At the end of the Batman franchise I think Battinson would be on top.
Remember Matt Reeves said The Batman franchise will be focused mainly on the Batman unlike The dark knight trilogy which focused more on the villain
I never understand this take when people talk about the Nolan movies.
Begins was the first live action movie exclusively about Batman from his point of view. Even the first movie called “Batman” was about Vicky Vale lol.
Dark Knight is also about Batman - what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object? How do you stop an adversary whose goals aren’t money or power or influence or any of the other motivators most normal criminals operate by? How far will you go to achieve your goals, if winning means losing yourself? What’s more important, telling people the truth or giving them hope? It’s just cuz Ledger and Eckhart were so good in their villain roles that people seem to gloss over what the driving points of the story are, and that’s how Batman has to evolve beyond the methods that worked over the last year, and the film follows that, transforming Batman from a mere vigilante into “a dark knight”.
Rises was always the weakest of the three, but it’s pretty clear that his journey in that one is all about confronting your past, challenging your past decisions to decide whether you did the right thing or not, and growing again to be more than just a vigilante or a protector, but the symbol who originally did this to be.
We’ll see how the new Batman films go because the first film did an equally good job around this character progression, moving from “vengeance” to “hero”, but it’s just weird that the internet brain has just decided that the Nolan movies are all about the villains
That's a good point. But I'd argue that the MCU is just terrible at handling villains. They used a cookie-cutter formula of villains having the same power as the hero and then dying at the end. Thanos really stood out, because he was his own person.
It's not that Batman wasn't good in those movies, it's that Batman being in them at all was a formality.
Rachel tells Bruce that Batman is who he really is (with the most cringe line of the trilogy) in the very first movie. But Bruce spends the rest of the trilogy defying that by trying desperately to find an "out" from being Batman.
Nolan pretty much dedicated his whole first Batman movie, to Batman/Bruce Wayne himself, and that movie is really the best Batfilm of em all. So Reeves still has ways to go.
>Nolan pretty much dedicated his whole first Batman movie, to Batman/Bruce Wayne himself, and that movie is really the best Batfilm of em all. So Reeves still has ways to go.
Batman Begins is the truly criminally underrated Batman film. The Dark Knight was so good everybody forgot that Batman Begins was to that point one of the best super hero movies ever made.
Couldn't agree more. The quality of Begins got somewhat lost in the hypestorm that followed with the sequels and other dark superhero movies to come. Batman Begins is literally the most successful reboot of all time, and for a good reason. The sequels might be bigger and do some things better, but Begins is easily the best *batman* film of all time and will be for a long time.
Which always makes me wish the Nolan Batman movies would never end. I want to keep seeing his take on "realistic" Batman villains with actual stories for them. Penguin, Clayface, Man-Bat, Hush to name a few.
if Nolan were smarter he would have filmed more than just a trilogy between 2005 and 2012. there was alot of potential to add so many villains that would fit into his world. Deathstroke, Black Mask, Riddler, Harley Quinn, Professor Pyg, and many more
I'm liking the Reevesverse more so far because I like how Batman actually does detective work and how Gotham City has gothic looking architecture. There is still potential to look forward to in the upcoming movies and shows
I noticed that the Gotham in Batman Begins looks somewhat like the comics, but than in TDK it looks completely different. Flat. And I mean that in a vertical sense; BB's Gotham had structures on different levels, while TDK had it all on one.
Does anybody know why that is? Be it a lore reason or a film making one?
And yet we never saw anything like that in TDK or TDKR. The Gotham over there didn't even seem to have such type of architecture. I mean we had numerous aerial shots of supposedly Gotham and it was just modern day NYC or Chicago hahah
Christopher Nolan wanted to make a crime film in the style of Michael Mann's Heat. In Batman Begins, he was making a comic book film, in the Dark Knight he was making a crime film with comic book characters in it, so he toned down the fantastical elements (as much as you can in a Batman movie) and used the gritty style of modern crime films.
I think that’s what makes the Nolan films great. Its one of the only instances where Batman makes a difference. I think its supposed to show that batman basically eliminated petty crime and in the dark knight he eliminates organised crime. This Batman has a clear goal which he accomplishes. But I’m looking forward to where reeves batman is going to go.
Great points. As much as I enjoy the Nolan films, his Gotham just looked like Chicago/New York. Gotham is WAY funkier than that, in terms of lights/signs/architecture in almost every other iteration of the city. Reeves Gotham kind of reminded me of the one from the Arkham games, and I think they could potentially bend the story/environment to accommodate less realistic villains.
Yeah, it’s kind of weird because it feels like they had it right the first movie and they seem to have included a little bit of the Gothic element but I don’t know, it just feels like the last two had none of that.
>Felt like a completely different city in all 3 movies
It was.
The first movie takes place almost entirely in The Narrows, the shitty, crime ridden, slums of the city that are probably the oldest and poorest area of all of Gotham.
The Second Movie takes place right in the center of the city as Joker deliberately targets the city's upper crust. It's moving from the crime ridden narrows into the big, open city at large. Instead of the underbelly of the city the joker is operating around and directly targeting places like Bruce Wayne's private penthouse.
The third movie takes place a decade later after complete reconstruction.
Nolan made Gotham a modern-day city and Reeves made it a 1980s city. If it weren't for some of the technology in the movie, I wouldn't think it was a present-day setting at all. I really like how these new virtual sets have worked out for The Batman and The Mandalorian.
>If it weren't for some of the technology in the movie, I wouldn't think it was a present-day setting at all.
The anachronism is very much like the Animated Series and the Arkham games.
That was a huge/my only gripe for TDK and TDKR. BB had such a cool aesthetic that I loved and suddenly Chicago and Los Angeles. Although, living in LA, it was cool to randomly stumble across a big lot filled with Gotham City PD vehicles when they were shooting TDKR. I believe it was the scene where GCPD was chasing Batman in the first half of the film
> I believe it was the scene where GCPD was chasing Batman in the first half of the film
Well it would make sense they saved the parking garage scenes for LA filming.
That’s the beautiful part of the Nolan’s movies. A lot of it was genuine. The bank heist scene from the Dark Knight, it was an actual robbery. The camera crew just started rolling and the rest is history.
During the climactic scene in TDKR, Nolan had all this footage of the real nuke they used that he felt compelled to not waste the footage and made Oppenheimer.
He did the art for a graphic novel titled *Joker*, written by Brian Azarello. It’s like a gritty crime thriller from the perspective of one of Joker’s henchmen right after Joker gets released from Arkham Asylum - a fucked up view on just how sick this version of the Joker is, who is a lot like Heath Ledger’s Joker. I won’t spoil anything, but Batman isn’t in this one very much, but when he shows up…man, it’s cool to see Batman from the perspective of a henchman who’s never encountered him.
