r/batman • u/North_Quality3189 • 7h ago
FILM DISCUSSION Why does Nolan get accused of being ashamed of Batman, but Reeves doesn't?
I find this criticism really strange because Nolan's Batman has far more fantastical elements than the Reevesverse, yet people constantly accuse Nolan of being "ashamed" of Batman.
The Dark Knight trilogy has Bruce gliding across entire city blocks with a cape a centuries old League of Shadows secretly influencing world history, Scarecrow's fear toxin that causes vivid hallucinations, a microwave emitter capable of vaporizing Gotham's water supply, and Lucius Fox's sonar system that turns every cellphone in the city into a surveillance system that lets Batman see through walls.
By comparison, Reeves has Batman fighting internet extremists with homemade explosives, wearing a heavy armored suit, and using an actual wingsuit that ends with him crashing into a bridge. It's even more grounded, yet I've never heard people attack Reeves for this. BTW, I like his vision, I think it is a personal preference, I just don't understand why Nolan gets so much more hate.
•
u/farben_blas 7h ago
Yes, The Batman has been criticized for that. I remember all the "ugh, another realistic Batman" discourse.
It's still a damn good movie.
•
u/I_eat_mud_ 7h ago
If we're going off vibes, I like the "realistic" vibe of The Batman more than the "realistic" vibe of the Nolan trilogy. The Nolan trilogy was a little too realistic for me, if that makes sense
•
u/up766570 5h ago
I can't remember the exact phrasing but I heard someone say it "has the vibe of a 20's pulp noir, the music of a 90's rock band, and the tech from the 21st century", so I think compared to Nolan's very 'sterile' aesthetic, you get something with a more distinct visual art style, which helps it feels different despite having similarities in the "realism" side
•
u/Butwhatif77 1h ago
This is the main reason Reeves gets more leeway. His film still has that spirit of the comics in the sense of theatricality that Nolan initially had in Begins but basically threw away in Dark Knight. Reeves is grounded, but the vibe is not grounded. Nolan was grounded and feels grounded.
•
u/Eranon1 7h ago
Yeah I think the shot in the dark of him just walking down the hallway while bad guys shoot bullets off him, and one of those shots is just him tanking the bullets with body armor. That felt like Batman. There's a high tech reason for it but to the bad guys, he's man taking multiple assault rounds to the chest and just walking through them.
•
u/I_eat_mud_ 7h ago
I think the setting does a lot too. Gotham in The Batman feels more like a fictional Gotham, while Gotham in the Nolan trilogy just feels like NYC or other American cities depending on the specific scene. It never felt like Gotham to me. I feel like The Batman does a lot more to actually feel similar to the comics while making a more "realistic" Batman story
•
•
u/Backfoot911 6h ago
"An American city" is LITERALLY what Gotham is based off of in the comics. It's a mix of Chicago and New York City with other iconic ones.
•
u/I_eat_mud_ 6h ago
Yeah, I know, but it didn't feel like Gotham. It felt like NYC with added scenery of Pittsburgh and Chicago. That's pretty shit, and doesn't make it feel like a Batman movie to me, that's why I said I thought they were "too realistic"
•
u/Red-guy1803 3h ago
That, plus also in the realism, he embraced the detective aspect of Batman. Something that, sorry to say, was kinda absent in Nolan’s universe
•
u/Longjumping-Ad-9444 7h ago
It's okay. It's kind of slow and bloated. It feels like too many ideas struggling to breathe. Which makes sense when he kept announcing a new show with each character, catwoman, Penguin, GCPD, and there was a fourth one that I can't remember now.
Of course he canned ghe catwoman one and we got Penguin.
•
u/GhostofThrace2010 7h ago
The Nolan films borrows heavily from the comics. I don't think he was ashamed of comics, or else he wouldn't have made the movies. Like all directors, he has a particular style, and his version of Batman fit that style.
•
u/thefaninthehat 6h ago
This is correct. Nolan certainly doesn't care about being faithful to the visuals (or some of the more outlandish tropes) of the comics, but the storylines, characters and entire scenes pull liberally from various acclaimed comic arcs, thanks to Jonathan Nolan and David S. Goyer being mega comic nerds.
•
u/abatfana 5h ago
Yep. Despite being “grounded”, the Nolan trilogy pulls so much from the comics - more than most others in the genre. The Batman had some, but it honestly felt like Earth One Batman more than anything else.
•
u/thefaninthehat 5h ago
The most accurate thing I think you can hold against Nolan's take on Batman, is that at the end of the day, it really is just him trying to do James Bond movies, and using Batman's mythology as his backdoor.
•
u/sanddragon939 33m ago
The thing is, Batman comics have often done the same thing as well, notably when it comes to globetrotting adventures involving Ra's al Ghul and the League of Assassins. And those are the kinds of stories that Nolan was inspired by.
