Ok, we get it. You didn't like the movie. Sheesh.
*** The Batman (spoiler thread) ***
63,268 Views |
864 Replies |
Last: 2 yr ago by TCTTS
I thought it was merely decent, but not the greatest movie of all time. I'm mostly responding to the "how DARE you criticize it!" aspect of this thread.AgfromHOU said:
Ok, we get it. You didn't like the movie. Sheesh.
And you've successfully beaten that horse to death
Seems like somebody needs to counter the 23 straight pages of undeserved gushing this movie has been getting.AgfromHOU said:
And you've successfully beaten that horse to death
aTmAg said:Seems like somebody needs to counter the 23 straight pages of undeserved gushing this movie has been getting.AgfromHOU said:
And you've successfully beaten that horse to death
Thursday, October 31st. The Texags boards are crowded for the holiday. Even with the rain. Hidden in the chaos is the element, waiting to strike like snakes. And I'm there too. Watching.
2 years of nights have turned me into a nocturnal animal. I must choose my targets carefully. It's a big message board. I can't be everywhere. But they don't know where I am. We have a signal now, for when I'm needed. When that light hits the sky, it's not just a call- it's a warning. To them.
Fear is a tool. They think I'm hiding behind a keyboard. But I AM the keyboard. I wish I could say I'm making a difference, but I'm not. Praise, enjoyment for the movie, analysis - 23 pages later, they're all up. And now this. This board's eating itself. Maybe it can't be saved, but I have to try. PUSH MYSELF. These nights all roll together in a rush, Behind the keyboard. Sometimes in the morning I have to force myself to remember everything that happened.
aTmAg said:Seems like somebody needs to counter the 23 straight pages of undeserved gushing this movie has been getting.AgfromHOU said:
And you've successfully beaten that horse to death
So, you hated it so much that you want everyone else to be just as miserable about it? You sound like fun.
Here's an honest take for you: Nolan's Batman was hyper unrealistic, as well, and if it wasn't for Heath Ledger the only thing it would have going for it was that it wasn't Tim Burton.
aTmAg said:Seems like somebody needs to counter the 23 straight pages of undeserved gushing this movie has been getting.AgfromHOU said:
And you've successfully beaten that horse to death
But why do you feel the need to do that? You're just picking fights at this point. You aren't going to move anyone, and nobody is going to move your opinion. You've made your point, move on.
Just beautiful. You did forget to mention the liberals, though.
They did go for realism somewhat in considering that a female counterpart to Batman might not be curvy and choose to wear tight, revealing leather costumes, which was a mistake.
It's the other way around. I express my opinion then get jumped by everybody for daring to not tow the #13 line on this being a great movie. Nobody here can tolerate dissenting opinions. Perhaps if you guys just let others have opinions and move on, this wouldn't keep happening with poster after poster.Average Joe said:aTmAg said:Seems like somebody needs to counter the 23 straight pages of undeserved gushing this movie has been getting.AgfromHOU said:
And you've successfully beaten that horse to death
So, you hated it so much that you want everyone else to be just as miserable about it? You sound like fun.
Here's an honest take for you: Nolan's Batman was hyper unrealistic, as well, and if it wasn't for Heath Ledger the only thing it would have going for it was that it wasn't Tim Burton.
And the Nolan movies were vastly superior to this one. This is basically the Marvelization of Batman (which is a bad thing).
It's because many of your critiques are stupid.
Rhutton125 brought up the amount of bullets he took, which I have also mentioned. That sounds like a reasonable critique of the movie, to me.
However, to walk into a movie about a masked vigilante who beats up criminals at night, and then critique the basic premise of the movie just makes you out to be someone who has some sort of personal vendetta against this movie.
We all go into a movie accepting the reality with which we are presented by the director and story. In this one, Batman is still raw, hasn't seemed to pull himself out of depression which makes him self-destructive. In this movie, like EVERY OTHER BATMAN IN THE PAST, he is able to confront multiple baddies at once.
