Jump to content
Acgott

The Batman is Robert Pattinson

Recommended Posts

Freeze can't be that tainted. All it would take is to pull back 25% on what needs to happen. Hell, the liberal portion of the audience would die of masturbatory induced dehydration if the reason he had to freeze his wife was that he couldn't afford her medication, and his inability to afford the 10k per pill costs was what drove him to start robbing banks in the first place. That motivation alone starts you at 3 stars in most of the biggest professional review places. Just don't lament the loss of Obamacare by name and you won't piss off anybody on the conservative side either. Sky high prices on medical treatments is a universally lamented problem.

Freeze as the out of control maniac trying to freeze everything for the sake of freezing everything and making ice based puns has never been the best version of that character.

Freeze as the reluctant villain just trying to save his wife in an unjust world, facing off against Batman, the rich boy hero with a religious zealotry, is what makes the entire dichotomy of the story worth telling in the first place. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Freeze can’t be anymore tainted than Bane was. Just get a good actor and write him correctly and all will be forgiven.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Freeze is Batmans most sympathetic rogue.   One of the smartest as well.  He would be great if done properly.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, FourThreeMafia said:

Freeze is Batmans most sympathetic rogue.   One of the smartest as well.  He would be great if done properly.   

Has anyone read Tom King's Cold Days arc? Its fantastic and illustrates this point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, FourThreeMafia said:

Freeze is Batmans most sympathetic rogue.   One of the smartest as well.  He would be great if done properly.   

and no puns or it all falls apart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/31/2019 at 3:27 PM, FourThreeMafia said:

While I'm willing to give him a chance, I'm not optimistic.  Not even so much because of RP, but there is just no real reason to be.

WB's indecisiveness on what to do with his Batman surely isn't helping matters. First they said The Batman trilogy would be a prequel to BvS, showing a younger Batfleck (now played by a different actor) in the years leading up to it and now, they're saying it might not be connected at all and be its own thing, which defeats the whole purpose of casting an elderly Batman in the first place. Why go for the seasoned vet angle of TDKR when they're not even gonna delve into his younger years fighting crime?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have they said anything about the movie outside of who is involved?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, KManX89 said:

WB's indecisiveness on what to do with his Batman surely isn't helping matters. First they said The Batman trilogy would be a prequel to BvS, showing a younger Batfleck (now played by a different actor) in the years leading up to it and now, they're saying it might not be connected at all and be its own thing, which defeats the whole purpose of casting an elderly Batman in the first place. Why go for the seasoned vet angle of TDKR when they're not even gonna delve into his younger years fighting crime?

Who ever confirmed this? Because I dont believe it was ever said, just speculated on with some "sources" being used but never even quoted. Matt Reeves has never said this, Ben Affleck has never said this about Reeves movie, and no one from WB/DC ever actually said this.

This was an assumption, a want, from many people once Affleck was taken off of it as writer/director. But as far back as 2017 it was also being rumored to not be a prequel or a soft reboot of this Batfleck character, that it was something completely different, but was dismissed by many because "it had to be part of the DCEU!!". Reeves flat out confirmed in 2018 that it wasnt connected, but wouldnt comment of Afflecks status, because he is a professional and you dont comment on another mans job. Plus Im sure WB was still trying to (dumbly) see if they could squeeze one more film out of The Batfleck.

We have heard every crazy asinine rumor and thought leaked out of everything WB/DC over the last handful of years, except for this Batman movie. Reeves seems to be completely in control of this thing, and has kept everything close to the vest. Right now, that alone makes me very confident in this project. And that isnt even getting into the ideas he has shared, and the casting we have gotten, all have been encouraging.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, seminoles1 said:

Have they said anything about the movie outside of who is involved?

There is some good stuff out there in interviews with Reeves, but what it comes down to at this point is that these movies will be of the Noir Detective vein when it comes to film influences. That we would dig into the "Wolds Greatest Detective" moniker that Batman has always been known for in the comics, but we have rarely seen on film. And that they would be setting a higher bar than the "bullet reconstruction" scene in TDK as really the only detecting that the Nolan films give us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, StLunatic88 said:

Who ever confirmed this? Because I dont believe it was ever said, just speculated on with some "sources" being used but never even quoted. Matt Reeves has never said this, Ben Affleck has never said this about Reeves movie, and no one from WB/DC ever actually said this.

