Pattinson/Reeves Batman Movie (Formerly Affleck Stand-Alone Film)

[LeotheLateBloomer]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Could it be Leslie Thompkins?

I just looked her up and it says that she's playing a character named Bella Reál. Though she could be Leslie in disguise. What makes you think it could be her?

Originally Posted by Sumac

Can't say I am impressed.

Why is that?

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by LeotheLateBloomer

Why is that?

It looks good, but kind of generic. Maybe I need to rewatch trailer more times.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

I'm not reading anything or getting bothered, I'm just doing the math and find it interesting. You're the one getting bothered.

Maybe. I just think it’s kind of odd to watch the trailer and start counting how many white guys can be considered good.

[Andrew NDB]

So are we still thinking that chest symbol is the gun that murdered his parents stripped down and mounted there? That's still going to reek of stupid if that's really the case. Hopefully it's not and the chest symbol has, like, a device in it or something.

I'm guessing... yeah, some kind of big secret emerges about Thomas Wayne (maybe a page is taken here from the "Joker" version of Thomas Wayne) abusing his wealthy privilege (something that makes for the slums getting worse or something) and Alfred covering for it for years. Then Bruce has to redeem himself and repent for his privilege and his dad's misdeeds and only then can he be worthy of benefiting from it and becoming a true hero, etc.. Maybe he'll even apologize to the Riddler at some point.

Something like this, I'm imagining.

Originally Posted by AquaParade

Maybe. I just think it’s kind of odd to watch the trailer and start counting how many white guys can be considered good.

It wasn't a reaction to the trailer, I was just thinking out loud from what we know of the movie in general. I'm not even saying it's entirely intentional.

[sdp]

people are already praising this movie that it's going to be the best batman eva, I'm not one who thinks Nolan was perfect but I don't know if this really gives me enough confidence, it'll be good because it's batman but I don't feel like this is doing anything too different from previous movies.

[CyberCubed]

Honestly it looks a lot like the Nolan movies to me, to the point where this Riddler would fit in with the Nolan movies perfectly. I think the trailer looks very good and the movie will most likely be good. But it does look a lot like we had before.

I think people were expecting a bigger change, certainly going from 90's Batman movies to the Nolan trilogy was a huge shift, but this feels more of the same.

[AquaParade]

Nolan's take was ripe for more, imo. I would have watched two to three more films set in Nolan's universe. But even then, this films subtle differences will add up and give it's own flavor, once we are able to take it in as more than a trailer.
This version of Bruce seems different from Bale's, the cinematography is great, the music will be different. It shares a sense of realism, but I think it takes more than that to just make this another Nolan - Batman.

I can understand how some people would want a more fantastical take though. I'm always down with that too.

[Sumac]

Hopefully this one has a better fighting choreography.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Sumac

Hopefully this one has a better fighting choreography.

It appears to. Fighting choreography was never Nolan's forte in the trilogy.

Gonna say it again. I bet the general thinking is that by the time the time the third "The Batman" comes out, most of the surviving DCEU series will be mostly played out. WW will have had her trilogy. Aquaman, too, if 2 does decent. Whatever is happening with Shazam and Black Adam will have likely run its course. Margot Robbie will be in her 40s. They can say "we tried!" with the black Superman projects that will be "important" but won't make enough money to do anything springing from them. The plan then might be that, given the way the timing all works out, assuming "The Batman" movies are box office hits and critical darlings... it means let's try it all again. The DCEU 2.0, springing out of the Reeves Batman movies. A new Superman. A new WW. And so on, but native to the Reeves/Pattinson universe. All they have to do is keep it low key and the Reeves Batman movies completely self-contained in the meantime.

Which is pretty much what they should have done the first time. Spin a DCEU out of the Nolan stuff... but maybe with a few changes in TDKR.

[CyberCubed]

The thing is this movie is the same push toward realism as the Nolan movies were. Instead of Riddler being a flamboyant trickster, he's more of a sadistic madman. So these movies can never feature the more sci-fi Batman villains like Mr. Freeze, Clayface, Poison Ivy (at least using her powers), Man-bat, etc. Same reason the Nolan films never featured them.

We already have Catwoman, Riddler and Penguin here. They'll use Joker again for the millionth time and then probably Bane, Scarecrow and Two-Face again.

