-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Batman begins streaming on HBO Max April 18th
- Thread starter ManaByte
- Start date
BouncyFrag
Member
Batman could have thwarted the Riddler’s plan had he only collected all 100 of the Riddler Trophies hidden across Gotham.
Last edited:
SafeOrAlone
Banned
Eh, see, I think it's more understandable to sympathize with someone I disagree with, then to kick someone off a building and call it "justified vigiliantism" lol.
Either way, I'm not putting this character's words on a pedestal. She said what she said. Then she tried to kick someone off a building. She's not someone I'm looking to for answers.
I agree that it's possible to enjoy a movie while taking issue with certain aspects of it. I don't believe that was in contention. Not seeing the connection. Sorry.
Last edited:
The Wise Old Man
Member
My take after watching this film a few times now:
1) Entirely too long. They needed to edit a lot of fat and didn’t. For example the shot of Batman reaching into the bat cage lasted for half a minute for no damn good reason. There were tons of long drawn out shots like this that needed trimming.
2) Ho-hum detective story. Yay, we finally get a proper Batman movie where he tries to solve murders! The bad news? The clues are total nonsense and far too obvious and literal.
3) The design of the cowl. I personally liked the new suit a lot but they dropped the ball on the cowl. I think the main problem with it is the eyebrows. They’re curved like the Adam West cowl eyebrows were. It looks goofy as hell.
4) Jeffry Wrights Lt. Gordon was a campy joke of a character. He comes across as gruff and befuddled. Almost as a joke of a character. Could’ve done better in the role I think. Penguin was like this too but with much more success.
5) Most of this movie appears to have been filmed in a closed set with the 360 degree LED screens as backdrops. It’s very claustrophobic feeling. Only the last scene with the bikes going out of the cemetery seems to have been filmed outside.
1) Entirely too long. They needed to edit a lot of fat and didn’t. For example the shot of Batman reaching into the bat cage lasted for half a minute for no damn good reason. There were tons of long drawn out shots like this that needed trimming.
2) Ho-hum detective story. Yay, we finally get a proper Batman movie where he tries to solve murders! The bad news? The clues are total nonsense and far too obvious and literal.
3) The design of the cowl. I personally liked the new suit a lot but they dropped the ball on the cowl. I think the main problem with it is the eyebrows. They’re curved like the Adam West cowl eyebrows were. It looks goofy as hell.
4) Jeffry Wrights Lt. Gordon was a campy joke of a character. He comes across as gruff and befuddled. Almost as a joke of a character. Could’ve done better in the role I think. Penguin was like this too but with much more success.
5) Most of this movie appears to have been filmed in a closed set with the 360 degree LED screens as backdrops. It’s very claustrophobic feeling. Only the last scene with the bikes going out of the cemetery seems to have been filmed outside.
Mato
Member
Visually pretty, nice dark vibe and Pattinson is a good Batman - certainly better than Affleck. I didn't mind the long duration either. But I felt very emotionally uninvested throughout the film. The story and the characters didn't capture me. Some scenes came across as rather awkard e.g. the shot with the flare near the end. It was an OK movie.
strange headache
Banned
So let me get this straight, you cannot sympathize with somebody wanting to throw a corrupt cop off the roof who killed your best friend in cold blood, but denigrating other people based on the color of their skin is totally fine? Batman is all about vigilantism, that is the core motivational force behind his actions. He literally calls himself "vengeance", yet you cannot extend that same theme to Catwoman? I find that hard to believe. It looks more like you're seeking ways to justify that crappy line of dialogue.
Look, Catwoman's line is undeniably woke. You can debate whether it is representative of the whole (I think not), but it does make you question other aspects of the movie. Like a hair in your soup, that one line taints the rest of the experience. It's far from the worst aspects of the movie, but one can easily see why people take issue with it.
As I said before, I can enjoy the movie's style and atmosphere, but the crappy story and dialogue prevent it from reaching its true potential. It's a real shame too, because that movie could have been so much more.
FunkMiller
Member
Look, the picture of the girl with a dick is undeniably anti-trans. You can debate whether it is representative of the whole (I think not), but it does make you question other aspects of the game. Like a hair in your soup, that one image taints the rest of the experience. It's far from the worst aspects of the game, but one can easily see why people take issue with it.
See the problem?
We live in a world where one small element of a piece of media is wrongly used to either define, or denigrate the entire thing. And it’s done to push a bias or political agenda.
We cannot rightly criticise this tactic from one side, but not do the same for the other.
The Batman is not woke and anti-white people, any more than Cyberpunk was anti-trans.
