The Batman (Matt Reeves) ***spoilers from post 1030***

Minime2.5

Still the best performance of Batman and Bruce Wayne yet in my opinion

The White Wolf

It's all just down to personal taste. For me Bale and Ledger are still the definitive portrayals of the respective characters; others will tell you it's Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill.

I grew up with Keaton's Batman so I of course love what he did, but in retrospect I look at his portrayal as more of an elseworlds version of the character.

It's a hard pick for me between Ledger and Hamill though.

Agent Coulson

Keaton is the best Bruce Wayne and Conroy the best Batman for me.

Hamill is the only Joker for me.

Agent Coulson

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Keaton is the best Bruce Wayne and Conroy the best Batman for me.

Hamill is the only Joker for me.

While I think that Hamill could have physically played the Joker, not so Conroy.

He may have been the best vocally, but he never had to play the full part including mannerisms and presence

The Phantom Pain

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

Affleck had the best look and fighting style as Batman but it was his personality they got wrong. Under all that brutality and hatred is a man who is compassionate and a genius. BvS turned him into nothing more but a bully and a thug. If you combine Bale's nobility with Affleck's look then you'd have a near perfect Batman imo

I still feel the films have yet to explore his detective side fully.

Affleck was told delivery exactly what he did though. Can't lay that on anyone but Snyder and WB.

Drumpot

Minime2.5 wrote: »

Still the best performance of Batman and Bruce Wayne yet in my opinion

Have to agree with you, he was so f**king good.

Also Keaton was such an under rated actor, loved his movies when I was younger. Beetljuice, nightshift, gung ho, clean and sober , the dream team (one of my favorite comedies growing up) Jack Frost and even desperate measures, he could do anything.

I know they aren’t Oscar winning movies but Keaton shines in every one.

Drumpot

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

Affleck had the best look and fighting style as Batman but it was his personality they got wrong. Under all that brutality and hatred is a man who is compassionate and a genius. BvS turned him into nothing more but a bully and a thug. If you combine Bale's nobility with Affleck's look then you'd have a near perfect Batman imo

I still feel the films have yet to explore his detective side fully.

The binary expectations of Batman fans was the problem not what Snyder tried to do with the character. Part of the silly “not my character” modern phenomenon where some people can’t accept different versions of characters they love.

The motives behind Batman’s demise into thuggery was easily understandable. Maybe if we had had a background movie (where robin is killed which makes batman a vengeful thug) it might of made more sense. Also, the Martha scene, on reflection makes total sense when people can get over rolling their eyes at it.

BvS was a solid movie, in fact a lot better and more unique then most comicbook movies we get. I just think Snyder is like marmite, people either love or hate what he does.

Baggly

Drumpot wrote:

BvS was a solid movie, in fact a lot better and more unique then most comicbook movies we get. I just think Snyder is like marmite, people either love or hate what he does.

The ultimate edition was better still. A good few scenes that offered context were put back in.

pixelburp

Drumpot wrote: »

The binary expectations of Batman fans was the problem not what Snyder tried to do with the character. Part of the silly “not my character” modern phenomenon where some people can’t accept different versions of characters they love.

The motives behind Batman’s demise into thuggery was easily understandable. Maybe if we had had a background movie (where robin is killed which makes batman a vengeful thug) it might of made more sense. Also, the Martha scene, on reflection makes total sense when people can get over rolling their eyes at it.

BvS was a solid movie, in fact a lot better and more unique then most comicbook movies we get. I just think Snyder is like marmite, people either love or hate what he does.

All of which might have made sense if the movie decided to make that clear, but it didn't and we only had the information presented on screen. That this batman was a psychotic thug who on more than one occasion killed people (to be fair, so did Burton's batman), while ranting about 1% chances being a certainty. Or indeed it's be fine if we ignored the rest of Synders representation of superheroics, which included a superman who happily demolished the entirety of downtown Smallville and Metropolis, purely because Synder doesn't have the sense to think ideas through. He does it in all his films, they're always tone deaf and have some weird emotional volumes. All the characters feel off.

As to best Batmans? Bale and Keaton tie for their portrayal of Wayne, but IMO nobody has quite managed to nail the presence of the caped crusader himself. I like Bales costume the most but his voice was way too affected.

I actually agree with that previous poster who threw out Clayface as an opponent; the CGI would be easy to achieve and could be a good one for some goopy body horror, while opening up an interesting thread of paranoia and mystery.

Black mask too, but I'm really not liking the look of the one we're getting with the Harly Quinn film...

Hell even Calendarman (done like Zodiac killer) would be awesome, showing the Greatest Detective in action

Drumpot

pixelburp wrote: »

All of which might have made sense if the movie decided to make that clear, but it didn't and we only had the information presented on screen. That this batman was a psychotic thug who on more than one occasion killed people (to be fair, so did Burton's batman), while ranting about 1% chances being a certainty. Or indeed it's be fine if we ignored the rest of Synders representation of superheroics, which included a superman who happily demolished the entirety of downtown Smallville and Metropolis, purely because Synder doesn't have the sense to think ideas through. He does it in all his films, they're always tone deaf and have some weird emotional volumes. All the characters feel off.