I would love to see a Mr. Freeze done right in a movie, but seeing a guy go around shooting people with a freeze gun and turning them into icicles probably isn't going to work in a grounded Batman take.

[sdp]

Don't underestimate the incompetency of DC, first they'll try to mix the universes so it wouldn't surprise me to see robbie's harley in a The Batman sequel or Phoenix's Joker in it as well, hell this is DC they might both show up because multiverse is cool now. Also by the time a The Batman trilogy finishes superhero movies won't bet he big hits they've been I would hope so no DCEU 2.0 after it, especially since Pattison would be much older.

I love the Nolan trilogy but he only made one amazing Batman film and that was Begins, the other two went too much on a different direction and didn't feel as much as a real Batman movie even if cool. The ending of Rises didn't allow DC to soft reboot from there since it was an actual conclusion.

Back in the 00's realism with superheroes was the thing, you can even see that with early MCU movies in phase 1 but after phase 2 they went crazy with super powers so having Mr Freeze won't be a big problem anymore in fact it does feel like this new movie is taking the realism of the Nolanverse but dialing it down which is good sort of like the gritty Gotham TV show which was realistic but still had Solomon Grundy, and other crazy supernatural ideas work in that universe. I think it'll be a good movie but perhaps not the most original, perhaps forgettable, perhaps cheesy, perhaps a dumb plot? we just don't know.

Expecting DC to get their **** together after messing things up over and over seems like a fantasy, especially with all the projects they have going on. I actually feel they abandoned the idea and it's probably for the best, they'll never have an MCU like universe and it's better for them to focus on single movie franchises.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

The thing is this movie is the same push toward realism as the Nolan movies were. Instead of Riddler being a flamboyant trickster, he's more of a sadistic madman. So these movies can never feature the more sci-fi Batman villains like Mr. Freeze, Clayface, Poison Ivy (at least using her powers), Man-bat, etc. Same reason the Nolan films never featured them.

We already have Catwoman, Riddler and Penguin here. They'll use Joker again for the millionth time and then probably Bane, Scarecrow and Two-Face again.

I would love to see a Mr. Freeze done right in a movie, but seeing a guy go around shooting people with a freeze gun and turning them into icicles probably isn't going to work in a grounded Batman take.

Oh, they can definitely do a "grounded" horror-esque Mr. Freeze. That's basically what he is in the Arkham games.

The question is, can larger than life stuff exist in the Reeves universe? Can a Bane that gets bigger (but not ridiculously) with venom exist here? Can a giant Killer Croc?

I do like how hard this music score hits:

[LeotheLateBloomer]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

I do like how hard this music score hits:

That theme, like a knight coming out of the ashes! I can't wait.

I think Pattinson will nail it as Batman.

[Sumac]

A weird theme.
It sounds like a slowed down version of an Imperial Marsh with some ques from Elfman's Batman theme throw in. It doesn't really sound like a superhero theme or at least I can't see it working in that capacity right now.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Oh, they can definitely do a "grounded" horror-esque Mr. Freeze. That's basically what he is in the Arkham games.

The question is, can larger than life stuff exist in the Reeves universe? Can a Bane that gets bigger (but not ridiculously) with venom exist here? Can a giant Killer Croc?

I do like how hard this music score hits:

This is fantastic. Giacchino has grown on me between this and No Way Home.

Just seems to me that every department is killing it on this film. Music, cinematography, score, and I think the casting is great too, aside from Kravitz, who needs to prove herself here.

This movie is going to kick ass.

[sdp]

It didn't feel much like a theme, more like background music but it's good. And a better alternative than reusing the Elfman theme

[Leo656]

Whenever people say "DC" when they actually mean "WB", I puke a little.

DC, as either a corporate OR creative entity, has ZERO say at the end of the day what goes into these movies, outside of whenever Geoff Johns gets a promotion for a minute. Everything you see onscreen comes from Warner Bros. Many, MANY people within the DC corporation have never been huge fans of how WB has presented their movies featuring DC characters, going all the way back to the '89 Batman movie, which most people in DC editorial were not fans of. It grew on people over time, but in the moment all anyone at DC cared about was, "Great, now every idiot and their kid is gonna think the Joker killed Batman's parents, all because of that dumb movie. What a pain in the ass." It cooled off, and those same people love it now, but IN the moment? DC Staff were not thrilled with that movie.

