'The Batman' director Matt Reeves: I was obsessed with Batman when I was a kid

By

·

April 30, 2017

The Batman director Matt Reeves spoke to Los Angeles Daily News about his upcoming movie War for the Planet of the Apes. Naturally he was asked about his Batman project that was recently announced. Reeves said it's still too early to say exactly what his take on the Dark Knight will be, but one thing is for sure -- he's a life long fan!

“It’s a strange thing to be involved in the two franchises which were the two that I was connected to most as a child,” Reeves said. “I just was obsessed with Batman when I was a kid. What I find so interesting about him as a character is that, as far a superhero goes, he’s not superhuman, he is a person. And he is a tortured soul who is grappling with his past and trying to find a way to be in a world that has a lot that’s wrong with it and trying to find a way to reconcile all of that.

“That is a really powerful character, in the same way that Caesar is such a powerful character.”

War for the Planet of the Apes hits theaters on July 14th. I have a feeling we'll be hearing more from Reeves about The Batman later this summer.

SOURCE: Los Angeles Daily News

This is an archive of Batman-News.com from 2010 to 2025. For the latest news, check out BatmanNews.com

146 comments

Seb
April 30, 2017
Can't wait for this film! WB has been doing really well lately with their choice of (potential) directors.
1. Reverse_Flash
  April 30, 2017
  Well they had a rough start.
  1. Seb
    April 30, 2017
    No kidding... WB was in dire need of a wake up call.
2. Orlando Furioso
  April 30, 2017
  I want to hear a really great choice for The Flash.
  1. Seb
    April 30, 2017
    Robert Zemeckis is rumored to be in talks. Not a bad choice at all.
TGI Fridays
April 30, 2017
Cool!
Jesse Hernandez
April 30, 2017
Give us the Batman movie that we deserve
1. residentgrigo
  April 30, 2017
  But not the one we need right now?
  1. Batsy
    April 30, 2017
    That would be another Batman and Robin. Because that's what most people deserve with their bitching about tone, how it's not family-friendly and all that crap.
    1. Johnathon
      April 30, 2017
      Tone wasn't the damn issue. The Dark Knight which was really dark is one the most beloved comic book movies and the first comic book movie to make over a billion. Look at Logan, really dark, rated R and still made over 600M. So enough of that flawed argument already.
      1. Schuyler Finley
        May 1, 2017
        It was an issue. People were complaining about how bleak and hopeless the film felt and looked. People changed their tune about it however when Snyder's wife called them out on it. People complained that both BvS and MoS were "too dark" for Superman.
      2. Johnathon
        May 4, 2017
        Oh please, you find one tiny complaint and then you think that is what majority thinks as well. Evidence by the reaction you have by that little unknown website complaining about the lack of marketing for WW and now you act as if that website represents what the majority thinks.
        Then that doesn't even include the fact that you take the complaint out of context. Be quiet.
      3. Schuyler Finley
        May 4, 2017
        Even though I read numerous reviews and comments that complained about the tone?
        And apparently you didn't even read my comment about "that little unknown website" because I was complaining that THEY, not the majority, were complaining about the lack of advertisement even though Chris has been posting tv spots and pictures for days now.
IamTheOneWhoKnocks
April 30, 2017
Comparing Batman to Caesar, you sir have my respect. Now I really can't wait for that Batman solo movie!
1. residentgrigo
  April 30, 2017
  https://www.youtube.com/wat...
Sense
April 30, 2017
Excellent
El Maybe
April 30, 2017
I love to hear this!!! Such a great director with a great understanding of the character, I don't think we can go wrong with that... I'm also really happy to see WB being more exacting in regards to DCEU's future directors, it was about damn time.
krampe1995
April 30, 2017
we all are, thats why we´re here
residentgrigo
April 30, 2017
This crossover is currently being published by DC:
http://www.newsarama.com/im...
residentgrigo
April 30, 2017
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice - Tragedy Through Character A Complete Analysis:
https://www.youtube.com/wat...
