MovieChat Forums > The Batman (2022) Discussion > Dumb movie with many UNANSWERED question...

Dumb movie with many UNANSWERED questions [spoiler]

posted 3 years ago by jhodess (84)
50 replies | jump to latest

1- How did The Riddler knew so much about EVERYTHING?
-How could he have linked the death of the journalist with Falcone?
-Knowing that Batman was Bruce Wayne for years, how could he have come up with such a SHIT plan? What a fucking waste of a character that was "brilliant" all along, including getting himself caught... why?

2- The emo batman, with hair blocking his eyes and the emo walk in many scenes, like a lost teenager.

3- The whispers between Batman, Gordon, Falcone and the commissary.

4- The scene where the black dude only had half of his make-up applied so we knew that he was black. And after his redemption, the asian guy, that saw Batman saving him, shout “Don’t hurt me”. Really, dude?

5- The opening, much like a mix of Rorschach and Taxi Driver. Too dumb for adults and too 'grown up' for kids.

6- The catwoman, weighing 50 pounds, was more like a superhero than a normal person with martial abilities. How did she acquire it? And why would she have a stunning cat suit and a horrible unfit face mask?

7- Summarizing the movie, Batman had no major impact on the overall story. The solved riddles led to next to nothing. The blonde girl died. The prosecutor died. Falcone died. The Penguin lived to be the next villain. The vans exploded.

8- The weird pace of some scenes. Too many slow motions; too many shots that lasted forever, breaking the rhythm that was already slow.

9- Batman suit could endure all kind of bullet calibers until it couldn’t.

10- Batman’s car was already in the place where he and Gordon followed Penguin to the drug manufacture. How? And the chase scene was horrible, and led to nothing, again.

11- So the ‘big crime’ was stealing the funds of the Wayne’s family for the last 20 years? WHAT? THE? FUCK?

12- How was Falcone being a ‘rat’ benefits him? (I could have misunderstood that)

13- Catwoman’s mom took her to her mom’s job from a young age. Way to go! Also, growing up without a father isn’t that big of a deal. She shouldn’t be so hurt to use it as an excuse to rob millions as Batman was heartfelt for his parents for the last 20 years. Come on, son.

14- The movie feels like an episode of something that was supposed to be bigger. The characters don’t evolve. We don’t have much clue about the perception of the city on batman. Or Riddler’s obsession in Batman, apart from that brief and pathetic explanation in the asylum. We were simply ‘thrown’ in a batman episode for 3 hours.

[–] jhodess (84) 3 years ago

15- The recently orphan kid, that batman stared for at least a dozen times in different moments, led to nothing at the end, not even some comfort words from Bruce.

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 3 years ago

The point of the orphan, aside from the parallels to Batman himself, have to do with who Batman is at the beginning and end of the film. At the start, he is "vengeance," and is just some horrible, avenging demon going from baddie to baddie and pummelling them.

As Bruce learns more about the kind of wake he's leaving behind him (specifically about the Riddler thinking he was "with" Batman and about the thug on the catwalk) Batman realizes that he isn't as heroic as he thought and he need to be more than just vengeance.

At the beginning of the film he can't offer comfort to the boy. I sat in the theatre wishing Bruce would go over and say something to help the kid, because Bruce knows more than anyone what rending that kid's soul is going through in those moments. But he's incapable of helping and healing. At the end of the movie, he becomes a light in the darkness as much as the darkness and helps people instead of just protecting them. He's starting to heal the scars of his own orphan soul, and he now can move forward as a hero and a person.

[–] jhodess (84) 3 years ago

That's hardly something that I will dwell on. Just something that bothered me because the movie kept showing it to me.

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 3 years ago

I liked those moments because of the way they were used to highlight Bruce's journey as well as to connect to him.

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 3 years ago

1. It might be nice to know more about how Riddler figured this stuff out, but a genius intellect, obsessive personality, and years of research over it are the explanations. We see this in his obsession-riddled apartment. The journalist's murder probably wasn't too hard to figure out.