In the Nolan Batman, are we to believe Bruce learned how to basically fight all by himself, while living around the world as a homeless man, and then went to the league of shadows for 2 months only to become the greatest fighter in history? Ra's al Ghul even tells Bruce they will teach him how to engage hundreds at once. Is this fine in the Nolan universe simply because of this one line of dialogue in the movie? Should we have just had Alfred say, "I know I taught you how to engage 30 men at one time, but you are testing your limits, Bruce." Would than then make it believable, to you?
To be honest, I now look at the Nolan Batman and don't think that Bruce was as broken as he should have been to take such an extreme action. We will see in the next movie, but if they spend more time on him now realizing he needs to be Bruce Wayne, and battles with both sides of himself, it would be much more realistic than the Nolan series from a human side.
Rhutton125 brought up the amount of bullets he took, which I have also mentioned. That sounds like a reasonable critique of the movie, to me.
However, to walk into a movie about a masked vigilante who beats up criminals at night, and then critique the basic premise of the movie just makes you out to be someone who has some sort of personal vendetta against this movie.
We all go into a movie accepting the reality with which we are presented by the director and story. In this one, Batman is still raw, hasn't seemed to pull himself out of depression which makes him self-destructive. In this movie, like EVERY OTHER BATMAN IN THE PAST, he is able to confront multiple baddies at once.
In the Nolan Batman, are we to believe Bruce learned how to basically fight all by himself, while living around the world as a homeless man, and then went to the league of shadows for 2 months only to become the greatest fighter in history? Ra's al Ghul even tells Bruce they will teach him how to engage hundreds at once. Is this fine in the Nolan universe simply because of this one line of dialogue in the movie? Should we have just had Alfred say, "I know I taught you how to engage 30 men at one time, but you are testing your limits, Bruce." Would than then make it believable, to you?
To be honest, I now look at the Nolan Batman and don't think that Bruce was as broken as he should have been to take such an extreme action. We will see in the next movie, but if they spend more time on him now realizing he needs to be Bruce Wayne, and battles with both sides of himself, it would be much more realistic than the Nolan series from a human side.
aTmAg said:
This is basically the Marvelization of Batman (which is a bad thing).
This is a bad take. The Marvel formula involves a lot of action and humor. This movie didn't have hardly any of either.
AgfromHOU said:aTmAg said:
This is basically the Marvelization of Batman (which is a bad thing).
This is a bad take. The Marvel formula involves a lot of action and humor. This movie didn't have hardly any of either.
I don't know about "Marvelization" but what it struck me as was just a Batman meant to appeal to under 30's, which it did. I teach 16 year olds and overhearing their take on it made me realize the makers did successfully start a trilogy for their generation. It appealed to some older fans of course because it was well-shot.
Interesting, cause I felt like they were specifically trying to target it more towards 30+.
This was my take. I'm actually amazed so many under 20's liked the movie as much as they did. When I left the movie, I thought it would be too slow and.... stylistic? for the younger crowd. The level of "filmmaking" was so much higher than anything in the marvel universe, which I really appreciated.Brian Earl Spilner said:
Interesting, cause I felt like they were specifically trying to target it more towards 30+.
I'm 34 and loved the movie (again, had my critiques at the end).
AgfromHOU said:aTmAg said:
This is basically the Marvelization of Batman (which is a bad thing).
This is a bad take. The Marvel formula involves a lot of action and humor. This movie didn't have hardly any of either.
Seriously, if this doesn't cement that this dude can't be taken seriously nothing will.
No, I'm claiming that your idea that a group of security people spread out over a warehouse sized club should have been able to quickly converge on a surprise intruder in the dark is absurd.aTmAg said:So you are claiming that a 1v10 fight against bouncers is realistic?fig96 said:Quote:
. I lost count of how many people he beat up when he walked into the club early in the movie. Like the guys conveniently lined up and waited for their turn.
Yeah, I'd expect random security guys and off duty cops to much more quickly converge on a guy who took out their doorman and his brother then quickly made his way through a darkened club. Don't know why they aren't just sitting there waiting for this exact scenario to occur.
