The Batman (Matt Reeves, 2022)

[Finch]

a "B" from A.A. Dowd at AV Club

[domino harvey]

Yet more dark gothic shadowy gruff-voiced Batman stuff.
Aren't people bored with this?
Obviously the Adam West series was the definitive Batman.
As Charlie Brooker said "Calling Batman the Dark Knight is like calling Papa Smurf the Blue Patriarch."

I am reluctant to defend any comic book movie, but c'mon, this franchise has always been steeped in noir elements and emotional darkness, and just because the first popular adaptation went in another direction first doesn't mean that's the natural choice

[Jack Phillips]

Just got back from an IMAX screening. One of the most visually inventive films I've seen in a long while. Ooooh, ooooh, there's a scene in it that's a really cool shout out to the ending of Kurosawa'a High and Low. Kerpan, check it out!

[DarkImbecile]

Probably the best extratextual evidence that the film has a critical take on the fascistic qualities of Batman would be if real-life apologists for fascism were offended by it:

[Brian C]

Well, not that it's any surprise coming from Shapiro, but that seems like a highly questionable assertion to me. I think this movie is considerably less ambivalent towards the Batman character than the Nolan films in general and The Dark Knight especially. That film went to great lengths to paint Batman and the Joker as a kind of duality and even borderline co-dependent, but when Riddler tries to paint himself in more or less the same way in this film, he's portrayed as completely delusional. And Nolan's last two films were all about the psychological struggles of whether Batman should even exist, where this Batman's psychological struggle is simply about whether or not he's "making a difference", i.e., is crimefighting hard enough.

Otherwise, though, it's amusing to me how closely this one followed the Nolan template, at least in a lot of superficial ways - their conception of the Catwoman character especially is only very lightly modified from the Nolan films, down to the detail of avoiding the name "Catwoman". And they even repeat the big structural mistake that Nolan made in The Dark Knight, which is to wrap up the story that thefilm was telling, only to jump off into a completely different story in the last third. I won't say that the movie is "too long", exactly, but (as with the Nolan!) that last third was easily the least interesting part of the movie and really tried my patience.

Some other stray observations:

-What exactly was the point of having the Penguin in this movie? He's really barely in it, he has no meaningful impact on the plot, and Farrell's characterization of him was pretty indistinctive. He seems basically here just so that the marketing could say that the Penguin was in the movie. I guess it's suggested that he'll have a bigger role in the sequel, but with everything that's suggested at the end of this movie to be in the sequel ... well, Batman 2: Vengeance is going to be more overstuffed with characters than any Avengers movie.

-Come to think of it, Dano's Riddler wasn't in the movie just a whole lot, either. Also, Kravitz's Catwoman disappears for very lengthy stretches, with the filmmakers seemingly needing to be reminded now and again that she's actually in this movie. Whatever else one might say about this film, it has less emphasis on its villains than any other Batman movie I've ever seen.

-This is an awfully convoluted plot, but it doesn't go anywhere, and then Batman kinda literally pulls the carpet up out from under it anyway and reveals that none of the first two-thirds even mattered. And while I appreciate giving Jeffrey Wright a lot of screentime as Gordon, it's a bit strange watching a Batman movie that for long stretches is basically a detective movie with the two of them as partners. The script could have maybe used another few drafts that made Gordon more of a secondary character and raised the profile of Catwoman. Or something. All I know is that the filmmakers aren't able to keep all these balls in the air.

-Agreed with DI that Turturro is great.

-One thing that was a little jarring to me were the repeated scenes where Batman was just hanging out with the cops, investigating crime scenes and shit. In that way - and that way only! - it actually was reminiscent of the 1960s TV show, where Batman could show up and say "Aha, a clue!".

-There is a scene in this movie that I think is the single most implausible scene in any movie ever, especially taking the rules of the film's own universe into account:

Spoiler

Batman gets knocked unconscious and is taken into the custody of the police, who don't see who he is under the mask? These cops are already demonstrated to be untrusting and borderline hostile to Batman! I guess we're supposed to believe that Gordon held them at bay, but even he had already hinted that he resented not knowing who Batman was. There's just no fucking way to believe that they wouldn't have taken the mask off, no matter what explanation we can imagine. I can believe that Eli Roth killed Hitler more than I can believe this.

