Movies THE BATMAN (Dragonlord's Review)

If you have seen THE BATMAN, how would you rate it?

  • Total voters
    252
HenryFlower said:
unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to be the case.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

You've seen the entire movie including the previous scenes of the actor in the role, so you're biased by knowing the character development of that scene.

I don't need to show somebody the entirety of 'Devil's Advocate' to appreciate Al Pacino's confrontation with Keanu Reeves at the end of the movie. I just need to show them that confrontation.

I know. Because I first watched the final 20 minutes of that movie while flipping through channels on cable a few years after it was in theaters. I was captivated with Pacino's performance without knowing anything about the movie other than he was the devil.
 
GearSolidMetal said:
I get he's Scottish and doing an American accent, and he does it pretty well.
Click to expand...

He is Irish. I told you in my earlier post that he broke out in an Irish gangster drama.

He is Irish like Colin Farrell that played the penguin, Cillian Murphy who played the scarecrow...... Are you starting to see a connection yet.....

<{1-2}>
 
7.5

Pros:
- very good job at portraying a raw and inexperience Batman. Obviously intelligent and capable but found himself in situations a refined batman would not.
panicking at the height jump out of the police station and botching the landing. Almost getting killed by a scrub riddler follower, almost rage killing a guy, not understanding falcone could be a rat with wings

- Dark, violent, gritty

- Danos portrayal of The Riddler. Especially with the mask off. The facial expressions and mannerisms were a great interpretation. Not to mention it being a realistic, dark, serial killer version.

- gotham had a very arkham city vibe, especially after the end events which leads for an exciting setting for future films.

- Bruce's obvious reluctances and issues with being Bruce Wayne. Actually this is a very good precursor to the Bale version who also had more trouble being Bruce Wayne than Batman but was more refined and experienced with it.

- dynamic between Kyle and Batman. Really got the sense that Bruce was relieved to see someone like him existed in the world.

Cons

- Too long with it feeling it dragging on at times

- Batman and Gordon scenes seemed redundant at times. There relationship also seemed to close.
cops probably would have detained, arrested and unmasked BATMAN. Gordan had way too much sway and influence as only a lieutenant.

- Serkis was heavily under utilized as Alfred. Plus Wayne seemed somewhat unappreciative and standoffish at times with him. It would be more like an angsty 12-14 year old Bruce relationship with him but he was 26-28 in the movie and should be way more appreciative of what Alfred was in his life.

- penguin needed to be darker and more ruthless. He was a tad more comic relief than I'd wanted and seemed less vicious than Falcone

-
Joker absolutely should not be in this movie and introduced absolutely terribly. Joke is the premier villain and criminal mastermind in Gotham and is already in arkham asylum in batmans year 2? Which means batman already faced him which takes away from riddler being batmans apparently first super villain, or that joker was brought down by Gotham PD which is extremely unlikely. Either way, terrible choice by Matt to include that in the movie
 
Last edited:
JackWhite said:
Man, I just got back from seeing it again and right now it's my second favorite Batman movie. I think this film deserves all the praise and acclaim it's getting. TDK is still the gold standard, IMO.

Once the dust settles off we will see where it truly stands, but right now, I think this film is too legit to quit.
Click to expand...
I’m gonna watch it again with my brother next week.
 
Pretty good is better than good

I'll never understand why you don't change that
 
I want Bane in the sequel, and I also like the Bane Easter Egg with the Possible venom Batman uses at the final act. I like the detective work in this movie, but the Riddler is so fucking boring. We don’t need Riddler for Batman to do detective work. Fuck em
 
9/10 for me.

First 2 acts were really good, but the tonal shift in the third act kinda took me out of the movie and made me look at the clock. It didn't have to be 3 hours long.

Great acting from all of the cast. Great cinematography. I really like the score as well. It's a mix of the harshness of Zimmer's score, with a hint of Elfman's comic book campy. I wasn't blown away by it like some, but it was good.

Seeing that batmobile start up and drive off was one of the highlights for me. As well as those long shots of Batman just walking in the dark where you can hear his footsteps. Reminded me of the dude in the tunnel with the baseball bat in Inglorious Bastards. The scene where he's moving in the dark and the gunfire is the only light was great too Wish they didn't show that in the trailer.

They kept a lot of the secrets in this movie close to the hip and I appreciated that.