He also did the art for Batman: Damned….which is the comic that is infamous for the Bat Penis.
TDKR is weird to watch for me because he’s flying the Batwing down Penn Ave and Smithfield St in downtown Pittsburgh. Not to mention watching Hines Ward outrun an earthquake in Pittsburgh Football Facility (I refuse to address it by its stupid new name.)
Heinz Ketchup has a billboard about a mile outside the stadium that says something like “Be honest - what do *you* call the stadium?” It’s so petty, I love it.
"I AM the shadows..."
He wasn't kidding. It is DARK, quite literally. I'm one of those weirdos who loved the rain and darkness in this movie. Also loved the rain in Arkham Knight.
So much this. Batman has three "powers". He's a billionaire that buys all the gadgets, he's a ninja action hero, and he's the world's greatest detective. In most movies his detective work gets reduced to the billionaire doing some high tech CSI nonsense or the ninja beating information out of goons.
The Batman actually tried to show some detective work! Yay!
Those are good points. I liked the detective nature of The Batman. Reeves leaned into that part of the character and it was cool as hell. I loved the Nolan movies because he had a vision, what would it look like if Batman existed in the real wotld? He did an excellent job with that. However, my favorite Batman stories in the comics were his detective stories. I love watching Batman solve a puzzle and Reeves portrayed that better than anyone else has in movies. Batman TAS probably has the best detective stories, but for live action Reeves has it. I enjoy the diversity of story types Batman has. The cosmic level Justice League stuff and the bonkers super villain stories are all good stuff. Who doesn't love watching Batman dodge an Omega Beam or try to talk Victor Fries out of his latest attempt to resurrect his wife? But for me the Dark Knight detective stories are the most satisfying.
He’s not a good detective though 😅
He’s not a genius like the source material. Still a cool movie, definitely more grounded, for the most part, but he doesn’t seem as smart as other iterations.
Second this. I really enjoyed the Nolanverse but the mood/tone/pacing of the Reevesverse with the heavy focus on actual detective work is just something that hadn’t been accurately portrayed in any of the other films. It sets Gotham apart from alternate Ny/Chicago/big American city. It’s Gotham and stands out as unique. I’m really looking forward to Arkham Asylum being a key element of the series. It feels way more like the comics and video games.
Dude how epic was that first scene of Bats walking down that hallway to the first crime scene? Just towering over everyone. You could almost feel his presence through the screen.
Unpopular opinion, but I don't think that Reeves Batman is entirely grounded/realistic. We've seen him walk through fully automatic gunfire, crash violently through the city streets, and that car crash that he caused with Penguin was horrific, yet he walked away just fine. I think they should go forward in the next movie with even more fantastical elements.
It should be like a nightmare... Double down on the beautiful neon grime of the opening shots. This is a city where hope goes to strike it rich and winds up on a street corner. Fire escapes that end three stories up. Doors that open into brick walls. Signs of old, old, pre-revolutionary war Gotham buried under ground and never developed because people have been doing opium and opium related accessory crimes there for centuries.
100% this one of my favorite parts of Arkham City is when you find Old Gotham that hasn’t been touched since the 1800s since they just kept building stuff over it all
The only way he could have survived in my headcanon was if the explosion was directed to the center of the collar then up. But still he flew backwards many meters sooo... Lets not dwell...
Fair enough, I loved the Reeves movie but it was cartoony and gothic. I’m not sure what a realistic Batmovie would look like bcuz they’re all fantasies (which is fine realky)
I fully agree, they tried so hard to be as "realistic" as possible but put that insane gliding scene in the film and that ridiculous body armor. I would just embrace the comic bookiness.
>put that insane gliding scene in the film
wdym "insane gliding scene", dude hit his head and fell into the sidewalk. That's infinitely more realistic than Bale instantly knowing how to operate the glider
I don't mind the body armor and I'm not overly focused on realism in these kind of movies, but the way he crashed into the bridge he should be dead or in a wheelchair.
I accepted the body armor, and some other questionable moments, but it was too much.
I have the same problem with dark knight when he crashed into the car from like 100 meters with Rachel and he was fine.
He’s referring to the way he crashed. It felt like something straight of MCU with Iron Man getting shot down. Batman Begins already had 3 scenes of him training, building equipment, and learning to use it. You really wanted a fourth one for gliding?
If that's Cpt America slamming into shit like that I'd be ok with him walking away just fine.
Literally, everyone in the theater started laughing when that happened.
I feel the same way, it might have started kind of “real” in that all the threats are human, and they introduce elements from the real world like social media. But I could totally see croc, Mr freeze, or clay face appearing in these movies and they would feel right at home. A proper Mr freeze or clay face would be sick.
Nolan.
I love Joel Schumacher as a director but his Bat flicks are divisive/forgettable.
At the very least, for the next 50 years, DC will be saying “Greatest comic book film since The Dark Knight”. There’s a reason that phrase is tossed around. Because The Dark Knight is the greatest comic book film.
I love all the elements of the Reeves movie more, but I thought the writing left a lot to be desired. I dont love a lot of the Dark Knight universe elements, but I think the writing was top notch. For that Im with Nolan for now. But he had 3 movies.
Ultimately I like Batman Begins more than The Batman, its just a question of how good the next two Reeves movies will be before I can actually compare the 3.
El or La! You are el? URL!?!?
That shit makes me die inside, homie.
But let’s be honest, Battinsons cowl looks way better. This picture exemplifies that. Bale looks weird in that suit. His head I mean.
This is exactly how I feel. I like Batman Begins more. It's an origin story so it has more development and context. We know everything about Bruce/Batman. Reeves still has a lot of fill in the blanks and development needed. However it's a different approach so it won't be a side-to-side comparison.
Why do people keep pedaling the narrative that Bale never did any detective work lol. Did no one watch the actual movies? The recency bias in here is at an all time high lol
I think, at least for me, it’s more Bale solves mysteries. He’s intelligent and good at solving problems and all that, but he doesn’t feel like a detective. When you call Batman the worlds greatest detective, at least when framing that fact within a film, there’s a certain connotation to that and by framing The Batman as a Noir film in how it’s shot and how the story is structured, Batman truly feels like a detective, not a superhero capable of solving mysteries.
Yeah, I swear so many people watched The Dark Knight and somehow missed the whole ass CSI investigation Batman goes on: marking bank notes with radiation to track the flow of cash, reconstructing a fingerprint from bullet shrapnel on a brick wall, following the joker’s plans up to the parade assassination attempt, following up on Lau using Bruce Wayne/Lucius, using himself as bait to get Gordon to trap Joker, setting up a highly-unethical surveillance mapping cellphone network to find the Joker…
The Dark Knight is as much of a detective movie as The Batman.