Well argued, but Bats only manslaughtered, not murdered. I would also go so far to say that the "real" Batman was only featured in the opening scene and at Kent´s funeral. iamthatroby´s video essays are all great. He has ones on Snyder´s Watchmen and Singer´s first X-men film too:
https://www.youtube.com/wat...
https://www.youtube.com/wat...
1. Shane
  April 30, 2017
  You are seriously going to call this manslaughter? He was literally shooting at the guy and then drove THROUGH the vehicle.
  https://www.youtube.com/wat...
  1. OGmacrazy
    April 30, 2017
    I doubt he even knows the difference between the two.
    1. Shane
      April 30, 2017
      Probably one of those people that blame the gun and not the person.
  2. residentgrigo
    April 30, 2017
    Murder: "The unlawful killing of another human being without justification or excuse."
    http://legal-dictionary.the...
    Manslaughter: "The unjustifiable, inexcusable, and intentional killing of a human being without deliberation, premeditation, and malice. The unlawful killing of a human being without any deliberation, which may be involuntary, in the commission of a lawful act without due caution and circumspection."
    http://legal-dictionary.the...
    I guess Nolan´s Batman was a murderer too... Burton´s certainly was, due to revenge as a motive.
    1. Shane
      April 30, 2017
      Yeah it's murder.
      1. residentgrigo
        April 30, 2017
        You neither watched the video, nor did you read a lot of comics (as his first appearance, or even Scott Snyder´s work). Him turning into a villain, someone he swore to fight against, was literally THE point of his -Frank Miller approved- character arc in the film.
      2. Shane
        April 30, 2017
        Yeah FIRST APPEARANCE, how many decades have passed with this new rule? It's no longer part of the character.
        Aquaman was a racist in his early days, should we go and make him a racist in his live action movie since you know, he was like that in the early comics...
      3. residentgrigo
        April 30, 2017
        Miller´s Batman burned cops alive in All Star, beheaded Dick Grayson and he literally praised Snyder´s work, to return to film. The first time he praised a Batman film!
        Bonus points for not getting his anti-gun speech in DRK either. The one where he indoctrinates an army of murderous teens to fight as his child-soldiers against the US military. No, Miller´s Batman ain´t a hero either.
        I do disagree with DKR being fascist but i see the point it´s critics make.
      4. Shane
        April 30, 2017
        Where did I say he was? His core rule was still there even when he was broken, also we are talking about the DKR, fuck Miller for the garbage he did in his other books.
      5. OGmacrazy
        April 30, 2017
        Prepare yourself to be blocked by him and never again have a reply from his part. He has a tendency of blocking users that challenge his point of view...
        Yup, that pathetic.
      6. residentgrigo
        April 30, 2017
        I have read EVERY Batman, Tec, Shadow of the Bat and so on comic since December 1969. Most spin-offs and the first few Golden Age years too.
        His last (seemingly) mortal strike was in 2017 against KGbeast but i present this gem instead:
        http://i.imgur.com/WmBuIQJ.jpg
        He castrated a man with his own gun and left him to bleed out in "Jekyll and Hyde".
      7. Shane
        April 30, 2017
        That's not even close to killing
      8. residentgrigo
        April 30, 2017
        Just before a ADITF:
        http://comicsalliance.com/f...
      9. Shane
        April 30, 2017
        Which book and how old?
      10. residentgrigo
        April 30, 2017
        I literally abbreviate the followup storyline´s name above. You know, one of THE Batman stories of all time. Go on detective (this is hint too), the issue number starts a 5. You apparently read all issues featuring Batman that were published after all...
      11. Shane
        April 30, 2017
        Stop editing your damn comments so much constantly. FYI that doesn't mean he is dead and second that is actually self defense. Little to no time to react with little options, whereas in the video above, he had plenty of other options and enough time to execute.
      12. Billy Batson
        April 30, 2017
        Well now you got me wanting to read that story. It happened before A Death in the Family..... I can't place the artist but it's not Jim Aparo.......
      13. residentgrigo
        April 30, 2017
        "The Doomsday Book" from, Tec 572. Mike W. Barr´s Batman was nearly as dark as Jim Starlin´s. Both Post Crisis runs aged well, especially if consider how crappy the previous Doug Moench stuff was. His endless bi-weekly run was a tough sit...
