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

[Leo656]

Aw c'mon, gatekeeping is awesome! It keeps stupid people away from nice things so they don't wreck 'em! Look at that stupid "Thundercats Roar" show, or what Netflix did with their awful She-Ra reboot once they handed it over to some pink-hair Tumblr lunatic who never even cared about She-Ra but loved the idea of co-opting an established name brand so as to better push "The Gay Agenda" (her words, not mine).

I've never liked sharing my toys with stupid people. They break them. So I find gatekeeping as a whole to be something we need more of, not less.
------------

My personal latest thing I'm mad at this movie for is that all signs point to it being another "Thomas Wayne was secretly an evil scumbag just as bad as any of Batman's villains" story. Thanks, I f*cking HATE IT!

Furthermore, I'm pissed at Morrison for first floating the idea in print during the "R.I.P." run. In that story, it was teased but then revealed to be fake. Then some idiots in other media saw it and were like "Saaaaaaay, what if Batman's dad really WAS evil?" I'll tell you "what if", it'd be STUPID.

In "Joker" they teased it but danced around it so maybe Thomas was a decent guy after all. That's one thing. But I'm already sick of "Thomas Wayne was evil because ALL Rich People are Evil" stories. Bruce's Dad being a decent human being is KIND OF F*CKING IMPORTANT insofar as where Bruce's moral compass came from. All these stories where it turns out his Dad was as bad as Falcone just make Bruce look like some clueless little putz for not noticing. There's "idolizing someone" and then there's just plain being oblivious. I personally choose to believe Bruce is not and never was a moron. Therefore these "Evil Thomas Wayne" stories simply do not work.

Maybe they won't go there. But every single thing I've read points to it, and the Telltale games are frequently cited as something that was drawn from heavily for this movie (FAKE Jigsaw Riddler being the most obvious transplant from the games to this film). So I'm pretty sure the "Thomas was a sh*t person" plotline will be a major plot point of the movie.

And that much will completely swing me from "I don't care about it" to actively being "F*ck this stupid movie." Guess we'll find out.

[AquaParade]

I did really like the Dr. Hurt angle from Batman R.I.P.

I think it was clever to touch on the idea that Bruce's dad was evil, without actually having to do it. And it didn't feel like a cop-out, because the dude turns out to possibly be the devil himself (if I remember correctly). Batman vs Batman's dad was actually pretty clever, but it turning out to actually be Batman vs the devil is as badass at it gets.

As much as I love what I've seen from Reeve's take as Batman, which I'm here for all day, I really do crave a take on Batman that leans more into the fantastic, supernatural, and strange, once again. I don't expect a film to adapt Morrison's run, but you could certainly take some inspiration. I don't really love Burton's films anymore, but he was great at taking us into a world, in which things didn't need to be realistic to be believable. Someone should do that again, in their own way.

[Leo656]

Yeah, I really liked that story as a whole. AFTER it was revealed the stuff with his parents was a hoax I was able to appreciate the mindf*ck Hurt put on Bruce so much more.

In the moment, though, it seemed legit and just more Grant Being Grant. "Ooh! Ooh! His dad's a crook! And Martha's a junkie! That will flip people out, whooooooo METAL!!" and all that. That's how it comes off when you read it cold and don't know it's a ruse. So I admit, while I was waiting to see the payoff I was like, "This BETTER not be serious." I definitely would have dropped the books immediately and never bought another Batman book with Grant's name on it, had he actually done that and made it "canon". Thankfully, he didn't. But I often wonder if DC Editorial didn't force him to change it. My initial impressions of "This is legit and he's doing it specifically to screw with people" is totally in-character for Grant.

I kinda think he wrote it "straight" and then someone upstairs made him change it at the very last minute so it was all part of Hurt's sick game. I mean the story goes to great lengths to convince you it's legit, to the point where the final reveal feels insincere. "Just kidding! They were good people after all!" Doesn't feel organic at all, feels like a tacked-on bit via editorial mandate.