It's weird...as much as I enjoyed it, I'm not in a rush to go back to see it. I wasn't running out of the theater saying, "OMG that was amazing!" I was very satisfied and recognized how good this movie is.

I put it above all the Batman movies except for TDK. And I'll say something that's probably gonna piss people off, but you take Heath Ledger out of TDK, and it's not that great. That's not a perfect movie to begin with, and it too has slight pacing issues between the second and third act. Heath sort of makes you forget that every time he was on screen though.

TDK and the Batman are 1a) and 1b) for me.
 
GearSolidMetal said:
Wrong.

You've seen the entire movie including the previous scenes of the actor in the role, so you're biased by knowing the character development of that scene.

I don't need to show somebody the entirety of 'Devil's Advocate' to appreciate Al Pacino's confrontation with Keanu Reeves at the end of the movie. I just need to show them that confrontation.

I know. Because I first watched the final 20 minutes of that movie while flipping through channels on cable a few years after it was in theaters. I was captivated with Pacino's performance without knowing anything about the movie other than he was the devil.
Click to expand...
out of all examples you could have used in an attempt to strengthen your argument, you choose Pacino hamming it up in The Devil’s Advocate? i’ll have what you’re smoking
 
Just saw it. I'm gonna hold off for a more rounded review for now.

Just overall a lot of the stuff worked for me, other things didnt. I enjoyed the fight choreography and I thought Pattinson was good in the role. I thought Dano as riddler was very good overall. I enjoyed the look and atmosphere of the movie a lot.

The detective aspect was good but

did he solve anything? Also the whole rat with wings thing....the batman I know would've made the bat connection right away. It was a funny line from the penguin but still

Also didnt think it nailed it's finale.
 
Last edited:
ufcfan4 said:
It's a very good Batman movie. I thought it was just missing some x factor that would have put it over the top. I still can watch The Dark Knight and feel as though I'm watching a great movie. I know not everyone shares that opinion, but that's what I think and I feel when I see it. This didn't strike me as great. Quite good but I was hoping for just some other element to slightly elevate it

It's frustrating too because I cannot even articulate what the missing element was. I mean, legitimately almost everything was either good or very good: I really liked the plot, I really liked the work Reeves and the technical crew did (lot of iconic shots and moments), I thought Pattinson was damn good, I thought Kravitz, Dano, Wright, Farrell, Turturro, the rest of the cast were really good, I loved Giacchino's (he's always great) score.

Still, clearly a very strong 8-8.5/10 for me. Definitely a top-tier showing as far as the DCEU goes.
Click to expand...

For me that missing element was the moment where batman gets the final word or finally gets one over on the villain or figures out the final clue or whatever. There was never a moment like that in the movie.
 
Both the catwoman narrative and Zoe Kravitz ( however you spell her name) absolutely ruined this film. She’s a product of nepotism and can’t act to boot .

Dano did an amazing job.
 
With regard to the ending.

The scene where Dano is trying to make the case that Batman helped him achieve his goals and then when he starts freaking out when Batman emphatically tells him he's going to die alone and forgotten in a cell was clutch. Dano did an excellent job. I thought his acting was great in that scene. Really liked the, "ohhhhh this is not how this was supposed to happen," meltdown. Yes, like some have mentioned in this thread, it did elicit some laughter in the audience but I don't think it was cause they thought it was patently funny so much as that it was an uneasy moment.

The big reveal of the private group of like-minded individuals online was very eerie and effective in my opinion. The problem is where you go from there. The buildup to the big climactic sequence was actually better than the climactic sequence. Once you get that scenario where Batman is taking on the Riddler minions, it felt somewhat underwhelming to me. Between the deluge and the gunmen, it almost felt like they were just seeing how much they could throw in there.

It was not bad, mind you. But it felt somewhat anticlimactic to me.
 
So let's talk about that deleted scene that Matt Reeves intends to release at some point. Batman tries to profile the Riddler and his murders and brings case files to Arkham to talk to the Joker. Allegedly the dialogue went something like this:


Then Batman is like: "I need to know how he thinks"

And Joker is rifling through the case file

And Batman says there are pictures

And Joker says: "You think I get off on this stuff?"

And Batman says: "Don't you?"

If that's really how the scene went, I wish they would have just kept it in.
 
ufcfan4 said:
With regard to the ending.