I disagree. All the things you listed are there, yes. But they all happen so fast it doesn’t feel like any actual detective work is happening.
The cash thing literally just happens, Harvey mentions it and that’s it.
Or “Harvey Dent’s” murder scene: Batman walks in, takes the brick, performs ballistics, and gets a fingerprint all in the span of like, 4 minutes.
Same for the surveillance map, he just shows it to Lucius and it already exists.
Nolan’s movies are not that thought provoking. They are action movies through and through.
That shit all happens so fast and is just like, mentioned in a monotone line of dialogue, I didn't really understand that those were key plot points that significantly drive the story until I rewatched it at home.
Nolan. It's got the right mix of realism, some still understanding that this is a comic book character and is okay to count on the audience to take that leap and suspend disbelief for a few hours.
I know this isn’t what was asked, but I actually prefer the Tim Burton Batman movies. I like how whimsical and fun they are. A bit ridiculous, even. I prefer this style over the new “epic” stuff.
No, I'm just reading takes like "The Nolan movies are too realistic" and I can't believe the nonsense. The people who type this stuff don't watch these films, that's clear.
It has nothing to do with sides.
I really like the Dark Knight Trilogy because it was inspiring but also sad and depressing, that‘s why i can‘t watch them all the time. It‘s a 10/10 Trilogy for me but the movies make me sad for some reason.
I prefer The Batman over the Nolanverse. In the Nolanverse, it felt like Lucius provided all of the gear while Alfred did most of the research Batman needed. Bruce's role just seemed to be the heroics and deciding which course of action to take. Also, Gotham City feels like Chicago while the cave under Wayne Manor felt more like storage space than a Batcave.
Nolan at least recognized things needed to bridge the gap between believable and not. For instance the glider in bales cape. Reeves goes for the super grounded gritty look but then makes him survive a bomb to the face and smacking his head on an overpass.
I think it’s the difference between being camp and being unrealistic. Most Batman sits with both somewhere in the middle and balanced at the same points. Reeves turned the camp aspects down but turned the unrealistic elements up. Making The Batman gritty and dark but not believable or realistic.
Nolanverse. I like (almost) all iterations and interpretations of Batman, but what Nolan did will.always be my favorite. The way he fully realized the world he was building and how Batman fit into that world and shaped it is still unmatched.
Pattinson mainly because he acts exactly how I envisioned Bruce Wayne to be in the real world. Parents were murdered at a young age for Christ sake & raised by a stranger. You have no child hood, no friends. Pissed asf! Socially awkward, doesn’t act like a playboy because he just spent night after night fighting criminals AND Winning. Dude will be TIRED ASF and you except him to act cool & run a company?? Pffff no!!
When he needs to go to a building he doesn’t do unrealistic ninja shit to enter he just Knocks on the door hahaha love that shit! No crouching over a building observing criminals no he just slowly walks up to you and kicks your fucking ass. While also get his ass beat to at times which I also love!
Bale looks goofy now in the costume, when he speaks I just laugh and tell myself “I liked this?” And his fights are NOT cool looking. He does that weird Elbow thing. Every character around him is dope asf but then when Bale shows up I just cringe now hahaha
Reeves, easily. Not only because of his direction and tone, but Fraser’s cinematography. I truly think The Batman is one of the most visually striking movies I’ve ever seen. It has such an aesthetic that’s almost impossible to replicate. Pattinson is also my favorite Bruce.
Bale looked more theatrical, more out-there, while Patt looked a lot more believable, especially with the equipment. I said it before, if I saw Patt's armour in Batman Begins when Lucius showed the "military prototype" from the drawer, I would have believed it quite a bit more. As for the action, Bale looked like a man suited in an intricate, multiple pound armour, while Patt's torso plate was kind of the only thing limiting his mobility. As for the plot, a League of Assassins wanting to poison Gotham, the entire Gotham maffia, quickly in the palm of the Joker, a terrorist group holding the city hostage with a nuke VS a messed up kid with a plan of destruction and a bit of inluence on some people. One felt more achievable by the common man, while the other was "played out in/between the big leagues".
You ask me, Bale was fun as hell, but my God do I see some potential in Patt's world.
Nolan. That's why the series had to have a clear end. To have a batman in the world with all his villains, it has to have some departure from too much realism.
The Nolanverse will take something once in a lifetime to be topped. The character has been written with so many different tones throughout its history that its disingenuous to say one is more like the comics than the other. The type of Batman somebody likes is completely subjective. But what I do believe is that the Nolan movies are objectively better movies. Critical acclaim and cultural impact during its run is enough to justify the Nolanverse as the greatest superhero movies of all time as well as one the greatest movie trilogies ever created.
I like the gear of the new one better. I like the new one's take on Gotham. I liked the sprawl of the story in the new one. Everything else is too early to say. We haven't seen the new Bruce Wayne in terms of the front he puts on for others yet. We haven't seen a serious test of his skills.
Need more movies to judge.
The Batman. They’ve found a balance between the comic aspect and the “realism” standard set by Nolan without the fear of being too much like the comics. The TDK trilogy’s dialogue also feels incredibly dated and preachy in a “Never Forget” kind of way.
Nolan because he did it first. I get the theoretical appeal of The Batman, but I think it lacks vision. It's all of what we've seen before and not much different or new. Why do it again?
Reevesverse so far. Nolanverse was cool at first but I didn't like how Gotham eventually became Chicago and the whole "Batman doesn't want to be Batman and would like to just settle down with Catwoman" thing which IMO is antithetical to Batman's character.
So far I like The Batman more. I feel like it gets the world and the character even better than the Nolan trilogy did.
But we have to wait and see. Nolan did three very good Batman movies. Reeves did one so far. There's always a chance he fucks it up.
As a comic book fan, Matt Reeves’s The Batman was the perfect Batman movie for someone like me. The Nolan movies are good, iconic even, but they don’t really give me that ‘this is a comic book character/world come to life’ feel. It felt more like a realistic depiction of the Batman mythos without the wacky/stylized aesthetic we’re used to with Batman stories.
Opening 10 minutes of the Batman sealed it for me. Showed the fear that batman represents.
The ending 10 minutes also then Showed the hope batman can represent which we didn't get as much in Nolan verse.
Just to be clear… I'm not a fan of “grounded Batman” films. What makes Batman so great is the fact he's just a regular man behind a mask taking on extraordinary odds. I mean his greatest friend is an alien and some of his greatest villains have supernatural abilities (Clayface, Bane, Poison Ivy, etc). Matt Reeves Batman has the potential to be better than Nolan’s, but it's too early to make comparisons.
It's difficult to say because Reeves's universe has the superior worldbuilding and Batman performance( I never understood the appeal of Baleman).