My suspicion has always been that Grant intended to do a real heel turn with the Waynes, and using them to make some kind of anti-capitalist point about all rich people being inherently evil, because he's that kinda guy, but in the end DC nixed it. I might be wrong but it would not surprise me at all.

[AquaParade]

That wouldn't surprise me. But nor would it surprise me if Grant was just trying to screw with the reader the whole time. At this point, he probably knows how to play the (admittedly predictable at times) comic book community like a fiddle.
The fact that readers get so twisted about it, helps you get entrenched in Bruce's perspective. It all feels so screwed up, and more than that, it feels wrong, because it is.

You're right that he loves to provoke, so it's a damn good theory, but I feel like Grant was at the top of his game with his Batman run, so I tend to give him the credit as well as assume he had a good bit of creative control at that point in time.

Speaking of Grant's run, it became a bit of a mixed bag for me, by the time we were in the Batman Inc era, but I still love that final issue and page, in which Bruce talks about "the hole in everything", reflecting on both the unexplainable events in his life, as well as the physical bullet hole left in his parents, which in turn left a metaphorical hole in his life...a hole that, as Bruce describes, in a bit of a silver-lined twist, is "big enough to fill with everything."

It's just so good. Grant gets credit for being the zany, psychedelic dude, but he's also one of the best when it comes to pulling heart-strings.

[Leo656]

I tapped out somewhere early on during Grant's "Batman and Robin". It had its moments but on the whole I was underwhelmed. For one thing his usual thing with "his version" of a character being completely different from how they're portrayed in other books was hard and heavy, especially with his "Jason Todd". Maybe it wouldn't have been so jarring if Jason wasn't in a ton of other books before and since, but Grant's Jason spoke and behaved like a completely different person and I just hate that kind of inconsistency. It shows a lack of editorial oversight and breaks the illusion of all these stories happening in the same universe when characters become completely different week to week depending on the writer. To be clear, I didn't really dislike his Jason as much as I just hated how we JUST saw him in another Batman book two weeks ago and now everything about him is completely different, because Grant Doesn't Read Other Peoples' Work Unless It Suits Him. Otherwise it was kinda neat. Frankly I was relieved to see Jason go full villain, that works better for me than "Mass-Murderer Vigilante Who Batman Looks The Other Way On And Still Hangs Out With Because Some Nonsense About Family".

Also, if it had been a Dick and Tim "Batman and Robin" book I might have stayed on longer. I f*cking HATE Damien. Grant loves him, obviously, so right from the start there was a disconnect.

Originally Posted by AquaParade

Grant gets credit for being the zany, psychedelic dude

With good reason, guy's a high-functioning drug addict. Every time I roll my eyes at something he wrote, I remind myself "Oh, wait, he was on acid when he wrote that."

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Leo656

With good reason, guy's a high-functioning drug addict. Every time I roll my eyes at something he wrote, I remind myself "Oh, wait, he was on acid when he wrote that."

You'd think so, but the guy didn't even experiment with drugs until he was fairly deep into his career. For instance, he was completely sober when writing Doom Patrol, and that's some of his weirdest stuff. Of course, anyone would think he's slagged out of his mind, but the guy is just creative.

[Leo656]

I'm aware that he was "sober" during his early work but that was a very long time ago.

He's bragged often and loud about how LSD has "enhanced" his thinking and his work since then. That's his opinion. I... Disagree.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

Originally Posted by 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.

I'll be honest here, I'm well over whatever DC, WB, or whoever does with Batman because there's a lot of different interpretations but also because I'm fatigued of Batman. It's a shame we didn't get any kind of Batfleck project but at this point, Batman fans are still eating good with content even if there's a fair share of junk right now. I just don't care what they do with him anymore. Whatever Batman related stuff gets pumped out, I'm either excited or just apathetic.