I need to say no more
It was everything Gen Z wanted, Twilight guy as Batman, a moody Nirvana song, no fetishized female characters, emotionally muted performances, a social media villain...Nolan's series was made for us, which is why everyone under 25 finds them "cringe".
None of my critiques are stupid. They are all 100% genius.DallasTeleAg said:
It's because many of your critiques are stupid.
Rhutton125 brought up the amount of bullets he took, which I have also mentioned. That sounds like a reasonable critique of the movie, to me.
I had no vendetta. While I have thought they have gone way overboard on the remakes of the same movie over and over, I decided I'd see it ever since I saw the trailer of the batmobile mobile flipping the Penguin's car. (Where I have never seen the Ben Affleck ones)Quote:
However, to walk into a movie about a masked vigilante who beats up criminals at night, and then critique the basic premise of the movie just makes you out to be someone who has some sort of personal vendetta against this movie.
I know from family experience that when people suffer depression, they tend to stay in bed. They don't train to become the next Bruce Lee. And I know of zero emo MMA fighters.Quote:
We all go into a movie accepting the reality with which we are presented by the director and story. In this one, Batman is still raw, hasn't seemed to pull himself out of depression which makes him self-destructive. In this movie, like EVERY OTHER BATMAN IN THE PAST, he is able to confront multiple baddies at once.
Ra's al Ghul saying that was hyperbole. Bruce never engages hundreds at once. If he did then that would be lame as hell too. In fact, he is more vulnerable in those movies and almost gets overpowered several times, including with Bane when 1v1.Quote:
In the Nolan Batman, are we to believe Bruce learned how to basically fight all by himself, while living around the world as a homeless man, and then went to the league of shadows for 2 months only to become the greatest fighter in history? Ra's al Ghul even tells Bruce they will teach him how to engage hundreds at once. Is this fine in the Nolan universe simply because of this one line of dialogue in the movie?
Saying it is not the problem, it's doing it. How many people would it take before you realize it's lame? 30? 100? 1000? 10,000? Is there any number of people that he could ass kick that you wouldn't cheer like a 2 year old?Quote:
Should we have just had Alfred say, "I know I taught you how to engage 30 men at one time, but you are testing your limits, Bruce." Would than then make it believable, to you?
To me, the Nolan movies imply he was broken prior to BB. That is the whole reason he is homeless and doing all of that crap. Him learning to fight wass his way out of that. Just like martial arts classes teach kids/adults to build confidence. And the Nolan Batman movies addressed a glaring hole that exists in every other version. And that is, how in the hell does he get all of this ridiculous hardware and a bat cave without anybody knowing? This movie blows that off again, and it's hard to ignore. It's like watching CSI Miami after watching the Wire.Quote:
To be honest, I now look at the Nolan Batman and don't think that Bruce was as broken as he should have been to take such an extreme action. We will see in the next movie, but if they spend more time on him now realizing he needs to be Bruce Wayne, and battles with both sides of himself, it would be much more realistic than the Nolan series from a human side.
I'm not talking about the humor part. That is actually a redeeming value. I'm talking about the action BS that is so over the top that it's boring. At least Batman didn't do "the pose" like every single superhero in Marvel movies (which is always conveniently timed to when the camera pans by).AgfromHOU said:aTmAg said:
This is basically the Marvelization of Batman (which is a bad thing).
This is a bad take. The Marvel formula involves a lot of action and humor. This movie didn't have hardly any of either.
Also, this whole "he's depressed so he looks emo" take is dumb.
He doesn't look like that because he's depressed and emotional (though he very well may be), he's so singularly focused on what he's doing that he's doesn't care to get a haircut, go out in public, etc. He hasn't yet learned that playing the Bruce Wayne persona can be used to his advantage.
He doesn't look like that because he's depressed and emotional (though he very well may be), he's so singularly focused on what he's doing that he's doesn't care to get a haircut, go out in public, etc. He hasn't yet learned that playing the Bruce Wayne persona can be used to his advantage.
