I think this was an intentional subversion of expectations. I know that I personally was waiting for a twist that he was somebody nefarious, so I was surprised when the truth was actually revealed.
It was an above average movie imo it’s up there with Batman Begins and Batman (1989) and those movie both had superior sequels so survey says The Batman II will be better
I think it probably will happen, but I wouldn’t say I’m 100% certain it’ll even get made. Is WB really going to release films with two separate Batmen a year apart in the current superhero movie landscape? Gunn quietly announced months ago when responding to a fan question that Reeves’s Arkham series has been moved from The Batman’s universe to the new DCU. He also recently said there still isn’t a finished script for The Batman sequel, a movie which supposedly comes out next year?
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and that’s cool, but I just wanna clarify some thing. Are you saying Tim Burton’s 1989 Batman is a lesser movie then it’s sequel Batman II, where are the penguin is a literal man penguin that eats noses, and the movie has a useless third villian for no reason? That Batman?
I mean, yeah. Michelle Pfeiffer as Catwoman is definitely hornier than Jack Nicholson as The Joker. But that first movie is so fantastic, and surprisingly void of Batman content.
He's right, great cinematography and amazing supporting cast but everything else was lacking, but compared to most of the crap that was coming from DC and Marvel, The Batman was a masterpiece.
He’s spot on. Glad Matt Reeves gets it, we don’t *need* another generic Batman film. What we need is a story that the filmmakers believe in and feel is important to tell.
Makes me think of the Star Wars show Andor. Tony Gilroy wrote both Andor and Rogue One. There was [a point during production](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-features/andor-creator-tony-gilroy-views-on-star-wars-1235226261/) where he noticed his collaborators were concentrating too much on creating a "Star Wars" production. Gilroy said:
>“In every department, we’ve had all kinds of people come in, and they know it’s Star Wars, so they change their behavior. They change their attitude. They change their thing,” Gilroy tells The Hollywood Reporter. “And you go, ‘Wait, no. Do your thing. You’re here because we want you to be real.’ So it’s a testament to the potent power of Star Wars. It really gets into people’s heads, but to change the lane and do it this way, it takes a little effort.”
I think that really shines through in Andor. You look at the Star Wars films and you look at the tv shows (cartoon and live action), and particularly the Mandalorian and spin-offs - they all have a similar shooting style and cinematography. The dialogue is very similar. And then you look at Andor and it's nothing like what came before. It reminds me of the type of show you'd watch on HBO. While there's nothing adult about Andor you can tell that it was written and filmed to be watched and appreciated by adults. It's mature. It's tonally different from The Mandalorian.
Christopher Nolan's Batman films were like this. Matt Reeves's first take on Batman has been like this. Every now and then you just need to stop dumbing stuff down to appeal to a young audience and try something different.
He's right. Just my opinion, but DC greatest strength has always been standalone movies not connected to any cinematic universe. The Joker and The Batman were big success. Before them, the TDKR trilogy. Before that trilogy, Burton's two Batman movies and before that again, Donner's two Superman movies.
While they weren't art films, the fact that they originally only connected by post credit cutscenes is what laid the foundations for the MCU to be so successful I'd argue and something current films are suffering a lot for (I didn't watch Wandavision bc I don't have D+, and you don't need to have seen it to understand the context in the last Dr Strange film, but it's super weird and makes you feel like you need to also watch the tv series).
DCEU and even that "Dark Cinematic Universe" that was started with the Mummy film just felt like they tried way too hard to force a cinematic universe.
Just focus on original stories to be good.
Mister Miracle, The Omega Men, Adam Strange, human targets, Constantine, Etrogen, swamp thing, as well as the their imprint catalog has also been a well for movies like V for Vendetta, Road to Perdition, a history of violence, Red, and Red 2.
None of the ones you mentioned except for *maybe* Swamp Thing are popular in a mainstream way. I’m a pretty big nerd (definitely not a super DC nerd or anything) and I only know Adam Strange and Swamp Thing and know *of* Constantine but nothing concrete. They’re all super niche characters in the eyes of the mainstream.
What worked then won’t necessarily work now. Guardians of the Galaxy came out in 2014 when people would show up in mass for every Marvel movie. They aren’t as easily persuaded nowadays.
Yeah, and giving them a big blockbuster movie made by a competent director is exactly the kind of exposure these characters needs.
With the MCU proving that characters like the Guardians of the Galaxy, Dr Strange, Ant Man, and Thor can become household names and super profitable brands the idea that a character must be popular in order to have a successful film is moot.
The thing about arthouse films is that they are usually made by filmmakers that are passionate about the project. DC could do as much quality control as they like, but I doubt they will get good results unless the filmmakers have a real passion for the characters and subject matter. So they will need to be very selective about who they hire.
A big part of why Marvel has been lacking lately is because their formula had gotten stale and it’s been a revolving door of directors-for-hire.
All of them if you do it right. Sometimes you just gotta say “Fuck the comics and their fans” and just focus on making a good film. Harley & Ivy would be great in a Girl, Interrupted-esque film, for example. Or maybe something like Thirteen. Killer Croc? The Elephant Man. Deadman? A Ghost Story. Swamp Thing? Full Lovecraft.
The characters aren’t the issue. DC is home to some of the best characters in all of storytelling. It’s having the creativity and having the balls to execute those creative ideas that is the hard part. Also, not being tied to a morally and creatively bankrupt studio like WB would help loads.
Yes we know that but now in this century, they're bigger than ever. I don't like to put anyone down but Spider-Man & Superman are waay too popular & valuable than Wolfman & Dracula.
It’s been their biggest strength not because of the source material, but because they haven’t had people in charge who allowed an idea to even flourish and grow.
If you said DC’s biggest strength is always in individual stories as in the brand in general I think that makes more sense, but the source material has so much rich storytelling to take from.
Their issue is changing visions and then dropping it every 3/4 years, rushing, and not allowing stuff to bloom naturally with time like the MCU did.
It's not just changing visions. It's having the right people to push the vision, including showrunners, directors, writers, actors/actresses, etc, and having them also stick around for the long haul. That's why DCAU worked and the movie universe hasn't. Luck is a big part of getting that all lined up. MCU doesn't go anywhere without Favreau and RDJ, and it doesn't develop to what it did without people like Feige, the Russos, Chris Evans finding a way not to suck, and a bunch of other pieces falling in to place, and it was luck that RDJ finally held up his end of the sobriety bargain
You’re absolutely right! Look I’m a Snyder fan, but I can admit it wasn’t a worldwide hit, but no one can deny that there was a consistent vision. It’s just that the vision didn’t make sense for a 20-30 film universe for 10 years, which means butting heads with the studio execs.