[MikeandRaph87]

Thomas Wayne helping people regardless of who they are or what the medical emergency is has been utilized more than once and is a great point to inspire Bruce's own actions while bringing up why did he enable a person or help someone better off dead. It's the reason why The Joker is still alive. Examples of what I am referring to about Dr. Wayne are in an arc of Legends of the Dark Knight Nora Fries confides with physican/patient clause about the illegal means that Victor has gone to in order to stop her terminal diagnosis. Information got passed incorrectly setting off Victor while Thomas only sympathized with her. Another case is when Dr. Wayne patched up Carmine Falcone not wanting any of his dirty money in a flashback in The Long Halloween.

The Telltale video game storyline is absurd. Having Flashpoint Batman running around still despite everything and Earth-3's Owlman being named Thomas Wayne is bad enough.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by MikeandRaph87

Thomas Wayne helping people regardless of who they are or what the medical emergency is has been utilized more than once and is a great point to inspire Bruce's own actions while bringing up why did he enable a person or help someone better off dead. It's the reason why The Joker is still alive.

The Telltale video game storyline is absurd. Having Flashpoint Batman running around still despite everything and Earth-3's Owlman being named Thomas Wayne is bad enough.

Exactly. And also, kids are not always so stupid that they "don't notice" their parents are bad people doing bad things. I thought my parents were awesome when I was really young, too, but by the time I was 10 (usually the age, roughly, that Bruce was when his parents are shot) I knew full well they (and their friends) were not Good People. Bruce has always been portrayed, even as a kid, as being rather quick on the draw. Just because he loved his parents doesn't mean he'd just be completely oblivious that they were doing bad things, or hanging out with and people. And the more people - like Alfred - who are supposedly complicit in preserving "the lie", the worse it gets and the more it taints the entire mythos.

As a one-off Elseworlds thing clearly labelled as being non-canon? Sure, his parents can be scumbags. In a more "mainstream" piece of work or something like a movie that's going to dictate what general audiences "know" about Bruce and his family for the next 10 years? NO, f*ck off, get outta here with that sh*t.

YES, in real life all rich people are rotten human beings, but this is fiction. Specifically, it's fiction where Good People exist, and get their morals from other Good People. That can be allowed. We don't ALWAYS have to be "realistic" just because it's cute to do "Everything you know is wrong!" nonsense stories.

I adored the gameplay and the general structure of the Telltale Batman games, a lot. But the stories? UGH. I had fun playing both of them but I haven't in a long time because they're just SO bad, story-wise. Like, it's only good if you're one of those "I don't care, as long as it's Batman" type folks. It goes so out of its way to be one of those "everything you know about these characters is wrong" that it becomes f*cking annoying. And unlike Injustice, it's not even labelled as any sort of "alternate universe". You're just supposed to roll with all the WTF-ery, and there's SO MUCH of it.

"Oh, okay, so Bruce's parents were pieces of sh*t... and Bruce was best friends with Penguin as kids... okay... oh, and Joker was more or less a 'regular' crazy person and he only became the Joker because Bruce Wayne wasn't nice to him enough... Riddler is Jigsaw, now... Bane is an idiot, and Harley Quinn is HIS boss... and Harley's also a criminal mastermind who everyone is afraid of, even joker... there's no Robin, but there IS some made-up daughter Lucius Fox never had in any other canon, and she becomes some kinda half-Robin, half-Batgirl sorta character, if you play it a certain way..." And there's so much more.

Yeah, it sucks, it's all junk. Great games to PLAY but the storyline is just completely f*cking bonkers A to Z. If you've read even ONE Batman comic or seen one movie or cartoon show, playing those games is just maddening as hell from all the stuff that's so blatantly wrong in the presentation of characters and events.

I get "needing to do something new" but they SERIOUSLY overdid it. It was like they went in with a checklist to do every single thing differently than had ever been done, and in the end that's TOO far.