      14. Billy Batson
        April 30, 2017
        I gotta check to see if I got that one. And speaking of Starlin, I reread The Cult not too long ago, and damn was that dark. Cool story though.
      15. residentgrigo
        April 30, 2017
        Dat art! RIP Bernie Wrightson:
        http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-z...
      16. Blockhead Jr.
        April 30, 2017
        I remember these. Makes me wish this site was more civil and we could talk Batman.
      17. Jack Thorne
        May 1, 2017
        This is from Detective Comics 572, and is often mistaken as being canon when in fact it's likely to be non-canon.
        Firstly, it was a special for the 50th anniversary of Detective Comics. Secondly, Batman and Robin meet Sherlock Homes, who after 100 years, is alive and well. Third, it's out of continuity because it's before Miller's Year: One reboot. And fourth, it's written by Barr; a lot of his work is out of continuity or elseworld, like Year Two, Son of the Demon, and In Darkest Knight.
        Therefore, everything points to this being a non-canon special anniversary comicbook.
      18. Jack Thorne
        May 1, 2017
        "I have read EVERY Batman, Tec, Shadow of the Bat and so on comic since December 1969. Most spin-offs and the first few Golden Age years too."
        So how many in those tens of thousands of comicbooks you've read does Batman murder, and in how many does he categorically rebuke murder, by words or by deeds?
        You don't need to have read all those comicbooks to know the latter will dwarf the former category to the point it becomes statistically insignificant.
      19. Shane
        April 30, 2017
        There is nothing wrong with turning him into the villain, he still wouldn't kill and that is what Frank Miller knew as well in the TDKR
        http://acephalous.typepad.c...
      20. Edgar Rivas
        April 30, 2017
        Understand the character portrayal, motivation and perspective within the film. My god you are dense.
    2. Jack Thorne
      May 1, 2017
      "intentional killing of a human being without deliberation, premeditation, and malice".
      It's quite clear what Batman's intent is when he's riddling endless numbers of high caliber bullets into an array of vehicles carrying thugs - both in the chase scene and later outside the warehouse with the Batwing. It's nonsense to think that Batman was riddling the vehicles with the intent NOT to kill the thugs. Also, his vehicles are also shown to be impervious to attack, or can easily counter-measure.
      Therefore, his kills are unjustifiable, and hold 'malice aforethought'. Therefore, he's a murderer.
      1. Edgar Rivas
        May 1, 2017
        I think it's quite clear that this Bruce doesn't uphold 'no-kill' code just recently after the arrival of Superman due to powerlessness and his obsession to his legacy. It's a losing battle to defend Batman's killing at this point, it certainly isn't a Batman, more like a fallen Bruce.
        It wouldn't make sense had the writers decided to go with Batman that still upholds the code to go up against Superman, which saves lives by his own statement at Lex's house and a couple of newspaper outlet at Wallace's apartment. Thus, proving that this Batman is hypocrite and has a very flawed obsession. Bruce isn't in the wrong though, imagine our world invaded by an alien, even though 'it' acts good but you don't really know 'it' agenda.
        "Well, you can in TKDR."
        TDKR is set in a world set in nuclear apocalypse where two giants still battling which differs from where the DCEU and on top of that, both of these heroes are already seasoned, instead of our Man of Steel who had just arrived.
      2. Jack Thorne
        May 1, 2017
        I've been here before with those that maintain what he did was morally permissible. I've never heard a convincing argument, even after one year. I'm aware of the reasons the film gave as to why Batman decided to break his no murder policy. My point is this was an unjustified contrivance which undermined the core of Batman.
        I don't understand your points in the second and third paragraph, but the no murder policy (or no kill in the comicbooks) is a redline for Batman -it's seminal to understanding him and how he came to be. He breaks the law, yes, but he's sanctioned by the ultimate law giver in the city to uphold order. The moment he murders he breaks that legitimacy and becomes an outlaw. There's no going back from murdering. It's final, no matter how many times he pontificates over the grave of Superman that "men are still good".
        There are other reasons too, such as becoming as bad as the people he's trying to stop, the internalization of his abuser, and the legitimization of the act that brought him into existence, but I can flesh them out later.
