Holy Fucking Kino

>Can't even let Batman use his cape to fly over the city because it's not heckin realistic
Thanks for proving his point

yah

Attached: TheBatmanFlightBTS.webm (720x720, 2.57M)

thats just times square wtf

>paranormal
You aren't getting anything paranormal, retard. It's another "realistic" Batmanverse.

I'm still trying to figure out how to improve the quality of the webm footage in a clip of that length. Maybe I would have to reduce the dimensions of the video. The cryptic formatting of the ffmpeg parameters doesn't help.

Attached: 1652162422077.webm (1280x720, 2.84M)

>Has space for the paranormal.
>Clayface will not even have his shapeshifting powers in the Penguin series
>Matt Reeves literally said he wants to make Mr. Freeze more realistic to fit his universe

Attached: 1652120984767.jpg (471x388, 23.51K)

I don't even like the Dark Knight, but it is a memorable movie. All I remember about the Batman is laughing at Paul Dano's horrible Riddler take and rolling my eyes at Batman just taking a bomb to the face and just solving every riddle immediately.

Based Mystery Men enjoyer. It's wild this came out long before the current wave of capeshit, even pre- Xmen by a year. I wonder if it would be more fondly remembered if it came out 10 years later.

This was the most retarded scene in the entire movie.

Lol

Comparing this to OP's video it's pretty clear The Batman is the better film. It has way more personality and style than Nolan's sterile shit.

>Why is The Dark Knight getting so much hate by zoomers?
1. It was popular before they could shit by themselves, so therefore it bad (boomer movie)
2. It's a movie focused on storytelling and themes instead of aesthetics and surface level artistry (joker, nu-batman) therefore bad
3. It doesn't pander to comic book lore or set up sequels like a TV show pilot, therefore bad.
It's a real movie, and not The Product tm. Zoomers only respond to The Product.

Reeves doesn't have to take that route. I don't understand what his fixation is. Nolan already defined the limits of how much realism Batman can withstand.

I'm not saying he has to go full Silver Age but he can explore other dimensions. Batman has eighty two fucking years years. He HAS options.

Attached: 30708347827.jpg (759x1084, 354.29K)

based

I would enjoy this movie more without all the post production. I want to see all these dumbass scenes in their full glory.

Why do zoomers value aesthetics over story? Is it over consumption of social media? The Batman is the Euphoria of Batman movies.

The sequence right before, with every cop in gotham chasing him through the tiny hallways and stairs was kino too.

The Batman had a good story though

The Batman not only has aesthetics but better story. Nolan's story in all 3 Batmen are mere vehicles for gimmicky gotcha moments so you go "What a twist" and trailer-worthy set pieces. The Batman is a slowburn investigatory drama similar to other film noirs and centres its story around realistic threats of domestic terrorism and political corruption.

Nolan has no style at all. If it wasn’t for Ledger’s performance this movie be an afterthought

Nolan just rippesoff Bond movies. The Dark Knight Rises is practically a remake of World Is Not Enough

This. The Batman is Chinatown + Casablanca + Blade Runner. Nolan's Batman trilogy are just action movies like The Rock + Heat + Con Air.

It has a lot of problems, but I can't hate what was attempted. Today I watch the footage of Batman's schumacher and think that people should not have been so cruel. I don't want to make the same mistakes of the past by talking over others and spewing venom for a movie.

It has its big share of problems. A lot of them. But I try to identify the kino in everything. There are seconds, moments of kino in every film.

Attached: 1652157838136.webm (1280x720, 2.95M)

The Batman is a ripoff of David Fincher's Se7en/Zodiac, featuring a retarded Batman who can't resolve simple clues, woke supporting cast and a literal "critique on internet incels" as the main villain.

I saw this movie in theaters 5 times. More than any other movie I've ever seen.

Yeah and all Nolan movies are Bond ripoffs. Your point?