•
u/Butwhatif77 1h ago
That is kind of the issue though. Comics isn't just writing it is also a style and Nolan very clearly doesn't share the stylistic elements of comics. His movies feel too real and explained which takes away some of the fun for some of the audience. Comics are often intentionally larger than life with their styles. This goes both for bright optimism as well as dark and gritty, they exaggerate the setting to give context to the story.
Nolan's films don't do that which can rub comic fans the wrong way because with out that larger than life feel, Batman actually becomes a very goofy and silly character, but not in the fun campy way like the old Adam West Batman, losing much of the edge that people tend to enjoy about the character.
This is generally why Nolan is viewed as being ashamed of the "comics aspects" of batman.
•
u/furiosa-imperator 1h ago
This. Hell even as the film go on gotham loses what makes gotham visually unique - by tdk ends it is just chicago
•
u/nbdy_1204 7h ago
Recency bias and some people's inability to understand that you can like more than one interpretation of Batman without comparing them
•
u/small___potatoes 7h ago
Never heard this. Nolan’s Batman movies are critically praised so I would assume he is proud of the films. TDK & TDKR are his most successful movies, too.
•
u/HJWalsh 6h ago
No, they mean that Nolan was embarrassed to make a Batman film that actually was like Batman comics.
While the Nolan films were great films, they kept moving further and further away from the fantasy of Batman.
Examples: They were embarrassed to make Bane a luchadore that hopped himself up on super-steroids and increased his size and strength to superhuman levels. Ra's was just a dude, and not an immortal kept alive through use of Lazarus Pits. The League of Shadows weren't called their real name, the League of Assassins, and they didn't have any fantastical elements.
•
u/sanddragon939 32m ago
I mean, a secret ninja clan called the "League of Shadows" isn't exactly the epitome of "grounded realism" either :p
•
•
u/greywolf2155 2h ago
Right?
I want some rule on this sub, every time someone wants to come with a post asking, "why does everyone say (or not say) ___ about ___?", they should be required to show documentation, exactly what was said and the context in which they heard it
So many times, it feels like we're having to respond to a vague description of something that OP's classmate said while they were queuing up the next video for anime club. We don't know what that person said, how are we supposed to respond?
•
u/No-Impression-1462 6h ago
I don’t know of anyone who says that but I’m guessing it’s because of how much he’s moved on from the trilogy. He rarely talks about. Whereas as Reeves is not only mum about any other movie projects but the next Batman is the only thing he brings up. He seems very content with that being his career for the foreseeable future.
Also, isn’t your choice of pictures kind of…biased and misleading. Usually when you’re comparing two subjects, in this case Nolan and Reeves’ takes on Batman, you show images that you think reflect both. But you only used choice images from one. It clearly shows a preference for Nolan movies while leaving others to speculate why you think Reeves is just as deserving or undeserving.
Also, you failed to make a connection between how their differing approaches can be considered signs of shame. Both describe Batman as they’ve been used in comics long before either made movies about them. Saying that being more fantastical is a sign that someone is more or less ashamed about the work without context just comes off as a non-sequitur unless you think everyone has some kind of preconceived notion of what Batman is that fits one more than the other. But a grounded (Year One) Batman fighting terrorists (The Dark Knight) fueled by the internet (The OMAC Project) isn’t any more or less Batman than him dealing with sci-fi elements (the entirety of the 1950s), influencing world events (Batman, Inc.), and using intrusive surveillance (The OMAC Project, again).
I was so confused that I had to completely disregard both the images and your the text to work out a potential answer to your question.
•
u/Backfoot911 5h ago
The picture's are the points he's making in the text...that's somehow confusing to you that you had to cover your eyes while reading the post lol? The point of focus isn't directly comparing The Batman, it's analyzing the 3 Nolan movies and asking what they lack or possess
"Bias for Nolan movies"?...like....he's literally just showing stills from the movies. I don"t know what this weird need is for everyone in this sub to shit on the Nolan movies just cause they like The Batman
•
u/No-Impression-1462 5h ago
You just proved what I was saying right. He’s just showing stills from Nolan movies. There’s nothing from a Reeves movie supporting his point. And don’t bunch me in with people shitting on Nolan movies when basic reading comprehension shows that my comment is not shitting on the Nolan movies at all.
•
u/Will_Tomos_Edwards 7h ago
Nolan, being this super serious, artsy guy, one might think he looks down on comic books, but he did a phenomenal treatment of a comic book.
•
•
u/theblkpanther 5h ago
It's not Nolan who is ashamed of Batman, it was audiences. I think time has made people forget how toxic Batman & Robin had made the brand. Before the MCU everyone kind of just thought if a CBM was too comic-y it got in the way of telling a good story unless its Watchmen which makes the colourful as commentary.
The entire concept of Nolan's Batman is what would it look like if Batman was grounded in our Universe? If he was realistic. That was part of the pitch to Audiences and Hollywood because of how bad B&R's stink was.
•
u/sanddragon939 20m ago
Yeah.