[tenia]

I watched New York Ninja recently and seemingly The Batman isn't much smarter when it comes to such a cliché moment. I keep wondering why super-heroes movies keep having scenes like these since they put them in difficulties like these.

[Orlac]

Yet more dark gothic shadowy gruff-voiced Batman stuff.
Aren't people bored with this?
Obviously the Adam West series was the definitive Batman.
As Charlie Brooker said "Calling Batman the Dark Knight is like calling Papa Smurf the Blue Patriarch."

Lewis Wilson clearly is the definitive Batman. Accept no substitutes.

[Mr Sausage]

What exactly was the point of having the Penguin in this movie...I guess it's suggested that he'll have a bigger role in the sequel, but with everything that's suggested at the end of this movie to be in the sequel ... well, Batman 2: Vengeance is going to be more overstuffed with characters than any Avengers movie.

He's getting his own spinoff series on HBOMax ala Peacemaker.

[Finch]

For me, the best Batman movie still is Mask of the Phantasm, followed by Burton's second film, the best of the live action films I've seen so far by a long shot.

[Orlac]

I really reccomend Batman vs. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles! Seriously!

[Maltic]

Yet more dark gothic shadowy gruff-voiced Batman stuff.
Aren't people bored with this?
Obviously the Adam West series was the definitive Batman.
As Charlie Brooker said "Calling Batman the Dark Knight is like calling Papa Smurf the Blue Patriarch."

I am reluctant to defend any comic book movie, but c'mon, this franchise has always been steeped in noir elements and emotional darkness, and just because the first popular adaptation went in another direction first doesn't mean that's the natural choice

I think I used to be on team "what happened to the fun in cosmic book movies?" but then came all those supposedly funny and colourful Marvel ones...

[therewillbeblus]

For me, the best Batman movie still is Mask of the Phantasm, followed by Burton's second film, the best of the live action films I've seen so far by a long shot.

Agreed on Batman Returns (as I’ve written extensively here in comparison to the Nolans, which I also love), but they’re almost all decent to some extent minus the fourth 90s installment. I don’t like superhero movies, but I love Batman, who is not a hero with super powers but rather a psychological study of trauma being sublimated into a savior role with challenging grey philosophical consequences. Like, all my favorites topics put on the table.

Having said that, I’ve been revisiting Batman: the Animated Series for the first time since childhood gradually over the last few months, and it’s easily near the top of Batman-related media. It’s quite dark and mature for a kids show but always somewhat light and hopeful in the end.

[brundlefly]

Yet more dark gothic shadowy gruff-voiced Batman stuff.
Aren't people bored with this?
Obviously the Adam West series was the definitive Batman.
As Charlie Brooker said "Calling Batman the Dark Knight is like calling Papa Smurf the Blue Patriarch."

I am reluctant to defend any comic book movie, but c'mon, this franchise has always been steeped in noir elements and emotional darkness, and just because the first popular adaptation went in another direction first doesn't mean that's the natural choice

I think I used to be on team "what happened to the fun in cosmic book movies?" but then came all those supposedly funny and colourful Marvel ones...

Way back I used to be on team "Why can't they make Batman movies as dark and serious as Miller's Dark Knight?" so I consider the cinematic state of DC a Monkey's Paw that's curled all its digits and is being used to pummel me Batman Black & Blue. I suspect I'll see this one eventually for Dano and because I'm enough of a masochist that I am occasionally up for three hours of abject misery and because (sigh) maybe it's worthwhile. But as far as visual style goes, options were available.



Which ultimately of course doesn't matter as the movie has to fit its own choices and something that looked as unmuted as the image above would allow too much hope to the viewer. It's not like that palette's been absent from recent work; we've seen it in a bunch of digital blockbusters. And surfaced in what I'd argue as the best recent superhero movie, Into the Spider-Verse. But then I was mostly a Marvel kid and can make apologies (while also apologizing) for several of the Marvel Films. Of those, the first Guardians film found a good balance and often found a way to be pretty.

