• 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 - Review Thread

The Batman doesn't vilify it's audience, it's your politics and world view that is vilifying the movie.

Oh f*ck right off!

What politics?
Nobody brought any political talk into this thread and I'm not even American so I have no stake in your partisan quibbles!

What worldview?
Of being against any kind of racism? Sure feel free to accuse me of that.
 
Last edited:

DKehoe

Gold Member
IMG_7549.jpg
 

DeafTourette

Perpetually Offended
No, you do better! Your silly appeal to emotion doesn't fly with me, sorry.

You are very well aware that Tarantino movies don't vilify their own audiences.

You are conflating two very different contexts in order to make your shoddy argument. A slave owner in a Tarantino movie using derogatory and discriminatory vocabulary makes sense, because he is a nasty racist. The use of the word is intended to make audiences despise these characters. A black character saying it to another black character would also be in line with their character, as evidenced by current real life vernacular and rap music.

In either case, I very much doubt that Tarantino movies are fostering resentment against black people, on the contrary. Movies like Django are putting racists into the vile light that they deserve and make audiences sympathize with the plight of slaves in America. That is the reason why you have no issues with these movies... myself included! A villain or nasty character hating white people and using derogatory terms, I'd have no issue with, as I also have no issue with the Riddler despite the heavy allusions.

The Catwoman line is very different from that. Yes, she is supposed to be a flawed character, but in no way are audiences supposed to regard her as a vile racist. On the contrary, we are supposed to feel for her and be empathetic to her struggles. I somehow very much doubt that DC and Warner have the intention of turning one of her superhero characters into a racist. Flawed or not, we are not supposed to despise Selina. The line was put in there not to portray her as a casual racist, but to appeal to a certain target audience who is resenting white people. In other words, racists!

If a non-black character that I'm supposed to feel sympathetic towards would be using the n-word in a discriminatory fashion, I would be complaining in the exact same manner! Imagine one of the Suicide Squad members casually dropping the line "black people are stupid", you would not be appreciative of that. And you'd be right! Movies, especially not dumb popcorn movies, should be fostering resentment towards demographics!

You'd think suffering through "decades" of this ignominy would make you more aware of these issues. You simply don't care because it is either not targeted at you, or you just want to enjoy these popcorn movies in a braindead manner.

Oh and Catwoman saying that line to the Batman doesn't really matter. First she is perfectly aware of him being a white dude, irrespective of his true identity. Second, the Batman just passively accepting her casual racism and also falling in love with her, can only mean that he either agrees with her, that he simply doesn't care, or that he's too stupid to realize it. None of the options put him in a very favorable light, but I'm somehow supposed to like that character?

Finally there is also the issue of considering Batman a "privileged character". Yes, he is rich, but he also witnessed the death of both his parents at a very young age, suffers from crippling depression, is unable to form human bonds, cannot maintain a healthy relationship with a woman, is unhealthily reclusive, has a battered and bruised body that cannot keep up with his crime fighting demands and he doesn't care about his material wealth beyond using it as a means to facilitate his vigilantism. You think it is a privilege being Batman? Think again! But you don't care, do you? For you he is simply "white and rich", that's enough.

In case you haven't noticed, that is exactly the same kind of rhetoric that the Riddler uses against Batman. He absolutely despises Batman for being a rich orphan, while Riddler himself was turned into a poor orphan whose cruel fate didn't receive any kind of attention. The Riddler is evil because he can only think in strict categories. He is by the true definition of the dictionary, a classicist with a deep grudge towards those who had it easier in life than him. That is the reason why he feels vindicated through his acts violence, because from his perspective he is merely punching up.

If you think a little bit more about that line, it flies directly into the face of everything that the movie wants to convey. It perpetuates Riddler's f*cked up worldview without even realizing it... and that, my friend, is the true irony behind it.

Fair enough. Explanation has me thinking...
 

silentstorm

Member
Superhero movies as a whole have gravitated to dark and gloomy (especially DC). Marvel movies can still have their laughs and jokes, though Dark Phoenix was pretty serious (good movie too though a lot of people didnt like).