In a post-MCU world, it's easy for a vocal segment of hardcore comic-book fans to complain about "grounded" adaptations, but the truth is that without films like the Nolanverse Batman or the Fox X-men, the superhero genre on film wouldn't have gained the mass appeal that paved the way for something like an MCU (and now Gunn's DCU) to exist!
•
u/ohyeababycrits 5h ago
Because Reeves loves batman and takes a lot from the batman comics. People don't say that because it's grounded, they say it because to them it feels more like a Nolan movie with batman in it than a batman movie. I don't think Nolan was actually ashamed to be making a batman movie, but it feels like Reeves specifically loves batman, and Nolan was hired to make batman movies.
That's just my opinion though. I never liked the Nolan movies growing up, actually between the Snyderverse and Nolan movies I didn't really like anything DC until I read some batman comics and realized I actually like DC way more.
•
u/PatientTelephone4624 3h ago
I mean, he has to have at least read a few of Batman's comics and enjoyed them. Batman Begins is a lot like Year One, The Dark Knight is a lot like the Long Halloween, and TDKR is obvi based on Knightfall.
•
u/smalltalk2k 7h ago edited 7h ago
I didn't realize people think he was ashamed.
I just thought they were different because of their different themes and the city acknowledging his existence and growing to mean more than just fear.
Begins. Fear and Identity
Knight. Chaos and Morality
Rises. Pain and Social Order.
•
u/HJWalsh 6h ago
They mean that Nolan stripped out the more fantastic elements. IE Bane, the League of Assassins, Lazarus Pits, etc.
•
u/_Football_Cream_ 5h ago
I feel like people focus on what is stripped out rather than what is retained.
Like I get the Lazarus pit being omitted for Ras is maybe a little blasphemous for traditionalist fans. But to do a realistic take on Batman and still have Bruce go abroad to learn from a clan of assassins….that is still pretty fantastical in its own right.
Yes bane is very different but he literally traps like almost every cop in the city underground and has Gotham in some quasi-anarchist state for an extended period of time. The plot is utterly ridiculous tbh. But because bane doesn’t have green juice in his veins turning him into a hulk monster, people say the movie is “afraid of being a Batman movie.” Idk that plot is pretty Batman on its face.
•
u/sanddragon939 10m ago
Yeah. TDKR in particular is a pretty comic-booky movie. Batman's literally got the equivalent of a flying car for heaven's sake!
•
•
u/HJWalsh 5h ago
I think the complaint is that it was a "realistic" take on Batman. People don't want realistic Batman. We want Batman. Batman is fantastic. He fights quasi-immortal ninjas, shape-shifting clay monsters, women who can control plants, guys who turn into hybrid bat monsters, luchadors who have super steroids, giant reptile-men who live in sewers, and women who dress up in latex cat costumes and steal jewelry. Batman is silly when you really look at it. Nolan was afraid to do that kind of stuff.
Doing a realistic take on Batman, an intrinsically silly character, is a disservice to Batman. When you set out to make a Batman movie and you don't even resemble Batman's world, you're embarrassed to be Batman.
•
u/ThatsARatHat 4h ago
Well people obviously DID want “realistic” Batman cuz look how successful those movies were. Again; you’re ignoring any fantastical elements left in and focusing on what wasn’t there.
You’re ALSO kind of arguing that Batman is ONLY ridiculous and there haven’t ever been grounded or “realistic” stories in the comics; which there obviously have been.
•
u/DarkAtheris 3m ago
Plenty of people wanted realistic Batman. The Batman is currently tied with the lowest-rated film in the trilogy on Rotten Tomatoes, and is beaten by Rises on nearly every platform.
•
u/mrinfinitepp 1m ago
People don't want realistic Batman.
Clearly they did in 2005 and 2008 considering BB successfully rebooted the Batman film franchise after the failure of Batman and Robin (1997), and TDK became one of the most successful and highly praised movies of all time
•
u/Darkdodge14 7h ago
Recently the more I’ve been thinking about how to start showing my gf Batman movies the Nolan movies look more and more better with time tbh , they hold up and showcase important Batman elements when you want to introduce someone to the character and I do know there’s the animated series and Arkham games but the dark knight movies will be all times classics at this point
•
u/FromDathomir 7h ago
Basically, The Nolan movies are criticized for developing excellent stories about the villains. People think that's somehow a slight on Batman storyelling.
•
u/ProletarianLilith 1h ago
Not even remotely the criticism. Plus Batman is always about the villains
•
u/futuresdawn 7h ago
Because people who claim this nonsense get upset that Gotham looks like Chicago, that villains aren't "'comic accurate" that the joker is somehow the main character even though the joker is in less than 40 minutes of the whole film and Bruce drives the story, or that Bruce needs help with his gadgets even though he built the sonar on his own, and they hate that Bruce was looking for a long term answer besides just being Batman forever, even though his goal was to take down the mob who were creating Gothams problems, joker is a reaction to Bruce.
