Am I losing my mind or something? Everywhere I go, I see people praise Reeves' Batman like it's literally the greatest fucking Batman story ever told, even people I would normally trust with having decent opinions about Yea Forums stuff. Then I decided to check this billionth "why The Batman is the tits" essay, and it told me how the movie is much more personal because they used fucking depth of field and shot/reverse shot.
When I watched it, the movie it didn't shake me to the core at all. Sure, it was fine and surprisingly well-paced, but it didn't even feel much like a Batman story. Bruce was too angsty and downright dumb, he stumbles through the story because it feels like everyone wants him to succeed, including the villains. And he still fucks it up somehow. The movie also wasn't some technical marvel, it was nice to look at but nothing jaw-dropping.
So why the fuck does everyone seem to love it so much?
Am I losing my mind or something? Everywhere I go...
Wow it's almost like people other than you have different opinions on movies or something
Because people had convinced themselves it was a masterpiece for months beforehand. Some of them weren’t gonna let it go. Honestly I thought it was a pretty damn boring movie. Didn’t do much for me and I had a hard time caring about Bruce or Batman in the story. Like if it had a good script, it might’ve been amazing.
My guess is that most people don't realise that the film was just a good palate cleanser for the Snyder shit.
Its easily the best Batman has been on film. But its also not a particularly engaging movie. Its also funnt to me how much of the narrative is based around shitting on the Nolan movies without realizing why they had so much crossover value, or over analyzing them
>Its easily the best Batman has been on film.
lmao
Because people dotn watch many movies. Since its not like other Marvel movies people think it's a masterpiece when it's just a poorly written
Shut up and let other people have fun with a movie you were too up yourself over to enjoy
Years ago, Yea Forums would have trashed the movie. Now they eat this shit up like ice cream. It's an edgy movie that borders on the same familiar tropes yet mixes just enough to seem new in some fashion without experimenting too far. It's the perfect compromise. Perfect bait. And they all fell for it.
It's garbage.
Most people are stupid
I should clarify, he's basically the closest thing to modern comic Batman in movies, in a nonoffensive way. Notice how much praise for this movie comes from younger people who are more casual.
>movie is released
>most people like it
>create a strawman about the movie being the most overrated thing that ever existed so you can be contrarian in the most edgy way possible
Everytime
When you grow up you won't care that other people like other movies, nolanbabby.
I thought it was just okay
Rob was much more kino than Bale
DC's strategy for making acclaimed movies is to just rip off some other director's movies and put superheroes in it. It started with Dark Knight which was a huge hit for DC and was basically just a Michael Mann movie like Heat but with Superheroes in it, and they've been doing the same thing since. The truth is that most people who've watch these movies haven't seen the movies they're blatantly taking from so it seems like this great movie when in reality it's just a pale imitation of what's come before.
If you mean on the internet, you need to remember seemingly no one understands how to or realizes the importance of speaking with any form of nuance or subtlety. Everything, well almost everything is the greatest thing ever and life changing and beautiful and groundbreaking or the worst thing ever and disastrous and an insult to everything that came before. Absolutely no in between, no pretty good, no OK, no not bad. THE BEST or THE WORST. I just take praise to mean that it's probably worth watching, even though that's not always a guarantee, and criticism to mean may not be worth paying to see and wait till I can see it when it's easily available.
But to me I saw very little difference between them and Nolan movies they are supposed to go so far beyond. Everyone was talking about "realism" and grounded this movie was compared to past movies including Nolans and then Batman takes a wireless contact lens camera out of his eye and I'm like WTF? This is more believable than Bruce getting rejected military RND supplies from his company, OK. People just say shit, user. Even what should be relatively innocuous online conversation or statements basically have the same wording and thought process or intentions as click bait article titles. Just assume everyone is flat out lying for attention or legitimately has their head stuck so far up their own ass that eating and shitting are basically the same act.
