film while I’m at it), and it’s perfectly plausible he made it back in 3 weeks given his ability to become “truly invisible”. Tell you what, whatever you told yourself that justified Indy and his buffoon of a father teleporting across Europe in a matter of minutes just apply that logic here, it’ll make it easier for you.
The Batman was enjoyable but nothing special, TDKR is one of those movies that only comes around every couple of decades and I’m sorry you weren’t able to appreciate it. In a way I feel sorry for you.
Yes we do, because if we do not know then the entire plot of rest of the film can not happen. That is what you call a plothole. In the previous two had gadgets as well as money. Also where in the Dark Knight Rises did it say he was truly invisible? Since you say these films are standalone you should not have to use the other two films to defend this point.
Nope The Batman was one of the best comic book films ever made. It already has surpassed the Dark Knight Rises and Batman Begins in my book.
The entire plot of the movie can happen because we know that Bruce is a master of theatricality and deception, being able to move around the world with ease is within his established character. Also you never answered why we just have to know every single step of Bruce’s journey back to Gotham yet the same doesn’t apply to Indy and Jar Jar Sean Connery?
Now you’re arguing something completely different, it has been established he knows how to become “truly invisible”, pay attention next time.
The thing is, no one cares about “your book”, and if you seriously think that The Batman is better than both BB and TDKR then your opinion clearly doesn’t mean much of anything.
Not without money or resources. He had both of those in Batman Begins. Do not deflect to Last Crusade, we are discussing The Dark Knight Rises. I never excused it in that film either.
In Batman Begins it states that, nowhere in TDKR does it state he can become truly invisible.
No one cares about your book either. If you think TDKR is better than the Batman your opinion does not mean much of anything. See I can play the same game. I can have my opinion and it be fine, do not insult people because they have a different opinion than you.
He had money and resources??? Ummmm I’m pretty sure he just left Gotham and left all of his money and resources to Alfred. Again your problem is you either don’t pay attention or you’re too stupid to understand either film.
And the fact that you won’t address the plot holes of Last Crusade show that you aren’t serious, you are just attacking TDKR because you think it’s the cool thing to do.
Good for you, all that matters to me is my opinion and you haven’t made an inch of progress in changing it.
Which he was able to be picked up by Alfred because Alfred had money and resources to come to his aid. He did not have this in TDKR.
Nope I am not going to let you deflect to that while ignoring a plothole in The Dark Knight Rises. You are trying to deflect and I am not going to allow it.
Same to you, you have not changed my view at all. Thing is I never aimed to change your view.
He went from Gotham, to all over Asia to Bhutan with “no resources”, him making it back to Gotham because of Alfred is irrelevant by this point. Yeah while I’m at it, did Alfred also fly Bruce to Asia??? Didn’t think so.
Then I don’t believe your criticisms are legitimate. I think you just want to be part of the cool crowd who nit picks TDKR to death while making every excuse in the book for Last Crusades long list of plot holes.
Good for you, sonny.
No he did have resources, that resource was Alfred. So no yet again false.
Not deflecting to Crusade. Sorry no amount of guilt tripping will work.
Good for you sonny.
So then Alfred flew him to Asia and gave him resources to move around Asia? WTF movie were you watching?
Then you are not a legitimate poster.
Good for you, kiddo.
I am confused are we discussing Dark Knight Rises or Batman Begins? The Dark Knight Rises you claimed was standalone. Where in that film does it say he could become truly invisible? Link me to where it states that in TDKR. You deflected to Batman Begins to try and cover up a plothole.
shareI said it could be viewed on its own and that the viewer could logically follow the story, I never said it wasn’t connected to Batman Begins.
So did Alfred fly Bruce to Asia or didn’t he?
So then if you had not seen Batman Begins that would not cover up the plothole then. Even with seeing it, it still does not cover up the plothole. However without seeing it, that plothole becomes even worse.
shareI clearly explained how you could watch TDKR and it would make sense. And regardless you said that I said that TDKR had nothing to do with Batman Begins which I didn’t. I said that TDKR tells it’s own individual story, I never said it wasn’t connected to Batman Begins. Also it isn’t a plot hole, you not being able to figure things out doesn’t constitute a problem with the film.
So did Alfred fly Bruce to Asia?
I did not say you said it was not connected, I said you said it could stand on it's own. So when I ask you to explain away the plothole you deflected to Batman Begins. Where in TDKR does it say he can become truly invisible? It is a plothole, do you know how long it takes to get a passport? A lot longer time than he had to get back.
shareIt can stand on its own because it tells its own story, it’s not 1/3 of a story, it’s one complete story. I never said it didn’t have references to the previous films.
So did Alfred fly Bruce to Asia?
Right but if it never states Bruce can become truly invisible in TDKR how was he able to get on the plane without being detected? How did he fly without a passport? You know it takes a while to get a passport correct?
shareDid Alfred fly Bruce to Asia or not?
shareDid Bane hijack a plane?
shareDid Alfred fly Bruce to Asia or not?
shareAs for your other question, this movie establishes that Bruce had the same training as Bane and Bane was able to move all around the world with little to no difficulty while being a well known international terrorist. So there you go, TDKR does stand on its own.
shareBane also had resources, henchmen and money which Bruce did not. So come again?
shareBane was also a wanted international terrorist and was actively being pursued by the CIA. Bruce was not, so come again?
shareSo terrorists can't fly or travel simply because they are wanted? Want to continue on with that statement or quit while you are ahead? Bane hijacked a plane because he had henchmen as well as resources. You know this happened in life before right? The hijacking of a plane occurs by terrorists. So um come again?
shareBeing actively hunted down by intelligence agencies will definitely make it hard for Bane to move around much like Bruce having “no resources” (which he didn’t have in Batman Begins yet was still able to move from place to place). So um come again?
shareWould make it difficult but it can be done. It was demonstrated he was able to hijack a plane in the beginning of the film. Second he had Alfred which had resources and money. He was the one who came to pick him up in Batman Begins. He did not have this in TDKR So um come again?
shareSo then Alfred flew Bruce to Asia? So come again?
shareSo you just side stepped your Bane point. So are you conceding that point? Sounds like you are. Second Alfred had control of the funds in TDKR he was completely broke.
shareFirst address my point. Did Alfred fly Bruce to Asia or didn’t he? We aren’t going anywhere until you answer this, don’t deflect.
shareI asked first buddy and you side stepped. You first.
shareDid Alfred fly Bruce to Asia or didn’t he? Did Alfred send resources over to Bruce while he was in a Bhutanese prison?
share