I didn't say that. But 2 to 3 bouncers should have been able to overpower him. Never mind 5, 6, or more.fig96 said:No, I'm claiming that your idea that a group of security people spread out over a warehouse sized club should have been able to quickly converge on a surprise intruder in the dark is absurd.aTmAg said:So you are claiming that a 1v10 fight against bouncers is realistic?fig96 said:Quote:
. I lost count of how many people he beat up when he walked into the club early in the movie. Like the guys conveniently lined up and waited for their turn.
Yeah, I'd expect random security guys and off duty cops to much more quickly converge on a guy who took out their doorman and his brother then quickly made his way through a darkened club. Don't know why they aren't just sitting there waiting for this exact scenario to occur.
I need to say no more
Then you need to tell the rest of this board (and the director) that. I didn't make that excuse up. I read it here.fig96 said:
Also, this whole "he's depressed so he looks emo" take is dumb.
He doesn't look like that because he's depressed and emotional (though he very well may be), he's so singularly focused on what he's doing that he's doesn't care to get a haircut, go out in public, etc. He hasn't yet learned that playing the Bruce Wayne persona can be used to his advantage.
I'll have to rewatch, but I don't recall an instance in that scene where there were 5-6 bouncers around him.aTmAg said:I didn't say that. But 2 to 3 bouncers should have been able to overpower him. Never mind 5, 6, or more.fig96 said:No, I'm claiming that your idea that a group of security people spread out over a warehouse sized club should have been able to quickly converge on a surprise intruder in the dark is absurd.aTmAg said:So you are claiming that a 1v10 fight against bouncers is realistic?fig96 said:Quote:
. I lost count of how many people he beat up when he walked into the club early in the movie. Like the guys conveniently lined up and waited for their turn.
Yeah, I'd expect random security guys and off duty cops to much more quickly converge on a guy who took out their doorman and his brother then quickly made his way through a darkened club. Don't know why they aren't just sitting there waiting for this exact scenario to occur.
I need to say no more
Do I buy that a highly trained guy in an armored suit could take out 2-3 semi prepared bouncers in various states of intoxication in short order? Absolutely.
Lol... here we go again. aTmAg knows these things because he knows someone who was different.
Also, in the Nolan Trilogy, Batman doesn't only fight just as many enemies at once, but he also fights multiple members of the League of Shadows at once. This would seemingly be much more difficult than several thugs in a dark club.
Again... your arguments come from a place of just not wanting to like this movie. That, and you are holding the Nolan films up on a pedestal simply because they came out a while ago and hit a chord with you. That's fine, but it doesn't make this movie bad.
I also would understand if you have comic book movie fatigue. But again, that is not a critique of the movie in question.
Anyway... I'm done responding to what is becoming simply trolling on your part
Also, in the Nolan Trilogy, Batman doesn't only fight just as many enemies at once, but he also fights multiple members of the League of Shadows at once. This would seemingly be much more difficult than several thugs in a dark club.
Again... your arguments come from a place of just not wanting to like this movie. That, and you are holding the Nolan films up on a pedestal simply because they came out a while ago and hit a chord with you. That's fine, but it doesn't make this movie bad.
I also would understand if you have comic book movie fatigue. But again, that is not a critique of the movie in question.
Anyway... I'm done responding to what is becoming simply trolling on your part
I didn't direct that to you, it's a bad take in general.aTmAg said:Then you need to tell the rest of this board (and the director) that. I didn't make that excuse up. I read it here.fig96 said:
Also, this whole "he's depressed so he looks emo" take is dumb.
He doesn't look like that because he's depressed and emotional (though he very well may be), he's so singularly focused on what he's doing that he's doesn't care to get a haircut, go out in public, etc. He hasn't yet learned that playing the Bruce Wayne persona can be used to his advantage.
I was also thinking about this, the other day.