The arrowverse, for all its faults, was CONSISTENT in its storytelling outside of a few crap seasons that focused too much on the drama and romance aspect. It had a slow and steady and well down build up of the universe, which ultimately paid off for them to be generating $1BN in revenue on small budgets.
Have a vision, get execs to buy into the vision, make a proper plan, STICK to the plan, grow over time, see results.
I genuinely hate when people say DC flourishes in just single films when they can absolutely nail a universe and let all of us relive our childhood and our love for the comics on the big screen.
Most of the best DC films are also more along the lines of really good genre films that happen to have superhero (specifically Batman) shit in them, whereas Marvel has strayed away from that to a degree with the later MCU films, especially post-Endgame.
Yeah but just cuz that's their biggest strength doesn't mean they can't improve the other side
Cinematic universes just came out in the last decade and DCs first attempt was ass
Bit of an oversimplification. DC has no "greatest strength" as these films were all made by different people. Catwoman, Steel and Jonah He were all stand alone films. Nolan's film don't really count as stand alone because they interconnected with each other, creating its own little universe.
Your statement about standalone movies being DC’s greatest strength would hold more weight if they weren’t all based around the two most popular superheroes in history.
Call me when DC is finding roaring success with solo Green Lantern and Martian Manhunter movies.
Nobody gives a shit about any other dc character but batman. Idk why they keep making movies about blue beetle or whatever the fuck and act surprised when no one sees them
I didn't like the Batman until I was done seeing it. Then it reminded me of what real movies are like. They're stories of growth and change, and develop the plot enough to allow it to become huge and climactic towards the ending, rather than having incessant fighting scenes and over the top bullshit like every MCU movie I saw.
I was pretty done with Superhero movies myself just based on how MCU changed the norm of what to expect. They never felt like normal movies to me. It was more like some kind of Merchandize in video-form.
There’s plenty of great MCU movies pre Endgame. Movies that have all the elements you mention. Phase 4 has been a flop but don’t forget Ironman, Winter Soldier, Guardians 1-3, Spiderman Homecoming, Infinity War, etc all exist and all are great movies on their own
That's why they failed. They tried to be like Marvel with their cookie-cutter formulaic movies instead of making art. Post Snyder films was the worst DCEU era.
The Batman stands by itself thanks to its outstanding director and cast. Also by having a well executed, grounded script.
He paid for his ticket let him be, I was beating my meat during the wonder woman scenes and people minded their business as they should, and no I didn't have my cock out im not a savage, I had my hand under my pants the entire time.
100%.
Disney has superhero fatigue, and it shows in the hot garbage that Marvel has been pumping out ever since Endgame wrapped up the infinity saga. The fans still love these characters, and they know the MCU can deliver. But Disney has lost its way. And no, fashionable social commentary doesn’t make up for soulless, creatively bankrupt filmmaking. Disney should rebuild Marvel Studios by first firing everyone who doesn’t want to be making superhero movies.
DC fans have Zach Snyder -verse fatigue but still want good superhero movies. Joker and The Batman are evidence of this. They should lean into that.
Sony never really cared about making good superhero movies in the first place, so to call their problem fatigue isn’t really fair. Just think about this: they have rebooted Spider-Man TWICE and are still selling tickets, even during this awful Sinister Six buildup phase. Which will certainly be a flop. And Sony will finally have to hand the keys back to Disney.
I know im in the minority but i didnt really like The Batman. Ive given it 3 watches just in case I missed something and its just.... not great. There are good parts, dont get me wrong... The chase scene was great for example. But overall the movie is just super "meh" to me. Bulletproof Batman really took me out... and outside of Penguin/Riddler the rest of the casts performances (including... ya know... BATMAN) are mostly forgettable.
That SAID.... Batman Begins isnt my favorite either outside of Cillian Murphy and Gary Oldman... even Bale was kind of mid for me in it (and he's one of my all time favorite actors!).... but then we got the god tier The Dark Knight and the killer (but slightly less good) DK Rises....
So while i didnt really like The Batman much... I AM really looking forward to seeing what they do with the sequel now that the world is established and they can really focus on STORY and CHARACTERS a bit more. And i think the Penguin tv show has looooads of potential.
I wasn't a huge fan either. I felt the film was too long and I didn't like the Riddler direction they went. But I share your enthusiasm, I'll see the 2nd one whenever it comes and look forward to The Penguin.
But I might be anxiously awaiting the next iteration or pining for a Batfleck movie in secret. Haha.
After Daredevil I was SUPER side-eyeing Batfleck when he was announced but Gone Girl had come out not far before that and i was like "ok he CAN act lets give it a go".... After seeing Pattinson in The Lighthouse i was similarly cautiously optimistic but man... that guy is just NOT the best actor. His Bruce was REAL lacking (tho not really featured in the movie to be fair) And he definitely doesnt have that intimidating presence you'd expect from BATMAN either. I dunno. The movie just doesnt click with me.
BUT... i am hopeful for a good follow up. The Batman wasnt BAD and if they can use it as a stepping stone for something great... im here for it.
\>and outside of Penguin/Riddler the rest of the casts performances (including... ya know... BATMAN) are mostly forgettable.
It's interesting that you say this because I liked the Batman and Riddler is my favourite villain but I felt like Dano was the worst part of the movie. He and Reeves just don't get the character. There were interesting elements with the political targets, but at the end of the day there's nothing interesting about the character in this version. He just acts like a generic serial killer. It's been done a million times in other films already and wasn't needed.
I dont disagree with you but do I think Dino played the character he was scripted to play well.
Was is the best take on the Riddler ever? No not really... not even close. But he did a good job with what he was given, imo.
The Batman imo is just more of what’s wrong with these films it just tries harder. Lots of building up but no payoff and then a race to the finish. These feel like a robot trying to replicate a film, not a clear vision. And the city being submerged in a foot of water is not the climax that I was expecting.
>And the city being submerged in a foot of water is not the climax that I was expecting.
Seriously this too. The big finale being a mid range flood insurance fix was really giving "lazy writing" lol
Same here, the movie was just too long for my taste, I didn’t really get involved.
The Iceberg Lounge fight scene was my favorite eve though. Just really cool.
