MovieChat Forums > The Batman (2022) Discussion > Bale / Nolan have some stiff competition...

Bale / Nolan have some stiff competition here


My son and I just got back from seeing this and both of us were jazzed by it. This is the best superhero movie I've seen since Bale / Nolan's version.

Affleck never seemed fully invested in the character, perhaps because his Batman was just one character in yet another series of movies about multiple superpowered beings squaring off against cosmic level villains. I'm more interested in 'street level' superheroes who dip their toes in vigilante-ism.

Although this movie is three hours long my son and I both agree that it never lagged. It's not balls-to-the-wall action either although there are some awesome sequences. There is an actual story about the relationships that unfold between the characters.

And no Joker! That alone deserves a round of applause. We really needed a break from him although we get a scene that introduces him at the end. Puhleeze, not again!

Dano's Riddler is nastier than any previous version we've seen of him.

Colin Farrell's Penguin doesn't get to do much here, but there's a promise of things to come in future movies or series. (There is a great visual gag though that made me chuckle.)

Zoe Kravitz as Catwoman hands down beats any previous version of the character, largely because she's not written as a cartoon, but as a genuinely damaged character with an arc of her own. And the fact she looks damn hot in a catsuit... yeah, that doesn't hurt either.

My two complaints:

1. We don't see enough of Andy Serkis' Alfred. One scene hints that the relationship between him and Bruce Wayne is more brittle than we've seen in past movies. We don't see enough of them together to know for sure.

2. As Batman, Pattinson is broody and intimidating. I had no idea that Pattinson was so tall. He's clearly worked out for the role, but he's not Ben Affleck jacked which is a plus. Affleck's Batman looked like he spent more time in the gym and drinking protein shakes than hitting the streets. Like Bale, Pattinson looks more combat ready, a balance between strength and nimbleness. And to the credit of Reeves and Pattinson, he dispenses with the raspy Batman voice which has become a cliche after 30 years.

As Bruce Wayne though, Pattinson is broody and emo. He looks more like the lead singer for a goth rock band. He passively shuffles his way through crowds without uttering more than a word or two to anyone in the entire movie. We have no sense of how he fits into Gotham high society. There's absolutely nothing of the alter-ego playboy billionaire meant to disguise his true identity. You could believe that someone could look separately at Batman and Bruce Wayne, and guess that they were the same person. In this respect, Bale's version is the better one.

I should mention the music too. I don't normally give it much attention when I see a movie, but Michael Giacchino's score stands out here. I saw this in IMAX though, so maybe that had some influence.

I liked it. I recommend it.

reply

Amen I agree wholeheartedly.

reply

I loved the movie. I thought them pushing into the noir-detective aspects was a great choice. I have no complaints with the actors, either, the worst of whom were "good", and the others were great (in my opinion).

The *look* of the film is beautiful. The feel of it... it's Gotham with its texture back (loved the Burton films' vibes and architecture - love it here). It's very moody and atmospheric.

I also really like that, nasty and dark though the film was, it still felt kinda "comic booky" like it wasn't worried about being "real".

Where I disagree with you is on Kravitz' Catwoman hands-down beating the previous versions. I liked her, but I prefer Pfeiffer. I can see why somebody would prefer this version, but hands down? No, the ballroom scene alone with Bruce and Selina straining against their duelling dual personae is so good, and Pfeiffer nails it. Plus, Eartha Kitt, man. She was playing a goofier version, but how do you not love Eartha Kitt?

My complaints are mostly nitpicks. I thought it was silly that the cops fired guns in the police station, but it's not like it spoiled the movie for me or anything.

Your point of Serkis/Alfred: yes. I wanted another scene of them nearer to the end to close off the arc set up in the beginning (about Bruce "taking an interest").

As to Pattinson, I liked him thoroughly from end-to-end. Yeah, he's super-gloomy and emo, but that's what this version is. Keaton has long been my favourite Batman, but I think Pattinson's close, and I mean that as Bats and Wayne. Part of the story of this film is Bruce's struggle with who he is and who he is becoming. Pattinson is doing that so well. I actually found it refreshing that they didn't retread the "playboy persona smokescreen". I think that's been overdone. I know it's in the comics, but Riddler isn't usually portrayed as a psychopath in the comics, either. Besides, it's just year two; plenty of time for him to develop over sequels.

You're *dead right* with the music, too. It was gorgeous.

reply

"I loved the movie. I thought them pushing into the noir-detective aspects was a great choice. I have no complaints with the actors, either, the worst of whom were "good", and the others were great (in my opinion).

The *look* of the film is beautiful. The feel of it... it's Gotham with its texture back (loved the Burton films' vibes and architecture - love it here). It's very moody and atmospheric."

Yes, to both.

I found the look of Gotham here less gothic than Burton's version which was a bit cartoony. No oversized stylized gargoyles and such here. This Gotham looks more like a gloomy New York city, everything in muted shades of grey and umber.

The Halloween street scene in the rain at the beginning reminded me a lot of Bladerunner's similar scenes of people shuffling through rain soaked streets. Both are neo-noir takes on their respective genres so no surprise there.

I would like to see Pattinson adopt more of the traditional Bruce Wayne persona in future installations. A different take might be to see him actually struggle with the persona, maybe barely keeping the real Bruce Wayne/ Batman under control in certain situations. Almost like the way a serial killer must struggle to keep their dark impulses in check moving around in public.