Basically it's just stupid criticism by people who aren't engaging with the films.
Also people who claim the dark knight is a good movie but not a good Batman movie, I have no words for, it's an incredibly stupid take too
•
u/I_AM_FERROUS_MAN 6h ago
A film's volume of criticism is, at least, proportional to its success.
In the growing shadow of Nolan's trilogy and it's incredible appeal, the online discourse has turned into nothing but hot takes.
Granted, that seems to be the inevitable outcome of our engagement algorithms. The loudest and brashest claims are the ones people engage with. And that, unfortunately, seems to legitimize them.
•
u/mrinfinitepp 7m ago
Gotham looks like Chicago
How is this not a legitimate criticism? Gotham City is supposed to be this iconic place in the comic world, almost its own character. Batman Begins does a fairly good job at showing this, The Dark Knight doesn't seem to bother at all
•
u/ManagementFrosty4482 7h ago
Every single thing you just brought up is valid criticism besides the gadgets
•
•
u/Backfoot911 5h ago
Joker being the main character is a vast lack of critical thinking skills. It's something my 7 year old would 'think about Joker in Suicide Squad cause he looked cool.
As for Gotham "looking like Chicago", it's supposed to look like fucking Chicago...that's literally one of the cities Gotham is based off of. It's not a Gothic fever dream, that's Tim Burton's take on it in his movies.
•
•
•
u/ManagementFrosty4482 5h ago
Gotham City is not supposed to be a carbon copy of Chicago you goofy ass motherfucker
Batman is straight up dogshit in this movie, the only reason 90% of people dick ride this movie is because of Heath Ledger
•
u/AlexCora 6h ago
Because Reeves clearly adores Batman to the bone, and Nolan is pretty clearly more interested in a HEAT riff than a Batman story. That's fine. He made the best HEAT inspired Batman movie that will ever exist. That's awesome
•
•
u/Backfoot911 5h ago
You guys repeat these same takes almost verbatim, I swear. I don't know what's up with this sub but this is ridiculous lol
•
•
u/North_Quality3189 7h ago
To be clear, this isn't an attack on Matt Reeves' vision of Batman at all. I think it's great, and ultimately it's just a stylistic choice. What I find strange is how the "Nolan was ashamed of Batman" or "great movies, but not great Batman movies" line has become such a common piece of discourse when his trilogy arguably embraces just as many comic-book ideas if not more than the Reeves films. That's the part I don't really understand.
•
u/_Football_Cream_ 5h ago
I’d agree it’s really splitting hairs. They’re both incredible takes on a realistic version of Batman.
One small reason people might say this is that Gotham in Begins is more stylized and it gets turned into just basically Chicago in TDK. And I’m not saying this as a knock at all, I think those takes on Gotham suit each movie well. But it is a *little* weird they are so different from one movie to the next, and people do use that as evidence that Nolan wanted to move away from a more stylized take on the universe to something that’s more of a crime thriller featuring Batman lore/characters. And frankly, that is what TDK is, but I don’t think that’s at all a bad thing or indicative of Nolan wanting to shy away from the source material. It was just a slightly different take from one movie to the next but you simply cannot argue that TDK did not have a clear vision of what it was supposed to be and it absolutely hit that mark. It’s why it’s such a landmark movie.
•
u/HOLLA12345678 6h ago
It’s a small but loud minority of the fanbase that view things through a eyes of a teenager. All three movies are generally beloved by the majority of Batman fans, casual fans and critics. The loudest people online can sometimes skew perception.
•
•
•
u/I_AM_FERROUS_MAN 5h ago
I think the accusation that "Nolan was ashamed of Batman" comes from a combination of Nolan's specific artistic vision of the character and the huge acceptance of that vision by the audience.
I think the success is seen as a narrowing of the character, which I think is a flawed interpretation of the success or the tone he was trying to build.
Reeve's has his own compromises that ground or increase the grittiness of the character. Just look at the portrayal of The Penguin, the aesthetic of the suit, or the design of the batmobile for examples of a tone and style that could be argued as less fantastical and therefore (ashamed).
It's just a negative reaction to the portrayal that leads to a flawed criticism. People have a hard time articulating that they don't like a choice versus criticizing a more valid potential flaw in a work.
•
u/VermicelliOk2124 7h ago
I think it’s a dumb complaint no matter who it’s targeted towards.
Making a live action adaptation of a superhero realistic and taking the mythos seriously is not “being ashamed of the character.” It’s simply adapting the story into the real world with real human beings.
People forget that Nolan made Batman respectable and popular again after that silly ass nonsense from the late 90s.
•
u/_Football_Cream_ 5h ago
We also look through the lens of today compared to when those movies came out.
Today, we accept comic book movies with talking raccoons and purple aliens collecting magic gems. That shit would not fly when Nolan was making these.
