The Batman - 2022

[Anteros]

Not in the visual language of comics it doesn’t.

In comics actions, particularly dynamic actions like violence, are denoted by action lines. They show things like the arc of a punch to draw the eye along it and lend dynamism to the still scene and make it exciting.

Watchmen does not. It is deliberately not showing a dynamic scene, it is showing the moment after. The focus is on the hurt caused not the dynamism of the event.

Violence in Watchmen is not cool and entertaining. But it is to Zack Snyder so that’s what he did in his film, using his usual visual tools to accentuate the action of violence.

I'm sorry, but what? Watchmen is full of dynamic and violent action scenes.

Spoiler: violent images

Show

Watchmen

does

not

lack

violence.

The idea that it's somehow totes different because his style doesn't use action lines is ludicrous.

[lord_khaine]

It’s artistic license for a comic book, but the bullet isn’t aimed at him, it’s aimed past him at his secretary so even if it doesn’t work he’s not the one dead (and it does mess up his hand).

The bullet he catches in his hand was aimed at him. Im not refering to the scene with the secretary getting shot.
And i dont think you can really cover cathing a freaking bullet up with artistic licence.

Watchmen does not. It is deliberately not showing a dynamic scene, it is showing the moment after. The focus is on the hurt caused not the dynamism of the event.

Violence in Watchmen is not cool and entertaining. But it is to Zack Snyder so that’s what he did in his film, using his usual visual tools to accentuate the action of violence.

That in turn i actually agree with.
I didnt think specifically about it before. Just noticed the style was radically different.
But yeah it does have a lot of focus on the damage inflicted. Violence isnt something cool in Watchmen. Its ugly and bloody.

[Anteros]

New Trailer is out for the actual thread topic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u34gHaRiBIU

Warning: It's one of those trailers that basically spoil the entire movie. If anyone cares.

What I liked: Fight choreography looked ok, and the Riddler seems to be actually intelligent and threatening.

What I disliked: Everything else. Way too grimdark still. So sick and tired of Batman stories that focus on him being emo. I also couldn't care less about the Batman+Catwoman relationship. It's never really worked for me.

[Psyren]

New Trailer is out for the actual thread topic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u34gHaRiBIU

Warning: It's one of those trailers that basically spoil the entire movie. If anyone cares.

What I liked: Fight choreography looked ok, and the Riddler seems to be actually intelligent and threatening.

What I disliked: Everything else. Way too grimdark still. So sick and tired of Batman stories that focus on him being emo. I also couldn't care less about the Batman+Catwoman relationship. It's never really worked for me.

In a word: ugh.

Spoiler

Show

Dark past of the Waynes kept secret by Alfred - great, so the one bright spot left in his life is going to be taken out back and bludgeoned with the emo stick in this version too. I'm getting ASM "forget what you think you know about this character's origin!" vibes.

Annoyed woman hanging a lampshade on Bruce doing nothing for the city - calling attention to the disconnect only works if you're going to do something with it, DC. And no, "I dress as a bat every night and put goons in the emergency room, what more do you want, you nagging cow?" is not doing something with it.

Catwoman volunteering to fight crime AND be his sidekick... wha? Is she getting paid at least?

Riddler channeling Zsasz/Bane... wha? I'm not saying we need another Jim Carrey (well, maybe I am, his Robotnik was stellar) - but a full 180 to edgetopia doesn't fit Nygma for me. Even the Arkham version didn't seem this dark.

[Peelee]

Spoiler

Show

Riddler channeling Zsasz/Bane... wha? I'm not saying we need another Jim Carrey (well, maybe I am, his Robotnik was stellar)

Jim Carrey would have been a perfect Riddler done straight, instead of done as Ace Ventura: Batman Villain.

I will die on this hill.

[Psyren]

Jim Carrey would have been a perfect Riddler done straight, instead of done as Ace Ventura: Batman Villain.

I will die on this hill.

No argument here. Especially with his more serious post-comedy work in mind like 23.