The Dark Knight took a lot of inspiration from Heat. The Batman took inspiration from Zodiac, Seven, and other neo-noir type movies.
If you were to ask me which movie I like better between Heat and Seven, it would be Seven. I also don't think the Dark Knight would be as high on my list if not for Heath Ledger's Joker performance. However, I'm not one of those who judges things by removing the best aspects of said things, just because they're so great (ie: Saying the 2012 Aggies wouldn't have been good without Johnny). Heath Ledger's performance is critical to the Dark Knight being what it was.
The Dark Knight took a lot of inspiration from Heat. The Batman took inspiration from Zodiac, Seven, and other neo-noir type movies.
If you were to ask me which movie I like better between Heat and Seven, it would be Seven. I also don't think the Dark Knight would be as high on my list if not for Heath Ledger's Joker performance. However, I'm not one of those who judges things by removing the best aspects of said things, just because they're so great (ie: Saying the 2012 Aggies wouldn't have been good without Johnny). Heath Ledger's performance is critical to the Dark Knight being what it was.
Bouncers shouldn't be intoxicated at all, and I don't remember any of them being portrayed that way.fig96 said:I'll have to rewatch, but I don't recall an instance in that scene where there were 5-6 bouncers around him.aTmAg said:I didn't say that. But 2 to 3 bouncers should have been able to overpower him. Never mind 5, 6, or more.fig96 said:No, I'm claiming that your idea that a group of security people spread out over a warehouse sized club should have been able to quickly converge on a surprise intruder in the dark is absurd.aTmAg said:So you are claiming that a 1v10 fight against bouncers is realistic?fig96 said:Quote:
. I lost count of how many people he beat up when he walked into the club early in the movie. Like the guys conveniently lined up and waited for their turn.
Yeah, I'd expect random security guys and off duty cops to much more quickly converge on a guy who took out their doorman and his brother then quickly made his way through a darkened club. Don't know why they aren't just sitting there waiting for this exact scenario to occur.
I need to say no more
Do I buy that a highly trained guy in an armored suit could take out 2-3 semi prepared bouncers in various states of intoxication in short order? Absolutely.
The movie simply took his invincibility too far. From taking 1000 rounds of automatic fire to the chest no problem (why did nobody aim for the face from 2 feet away?), to kicking too many people's asses at once with his fists, etc. It was common theme throughout.
The Nolan movies made it more about him sneaking around and getting one (or at most 2) at a time. That is until his last one, which had several ridiculous 2v10 fights. But that is Nolan's worst, and I put it behind this movie in my ranking list.
Discussions about the realism of fighting prowess in comic book movies is pointless. None of it is realistic, obviously. A dude the size of Pattinson is not going to fend off 15 even kind of trained guys regardless. Zoe Kravitz isnt going to beat up even a couple of 8th grade boys. It's a comic book movie, let realism concerns go.
Teacher_Ag said:
It was everything Gen Z wanted, Twilight guy as Batman, a moody Nirvana song, no fetishized female characters, emotionally muted performances, a social media villain...Nolan's series was made for us, which is why everyone under 25 finds them "cringe".
Are Nirvana (the band, not the t-shirt) and Twilight popular among high schoolers these days?
A 16 year old would've been 6 years old when Twilight ended. And I'm curious how many of them listen to Nirvana.
Those both feel like targeted for millennials.
It's not about realism, it's about eliminating suspense. If he can walk in a room and kick 100 people's asses, then is there really any suspense anymore? This is the same problem Superman movies have. He is the greatest superhero, but has the most boring movies.Teacher_Ag said:
Discussions about the realism of fighting prowess in comic book movies is pointless. None of it is realistic, obviously. A dude the size of Pattinson is not going to fend off 15 even kind of trained guys regardless. Zoe Kravitz isnt going to beat up even a couple of 8th grade boys. It's a comic book movie, let realism concerns go.