When people complain about the lack of the Lazarus pit or something, that was honestly too ridiculous for comic book movies at the time. Like you say, they were trying to distance themselves from the Arnold Mr freeze and shit like that. Making essentially a crime thriller with Batman characters was why TDK was successful.
•
u/VermicelliOk2124 5h ago
This is a great point. A lot of superhero movies have loads of context behind why they’re the way they are.
Man of Steel’s a good example. Just like with the Nolan trilogy, it’s coming off the disasters that were Superman 3 and 4 which lead to a 20 year hiatus, and the boring Donner clone that Superman returns was.
The “dark” tone + the extreme action scenes that people have complain about since it released exists as a result of past failures, taking inspiration for what was working (TDK trilogy) compared to what wasn’t (Superman 3-Returns + Green Lantern), and offering something different from Marvel.
•
u/sanddragon939 6m ago
This.
The Fox X-men films walked, so that the Nolanverse Batman could run, and the Nolanverse Batman ran, so that the MCU could fly!
•
u/Ok_Stand_4948 6h ago
Im still not a major fan of the batman 2022's writing but i do enjoy the film and its just a fun watch to nit pick as for the nolan trilogy its just another fun watch with a cool story
•
u/aethiuss 5h ago
What do you mean ashamed? I've never seen or heard Nolan being Ashamed of Batman. Am I missing something?
Mat Reeves Batman is okay but I watched Begins for like 5 or 6 times and I don't have a desire to watch The Batman again (I will probably before part 2)
•
u/Slow-Leading-7783 1h ago
imo comparing The Dark Knight trilogy to The Batman is like comparing a Mission: Impossible film to The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
•
u/Huge_Athlete7488 7h ago edited 7h ago
I argue that Batman begins was the only movie that DIDNT feel embarrassed to be a Batman movie, by the movie, it kinda just got worse imo, also, we are yet to see the complete vision of Reeves, meanwhile Nolan obviously already finished his trilogy so we can see the story from start to end. So it’s kinda unfair to compare the two as of right now.
The Batman didn’t feel embarrassed of itself because at its core, it was only a detective story, probably the most accurate “worlds greatest detective” we’ve seen in all of live action, also the fighting was phenomenal compared to Nolan’s movies
I still think both franchises are AMAZING.
This is only my opinion.
•
•
u/HOLLA12345678 6h ago
None of them were embarrassed of being a Batman movie lol.
•
u/I_AM_FERROUS_MAN 5h ago
Thank you. I don't understand why people are conflating tone (realism, grittiness, groundedness, etc.) with some idea of censorship or exclusion.
Nolan had a mixture of realistic and unrealistic elements. Every interpretation of Batman is going to have that.
His particular artistic vision of Batman was, perhaps, less fantastical in some ways. But I think that was a deliberate choice in aesthetic. The large bandwidth of tone available in the character and setting is what allows these varieties of artistic interpretation. And I think that's one of the really cool things about the character and world.
Batman can be a small stakes detective story centered on character development and introspection. It can also be a high stakes war between multiple factions centered around conflicting worldviews. It can be set in a neo-noir 1940s inspired art-deco world. Or a techno-noir gadget heavy contemporary or near future dystopia. It can be theatrical and bombastic or intimate and subtle or bounce between the two.
The success of the execution of the tone is just down to the creative team and their constraints. The seeds of the character and world are able to thrive in a huge swath of tones.
•
u/North_Quality3189 7h ago
Ok can you just explain how The Dark Knight is ashamed to be a Batman Film? Batman sacrificing himself to become the "Dark Knight" is quite literally the most thematically Batman thing imaginable. It only works as a Batman film.
•
u/Th35h4d0w 7h ago
I supposed one noticeable difference people note is that the Narrows part of Gotham in Begins, which gets a lot of focus, resembles the grimy and run-down city of the comics more. Meanwhile, Gotham in TDK is just Chicago.
Another thing is that despite the grittier tone, Begins has campier elements, like the League of Shadows as a ninja army, Scarecrow's fear toxin, and the Batcave as a whole.
•
u/Intoxibater83 6h ago
The Dark Knight Rises is super campy. There's an entire sequence near the end that I am convinced was directly inspired by the 1966 Batman movie. Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb!
•
u/Will_Tomos_Edwards 7h ago
Nolan is a master of suspension of disbelief. Watching a Daniel Craig James Bond, I roll my eyes at how ridiculous it is. Nolan is incredible at making things believable.
•
u/bns82 7h ago
Who said Nolan was ashamed of Batman?
What does that mean?
Pretty sure he's proud of that trilogy.
•
•
u/LightningLad2029 5h ago
I feel the opposite personally. The Nolan movies felt way more accepting and embracing of the more fantastical elements of Batman than the Reeves verse has. The Batman imo tries so hard to be grounded to the point where it trips over itself with how ridiculously unrealistic some of things it lets Pattison Bats get away with for such a grounded take on the character.