      3. Edgar Rivas
        May 1, 2017
        Above picture summarise my thoughts well. Oh well..
      4. Edgar Rivas
        May 1, 2017
        https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
      5. Jack Thorne
        May 2, 2017
        In order for us to believe that Batman would want to fight and kill Superman, we need him “darken and fallen” – I understand that line of reasoning. What I’m saying though is that is not a justifiable premise for Batman because it fundamentally undermines the very core concept of Batman – he does not murder, it's a redline for him. In order to fit a story about him intending to kill Superman, they screwed up the character.
        Incidentally, you didn’t need to show Batman murder thugs to show he was willing to murder Superman – that’s a false syllogism. In fact, I think you could’ve easily shown Batman becoming more reckless or bloodthirsty without murdering, and still wanting to kill Superman. Afterall, it’s not like Batman is bound by laws and jurisdiction for killing an alien as he is for killing a human being. Therefore, murdering thugs was not necessary either way.
        You’re right, I have major problems with the chase and Batwing scene. You explain the conditions that Bruce was suffering beforehand as an explanation for him murdering. But murder is murder. The rage, paranoia and mental state are moot points (actually, Bruce's psychology never changes, he's always wanting to kill Superman), the fact of the matter is he shot up vehicles with the explicit intent to kill (in legal terms, ‘malice aforethought’). He also used indiscriminate and grotesque force which often shows murder rather than manslaughter. Finally, his life was not in danger (as evidence by the virtual invulnerability of his Batmobile and Batwing), which means it was not in self-defence, and therefore was not justified. Therefore, he committed unlawful murder.
        Bruce has already gone to the point of no return, because although he did not kill Superman, he DID murder people. Maybe this wouldn’t be so bad if there was some poetic justice in the film, like him sacrificing himself to destroy Doomsday. But instead, we get him standing over the grave of an innocent man he hounded for 18 months pontificating that men are still good, even though he fails to take responsibility for what he’s done.
  3. Jac
    April 30, 2017
    The guy was shooting at him with a machine gun first. So honestly this would actually be justifiable homicide aka self defense. Not murder. Batman returned fire to the turret, which the guy happened to be operating.
    1. Shane
      April 30, 2017
      Batman will never kill in self defense or in any type of situation for that matter, you are literally throwing out Batman's core rule for the sake of a cool action scene.
      1. residentgrigo
        April 30, 2017
        https://wtfdccomics.files.w...
        http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-U...
        http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-i...
        And THE classic, to keep it to just Miller:
        http://legendsrevealed.com/...
        Good luck walking that caliber thought the chest off... and he tricked another mutant into killing his partner 1 page before, if you somehow insist that the girl lived.
      2. OGmacrazy
        April 30, 2017
        You know you're reaching for the fucking stars when you use All Star Batman and Robin as an example in your favor, one of the worst, most reviled Batman comic books in recent memory, probably of all time. I love The Dark Knight Returns, but All Star? Sorry, but no. You should have really just used Returns... Which didn't even help your argument since:
        a) it was never specified that he actually killed the guy there;
        b) it wasn't in self defense, it was the only window he had to save the helpless kid.
      3. Jac
        April 30, 2017
        Batman kills people all the time, in every type of media. He just doesn't execute people (defeat them and then kill them.) He has killed somebody in almost every Batman film, he's killed people in the animated universe, he's killed people in the comics, he does it all the time. The only mistake Snyder made was he had people die from interactions with Batman too often in this film. If he only had it happen a couple times instead of several times, nobody would have even noticed or said anything about it, just like in all the other films.
      4. residentgrigo
        April 30, 2017
        Batman & Robin is the sole life action Batman film (outside of Suicide Squad) without kills by him. Even Batman 1966 has ONE.
        Synder pointing out Batman´s likely carnage was deliberate though. His criticism against how Hollywood action films work on a moral level.
        The video essay on his Watchmen above features a topical interview by him.
      5. Billy Batson
        April 30, 2017
        Batman and Robin saw Batman kill his own movie career. At least temporarily.