Teacher_Ag said:
It was everything Gen Z wanted, Twilight guy as Batman, a moody Nirvana song, no fetishized female characters, emotionally muted performances, a social media villain...Nolan's series was made for us, which is why everyone under 25 finds them "cringe".
this is an underrated assessment.
but I hate the Nolan batman. I loved Clooney as batman and the old school TV show.
I want a broody emotionally stunted batman and super zany absurd villains. The beauty of batman (to me) is the juxtaposition of the darkest most serious Gothic superhero and setting, then these over the top villains. bring me baby doll and the royal flush gang.
edited for a hilarious auto correct adjustment
Yeah leading up to the release the students were excited that Pattinson was the star. I heard more about that than any other aspect of the movie.
And yes, anything 90's to them has special appeal. I'm not saying the movie didn't try to appeal to older fans, but the fact that my students didn't find it "cringe" speaks volumes. Any time a bunch of 40 and 50 year olds can collectively make something that a 16 year old will enjoy they've had to really REALLY try.
And yes, anything 90's to them has special appeal. I'm not saying the movie didn't try to appeal to older fans, but the fact that my students didn't find it "cringe" speaks volumes. Any time a bunch of 40 and 50 year olds can collectively make something that a 16 year old will enjoy they've had to really REALLY try.
They shouldn't be, doesn't mean they weren't (and I didn't get the feeling this was the tightest run ship in the world).aTmAg said:Bouncers shouldn't be intoxicated at all, and I don't remember any of them being portrayed that way.fig96 said:I'll have to rewatch, but I don't recall an instance in that scene where there were 5-6 bouncers around him.aTmAg said:I didn't say that. But 2 to 3 bouncers should have been able to overpower him. Never mind 5, 6, or more.fig96 said:No, I'm claiming that your idea that a group of security people spread out over a warehouse sized club should have been able to quickly converge on a surprise intruder in the dark is absurd.aTmAg said:So you are claiming that a 1v10 fight against bouncers is realistic?fig96 said:Quote:
. I lost count of how many people he beat up when he walked into the club early in the movie. Like the guys conveniently lined up and waited for their turn.
Yeah, I'd expect random security guys and off duty cops to much more quickly converge on a guy who took out their doorman and his brother then quickly made his way through a darkened club. Don't know why they aren't just sitting there waiting for this exact scenario to occur.
I need to say no more
Do I buy that a highly trained guy in an armored suit could take out 2-3 semi prepared bouncers in various states of intoxication in short order? Absolutely.
The movie simply took his invincibility too far. From taking 1000 rounds of automatic fire to the chest no problem (why did nobody aim for the face from 2 feet away?), to kicking too many people's asses at once with his fists, etc. It was common theme throughout.
The Nolan movies made it more about him sneaking around and getting one (or at most 2) at a time. That is until his last one, which had several ridiculous 2v10 fights. But that is Nolan's worst, and I put it behind this movie in my ranking list.
And the argument apparently just changed that he's just too invincible rather than the 5-6 guys scenario
He's a guy in padded armor who took some shots but was more skilled than his opponents. Was he a little too strong/lucky/able to take a hit? Welcome to every action movie.
I wonder if that's more to do with his post-Twilight career though.
I've never seen Twilight but I was excited for it purely from seeing Good Time.
But still interesting that teens were as into the movie as you're saying.
Almost like NOT being Marvel fluff in a roundabout way made it more appealing to late teens. (At the expense of younger kids.)
I've never seen Twilight but I was excited for it purely from seeing Good Time.
But still interesting that teens were as into the movie as you're saying.
Almost like NOT being Marvel fluff in a roundabout way made it more appealing to late teens. (At the expense of younger kids.)
Featured Stories
See All
2026 Lakewood (CA) tight end Caleb Tafua commits to Texas A&M
by Jason Howell
Presenting Texas Aggies United's 'Battle At Reed' Sweepstakes!
by Texas Aggies United
22:08
1d ago
4.9k
Hefner scores 19 as No. 12 A&M overpowers HCU in Friday matinee
by Olin Buchanan
Ar'maj Reed-Adams announces his return to Texas A&M for 2025
by Richard Zane