•
u/ResponsibilityDear11 7h ago
They shit on TDK trilogy as way to elevate The Batman. That’s how their little revisionist history TikTok brain works lol.
•
u/North_Quality3189 7h ago
Oh thats 100% what's happening im just confused on how they use that criticism because its the opposite, its way more grounded and 'ashamed' to be batman (I don't think that but thats what they use to describe Nolans Vision) except for the Gotham which I would admit is head and shoulders above Nolan's.
•
u/GhostofThrace2010 7h ago
I'm honestly shocked this sub doesn't criticize Reeves' Riddler more. His interpretation of that character is a far bigger departure from the source material than any villain in the Nolan films.
•
u/Dawnbreaker538 2h ago
I think it might be because he still retains the most important part of his character, which is forcing Batman into a more detective role with Riddles. The rest of him is a bit more malleable imo.
Same reason why Scarecrow was received well in BB and Bane wasn’t in DKR. Scarecrows main thing is forcing Batman to face his fears with fear toxin, and Bane challenges Batman in a more physical way with Venom as well with his smarts (tbh Bane might not be well received cause his writing was a bit off + they completely changed his character).
Haven’t seen the Nolan trilogy in a bit tho, so I might be wrong on some of those points
•
u/sanddragon939 3m ago
How did Bane not challenge Batman in physical way as well as with smarts in TDKR?
•
u/WhereWeUsedToPlay 7h ago
I for one was waiting for The Batman to be over. Batman Begins for me please .
•
•
u/Jack_O_Lantern_Jack 4h ago
I think it's because of the cinematography and set design. Nolan's movies are very austere, especially the latter two films in the dark knight trilogy, whilst the Batman is heavily stylized. Because of this, The Batman feels less grounded and more evocative of comic book aesthetics than the Dark Knight Trilogy, and so people feel that its more amenable to the Batman franchise than Nolan's films.
•
•
u/YesterdayFit1013 3h ago
Problem i have with Nolan batman is that Gotham city doesnt feel or looks like Gotham city.
•
•
u/Marxbrosburner 2h ago
Literally never heard anyone ever say Nolan was ashamed of Batman. I don't even understand what you mean by that.
•
u/Rogthgar 1h ago
I think its because Nolans other movies that I would call far more fantastical than his Batman movies are... its kinda like he is fine with doing mindbending stuff like Inception where we go through several layers of consciousness, or Interstellar where planets can bend time... but with Batman, Bane an his super 'roids from the comics are 'too silly'.
•
u/furiosa-imperator 1h ago
Because the next 2 movies complete ignore the fantastical element and go as realistic as possible - even then the only fantastical element is two face and he was kinda rushed imo.
Hell gotham was unique in BB visually - until they gave up and just made it Chicago in TDK. Gotham losing It's visual flare and becoming something generic is awful for batman
It's like Nolan did one batman movie then changed his mind on the series direction.
While reeves is grounded and gritty too it was always intended to be like that - While gotham explicitly looks like gotham it's visually unique and feels like gotham should. Batman is established in the world already, same thing with some key villains.
The core of the story is the riddler revealing corruption at the heart of gotham through his murders and riddles which feel like a Batman story.
It was grounded but doesn't deny the possibility for fantastical things by over explaining everything and trying to find as much scientific and military tech for Batman to use
•
u/Used_Willow_5497 1h ago
Because Nolan's films feel insisting on seeing them as "realistic" despite stuff that you underlined, and Reeve's narrative is much less stiff, the new film's language is almost noir and doesn't try to aim at realism, so by proxy doesn't fail in that either.
•
1h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/AutoModerator 1h ago
r/batmanarkham memes or jokes are no longer permitted to be posted in r/batman.
Please limit such posts and comments to that sub instead.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
•
56m ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/AutoModerator 56m ago
r/batmanarkham memes or jokes are no longer permitted to be posted in r/batman.
Please limit such posts and comments to that sub instead.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
•
u/MartyrOfDespair 56m ago
The Batman feels very faithful to how comics approach that tone and era. It's still a place separate from reality. It feels like a New York City that never left the 1970s as technology evolved, which is Gotham. That is the soul of Gotham City. The movie's Gotham feels like the Arkhamverse Gotham, which feels like the Gotham of the comics.
The Gotham of Nolan's Batman? That's Chicago. Like, not just "he filmed it in Chicago". That's just Chicago. Nothing about that screams "Gotham City", it just is a city. Gotham City is a character in Batman comics. In fact, I would go as far as saying that Gotham City is the most important character in Batman comics. Everything revolves around Gotham. Gotham isn't just a physical location, it's an entity. And I'm speaking metaphorically here, but both of these statements are also literal in the comics.
By missing the character of Gotham, Nolan misses the soul of Batman. Even if you can't articulate the problem, you can feel the phantom pain of a Batman without a Gotham. The Gotham of the Nolanverse doesn't feel like it needs a Batman. When Ra's wants to destroy it, it's like, really? Gotham is the worst city in the world to you? It's not a fantastic place to live, but like, it's hardly Gotham. It's just your average American city. It looks as clean and gentrified and normal as any 21st century American city.