[Traab]

You know what I think would be a great way to play the riddler? A somewhat deranged but brilliant man whose riddles are something along the lines of those old text based games where you had to solve puzzles in obscure ways. As an example, you had to get a key off the subway track, but its electrified. Well, I found this swim floaty and a clamp device, if I inflate it it will hold the clamp open, then I put a slow leak in it so the clamp slowly closes and I drop it onto the key, grab it as the clamp shuts, then pull it up! EASY! Basically, the riddlers questions follow a thread of logic, but its not the logic of a normal person, and part of the challenge is figuring out his mindset and exploiting that to beat him. He has the obsessive need to leave clues but they dont make sense from a normal standpoint.

"I dont get it, he left a chair from a baseball stadium, what could that mean?"

"More specifically, its a chair from the dugout for the home team. That means we have to "dig out" the foundation of nigmas old home to find the next clue."

I literally just made that up dont take it too seriously, but I think it illustrates my point well enough. Once batman figures out how he thinks, his riddles become solvable.

[Lord Raziere]

You know what I think would be a great way to play the riddler? A somewhat deranged but brilliant man whose riddles are something along the lines of those old text based games where you had to solve puzzles in obscure ways. As an example, you had to get a key off the subway track, but its electrified. Well, I found this swim floaty and a clamp device, if I inflate it it will hold the clamp open, then I put a slow leak in it so the clamp slowly closes and I drop it onto the key, grab it as the clamp shuts, then pull it up! EASY! Basically, the riddlers questions follow a thread of logic, but its not the logic of a normal person, and part of the challenge is figuring out his mindset and exploiting that to beat him. He has the obsessive need to leave clues but they dont make sense from a normal standpoint.

"I dont get it, he left a chair from a baseball stadium, what could that mean?"

"More specifically, its a chair from the dugout for the home team. That means we have to "dig out" the foundation of nigmas old home to find the next clue."

I literally just made that up dont take it too seriously, but I think it illustrates my point well enough. Once batman figures out how he thinks, his riddles become solvable.

the problem is, is that requires effort.

and coming up with riddles that aren't usual ones but still make sense to some degree is a little difficult.

and I don't think either movies or comic books are full of people who go into wanting to put that kind of effort into their writing.

[Androgeus]

As an example, you had to get a key off the subway track, but its electrified. Well, I found this swim floaty and a clamp device, if I inflate it it will hold the clamp open, then I put a slow leak in it so the clamp slowly closes and I drop it onto the key, grab it as the clamp shuts, then pull it up! EASY!

Wasn’t expecting a The Longest Journey reference.

[TwilightSandwic]

Honestly the Riddler Question Mark Suit is such a good look I don't see why any adaptation, even the darkest and edgiest, would want to get rid of it.

Also I am forever kinda bitter about the movie's name. I actually love the fact that a character like Batman can have endless reimagining and reboots and reinterpretations - but can we at least get some subtitles to the names so we can distinguish them better?
Like, not only is distinguishing the name with just a definite article not THAT memorable, but we already had a cartoon show named "THE Batman" and finding info about it got like a billion times harder since this movie got announced!

[Dragonus45]

So hear me out, and preferably play this song while doing so. What group of people are known for clever word play, crime to greater or lesser degrees, and really specifically talking about their crimes[/URL] often with clever wordplay and delivery?... An excellent new take for the Riddler would be to have him be a rapper who codes messages about his crime sprees in his music to taunt Batman while hiding himself in plain sight. Played by Donald Glover in a brave and the bold tone if there is any real justice in the world. It's an idea with endless possibilities and story beats to work in and I think works best if you have a Batman with Robin around for various reasons.

[Trafalgar]

So hear me out, and preferably play this song while doing so. What group of people are known for clever word play, crime to greater or lesser degrees, and really specifically talking about their crimes[/URL] often with clever wordplay and delivery?... An excellent new take for the Riddler would be to have him be a rapper who codes messages about his crime sprees in his music to taunt Batman while hiding himself in plain sight. Played by Donald Glover in a brave and the bold tone if there is any real justice in the world. It's an idea with endless possibilities and story beats to work in and I think works best if you have a Batman with Robin around for various reasons.

Dr. Dre could be Batman and Eminem could be Robin. I think I saw that video.