      6. dugzino
        April 30, 2017
        Well that was lots of fun. It's fun to see ppl getting shut by showing them the actual materials. Lots of people are missguided by the movies. Just watch all those hating Cavill because he's not like Reeve, or because he's like the Supes from the books. People hating on Batfleck because, unlike Batbale, he killed.
        Newflash, Batman has killed in the comics. And residentgrigo just proved it, over and over again. People should get out of their tight butts.
        BTW, I still hope Snyder gets to do more than the 2 JLs.
      7. residentgrigo
        April 30, 2017
        The first 2 Reeves film aren´t crazy different from Post Crisis Cav-El BUT having 2 directors for the second film (the "replacement" is a slapstick comedy man!), while leaving the first somewhat unfinished on filming, messed with the overall vision.
        I want Snyder gone off JLA and the Trinity (his thumb print on WW looks immense) after JLA 2 but he should be left to do "his" finale, if JLA makes 900+ mil. DC has enough properties for him to play with outside the big guns. Whole Vertigo lines, Omac, the Akira rights,...
      8. TGI Fridays
        April 30, 2017
        Bale killed Two-Face
      9. OGmacrazy
        May 1, 2017
        With no other resources and not in a purposeful manner. He simply had to protect the kid, after being shot, and could only push him out of the way, when the only way to go was a very big fall. It's not shooting down a car with hundreds of high-caliber bullets until the car is nothing but a fireball and then running over what remains of it.
      10. Trevor Philips
        April 30, 2017
        He didn't kill The Joker.
      11. Jack Thorne
        May 1, 2017
        Batman in TDKT killed, while Batfleck murdered.
        Yes, Batman has killed in the comics - a handful of times out tens of thousands of comics since 1939. Many of them are daft murders, like in the first issue, where the character was still being ironed out. For every one kill in the comicbooks one can point to dozens of examples where he go against killing - by deeds or by words.
        People who continue to think a handful of murders can wipe out what is now perceived to be a redline for in the Modern Age should remove their heads out of their own asses and question themselves if they're really Batman fans.
      12. jrvc
        April 30, 2017
        well it only happened a couple of times actually (shooting from batmobile and from batwing)
      13. Trevor Philips
        April 30, 2017
        Then why didn't he killed The Joker for all the bullshit he caused?
        After what happened to Jason Todd and Barbara Gordon, Joker should have been fucking dead.
      14. Edgar Rivas
        April 30, 2017
        Because only with Superman existence that he truly felt powerless.
        Joker killing only adds up to his brutality. Superman is his breaking point.
      15. Trevor Philips
        May 1, 2017
        Pretty sure he would have solved half of Gotham's problems.
      16. Edgar Rivas
        May 1, 2017
        Well, didn't Joker has all the grills in the world? Brutality doesn't solve anything. And he said it himself.
        'Criminals are like weed"
        Which true in a sense. It draws similarities with Marlo in the WIRE. You can also draw similarities with U.S.A since war of terror. Certainly it spikes up huh since early 2000s?
    2. OGmacrazy
      April 30, 2017
      Which only happened after Batman threw himself at them, and destroyed two cars previously, with much more potent firepower and technology. Sorry, but this was absolutely murder. He put himself in that situation, when in the actual movie itself, he didn't even need to, since he had already put a tracker on them (but that's discussing the movie's bad writing, and we'll be here 'till tomorrow if we go down this rabbit hole).
      Actually, I just realized... They're the ones acting in self-defense... Jesus fuck, Snyder's more hilarious the more you analyze his films. I hope he does a comedy next. An intentional one, that is!
      1. Batman93
        April 30, 2017
        Well, I take the tracker thing like a plan b type of thing, actually. The DCEU has some issues with the writting so far (*ahem*, jonathan kent and the tornado *ahem*), but that's not one of those.
        And about the whole batman killing people, it shocked me at first, but I get what snyder wanted to show: a washed up batman that has been doing the same thing for far too long without results. They're definetly gonna adress all the killings in the next movies.
      2. OGmacrazy
        April 30, 2017
        plan b? It should be plan A. It should be a smart person's plan all along. Covert, tactical and stealthy. It really was just an excuse for Zack Snyder to have an action scene featuring the Batmobile and unnecessary slo-mo. That's really it.