1a. He didn't know Bruce was Batman. He failed there.

2., 3. Personal taste - I liked these elements just fine (although wasn't wild on emo Bruce).

4. What's the problem here?

5. Personal taste. I liked it.

6. Martial arts training will close gaps. She was bested by Batman, so they didn't make her a fighting machine. I'll give you the mask. I'd like that improved in sequels.

7. Batman's arc was about realizing who he was as a hero and how to not become those he hated, as well as how to rise above them. Batman did fail a lot, but most heroes do for the first chunks of movies. It gives them a place to go in the last act.

8. Personal taste; I liked the pacing.

9. Granted. It wasn't clear to me why he could absorb automatic gunfire in the hallway and not at another moment, but this is no worse than most action movies and it didn't bother me too much.

10. I thought Batman drove there separately...? Maybe I missed something. The chase lead to Penguin's arrest which lead to more information about the larger case. This is pretty normal in a detective story.

11. The big crime was the Riddler, but the embezzlement of funds and defrauding of a charity wasn't the big crime of the mob, the staggering levels of corruption were, and the Wayne fund theft was part of that, not the entirety. It also affected Bruce more because he felt like he was linked to the criminals and if he spent more time on his personal life instead of as Batman he might have been able to figure this out faster.

12. Not sure what you're getting at here entirely, but Falcone made a lot of backroom deals to save his own hide and eliminate his competition.

13. Yeah, Selina's mom was a bad mother, although it's also a dark, true commentary on poverty that sometimes people are forced into no-win scenarios where they can't afford childcare and have to do stuff like this. But, yes, that's not a great "mom" moment. Growing up without a father, statistically, has a huge impact on kids. But, yes, it shouldn't be an excuse. Still, I thought it was a well-written character and I know of people who think like this. "I was wronged, so I'm getting mine now." It's one of the reasons Catwoman is a flawed character (and therefore more believable than a paragon of virtue and more of an interesting foil for Batman).

14. It felt like a good story to me, not an episode of a bigger thing (although I'd love a sequel). The characters did evolve and I don't know why you don't think they did. As to the perception of the city, Gotham's portrait here was one of the best parts of the film and was amazing. I thought this is also a great portrait of Batman himself.

[–] maul (1635) 3 years ago

Why get himself caught, if all it led to was a monologue behind bars to Batman?

*Edited out an apparently incorrect statement. Apparently. I'm not fully convinced.

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 3 years ago

"Bruce. Wayne. He's the only one we didn't get. But we got the rest of 'em, didn't we?"

He didn't know Batman was Bruce. He refers to them separately and never gives any indication that he knows outside of chanting "Bruce Wayne" with Batman in the room, but as the rest of the monologue reveals (in the quote above) he isn't outing Batman's identity, he's just a little upset they "missed one".

[–] Darren (1344) 3 years ago

Exactly. I thought it was abundantly clear. When the Riddler kept saying "Bruuuuuuce. Waaaaayne." you could see Batman looking anxiously toward the security camera, clearly anticipating being outed on camera, any second, complete with recorded audio. He's just bracing himself. Then when the Riddler says "he's the only one we didn't get," -- note he's the only one, not you're the only one -- you can see it dawn on him that Nashton actually has no idea he's talking to Bruce Wayne at that very moment. Another giveaway is the contemptuous manner in which the Riddler describes Bruce as not really an orphan, because he has all that money and doesn't know what it was like in the hellish conditions of the neglected orphanage, juxtaposed with the admiration in his speech for Batman, until he realizes Batman isn't on his side at all.

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 3 years ago

Oh, it's such a good moment. Pattinson does a great job of displaying that feeling you get when your stomach turns into ice and feels like it's just dropping and dropping without end. So good. And that moment of relief is great, too. I love that Riddler's not *quite* as clever as he thinks he is. It's a great scene.