>2. It's a movie focused on storytelling and themes instead of aesthetics and surface level artistry (joker, nu-batman) therefore bad
user, it's the same thing. Nolan, nu-batman, all the same. The difference is that Nolan had a good story to tell and knw how to tell it.
>Joker
Joker focuses on it's main character so much more and the worldview of said character unlike the other two (not saying this is bad or good). They can't be compared at all. Nolan focuses in the themes. Joker focuses in the character. The Batman in the plot and the character. Not saying which one is better, just that they take different views.
Criticize the movie for what it's most important: the characters. Not the themes. Themes are the cherry in the cake.

The Batman takes so much from The Dark Knight that saying it has a better story is laughable.

Batman begins is a way better movie. Action scenes sucked in all 3 nolan movies but at least begins had a good story and characters.

Dark knight is overrated with Jewker and two face felt tacked on last minute.

TDK: old and busted
The Batman: new hotness

>internet incels

They are people who were radicalized because the Gotham crime family stole a welfare fund founded by Wayne Sr. with the help of the city administration.

Attached: 1652202801468.webm (1280x720, 2.84M)

cracked.com/article_21249_5-huge-movies-that-stole-their-plot-from-other-hit-films.html

Attached: E191C81F-0767-4CEF-B25F-09D546E1ABB2.jpg (350x308, 42.74K)

The Green Milita is essentially a soft disclosure for kids about January 6 in the same way that the Riddler is a psychopath's story told for children.

Attached: 1652214378540.webm (1280x720, 2.03M)

>2. It's a movie focused on storytelling and themes instead of aesthetics and surface level artistry
Bro the fuck are you talking about? Nolan "artistry" is having the characters talk like robots for 90% of the story. I don't even dislike The Dark Knight, but it's not that different from The Batman with it'd themes outside the fact the third act fucking sucked and most characters are poorly developed. With Nolan it works because he gives kino dialogue sometimes to his stories, but it's not different at all.

>slowburn

Slow and boring as batshit.

Not to mention dark. Shit cinematography.

Dark knight is a shitty movie that seems great cause people viewed it though, oh no heath died lenses,

It didn't though. It builds slowly for 2.5 hours only to throw its central antagonist into the trash and then set up sequel bait. In turn it's themes are extremely weak and forced. It's the definition of a bad story.
>Nolan's story in all 3 Batmen are mere vehicles for gimmicky gotcha moments so you go "What a twist" and trailer-worthy set pieces
In what way does this apply to The Dark Knight? It's themes of what Batman represents as a "hero" are significantly more developed and well delivered through it's story than anything in The Batman. Muh detective Chinatown ripoff is about as good of an argument as saying Joker was good because muh Taxi Driver. Pointing out the better movies that it is turning into low rent capeshit is not a positive thing.
Sure

Nolan movies have depth peaking with Dark Knight

The Batman tries to create depth but ends up tripping over itself. People just like it because Bruce Wayne is a loner moody rich kid who's a sperg. Not a charismatic playboy. Imagine how many nerds would have coomed if Ryan played Batman instead.

>Nolan "artistry" is having the characters talk like robots for 90% of the story
Uh, no. Nolan artistry is a simple well told story that doesn't big itself down in dishonest cinematography and aesthetics. And how is this the argument you choose to make? The characters in The Batman are infinitely more robotic and two dimensional than everyone in TDK

user, The Dark Knight is Heat. All capeshit, including The Dark Knight, is taken from other better movies.
>Turning into
It's called inspiration you stupid zoomers. Originality doesn't exist in art and has never existed. Everything takes from something. Experiences, novels, paintings, philosphy, history, and in this case other movies. NTA btw.

>Uh, no. Nolan artistry is a simple well told story that doesn't big itself down in dishonest cinematography and aesthetics.
What kind of fucking stupid criticism is this? Are you just throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks? I don't even like The Batman, I'm not the user you're sperging with, but this kind of zoomer pretentious "film snob" is pathetic.
>I have no argument, let's just add random buzzword to this thing
The Dark Knight IS capeshit. It's and will always be capeshit. It's the same thing you're against.