At least they're fun to play. But I HATE the story. A ton.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Leo656

"Oh, okay, so Bruce's parents were pieces of sh*t... and Bruce was best friends with Penguin as kids... okay... oh, and Joker was more or less a 'regular' crazy person and he only became the Joker because Bruce Wayne wasn't nice to him enough... Riddler is Jigsaw, now... Bane is an idiot, and Harley Quinn is HIS boss... and Harley's also a criminal mastermind who everyone is afraid of, even joker... there's no Robin, but there IS some made-up daughter Lucius Fox never had in any other canon, and she becomes some kinda half-Robin, half-Batgirl sorta character, if you play it a certain way..." And there's so much more.

That makes me angry just reading that.

[Leo656]

Oh yeah, man, it's ludicrous. I think Harvey Dent was almost Mayor in the first game, too, I gotta go back and play it again. You can also play it so that he doesn't even become Two-Face (but still goes nuts), if you choose to. And like, him becoming Two-Face is ALSO Bruce's fault, and so is his mental break, kind of, because Dent is dating Selina Kyle and she ends up cheating on him with Bruce, and Harley catches them and snaps.

I love a lot of Telltale games and as I've said the Batman games are fun to PLAY, like they do some very interesting things with the mechanics in them, especially the second one. But the PLOT? Oh, god, both games' plots are garbage.

It's like they were written by people who hated everything about the Batman mythos and felt they had to "fix" it.

Again, I get that in story-driven, choice-based games where it's largely "you" shaping the storyline, they needed to do some things unpredictably and not rehash stuff everyone already knows. Granted. But SOME of that goofy sh*t should've been, like, you can choose to make it that way, or not. But most of that is Hard Canon to the games' storyline, and it's AWFUL.

A lot of what I've seen and read suggests that this new movie borrows a LOT from the Telltale games. If so, we should all be worried! So far we've got Jigsaw Riddler, Thomas Wayne is probably a scumbag (the "dark secrets" Riddler is threatening to expose), and we'll probably get something about Bruce and Cobblepot being friends, too.

Not off to a great start! But I guess that's circumstantial evidence. Just saying, it's a bit much to just be coincidence.

[Sumac]

The Riddler.
Most retarded design one can give to this character.

Aside from looking too similar to Scarecrow from Nolan movies, even by itself this design has nothing to do with Riddler, and if it was not for the question mark on his jacket I won't be able to figure out is that supposed to some generic serial killer from Scream or Halloween rip-off or a member of Batman's rogue gallery.

Seems, we are very much away from even a possibility of Riddler being executed right on the screen. Or at least as far as appearance goes.

[Leo656]

Everybody: "BRUH I have the most AWESOME idea how to make that crummy Batman villain The Riddler SO super-awesome! Wanna hear it?!"

Also Everybody: "JUST MAKE HIM JIGSAW!"

Everybody, Again: "I know, RIGHT, just make him Jigsaw! That's what I was gonna say!"

[AquaParade]

I love the look, personally. I guess the truth is I never loved the Riddler's classic design. Nothing against it, just never clicked with me. I like the idea of taking his classic traits, such as high intellect and a narcissistic, competitive personality, and giving it a bit of a creepy zodiac edge. It works for me.

I guess it's all bolstered by the fact that they cast Paul Dano in the role, which is just fantastic casting, no matter what slant they put on this character. Love that guy's work.

Between this and Colin Farrell's take on The Penguin, I couldn't be more excited to see the villains in this film. They both seem so electric, in the trailers.

[Sumac]

I have no idea who his actor is, and most likely never seen any movie with him, so for me it is out of context thing.

But the costume is so painfully boring and generic - it could be anybody. I am not saying Riddler should be dressed in his tights with question marks or whatever crap Batman Forever attempted to do, but Batman TAS and Arkham games offered much better realistic alternatives, which were down to earth, were not over the top ridiculous and, yet, clearly signaled who the character is.