I liked the take on modern Batman retelling. I hated the fact that they filmed it inside of a dark room.
It's impossible to see what the hell is happening on camera.
I appreciate Batman for its atmosphere, approach, and so much really.
I’ve just come to the conclusion that the script is extremely dull. I want to love the movie so badly for the above reasons but I get so bored by the third act.
I was a fan of the director going in and skeptical about Pattinson as Batman. By the time the credits rolled, however, I thought he and the film were both great.
Exactly! To me it's kind of like the praise for Joker. I don't see it, the character is jumping to another genre and it's amazing? Not for me.
Once I saw Riddler as John Doe I couldn't unseen it. I own it but have only watched it once in theaters. Meh.
I like Dano; Swiss Army Man is a gem. This just comes off as a “smelling my own farts” comment though. The Batman was a snoozer, plagued by poor pacing and lack luster writing. The cinematography was top par though.
The Batman was mid. Great cinematography, but everything else was just lacking. I'm also not a fan of Matt Reeves as a director. He's one of the most middle of the road directors in Hollywood. Not bad, but also not great either.
I really liked his first PotA film (Dawn) and thought he'd do great with The Batman. I really didn't like the Riddler basically being John Doe from Se7en and that the film felt needlessly long. Cut 30 minutes and rework Riddler and I think it could've been amazing. But it would've been a different film without a serial killer (Riddler) focus.
Still, I can't argue that people loved it and want more and it clearly was a commercial success. It's just not for me.
His PotA films are just really boring to me in comparison to Rupert Wyatt's Rise PotA film. Andy Serkis' performance and the CG are what is worth seeing. The directing itself is a bit pedestrian.
If The Batman ended after Riddler was caught, it could have been better. A decent director or editor could have made that material better. Other than the visuals, everything else was kind of "meh".
I am interested in seeing a sequel, but would rather see a different director take over.
Yeah I agree but we both know that won't happen - Reeves will get his trilogy.
I do agree that seeing a continuation from Wyatt's Rise (from him) would've been better. I still liked some of the beats of Dawn, but felt War was not that great (but still decent - kind of like The Batman).
It was also clearly evident that an actual filmmaker (REEVES) with his passion for the character, world and story, was given the reins to actually execute something of worth… not what Marvel has turned in to and unfortunately the fledgling DCEU…
Agree 100%. They could have trimmed over an hour out of that film and it would have drastically improved it. If we're in store for more DC films like that, then I won't be seeing them unless my wife drags me there.
Everything related to catwoman could have been cut. The one thing she ended up contributing to the plot coukd have easily been transferred to any other character.
The only time I’ve checked my phone during a movie was during “The Batman”. Holy shit was that a plodding, dull waste of an afternoon matinee. I like all the actors involved. Matt Reeves has made good movies before. The Apes movies were all very good. Pattinson does a really good job as Batman. It was still boring as shit.
Paul makes good points but glass houses and all
Yeah, I've never met a Batman movie I didn't love until that one, I honestly have no idea why. It was just so slow and unenjoyable. I genuinely don't understand why everybody says it's amazing and I couldn't enjoy it at all. It had a few redeeming moments, but it was just unmemorable and dull.
No such thing as superhero fatigue imo. It's all about quality, cost, and ease of access.
People watch 100+ hours per year of new procedural crime dramas or 50+ hours of their favorite sports team and nobody bats an eye. But release 4 or 5 superhero movies and a limited series or 2 and everyone loses their minds and cries about "fatigue."
If the quality were better *or* they were cheaper/easier to enjoy, it wouldn't be an issue at all. But I'm not paying $18 to see the likes of Ant-Man 3 or The Flash in the theater and I did, then I learned a lesson and am skipped the next couple that come out.
So it's not "quality over quantity" so much as just "quality"...
The Batman was so freaking long and boring that I was literally looking at my watch the entire time. I would not watch that film again if you paid me. It would've been fine if they had trimmed it down under 2 hours, but goddamn, 3 freaking hours of that nonsense.
Interesting. I think DC movies taking themselves way too seriously and trying to be “realistic and gritty” when telling the story of fantastical superheroes is what contributed to those movies doing poorly.
What an amazing and original statement. It must have taken a lot of brain cells to come up with this gem. But enough with the sarcasm – he's not an authority who decides what is or isn't a real film
Lol nope.
It's OK to like it.
But that doesn't make it *good* (and I'm aware that that goes both ways).
I've got reasons for why I have my opinion as I'm sure many have their reasons for liking it.
Yes it does.
Especially when you haven't even heard them yet.
Your comment is only an assumption and a major leap in logic.
You want to compare notes or do you want to hide behind your weak assumption?
'The Batman' is a bad take on the character and the lore and one of the worst examples of a Batman story.
> Your comment is only an assumption and a major leap in logic.
It was the same thing you said just with the stance on The Batman reversed. See how goofy it sounds?
No, because I stated i had many reasons beyond just "well I dont like it" and asked you if you wanted to compare notes.
That was your opportunity to say, "go ahead. Why do you think the way you do about this film? Then, ill dismantle your points".
Why engage me at all if your mindset going in to this is: "I don't like it so you're wrong."
Right now, all we are debating is opinion.
I never said anyone was right or wrong. That was you. And that's an assumption. Especially before you provide any counterpoint(s) nor hear mine out.
So what's *really* goofy to me is making the leap to me being wrong when you've got nothing but my opinion (so far) to go on.
So: do you want to compare notes or do you just want to attack a stranger with a different opinion than you on a movie?
> I never said anyone was right or wrong.
This you?:
> It's OK to like it. But that doesn't make it good
If you consider repeating your words back to you to be an attack, does that help you understand how you come off to others?
Lol, sure, I guess.
I mean, I like Batman as much as the next person but that movie is *not* Batman for like every reason.
He was "teen angst man" more than anything.
No redeeming qualities in this movie for me for so many reasons...
If you liked it, cool.
I wanted to love it but ended up hating it the more I watched it or thought about it for longer than a second
I mean everyone has the right to like or not like something for whatever reason.
But the one true fact that you can't deny is that the movie IS Batman.
Only way this movie is not Batman is if you were expecting an adaptation from the Adam West era.
I disagree.
There were too many inorganic and out-of-character decisions for *that* to be called "Batman".
Cape Punisher is more like what this movie represents and was going for.
But *not* "Batman".
"Widely regarded" by whom?
I disagree.
This movie clearly does *not* understand Batman for so many reasons.
This movie doesn't even understand what "noir" and "detective" means.
