This movie blows. - The Batman (2022) Discussion

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

I was okay with it but it's not a movie I'd rewatch. I thought Patterson did well as Batman. But, you're right about the length.

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4423) 2 years ago

I enjoyed it more than I thought I would. Pattinson was a really good Batman.

But yeah, the film could've easily been 20-30 minutes shorter

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

I should give the makeup a shout out. Collin Ferrell's penguin was really good.

But, I still wouldn't want to see it again.

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4423) 2 years ago

Are you excited for the Penguin spinoff series on HBO Max? Or the announced Arkham Asylum spinoff?

Personally, I'm looking forward to the sequel but that's about it.

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

No. I had not heard of it yet. I'll look into it. I tend to avoid TV shows that have 1 story for 8 episodes.

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4423) 2 years ago

I honestly don't like how they're all doing the "everything is connected" thing

You have to watch the individual shows plus the films & animation just to get the references & keep up with the story.

Sorry but that just feels like I'm doing homework. And it just starts to feel like a chore

reply

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 2 years ago

Hopefully it's not like the Disney+ MCU thing. Maybe it'll just be an interesting story about the Penguin that's just conveniently in the same world. And that it won't matter at all for the Batman sequel if you've watched it or not. I'd like to see more of Ferrell so I'm just down for that.

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4423) 2 years ago

I really really hope that's the case. Farrell was pretty good with the limited screen time he got.

And I'm also glad that it's not in James Gunn's DCU plans.

Cause with his plans, everything is gonna be connected. From films to shows, animations & games.

reply

[–] Ace_Spade (9551) 2 years ago

When Todd Phillips was asked about Joker getting a sequel and he basically said, no, and that he just wanted to focus on that film, I was ecstatic.

The MCU did a lot of fun things with making a multi-movie event, but sometimes it's nice to get a standalone or a unique take on something.

Yeah, it does feel like a chore. I always found the Ultimate Marvel universe to be, ultimately, ironic because they started it up in response to Spider-man movies and X-Men movies coming out and a wave of new fans getting overwhelmed by decades of continuity and mythology. So, Ultimates got started to give those fans a clear path into comics - great idea. But the irony is that the MCU eventually became like the comics were: convoluted crossovers.

Weird that comic fans came to hate "crossover events" but hailed it as awesome in the films...

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4423) 2 years ago

I feel like they're going with quantity over quality. Pushing out so much mediocrity in the process.

Don't get me wrong, the MCU was never perfect but we always got more good things than bad.

We got 18 films leading up to Infinity War. That's 19 films in 10 years. 2-3 films a year used to excite people.

But now, we've gotten 15 projects since January last year. That's 7 films & 8 shows.

And James Gunn is building his own 10 year planned universe with DC

I just feel burnt out on the whole genre. I do NOT hate them, they just don't excite me as much as they used to.

reply

[–] Ace_Spade (9551) 2 years ago

Yup. Me, too. 100% in agreement, and "burnt out" is exactly the right phrase.

Honestly, I started getting worn down around Age of Ultron. That was when the "MCU Formula" started being palpable to me, and I felt like a weird, puny geek version of Neo: seeing the "code" everywhere.

I'm not saying that formula doesn't produce fun movies. I like them when I watch them. I just don't get excited.

Marvel gathered momentum, DC is still flailing around trying to play catch-up, and both of them are just bulldozing theatres with the same two movies (MCU fun time! DC gloom!) over and over again.

The individual projects are more fun. The Batman I really like. Joker I like. Deadpool felt fresh. Logan, while a sequel, did its own "thing" in terms of aesthetics and vibe - those are some of the best superhero movies of the latter part of this trend, and it's because those filmmakers got to make something they really wanted to do instead of being shackled to the same tone, vibe, and aesthetic that the rest of the MC/DC Universes established.

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4423) 2 years ago

I really enjoyed The Batman more than I thought I would. It was pretty darn good. Finally, a freaking noir (live action) Batman story.

Also, Werewolf by Night. That was fantastic. I enjoy things like that. Things that aren't bogged down by a shared universe. Something that doesn't feel formulaic.

In my opinion, The MCU shows try new things & actually try to be original but by the final 2 episodes, they just turn into formulaic MCU offerings.

reply

[–] Ace_Spade (9551) 2 years ago

I had reasonably high expectations for The Batman - just a touch of trepidation - but the reality outran my apprehension.