Nothing has changed. "DC" doesn't make the decisions for DC movies. WB does. And generally, whenever a DC movie comes out, the majority of people who actually work at DC are usually not thrilled with the final product for a multitude of reasons. If we're going to cite incompetence, let's at least be sure and yell at the correct people. Whether a person loves or hates the DC movies of the last decade, "DC" has nothing especially to do with them, except for the ones Goeff Johns is involved with.

It is "WB" that is spectacularly incompetent. DC, on the other hand, is only occasionally incompetent. But again, with regard to the movies let's not point fingers at the innocent, it's vulgar.

[ZariusTwo]

Originally Posted by Leo656

DC, on the other hand, is only occasionally incompetent

When it comes to Batman and Superman lately, they're grossly incompetent.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

When it comes to Batman and Superman lately, they're grossly incompetent.

Yeah, but 1. Almost every single thing since 2011 has been godawful, so it's just par for the course by this point, and 2. They both had almost 30 straight years of really good stuff with those characters before 2011, with only the occasional minor hiccup along the way.

USED to be, those were the two Big Characters that you could trust DC to do right by, more often than not. Ever since DC decided to try and entice Marvel readers, despite those universes' audiences having COMPLETELY different tastes and sensibilities to the point where "they do books about super-heroes" is about the only thing the two companies have ever had in common to begin with, ergo trying to win some people over to the other side of the fence is like inviting Megadeth fans to a Toby Keith concert... anyways, since THAT started happening, it ALL went to sh*t. But again, that's more Recent History stuff.

HISTORICALLY, DC as an entity has only been Occasionally Incompetent. Post-2011, all bets are off, I don't even really see it as "DC" proper anymore, it's just "DC trying to be Marvel, Kinda" and it doesn't work. It's definitely not the DC *I* spent 30 years on, and it's not one I'm interested in spending time with any longer.

But anyways, when it comes to movies, it's WB's incompetence at fault, not DC's. DC have nothing to do with the movies made about their characters, they don't even get to give notes. The intern who gets Matt Reeves his coffee honestly has more of a say in what's going into the latest Batman movie than anyone working on the Batman comics. Just based on the corporate structure at Warner Media. WB and DC share corporate "parents" but the two corporations historically clash more often than not and neither side likes how the other side does their business or handles their characters.

So again, when people are talking about movies specifically and they say "DC sucks" when they mean "WB sucks", it's a huge pet peeve. Fight The Real Enemy. I mean, saying "WB Sucks" isn't even an opinion, anymore, it's just a general statement of fact. DC shouldn't get slandered for WB's chronic ineptitude just because their initials show up before the credits; they didn't make the movies.

[AquaParade]

This movie is getting a surprising amount of pushback online. Mostly I think from Snyder loyalists, with YouTube pages, who are still pouting about this not being the Affleck film. That hardcore Snyder-community truly is loud.

I'm seeing a lot of people, who should know better, predicting this film will underwhelm in the box office, and that's a pretty ridiculous, if you ask me. Feels like it's out of spite, in a lot of these cases.

Secondly, I'm rolling my eyes at several of these "This Batman isn't like the comics" takes, in which they pick out some element of the movie that doesn't match up with the comics (*that they have personally read*). It's the most ridiculous type of complaint in my eyes, because not only is it gatekeeping, but it's built on a false idea.
Again, anyone who actually reads the comics, knows that there isn't one interpretation of Batman. Change is a constant with the character and it's been that way since the very beginning.
It's nothing but a gatekeeping card. People assume they have the higher ground, if they bring up the comics, even when what they're saying is completely wrong. And it's one thing to dislike something for being different from your favorite comics, but another thing to try to paint it as "wrong" because it doesn't match up with your favorite comics.
As a hardcore lover of all Batman comics, I find that particular gatekeeping tactic to be desperate and ignorant.

I mean, It's arguably more faithful to the comics to bring your own spin to your vision on the character, than to just ape what's come before panel for panel. That's what has kept the comics interesting and successful after so many decades.

In conclusion, I just find that there is a section of the online community that seems to have a rock-hard bias against this film and want to tear it down anyway possible, both in terms of creative vision and box office, and I'm excited to see the turn around on that.
All due respect to anyone here who wants to critique the movie. Obviously, you're entitled to that. I'm just talking about a particular segment of the internet where I am perceiving bias, as well as a certain form of critiquing, which I find to be disingenuous.