Movies

Review: The Batman

The movie's whole idea seems to be that if Batman truly wanted to make Gotham a better place, he'd find some other way to do it, perhaps involving politics.

|

The Batman isn't an anti-Batman screed, nor is it an overt identity politics rant. The overlong movie is too sprawling, too messy, too unfocused to seriously explore a single Big Theme.

But it does seem to question whether being Batman is the right choice for a billionaire playboy who wants to produce social change. It's a Batman movie that comes across as uncomfortable with the whole idea of Batman.

Yes, it offers grit and gloom and classically Batman-esque moments, but it also frequently undercuts them, as if to suggest that the underlying idea of the character is kind of silly. Throughout the movie, there are invocations of whiteness and privilege, networks of urban corruption, and a mayoral race between a young black woman and an older white man. (The latter, we are supposed to understand, represents Gotham's corruption.) The finale manages to hint at fears of both climate change and the January 6 Capitol riot. The hero's connection with the supervillain is closer than usual, and when the antagonist inevitably announces that he and the Batman are really the same, the movie seems to agree.

The idea seems to be that if Batman truly wanted to make Gotham a better place, he'd find some other way to do it, perhaps involving politics. No thanks.

NEXT: Review: The Second Shooter

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. This doesn't seem like a good-faith interpretation by a fan of the franchise, but rather a diatribe by a scorned culture warrior upset with modern political messaging in media. Scorned enough to look for it everywhere, even where it is not.

    The movie was about Batman's transition from being a figure of vengeance who lurks in the shadows to him becoming a figure of hope that the community could gather around. Batman went from being a reactive hero to becoming a proactive hero. All of the character development was centered around Batman, with Bruce Wayne having little to no growth (despite his brief conversations with the woke characters).

    If anything, the movie suggests that Bruce Wayne could not have fixed the problems of Gotham by simply throwing money at them, as the film established that's what his father did. His father failed in making things better, and only succeeded in making things worse.

    This was a 3 hour movie with a couple of jabs against white billionaires that were never followed up on. To emphasize them as the central theme of the movie is entirely disingenuous.

    1. " To emphasize them as the central theme of the movie is entirely disingenuous."

      Maybe reading the second sentence is important: "The overlong movie is too sprawling, too messy, too unfocused to seriously explore a single Big Theme."

      1. I watched it and it was work. Don't recommend it. Not entertaining.

        1. I thought it was quite good, and didn't seem too long. A different take on Batman, even more gritty and realistic. He could pretty much beat up anyone one on one, but was always closer to actual danger of losing when outnumbered than he was in other movies.

          1. >>when outnumbered

            the Ventures start playing and Batman breaks into a Mashed Potato

  2. Batman IX: Use Your Words

    1. Batmantifa - All Superheroes Are Bastards

      1. gold, Jerry.

  3. Batperson

  4. I, for one, look forward to the Awoken Twittman superhero.

    1. Superman now has a son who identifies as bi.

  5. Beating people up only goes so far, and they already have Antifa and the cops to do that.

    But I like how they assume the next mayor will remain incorruptible, instead of funneling a few million in donations to a new house for her brother to use as activist HQ.

    1. ya the boring media pushed and hackneyed assumption that women of color are some sort of modern day saints

      ...until you give them money and power then they act a whole lot like the rich white bastards they rail against

      1. Lori Lightfoot resembles your comment.

  6. This is a weird movie review. Having not seen the film (the intended audience for a review, right?), the review leaves me more confused about the movie than I was before (knowing nothing but that the name 'batman' was attached to it). About the only thing useful I learned was the second sentence.

    1. Actually you just wrote a good review of the movie! Wierd, confusing, nothing but the name Batman attached to it. Just add that its this for 3 hours.

  7. Its too long. If it was fantastic that would be fine, but felt drawn out.

    Nolan's trilogy already pretty well captured a grim, dismal chaotic gotham. It feels like they wanted to outdo that, and it just came off as kind of depressing (like Phoenix's Joker movie)

    The included necessary woke pandering continues to be lame and is getting old. Billionaires bad. White privelege bad. Old white men ruin society. We need a womyn of color that if virtuous to save us from the whites. Blah blah fucking blah. No one cares.

    Movie was 3 hours of kind of OK meh. Probably skip

    1. There are two ways to improve the Joker movie.
      1) Eliminate all Bruce Wayne references.
      2) Make it about a guys decent into madness instead of the Joker origin. Aka eliminate all the Batman references.

      It's a great psychological thriller without Batman/Joker.

      1. Same for Batman. Remove all the Batman references, and its a improved crime noir.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.