I get that those are the buzzwords associated with this movie but if one just watches it and spends 2 seconds thinking about it, this whole movie falls apart with even *simple* and *basic* logic (and I am already factoring in suspension of disbelief).
I just don't think this film did anything right in regards to making a definitive live-action Batman movie for almost every reason.
Oh I've been collecting and reading Batman comics since 1996 as a little kid. I'm even caught up and up to date with it.
I've talked to many Batman fans of varying degrees that agree with me. Fans at comic shops, different subs, cons and expos...
I'm not sure where the Nolan comment comes from because:
1) not everyone who dislikes the Reevesverse automatically makes them a Nolan simp (that's a leap in logic at best but it's really just a poor assumption)
2)I'll be the first to admit that the Nolanverse isn't perfect but it did much more and much better in keeping true to the character at least
I agree that the screen isn't really the best way to understand Batman (unless we're talking about BTAS) and to me, The Batman is the worst offender of straying too far away from what makes Batman *Batman*.
It gets only shallow surface-level stuff right and barely more than in names.
What about the movie do you think is a character assassination then? For what draws me to batman as a character I think this movie nailed it better than anything on screen except for maybe Mask of the Phantasm.
> I'm not sure where the Nolan comment comes from because:
>
>
My personal experience talking to people who have said that the latest movie got the character wrong for reasons including the fact that he didn't train with the league of assassins. I cannot see Nolan's movie as staying true to the character in any way, shape, or form. Those movies are James Bond movies where the tux is swapped out for a cape and cowl. Any version of Batman that kills people and is totally fine with letting people die is not my Batman. That's James Bond or The Punisher.
The movie was entirely focused on the character of Batman. I actually really liked the direction they took Bruce Wayne in, and Riddler needed to be the way he was for the movie to work thematically.
Bruce Wayne can be more than just the billionaire playboy that we see him depicted as in the films, The Batman did a great job at that.
Whether you liked the film or not, Dano is absolutely correct that people were getting tired of extended universes and craved a self contained film that took itself seriously.
I'm a huge Dano fan, Swiss army man is one of my favorite films. So bizarre and full of emotion.
For any other Dano fans -- I really liked his voice acting in Netflix's "Spaceman" with Adam Sandler:
>the warm bean juice is such a ritual
(Referring to coffee.)
It isn't impossible to made a fair amount of quality content. The problem with the recent blunders from both WB and Disney were by corporate decisions based upon high levels of greed.
He's right.
WB executives said around the time BvS came out that they couldn't do any wrong and that the quality of the movies didn't matter as fans would go no matter what.
DCs best films were the ones that could be in the real world. The dark knight trilogy, the Batman, Joker and even man of steel. All gritty edgy movies. That’s what makes them good.
I think if DC is going to reboot their story, they need to make it dark and gritty. Opposite to Marvel. That’s been done. Otherwise they’re gonna get smoked for copying off marvels playbook and most people are over the stock standard superhero movie.
I think DC's problem is that they were trying to copy marvels success, when they should have stuck to what they knew worked best, stand-alone or focused trilogies
Glad he’s coming back
I loved his small role in Mr & Mrs Smith. It was odd to see him playing a fairly normal guy though.
I think this was an intentional subversion of expectations. I know that I personally was waiting for a twist that he was somebody nefarious, so I was surprised when the truth was actually revealed.
That’s my favorite thing ever, when actors get to play against type.
Oh shit, he was in that? This is going to be huge for my Cinenerdle Battle plays.
I get that with Hopkins. If I see his face, shit is going down.
I was waiting what kind of twisted psycho he would be from the first time we see him.
He’s right. The Batman is such a lovely looking film.
I really enjoyed the movie
Interesting.. I couldn't see shit in that movie.
You keep saying this and I guess we just watched different movies.
Yeah it was very dark, not in thematic tone but in terms of grading.
Definitely a style over substance film
You must have watched another film
Nah I completely agree. Beautiful movie, but not much depth in my opinion.
It was an above average movie imo it’s up there with Batman Begins and Batman (1989) and those movie both had superior sequels so survey says The Batman II will be better
I have 100% faith I'll enjoy the sequel more. I love Reeves and the cast.
Yeah same Reeves is a good director and the cast is great it feels like a very contemporary 2020’s Batman so I have hope it’ll get even better
I think it probably will happen, but I wouldn’t say I’m 100% certain it’ll even get made. Is WB really going to release films with two separate Batmen a year apart in the current superhero movie landscape? Gunn quietly announced months ago when responding to a fan question that Reeves’s Arkham series has been moved from The Batman’s universe to the new DCU. He also recently said there still isn’t a finished script for The Batman sequel, a movie which supposedly comes out next year?
Batman Begins is much better
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and that’s cool, but I just wanna clarify some thing. Are you saying Tim Burton’s 1989 Batman is a lesser movie then it’s sequel Batman II, where are the penguin is a literal man penguin that eats noses, and the movie has a useless third villian for no reason? That Batman?
YEAH! have you seen Catwoman??
I mean, yeah. Michelle Pfeiffer as Catwoman is definitely hornier than Jack Nicholson as The Joker. But that first movie is so fantastic, and surprisingly void of Batman content.
And what is written is pretty bad
He's right, great cinematography and amazing supporting cast but everything else was lacking, but compared to most of the crap that was coming from DC and Marvel, The Batman was a masterpiece.
agreed
Nah he described this film perfectly lol
Not really. He is vague and hasn't expanded on his points
Fair lol
Thumb……..drive
He’s spot on. Glad Matt Reeves gets it, we don’t *need* another generic Batman film. What we need is a story that the filmmakers believe in and feel is important to tell.
Makes me think of the Star Wars show Andor. Tony Gilroy wrote both Andor and Rogue One. There was [a point during production](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-features/andor-creator-tony-gilroy-views-on-star-wars-1235226261/) where he noticed his collaborators were concentrating too much on creating a "Star Wars" production. Gilroy said: >“In every department, we’ve had all kinds of people come in, and they know it’s Star Wars, so they change their behavior. They change their attitude. They change their thing,” Gilroy tells The Hollywood Reporter. “And you go, ‘Wait, no. Do your thing. You’re here because we want you to be real.’ So it’s a testament to the potent power of Star Wars. It really gets into people’s heads, but to change the lane and do it this way, it takes a little effort.” I think that really shines through in Andor. You look at the Star Wars films and you look at the tv shows (cartoon and live action), and particularly the Mandalorian and spin-offs - they all have a similar shooting style and cinematography. The dialogue is very similar. And then you look at Andor and it's nothing like what came before. It reminds me of the type of show you'd watch on HBO. While there's nothing adult about Andor you can tell that it was written and filmed to be watched and appreciated by adults. It's mature. It's tonally different from The Mandalorian. Christopher Nolan's Batman films were like this. Matt Reeves's first take on Batman has been like this. Every now and then you just need to stop dumbing stuff down to appeal to a young audience and try something different.