People just like whatever is the most recent version of something. Right now the Reeves Batman is a relative blank slate, and it’s bogged down by no additional DC continuity or studio politics, so people are excited for what’s to potentially come next. We’ll see how people feel about it 10 years from now.
big brain take
>Its easily the best Batman has been on film
It's not film, it's digital. This is the very first Batman movie to be shot on digital which automatically makes it less than Nolan's and Burton's movies, hell even Schumacher and Snyder's.
it was very good, definitely better than TDKR. been a long time since I've watched the other 2 though.
It's like Nolan's Batman except with good actors, good visuals, and good music, and a much better planned and consistent tone
Because of the cinematography and the actors, same reason why Blade Runner 2049 (and Dune) was popular, except this one didn't flop because it had Batman.
Also, because one of the selling points were the detective angle that wasn't touched that much in previous movies. Add in recency bias, a desperate wish from comic fans to be legitimized (like with Joker) and Marvel fatigue (good thing, wish it was more widespread) and you have this.
The runtime wasn't a problem for me, what was a problem was that all the characters besides Bruce and Selina, were one dimemsional cardboard cutouts. Like Gordon is literally there to act surprised and tell the audience what is happening on screen.
I'd say he was better as Batman though the movie doesn't do anything interesting with Batman so he ends up boring as dirt in this, but Bale was leagues better as Bruce. Like sorry, but Pattinson's Bruce was annoying as fuck with that emo bullshit with Alfred.
>and a much better planned and consistent tone
This just isn't true at all. Like the last portion of the movie was a common complaint you see online because it basically turns into another movie after Riddler gives himself up. Probably because they couldn't go through with copying Seven, and needed to turn it into a generic capefest and give Batman his only win. But even then the ending highlights that it wasn't well planned at all, whereas Nolan didn't need an extra half hour to tell his story in BB, he planned everything and worked it throughout the movie about themes of fear, about Batman being a symbol, etc.
>Then I decided to check this billionth "why The Batman is the tits" essay
Well, THERE'S your problem...
Pretty much this. I mean, I like the movie, but the way people are treating it as this trailblazing work of an auteur…
I also liked "Joker," but the people saying it's "one of the greatest films ever" are just people who have never watched a movie that didn't have a promotional Doritos tie-in, and have never seen Taxi Driver.
its the wonder of "VIRAL" marketing, pay some kids, teenagers, etc from a slush fund money to tell their friends and lovers, etc that this "product here" is the best ever, and to keep doing so for 2 weeks+/- a couple days, EACH. Also try to choose "popular" in connections/likes/monetary value assets. This raises funds and support for your "product here" AND generally makes the financiers happy as well; you are generally also funding their own cousins, kids, favorite people.
This causes a temporary spike in all the rapidly changing social apps/groups/news/feeds/etc.
Rinse and repeat, also the main reason Yea Forums and 4channel are having such rapid turnover rates compared to the old days.
It looks bad so I don't plan on watching it
I like it not because it's edgy, but because it shows a fresh, inexperienced Batman and focuses more on his detective skills rather than "HURR DURR PUNCHING YOU MEANS I WIN"
>Like Gordon is literally there to act surprised and tell the audience what is happening on screen.
He's playing the Greek Chorus/Krillin role and it's an important part of storytelling.
Sure is Yea Forums in here. Why does Yea Forums get so much traffic from all the worst boards?
The Batman is a good movie with a great movie inside of it. With the right editing, The Batman would be truly great, but the pure studio shittery that is the finale and last act drags it down. Had it leaned into the Se7en feel and gone for a non-action, explosion-free ending it would have been great.
More like the Watson character; gives Sherlock someone to explain his reasonings diagetically.
Please stop using that word "fresh". It hardly describes the movie and only further validates my point about it just doing the bare mininum to be different.
You're only describing it vaguely. Can you describe to me another reason you enjoyed it besides it just trying to reinterpret the same characters? Did it have a message? Did it make you think? Was there anything substantial or meaningful, user?