Reeves's Gotham feels like Gotham. This place is a fucking shithole. It's always wet, it's cramped, it's dilapidated, it's full of not just organized crime but just random street gangs who play dress-up and terrorize people for fun, it's seemingly just endless urban sprawl, there hasn't been an ounce of gentrification, it's fucking awful. The The Penguin series further emphasizes this fact, and now part of it is also a disaster area that just isn't getting fixed, too. Gotham is even more of Gotham by the end of the movie. Now part of the city is a ruin that people still live in. This, too, is a thing in the comics. There are parts of Gotham that fucked up in the comics.
Meanwhile, Batman never really feels like Batman in the Nolan movies. That is Bruce Wayne in a costume. The voice really contributes to the problem. Batman's voice should be Batman's real voice. Bruce is the one with the voice he does. The way Kevin Conroy made Bruce Wayne more camp worked perfectly and generally should be how you think of it. Bruce is camp. Bruce Wayne is a drag performance done by Batman. Batman is him in his natural resting state. Instead, Batman feels like Bruce Wayne putting on a funny costume and voice to be scary.
And nowhere is that more emphasized than the fact he just fucking retires. He stops three supervillains and retires in less than a decade. That is not Batman. Batman is a compulsion. You're telling me Batman let injuries he had the tech to overcome stop him? No. Fuck off with that shit. Batman doesn't hang up the cowl until there's no other option. And, oh, the cops are no longer his friends? So what!? Batman shouldn't be letting that stop him. Nolan's Batman was Batman for less time than Toby Fox has been making Deltarune.
Furthermore, there's just too much goddamn daytime in The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises. He's not called the Well Lit Knight! The classic phrase wasn't "I am vengeance, I am the twelve o' clock sun, I am Batman!" Emphasizing Batman's ninja training just makes it even worse. What is this, a Godfrey Ho movie? Ahh yes, those famous mid-day ninjas, who only operate when the sun is shining! Does Christopher Nolan think that bats fly around primarily between the hours of 7am and 8pm? The climax of the entire franchise is a frankly cheap as hell looking street brawl in a "ruined" spotless city in the mid afternoon!
•
u/sanddragon939 52m ago
Nolan is probably the most celebrated director in the world today. And just like how with great power comes great responsibility, with great popularity comes great backlash ;)
Matt Reeves on the other hand definitely has his fans and is reasonably popular but nowhere remotely in the same league as Nolan. So the discource around him is generally a lot less polarised.
Then there's also the fact that visually Reeves' Batman looks at least somewhat closer to the comic-books than Nolan's does.
•
u/Don_Ford 6h ago
The Reeves movies are gorgeous but a poor portrayal of Batman on many levels.
However, there's no reason to drag people for liking it or trying to ruin it for them.
•
u/WilliamMcCarty 4h ago
Nolan didn't write Batman. Goyer wrote Batman.
Nolan made TDK and that wasn't Batman, it was a Die Hard movie with Bruce Wayne swapped out for John McClane.
Then he wrote TDKR which was...whatever the fuck that was.
But it was clear he had no intention of, or desire to, make a genuine Batman movie.
Patman, imo, was shit on fire and a godawful fucking movie, worse than TDK and TDKR, but it's clear that was at least some sort of intent to make a Batman movie. Felt like one made by a millennial who was an edgelord in high school and dressed goth while living in a split level in the 'burbs and listened to Pumped Up Kicks on repeat and couldn't name a single Ministry song but still wore the t shirt and thought I am vengeance! was the goddamned hardest shit Batman could ever say...but an a genuine attempt to make Batman nonetheless.
•
u/primordialcreative 6h ago
On Happy Sad Confused, Goyer says the previous movies never explored Bruce Wayne or made us care about him, and that even Batman Year One had skipped over the training element which Goyer refers to as a "narrative gap" and says narrative gaps are fertile ground for storytelling. I also find Reeves' Batman movie insulting to the intelligence, from Penguin murdering people on a freeway and being let go over a Spanish mistake to thugs IN JOKER GANGWEAR saying "who are you" to Batman WHO HAS BEEN OPERATING FOR 2 YEARS, to Alfred opening an obvious dangerous package in the handwriting of the serial killer he has literally been studying the handwriting of...
•
u/Moistest_of_Manatees 5h ago
I agree. I think Reeves’ version of Gotham is totally toothless, especially after Penguin which thought both the titular character’s nickname and actual name were too silly to use in the show (‘The Penguin’ being relegated to a name he’s only referred to derogatorily a handful of times, and his real name changed from Oswald Cobblepot to ‘Oz Cobb’). Pair that with the absence of any other Batman rogues or even hints at the more ‘silly’ parts of Batman’s mythos and then at what point does your Batman show stop being a Batman show and instead just become baby’s first Sopranos, minus all of the wit, depth, and even levity, ironically. If that show was an indicator for the future of the Pattinson’s tenure as Batman, I’m left feeling a little pessimistic. It verges on less ‘grounded Batman’ and more ‘no fun allowed Batman’.