SafeOrAlone
Banned
I don’t actually think you’d push someone off a building and I’m not racist, so I’m just going to leave that part of the discussion out from now on.
My point is, I think it’s okay to have a character say questionable things, without resting the message of the film upon them.
I don’t really see the problem. People say stuff like that in real life too. We don’t have to agree with her, and I was backing up that point with the fact that she’s also kicking people off of buildings, so she’s a morally questionable character, not the voice of reason.
I think people are extra sensitive, understandably so. I see where you are coming from, but it didn’t bother me. If Captain Marvel had flown down and started lecturing about white journalists, I’d be bothered.
Nobody_Important
“Aww, it’s so...average,” she said to him in a cold brick of passion
Yeah she is the best Catwoman we have gotten so far. Not that she has much competition. I was worried about her role in the movie because I wasn't sure how good of an actress she was, but she nailed it. her breakdown scene before she tries to kick the cop off the ledge was great. She was able to telegraph the hurt and the anguish without saying a word while the voicemail played. It also helped that she and Pattinson have good chemistry with each other. Hope they bring her back.
Also on the subject of casting I loved that guy as Riddler. When I first heard about it and saw it I was like ehhhhhh, but he nails the creepy outcast that is clearly off his rocker vibe that they were going for. The scene with him and Batman in the prison was fantastic. He was so in control. So "above" it. Laying out the chessboard that he set and then once he realized that batman wasn't like him it broke him and the way he went off gave me chills. Dude deserves some award noms at the very least for that scene alone imo.
Last edited:
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
I think Kravitz sold the part by how hard she went in both directions of the character. When she was trying to be sultry and use her feminine charms she turned it on 200%, and the same when she was fighting like a cat or getting emotional. She just went for it and it totally worked.
Paul Dano worked for me as Riddler because instead of giving into any camp, it's like he stepped back and thought "why would anyone strive to be a villain like this, telling jokes and riddles?". And he found it in a character that was so absolutely overcome with rage and a knowing knowledge of being wronged that it fell into place. He was literally driven insane by rage and loss and built an intricate world within his head based on several artifacts and circumstances. He and Reeves really boiled down the essence of what makes a classic comic character, but presented for a modern movie.
Last edited:
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
You know, while we're on the topic of the casting, Wright was also amazing as Gordon. From the very second he shows up, stanning for Batman, that solemn look, the trench coat, the glasses: it immediately tells you he's Gordon. Then when he's with Batman they cut right to core of the character: he's a cop amongst cops, however, despite their disdain for the vigilante and their obvious want to cling onto their insular kind of tribal ways, Wright (as Gordon) conveys how he doesn't care about any of that, only justice, and that's why he's choosing Batman over them.
Really this movie just keeps getting better the more I think about it.
Really this movie just keeps getting better the more I think about it.
Your opinion is that it is a reach. I don't really think it is. Whether another another black person is seen somewhere in that group that I didn't see in my viewing isn't really going to change my opinion on it.
mcjmetroid
Member
That infamous line from catwoman stuck out to me as well. It kinda came out of nowhere and was jarring to hear in a movie these days.
Catwomans story was a lot more subtle and didn't need it in my opinion.
Catwomans story was a lot more subtle and didn't need it in my opinion.
thefool
Member
The cyberpunk comparison reminds me of the user in the tyson thread comparing the incident with the will smith slap. It's certainly all kinetic energy, but that's where the similarities end.
The Batman has imagery, characterization and dialogue that emphasizes certain race issues. You can find such thematic choice egregious, a matter of no-concern or merely another layer of the textured world Reeves built. That's how art resonates with us.
Cyberpunk has really nothing to say about people with dicks beyond acknowledging their existence.
Conflating the two is the sort of trapping radicals do to position their extremes next to real issues as if they are equal.
The Batman has imagery, characterization and dialogue that emphasizes certain race issues. You can find such thematic choice egregious, a matter of no-concern or merely another layer of the textured world Reeves built. That's how art resonates with us.
Cyberpunk has really nothing to say about people with dicks beyond acknowledging their existence.
Conflating the two is the sort of trapping radicals do to position their extremes next to real issues as if they are equal.
strange headache
Banned
No, I really don't see the problem since both are entirely different situations. By your faulty comparison, one could easily defuse any sort of criticism, valid or not. If you remember, I took part in the GAF contest about the Cyberpunk poster. The REE crowd wasn't contempt with mere criticism, they actually tried to cancel and boycott the movie. Nobody is doing that here though in regards to the Batman, so your overblown response to a bit of criticism about a bad line of dialogue is just as bad as the hyperbolic reactions you try to ridicule.