I'm more curious is if the trend will ever 180 and superhero movies get back to being colourful and more comedic like the 80s and 90s family fun of Superman and Batman flicks. Or if superhero movies will forever stick to the more gritty realistic way of doing them.
Probably not, even in terms of animated movies, show of hands, who here saw "Return Of The Caped Crusaders" or "Batman VS Two-Face", two recent-ish animated movies which had by far the nicest animated Batman in a long while and one whose relationship with Robin doesn't feel like it will break in the future, heck, that Batman only dissapears mid-conversation with Comissioner Gordon when brainwashed into being evil at one point...because that Batman is too nice and cheerful to just dissapear out of nowhere without saying goodbye.

Last i checked, they did terribly for animated Batman movies and a lot of people don't even know they exist, even though William Shatner voices Two-Face and does a suprisingly good job at it.
 

0neAnd0nly

Member
Superhero movies as a whole have gravitated to dark and gloomy (especially DC). Marvel movies can still have their laughs and jokes, though Dark Phoenix was pretty serious (good movie too though a lot of people didnt like).

I'm more curious is if the trend will ever 180 and superhero movies get back to being colourful and more comedic like the 80s and 90s family fun of Superman and Batman flicks. Or if superhero movies will forever stick to the more gritty realistic way of doing them.

I actually prefer Batman / some DC for this reason, Marvel feels and has felt way too light for a long time. Everything is retconned or magically fixed. You can never trust what you see, deaths included. I suppose one day I will watch thru the universe just to catch up on the hype train it has become, but yeah from what little Marvel I have seen it just seems to never matter and be a little too fluffy.

Batman has always been more the student of detective work, the get your hands dirty hero. He feels pain, he ages. Stuff I enjoy. His criminals are evil and varied. The Rogue Gallery is unmatched.

BUT -

I do think you are on to something personally. Everything is cyclical. People will grow tired of the super serious / adult takes. DC actually for once played this correctly and opened that window too with Shazam, which I totally enjoyed. It’s more colorful, less serious and prone to be self aware but was a joy IMO. Not a wonderful movie of art, but just fun to watch. I wasn’t a huge fan of WW movie, and have zero interest in Aquaman or Flash. But Shazam was a nice , unexpected treat. So I do think there is a market for what you described.

This Batman is a buffoon. He has a giant ticking bomb clock in front of him as it counts down to zero and ignores it, letting it explode in his face. It facilitates a "cool" slow motion sequence, but undermines the character.

All I can muster from this scene that makes me not as critical as you are is that he is early on. I think Reeves said “second year”, so he is still potentially blinded by the goal and less aware of what is going on around him (we see this several times; car chase, enemies sneaking up behind him during fights and inflicting damage, etc.) so I just chalk it up as green.

I do completely get where you are coming from with the underlines his character, my only argument (I am not sure how familiar you are with the comics or batman in media) is that the portrayal we generally see of him is already when he is well established in the role, years in - late 30s/40s. So he has better tuned these areas.

The scene I think was inline with how Alfred had been talking with him about how he had becomes too focused, too removed from his actual self - to see what was really going on around him.

But that’s just me! Fair criticism, for sure.

I think the movie would have been better (to me) if they cut the catwoman subplot, the movie was 2 hrs, ect

I agree. After the film, I really began to think - and if you removed Catwoman entirely the film doesn’t really change. The only thing really added was the club scene when she wears the contacts to get intel, everything else would have unfolded how it did one way or the other. He addition was too much, and wasted a good bit of time for minimal gain IMO.
 
My second favourite batman but it for sure has some big flaws thinking back on it.

I was thoroughly engrossed though.

One of my biggest problems with it is Batman achieved absolutely nothing at all over the whole movie.
 
Last edited:

sol_bad

Member
How can Catwoman even be considered a racist when she is clearly attracted to and wants to be with Batman who is white, she even wants him to run away with her. On top of that her friend that she is trying to help is also white.