I haven't seen any of the MCU shows, but it doesn't surprise me that that's the way they go. I find that happens a lot, where even "experimental" stuff winds up dwindling to formulae by the end of the third act. But it's hard to do a superhero show without having it come to that. Heck, even getting out of the gravitational pull of the current formula would probably just have the story come off like a bit of a Watchmen derivative.

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4423) 2 years ago

There's this Marvel show called "Legion". It's my second favorite Comicbook show of all time.

It's not MCU. Don't know if you've seen it or heard of it. It's one of those shows that you either love or hate. There's no in-between. It's pretty out there.

Anyways, just like WandaVision, it's pretty unique & very experimental but unlike WV, it doesn't turn into a formulaic superhero project towards the end. It stays its own thing up until the very end.

reply

[–] Ace_Spade (9551) 2 years ago

I don't have Disney+ right now, but I'll put it on my list if/when I get that platform. I like weird stuff. Even if I don't love them, I'd rather watch something that was flawed but interesting and experimental than something a little more "quality" but that just plays formulae straight.

I'd probably watch WandaVision, too, though.

If it's not officially MCU, that's why. They can't go too far out of the box on an official part of the MCU because they have to keep hitting the very specific marks.

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4423) 2 years ago

Even with that shit finale, I'd still recommend WandaVision. It was absolutely fantastic!

That finale felt very "studio mandated". God, it was awful.

reply

[–] FilmBuff (7238) 2 years ago

I went back to the theater less than a week later to see it again, and then watched it via streaming since. I love the pacing of the movie, and the way it unfolds. For my taste it's the best Batman film yet made.

reply

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4423) 2 years ago

Personally, the best Batman film is an animated one. It's called, "Batman: Under the Red Hood"

That & Mask of the Phantasm are some of the most excellent comicbook films of all time, in my opinion.

reply

[–] FilmBuff (7238) 2 years ago

I'm not an animated film/ cartoon person in general, but if it's the best, I'll check those out.

reply

[–] R_Kane (15828) 2 years ago

“I enjoyed it more than I thought I did”?

Did you misremember your own memory?

Where did you say you got your doctorate from, “Doctor”?

reply

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 2 years ago

wow. you really are the worst person on this site.

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

[deleted]

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7704) 2 years ago

I liked it a bit but they should have just ended it after Riddler was arrested. We didn't need that whole plot of the the dam blowing up and Gotham flooding.

reply

[–] LogicalLeftist (869) 2 years ago

agreed they clearly felt they needed some big "ending set piece" and without it it'd be anti climatic. maybe have the set piece before the arrest idk

reply

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 2 years ago

That would leave Batman's entire narrative arc without an ending.

reply

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7704) 2 years ago

Not necessarily. I mainly am just talking about Riddler getting locked up and then Catwoman and Batman going there separate ways. The flooding of Gotham and the whole thing of Riddler having followers doing more terrorist acts just seemed like a forced way of extending the story. The movie didn't need to be 3 hours long.

reply

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 2 years ago

But that's what I'm talking about though. Batman's character development in this movie needs the flooding event (or something equivalent) to happen. The unmasked riddler terrorist finally opened his eyes and showed him how problematic his approach to defending Gotham is. (It didn't quite click for him until that moment as he'd just dismissed Riddler's delusional views on their relationship). The subsequent sacrifice helped establish the people's trust in him, and the follow up recovery efforts pushed him into the light as beacon of hope. A nice bookend since the first time we see him in the movie, the person he saves doesn't even realized they're being saved lol

The movie didn't need to be 3 hours long. There's a few small side scenes that could have been cut. And everyone could have spoken maybe just 10% faster. But I do think the flooding thing is integral to the movie.

reply

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7704) 2 years ago

Let's just agree to disagree.

reply

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 2 years ago

I was curious about your take on the movie if you felt like it was complete before the third act. That's why I bothered to share my own perspective in such detail. But whatever. No big deal.

reply

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7704) 2 years ago

Sorry. I liked it a bit. Some pluses were Batman having Catwoman infiltrate the mob hang out, Catwoman herself was good, and Riddler was pretty good. I admit I didn't care for Catwoman being that mob boss' daughter. Other than that it was a little too long with a little too many plotlines. I could've also gone without Bruce's parents being connected to the mob boss too.