        Can't wait for Batman to never be an individual with the right to contest another hero's methods because he has killed before, therefore he really won't have any kind of say in the matter, morally speaking.
      3. attentionisattention
        May 1, 2017
        We can't know for sure what is easier for Batman (stealth or head on) at this point in his career. But setting up back up plans from the start I thought was a *very* Batman thing to do. We all know how he is with contingency plans. Can't intercept in transit? Slap on a tracker just in case. It's either breaking into a facility with the best security money can buy and dodging gunfire from automatic weapons vs. chasing a regular ass truck in a state-of-the-art vehicle that you're almost invincible in. Which one seems riskier/easier? I would've preferred to see a stealth mission, but I don't think the plan was irrational.
      4. Batman93
        May 1, 2017
        Batman's methods usually serve one purpose: sending a message. He wants Luthor to know who took the kryptonite, cause at that point he knows that he's the guy he's been tracking down. It's just like the dinner scene in year one. He didn't have to go to that house, break into the room (by tearing down the wall, btw) and let them see him. It was just to let them know they're not safe.
        Also, as I said, this batman has run out of fucks to give, so he just want to let the bad guys know that Gotham is his city and that they can't get away from him there, but he also wants the kryptonite, hence the tracker device.
      5. OGmacrazy
        May 1, 2017
        Didn't Luthor know it was him by:
        a) leaving a batarang in the place of the kryptonite;
        b) security cameras?
      6. Batman93
        May 1, 2017
        He knew by those ways when batman stole the kryptonite at lexcorp, which was AFTER the chase in Gotham docks. If Supes wouldn't showed up that time, batman would have taken the cargo with all the ruckus, probably letting someone go so he would tell luthor what happen.
        Let's not forget he already followed that MO in BvS previously, when he brands the thug in the abandoned building (and that man knew something about Luthor/KGBeast, so he was sending a message even there).
      7. TGI Fridays
        April 30, 2017
        They would have shot at him regardless of what he did because he's Batman!
      8. Edgar Rivas
        April 30, 2017
        I'm sorry, you're just too stupid to analyze the film lol!
        Batman is obsessed with killing Superman. Retrieving the kryptonite would surely his no.1 priority, by your logic, "let's wait another day maybe Superman won't turn rogue the next day".
        And they DID shot at him FIRST. If you can't properly remember the film then stop it with the bullshit.
        Oh and please point out any writing flaws, I would gladly answer it even though in the end you would disagree it. At least, it will enlighten few more people.
      9. OGmacrazy
        May 1, 2017
        Yes, because that logic is sound right?
        "The dude is at least 30 years old, hasn't turned rogue yet, but I just can't wait one more day, because everything will change in one day, even if he's been saving people publicly for over a year now"
        Sorry, but if you want to call others dumb, please try not to employ such forced and shitty logic, It just blows up in your face, big time. Jesus christ, pointing out writing flaws? Ok, just one, to humour you: please, explain to me the point of Luthor blowing up Superman's court hearing. I can't wait, buddy.
      10. Edgar Rivas
        May 1, 2017
        Oh wow, you can't figure that out? My god you are such a genius, did you watch the film? Did you see the repercussion after the capital bombing? His plan is to take away Superman's speech lol and diminish his confidence.
        Did you really think Lex would let Superman speaks out about his action, his view on the world and where does his stand on this world? It would've backfired him had he not bomb the capitol. By taking that speech away, Lex creates mass confusion among the public and it certainly sparks the media narrative into condemning Superman as you can see on the film. I mean why a powerful being like Superman couldn't save the people in there? And not, not everybody knows Superman weakness, which is why the Star Labs gal questioned the input of LEAD material.
        And add to that, it certainly ties up his loose end. Lex knew Katrina would eventually turned against him and informed Senator Finch, which is why he already sent goons prior to Capitol Bombing sequence. And then there's Mercy, which is a bit cruel to be honest.