Remember that brilliant Superman scene with Christopher Reeve where Clark Kent is about to reveal to Lois -- who is in another room -- that he is Superman? Reeve takes off his glasses, he stands taller, his shoulders subtly square off, his expression becomes more determined, his voice gets deeper. Then he changes his mind and in an instant we see him morph back into his alter-ego. It was a great scene and demonstration of the power of body language.

-- cont'd below --



reply

In my head I picture a similar scene with Pattinson. We see him standing behind someone as Bruce Wayne. Someone evil. We see the carefree billionaire literally morph into his dark alter-ego by the change in his body language and facial expression. The evil character is surprised by the new tone in Bruce Wayne's voice. When he turns to face him though we'd see Batman literally 'dissolve away' back into innocuous Bruce Wayne.

I'm always thinking of stuff like this.

Anyway, yes, I've been recommending this movie since seeing it yesterday.

reply

I don't think of Burton's films as cartoony. I think of them as living comic books, which might technically sound like "cartoony", but the difference is that I find them more translations than send-ups. I don't get why people say "Oh, they're campy." They're not campy, even if they do know how to have fun sometimes, but they are stylized. Campy suggests something more like the Adam West show - something silly and vapid. The psychodrama is real there.

That Hallowe'en street scene was marvellous. I wanted to spend more time on Hallowe'en in Gotham, it was so rich and creepy looking! The Blade Runner reference is a good one.

If they decide he's going to have the playboy smoke-screen, sure, but for now I just enjoyed a different direction. I've seen it done so much in the comics and the Nolan films really pushed that angle, and I like that this film had something new.

I do really like your idea for the body language thing. That could be a good moment in a sequel.

My main hopes for the sequel are that they show Batman getting more into his role, maybe turning the tables on Riddler (and Joker...?) a bit, in terms of the mind games. I kinda want him to get a little revenge (or put up more of a fight) in terms of stymieing villainous schemes.

I would like to see Bruce get back in touch with his humanity, but not just to craft a public persona. I want to see him reevaluate his life and maybe make a very small, hard-won victory for managing his trauma and pain.

And I'd like to see a Catwoman rival. Dangle an angel to Selina's devil in front of Bruce. Almost like, "Give up crime-fighting, be normal," and have part of that life be...I dunno, Julie Madison, maybe? Of course, the Siren of the Night, Vesper Fairchild, would fit into the super-dark Gotham we're seeing. The late-night call-in show girl (showgirl?) has a sultry, unseen aspect that plays thematically. Now, she appeared on Batwoman played by Rachel Maddow, and I don't think that version would work...

For villains, I'd like to see Killer Croc make an appearance as some muscle. Victor Zsasz would really fit in. Two-face would be awesome in this universe, too. I'd actually like to see them play with his morality. Instead of just making him a villain, make him a psychotic vigilante as much as a bank robber. Have him keep the D.A. job for awhile post-scarring. (The Phantom of the Opera thing wouldn't play with juries, though, which would anger him). Maybe his life falls apart more because of it and then he snaps? It'd be nice to see Poison Ivy in a serious film, too.

I'd LOVE to see Man-bat. But I don't know if they're prepared to go supernatural. Well, one thing at a time. He's still got a lot of organized crime to fight with Penguin and the other power players filling the vacuum left at the end of the picture. And Riddler and Joker look like they're coming in.

reply

Killer Croc and Man-bat are too fantasy for me. I've no interest in another Joker variation myself. There so many others in the rogues' gallery to explore beyond the usual ones.

I definitely want to see more of Catwoman. The two of them have this dynamic. Each of them stand on either side of that line between right and wrong, each of them tries the pull the other one to their side. A rival could be interesting in the hands of a good writer as long as they don't re-do the too-sweet-to-be-believable Rachel from Nolan's trilogy.

I'd love to good Poison Ivy done right. Uma Thurman's version was... not well done and the character was caught up in the mess that was Schumaker's movie. Make her motives pure -- fighting deforestation, climate change or similar -- but make the means horrible in their application. An examination of the classic dilemma: Does the end justify the means? (Which is sort of the same dilemma that Batman faces so there's a symmetry there.)

I guess we're in for a long wait in the meantime.

reply

Killer Croc can be done as more just a heavy with self-sharpened teeth or something. In the comics he sometimes looks like an alligator man and sometimes he just looks like a mob enforcer with callouses. I'm thinking more the latter.

The fantasy element could work, but yeah, it might not work in the universe as they're setting it up.

They'll bring back Catwoman, I'm sure. They set it up that they'll meet again.

What kills me most about Uma Thurman's Poison Ivy is that Thurman herself was fine and capable of turning in a great performance, but she was stuck in the goofy one. Not that goofy can't be fun...

Black Mask would be a good fit for this world, too.

If Reeves continues on the track he's set down for himself, I think he'll give us something amazing.

reply

I'm generally not a fan of superhero movies but I really enjoyed Nolan's Batman trilogy.

I am looking forward to seeing this version.

reply

I think you'll like it if you like Nolan's 'realistic' take.

It really would be hard for me to pick one over the other. Comparing Nolan's first movie in his trilogy to this one, I'd probably give the slight edge to Nolan's. Honestly though there's so much to like in both versions that I'd be hard pressed to debate with someone who preferred this one.

reply

It’s the movie Se7en with more rain somehow. Also batman is never actually Bruce Wayne in this. He’s just the Batman

reply

"Also batman is never actually Bruce Wayne in this. He’s just the Batman"

Exactly. Billionaire Bruce Wayne is a disguise... an early work in progress. I hope. I'm not sure I want to see two more movies with mopey Bruce Wayne though.

The end voiceover suggested that he's starting to lighten up so we'll see where that goes with the next one.

reply