>Uh, no.
Go back.
>Nolan artistry is a simple well told story that doesn't big itself down in dishonest cinematography and aesthetics.
The Dark Knight Rises was such a terrible movie Yea Forums has spend 10 years making fun of it. It's Nolan at it's worst. It's what Nolan becomes when no one tells him to fucking stop. Not even a TB fan.

This is how The Batman does a cool action scene

Attached: The Batman Hallway.gif (625x256, 1.02M)

>It builds slowly for 2.5 hours only to throw its central antagonist into the trash
But the Riddler is the main villain pretty much the entire time? What are you talking about?

>doesn't big itself down in dishonest cinematography and aesthetics.
Are you stupid? Is this your cope for having shit cinematography? I don't even dislike TDK but this fucking shit is stupid. You can't just say "dishonest" to everything as an argument and expect it to have any sense of reason.

And this is how The Dark Knight Rises does a "cool" action scene.

Attached: dark knight rises hallway.gif (500x206, 268.45K)

Yeah, The Dark Knight is a great film, but The Batman made me realize it's just Batman set in modern chicago.
The fact that watching The Batman ruined Nolan's version a bit for me really makes it that much more impressive.
The Gotham depicted in The Batman is easily the best interpretation since Returns.

>The Dark Knight is Heat
Not even fucking close though? Literally in what way? Because they are trying to find the Joker?
>Originality doesn't exist in art and has never existed. Everything takes from something. Experiences, novels, paintings, philosphy, history
Horrific argument. "Bro you can never be a rip off piece of shit because all art is not le original"!! Art can only be designated as "inspired" by other art when it is transformative and actually makes something better than its source. All the 90s Tarantino rip offs are not "inspired", they are rip offs, because they are shittier than what they are stealing from. Jackie Brown is inspired by blaxploitation because it's actually different and better than any blaxploitation movie. The Batman is not better than the things it rips off, I mean it literally has its central killer turn himself in pretty much for the sole reason that that's what the killer does in Seven, even though it makes no fucking sense and completely ruins the entire character.

>big itself down in dishonest cinematography and aesthetics.
The Dark Knight and The Batman have the same problem, retard. They're "Realistic" stories of a man dressed in a bat costume. The Batman at least gives it a "noir" aesthetic but it still makes it look terrible. But at least it tried. That's something.
You're so triggered by zoomers praising cinematography that you're now in full damage control pretending they're a bad thing at all. Just because Nolan didn't do it doesn't mean it's bad. I'm not even a The Batman fan, but the cinematography and the style it gave to Gotham it's by far the best thing it could do that universe.
>b-but visuals d-don't matter!
Yes they fucking do, retard. If I didn't want visuals I would just read a fucking book.

The Batman is the definition of dishonest cinemtography

Um Bane beating the shit out of Batman was top tier in the film. Battinson went up against a fag dressed in a green trash bag who posted on tik-tok

I will try to get webms for both. Maybe tomorrow. Using those is not fair.

>The Dark Knight Rises was such a terrible movie
I agree. What's your point? So it's The Batman vs three movies? Whichever one is easier to argue right

And Dark Knight didn’t do same shit? Rushing Two Face at the end and killing him just set up the next movie which bit Nolan in the ass because Ledger died

The footage does not reek of dishonesty. It has problems, but dishonesty is not one of them.

>a fag dressed in a green trash bag
ITS A WINTER COMBAT SUIT!!!

And they throw him away by just deciding he's "le crazy riddle man" instead of actually addressing any of the themes they were developing with his character by having him turn himself in because he thought him and Batman were friends, then he floods the city for no reason other than a visually climactic ending. They threw him in the trash because they couldn't figure out how to actually tell a good story.

>dishonest
What does this even mean in this context? Where is the lie?

Attached: vlcsnap-2022-05-10-20h43m27s261.png (1920x1080, 1.42M)

Go watch Bladrunner 2049, faggot

Nolan weakness is he's bad at fight direction. You can literally asleep watching every fighting because it's so slow and cringe. Batfleck still the best lolololol

fuck capeshit but I like to imagine the dark knight as a billionaire vigilante and a terrorist I like put the batman and comic shit aside
Its a fantastic thriller film about a post 9/11 world

It doesn't get shit on by zoomers, only contrarian faggots like 90% of the people on Yea Forums. The Dark Knight is still the best capeshit movie we've gotten and no one can argue against this in any substantiated manner.