Just because someone despises a certain demographic of a race doesn't make them racist. There is a lot of grey in the world, not everything is black and white.
 
Last edited:
My second favourite batman but it for sure has some big flaws thinking back on it.

I was thoroughly engrossed though.

One of my biggest problems with it is Batman achieved absolutely nothing at all over the whole movie.
The achievement is in his growth as a character and realizing being "vengeance" and just the Batman isn't going to change the city. What happens to the Gotham in the end is a direct reflection of himself.
 

Konnor

Member
What assumptions?


Let me get this straight, if someone says here that they despise ghetto black teenagers which is in fact "a certain demographic of a race" that's totally not racist and you'd definitely defend that person, right?
 

sol_bad

Member
Let me get this straight, if someone says here that they despise ghetto black teenagers which is in fact "a certain demographic of a race" that's totally not racist and you'd definitely defend that person, right?

You're trying to make it a black and white situation, I said above that life isn't like that. If someone hated African Americans as a whole, yeah, that's racist. But if someone specifically doesn't like ghetto black teenagers and there is some event that happened in their life to cause that, then so be it. Their life experience and opinion is their own. If someone was to come on these forums and create a thread about that, I wouldn't defend them, I generally don't interact with threads about life experiences or advice requests. And if I do interact in one of those threads it'll be a 1 or 2 sentence reply and then I generally don't return.
 

Konnor

Member
You're trying to make it a black and white situation, I said above that life isn't like that. If someone hated African Americans as a whole, yeah, that's racist. But if someone specifically doesn't like ghetto black teenagers and there is some event that happened in their life to cause that, then so be it. Their life experience and opinion is their own. If someone was to come on these forums and create a thread about that, I wouldn't defend them, I generally don't interact with threads about life experiences or advice requests. And if I do interact in one of those threads it'll be a 1 or 2 sentence reply and then I generally don't return.


So we have it on record that you think saying "I despise ghetto black teenagers" is not racist. OK, this is just funny.
 
You're trying to make it a black and white situation, I said above that life isn't like that. If someone hated African Americans as a whole, yeah, that's racist. But if someone specifically doesn't like ghetto black teenagers and there is some event that happened in their life to cause that, then so be it. Their life experience and opinion is their own. If someone was to come on these forums and create a thread about that, I wouldn't defend them, I generally don't interact with threads about life experiences or advice requests. And if I do interact in one of those threads it'll be a 1 or 2 sentence reply and then I generally don't return.

If people need to explain to you that despising people based on their race is racist, then you should stay the f*ck away from these discussions.

It's simple really:
Do you despise white corrupt men because they are a) white, b)men or c) corrupt?

Surely you despise them because they are corrupt, not because they are white and/or male. In other words, race has nothing to do with it. The same goes for the black ghetto teenagers, you dislike them because they are "ghetto" or "gangsta", not because they are black teenagers. In other words, race has nothing to do with it.

In what world is hating a subset of a demographic because of their race even justified? Like ever? Give me one example where the ethnicity of a person would frikken' matter in relation to her likeability! Or are we somehow to assume that "corrupt white men" are somehow worse than "corrupt black men". Because that would be the logical conclusion to your, quite frankly, inane and dumb comment and would make Catwoman's line so much worse.

How can Catwoman even be considered a racist when she is clearly attracted to and wants to be with Batman who is white, she even wants him to run away with her. On top of that her friend that she is trying to help is also white.

Yeah, because making the difference between a borderline racist comment and the person that say it is apparently too much to ask.

Even if what you are saying is true, it would make Catwoman's comment even dumber, lest you fail to realize her moronic hypocrisy. Falling in love with a white dude while going on racist tirades against white men wouldn't exactly speak for Catwoman's intelligence and be indicative of the braindead script of these superhero movies.

So spare us this nonsensical and inane lecture about binary thinking, you're barely able to grasp the paradoxical nature of your comments.
 

0neAnd0nly

Member
I'm torn on if I really want these spinoff shows or not ...