Zoë Kravitz who plays Catwoman literally acknowledged her woke worldview in reference to that "white male privilege" line and the symbolic nature of the movie itself:
Straight from the Horse's mouth. If it is important enough to be put in the movie, it is also important enough to be talked about.
You're essentially kafkatrapping people into a binary fallacy by implying that any sort of criticism maut fall on either extreme side of the spectrum, when it is perfectly reasonable to assume that some aspects of the movie are bad, while others are good. IT seems to me like you just don't want to acknowledge these issues because you liked the movie more than those who criticize it for its heavy-handed allusions and demographic casting choices.
That's fine, you don't have to agree with this, but your desperate attempt at shutting down any discussion by strenuously attributing any sort of criticism to ideological zealotry is f*cking wank.
Last edited:
Pegasus Actual
Member
Wow this is a boring turd. I'm slamming White Claws like Elon Musk over here but I think I'm going to have to finish this another day.
SafeOrAlone
Banned
Gotcha. I guess if you want to ignore certain elements that get in the way of your point, that’s your prerogative.
I’ve found that drinking during a slow movie can ruin the experience and make it hard to focus on details.
Unlike partaking in marijuana before a movie.
Everyone’s different, but the first time I tried sneaking alcohol into a theater, I couldn’t even enjoy the movie.
Last edited:
Pegasus Actual
Member
Yeah but the movie drove me to drink in the first place. Why is this 3 hours? Anyway I played Rocket League and berated my teammates so I'm good now. I might try to finish this thing before I fall asleep but I don't know.
You can't ignore certain elements that get in the way of your point if you don't originally notice or remember those elements. It is reaching for you because you noticed or remembered that black character in the scene so you knew that the poster was using evidence that was wrong to prove his views but for that person it wouldn't be reaching if they didn't notice or remember that character.
FunkMiller
Member
QSD
Member
Saw this yesterday and was pleasantly surprised. It was nice the movie had a kind of noir-ish, slightly stylized aspect to it coming off the dreary realism of the nolan movies. The movie also felt less cerebral which also benefited the story. Even so, I still felt like in a movie with such a realistic setting and believable story/characters, the thing that stands out the most is Batman himself, who seemed inherently silly running around in his suit, in between all these other characters living out very real dramas. This was also an issue with the Nolan movies for me.
I liked the bad guys as mobsters and the riddler was suitably creepy.
I liked the bad guys as mobsters and the riddler was suitably creepy.
SafeOrAlone
Banned
Yes, you can. It's called being "ignorant". The key section of that word being "ignore". You weren't aware of the other black gang member - you were ignorant to his presence. Yet, he was there, and stands in contrast to the point that this scene was about white people pressuring a black person.
I thought he was rather aloof and clueless as Gordon. Or perhaps it was the writing.
He is a good actor though.
What is the Catwoman line? I can't remember it.
strange headache
Banned
"All anyone cares about in this place are these white privileged a**holes: the mayor, the commissioner, the DA, now Thomas and Bruce Wayne. I mean, as far as I'm concerned, that psycho is right to go after these creeps."
Ah. The inclusion of 'white' in this case.
FunkMiller
Member
A line spoken directly to one of the men she considers to be a white privileged asshole, who is actually Batman. Thus completely undercutting her point, and making her, the black femme fatale, look a bit stupid.
So woke!
Last edited:
strange headache
Banned
Dude I literally posted you an interview with the actress talking about white privilege, the movie's allusions to modern day societal talking points and the importance of that line.
It is painfully obvious that the line in question wasn't meant to make her look stupid, but empowering.
By this point, you're just being willfully obtuse.
Last edited:
FunkMiller
Member
And I literally watched the movie where Catwoman made herself look a bit stupid by tarring every white dude with the same brush. Zoe Kravitz is welcome to say whatever she likes, but the fact remains…. thats the context the line was delivered in. You think Matt Reeves wasn’t aware of it? You think maybe there’s a bit more nuance going on than just “white man bad!” …Which is all you want to see and hear?
Last edited:
strange headache
Banned
Again, read her interview. He certainly wasn't and neither was it his intention to ridicule Catwoman in that scene.
You're just grasping at straws to keep, because you can't admit that you're simply wrong. I gave you factual evidence, you keep retorting with your subjective interpretations.
So you agree that Catwoman's woke rhetoric is stupid.
Alrighty then, I think we're done here.
FunkMiller
Member
Ah, so now Matt Reeves didn’t know what he was writing and filming then? Gotcha.