TDK isn't great either, but apparently you had no problem with everyone fellating it as the greatest film of all time for 14 years
user, op asked why, not that its inconcievably bad. asking for an explanation =/= other opinions are wrong. retarded namefag.
...I didn't use it to describe the movie, retard. I used it to describe Batman; As in "He's only been Batman for 2 years, so he comparatively a fresh Batman"
Learn to fucking read.
The main message at the end was blind rage won't fix anything and you need a hopeful message to bring about real change. If that isn't relevant to today's political climate, then I don't know what is.
idk, seems pretty broadly applicable. I dont think the message is new. Doesnt mean its a bad message, just thats its not exactly alien to batman. Its actually pretty downright common.
Really? Well I didn't see it but I'll take your word for it. I don't plan to see it because it just looks uninteresting. Who knows if the masses even paid attention to that.
Or the fact that they needed a movie about a guy dressed as a bat to emphasize that point is...odd.
I see what you mean.
But Batman Begins did the same thing, and he gets his ass kicked in that movie too. So I don't see how it's fresh.
Yes, I rambled a bit off topic but I don't think they did anything new.
It feels made by people who fundamentally do not like Batman, how he works, his mythos, any of it.
I don't understand how anyone can like it when it can't even get the bare bones basic idea of a character right.
"Batman just punches poor people and nothing else" is literally the single worst and shallowest depiction of Batman possible, something not a single fucking piece of Good Batman media actually showed as the truth, being projected into the one big main item of This Batman, because people who hate how he normally is wants him to be this bullshitery.
That and some generic as all hell Wokenss found in literally everything else just being a sprinkle on top to avoid everything about this garbage fire.
>But Batman Begins did the same thing, and he gets his ass kicked in that movie too. So I don't see how it's fresh.
...Did you not read my post?
"FRESH" as in a NEW Batman in-universe. Not as a fresh take on Batman, but because he literally just started being Batman 2 years ago!
Where? That guy at your job you don't like? People were making fun of TDK a few years later.
Comparing this to Joker is stupid. Joker is a Golden Lion winner. The Batman never went through that. Not saying they're the same, just that both are very different kind of stories. The Batman is meant to start a cinematic universe while Joker is meant as a standalone story set in other universe.
>The most edgy way possible
huh?
Difference is that Joker stays grounded all the time. There's no big showdown at the end, just a revolution, which is how The Batman should've ended. Riddler starting a revolution and Batman having to chose to either protect the rich or the poor.
look up the top movies of all time on imdb
I watched this 2 days ago having completely dismissed it previously, actually really liked it.
>Batman having to chose to either protect the rich or the poor.
Would be kino. Rich guy with daddy issues has to choose between being a hero of the poor that hate him or the rich that also hate him, knowing if he choses badly he will become just like his father. Why didn't they do this?
user no one uses IMDB as an active community since the forums stopped being a thing. I mean actual human beings.
It doesn't help that so much of the discourse of The Batman is punching down on the Nolan Batman movies to elevate it.
>Why didn't they do this?
Because the movie was running out of time, so they decided to go with drowning the poor and protecting the rich black queen.
We are still in the honey moon period
I will say I really like the Gotham they set up, how it looks like it hadn't been upgraded since the 60s, the casual gothic architecture some of it falling apart, the density, just a total shit hole, all quite nice
based retard snowflake
I see you are a man of culture
this
everything is the goddamn greatest when it's been released so recently, just give it a year or two and the hot takes will start rolling in.
Nolan Bats was the worst.
The best DC flick still isnt on par with the worst marvel film.
I thought this was better than Thor The Dark World or Eternals
Batman's arc in the movie is realizing that beating up bad guys isn't enough. Did you even watch the movie?
Why are you so afraid for Batman to be a fuckup in his second year of crime fighting?