Yeah… me too. The Gordon one specifically sort of makes me think it will be too much. The Penguin one could work, as a typical mob show, with some success. But I’m with you, what bothers me is I don’t want the story from the shows to directly impact the films. That will feel… a little cheap.
 
I'm torn on if I really want these spinoff shows or not ...

Yeah… me too. The Gordon one specifically sort of makes me think it will be too much. The Penguin one could work, as a typical mob show, with some success. But I’m with you, what bothers me is I don’t want the story from the shows to directly impact the films. That will feel… a little cheap.


It looks like the series has shifted to focus on Arkham. It's HBO, I'm giving the benefit of the doubt and if done well it could be amazing.
 

DKehoe

Gold Member
I think this is the oh shit moment people were talking about during test screenings, but I agree this is a promo for the sequel now.
Yeh? I hadn't been paying attention to the test screening stuff because I wanted to go in fresh. So those had additional scenes? Could the oh shit moment not have been the other Joker scene?

Personally the Joker stuff was my least favourite thing about The Batman. I don't like when these franchise films have stuff in them that's just there to set up the sequel rather than to actually contribute to the film it's in. Also Joker could do with a rest. Explore some other members of the rogues gallery. I'm sure the studio are clamouring to get him in though.
 

trikster40

Member
New scene was nice, not sure why they didn’t leave it in the final cut. It fits everything nicely, pretty gruesome depiction of the Joker. Hope he’s in the sequel
 

DonJorginho

Banned
I'd rather have had this scene in the final cut of the film than the scene of Joker with The Riddler, this fit the film far more.
 

niilokin

Member
batman character and pattinson was good but overall the movie was bit off to me... like the writing somehow felt like it was just very average tv series tier... tried to be dark and gloomy but felt kinda immature , I dunno.
 
I thought it was a pretty good movie with a few cons. Movie could have been 30 minutes shorter and him being bulletproof are two examples I can think of (even if we we have a suspended disbelief that his suit is made of ironman like unbreakable nanotech half of his face and his eyes are still uncovered). Woke moments didn't really detract me from it, but I think they'll turn up the woke to another level on the sequel.

This Batman is a buffoon. He has a giant ticking bomb clock in front of him as it counts down to zero and ignores it, letting it explode in his face. It facilitates a "cool" slow motion sequence, but undermines the character.

I said WTF right then and there. Bomb is about to explode and dude just walks right to it....
 

Chronicle

Member
I thought it was a pretty good movie with a few cons. Movie could have been 30 minutes shorter and him being bulletproof are two examples I can think of (even if we we have a suspended disbelief that his suit is made of ironman like unbreakable nanotech half of his face and his eyes are still uncovered). Woke moments didn't really detract me from it, but I think they'll turn up the woke to another level on the sequel.



I said WTF right then and there. Bomb is about to explode and dude just walks right to it....
I came in here to mention that I saw the film tonight. I was hoping to give my thoughts which were generally positive but I can help but ask you what you meant by woke moments'? I mean, I get the whole woke thing but there is nothing woke about this movie at all (not that I saw anyways). So what are they if you don't mind me asking?
 
I came in here to mention that I saw the film tonight. I was hoping to give my thoughts which were generally positive but I can help but ask you what you meant by woke moments'? I mean, I get the whole woke thing but there is nothing woke about this movie at all (not that I saw anyways). So what are they if you don't mind me asking?
There is a single line about a certain demographic of white people being bad, and people are upset.
 

Jennings

Member
I wonder why they choose to demonize white people and create racial tension rather than focus on a general class struggle.
 

Turnt

Member
I came in here to mention that I saw the film tonight. I was hoping to give my thoughts which were generally positive but I can help but ask you what you meant by woke moments'? I mean, I get the whole woke thing but there is nothing woke about this movie at all (not that I saw anyways). So what are they if you don't mind me asking?
Some people only have one lens through which to view media. Then once they get a hint of “wokeness” it becomes all consuming and a single throwaway line becomes a point of fixation.
 
Top Bottom