It‘s a politically motivated comment, certainly. But it’s one that’s very obviously undercut by the person it’s being delivered to.
A point you, and so many others in this thread, are desperate to ignore, because it doesn’t fit the narrative you’re trying to construct.
Keihart
Member
People complaining about the Bruce part, don't you like year one, court of owls or zero year? And about the pacing? what about Death of the family?
I think the inspiration on this comics to be exactly what i wanted. Scott Snyder is the best thing to happen to Batman after Frank Miller.
I think the inspiration on this comics to be exactly what i wanted. Scott Snyder is the best thing to happen to Batman after Frank Miller.
strange headache
Banned
So let me get this straight...
...despite the woke line in the movie,
...despite Zoë Kravitz riding the woke wave,
...despite the actress outright admitting to it,
...despite how said line is marketed to audiences,
...despite the director's own admission of alluding to these issues,
...despite the deliberate casting,
...you are still trying to tell me that it doesn't exist in movie and that people should simply accept your factually wrong interpretation without any evidence at all. Your whole "hurr, durr Matt Reeves just wanted to make her look dumb" schtick is just so hilariously wrong, it's laughable.
The movie's own director is telling you, ffs:
Sorry, but maybe you shouldn't be complaining about the culture warriors, you are just as boneheaded as them.
Last edited:
Yoboman
Member
You guys are like the street level thugs in the movie, scared of Batman being around every corner. Except your Batman is the WOKE PROPAGANDA
strange headache
Banned
If he'd be screeching from the shadows and wearing a pussy hat... maybe.
FunkMiller
Member
So, your problem really just is that the movie (or at least this one single line from it) is consciously commenting on the privilege that some white people have then? That’s it, is it?
The young black woman makes a salient and quite accurate comment about the rich white assholes she sees around her, to the richest white guy in the whole city… who just happens to be the hero of the entire damn thing, and you have a problem with this.
Yes, it’s a deliberately politically motivated comment (I have never claimed otherwise), but as repeatedly stated, one that is given in a context that - and I’ll put this is in bold - proves it to be inaccurate.
Are you just mad that the film contains a very small bit of social commentary? If so, why?
I’m the first to jump up and down something made just to appeal to a political agenda, but this movie really ain’t that.
Last edited:
strange headache
Banned
My problem is that your interpretation of that line was quite simply wrong. It is factually what people would describe as "woke" and also intended as such as evidenced by the actress and the director. I've presented evidence, you've presented nothing so far.
You can feel about that line however you please, but that doesn't change the fact that people are rightfully calling it out for making skin pigmentation a function of wealth and corruption.
My other problem is that you keep shifting goalposts because you have no leg to stand on. We've gone from "there are no woke elements in the movie", to "that woke line is intended to make Catwoman look bad", to "the young black woman makes a salient and accurate comment". You can't even keep your own narrative straight anymore.
Lastly, your constant straw-manning is just tiresome. I have nothing against social commentary, class struggle, corruption and wealth inequality are all good points to criticize in modern society and plenty of good movies do that (Snowpiercer, The Platform, Wolf of Wallstreet, Slumdog Millionaire, etc...).
I have something against bad social commentary that makes social inequality not a class struggle, but the mere result of skin pigmentation. I do not appreciate a Batman movie being abused as a platform to popularize the silly notion of "white privilege" and to create resentment against white people. It is a bad line of dialogue that completely misses the point that wealth and power are what corrupt, not the color of your skin.
Badlucktroll
Member
Yeah, its like a whole new person was created from nothing.
Decontamination Silo
Banned
I thought the Catwoman line, in a vacuum, wasn't awful. But Riddler is clearly cut from the extremely online white incel cloth. Especially at the end when he musters help from his online friends with the chat log they showed. These two points combined is a very clear message in my opinion.
Thankfully the rest of the movie wasn't good enough for me to think these aspects "ruined" it. It wasn't awful, just very mild and boring. It was an absolute chore to finish and this morning I woke up wishing I hadn't wasted my whole night watching it.
Thankfully the rest of the movie wasn't good enough for me to think these aspects "ruined" it. It wasn't awful, just very mild and boring. It was an absolute chore to finish and this morning I woke up wishing I hadn't wasted my whole night watching it.
Last edited:
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Seriously. It's fine to have opinions about certain elements of the writing, but this complaining is a mountain out of a molehill. Art is subjective and if it really is a huge nitpicky problem to some of you, then so be it, but don't make it our problem too.
strange headache
Banned
The movie is so flat, there's really not much else to talk about anyway. Without this discussion, the thread would have sunk to the bottom a long time ago.