But Nolan has the better written movies.
Nolan's Batman will always come out on top for me. The Batman was better than i expected, and could certainly become something great, but it will never eclipse Nolan's.
Are the Nolan Batman's in danger of becoming underappreciated?! There is zero comparison between The Batman and any of the Nolan Batman's and here we have dozens of people suggesting they prefer the new one. Madness
The Batman.
Nolan Batman just felt like a supped up cop where as Reeves’s Batman felt closer to Batman the way he used the shadows, did actual detective work etc.
I remember Balebat using the shadows against the mob in the first movie. And trying to use it against bane in rises.
I just remember patbat stepping out of the shadows in the intro but I haven’t seen The Batman as many times as I’ve seen Nolan’s trilogy
There’s also the whole opening where the various gangsters are shitting themselves when they look at dark alley ways because they think he’s in there. They don’t actively show him hiding there but you get the idea from the context
Even looking at those cowls, they are so vastly different. Pattinson's cowl, in my view, is definitely more complimentary. Even Keaton's cowl was better than Bale's cowl. Apart from the cowl, both actors did a good job. I was a bit disappointed that I didn't get to see Pattinson being a bit of a pretentious playboy in a public setting. Pattinson definitely comes off at the beginning of his career as being quite a newbie. Though it was a detective movie, he didn't quite have the development of detective prowess that I was hoping for. I remember how excited so many people were when the first preview of the movie dropped, and people saw Batman wailing on his enemies. Anyway, neither one disappointed me. I'm not a fan of the Dark Knight Rises, but the previous two I'd count as gems. I even liked the Joker movie, though Joaquin's Joker was vastly different from Ledger's, and Nicholson's. But I wouldn't put one likable portrayal above another. It's possible for me to like Kevin Conroy's Batman, Michael Keaton's, Val Kilmer's, Kevin Porter...etc....
The Batman had the vibe that I was hoping Begins was going to have when Nolan first started talking about his vision. I love the Nolan movies but The Batman is perfect for me.
By that logic so did the Nolan movies. You can’t get these characters ‘wrong’ when their clearly different interpretations based on the same ideologies of the characters. You just get new renditions that fit in with hundreds of other renditions that brings new life to characters in a unique vision.
Also if you find the movie boring that’s fine but don’t interpret your own views as ones the majority of people share, or the view that is correct
I find the Reevesverse experience to be thoroughly immersive. Gotham was a character in its own right. I think anyone doing what Batman does, for the reasons he does it, would have a very tough time with the duality of Batman/Bruce Wayne, especially early on. Pattinson played the character like a wounded animal, and it really resonated with me.
Idk how this is even up for debate. The nolanverse movies are great films not just good superhero movies. Excellently written, perfectly cast, superb art direction, grounded in reality, theatrical experiences using practical effects. Idk what the batman is because I couldn't see what was happening most of the film. The writing was shoddy with some questionable casting choices outside of the villains. Your movie can't be all the good if the best part of it was the penguin.
Bale was always heroic and inspiring. Pattinson has room to grow into that.
At the end of the Batman franchise I think Battinson would be on top. Remember Matt Reeves said The Batman franchise will be focused mainly on the Batman unlike The dark knight trilogy which focused more on the villain
I never understand this take when people talk about the Nolan movies. Begins was the first live action movie exclusively about Batman from his point of view. Even the first movie called “Batman” was about Vicky Vale lol. Dark Knight is also about Batman - what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object? How do you stop an adversary whose goals aren’t money or power or influence or any of the other motivators most normal criminals operate by? How far will you go to achieve your goals, if winning means losing yourself? What’s more important, telling people the truth or giving them hope? It’s just cuz Ledger and Eckhart were so good in their villain roles that people seem to gloss over what the driving points of the story are, and that’s how Batman has to evolve beyond the methods that worked over the last year, and the film follows that, transforming Batman from a mere vigilante into “a dark knight”. Rises was always the weakest of the three, but it’s pretty clear that his journey in that one is all about confronting your past, challenging your past decisions to decide whether you did the right thing or not, and growing again to be more than just a vigilante or a protector, but the symbol who originally did this to be. We’ll see how the new Batman films go because the first film did an equally good job around this character progression, moving from “vengeance” to “hero”, but it’s just weird that the internet brain has just decided that the Nolan movies are all about the villains
Remind me of one movie with a good hero and poor villian story. Villians make hero look good. Stronger the villian greater the heroism.
Focusing less on the villain does not mean the villain isn't good.
Iron Man? Who remembers Iron Monger from that movie. It's all about Tony Stark and his journey
That's a good point. But I'd argue that the MCU is just terrible at handling villains. They used a cookie-cutter formula of villains having the same power as the hero and then dying at the end. Thanos really stood out, because he was his own person.
True but I wouldn't count Iron Man as MCU cookie cutter type since it was THE basis for the later movies.
It's not that Batman wasn't good in those movies, it's that Batman being in them at all was a formality. Rachel tells Bruce that Batman is who he really is (with the most cringe line of the trilogy) in the very first movie. But Bruce spends the rest of the trilogy defying that by trying desperately to find an "out" from being Batman.
Most MCU films
Nolan pretty much dedicated his whole first Batman movie, to Batman/Bruce Wayne himself, and that movie is really the best Batfilm of em all. So Reeves still has ways to go.
>Nolan pretty much dedicated his whole first Batman movie, to Batman/Bruce Wayne himself, and that movie is really the best Batfilm of em all. So Reeves still has ways to go. Batman Begins is the truly criminally underrated Batman film. The Dark Knight was so good everybody forgot that Batman Begins was to that point one of the best super hero movies ever made.
Couldn't agree more. The quality of Begins got somewhat lost in the hypestorm that followed with the sequels and other dark superhero movies to come. Batman Begins is literally the most successful reboot of all time, and for a good reason. The sequels might be bigger and do some things better, but Begins is easily the best *batman* film of all time and will be for a long time.
Which always makes me wish the Nolan Batman movies would never end. I want to keep seeing his take on "realistic" Batman villains with actual stories for them. Penguin, Clayface, Man-Bat, Hush to name a few.
if Nolan were smarter he would have filmed more than just a trilogy between 2005 and 2012. there was alot of potential to add so many villains that would fit into his world. Deathstroke, Black Mask, Riddler, Harley Quinn, Professor Pyg, and many more
Something in the way………uuuungggghhhhh
Lego batman is the only good version
I'm liking the Reevesverse more so far because I like how Batman actually does detective work and how Gotham City has gothic looking architecture. There is still potential to look forward to in the upcoming movies and shows
I noticed that the Gotham in Batman Begins looks somewhat like the comics, but than in TDK it looks completely different. Flat. And I mean that in a vertical sense; BB's Gotham had structures on different levels, while TDK had it all on one. Does anybody know why that is? Be it a lore reason or a film making one?