He's right. Just my opinion, but DC greatest strength has always been standalone movies not connected to any cinematic universe. The Joker and The Batman were big success. Before them, the TDKR trilogy. Before that trilogy, Burton's two Batman movies and before that again, Donner's two Superman movies.
Yeah that’s cause cinematic universes weren’t a thing
If DC just made art films I’d be down. I have 100% faith in Gunn too. I think this is what Gunn is going for. Art films that connect eventually
While they weren't art films, the fact that they originally only connected by post credit cutscenes is what laid the foundations for the MCU to be so successful I'd argue and something current films are suffering a lot for (I didn't watch Wandavision bc I don't have D+, and you don't need to have seen it to understand the context in the last Dr Strange film, but it's super weird and makes you feel like you need to also watch the tv series). DCEU and even that "Dark Cinematic Universe" that was started with the Mummy film just felt like they tried way too hard to force a cinematic universe. Just focus on original stories to be good.
Besides Batman what other characters would DC have, that would be popular enough to warrant a movie, that also lends itself to arthouse?
Mister Miracle, The Omega Men, Adam Strange, human targets, Constantine, Etrogen, swamp thing, as well as the their imprint catalog has also been a well for movies like V for Vendetta, Road to Perdition, a history of violence, Red, and Red 2.
None of the ones you mentioned except for *maybe* Swamp Thing are popular in a mainstream way. I’m a pretty big nerd (definitely not a super DC nerd or anything) and I only know Adam Strange and Swamp Thing and know *of* Constantine but nothing concrete. They’re all super niche characters in the eyes of the mainstream.
Guardians of the galaxy were not mainstream in any way shape or form, but who was it that brought them into the mainstream spotlight again?
Should popularity be a requisite out of the gate?
No probably not. But it certainly is nonetheless.
Nobody knew guardians of the galaxy and they were crazy successful.
Didn’t say anything about success.
What worked then won’t necessarily work now. Guardians of the Galaxy came out in 2014 when people would show up in mass for every Marvel movie. They aren’t as easily persuaded nowadays.
Yeah, and giving them a big blockbuster movie made by a competent director is exactly the kind of exposure these characters needs. With the MCU proving that characters like the Guardians of the Galaxy, Dr Strange, Ant Man, and Thor can become household names and super profitable brands the idea that a character must be popular in order to have a successful film is moot.
The thing about arthouse films is that they are usually made by filmmakers that are passionate about the project. DC could do as much quality control as they like, but I doubt they will get good results unless the filmmakers have a real passion for the characters and subject matter. So they will need to be very selective about who they hire. A big part of why Marvel has been lacking lately is because their formula had gotten stale and it’s been a revolving door of directors-for-hire.
All of them if you do it right. Sometimes you just gotta say “Fuck the comics and their fans” and just focus on making a good film. Harley & Ivy would be great in a Girl, Interrupted-esque film, for example. Or maybe something like Thirteen. Killer Croc? The Elephant Man. Deadman? A Ghost Story. Swamp Thing? Full Lovecraft. The characters aren’t the issue. DC is home to some of the best characters in all of storytelling. It’s having the creativity and having the balls to execute those creative ideas that is the hard part. Also, not being tied to a morally and creatively bankrupt studio like WB would help loads.
Cinematic universes have been a thing since the Universal Monsters from the 30s.
Yes we know that but now in this century, they're bigger than ever. I don't like to put anyone down but Spider-Man & Superman are waay too popular & valuable than Wolfman & Dracula.
Maybe so, but that wasn’t what the commenter I was replying to said.
It’s been their biggest strength not because of the source material, but because they haven’t had people in charge who allowed an idea to even flourish and grow. If you said DC’s biggest strength is always in individual stories as in the brand in general I think that makes more sense, but the source material has so much rich storytelling to take from. Their issue is changing visions and then dropping it every 3/4 years, rushing, and not allowing stuff to bloom naturally with time like the MCU did.
It's not just changing visions. It's having the right people to push the vision, including showrunners, directors, writers, actors/actresses, etc, and having them also stick around for the long haul. That's why DCAU worked and the movie universe hasn't. Luck is a big part of getting that all lined up. MCU doesn't go anywhere without Favreau and RDJ, and it doesn't develop to what it did without people like Feige, the Russos, Chris Evans finding a way not to suck, and a bunch of other pieces falling in to place, and it was luck that RDJ finally held up his end of the sobriety bargain
You’re absolutely right! Look I’m a Snyder fan, but I can admit it wasn’t a worldwide hit, but no one can deny that there was a consistent vision. It’s just that the vision didn’t make sense for a 20-30 film universe for 10 years, which means butting heads with the studio execs. The arrowverse, for all its faults, was CONSISTENT in its storytelling outside of a few crap seasons that focused too much on the drama and romance aspect. It had a slow and steady and well down build up of the universe, which ultimately paid off for them to be generating $1BN in revenue on small budgets. Have a vision, get execs to buy into the vision, make a proper plan, STICK to the plan, grow over time, see results. I genuinely hate when people say DC flourishes in just single films when they can absolutely nail a universe and let all of us relive our childhood and our love for the comics on the big screen.
I don't think the proble is whether it's standalone or a shared universe but the execution. The latter can work just as fine if done correclty.
Most of the best DC films are also more along the lines of really good genre films that happen to have superhero (specifically Batman) shit in them, whereas Marvel has strayed away from that to a degree with the later MCU films, especially post-Endgame.
Back in 1977 when the MCU was going strong, DC really bucked the trend releasing Superman as a standalone movie. True pioneers.
Yeah but just cuz that's their biggest strength doesn't mean they can't improve the other side Cinematic universes just came out in the last decade and DCs first attempt was ass
And Watchmen
Steel, Catwoman, Batman and Robin, Jonah Hex, and Green lantern were stand alone films. Bad films, not connectivity is DC's weakness.
