Here you can find all forums, blogs and similar sections, that are meant for different types of communication.

Banner Hide banner



Watched "The Batman" with Pattison just now. I can see why there is some polarity, if you check user reviews, but personally, I quite liked it.

I agree that Pattison is "controversial" here, mostly because of the looks. Batman is one of those characters (along with Judge Dredd), that requires an actor with... Articulate chin and lips. And let's be honest it's difficult to call Robert's face "masculine". He does compensate for that with eyes, though.

But aside from the looks, some people may find his overall portrayal of the character as "too brooding". And I would agree, that the haircut and overall demeanor of his as "Bruce Wayne in public" is a bit emo-style and does not fit the character that well. But again - that's (mostly) the looks.

In terms of everything else, though... I would dare say that it is somewhat realistic. Or at least "the feel" of it all is. And I think that's where all controversy is coming from: it's not "comics". Previously even Nolan's trilogy of "Batman V Superman", which were relatively "dark", were "comics". This movie does not feel like "comics" based. I dare say, that if you removed all the knowledge about the character, you would not think of it as "comics-based" after watching.

It has that kind of atmosphere... I am not sure how to describe it. It reminds me of some movies, probably mockumentary ones or even those older "prohibited" ones. Like something slimy, but without the slime. Like lump of dead flesh falling on the floor, because it is a real dead flesh and not some prop, because it's a snuff movie. It's "yucky". Close to "Irreversible" kind of yucky, but not on the same level, because otherwise it would scare the audience from the theaters.

That's not something most viewers were expecting, I am sure. But it fits.

What made Batman comics stand out back in the day (and to an extent today without people realizing it) were characters, that had psychological traumas or disorders. They usually were not driven by something ephemeral, there was order behind the madness. That's what made "The Joker" movie a hit, if you think about it.

And "The Batman" delivers the same thing, but also on the "hero". There are glimpses of his insanity here and there. And only glimpses of the motivation. There is not much of "bravado" from Batman besides "I am vengeance" very early in the movie. The man is clearly in a state similar to mixed states of bipolar: he is depressive, he sees the world very darkly, but yet he has signs of mania, because he thinks that he is the only one (or one of the few) who can change that.

And I think this scares a lot of viewers. Because it makes the character "too human". Even more human than the what Ben Affleck delivered in his "disappointed by life" version of Batman. It's no longer a "rock" akin to Superman and is even more "human" than Spider-Man, which became a hit because Peter was very relatable to kids and young people.

Almost everything in the movie was delivering this kind of feeling. Or at least I interpreted it that way. Sense of lifelessness behind the act of life, I guess. Do I find the movie "the best ever"? Hell, no. I agree, that it may be too long, for example. I would probably prefer it as a TV Series. Or maybe a series of shorter movies, like "Spawn" animation, which had similar atmosphere, actually. But, personally, I would not mind a continuation of this version. In fact, I'd prefer it more than continuation of Nolan's action-packed trilogy even.