[Velaryon]

So hear me out, and preferably play this song while doing so. What group of people are known for clever word play, crime to greater or lesser degrees, and really specifically talking about their crimes[/URL] often with clever wordplay and delivery?... An excellent new take for the Riddler would be to have him be a rapper who codes messages about his crime sprees in his music to taunt Batman while hiding himself in plain sight. Played by Donald Glover in a brave and the bold tone if there is any real justice in the world. It's an idea with endless possibilities and story beats to work in and I think works best if you have a Batman with Robin around for various reasons.

So basically a less comedic version of this Key and Peele sketch?

[Dragonus45]

So basically a less comedic version of this Key and Peele sketch?

Yea, but not too much less comedy. I think it works best in a more colorful Brave and the Bold Spider-Man as directed by Sam Rami kind of style.

[Psyren]

So basically a less comedic version of this Key and Peele sketch?

They could have tried a bit harder with the meter on that one

[Peelee]

Spoiler: New poster is up.

Show

I, for one, applaud the studio for giving people who have just entered the world of graphic design a shot with such a major piece of advertising.

Seriously, though, it's like they're actively trying to tank this movie. I don't even think I'm going to bother with it once it becomes free on one of my streaming platforms.

[Fyraltari]

Spoiler: New poster is up.

Show

I, for one, applaud the studio for giving people who have just entered the world of graphic design a shot with such a major piece of advertising.

Seriously, though, it's like they're actively trying to tank this movie. I don't even think I'm going to bother with it once it becomes free on one of my streaming platforms.

Ah, yes I look forward to watching CulCbom.

[Peelee]

Ah, yes I look forward to watching CulCbom.

Ha! Saw it on reddit first but image hosting wasn't working so I grabbed the first one I found off Google to toss in the spoiler.

[Psyren]

I understand wanting to have a clear break with Jim Carrey's campy performance, but I'm just not sold on Grimdark-Zsasz-slasher-mixed-with-Anarchist-Bane Riddler. If anything they should be emulating Jigsaw, with elaborate deathtraps that nevertheless have a solution if you can think under pressure.

Ah, yes I look forward to watching CulCbom.

I think that's actually... Thai script? Tagalog maybe? Malay? I'm not familiar enough with that hemisphere...

Seriously, though, it's like they're actively trying to tank this movie. I don't even think I'm going to bother with it once it becomes free on one of my streaming platforms.

My willingness to stream it (definitely not a theater watch) will be entirely dependent on the meme quality.

[Peelee]

I understand wanting to have a clear break with Jim Carrey's campy performance

I will go to my grave maintaining that Jim Carrey would have been a perfect Riddler if he hadn't played Ace Ventura: Batman Villain and instead been in a more seriously written movie.

Anyway. Batman movies keep rehashing the same old things over and over. You know what would be an awesome Batman movie? Anarky as the antagonist. That's it. The script could practically write itself.

[Fyraltari]

I will go to my grave maintaining that Jim Carrey would have been a perfect Riddler if he hadn't played Ace Ventura: Batman Villain and instead been in a more seriously written movie.

Anyway. Batman movies keep rehashing the same old things over and over. You know what would be an awesome Batman movie? Anarky as the antagonist. That's it. The script could practically write itself.

Isn't Anarky's whole deal that he fights for the poor and downtrodden?

Because we already have enough memes about Batman being a capitalist getting off on beating poor people without a movie where the main antagonist would be a revolutionnary is doing social justice wrong and the hero is a vigilante born with a silver spoon in his mouth.

Edit: What I am saying here, rather than defending a particular real-world political stance, is that having as a main villain one of the most "well-intentionned extremist" risks the infamous audience reaction of "the villain makes better points than the hero". Which is usually, not the intended reaction. Unless, you're going for a deconstruction angle, I guess?

[Psyren]

I will go to my grave maintaining that Jim Carrey would have been a perfect Riddler if he hadn't played Ace Ventura: Batman Villain and instead been in a more seriously written movie.

I don't disagree - I specified JC's performance rather than the actor himself for this reason
(23 - and even The Cable Guy to an extent - showed what he can do as a proper menacing villain, and Robotnik showed that he can even be menacing AND campy.)