I thought it was very obvious why batman was so psychotic and that we didn’t need any extra sub text at all. Alfred filled in any gaps on why batman has gone a bit mad, but batman looking at Robins suit and constant knight mares about his parents should of been enough.

In terms of superman , again a binary expectation, interesting that the same complaint rears it’s head, the perfectionist white as white super hero that’s always thinking of not killing. Is it not ok to get different versions of super hero’s? I mean it’s a different batman and superman. Ironically these hero’s are set in more fantasy type world but they act in more realistic manner (collateral damage happens).

In Superman 2, superman has to fight with the baddies in metropolis and nearly destroys it aswell. Until he eventually flies off so they follow him. Why didn’t he just say “general would you care to step outside?” and fly to where he went anyways? That’s still possibly my favourite of all movies but I don’t worry about such things because it’s ok for superman not to be perfect.

Superman v Zod in MOS was not that different. It was that machine that destroyed metropolis, not their fight. It was also the first time superman had any sort of foe so to expect him to instinctively know how to react doesn’t make sense unless you can only accept a perfect superman that follows along a rigid path of decision making.

pixelburp

Drumpot wrote: »

In Superman 2, superman has to fight with the baddies in metropolis and nearly destroys it aswell. Until he eventually flies off so they follow him. Why didn’t he just say “general would you care to step outside?” and fly to where he went anyways? That’s still possibly my favourite of all movies but I don’t worry about such things because it’s ok for superman not to be perfect.

Superman v Zod in MOS was not that different. It was that machine that destroyed metropolis, not their fight. It was also the first time superman had any sort of foe so to expect him to instinctively know how to react doesn’t make sense unless you can only accept a perfect superman that follows along a rigid path of decision making.

But it wasn't the first time. As I said, Smallville itself got completely demolished during the fight with one of Zods henchman so the whole "superman is new to this" doesn't track within the simple structure of an Origin Story narrative. Metropolis got demolished because the filmmakers thought it looked cool, when after Smallville the obvious arc should have been Clark realising the damage he can cause. Donners superman was fine because, aside from the collateral damage being wayyyyyyy less due to FX of the time, you could see this was Supes first fight with an equal and how he was struggling against. Synder just hurled his toys into buildings cos he could.

Uh, this is getting way off topic and it's kinda my bad cos I replied and started it, but I really don't but this "it's just a different angle" argument. You can do different while maintaining the core of what the character is or stands for. To me, Synder did not retain the core elements of the characters, and you could absolutely see that by the desperate retconning BvS tried to do with Supes. I'm glad this batman is dead because like superman, it made a balls of who the character was; plenty of "different" takes exist via Elseworlds (batman in Victorian times, batman as a ninja), yet they always maintain a core identity.

Because Zod was controlling the battlefield, as a trained general. His whole plan was to burn it down.

Burton Batman killed
Doner Superman killed Zod

pixelburp

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Because Zod was controlling the battlefield, as a trained general. His whole plan was to burn it down.

Burton Batman killed
Doner Superman killed Zod

Depends which superman 2 we're talking about though

And yup, I did say that Burton's batman killed. You can reason all sorts of theories as why that gets a pass. Fundamentally though, and having rewatched 300 recently I don't believe Synder "gets" human characters as a flaw, and his superheros suffer from the same problem. His batman and superman fall apart and I just don't buy the various "well, actually" to get around what amounted to Synder going nuts on a FX budget between him and Geoff Johns I think they're both obsessed with the whole "Gods as men" angle that pervades much of their work IMO. Especially Synder.

pixelburp

pixelburp wrote: »

Depends which superman 2 we're talking about though

And yup, I did say that Burton's batman killed. You can reason all sorts of theories as why that gets a pass. Fundamentally though, and having rewatched 300 recently I don't believe Synder "gets" human characters as a flaw, and his superheros suffer from the same problem. His batman and superman fall apart and I just don't buy the various "well, actually" to get around what amounted to Synder going nuts on a FX budget

Agree on all this. Snyder knows how to capture a shot but that's it.
Would be a much better universe if, say, Whedon was there from the off.
I don't think that there was much wrong with script/story of MoS (other than regular scifi error of NEEDING this particular planet)
BvS should have been just that with Doomsday as Justice Leage antagonist.