      11. OGmacrazy
        May 1, 2017
        And therefore add more crimes to his already extensive list when he inevitably gets caught in the end (yes, because no matter how Lex plans things out, according to his brillant plan, he either gets caught because he thought putting two heroes against one another would actually work instead of them buddying together, which they did, or he gets killed because he stupidly created Doomsday and let him out. Either way, he has no future). Sorry, but making excuses and just seeing what the movie wants you to see doesn't make you or the movie smart. My advice: take those goggles off and maybe see the film as a film, and not through a rose tainted glass.
        That bombing had no point, whatsoever. It was just to add to the movie's already beaten to death theme of "superman is tormented and is questioning his place in this world". No criminal with an IQ over 70 will add more culpability and crimes to his already extensive list if he can avoid it, especially such a stupidly public crime (not to mention he had fucking reserved spot in the hearing, and then wasn't there, which only makes him a further suspect, regardless of what he has done in the past). If you use your brain, this movie's "intelligent" writing becomes dumb as fuck, plain and simple. By that logic you used there, Lex is fucked either way, since he Superman is still saving people, hated or not. That alone serves to show that he is indeed good, and then he even saved people after the bombing, which completely destroys your argument, because actions speak louder than words, brother.
      12. Edgar Rivas
        May 1, 2017
        I just wrote a whole paragraph and it disappears again.
        In summary, we could've see his contingency regarding the capital bombing had he not learn about the cosmic being. After the capital, it's more of a rushed plan, I mean the guy straight up fronts Superman by kidnapping his mother and girlfriend, it's surely not the Lex we know that we followed from the get-go to capital bombing. But I guess it will fall on plot hole and writing error according to your logic.
      13. Edgar Rivas
        May 1, 2017
        https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
2. Kerk Lastnameless
  April 30, 2017
  Another presumptuous cunt telling people that they are the problem, and right off the gate. Fuck him.
  1. Edgar Rivas
    April 30, 2017
    It is the audience's fault though to pre-determined the characters of the movie and disagree with the movie because of it.
    1. Kerk Lastnameless
      May 1, 2017
      No, it's the director's fault to create a movie that disagrees with the audience.
      1. Edgar Rivas
        May 1, 2017
        What a childish response. So I guess that every movie needs to be in the same vision as the audience or as exact as how the comic book portrays? Or you know, let's make another Nolan's Batman? We wouldn't get Nolan's Batman by your logic.
      2. Kerk Lastnameless
        May 1, 2017
        You don't know what you're talking about. Nolan got Batman right. To the note. And DCEU was intended as a cinematic representation of the comics. That includes getting the characters in accordance with the comics.
      3. Edgar Rivas
        May 1, 2017
        Well, there's plenty of portrayal in the comic book and resident pointed out that there's a Batman that kills? We get Lex 'Birthright' but yet people still complained? The Batman's character in DCEU is right in a sense, it's just an arc, you'll see it at JL.
      4. Kerk Lastnameless
        May 1, 2017
        Uh yes, that again...And Superman will FINALLY inspire hope. I shouldn't have to wait 6 years and watch 9 hours worth of movies for my favorite character to finally become what he was supposed to be from the get go. This is not a Netflix TV show, you don't get to binge watch.
      5. Edgar Rivas
        May 1, 2017
        lol, that's your problem then. I'm binge on DCEU as it dares to challenge the iteration and the characters to the limits. I get it though, it's not like you know the year of your death.
      6. Azrael
        May 1, 2017
        " for my favorite character to finally become what he was supposed from the get go"
        Why would you instantly desire a fully idealized Superman in a single film as oppose to simply allowing him to be molded over the course of the DCEU? That's not remotely interesting. Observing what shapes Superman into a beacon of hope is far more compelling. The journey should be the interesting part, not the destination.
      7. Kerk Lastnameless
        May 1, 2017
        Not instantly. But by the end of Mos, for sure. Spiderman did not take 3 movies to take his uncle's lesson to heart, and neither should Sups.