[–] maul (1635) 3 years ago

Was it really abundantly clear, with the overly dramatic pronunciation and repetition of the name, and specifically talking about Bruce's upbringing and how he wasn't a real orphan? Why would all that be relevant to Batman, if he wasn't Bruce? Not to mention how Riddler was acting in that scene... he has this highly intricate plan which is played out perfectly, has unbelievable knowledge about the inner workings of the city and its players, yet illogically thinks that Batman would be on his side and willing to flood Gotham?

I didn't think this conversation was being played completely straight because it would be so ridiculous... but apparently it was. So him saying "he's the only one we didn't get" did not dissuade me from believing he knew Bruce was Batman, because it was no more nebulous or facetious than him believing Batman to actually be working with him and supporting his plan. I wasn't taking every statement at absolute face value. My mistake.

But at the same time, if we are to take this at face value and believe that Riddler illogically believed Batman would support his plan, couldn't he also want to protect his real identity? Either way, I'm not seeing how this was abundantly clear, at all.

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 2 years ago

Bruce's upbring is relevant to Batman because Bruce was one of the targets. In the Riddler's mind, Batman and Riddler were working together to eliminate these people. He feels like he's chatting with his comrade-in-arms. That's why he got so upset when Batman said "I'm nothing like you."

The movie has issues, but it really sounds like you weren't paying attention to the movie at all.

[–] maul (1635) 2 years ago

It really sounds like you weren't paying attention to my post at all because you didn't adequately answer anything I said.

It makes zero sense why he would think Batman would be his comrade-in-arms (especially with his borderline supernatural knowledge of Gotham and its players), and him over-emphasizing the name "BRUUUCCEE.... WAAYNE" and specifically going on and on about Bruce's background and the true meaning of being an orphan (which has all the relevance in the world if he's talking to Bruce, but none to an unknown Batman) is the opposite of something being "abundantly clear".

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 2 years ago

Your first question.

Was it really abundantly clear, with the overly dramatic pronunciation and repetition of the name, and specifically talking about Bruce's upbringing and how he wasn't a real orphan? Why would all that be relevant to Batman, if he wasn't Bruce?

My response.

Bruce's upbring is relevant to Batman because Bruce was one of the targets. In the Riddler's mind, Batman and Riddler were working together to eliminate these people. He feels like he's chatting with his comrade-in-arms.

I hadn't bothered to respond to your second concern, because if it's not readily obvious to you why a delusional sociopath like the Riddler would make the mistake that the Batman is his ally, there's nothing I can say to convince you.

specifically going on and on about Bruce's background and the true meaning of being an orphan (which has all the relevance in the world if he's talking to Bruce, but none to an unknown Batman)

Again...one more time.

"Bruce's upbring is relevant to Batman because Bruce was one of the targets. In the Riddler's mind, Batman and Riddler were working together to eliminate these people. He feels like he's chatting with his comrade-in-arms."

You don't believe why Riddler would have this delusion. But factually, he does, and that's exactly why he's overemphasizing the name. That's literally the reason.

[–] jhodess (84) 3 years ago

"He's the only one we didn't get"

Why "we"?. This Riddler is beyond egocentric. And such an unsophisticated way to get Bruce, a simple bomb in an envelope, isn't his style AT ALL. Like we learned from the movie, The Riddler was simply BRILLIANT.

[–] Corbell (10995) 3 years ago

1. Because he imagined that he and The Batman were working together.

2. Good question about how odd the envelope was. The harsh critic would say, it is so that that part of the plot can fail. The generous critic would say it was because Bruce Wayne was too hard to get too, so he had to use what he could.

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 3 years ago

Yes and yes.

To the last point, it's interesting that Bruce almost entirely neglecting his personal life made him a recluse in an impenetrable fortress. His non-existence couldn't be planned around. Riddler couldn't do anything but just mail a bomb.