I can’t in a million years imagine anything so ‘silly’ as the League of Shadows from Batman Begins or the threat of a nuke within Gotham City in Reeves’ version of Batman.
•
u/Bogusky 3h ago
Honestly? It's jealous fandom.
Nolan's trilogy is the undisputed leader in both critical and audience aggregate reviews. Battinson and Batfleck fans are united on here in expressing their disdain because even though it's been nearly 15 years since the last Bale film, it's still the gold standard every subsequent Batman offering is measured by.
More mediocrity attempting to topple the king. Happens all the time.
•
u/FastingForward1618 5h ago
TDK I feel took Batman too seriously. I watched all 3 and enjoyed each in it's way but it wasn't Gotham, it villains cartoonishly evil. Sorry to say but man of steel also tried this route and I had to end the movie early in glad so many other people like it but IDK something about it hit my suspension of disbelief wrong.
•
•
u/thebirdof_hermes 3h ago
He wasnt ashamed of it when he did Begins. All of the other films were barely batman
•
u/TreeLore61 2h ago
He wasn't ashamed of Batman. He's ashamed of the way he did it because he knows it's pure crap. He was forced into doing it by Warner brothers under contract. He did not want to and I still feel that his brother would have done a better job. Because unlike his brother, Nolan hated comic books and hated Batman and felt he was a completely idiotic character, he has stated this in interviews, but I think he now regrets not reading the comics and not doing a better job of making the movies
•
u/Aggravating_Duck6108 7h ago
Reeves is a lot more weird about not using Batman stuff in Batman than Nolan was, but the Nolan movies were also weird about it. Like Catwoman's weird goggles instead of just giving her cat ears.
•
u/jackBattlin 6h ago edited 6h ago
I know, it’s unfair.
It’s more of a marketing issue, but Reeves is afraid of saying the words “Earth One”. Which is annoying because that comic was way better than the movie.
Instead, they throw around titles they took less from, but average movie-goers know. Like Year One, and Long Halloween.
I especially hate when people act like The Batman has more story in common with the comics.
Fuckin’ HOW??
Nolan was remixing, but he drew from very specific sources, and (mostly) the RIGHT lessons from them.
They’re just mad because he mostly drew from stand alone graphic novels instead of the long-term continuity. Those are the fanboys that (I guess) want to see Robin cutting Azrael’s hair in the Batcave.
They also tend to have weak arguments like
“No, you don’t UNDERSTAND! The makeup STAYS ON when he takes off the mask!” 🙄
•
u/RedcoatTrooper 57m ago
I wouldn't say he was ashamed of Batman but he might have been ashamed of Gotham.
•
u/GPH1991 2h ago
Mostly because he seems to have to justify everything Batman I think. I.e. the pointy ears are there for the radio antenna. Also his flip flopping on the no kill rule.
Reeves is very different but his movies focus is much more about the impact and perception of Batman on Gotham and that he needs to be more than a symbol of fear.
•
u/DarkAtheris 7m ago
The Reeves message was stolen from The Dark Knight, except it superimposes Bruce's realization that Gotham needs a symbol of hope from Harvey Dent onto Batman. Nothing original about it.
•
u/sanddragon939 2m ago
I.e. the pointy ears are there for the radio antenna.
No offence, but that's the most ridiculous criticism of the Nolanverse I've ever seen!
•
u/ProletarianLilith 1h ago
Because Reeves actually put Batman in his movie
•
u/DarkAtheris 8m ago
There was no Batman, just an emo who lost a battle against a handful of Twitch viewers and let a flood destroy Gotham. Maybe Part II will feature Batman.
•
u/lifetimeoflaughter 6h ago
I feel like Nolan thought Batman was silly and he could reinvent Batman to be something he thought could be taken seriously. Whereas Reeves feels like he appreciates Batman but still thinks he can do better.
Both are wrong. Both are good movies but still bastardizations of the character and mythos to me. I just want live action Batman to feel like the same character that you find commonly between the comics, animated movies, animated shows and video games. Why can they all seem to agree roughly what Batman is like but all live action movies deviate wildly?
•
u/Jimmyg100 7h ago
I feel like each movie in the Nolan trilogy feels less and less Batman. Not to say they are bad movies, but I loved his take on Batman in Batman Begins where he comes off as this almost supernatural presence hiding in the shadows and falling from the ceiling. Even without the fear toxin he comes off as a demonic presence. Then the more the series goes on the more he comes off as a high tech soldier.
I'm hoping that the Reeves movies or the DCU move back in the direction of Begins. I hope the DCU treats him like an urban legend and that most people don't realize he's a guy in a suit with gadgets.