Official The Batman Thread

[MartyMcFly]

I think he’s almost convinced. Give him another day or two

Any day now

 

[Saysumthinfunnymike]

Any day now

Not my fault when someone posts nonsense then i call them on it and they don't share any evidence to bacc their claim. The guy wasn't convinced per se he just disappeared

 

[MartyMcFly]

Not my fault when someone posts nonsense then i call them on it and they don't share any evidence to bacc their claim. The guy wasn't convinced per se he just disappeared

That’s the thing. It wasn’t nonsense. He has his views on Superman and they’re no less right than yours.

The problem with this place, which is the problem with that whole argument, is the idea that two things can be true at once. And nikkas refuse to accept that one basic fact. Are there things Snyder and goyer got “right” about Superman? Yes. Are there things I feel they didn’t? Also yes. And the same can be said for Richard donner, Bruce timm, or any of the dozens of comic book writers who signed their name on a contract over the years.

These characters are always reinterpreted for the times. What works in 1978 might not work in 2022 so you adapt while keeping the core of the character there. And rather than accepting that basic nugget, you two went on and on and on…and on because you both thought this shyt was math and it’s not. Art, things up for interpretation? They’re not math. There’s no one way to do it. James Bond is the best example of this. There are some who prefer Roger Moore’s very lighthearted interpretation. There are some who prefer Daniel Craig or sean Connery. And neither group is wrong when they say “that’s James Bond.”

Getting into a pissing contest over your interpretation vs someone else’s for eons ain’t it. I have disagreements with the way a handful of people here see Peter Parker. Deep in my bone disagreements. But I also recognize how they see the character has validity to it, even if it’s not what I think Peter is, because his core is intact in either version.


And lastly, while I’m on this soapbox, I think most cats just wanted to come to a Batman thread to talk about Batman. Not a damn near 10 year old movie that clearly underperformed by the studios standards. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t good. That doesn’t mean its bad. That means they didn’t like their cash return on it so they gave it the Batman boost for the sequel. And since then, WB has gone through so many regime changes and different business models that a lot of shyt is in flux and a victim of politics.

 

[Saysumthinfunnymike]

That’s the thing. It wasn’t nonsense. He has his views on Superman and they’re no less right than yours.

Sorry you wrote all of that (i'll read your post in a second) because i meant "nonsense" in that he was arguing with me over whether these films were successful and i provided plenty of evidence that yes.. they mostly were and have been.. That's the part of the argument that is not subjective. There are numbers and those numbers can only be interpreted a couple of ways.

The part about what's Superman can be argued and that can be more subjective..

 

[MartyMcFly]

Sorry you wrote all of that (i'll read your post in a second) because i meant "nonsense" in that he was arguing with me over whether these films were successful and i provided plenty of evidence that yes.. they mostly were and have been.. That's the part of the argument that is not subjective. There are numbers and those numbers can only be interpreted a couple of ways.

The part about what's Superman can be argued and that can be more subjective..

Even success is subjective unless it’s an out and out success my man. Clearly man of steel was not the success WB wanted. I don’t think there’s any argument with that. At all. Suicide squad is another issue and a thornier one. Especially because if hbo max. So I don’t think anyone besides the people who work at hbo can know for sure what that was and what they wasn’t. It’s like arguing over ghosts

 

[Saysumthinfunnymike]

And lastly, while I’m on this soapbox, I think most cats just wanted to come to a Batman thread to talk about Batman.

That's true.. however.. the argument was going on before i stepped into it. Go and read for yourself. i came here to discuss 'The Batman'. i didn't come in here to discuss Man of Steel or box office numbers of other films but let's be honest.. it's always the same select few who want to enter any thread and have these arguments.

That guy with the Fresh Prince avatar and the other guy named static something are always front and center

 

[Saysumthinfunnymike]

Even success is subjective unless it’s an out and out success my man. Clearly man of steel was not the success WB wanted. I don’t think there’s any argument with that. At all. Suicide squad is another issue and a thornier one. Especially because if hbo max. So I don’t think anyone besides the people who work at hbo can know for sure what that was and what they wasn’t. It’s like arguing over ghosts

Wasn't just that.. there's no argument that Wonder Woman or Aquaman or even Shazam because it was a smaller scale project or definitely Joker (though that's not a part of the DCEU) were huge successes... both financially and critically..

So it's inaccurate to say they weren't.. That's all..

 

[Saysumthinfunnymike]

'The Batman' imax early screenings are happening. Here's how:

The Batman Fan First Premieres in IMAX: How to Get Tickets

 

[KevCo]

Got my 7pm tickets for the first

 

[Mortal1]

Back on track, I think this BATMAN, from the trailers and snippets, will explore the Trauma of being BATMAN.

To this day, Batman really hasn't been explored as a detective element, he just sits and does his computer shyt, and he knows the next move.

The trauma was explored with Batman Forever and Batman Begins, but they kept up Heroic aspect. This one looks more like a Batman that is tormented, and NEEDS to be Batman as a excuse for his trauma rather than being a Hero.

Yeah, Matt Reeves mentioned the graphic novel Batman Ego by Darwyn Cooke as a source of inspiration and a lot of mental conflict between the two personas in that story.

 

[King Static X]

i think the two of you both "agree" on the core of what makes Superman, Superman. the same thing is being said but inside different contexts.

Human nature, for the most part, is selfish. Superman was first published during World War II when one dictator tried to eliminate an entire race of people. So, along came two Jewish boys who thought of hope in the form of a comic book. Superman is the antithesis of human. He represents the greater good over personal gain. Humans prefer the latter but Superman has always been about the former. His nature might seem "boring" in this day and age but he was created in a time of war, crisis, famine and genocide.

Donner took a more conservative approach and Snyder the more liberal. At the end of the day, both Reeves & Cavill arrived at the same conclusion, Superman is for the people.

All being said, can we please get back to The Batman.

Actually no. Superman was created in 1938 (a year before WWII started) and his creation didn't have to do with the Nazis. However, Superman did fight Nazis in his early comic runs.


Anyways, back to "The Batman"

 

[papertrail08]

Matt Reeves directing this has me nervous even if it gets great reviews. That last Apes film he did was absolute trash (I loved Dawn though).

 

[Saysumthinfunnymike]

Matt Reeves directing this has me nervous even if it gets great reviews. That last Apes film he did was absolute trash (I loved Dawn though).

nah breh... that was heat

 

[AnonymityX1000]

Matt Reeves directing this has me nervous even if it gets great reviews. That last Apes film he did was absolute trash (I loved Dawn though).

Yeah, I don't think I finished it I was so bored.

 

[papertrail08]

nah breh... that was heat

Rise and Dawn yes (I know Reeves didn’t direct the 1st one) . I was damn near watching War.