This was an assumption, a want, from many people once Affleck was taken off of it as writer/director. But as far back as 2017 it was also being rumored to not be a prequel or a soft reboot of this Batfleck character, that it was something completely different, but was dismissed by many because "it had to be part of the DCEU!!". Reeves flat out confirmed in 2018 that it wasnt connected, but wouldnt comment of Afflecks status, because he is a professional and you dont comment on another mans job. Plus Im sure WB was still trying to (dumbly) see if they could squeeze one more film out of The Batfleck.

We have heard every crazy asinine rumor and thought leaked out of everything WB/DC over the last handful of years, except for this Batman movie. Reeves seems to be completely in control of this thing, and has kept everything close to the vest. Right now, that alone makes me very confident in this project. And that isnt even getting into the ideas he has shared, and the casting we have gotten, all have been encouraging.

 

So no backstory on the seasoned vet Batfleck was the plan all along?

Still a stupid idea. Then again, that's kinda par for the course with WB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, KManX89 said:

So no backstory on the seasoned vet Batfleck was the plan all along?

Still a stupid idea. Then again, that's kinda par for the course with WB.

First of all; Im sure the plan was VERY different when we were getting the Affleck written/directed movie(s). But that was abandoned long ago

Secondly; Why do we need a backstory for that Batman? We all know who he is, we all know his backstory. He is one of the most iconic figures (and most robust backgrounds) in the entire world

All anyone started to complain about around 2015 was "not another origin story" and this Batman just being dropped into this Film universe as an already established character was one of the most refreshing things about him. We understood he was at a breaking point, just by some comments made to Alfred, a messed up Robin suit, a heavily drinking/manwhoring Bruce Wayne. It was all there, and would have been just as effective (probably more) if it was explored in real time, instead of going back into his past. There are plenty of ways to do it, but not having it spoon fed to us was something that was different, and pretty exciting the first time you saw BvS.

 

For some reason, many here and throughout the internet are having a hard time letting go of the Batfleck/DCEU version in their minds at this point, especially for as much as everyone says they hate the DCEU. They are trying to make a clean break, separate this Batman from the rest, and just give us what we want, a new fresh take with no strings attached to what we dont like, so why are we fighting it? They tried to bury the idea of the DCEU, they have said they are not focusing on making connective movies to build up to another team up, but at this point we wot accept it. Maybe it will be different once we actually see Pattinson in the Cape and Cowl? Is that the stimulus that is needed? Not sure, but I hope something does, because every conversation in here somehow immediately reverts back to BvS or JL. 

Edited by StLunatic88

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/11/2019 at 9:13 AM, StLunatic88 said:

Secondly; Why do we need a backstory for that Batman? We all know who he is, we all know his backstory. He is one of the most iconic figures (and most robust backgrounds) in the entire world

exactly 

its just like Spiderman. We didnt need to see Uncle Ben dying in every damned reboot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Malfatron said:

exactly 

its just like Spiderman. We didnt need to see Uncle Ben dying in every damned reboot

I definitely agree with this. But the fact that Robin was dead and presumably Jason Todd was Joker was inexcusable. That is something that absolutely should have been covered in movies prior.

With Pattinson's Batman, I want/expect a rookie-ish Batman that's doing more investigating than beating up random bad guys. I expect they'll likely talk about or hint at his parents murder, but I really don't want/expect to see it happen for the millionth time in fourteen years. However, if there's more that we should know than that (ie Robin's dead, Jason Todd, etc), they better absolutely show it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, kingseanjohn said:

I definitely agree with this. But the fact that Robin was dead and presumably Jason Todd was Joker was inexcusable. That is something that absolutely should have been covered in movies prior.

With Pattinson's Batman, I want/expect a rookie-ish Batman that's doing more investigating than beating up random bad guys. I expect they'll likely talk about or hint at his parents murder, but I really don't want/expect to see it happen for the millionth time in fourteen years. However, if there's more that we should know than that (ie Robin's dead, Jason Todd, etc), they better absolutely show it.

I definitely want this to be pre-Robin, with Pattinson being young enough to where that's a possibility in the future, but it shouldn't be a necessity either.  If they want to work to that, earn it and let it payoff years down the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, THE DUKE said:

I definitely want this to be pre-Robin, with Pattinson being young enough to where that's a possibility in the future, but it shouldn't be a necessity either.  If they want to work to that, earn it and let it payoff years down the line.

They could have it where, in the first movie, D.  Grayson is living with Bruce, but doesn't know he is Batman yet, and maybe in a post credit scene, he finds out....which would set things up for the sequel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×