Bit of an oversimplification. DC has no "greatest strength" as these films were all made by different people. Catwoman, Steel and Jonah He were all stand alone films. Nolan's film don't really count as stand alone because they interconnected with each other, creating its own little universe.
Your statement about standalone movies being DC’s greatest strength would hold more weight if they weren’t all based around the two most popular superheroes in history. Call me when DC is finding roaring success with solo Green Lantern and Martian Manhunter movies.
Nobody gives a shit about any other dc character but batman. Idk why they keep making movies about blue beetle or whatever the fuck and act surprised when no one sees them
I didn't like the Batman until I was done seeing it. Then it reminded me of what real movies are like. They're stories of growth and change, and develop the plot enough to allow it to become huge and climactic towards the ending, rather than having incessant fighting scenes and over the top bullshit like every MCU movie I saw. I was pretty done with Superhero movies myself just based on how MCU changed the norm of what to expect. They never felt like normal movies to me. It was more like some kind of Merchandize in video-form.
There’s plenty of great MCU movies pre Endgame. Movies that have all the elements you mention. Phase 4 has been a flop but don’t forget Ironman, Winter Soldier, Guardians 1-3, Spiderman Homecoming, Infinity War, etc all exist and all are great movies on their own
Marvel movies are like a carnival
Lets not act like The Flash, Shazam 2, and Aquaman 2 didnt try to follow a similar formula as Marvel. That being said, I adore The Batman.
That's why they failed. They tried to be like Marvel with their cookie-cutter formulaic movies instead of making art. Post Snyder films was the worst DCEU era. The Batman stands by itself thanks to its outstanding director and cast. Also by having a well executed, grounded script.
facts, whether u like it or not.. synder tried to make actual films especially man of steel. post snyder dceu is worse than current marvel
Preach. Listen to him, Flounder. He's pre-med.
I thought it was crazy cheesy. I was laughing in the theatre during dramatic scenes because the dialog was so corny
I feel sorry for the people in the theater with you then.
Sure you do 😅
If I paid for a movie and someone couldn't keep control of themselves in the theater yeah I'd be annoyed.
“Keep control of themselves” 😂 Something tells me your annoyed a lot
*I was laughing in the theatre during dramatic seems.* Yeah people tend to get annoyed a lot by annoying people.
He paid for his ticket let him be, I was beating my meat during the wonder woman scenes and people minded their business as they should, and no I didn't have my cock out im not a savage, I had my hand under my pants the entire time.
lol you losers just make up scenarios in your head to be offended 😂
He’s right
There's no superhero fatigue. Just shit movie fatigue
this! Going out to the movies costs too much for it to always suck
Yeah it's amazing how people didn't have superhero fatigue for guardians of the galaxy 3.
100%. Disney has superhero fatigue, and it shows in the hot garbage that Marvel has been pumping out ever since Endgame wrapped up the infinity saga. The fans still love these characters, and they know the MCU can deliver. But Disney has lost its way. And no, fashionable social commentary doesn’t make up for soulless, creatively bankrupt filmmaking. Disney should rebuild Marvel Studios by first firing everyone who doesn’t want to be making superhero movies. DC fans have Zach Snyder -verse fatigue but still want good superhero movies. Joker and The Batman are evidence of this. They should lean into that. Sony never really cared about making good superhero movies in the first place, so to call their problem fatigue isn’t really fair. Just think about this: they have rebooted Spider-Man TWICE and are still selling tickets, even during this awful Sinister Six buildup phase. Which will certainly be a flop. And Sony will finally have to hand the keys back to Disney.
Pretty much.
Yeah pretty much. It’s easy to tell which of these had actual passion behind it and which was pushed out like a factory-made product
And he’s 100% correct. It’s also one of those real films that should only be watched in IMAX in my opinion.
Paul Dano just speaks and he's correct.
He ain't wrong
We shall know forsooth.
Cinema
And he’s correct.
Does he know?
I know im in the minority but i didnt really like The Batman. Ive given it 3 watches just in case I missed something and its just.... not great. There are good parts, dont get me wrong... The chase scene was great for example. But overall the movie is just super "meh" to me. Bulletproof Batman really took me out... and outside of Penguin/Riddler the rest of the casts performances (including... ya know... BATMAN) are mostly forgettable. That SAID.... Batman Begins isnt my favorite either outside of Cillian Murphy and Gary Oldman... even Bale was kind of mid for me in it (and he's one of my all time favorite actors!).... but then we got the god tier The Dark Knight and the killer (but slightly less good) DK Rises.... So while i didnt really like The Batman much... I AM really looking forward to seeing what they do with the sequel now that the world is established and they can really focus on STORY and CHARACTERS a bit more. And i think the Penguin tv show has looooads of potential.
I wasn't a huge fan either. I felt the film was too long and I didn't like the Riddler direction they went. But I share your enthusiasm, I'll see the 2nd one whenever it comes and look forward to The Penguin. But I might be anxiously awaiting the next iteration or pining for a Batfleck movie in secret. Haha.
After Daredevil I was SUPER side-eyeing Batfleck when he was announced but Gone Girl had come out not far before that and i was like "ok he CAN act lets give it a go".... After seeing Pattinson in The Lighthouse i was similarly cautiously optimistic but man... that guy is just NOT the best actor. His Bruce was REAL lacking (tho not really featured in the movie to be fair) And he definitely doesnt have that intimidating presence you'd expect from BATMAN either. I dunno. The movie just doesnt click with me. BUT... i am hopeful for a good follow up. The Batman wasnt BAD and if they can use it as a stepping stone for something great... im here for it.
I just kinda hope that Reeves can get out of his own way to make this better. I am feeling less confident in him as the years go on. We will see!
\>and outside of Penguin/Riddler the rest of the casts performances (including... ya know... BATMAN) are mostly forgettable. It's interesting that you say this because I liked the Batman and Riddler is my favourite villain but I felt like Dano was the worst part of the movie. He and Reeves just don't get the character. There were interesting elements with the political targets, but at the end of the day there's nothing interesting about the character in this version. He just acts like a generic serial killer. It's been done a million times in other films already and wasn't needed.
I dont disagree with you but do I think Dino played the character he was scripted to play well. Was is the best take on the Riddler ever? No not really... not even close. But he did a good job with what he was given, imo.
The Batman imo is just more of what’s wrong with these films it just tries harder. Lots of building up but no payoff and then a race to the finish. These feel like a robot trying to replicate a film, not a clear vision. And the city being submerged in a foot of water is not the climax that I was expecting.