reply

[–] Ace_Spade (9551) 2 years ago

I know what you're getting at - with the film running long and dragging for a bit at the Act 3 start - but I did think Act 3 was necessary as far as Batman's character development goes. I do think the film could have/should have been shorter, but that's a quibble for me. I loved it, pretty much end-to-end.

reply

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 2 years ago

Yeah, I don't mind long films, but I think attending to length is still an important part of the writing and editing process. And I feel like here, they just didn't care to do so XD. Great movie but they could have tightened it a bit.

reply

[–] Ace_Spade (9551) 2 years ago

Yeah, me too. I blame Lord of the Rings, which blurred the lines between "Blockbuster action movie" and "Epic adventure movie". The former can run 90-120 minutes just fine. The latter needs 3+ hours. But now we live in an era of 3 hour James Bond movies (run, shoot, drive car fast, pretty girl, pretty girl, bad guy space laser, credits...right? Why does this take 200 of my minutes?)

Specifically to The Batman, I also think it could have been shorter, but I'm honestly not sure what I'd cut. I need to rewatch it, maybe I could tell you then. I knew Skyfall was too long, but it wasn't until my second or third time through that I thought, "This whole skyscraper assassin thing. They could have gone right to Macau and saved 10-15 minutes!" I suspect I'd just snip a bit here and there, but the pacing is so good (especially during the fight scenes) that I might mess the film up.

But, yes, in principle, I agree, it's just like cutting lines to shorten Shakespeare - they're all so gooood.

reply

[–] bond998 (1213) 2 years ago

So in order for Batman to have a arc. People have to die. Tell the truth i could care less about Batman Arc in this. Im Vengeance, Oh no, im all about hope now. And all it took was a weirdo with Autism in a bad Zodiac Killer outfit to flood the city and kill thousand of People. Batman had a better arc in Batman Begins. Hell he had better arc in the Dark Knight.

reply

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 2 years ago

So in order for Batman to have a arc. People have to die.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

Batman had a better arc in Batman Begins.

That has nothing to do with what he and I were talking about.

reply

[–] Kowalski (75736) 2 years ago

SHORT ATTENTION SPAN IS A SIGN OF BEING UNINTELLIGENT. NOEMOJI

reply

[–] Bossdog677 (1563) 2 years ago

I watched the first four Batman Films tons of times and if I watched one now would still have my undivided attention. Any Batman movie past Batman and Robin and I can't even make it through the opening credits so I say Short Attention Span can be a sign of unintelligence or it could be a sign that modern media sucks.

reply

[–] pjl69 (2647) 2 years ago

Only Batman Returns from the "first four" was watchable. Batman & Robin was entertaining in an unintentional way, though. Always fun to see Schwarzenegger making fool himself.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6126) 2 years ago

Wow you have awful taste in cinema dude. The Dark Knight trilogy and the Batman were far better than Batman Forever and Batman & Robin were. Only competent Batman films from the original four were the first two Burton flicks.

reply

[–] bond998 (1213) 2 years ago

Wow you have awful taste in cinema dude. The Dark Knight trilogy was far better than Batman Forever and Batman & Robin were. Fix it.

The one thing the Dark Knight trilogy, Batman Forever and Batman & Robin have in common. They weren't as boring as shit.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6126) 2 years ago

I did not find the Batman boring in the slightest. I think it is one of the best Batman films ever made.

reply

[–] Kowalski (75736) 2 years ago

YOU SOUND AWFUL. NOEMOJI

reply

[–] pjl69 (2647) 2 years ago

I thought this one was the best superhero/comic book movie for a very long time. I loved the pacing, reminded me a bit of Sergio Leone's spaghetti westerns. There were some minor details that bothered me and it wasn't perfect masterpiece, but pretty close.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 2 years ago

I didn't love the film, but I'm actually surprised that more DC fans don't agree with you. The movie is everything they seem to like - humorless, grim, gray, slow-moving, and nonsensical! Everything I dislike in a movie, they seem to love.

Of course the movie isn't without merit, I actually loved Pattinson's batshit Batman, I mean if Batman were real, he really would be that crazy. But of course the whole mess desperately needed to be edited, maybe down to 2 hours long and coherent.

reply