Cinema seeks to deliver an experience through the deception of the senses. Dishonesty is when you do it with a morally twisted, bad or downright evil objective.

>Rushing Two Face at the end and killing him just set up the next movie
It was a literal and thematic end to his character. The fact that you can't, or choose not to, see this only serves to make you look more embarrassing than you already do.

>RIPOFF BAD!
>Your movie is a ripoff
>N-NO HOW?!
Do you see how stupid you sound?
>Art can only be designated as "inspired" by other art when it is transformative and actually makes something better than its source.
This is the cope of someone that has never done something or wrote a story in their lives. Basically a retarded zoomer that is so shallow they see everything as a ripoff because it takes from other sources, because they have never wrote anything of their own ever, just look at visual and story, the same thing you're against. Most of the story you mentioned is not even close to Se7en, and I'm one of the people that said it was a ripoff of Se7en until I watched it. Ripoffs exist? sure, but this is not one of them. And I say this as a person that disliked the movie. The story are give another kind of message, of ending, of conclusion. A movie that takes the aesthetic of something and does a different story from it is not a ripoff. Ripoff would be if it took the main message and plot and conclusion, but The Batman doesn't. It takes the "view" and shallow aspects of it to do a different tale.
>B-but looks s-similar s-so h-has s-same message!
You fucking retard contradicted yourself. Cinematography and aesthetics are not part of the core of a story. Neither are concepts. It's what you do with those. When someone is writing something they always take parts of a story to complete their own. That's what most stories do. And all those give another tale. That's the difference between a ripoff and an inspiration. But you can't see that because you're a braindead Nolan fanboy that has no real argument, despite Nolan himself doing something like that for his stories.
>Tarantino
Nolan and Tarantino are the same shit, retard.

Bane fight scene is one of the worst choreographed fights put on screen. As yes a fist fight is comparable to taking a shotgun blast to chest at close range

Attached: 286DF540-A6BB-42BF-BBF3-C804B306764E.jpg (700x700, 97.24K)

>it's referencing a better movie
Is this the only argument zoomers have for nu-DC shit?

That's such a weird prescriptive definition of cinema.
I also don't see how anything is being twisted in such a way.

>Do you see how stupid you sound?
No actually, you're really bad at greentexting.
>This is the cope of someone that has never done something or wrote a story in their lives
I'm actually incredibly embarrassed for you.

The Batman is pure pleb dogshit for reddit sensibilities. Similar to how TDK pandered to the pleb IMDB sensibilities
>We’re back to the moral underworlds of Saw, Seven, and Zodiac, back to the beginning of when adolescent consumers were first trained into grateful compliance with only a soupçon of cynicism. Cynicism was smartness. Now cynicism is all. The Batman can declare “Fear is a tool” and have the full support of Warner Bros. media behind it. (No coincidence that society’s politically progressive “stakeholders” act as proprietary as corporate stockholders.)
>This is political decadence more than anything else. Coming exactly 100 years after F. W. Murnau’s still-disturbing Nosferatu, The Batman doesn’t earn being called artistic decadence. Its depiction of social horror isn’t fully imagined; it never gets to the core of spiritual repulsion that Murnau touched. The mythology of good and evil, so important for Murnau, has no resonance for Reeves. One is merely offended by Reeves’s obvious political allegories that are too vague and trite to take seriously. Given the moody photography and action set-pieces staged at J. J. Abrams’s level, The Batman hits no deeper than Dick Tracy and his cartoon foes as conceived by a depressive.

Comparing to movies that obviously want to do a different kind of message because "they look similar" is the most stupid kind of shit you could do, or have similar concepts. A concept is something that can and will always be taken for other sources. This is how storytelling is born. They should not be criticized by how much similar they are because they're both clearly trying to give a different message, and comparing them obviously will be stupid because you will judge how similar they're to each other and how much success the "ripoff" has to being similar, when at the end no story wants to do the same ending. This is why zoomer criticism like this is stupid. At the end they take visuals so seriously they think visual is the same as a message and a conclusion, so they get angry when the "ripoff" tries to do something different with those ideas instead of copying the original story even more. See how at the end this criticism even contradicts itself and glorifies the same thing it criticizes?