The best of the best, Batman Returns, looks even better now for having co-mingled a sense of play with its brooding sense of purpose. Those were more playful times. For now the best we can do is keep our heads down and get to the chore of suffering seriousfacedness and pray for the return of joy.

[RIP Film]

Have I got the movie for you…



But seriously, I think everyone is quick to forget how much cinematic experimentation has already been done with this character. Take the Adam West people, the closest film in tone to that was clearly Batman & Robin, with Clooney being a modern stand-in. The 60s show was such a product of its time it’s hard to imagine how to bring that back in any modern sense. Recall the Bond franchise with Spectre, how they tried to inject some of that buoyant silliness and people hated it.

I guess my larger point is, these big franchises are always deeply influenced by the times, and it’s no wonder we have a cynical, nihilistic, brooding Batman now. The most interesting and dare I say relevant aspect of the character though, is that he is a vigilante who doesn’t kill. It’s probably the one thing keeping him from being co-opted by right wingers like the Punisher was. But it makes him universally appealing simply as a figure who’s seeking a higher form of justice. I don’t know if this new movie does that, but certainly Nolan wrestled with it.

That said, I agree with the sentiments about Burton striking the perfect balance of gravitas and “this is a comic book”.

[Brian C]

What exactly was the point of having the Penguin in this movie...I guess it's suggested that he'll have a bigger role in the sequel, but with everything that's suggested at the end of this movie to be in the sequel ... well, Batman 2: Vengeance is going to be more overstuffed with characters than any Avengers movie.

He's getting his own spinoff series on HBOMax ala Peacemaker.

Ah, I did not know that. So I hit pretty close to the mark … just a marketing tactic. What a giant fucking waste of time and money these franchise movies have become.

[TheDudeAbides]

Yet more dark gothic shadowy gruff-voiced Batman stuff.
Aren't people bored with this?
Obviously the Adam West series was the definitive Batman.
As Charlie Brooker said "Calling Batman the Dark Knight is like calling Papa Smurf the Blue Patriarch."

The thing is, the notion of who Batman is, what he represents and the tone he is presented in has changed a lot in the years since Adam West's Batman series. Not sure if it began with Frank Miller, but the comic series took a decided dark tone with Miller's The Dark Knight Returns and the majority of adaptations in the years since have been equally dark.

While you might not be a fan of dark & gothic Batman, it has become the style of Batman for nearly the last 40 years (comics first and then the Nolan films) and feels accurate and appropriate for lots and lots of fans of Batman.

Besides we get treated to 1-2 marvel films every year that feel light and goofy

[TheDudeAbides]

Probably the best extratextual evidence that the film has a critical take on the fascistic qualities of Batman would be if real-life apologists for fascism were offended by it

Ben Shapiro is to political discourse what Armond White is to film criticism. Of course he didn't like it, he's probably not a fan of the fact that Batman doesn't use firearms and is decidedly less conservative than he was written in past generations.

Speaking of Armond, he unsurprisingly agrees with Shapiro.

Armond makes a point I agree with, that "we’re back to the moral underworlds of Saw, Seven, and Zodiac" but then veers into his typical Old Man Yells at Cloud territory claiming that Warner Bros want cynical Batman films because they think it sells better than 'Snyder's morality'

[therewillbeblus]

I liked this a lot, and oh boy does it render Nolan’s image of Gotham and Batman as chipper and “comic-booky” by comparison! This is a grimey mood piece that isn’t afraid to get messy in its brutality or filmmaking, while retaining a composed control of vision and never ‘overdoing’ it with style. The sound design was terrific, honing in on violent and abrasive thumps and thrashes as primary tones, and even a moment like the car chase (which these days have an almost perfect batting average of taking me out of a movie or putting me to sleep) was orchestrated as an engrossing pulpy nightmare, with only one lucid and silly contrived beat in how a ramp is constructed last minute. Otherwise it’s a sloppy display of how this might actually play out- a very raw scene of flawed and chaotic driving through variables, divorced from the security of traditional ‘superhero’ mechanics.