[–] Corbell (10995) 3 years ago

The moral of this story is being a nerd with no friends and certainly no girlfriends, is a good thing. Something the 13 year old boy living inside me, can respect. lol.

It does work from a comic book logic pov too. The playboy cover was also so that no one would think that Bruce Wayne was the kind of guy to be batman.

BUT, not having any life at all, makes it easy to hide all the time you spend being batman.

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 3 years ago

Yup. Why do you think I spend so much time on message boards? I'm harder to unibomb this way.

[–] Corbell (10995) 3 years ago

lol. Good one. I mean, Very wise.

[–] jhodess (84) 3 years ago

1. Because he imagined that he and The Batman were working together.

Are you f#cking kidding me? "They were working together"? How old are you? He acted dumb and he was definitely crazy, so is Joker, but both have clear goals and their craziness don't start abruptly.

[–] FilmBuff (7239) 3 years ago

Dude, rewatch it. He has no idea Bruce Wayne is Batman. He literally says to Batman that the only place they failed was at killing Wayne. He expects Batman to kill Wayne for him. Just like nearly everything on your list, the problem isn't the movie, it is your inability to understand the movie. Stick to simpler fare.

[–] davodikum (6198) 3 years ago

[deleted]

[–] maul (1635) 3 years ago

It wasn't my list, so maybe you have an inability to read usernames before you respond. Anyway, I'm more than willing to admit if I made a mistake on this detail, but going so far as to indicate that this is some complex movie is truly hilarious. I also notice that you haven't responded to anything else on said list (which again, wasn't mine).

[–] FilmBuff (7239) 3 years ago

I clicked reply to the wrong post, and was responding to the original poster and his list. And apparently it is much too complex for him, if he couldn't even understand the most pivotal, and gripping, moment in the entire film.

[–] jhodess (84) 3 years ago

You HAVE to have some common sense about '11', the embezzlement of funds of Wayne's foundation. The corrupt cop said that this very thing was the reason that the city was run over by corrupts for over 20 years. This REALLY IMPORTANT thing fell short in the movie and was never brought up again.

Your explanation for '12' is on par with the movie, very brief and deficient. Just because you can come with AN answer, doesn't mean it is fitting answer.

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 3 years ago

So, the Wayne funds were part of the crime problem, not all of it. I remember it being brought up a couple times. And, yes, that much capital would have been a major funding source for anything; it was designed to be a major funding source. It just got taken over by a corrupt element. The main story though, wasn't about it, just used it, so that's maybe why it isn't dwelt upon too much?

My explanation for 12 included my own question about not being sure what specifically you were referring to. Can you clarify what you mean? Falcone ratted on his boss to send him up the river which opened the doors for Falcone to take over the underworld (if I recall correctly). Is that what you're referring to?

[–] jhodess (84) 3 years ago

So you basically agree that the 'Wayne funds' segment was flawed and almost childlike.

About Falcone being a rat, yes we all got it. The main part is, HOW? Tjat would invole MANY ACTORS. The prosecutor alone said that he was getting paid 10k a month for something that was already put to bed. And he disclosed that information in 10 seconds to a stranger. Are you kidding me??

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 3 years ago

No, I don't agree that it was flawed or childlike.

See, that's why I needed clarification because I thought you were talking more generally about Falcone being a rat. The nitty-gritty of payments didn't bother me when I watched it. I also can't quote you numbers on who was being paid off how much and when by whom because I didn't go back a second time and take notes.

[–] maul (1635) 3 years ago

Also, what was the point of Riddler revealing his plan under the carpet? Had Batman discovered it earlier, he would have foiled the whole thing, no? In fact, he said he was surprised that he hadn't figured it out. Did he actually, non-jokingly think that Batman was going to go along with such a thing, and let Gotham be flooded? On what basis? None of it makes sense.