It's quite simple really, Dishonest Filmmaking (Damien Chazelle, Tarantino, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, Wes Anderson, Christopher Nolan, Alex Garland, Paul Thomas Anderson, Nicholas Refn, Tom Hooper, Tyler Perry, Rian Johnson, Alfonso Cuaron, Noah Baumbach, Andrea Arnold, David Yates, Denis Vilenueve, Matt Reeves, Steve McQueen) are intellectually bankrupt moral whores and charlatans; their films appeal to the modern phenomenon of the 'Pretend Epic' or Pseudo Cinema, often tied to the criticism that "It was a movie that thought it was a film" they have no ideas of their own and are filmed purely to have fancy essays made about them. They obfuscate their lack of insight under a smug impenetrable irony and often contain scenes with disingenuous attempts at depth with characters spouting platitudes that the director takes VERY seriously.
This directly panders to the IMDb reddit sensibility of quote circlejerking since these hacks are masters of the fools wit, "Quipping" (Not to be confused with the marvel co-opting of the word) , it sounds smart, cool and worldly but in reality there's nothing of substance, the Revenant's attempt at spiritualism was cheap and laughable and whilst someone like Malick has considered his philosophy, Inaurritu wears his introspection on his sleeve to give his film a false sense of depth with pathetic sermonising.

THIS is Dishonest Filmmaking.

They leech the greater works that preceded them; like The Enemy being a rip off Eraserhead, but they have nothing else to say.
They act under the guise of deconstruction with surface layer obvious 'social commentary' and a quirky forgettable score praised as 'innovative'. They are all inauthentic sycophants that rely on oscar buzz and post 9/11 detachment for relevance.

These directors are hacks and will be forgotten to time.
Some notably earnest filmmakers include, but are not limited to:
>Mike Stoklasa
>The Coen Brothers
>Werner Herzog
>James Cameron
>Terrence Malick
>Clint Eastwood

Whose review is that? I'm confused what they mean by political decadence

Faggot, you are having a meltdown because someone in a board for movies said the new men dressed as a bat fighting crime movie is better than the older men dressed as a bat fighting crime movie. You are a zoomer, and if you aren't then please get help.

No, it was poorly handled shit. Let’s shoehorn Dent turning into Two Face at garbage end of the movie and kill him off

The truth is that it makes me a little angry because it gives me the impression that Riddler 22 is not original. Maybe it's a bit dishonest in that sense: It's not trying to do something totally new with the character. Instead, the new Riffler is a tangential reference to an earlier instance of himself with the skin of a domestic terrorist psychopath for the young and impressionable masses.

Batfleck having the best fight scenes doesn't make him the best batman, but with that being said...
Nolan's fight scenes aren't as bad as people make them out to be. In Batman begins it was pretty bad, but much of it was supposed to be from the point of view of the goons batman was beating up, Nolan literally says this, so you weren't supposed to be able to see in detail what was going on for most of it anyway. that was the whole purpose. was still bad though
In the dark knight it's as clear as day that he's utilizing the keysi fighting method and krav maga which is satisfying as fuck to see if you understand said fighting style because it's the most realistic approach when considering who batman is. If you want to really hurt another person and take them out as fast as possible because you are planning on taking on multiple enemies and need to conserve your energy, those are the styles you use.
In the dark knight rises, despite it being the worst, the sewer fight scene between batman and bane has more weight and emotion behind it than any scene in nolan's batman films and more than anything we've gotten from batfleck by a mile. Hearing tom's voice booming through the mask while he manhandled batman was heart wrenching in the threatre for the first time. I have never been in a theater that was as quiet as the one I was in when watching tdkr for the first time after that fight scene
Imagine if stupid people like you took said shotgun blast lol that wouldn't be totally amazing