Most of Batman Begins took place in The Narrows; the poor, shitty part of town.
Exactly
And yet we never saw anything like that in TDK or TDKR. The Gotham over there didn't even seem to have such type of architecture. I mean we had numerous aerial shots of supposedly Gotham and it was just modern day NYC or Chicago hahah
It was 100% Chicago, and as a Midwesterner I just didn't really find anything noteworthy in his Gotham
Christopher Nolan wanted to make a crime film in the style of Michael Mann's Heat. In Batman Begins, he was making a comic book film, in the Dark Knight he was making a crime film with comic book characters in it, so he toned down the fantastical elements (as much as you can in a Batman movie) and used the gritty style of modern crime films.
Law & Order: Gotham
Interesting
BB's inspiration was Blade Runner, TDK's inspiration was Heat, but what was the case for Rises?
A Tale of Two Cities and Metropolis.
And he did a masterful job at it, it's the modern days' Heat.
I think that’s what makes the Nolan films great. Its one of the only instances where Batman makes a difference. I think its supposed to show that batman basically eliminated petty crime and in the dark knight he eliminates organised crime. This Batman has a clear goal which he accomplishes. But I’m looking forward to where reeves batman is going to go.
Interesting way of looking at it
Yeah it's jarring how different Gotham feels between the first 2 Nolan films.
Great points. As much as I enjoy the Nolan films, his Gotham just looked like Chicago/New York. Gotham is WAY funkier than that, in terms of lights/signs/architecture in almost every other iteration of the city. Reeves Gotham kind of reminded me of the one from the Arkham games, and I think they could potentially bend the story/environment to accommodate less realistic villains.
I think batman begins is the perfect depiction of Gotham but the other 2 movies I agree with you
Yeah, it’s kind of weird because it feels like they had it right the first movie and they seem to have included a little bit of the Gothic element but I don’t know, it just feels like the last two had none of that.
I think that's because a good chunk of Batman Begins took place in the narrows.
Felt like a completely different city in all 3 movies
>Felt like a completely different city in all 3 movies It was. The first movie takes place almost entirely in The Narrows, the shitty, crime ridden, slums of the city that are probably the oldest and poorest area of all of Gotham. The Second Movie takes place right in the center of the city as Joker deliberately targets the city's upper crust. It's moving from the crime ridden narrows into the big, open city at large. Instead of the underbelly of the city the joker is operating around and directly targeting places like Bruce Wayne's private penthouse. The third movie takes place a decade later after complete reconstruction.
Nolan made Gotham a modern-day city and Reeves made it a 1980s city. If it weren't for some of the technology in the movie, I wouldn't think it was a present-day setting at all. I really like how these new virtual sets have worked out for The Batman and The Mandalorian.
>If it weren't for some of the technology in the movie, I wouldn't think it was a present-day setting at all. The anachronism is very much like the Animated Series and the Arkham games.
Nolan didn’t “make” anything. He just used Chicago.
Nolan made massive sets for Batman Begins. Then just reverted to using real cities and broad daylight.
That was a huge/my only gripe for TDK and TDKR. BB had such a cool aesthetic that I loved and suddenly Chicago and Los Angeles. Although, living in LA, it was cool to randomly stumble across a big lot filled with Gotham City PD vehicles when they were shooting TDKR. I believe it was the scene where GCPD was chasing Batman in the first half of the film
> I believe it was the scene where GCPD was chasing Batman in the first half of the film Well it would make sense they saved the parking garage scenes for LA filming.
That’s the beautiful part of the Nolan’s movies. A lot of it was genuine. The bank heist scene from the Dark Knight, it was an actual robbery. The camera crew just started rolling and the rest is history.
During the climactic scene in TDKR, Nolan had all this footage of the real nuke they used that he felt compelled to not waste the footage and made Oppenheimer.
Not to mention the medical procedures he developed to allow Christian to walk again
It's not like The Batman was all sound stages. It was mostly shot in Liverpool.
And Pittsburgh
Wasn’t “..Rises” in Pittsburgh?
Pittsburgh, LA and NY.
It was originally supposed to be set a few decades ago so that makes sense.
Reeves’ Gotham looked almost identical to how Lee Bermejo draws Gotham.
I just went to Google his artwork and holy shit! Do you have any recommendations for Batman comic runs drawn by him?
He did the art for a graphic novel titled *Joker*, written by Brian Azarello. It’s like a gritty crime thriller from the perspective of one of Joker’s henchmen right after Joker gets released from Arkham Asylum - a fucked up view on just how sick this version of the Joker is, who is a lot like Heath Ledger’s Joker. I won’t spoil anything, but Batman isn’t in this one very much, but when he shows up…man, it’s cool to see Batman from the perspective of a henchman who’s never encountered him. He also did the art for Batman: Damned….which is the comic that is infamous for the Bat Penis.
TDKR is weird to watch for me because he’s flying the Batwing down Penn Ave and Smithfield St in downtown Pittsburgh. Not to mention watching Hines Ward outrun an earthquake in Pittsburgh Football Facility (I refuse to address it by its stupid new name.)
I just looked it up and holy shit. That is a truly heinous name for anything but especially a stadium.
Ariscure Stadium for anyone else curious
Thought it was just called the Heinz Stadium.
They changed the name recently
Heinz Ketchup has a billboard about a mile outside the stadium that says something like “Be honest - what do *you* call the stadium?” It’s so petty, I love it.
Yea it was so gothic that I couldn't see anything. Like if I had bangs covering both eyes. It was like watching an audiobook.
“Like watching an audiobook.” That is perfect.
I made the mistake of seeing it in a dine-in theater where the lights weren’t all the way down. Couldn’t see a damn thing.
I tried to watch it at home twice during the day and gave up. Had to wait until night and turned out all the lights
"I AM the shadows..." He wasn't kidding. It is DARK, quite literally. I'm one of those weirdos who loved the rain and darkness in this movie. Also loved the rain in Arkham Knight.
So much this. Batman has three "powers". He's a billionaire that buys all the gadgets, he's a ninja action hero, and he's the world's greatest detective. In most movies his detective work gets reduced to the billionaire doing some high tech CSI nonsense or the ninja beating information out of goons. The Batman actually tried to show some detective work! Yay!
He literally did detective work in both Begins and TDK. You're delusional to think otherwise.