Anyway. Batman movies keep rehashing the same old things over and over. You know what would be an awesome Batman movie? Anarky as the antagonist. That's it. The script could practically write itself.

Not sure who that is I'm afraid, my Bat-knowledge is fairly surface level. If Fyraltari's summary is correct then I'd have the same reluctance for the same reason.

If they're looking for a bigger name, I'd actually love to see an Arkham Asylum movie with Hugo Strange as the primary villain.

[Fyraltari]

Or I guess Anarky could work as a decoy villain? Like at the beginning of the movie he's a non-violent criminal activist but then he suddenly turns to murder and terrorism, so Batman decides to take him down. But, plot twist he was being framed by The Penguin or whoever and wasn't telling Batman because he assumed he was in the pocket of the police who he thought were the one framing him. Once the misunderstanding is cleared up, they join forced to beat the real bad guy and part ways with a newfound respect for one another, but with no intention of working together.

Like, I think DC is going for an antihero vibe with the character recently, so that'd fit.

[Peelee]

Isn't Anarky's whole deal that he fights for the poor and downtrodden?

Because we already have enough memes about Batman being a capitalist getting off on beating poor people without a movie where the main antagonist would be a revolutionnary is doing social justice wrong and the hero is a vigilante born with a silver spoon in his mouth.

Edit: What I am saying here, rather than defending a particular real-world political stance, is that having as a main villain one of the most "well-intentionned extremist" risks the infamous audience reaction of "the villain makes better points than the hero". Which is usually, not the intended reaction. Unless, you're going for a deconstruction angle, I guess?

I don't disagree - I specified JC's performance rather than the actor himself for this reason
(23 - and even The Cable Guy to an extent - showed what he can do as a proper menacing villain, and Robotnik showed that he can even be menacing AND campy.)



Not sure who that is I'm afraid, my Bat-knowledge is fairly surface level. If Fyraltari's summary is correct then I'd have the same reluctance for the same reason.

If they're looking for a bigger name, I'd actually love to see an Arkham Asylum movie with Hugo Strange as the primary villain.

A reviewer put it better than I could: "In the age of the anti-hero, it only makes sense to have the occasional anti-villain as well. But unlike sociopathic vigilante anti-heroes like the Punisher, an anti-villain like Anarky provides some interesting food for thought. Sure, he breaks the law, but what he really wants is to save the world... and maybe he's right."

And yes, the idea of him going against Batman, who is a billionaire, is exactly why I think it would be an interesting movie. I'd say more, but the very nature of Anarky sort of prevents me from doing so here. Suffice it to say that he still uses extreme methods and could carry the antagonist role well, IMO. Note that I'm not saying "villain".

[Psyren]

My issue with the "anti-villain has several good points but uses extremist methods" approach is that resolving the core issues they bring up in a truly satisfying way means committing to changing the status quo that gave rise to those issues in the first place. That's hard to do for any comic book character, doubly so for a character like Batman who is intrinsically tied to said status quo - so the suits tend to take the lazy way out of just dialing the anti-villain's extremist angle up to eleven instead. This removes all sympathy from the once-complex antagonist, and all moral complexity from punching them in the face so hard they fall out of frame and throwing away the key (or even outright killing them).

Another recent weak example of that problem were the Flagsmashers in FatWS, where to make Karli unsympathetic enough to power the finale they had to have her literally blow up a bunch of innocent people, supplies earmarked for child refugees, and threaten Sam's family halfway across the globe directly. Once she was out of the way, they rushed through addressing her points (i.e. the "do better!" speech) so we could get to Sam and Bucky's denouement on the boat. (Don't get me wrong, I liked the speech and I liked Sam's delivery, but all it amounted to was a promise to reconsider Karli's points - none of which I'll elaborate on here - not an actual commitment to meaningful change or restructuring.)

By contrast, one place where I saw this paradigm truly done well was Black Panther. Killmonger was an extremist who needed to be stopped, sure - but his good points actually effected lasting change by ending Wakanda's policy of isolationism, the effects of which we saw at the end of that movie, then in Infinity War and FatWS, and will continue to see in BPWF. That's a big part of the reason why he consistently ranks so highly as far as MCU antagonists go.