[–] Darren (1344) 3 years ago

Gee, a mass-murdering psychopath calculates wrongly, and makes erroneous assumptions because he's insane! Oh, yeah, that's real hard to swallow.

[–] jhodess (84) 3 years ago

This "mass-murdering psychopach" was a brilliant killer, detective and always a step ahead of batman and the police that chose to get caught. So yes, it is a flawed non-sensical part of the movie.

[–] Darren (1344) 3 years ago

No, it's not. He's INSANE. I don't think you understand what that really means. Truly brilliant people can and do lose their sanity (e.g. Friedrich Nietzsche). Guess what happens when they do: they can no longer function properly in the real world even though their intelligence is not diminished in any way. Being insane means that on some level your mind is not functioning properly, and is living partly or wholly in an unreal world. Your perception of things becomes distorted, wrong. How would you NOT expect a person under these conditions not to make serious mistakes?

Thomas Harris, the creator of Hannibal Lecter understood this perfectly, and Will Graham, protagonist of "Red Dragon" catches Lecter in the end, even while admitting Lector is much cleverer than he is.

Will Graham: I know that I'm not smarter than you.

Doctor Hannibal Lecter:Then how did you catch me?

Will Graham: You had disadvantages.

Doctor Hannibal Lecter: What disadvantages?

Will Graham: You're insane.

A person with serious mental illness has impaired mental faculties, and cannot perceive the world with 100% accuracy, so why would you expect a person suffering some form of irrationality to make exclusively 100% rational calculations? It's like looking at a map, but being unable to see the whole thing properly. Of course you're going to get lost somewhere along your route.

[–] jhodess (84) 3 years ago

Deus Ex-Machina alright. So because he is insane, let's expect anything from him. Although 95% of his work was marvelous, he ended what he planned like a complete fool. But that's ok.

[–] maul (1635) 3 years ago

So he's highly intelligent, essentially knows everything, performs his plan perfectly... until he doesn't, for no logical reason. That's called bad writing.

[–] jhodess (84) 3 years ago

Thank you.

[–] moviefanatic505 (6126) 3 years ago

If characters always made the logical choice they would not be actual characters. Humans are fallible, even the most intelligent criminals make mistakes. That is what makes us human.

[–] maul (1635) 3 years ago

That's just a complete cop out of an explanation, a flimsy excuse that could be rolled out in so many instances of bad writing. If you set up a character as highly intelligent, detail-oriented, etc. and just randomly have them make a huge mistake out of nowhere to progress the plot, that is absolutely indicative of bad writing.

This wasn't even presented as a mistake, as Riddler implied that he expected Batman to figure out his plan. Why, after being presented as highly intelligent, and having incredible knowledge about the city and its occupants, would he ever expect Batman to go along with flooding Gotham? Why on Earth would he not expect Batman to foil his plan?

Character motivations, mistakes, and actions need to make sense within the framework of the film. This didn't.

[–] moviefanatic505 (6126) 3 years ago

No it is the truth of the matter. It actually adds more to a story when a character is flawed.

He stated I guess I gave you too much credit. This was the mistake he made. Batman was only known to be scary to people. He was not known as some boy scout hero. Which is why at the end Batman realizes he needs to be more than just fear but a beacon of hope for the people. This demonstrates that.

No actually it did. You just do not like the film. Guess what though a movie does not need your stamp of approval in order for others to consider it a great film. There will be a sequel to this film. No amount of your whining will change this. The movie was a critical hit and a hit among users. It was a financial success as well. Deal with it.

[–] maul (1635) 3 years ago

Where did I say I didn't like the film? What the hell does the movie being a critical hit or a financial success have absolutely anything to do with this discussion? Ridiculous deflection. You clearly are just a juvenile, belligerent fanboy who will defend any aspect of it regardless of whether it's illogical or not.