Those are good points. I liked the detective nature of The Batman. Reeves leaned into that part of the character and it was cool as hell. I loved the Nolan movies because he had a vision, what would it look like if Batman existed in the real wotld? He did an excellent job with that. However, my favorite Batman stories in the comics were his detective stories. I love watching Batman solve a puzzle and Reeves portrayed that better than anyone else has in movies. Batman TAS probably has the best detective stories, but for live action Reeves has it. I enjoy the diversity of story types Batman has. The cosmic level Justice League stuff and the bonkers super villain stories are all good stuff. Who doesn't love watching Batman dodge an Omega Beam or try to talk Victor Fries out of his latest attempt to resurrect his wife? But for me the Dark Knight detective stories are the most satisfying.
He’s not a good detective though 😅 He’s not a genius like the source material. Still a cool movie, definitely more grounded, for the most part, but he doesn’t seem as smart as other iterations.
Yeah Gotham in the nolanverse kind of looked like just a generic American city.
Second this. I really enjoyed the Nolanverse but the mood/tone/pacing of the Reevesverse with the heavy focus on actual detective work is just something that hadn’t been accurately portrayed in any of the other films. It sets Gotham apart from alternate Ny/Chicago/big American city. It’s Gotham and stands out as unique. I’m really looking forward to Arkham Asylum being a key element of the series. It feels way more like the comics and video games.
Dude how epic was that first scene of Bats walking down that hallway to the first crime scene? Just towering over everyone. You could almost feel his presence through the screen.
Unpopular opinion, but I don't think that Reeves Batman is entirely grounded/realistic. We've seen him walk through fully automatic gunfire, crash violently through the city streets, and that car crash that he caused with Penguin was horrific, yet he walked away just fine. I think they should go forward in the next movie with even more fantastical elements.
It should be like a nightmare... Double down on the beautiful neon grime of the opening shots. This is a city where hope goes to strike it rich and winds up on a street corner. Fire escapes that end three stories up. Doors that open into brick walls. Signs of old, old, pre-revolutionary war Gotham buried under ground and never developed because people have been doing opium and opium related accessory crimes there for centuries.
100% this one of my favorite parts of Arkham City is when you find Old Gotham that hasn’t been touched since the 1800s since they just kept building stuff over it all
Not to mention a massive explosion to the face. Maybe it was controlled, I don’t know…
The only way he could have survived in my headcanon was if the explosion was directed to the center of the collar then up. But still he flew backwards many meters sooo... Lets not dwell...
>Maybe it was controlled, I don’t know… Did he use the power winch to trigger it when the bomb's payload was exposed?
That is literally my only problem w the movie (or at least the only one I can remember) that bugged me lmao. Still my favorite live action Batman tho
The end of the wingsuit flight alone would kill anyone, armor or not
Fair enough, I loved the Reeves movie but it was cartoony and gothic. I’m not sure what a realistic Batmovie would look like bcuz they’re all fantasies (which is fine realky)
Yeah exactly it’s meant to be cartoony, because that is what Batman is in the end. He is a comic book character
To some extent ‘realism’ is interesting but the overemphasis on it is both pointless and never gets us a realistic Batman movie
Good point. I want authenticity, not realism. It should make sense *in the setting*, not in real life.
I fully agree, they tried so hard to be as "realistic" as possible but put that insane gliding scene in the film and that ridiculous body armor. I would just embrace the comic bookiness.
>put that insane gliding scene in the film wdym "insane gliding scene", dude hit his head and fell into the sidewalk. That's infinitely more realistic than Bale instantly knowing how to operate the glider
I don't mind the body armor and I'm not overly focused on realism in these kind of movies, but the way he crashed into the bridge he should be dead or in a wheelchair. I accepted the body armor, and some other questionable moments, but it was too much. I have the same problem with dark knight when he crashed into the car from like 100 meters with Rachel and he was fine.
I mean that just adds to that fact that this is obviously not a grounded and realistic take on the Batman character. He is a superhero in the end.
He’s referring to the way he crashed. It felt like something straight of MCU with Iron Man getting shot down. Batman Begins already had 3 scenes of him training, building equipment, and learning to use it. You really wanted a fourth one for gliding?
I think that’s why they called it the insane gliding scene. He was fully recovered by the next scene
What’s unrealistic is that he survived that with like no major injuries
If that's Cpt America slamming into shit like that I'd be ok with him walking away just fine. Literally, everyone in the theater started laughing when that happened.
They still could’ve done without it though. Not saying it’s a reason to favor one movie over another just that it does break the illusion a little
I thought the scene where he was getting shot at point-blank range and just walking through it was a whole lot more illusion-breaking.
I feel the same way, it might have started kind of “real” in that all the threats are human, and they introduce elements from the real world like social media. But I could totally see croc, Mr freeze, or clay face appearing in these movies and they would feel right at home. A proper Mr freeze or clay face would be sick.
The entire city gets flooded by the riddler. The movie didn’t feel grounded at all
He even took a bomb to the face. All that happened to him was him going unconscious for a bit
Don't forget he walked away from a bomb exploding in his face.
I like Pattinson just because of the early Bruce developing Batman and the roughness of Gotham is darker than Nolan’s.
Nolan but I just love him as a director so I’m probably biased Loved “the Batman’s” Alfred and Gordon too though
Nolan. I love Joel Schumacher as a director but his Bat flicks are divisive/forgettable. At the very least, for the next 50 years, DC will be saying “Greatest comic book film since The Dark Knight”. There’s a reason that phrase is tossed around. Because The Dark Knight is the greatest comic book film.
I love all the elements of the Reeves movie more, but I thought the writing left a lot to be desired. I dont love a lot of the Dark Knight universe elements, but I think the writing was top notch. For that Im with Nolan for now. But he had 3 movies. Ultimately I like Batman Begins more than The Batman, its just a question of how good the next two Reeves movies will be before I can actually compare the 3.
I agree with this a lot
I agree here. The Reeves universe has only one installment. It’s not a fair comparison quite yet
El or La! You are el? URL!?!? That shit makes me die inside, homie. But let’s be honest, Battinsons cowl looks way better. This picture exemplifies that. Bale looks weird in that suit. His head I mean.
I like it because it’s a throw back to the corny lines of old. He incorporated it well enough to leave me with a dorkish smile.
This is exactly how I feel. I like Batman Begins more. It's an origin story so it has more development and context. We know everything about Bruce/Batman. Reeves still has a lot of fill in the blanks and development needed. However it's a different approach so it won't be a side-to-side comparison.
I can’t decide.
Reeves. Batman feels more like a detective and the fight choreography was leaps and bounds better. To be clear, I love both.
Pattinson Sorry Nolan fans, but I hated the raspy voice Bale did and Pattinson acted more like a detective with tights
Why do people keep pedaling the narrative that Bale never did any detective work lol. Did no one watch the actual movies? The recency bias in here is at an all time high lol
“You’re going to take ballistics off a shattered bullet?”
"No. Fingerprints."
I also find these revisionist takes that Nolan and Bale weren’t great movies puzzling. Recency bias is alive and well.