[Fyraltari]

I don't really know how to word my thoughts on the issue without infringing on the Forum Rules (honestly, I'm almost surprised Peelee didn't give me an Infraction for my ante-previous post) but I agree with what Psyren said.

By contrast, one place where I saw this paradigm truly done well was Black Panther. Killmonger was an extremist who needed to be stopped, sure - but his good points actually effected lasting change by ending Wakanda's policy of isolationism, the effects of which we saw at the end of that movie, then in Infinity War and FatWS, and will continue to see in BPWF.

Aren't they still isolationnists by Infinity War? I remember the camouflage shield still being up and people being surprised by the tech the Wakandian have.

[Peelee]

My issue with the "anti-villain has several good points but uses extremist methods" approach is that resolving the core issues they bring up in a truly satisfying way means committing to changing the status quo that gave rise to those issues in the first place. That's hard to do for any comic book character, doubly so for a character like Batman who is intrinsically tied to said status quo - so the suits tend to take the lazy way out of just dialing the anti-villain's extremist angle up to eleven instead. This removes all sympathy from the once-complex antagonist, and all moral complexity from punching them in the face so hard they fall out of frame and throwing away the key (or even outright killing them).

Another recent weak example of that problem were the Flagsmashers in FatWS, where to make Karli unsympathetic enough to power the finale they had to have her literally blow up a bunch of innocent people, supplies earmarked for child refugees, and threaten Sam's family halfway across the globe directly. Once she was out of the way, they rushed through addressing her points (i.e. the "do better!" speech) so we could get to Sam and Bucky's denouement on the boat. (Don't get me wrong, I liked the speech and I liked Sam's delivery, but all it amounted to was a promise to reconsider Karli's points - none of which I'll elaborate on here - not an actual commitment to meaningful change or restructuring.)

By contrast, one place where I saw this paradigm truly done well was Black Panther. Killmonger was an extremist who needed to be stopped, sure - but his good points actually effected lasting change by ending Wakanda's policy of isolationism, the effects of which we saw at the end of that movie, then in Infinity War and FatWS, and will continue to see in BPWF. That's a big part of the reason why he consistently ranks so highly as far as MCU antagonists go.

Is an infinitely repeating set of origin stories or Joker, Riddler, and Penguin much better?

[Fyraltari]

Is an infinitely repeating set of origin stories or Joker, Riddler, and Penguin much better?

Psyren suggested Hugo Strange as a main antagonist...

[Psyren]

Is an infinitely repeating set of origin stories or Joker, Riddler, and Penguin much better?

I specifically-

Psyren suggested Hugo Strange as a main antagonist...

Yeah, that.

(And frankly, I'd be fine with a less Tim Burton take on Penguin too.)

Aren't they still isolationnists by Infinity War? I remember the camouflage shield still being up and people being surprised by the tech the Wakandian have.

Infinity War took place after BP, i.e. after T'challa and Nakia joined the UN and started founding STEM education centers aimed at enriching BAME children across the globe. I was under the impression that their use of hiding tech was more to do with wanting to keep their super-advanced toys out of the wrong hands longer, than it was continuing to hoard them only for their own use. In short, having an embassy now doesn't mean they need to point neon signs at their backyard

Besides which, hiding your population center by default is just prudent when you know there are plenty of extraterrestrial threats too - which they do.

(Moreover, the mere fact that they mobilized all their defenses to defend the planet from alien invaders instead of telling Steve Rogers to take a hike back to SHIELD, suggests that they are looking out for more than their own interests by that point.)

[Peelee]

Psyren suggested Hugo Strange as a main antagonist...

I specifically-



Yeah, that.

Eh, it'd be novel, but also would just be another superhero movie in the fold of all the other superhero movies without any commentary whatsoever. As mentioned, Black Panther's villain was well received and was able to deliver commentary. I doubt those are unrelated.

Also, I don't share the idea that change has to be enacted by said character, because that is way too close to "the ends justify the means" for me.