The scene where Dano is trying to make the case that Batman helped him achieve his goals and then when he starts freaking out when Batman emphatically tells him he's going to die alone and forgotten in a cell was clutch. Dano did an excellent job. I thought his acting was great in that scene. Really liked the, "ohhhhh this is not how this was supposed to happen," meltdown. Yes, like some have mentioned in this thread, it did elicit some laughter in the audience but I don't think it was cause they thought it was patently funny so much as that it was an uneasy moment.

The big reveal of the private group of like-minded individuals online was very eerie and effective in my opinion. The problem is where you go from there. The buildup to the big climactic sequence was actually better than the climactic sequence. Once you get that scenario where Batman is taking on the Riddler minions, it felt somewhat underwhelming to me. Between the deluge and the gunmen, it almost felt like they were just seeing how much they could throw in there.

It was not bad, mind you. But it felt somewhat anticlimactic to me.
Click to expand...

Dano nailed that scene. It could have easily went sideways and been too over the top, but it was the right amount of cringe where you're like "woah, this dude is really out there mentally". Kinda reminiscent of Joaquin in Joker when he goes on Murray's show.

But yeah, I could see how the final battle with the Riddler goons felt tacked on or underwhelming. But when Batman comes crashing down from the rafters and uses his double grapnel gun to rope in two of the Riddler goons and that score starts playing; I lost my shit both times I saw it, lol.
 
revoltub said:
Also they gave way too much up in the trailers and preview clips for this.
Click to expand...

This is true. When Riddler tells Batman "you're part of this too" in the first trailer; you just knew something happened with the Wayne's in a potentially unsavory manner.

I found myself kinda checking off boxes as to what would happen next when I first saw the film. But upon second viewing is when I was really able to just lose myself in the story and characters.

That's probably another reason why TDK is still the GOAT for me. I had no idea what was going to happen in the third act of that film. And didn't know how the Two Face stuff was going to unfold, if at all in the film.
 
JackWhite said:
This is true. When Riddler tells Batman "you're part of this too" in the first trailer; you just knew something happened with the Wayne's in a potentially unsavory manner.

I found myself kinda checking off boxes as to what would happen next when I first saw the film. But upon second viewing is when I was really able to just lose myself in the story and characters.

That's probably another reason why TDK is still the GOAT for me. I had no idea what was going to happen in the third act of that film. And didn't know how the Two Face stuff was going to unfold, if at all in the film.
Click to expand...

Yeah and they show riddler getting caught in the trailer too which i think is too much. From that scene, you can make a lot of assumptions about what happens in the movie without even seeing it if you are paying attention to its influences and trends in the genre

which are probably true. Its a major trend in the genre: tdk joker wanted to be caught. Skyfall he wanted to be caught. Whenever a trailer shows you they got caught, most likely they wanted to. Oh yeah and se7en? That mf wanted to be caught. I wonder what's going to happen in this movie? Maybe that's the end of the movie!. They wouldnt spoil the ending.

Spoil your own movie without spoiling it.





As for your second point yes I think I need to see this movie again. I was a little caught up in the moment of it I think.

I really enjoyed the aesthetic of this film a lot. The movie is grounded (mostly) but the visual has a fuzzy dreamlike, comicbook quality to it. So it makes it seem less real than it is which I appreciated.
 
GearSolidMetal said:
Its more like complete disgust.

Joker used to be a well respected character viewed that only Hollywood's absolute best actors could play him.

*Jack Nicholson
*Heath Ledger
*Jared Leto
*Joaquin Phoenix

Even Jared Leto's Joker...who had like 8 minutes of screentime in a shitty script and the visual design was completely off... at least Leto did absolutely everything he could do given his limitations. He had respect for the character.

But the actor who played Joker in one of the final scenes of The Batman? His appearance is in shadow, so he had mainly his voice to portray the character, and he completely failed, its like he didn't put any effort into it at all. I bet most of the thousands of actors that would love to get a break into Hollywood could have done a better job than that. No one's saying a new Joker has to have as good of a Joker voice as the previous listed actors, or Mark Hamill, but at the very least it should be in the same ballpark with the potential for improvement in a cameo scene to hype up the sequel.

Which begs the question how HE got the job, and apparently its Hollywood where connections matter much much more than ability. The rest of the movie has great actors for every role, but they dropped the ball on this one.
Click to expand...
Are we even sure that was joker? I thought maybe it could have been two face
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,281,010
Messages
58,335,257
Members
176,003
Latest member
HeneryH

Share this page

Back
Top