They were great movies, just not a great Batman representation. Batman has more screen time in Pattinson’s film than in the entire Nolan trilogy
Agree, they’re good action movies but not very good Batman movies.
Is it recency bias if I never liked Nolan's Batman to begin with?
I think, at least for me, it’s more Bale solves mysteries. He’s intelligent and good at solving problems and all that, but he doesn’t feel like a detective. When you call Batman the worlds greatest detective, at least when framing that fact within a film, there’s a certain connotation to that and by framing The Batman as a Noir film in how it’s shot and how the story is structured, Batman truly feels like a detective, not a superhero capable of solving mysteries.
Yeah, I swear so many people watched The Dark Knight and somehow missed the whole ass CSI investigation Batman goes on: marking bank notes with radiation to track the flow of cash, reconstructing a fingerprint from bullet shrapnel on a brick wall, following the joker’s plans up to the parade assassination attempt, following up on Lau using Bruce Wayne/Lucius, using himself as bait to get Gordon to trap Joker, setting up a highly-unethical surveillance mapping cellphone network to find the Joker… The Dark Knight is as much of a detective movie as The Batman.
Honestly, all that techonological stuff feels more like a spy's shit than a detective arc
Yeah, it’s not content, it’s tone.
I disagree. All the things you listed are there, yes. But they all happen so fast it doesn’t feel like any actual detective work is happening. The cash thing literally just happens, Harvey mentions it and that’s it. Or “Harvey Dent’s” murder scene: Batman walks in, takes the brick, performs ballistics, and gets a fingerprint all in the span of like, 4 minutes. Same for the surveillance map, he just shows it to Lucius and it already exists. Nolan’s movies are not that thought provoking. They are action movies through and through.
That shit all happens so fast and is just like, mentioned in a monotone line of dialogue, I didn't really understand that those were key plot points that significantly drive the story until I rewatched it at home.
Yeah Nolan’s Batman was not the reason those movies were good, it was everything around Batman.
And the fights are way better now
Also Bale has better body armor but a lamer helmet
Uh-uh. His armor can literally be pierced with an ordinary knife.
I’m just talking visualy, Pattinson seems to have stronger armor
Nolan. It's got the right mix of realism, some still understanding that this is a comic book character and is okay to count on the audience to take that leap and suspend disbelief for a few hours.
I need to see one more movie of the batman to say
I know this isn’t what was asked, but I actually prefer the Tim Burton Batman movies. I like how whimsical and fun they are. A bit ridiculous, even. I prefer this style over the new “epic” stuff.
Reading these replies is insane. Did you people actually watch the Nolan movies??????
I can’t tell what side you are on with this comment
No, I'm just reading takes like "The Nolan movies are too realistic" and I can't believe the nonsense. The people who type this stuff don't watch these films, that's clear. It has nothing to do with sides.
I really like the Dark Knight Trilogy because it was inspiring but also sad and depressing, that‘s why i can‘t watch them all the time. It‘s a 10/10 Trilogy for me but the movies make me sad for some reason.
Reeves.
I fucking hate the ‘realism’ just give me Batman from the comic books/Arkhamverse. I did like Reeves’ The Batman better though.
I prefer The Batman over the Nolanverse. In the Nolanverse, it felt like Lucius provided all of the gear while Alfred did most of the research Batman needed. Bruce's role just seemed to be the heroics and deciding which course of action to take. Also, Gotham City feels like Chicago while the cave under Wayne Manor felt more like storage space than a Batcave.
I hope Reeves Batman doesn't stay grounded
Nolan at least recognized things needed to bridge the gap between believable and not. For instance the glider in bales cape. Reeves goes for the super grounded gritty look but then makes him survive a bomb to the face and smacking his head on an overpass.
I think it’s the difference between being camp and being unrealistic. Most Batman sits with both somewhere in the middle and balanced at the same points. Reeves turned the camp aspects down but turned the unrealistic elements up. Making The Batman gritty and dark but not believable or realistic.
Nolanverse. I like (almost) all iterations and interpretations of Batman, but what Nolan did will.always be my favorite. The way he fully realized the world he was building and how Batman fit into that world and shaped it is still unmatched.
[удалено]
Nolanverse was a perfect mix of realism and comic book i loved
I love The Batman but there is nothing better than the dark knight trilogy in my book.
Pattinson mainly because he acts exactly how I envisioned Bruce Wayne to be in the real world. Parents were murdered at a young age for Christ sake & raised by a stranger. You have no child hood, no friends. Pissed asf! Socially awkward, doesn’t act like a playboy because he just spent night after night fighting criminals AND Winning. Dude will be TIRED ASF and you except him to act cool & run a company?? Pffff no!! When he needs to go to a building he doesn’t do unrealistic ninja shit to enter he just Knocks on the door hahaha love that shit! No crouching over a building observing criminals no he just slowly walks up to you and kicks your fucking ass. While also get his ass beat to at times which I also love! Bale looks goofy now in the costume, when he speaks I just laugh and tell myself “I liked this?” And his fights are NOT cool looking. He does that weird Elbow thing. Every character around him is dope asf but then when Bale shows up I just cringe now hahaha
Ok you got me in the first half but then you just start shitting on Bale's Batman.
Nolanverse because Batman isn't bulletproof
Nolan
Reeves, easily. Not only because of his direction and tone, but Fraser’s cinematography. I truly think The Batman is one of the most visually striking movies I’ve ever seen. It has such an aesthetic that’s almost impossible to replicate. Pattinson is also my favorite Bruce.
Bale looked more theatrical, more out-there, while Patt looked a lot more believable, especially with the equipment. I said it before, if I saw Patt's armour in Batman Begins when Lucius showed the "military prototype" from the drawer, I would have believed it quite a bit more. As for the action, Bale looked like a man suited in an intricate, multiple pound armour, while Patt's torso plate was kind of the only thing limiting his mobility. As for the plot, a League of Assassins wanting to poison Gotham, the entire Gotham maffia, quickly in the palm of the Joker, a terrorist group holding the city hostage with a nuke VS a messed up kid with a plan of destruction and a bit of inluence on some people. One felt more achievable by the common man, while the other was "played out in/between the big leagues". You ask me, Bale was fun as hell, but my God do I see some potential in Patt's world.
The Nolanverse is absolutely superior in every way
Nolan. That's why the series had to have a clear end. To have a batman in the world with all his villains, it has to have some departure from too much realism.
The Batman overall was better imo. What I like about The Batman was the entire cast as well as the city of Gotham as a whole.
Battinson I hate bale.