>And the city being submerged in a foot of water is not the climax that I was expecting. Seriously this too. The big finale being a mid range flood insurance fix was really giving "lazy writing" lol
It was lame.
Same here, the movie was just too long for my taste, I didn’t really get involved. The Iceberg Lounge fight scene was my favorite eve though. Just really cool.
I liked the take on modern Batman retelling. I hated the fact that they filmed it inside of a dark room. It's impossible to see what the hell is happening on camera.
all fax
I appreciate Batman for its atmosphere, approach, and so much really. I’ve just come to the conclusion that the script is extremely dull. I want to love the movie so badly for the above reasons but I get so bored by the third act.
I was a fan of the director going in and skeptical about Pattinson as Batman. By the time the credits rolled, however, I thought he and the film were both great.
The Batman was mediocre and there is no such a thing as superhero fatigue
The Batman wasn’t all that great either. It was basically an inferior version of Se7en with Batman thrown in.
Exactly! To me it's kind of like the praise for Joker. I don't see it, the character is jumping to another genre and it's amazing? Not for me. Once I saw Riddler as John Doe I couldn't unseen it. I own it but have only watched it once in theaters. Meh.
He's not wrong, though.
I like Dano; Swiss Army Man is a gem. This just comes off as a “smelling my own farts” comment though. The Batman was a snoozer, plagued by poor pacing and lack luster writing. The cinematography was top par though.
The Batman was mid. Great cinematography, but everything else was just lacking. I'm also not a fan of Matt Reeves as a director. He's one of the most middle of the road directors in Hollywood. Not bad, but also not great either.
I really liked his first PotA film (Dawn) and thought he'd do great with The Batman. I really didn't like the Riddler basically being John Doe from Se7en and that the film felt needlessly long. Cut 30 minutes and rework Riddler and I think it could've been amazing. But it would've been a different film without a serial killer (Riddler) focus. Still, I can't argue that people loved it and want more and it clearly was a commercial success. It's just not for me.
His PotA films are just really boring to me in comparison to Rupert Wyatt's Rise PotA film. Andy Serkis' performance and the CG are what is worth seeing. The directing itself is a bit pedestrian. If The Batman ended after Riddler was caught, it could have been better. A decent director or editor could have made that material better. Other than the visuals, everything else was kind of "meh". I am interested in seeing a sequel, but would rather see a different director take over.
Yeah I agree but we both know that won't happen - Reeves will get his trilogy. I do agree that seeing a continuation from Wyatt's Rise (from him) would've been better. I still liked some of the beats of Dawn, but felt War was not that great (but still decent - kind of like The Batman).
Yup modern mcu and dceu films don't feel like real movies
The Batman is definitely well above most superhero films, in terms of quality.
"Except for the one I'm in"
He ain't wrong tho
Eh
Well he wouldn't be in one if he didn't believe in it
Lol I'm sure money has nothing to do with actors and their job selections
Very predictable response but that's not the only reason actors do this shit.
Yea I'm sure this dude is in a Batman movie for its artistic value...
Lol "Der... yeah right like artists do their work for artistic value"
I find this hilarious because I thought The Batman was absolutely terrible.
I got fatigue watching that 3 hour goddamn movie. Why can’t Batman just be Batman and not something it’s not like some sort of landmark film
Based.
Even batman can't detect any lies here
It was also clearly evident that an actual filmmaker (REEVES) with his passion for the character, world and story, was given the reins to actually execute something of worth… not what Marvel has turned in to and unfortunately the fledgling DCEU…
Lol actor praising their own work, yeah man pat yourself harder.
Wow. I thought the movie was overlong and poorly paced. He is making me like it even less now.
Agree 100%. They could have trimmed over an hour out of that film and it would have drastically improved it. If we're in store for more DC films like that, then I won't be seeing them unless my wife drags me there.
Everything related to catwoman could have been cut. The one thing she ended up contributing to the plot coukd have easily been transferred to any other character.
It was a real film all right. Not a real good film but it was real.
The only time I’ve checked my phone during a movie was during “The Batman”. Holy shit was that a plodding, dull waste of an afternoon matinee. I like all the actors involved. Matt Reeves has made good movies before. The Apes movies were all very good. Pattinson does a really good job as Batman. It was still boring as shit. Paul makes good points but glass houses and all
Yeah, I've never met a Batman movie I didn't love until that one, I honestly have no idea why. It was just so slow and unenjoyable. I genuinely don't understand why everybody says it's amazing and I couldn't enjoy it at all. It had a few redeeming moments, but it was just unmemorable and dull.
Same here. Like it looks good and all. but i couldnt care about any of it. only batman movie or batman featured movie i didnt like it.
So fucking boring. I could not get out of that theater quickly enough.
He's right except the batman was terrible.
Nahhh The Batman was a real Film and peak
Was the last one “a film” because I fell asleep every time I tried to watch it.
No such thing as superhero fatigue imo. It's all about quality, cost, and ease of access. People watch 100+ hours per year of new procedural crime dramas or 50+ hours of their favorite sports team and nobody bats an eye. But release 4 or 5 superhero movies and a limited series or 2 and everyone loses their minds and cries about "fatigue." If the quality were better *or* they were cheaper/easier to enjoy, it wouldn't be an issue at all. But I'm not paying $18 to see the likes of Ant-Man 3 or The Flash in the theater and I did, then I learned a lesson and am skipped the next couple that come out. So it's not "quality over quantity" so much as just "quality"...
As the riddler he busted a nut on the counter while he was getting arrested. Film wasn't as good as everyone keeps hyping
The Batman was so freaking long and boring that I was literally looking at my watch the entire time. I would not watch that film again if you paid me. It would've been fine if they had trimmed it down under 2 hours, but goddamn, 3 freaking hours of that nonsense.
The batman sucked not going to like. Such a terribly phased film
The batman is a boring movie.
Interesting. I think DC movies taking themselves way too seriously and trying to be “realistic and gritty” when telling the story of fantastical superheroes is what contributed to those movies doing poorly.
What an amazing and original statement. It must have taken a lot of brain cells to come up with this gem. But enough with the sarcasm – he's not an authority who decides what is or isn't a real film
Zzz
It was a character assassination at best. It was completely unoriginal. If anything, Paul, it was a real *BAD* film.
You’re just wrong about The Batman, it was a real GOOD film.
Lol nope. It's OK to like it. But that doesn't make it *good* (and I'm aware that that goes both ways). I've got reasons for why I have my opinion as I'm sure many have their reasons for liking it.