Unlike Brian, I liked the third act a lot.

Spoiler

The concept of incel culture/underground QAnon-esque communities on the Internet ready to rise up was treated seriously by the writers and I loved how these ‘nobodys’ with guns posed just as serious (if not more) a threat than anyone else had in the film- to both Batman and the average citizens. Instead of laying all the attention on a big villain showdown, they are portrayed as just as dangerous and worth seeing as such.

I also loved the utterance of “vengeance” to convey the idea of vengeance as selfish, and making room for a sobering transfer of anger into altruistic focus for Batman. Overall the film felt like a realistic depiction of early childhood trauma taking over a life in all ways like a disease putting Nolan’s “grittiness” to shame, but also not taking as much of an interest in fleshing out Bruce’s characterization. Pattinson colors his character with his general demeanor instead of intrusive inserts from the outside, and it’s a welcome tactic.

Paul Dano was the highlight of the film for me- his strengths as an actor are capitalized on perfectly and drenched of their juice. I realize this is sacrilege to say, but I think it’s on par with Ledger’s take on Joker for best superhero villain ever, and the most frightening.

Spoiler

(and I can’t wait for Keoghan’s take on the maniac, what an inspired casting choice!)

[Brian C]

Unlike Brian, I liked the third act a lot.

Spoiler

The concept of incel culture/underground QAnon-esque communities on the Internet ready to rise up was treated seriously by the writers and I loved how these ‘nobodys’ with guns posed just as serious (if not more) a threat than anyone else had in the film- to both Batman and the average citizens. Instead of laying all the attention on a big villain showdown, they are portrayed as just as dangerous and worth seeing as such.

I can't really agree with this. I mean, I suppose I agree with you that it's a plausible enough explanation of the filmmakers' intentions, but if so, the execution leaves a lot to be desired in my view:

Spoiler

Ultimately, the snipers are objectively not as dangerous as the Riddler. The Riddler was able to murder a series of high-profile public figures and destroy the city's infrastructure to a catastrophic extent (not that the movie cared about what must have been thousands likely dead any more than, say, Roland Emmerich might have). All of the snipers together managed to ... wound the mayor-elect, and that's it.

And that's because the entire sniper sequence is conceived as nothing more than a bog-standard action sequence. Batman is able to take on dozens of snipers without any consequences to anyone else in the arena simply by being a superlative ass-kicker - there's no further nuance than this, and not any particular effort to tie this sequence in with anything that come before in the film, either narratively or thematically. It felt inconsequential and low-stakes to me.

Perhaps that's also partly because it made me think of the Las Vegas sniper massacre some years back, when one dude with a sniper rifle shot hundreds of people all by himself. I would have a hard time believing that this association was unintentional on the part of the filmmakers, and to be honest, I vaguely resented it. But even aside from my resentment, it just made the whole sequence feel silly - frankly, even kind of stupid. This should be an incredibly deadly situation, but in this movie, it's not.

And honestly, even aside from all that, the entire sniper fight was very unimaginatively staged. As with a number of other fight scenes in the film, Reeves and his team could think of nothing to do other than make Batman invulnerable to gunshots, so that mostly all Batman had to do was walk up to the bad guys and punch them. Not really very elegant but I guess it gets the job done! It must be tough to come up with novel fight choreography in this day and age, but the filmmakers here just punt it altogether. So he just walks around the catwalk throwing guys over the railing even as they're constantly pelting him with point-blank fire from weapons that are designed to kill even at great distances. Burton and Nolan had some problems at times with staging action sequences too, but I don't remember any of the setpieces from their films being so generic as this. Maybe that brief scene in The Dark Knight when Batman is beating people up to get to Eric Roberts (which, to Reeves' credit, I'll grant that at least he was able to top Nolan in the nightclub brawl department - not by much, but even little victories are worth celebrating!).