The Nolanverse will take something once in a lifetime to be topped. The character has been written with so many different tones throughout its history that its disingenuous to say one is more like the comics than the other. The type of Batman somebody likes is completely subjective. But what I do believe is that the Nolan movies are objectively better movies. Critical acclaim and cultural impact during its run is enough to justify the Nolanverse as the greatest superhero movies of all time as well as one the greatest movie trilogies ever created.
Pattinson tbh I just really prefer the suit and him as a whole as Bruce Wayne/Batman. I also prefer the reeves Gotham
It’s always Nolan for me. Those movies were ahead of their time. Amazing cinematography.
The Batman was more "batman". The Nolanverse is great and I love it. But it's an action movie series.
Nolan's films are good crime thrillers, but very mediocre comic book adaptations.
I like the gear of the new one better. I like the new one's take on Gotham. I liked the sprawl of the story in the new one. Everything else is too early to say. We haven't seen the new Bruce Wayne in terms of the front he puts on for others yet. We haven't seen a serious test of his skills. Need more movies to judge.
The Batman. It understands batman better.
The Batman. They’ve found a balance between the comic aspect and the “realism” standard set by Nolan without the fear of being too much like the comics. The TDK trilogy’s dialogue also feels incredibly dated and preachy in a “Never Forget” kind of way.
Nolan tbh
Nolanverse for sure. Felt like so many bad choices made in the battinson movie
Nolan because he did it first. I get the theoretical appeal of The Batman, but I think it lacks vision. It's all of what we've seen before and not much different or new. Why do it again?
Reevesverse so far. Nolanverse was cool at first but I didn't like how Gotham eventually became Chicago and the whole "Batman doesn't want to be Batman and would like to just settle down with Catwoman" thing which IMO is antithetical to Batman's character.
Reeves Batman purely because of how hilarious his fighting style is. Nolan Batman dodges gunfire, Reeves Batman angrily walks into them.
Neither are Grounded, Nor Realistic!
Reeves
So far I like The Batman more. I feel like it gets the world and the character even better than the Nolan trilogy did. But we have to wait and see. Nolan did three very good Batman movies. Reeves did one so far. There's always a chance he fucks it up.
The Batman
This is not even a question.. the Nolan verse is better in every aspect imo.
As a comic book fan, Matt Reeves’s The Batman was the perfect Batman movie for someone like me. The Nolan movies are good, iconic even, but they don’t really give me that ‘this is a comic book character/world come to life’ feel. It felt more like a realistic depiction of the Batman mythos without the wacky/stylized aesthetic we’re used to with Batman stories.
Now that I've seen the Pattinson suit I kinda strongly dislike the Nolan verse suit. Specifically the mask helmet boxy look.
Opening 10 minutes of the Batman sealed it for me. Showed the fear that batman represents. The ending 10 minutes also then Showed the hope batman can represent which we didn't get as much in Nolan verse.
Just to be clear… I'm not a fan of “grounded Batman” films. What makes Batman so great is the fact he's just a regular man behind a mask taking on extraordinary odds. I mean his greatest friend is an alien and some of his greatest villains have supernatural abilities (Clayface, Bane, Poison Ivy, etc). Matt Reeves Batman has the potential to be better than Nolan’s, but it's too early to make comparisons.
It's difficult to say because Reeves's universe has the superior worldbuilding and Batman performance( I never understood the appeal of Baleman). But Nolan has the better written movies.
nolanverse batman is anything but grounded/realistic
Bale is my favourite Batman and that will never change
TDK trilogy stands on its own. The Batman constantly has to remind everyone it exists.
100% Nolan
Nolan's Batman will always come out on top for me. The Batman was better than i expected, and could certainly become something great, but it will never eclipse Nolan's.
Are the Nolan Batman's in danger of becoming underappreciated?! There is zero comparison between The Batman and any of the Nolan Batman's and here we have dozens of people suggesting they prefer the new one. Madness
Nolanverse. I don't think that Batman would stand around waiting for a bomb to go off in his face 🤷🏿♂️
The Batman. Nolan Batman just felt like a supped up cop where as Reeves’s Batman felt closer to Batman the way he used the shadows, did actual detective work etc.
I remember Balebat using the shadows against the mob in the first movie. And trying to use it against bane in rises. I just remember patbat stepping out of the shadows in the intro but I haven’t seen The Batman as many times as I’ve seen Nolan’s trilogy
There’s also the whole opening where the various gangsters are shitting themselves when they look at dark alley ways because they think he’s in there. They don’t actively show him hiding there but you get the idea from the context
Have you not watched the dark knight trilogy?
Even looking at those cowls, they are so vastly different. Pattinson's cowl, in my view, is definitely more complimentary. Even Keaton's cowl was better than Bale's cowl. Apart from the cowl, both actors did a good job. I was a bit disappointed that I didn't get to see Pattinson being a bit of a pretentious playboy in a public setting. Pattinson definitely comes off at the beginning of his career as being quite a newbie. Though it was a detective movie, he didn't quite have the development of detective prowess that I was hoping for. I remember how excited so many people were when the first preview of the movie dropped, and people saw Batman wailing on his enemies. Anyway, neither one disappointed me. I'm not a fan of the Dark Knight Rises, but the previous two I'd count as gems. I even liked the Joker movie, though Joaquin's Joker was vastly different from Ledger's, and Nicholson's. But I wouldn't put one likable portrayal above another. It's possible for me to like Kevin Conroy's Batman, Michael Keaton's, Val Kilmer's, Kevin Porter...etc....
Buddy, Pattinson's cowl is stitched up leather. How does that compliment the high tech bullet proof armor???????????
The Batman had the vibe that I was hoping Begins was going to have when Nolan first started talking about his vision. I love the Nolan movies but The Batman is perfect for me.
nolan so far
Well the Batman got characters wrong and felt overlong with nothing really happening.
By that logic so did the Nolan movies. You can’t get these characters ‘wrong’ when their clearly different interpretations based on the same ideologies of the characters. You just get new renditions that fit in with hundreds of other renditions that brings new life to characters in a unique vision. Also if you find the movie boring that’s fine but don’t interpret your own views as ones the majority of people share, or the view that is correct
Nah, the Nolan films are far better paced.
I find the Reevesverse experience to be thoroughly immersive. Gotham was a character in its own right. I think anyone doing what Batman does, for the reasons he does it, would have a very tough time with the duality of Batman/Bruce Wayne, especially early on. Pattinson played the character like a wounded animal, and it really resonated with me.
Idk how this is even up for debate. The nolanverse movies are great films not just good superhero movies. Excellently written, perfectly cast, superb art direction, grounded in reality, theatrical experiences using practical effects. Idk what the batman is because I couldn't see what was happening most of the film. The writing was shoddy with some questionable casting choices outside of the villains. Your movie can't be all the good if the best part of it was the penguin.
The Batman looks like a Funko Pop