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

It will be interesting to see how this film goes. I heard it is going to be some type of a noir/Blade Runner type take on Batman? The indications are there that this will be good. One thing for sure is it will never create the hype of exactly 30 years ago when Batman first came to the big screen. One can argue if Batman 1989 was the best Batman or not but no one can argue that it was not the biggest Batmania event ever. The hype, the crowds queuing up to get in, the sheer excitement of seeing it in the cinema, remember being all excited talking about it with my dad on the way home and with my mam after getting home. All Batman films since owe something to this one that started it off too. And the noir/Blade Runner elements were actually introduced to Batman in that seminal 1989 classic.

We will have to wait and see where this film goes with Batman. Everyone who makes a Batman film has the perfect Batman film in their mind: it MUST have the Joker as the bad guy, Robin has to be left out, there has to be a love interest in Bruce's life who finds out he is Batman. The danger here is the same film could get made over and over. 30 years ago almost exactly, Batmania hit Ireland and this first Batman film created excitement precisely because it was so different and unique.

The last 2 Batman films where Batman is teamed up with other superheros were a bit too sci fi and were in their own way every bit as OTT as Batman & Robin. What the new film needs to do is bring Batman back to a grittier thriller style much the same way The Dark Knight trilogy did after the disaster that was Batman & Robin. What could the new film do well that hasn't been done before? Are there enemies that haven't featured that could be revived? We know that having Batman fight aliens, the villains of the last 2 films, is not really a good idea. Leave them to Luke Skywalker, Han Solo and co. Likewise, Lex Luthor is better off where he belongs, as Superman's main enemy. The Joker and The Penguin are among the most important Batman villains and rather than reviving the Joker for a third time, perhaps reviving the Penguin might be good. Or what about giving the Riddler a darker, grittier makeover than what we got in Batman Forever? Other Batman villains like the Book Worm, King Tut or Egghead do not seem to be worth reviving and would belong more in those Schumacher films than noir-inspired thriller.

I agree that this film needs to jump straight into the action and avoid any lengthy origin backstories. These have already had a whole film dedicated to them and have featured quite heavily in other Batman films over the years too. I feel though the backstory will feature as it always has but this may take from the film because it essentially is the same thing done each time. Having Harvey Dent's story done for a third time also may not be a good move.

In the 30 year history of Batman on the big screen so far, the series went from darker to more lighthearted and from realistic to sci fi as well. Some films have been accused of being way too long and as with many people saying Blade Runner 2049 was too long and the original did way more in less time, the same is said of Batman 1989 v some of the later films.

Batman 1989 was more than a film to a whole generation of people. It was part of their teenage years, it was part of pop culture, it was a reminder there was more to enjoy in the closing days of summer before the back to school and the Autumn set in. Other Batman films were criticised for being too silly or too dark but Batman 1989 got the balance right. It had its darker moments both with Batman's and the Joker's backstories but never let it stop the comic book feel either.

Batman 1989 is one of my go to films for escapism and to cheer me up if I had a bad day or a bad week. And with all the terrorism and evil in the world, Batman is someone people identify with more than ever. While it is doubtful any Batman film will repeat the Batmania of 1989, the market for quality Batman films is still massive. Let's hope The Batman is one of them.

Goodshape wrote: »

Surely they're going for the ex-James-Bond-type of Alfred then.

Wouldn't be my choice.

I get the feeling if Pierce Brosnan is Alfred he will be a younger, more active Alfred than what we have been used to in the films from 1989 to now.

Deleted User wrote: »

Pierce Brosnan is 66!

I know that but in Alfred terms, this is young. Michael Gough was 73 for example when he first played him and it was inferred he was playing a character at least 10 years older than that. Same with Michael Caine (72 in Batman Begins but portrayed once more as a man at least 10 years older). I feel Brosnan will be depicted as a more active Alfred and of the age Brosnan actually is.