The only ones making a mountain out of a molehill are the obsessive crusaders who simply can't let others have their opinions too.
Feel free to ignore this particular discussion if you're not interested and contribute something else instead.
So it's okay when you bring it up in the Northman thread, but everybody else is not allowed to do the same in other threads?
It's hardly a derail when the discussion pertains directly to the movie anyway.
Last edited:
Fbh
Member
Finally saw it yesterday.
I thought it was ok, still had fun but it was really underwhelming and the length didn't feel justified. Loved the look and mood and I think Pattinson did a great job as Batman (not a fan of his Bruce, though that has more to do with the writing).
It was nice having a Batman movie that really leans into the detective aspect of the characters but the actual investigation and riddles were pretty bland. Too much stuff solved with coincidence and luck and too much time spent getting to people only to be like "you are the one I'm looking for!", "nope", "oh, ok". The whole "Rata Alada" thing in particular just felt really dumb and there were a bunch of small inconsistencies that just add app.
Like opening with a whole monologue about the symbol being something criminals recognize only for the first thugs to not know who he is, or Batman not backing away when a bomb was obviously about to blow, or him being blacked out surrounded by police and no one taking his mask off, or the DA having zero protection when he was an obvious target, etc.
The final act was also pretty bland and didn't fit the rest of the movie. It felt like they remembered superhero movies need to end with a big fight, and it also diminishes the Riddler IMO, he goes from exposing and punishing the corrupt to generic mass murder
I thought it was ok, still had fun but it was really underwhelming and the length didn't feel justified. Loved the look and mood and I think Pattinson did a great job as Batman (not a fan of his Bruce, though that has more to do with the writing).
It was nice having a Batman movie that really leans into the detective aspect of the characters but the actual investigation and riddles were pretty bland. Too much stuff solved with coincidence and luck and too much time spent getting to people only to be like "you are the one I'm looking for!", "nope", "oh, ok". The whole "Rata Alada" thing in particular just felt really dumb and there were a bunch of small inconsistencies that just add app.
Like opening with a whole monologue about the symbol being something criminals recognize only for the first thugs to not know who he is, or Batman not backing away when a bomb was obviously about to blow, or him being blacked out surrounded by police and no one taking his mask off, or the DA having zero protection when he was an obvious target, etc.
The final act was also pretty bland and didn't fit the rest of the movie. It felt like they remembered superhero movies need to end with a big fight, and it also diminishes the Riddler IMO, he goes from exposing and punishing the corrupt to generic mass murder
ManaByte
Member
It happened in the last thread about the movie too. Same arguments there.Seriously. It's fine to have opinions about certain elements of the writing, but this complaining is a mountain out of a molehill. Art is subjective and if it really is a huge nitpicky problem to some of you, then so be it, but don't make it our problem too.
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
I don't know dude, it kind of feels like you're using circular logic to continue complaining about a nothing of a line: because she mentions white entitlement within her society, that means the entire movie must be politically motivated - and that's clearly not the case.
The character is a down-trodden black woman in America. It's a completely understandable opinion she briefly shares, which the majority of us in the US merely acknowledged and didn't give a second thought about.
It's a shame that the most comic book Batman movie ever is being reduced to a single line from a supporting character.
SafeOrAlone
Banned
I think it's fine to discuss but gimme a break with the "well, the movie is so flat, there is nothing else to discuss" bit.
If you want to hyper fixate on it, that's fine, but there is plenty to discuss otherwise.
If you want to hyper fixate on it, that's fine, but there is plenty to discuss otherwise.
Last edited:
strange headache
Banned
It is hard to ignore when there are a bazillion articles from the actress and the director talking about the movie's social commentary. I'm absolutely fine with media tackling the issues of wealth inequality and political corruption, but skin color has nothing to do with this. Also what exactly do you mean by "white entitlement"?
Oh, I can totally relate to the issues of class differences and the lack of social mobility, but not skin pigmentation.
It's a shame that such a stylish movie is bogged down with a bad script, crappy dialogue and clichéd characters. Nolan's Batman is still far superior, except for visual style.
I've already posted a lengthy review about other things that I liked and did not like in another thread. So it's not like I am fixating on anything here, just defending myself against dumb accusations and people trying to shut down discussion about something that is clearly present in the movie. Don't fret though, I've said my piece and am done with it.
Last edited:
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
We all know what she meant by the line.
Again I think you're reading far too much into this. It's really not a big deal and the movie simply is not a social commentary any more than any other comic movie is.