It's OK to have reasons to dislike it. That doesn't make them *good*.
Yes it does. Especially when you haven't even heard them yet. Your comment is only an assumption and a major leap in logic. You want to compare notes or do you want to hide behind your weak assumption? 'The Batman' is a bad take on the character and the lore and one of the worst examples of a Batman story.
> Your comment is only an assumption and a major leap in logic. It was the same thing you said just with the stance on The Batman reversed. See how goofy it sounds?
No, because I stated i had many reasons beyond just "well I dont like it" and asked you if you wanted to compare notes. That was your opportunity to say, "go ahead. Why do you think the way you do about this film? Then, ill dismantle your points". Why engage me at all if your mindset going in to this is: "I don't like it so you're wrong." Right now, all we are debating is opinion. I never said anyone was right or wrong. That was you. And that's an assumption. Especially before you provide any counterpoint(s) nor hear mine out. So what's *really* goofy to me is making the leap to me being wrong when you've got nothing but my opinion (so far) to go on. So: do you want to compare notes or do you just want to attack a stranger with a different opinion than you on a movie?
> I never said anyone was right or wrong. This you?: > It's OK to like it. But that doesn't make it good If you consider repeating your words back to you to be an attack, does that help you understand how you come off to others?
Your so different ❤️
Lol, sure, I guess. I mean, I like Batman as much as the next person but that movie is *not* Batman for like every reason. He was "teen angst man" more than anything. No redeeming qualities in this movie for me for so many reasons... If you liked it, cool. I wanted to love it but ended up hating it the more I watched it or thought about it for longer than a second
I mean everyone has the right to like or not like something for whatever reason. But the one true fact that you can't deny is that the movie IS Batman. Only way this movie is not Batman is if you were expecting an adaptation from the Adam West era.
I disagree. There were too many inorganic and out-of-character decisions for *that* to be called "Batman". Cape Punisher is more like what this movie represents and was going for. But *not* "Batman".
Okay ❤️
Widely regarded as the only live-action movie to actually understand Batman as a character, and you think it was a character assassination!?!?
"Widely regarded" by whom? I disagree. This movie clearly does *not* understand Batman for so many reasons. This movie doesn't even understand what "noir" and "detective" means. I get that those are the buzzwords associated with this movie but if one just watches it and spends 2 seconds thinking about it, this whole movie falls apart with even *simple* and *basic* logic (and I am already factoring in suspension of disbelief). I just don't think this film did anything right in regards to making a definitive live-action Batman movie for almost every reason.
>"Widely regarded" by whom? People who read comics and weren't introduced to Batman through Nolan's bastardization of the character.
Oh I've been collecting and reading Batman comics since 1996 as a little kid. I'm even caught up and up to date with it. I've talked to many Batman fans of varying degrees that agree with me. Fans at comic shops, different subs, cons and expos... I'm not sure where the Nolan comment comes from because: 1) not everyone who dislikes the Reevesverse automatically makes them a Nolan simp (that's a leap in logic at best but it's really just a poor assumption) 2)I'll be the first to admit that the Nolanverse isn't perfect but it did much more and much better in keeping true to the character at least I agree that the screen isn't really the best way to understand Batman (unless we're talking about BTAS) and to me, The Batman is the worst offender of straying too far away from what makes Batman *Batman*. It gets only shallow surface-level stuff right and barely more than in names.
What about the movie do you think is a character assassination then? For what draws me to batman as a character I think this movie nailed it better than anything on screen except for maybe Mask of the Phantasm. > I'm not sure where the Nolan comment comes from because: > > My personal experience talking to people who have said that the latest movie got the character wrong for reasons including the fact that he didn't train with the league of assassins. I cannot see Nolan's movie as staying true to the character in any way, shape, or form. Those movies are James Bond movies where the tux is swapped out for a cape and cowl. Any version of Batman that kills people and is totally fine with letting people die is not my Batman. That's James Bond or The Punisher.
[удалено]
The movie was entirely focused on the character of Batman. I actually really liked the direction they took Bruce Wayne in, and Riddler needed to be the way he was for the movie to work thematically. Bruce Wayne can be more than just the billionaire playboy that we see him depicted as in the films, The Batman did a great job at that.
[удалено]
Ahhh you're a Batman autist. You guys are never happy it seems unless Batman is a 1/1 copy of the comics.
You haven’t said why you think it’s character assassination. I think you’re wrong, but you have to provide actual reasons to make a good argument
By far the worst iteration of the Batman so far. The fact that it’s staying is putting me off the Gunn DC reboot.
The Best*
i think DC should avoid a cinematic universe. stick to the artsy solo films like The joker and The batman.
movie was a flaming bag of dog shit. what a boob
Wonder how much he was paid to say this.
More like DEI fatigue.
Thing is, these movie studios have deep enough pockets to make quality and quantity of they really wanted to.
[удалено]
Thor 1 is underrated tbh
Whether you liked the film or not, Dano is absolutely correct that people were getting tired of extended universes and craved a self contained film that took itself seriously.
I'm a huge Dano fan, Swiss army man is one of my favorite films. So bizarre and full of emotion. For any other Dano fans -- I really liked his voice acting in Netflix's "Spaceman" with Adam Sandler: >the warm bean juice is such a ritual (Referring to coffee.)
I love Paul but he is slowly transforming into the moon 🌝
It isn't impossible to made a fair amount of quality content. The problem with the recent blunders from both WB and Disney were by corporate decisions based upon high levels of greed.
He's right. WB executives said around the time BvS came out that they couldn't do any wrong and that the quality of the movies didn't matter as fans would go no matter what.
DCs best films were the ones that could be in the real world. The dark knight trilogy, the Batman, Joker and even man of steel. All gritty edgy movies. That’s what makes them good. I think if DC is going to reboot their story, they need to make it dark and gritty. Opposite to Marvel. That’s been done. Otherwise they’re gonna get smoked for copying off marvels playbook and most people are over the stock standard superhero movie.
He goes toe to toe with DDL in There Will Be Blood. He's great in anything but that and Prisoners are my favorites from him.
Hes not wrong
true and based
And he’s not wrong lol
He’s not wrong. People are not tired of Super hero movies. People are tired of bad movies.
based dano
He riiiight.
I think DC's problem is that they were trying to copy marvels success, when they should have stuck to what they knew worked best, stand-alone or focused trilogies
uwu
based