[AquaParade]

Originally Posted by Sumac

I have no idea who his actor is, and most likely never seen any movie with him, so for me it is out of context thing.

But the costume is so painfully boring and generic - it could be anybody. I am not saying Riddler should be dressed in his tights with question marks or whatever crap Batman Forever attempted to do, but Batman TAS and Arkham games offered much better realistic alternatives, which were down to earth, were not over the top ridiculous and, yet, clearly signaled who the character is.

I get that. I mean, it's not the most creative look. It gives me the creeps though and I like that.

Again, knowing Dano's work probably helps. If interested, I'd check out the movie "Prisoners" to see a little of what he can do. He sure knows how to act offputting and strange.

[Sumac]

I always forget that creators of this movie are so """creative""", they've reimagined Riddler as a serial killer, or so I've heard. Though, I'd say it is not much better than making Two-Face Joker 2.0 in a Batman Forever.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by AquaParade

I love the look, personally.

Captain Contrarian strikes again!

Just razzin', you can like it if you want. But that is NOT the Riddler, no matter what they call him in the credits. "Keep the name, change literally everything else, it's still the same thing" isn't how it works. You can put a cat in the oven, but that don't make it a biscuit.

Likewise, you can dress a guy up in a dollar-store gimp costume and have him torture people to death, if that's how you wanna roll, but he isn't suddenly "The Riddler" because you make the gimp suit green and stick a question mark on it. Names are not Characters; what makes a character goes way beyond the name, or any other superficial trappings like a color or an insignia.

I'd actually be a lot more impressed if someone found a way to do the "real" Riddler in a movie and somehow make it not-stupid. THAT would be a feat. "Yeah, we changed everything but the guy's name" isn't "creative", it's actually pretty lazy on its face because anyone could do that. Taking such a ridiculous C-lister and making it work on film while still keeping it somewhat faithful to the source material, though? THAT would require some skill, and I'm not sure how it could be done but in any case it would require a lot more "creativity" than... whatever this thing is.

I do kinda get it, though. For one thing, the Joker tends to be the only Batman villain anyone cares about seeing in a movie, and HE'S a serial killer. Seeing Batman fight anyone BUT a serial killer in a movie, therefore, feels like a serious de-escalation of stakes. The broader audience probably has no patience to watch Batman match wits with someone who's "only" robbing banks or sowing general disorder; they want to know there's high stakes and lives in the balance. They want a body count. I get it. The Joker being so dominant as a Batman villain sort of ruins it for all the other Batman villains, to the point they're ALL sort of forced into "Joker-mode" for a live-action film, even if it's not true to their own individual character(s).

Still dumb to strip any character of everything that makes them unique, give them a creepy outfit and set them up as Joker 2.0 (or Jigsaw 2.0, or whatever) just because "well, it works better for a movie that way." If the only thing you keep is the name... Jesus, make up a brand-new character by that point.

[AquaParade]

Yeah, I'd also be impressed to see the classic version done in a way that doesn't seem stupid and non-threatening on the big screen. I'm sure there's a way, but I'm happy with this approach.

A high-intellect, narcissistic psychopath that fancies riddles and challenges Batman is faithful enough for me. That is how I'd describe the riddler and that's what we are looking at.
Especially when played by Dano, who will undoubtedly bring an interesting charisma to the role, which may even bring him more in line with the classic Riddler we know. Who knows.

And I want to emphasize “who knows” because many people, even here, were losing their crap at Colin Farrel’s casting until the trailer revealed enough to make them realize “okay, this is a more faithful Penguin than I expected.” And it certainly is a classic version of the Penguin. People be eating crow out here. Same could happen with Riddler, once we see more from him, but that won’t be what sways me at this point, because it already looks great to me.

Oddly enough, once this movie is a hit with critics and everyone is raving about it, you guys will look like the contrarians :p

Not that there is anything wrong with that