Like I said, character motivations, mistakes, and actions need to make sense within the framework of the film. There was no logical or believable explanation given for him making such a mistake, and you have yet to provide one. Saying "Batman was only known to be scary to people" is complete nonsense. He was known to fight criminals and protect their victims - there's literally an entire sequence right in the beginning of the film dedicated to this fundamental concept. Criminals specifically fear him, because he fights crime. Duh.

Would an average person also be fearful of such a person who lurks in the dark and looks as he does? Sure, but there's absolutely nothing to indicate that he would be willing to flood Gotham and let innocent people die in the process. Especially to someone like Riddler who apparently has infinite knowledge about the city's inner workings, and knows Batman works with the police and goes after criminals. But hey, keep fanboying out.

[–] moviefanatic505 (6126) 3 years ago

You act as if your opinion is fact. Answer my question can smart people make mistakes? Nope this is not even my favorite Batman film try again. I just do not respect when people act is if you need to get through them in order to have an opinion on a film. That is not how it works. Ditch the entitled attitude.

It made perfect sense within the context of the film. He thought Batman would figure the clue out. He thought Batman was a poor person like he was. The reason Batman did not know about the clue he left was because how would he know that he grew up rich. Then why did the police turn on him? You miss the part where the cop said is he involved in this? How do you know he could be a suspect. This showcases sometimes it is not clear as to what side Batman appears on to people. So nope wrong.

Cops turn on Batman and Riddler does not like corrupt cops, either does Batman. Thanks for helping prove my point. Since Batman acts outside the law he saw it as them being similar to each other. Both Riddler and Batman are vigilantes. Batman is just good and Riddler is evil.

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 3 years ago

Batman is Chaotic Good. Riddler is Chaotic Evil who thinks he is Lawful Good because he only respects his laws.

[–] moviefanatic505 (6126) 3 years ago

Ha yeah true. That is a great way of putting it. You worded that quite nicely. Good job.

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 3 years ago

Thanks go to Gary Gygax, I think.

[–] Goliard (1421) 3 years ago

Maul: this is an interesting perspective, because it reminds me of the complaint a lot of people level against Superman: "He's too perfect; he's OverPowered! Booooring! Impossible to take seriously!" Etc.

You seem to be flipping it: The villain is too powerful; the only way to beat him is to nerf his abilities at crucial junctures.

It's the reason the BvS fight was so absurd to me.

While I get it, I (for now, at least) can forgive the concept that this particular brilliant criminal is also intrinsically flawed. And that some of his flaws are tied directly to his insanity.

So I guess I get what both of you are saying.

Sigh. Gonna have to watch the movie again. . .

[–] fc31 (5434) 3 years ago

1- How did The Riddler knew so much about EVERYTHING?

He was a forensic accountant, which is kind of a detective in accounting world, and he had the chance to look at "the renewal" file, probably through the accounting firm he worked at.

Then I think the batman inspired him to become a vigilante.

[–] jhodess (84) 2 years ago

Forensic accountant doesn't mean that you're omniscient. This villain would make the most genius villain in all of the stories. Also, he's also an expert assassin that breaks a guarded mansion and kills undetected and has time to leave idiotic clues.

[–] fc31 (5434) 2 years ago

He was not, that was why he knew nothing about batman.

I never killed before, so I can't tell you how hard it is to be an assassin.

[–] millsey72 (10334) 3 years ago

They are not unanswered questions. They are plot holes

[–] LoveCatsHateDogs (1952) 3 years ago

Maybe Catwoman learned some poledancing skills (like when we see her rappeling down the rope, and it looks like she is sliding down a stripper pole, lol) and used that muscle conditioning to deliver all those high kicks.

Just saying.

[–] Otter (24464) 2 years ago

Here's a bigass unanswered question:

Who the hell builds a major coastal city that's UNDER sea level? One that can be flooded by any major storm or a wackjob with a car bomb?

I mean the city was easily flooded on an ordinary day with normal weather conditions, no flooding or storm surge or anything!