Finally, I don't think these guys had any resemblance to either incel or QAnon culture, and I think that distinction matters somewhat. Joker, for better or worse, was an attempt to set its subject in incel culture, portraying him as someone angry at the world over his inability to get laid; Riddler, though, has an actual personal and political motivation that goes beyond mere self-pity. And QAnon is a very specific set of paranoid conspiracy theories, which also doesn't apply here (among other things, the conspiracies in this movie are proven as genuine fact). I think it's more appropriate to see this element of the movie as just a cheap Fight Club ripoff - just destruction for destruction's sake. But unlike Fincher, Reeves isn't able to give his "nobodys" any kind of worldview or actually, any traits whatsoever. And that's a real shortcoming in executing the part of this movie, as well - there's just no stakes, because the filmmakers aren't imaginative enough to realize that they need any.

[therewillbeblus]

Some fair points, and yeah, I’m using specific group signifiers when maybe I should have simply said “extremist-minded anti-govt vigilantes in the making” or something of the like, but I think we are defining “dangerous” differently

Spoiler

Sure, the Riddler is clearly more of a threat and, if measured objectively, did more damage throughout the film, but Batman suffered the greatest and most debilitating hits from these guys at the end. More than from Catwoman or any of the other goons’ gunfire in the one-shot dark fight in the club, for example. That doesn’t mean they are as formidable villains as the Riddler is, but it also demonstrates that anyone with a weapon and an absence of empathy as a priority over introverted hiveminded beliefs poses a serious threat, or the potential, and should not be misjudged.

I also struggle with the complaints about the fights and setpiece staging. I felt the film was pretty clearly going for something muted and different by design- messy and claustrophobic, which worked best with the Penguin car chase in the rain, and not as well here in the end (the grungy ‘messy’ aspect is perhaps best exemplified by the bat signal’s irregular and lazy shopmetal look vs the pristine and symmetrical one in every other iteration). Still though, I found them effective in a totally off-brand way to Batman but on-brand to the raw and stripped-back version Reeves is telling. Now, that doesn’t mean that an audience member needs for forfeit what they’re looking for to subscribe to Reeves’ interests, but I don’t think that ending is supposed to be climactic the way Nolan tried (and, in my opinion, mostly failed) with his installments- it’s supposed to be sparse and quick and rough around the edges, deglamorized and ‘nasty, brutish and short’ in a Hobbesian outlook at society and the reflexively towards superhero blockbuster as well.

Even Riddler is stripped back to be a Joe Shmoe shouting out to Internet followers in the end, thanking this community for empowering him, rather than embodying the loner madness ignited by personal history in a nebulous vacuum that I expected before this reveal. In that way, the film reminded me of Joker’s best moment- when Phoenix is on De Niro’s show at the end and pretends to not give a fuck only to show violently that he is vulnerable and reactively weak when this facade is challenged. The Riddler’s fantastical, mysterious fixed confidence is exhibited as falsely stoic nor independently sustained, so he becomes a more realistic opposite to Ledger’s Joker, the frightening enigma smashed to uncover pathetic soft tissue underneath.

[Orlac]

Nice to see Sandra Dickinson return to DC movies nearly 40 years after she got turned upside down in Supergirl.

[dekadetia]

Nice to see Sandra Dickinson return to DC movies nearly 40 years after she got turned upside down in Supergirl.

Wow...had no idea that was her!

[hanshotfirst1138]

I didn’t think this was a bad film, but the three-hour runtime bordered on psychotic. I like Reeves when his films have so sort of sociopolitical allegory to hang onto like the POTA films, but this kind of felt just like epic brooding for the sake of epic brooding. It didn’t really bring anything new, and at no point did I feel surprised.

[cantinflas]

Deleted Arkham Scene

[therewillbeblus]

It’s not a direct spoiler for this film’s events, but I wouldn’t click the link if you haven’t seen it yet, since it spoils something teased at the end

Amusingly, a system was created for fans to unlock the video if they logged onto a certain site used in the film as a Riddler clue (which spontaneously went live today) and answered a series of three riddles once there. Pretty cool stuff.