Common thread bringing these all down was direction


On the destruction of Metropolis, I think it is straight from TAS and a nod that way but Whedon would have had Zod state why to focus the fight there and had Supes struggle in fight trying to save innocents

Drumpot

pixelburp wrote: »

Depends which superman 2 we're talking about though

And yup, I did say that Burton's batman killed. You can reason all sorts of theories as why that gets a pass. Fundamentally though, and having rewatched 300 recently I don't believe Synder "gets" human characters as a flaw, and his superheros suffer from the same problem. His batman and superman fall apart and I just don't buy the various "well, actually" to get around what amounted to Synder going nuts on a FX budget between him and Geoff Johns I think they're both obsessed with the whole "Gods as men" angle that pervades much of their work IMO. Especially Synder.

I didn’t think his characters fell apart at all in the context you are saying. In MOS superman had never faught anybody, at least He had beaten Lex in superman 1 before he had to take on the three villains in the originals. But like you said, we aren’t getting anywhere so maybe we leave it there. I’m terrible at keeping on these sort of discussions when everybody else wants to move on so maybe we just agree to disagree.

Drumpot

Actually can somebody explain what it means for “characters to fall apart”?

Perhaps I have misunderstood what was meant by this statement. Do you mean in the context of what their characters are supposed to do (not kill) or do you feel there wasn’t enough back story or clarification of hero’s actions/ motives?

Drumpot

Drumpot wrote: »

Actually can somebody explain what it means for “characters to fall apart”?

Perhaps I have misunderstood what was meant by this statement. Do you mean in the context of what their characters are supposed to do (not kill) or do you feel there wasn’t enough back story or clarification of hero’s actions/ motives?

For me it's where you have to infer a lot, not based on previous action or exposition.
Instead of telling the story, forcing audience to fill in the blanks which leads to people having vastly different views.

Which explains why I say destruction of Metropolis was Zod dictated control of the engagement Vs other blaming Supes

Drumpot

Deleted User wrote: »

For me it's where you have to infer a lot, not based on previous action or exposition.
Instead of telling the story, forcing audience to fill in the blanks which leads to people having vastly different views.

Which explains why I say destruction of Metropolis was Zod dictated control of the engagement Vs other blaming Supes

That’s what I thought aswell , the baddies were at the core of the destruction of cities, not the goodies who couldn’t dictate everything. But Batman did draw doomsday to a more secluded part of the city so it did happen in BvS.

Do you think having to fill in the blanks is bad in this case? I didn’t think I needed to over think how we got to where we are with these interpretations of the characters so I don’t understand why we needed more story telling to explain how they got here.

It’s not that I’m objectively correct by the way, it’s that I just don’t understand how this is an issue for some. Is it more a Snyder style that people don’t like and they put more stock in things that don’t need to matter? Or am I not understanding the critiquing of his movies? I honestly don’t know, sometimes I just like some movies and I like how he makes them. Especially watchmen. I mean could it simply be that I like how he tells a story and that over rides the bits that annoy others?

Minime2.5

Drumpot wrote: »

Have to agree with you, he was so f**king good.

Also Keaton was such an under rated actor, loved his movies when I was younger. Beetljuice, nightshift, gung ho, clean and sober , the dream team (one of my favorite comedies growing up) Jack Frost and even desperate measures, he could do anything.

I know they aren’t Oscar winning movies but Keaton shines in every one.

Yep . Class actor . Dream team and Clean & Sober are very good . Have you seen Pacific Heights? He's brilliant in that . Hard to believe he's just turned 68. Has aged very well

JP Liz V1

nix wrote: »

Fingers crossed for Alan Tudyk or Domhnall Gleeson to play Lucius Fox..

:pac:

I think we may get a female in that role

Slydice

Rogue One Composer (Michael Giacchino) on board!
I'm in! Sold! Take my money!

https://twitter.com/RaptorChaser17/status/1185454527639670784

Drumpot

Minime2.5 wrote: »

Yep . Class actor . Dream team and Clean & Sober are very good . Have you seen Pacific Heights? He's brilliant in that . Hard to believe he's just turned 68. Has aged very well

I feel like I’ve seen bits of pacific heights but can’t remember! Weird I know, worth a watch ?

Drumpot

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

Nice choice. I love Zimmer and the work he did on TDK trilogy as well as BvS but it's time for a change.

Going to see “the best of John Williams” in the national concert hall on Saturday fortnight , can’t wait. Love this sort of stuff!

Minime2.5

Drumpot wrote: »

I feel like I’ve seen bits of pacific heights but can’t remember! Weird I know, worth a watch ?

Yes def

EoinMcLovin

Matt Reeves officially confirmed Jeffrey Wright will play Commissioner James Gordon.


https://twitter.com/mattreevesla/status/1189668589726584832

EoinMcLovin

EoinMcLovin wrote: »

Matt Reeves officially confirmed Jeffrey Wright will play Commissioner James Gordon.


https://twitter.com/mattreevesla/status/1189668589726584832

Good actor, should be a good one. Means any Barbara will not be a red head. Gingers being erased from on screen super shows

pixelburp

Wright had be in the mix for so long, I'd honestly just presumed he already was official.