      8. Azrael
        May 1, 2017
        So evidently you want things done instantaneously. Arcs can be done within a single film or across multiple films. It's not a rule that every character has to be completely fleshed out in the very first outing. Especially if you're world building a cinematic universe. And not all writers will approach two fairly different heroes the same either, Spider-Man is a totally different kind of character from Supes. The concluding moments of Mos was clearly the beginning of Supes journey as a hero that will eventually inspire hope. BvS deals with how a divided world views Superman's existence and the ramifications of the Kryptonian invasion, which is settled at the end of the film.
      9. Kerk Lastnameless
        May 1, 2017
        Eh...My very first sentence was "not instantly." Do you read what you reply to? 2 hours is more than enough for that essential trait to develop.
      10. Azrael
        May 1, 2017
        "Do you read what you reply to?"
        That's probably something you'd be better off asking yourself, but I digress. Snide response aside.....Clearly you wanted a fully idealized version of Supes in the first outing.
      11. Kerk Lastnameless
        May 1, 2017
        Yeah. And so did everyone else. 2 hours is more than enough to do that. But I was even willing to let MoS slide as an origin story. I thought to myself, "Ok, fine, it's his origin. Surely, in BvS I'll see him become his true self." But that did not happen.
3. OGmacrazy
  April 30, 2017
  Not even Saul Goodman could stretch it that far!
  This guy is comedy gold.
4. Kerk Lastnameless
  April 30, 2017
  Lol, self-defense on their part cause he attacked first.
5. Joker
  April 30, 2017
  Yea....uhh why did Batman attack them to begin with? To gain a weapon to kill Superman, one hell of a hero, jesus christ.
  1. Kerk Lastnameless
    April 30, 2017
    I think nobody calls him that anymore. Instead, they shifted to the "shot god." Well, great, let's find him a job taking family photos on the entrance to the San Diego Zoo or something. I'm sure families will love those in black&white.
  2. Edgar Rivas
    May 1, 2017
    I'll try to explain this as simple as possible as my 3+ paragraphs disappear. Batman in the movie is not a HERO. He is a KILLER and a hypocrite because he felt POWERLESS. He faces a god-like alien power as opposed to mere men he encountered before and the little girl tragedy at Black Zero certainly plays a part. Through POWERLESSNESS, he sees Supes as a threat to mankind. It'll be monumental for him to kill Superman as it'll make him the protector of the earth, it debunks cosmicism and prove humanity can exceed more, and more of the same, share Lex's view "We don't have to depend on the kindness of an alien". Both deemed hypocrite though because in the end Superman is GOOD.
    The chase sequence is a character action driven one, in my opinion, as we see how house of Wayne has fallen due to Bruce's obsession with his legacy. His traits as careful planner diminishes and the death goons acts as a proof to his recklessness. The knightmare sequence reinforces the notion that he must take down Superman QUICKLY instead of playing the waiting-game. Ah, and lastly, Superman took off as it has no reason there other than Batman. Wouldn't be hypocrite if he apprehends those "goons" without any context whatsoever? He doesn't want to fall under Judge, Jury, Executioner type.
    1. Edgar Rivas
      May 1, 2017
      lol, another syndrome of "Not muh Batman."
      Again, if you want to criticize the movie, move beyond past your own ideas of the character. Criticize the movie's portrayal of the character, whether it make sense for him to act that way, consistency, and his overall arc. Don't bleed in your own fantasy from comic book or et cetera. Judge the movie within the medium.
      It's frustrating lol. I detest BVS theatrical as it has very choppy editing. But BvS UE is a well made movie. It has a very good sound design, cinematography, and acting. Granted, it has slow pace, which is not a bad thing, it makes me reminisce older movies. Hell if it weren't for Batman popularity, we wouldn't having this discussion about the character writing. Snyder is a comic-book fan, this is just a stepping stone for, maybe, your Batman, as implied in the last sequence with Lex. Well, I'm just glad we have the DCEU. It's nice change of pace to see our beloved characters fallen instead of starting as a 'hero' or remain constant from the get-go, and it's NOT an origin story as well. DCEU is not an established or continuation from previous iteration, we have many things to explore and that's why we're getting Ben Affleck's own Batman. If DCEU was a continuation, just like Star Wars, I would be mad because Last Jedi (based on trailer though) completely betrays Luke's arc at the end of Return of the Jedi. Well, happy hating though.
      1. Edgar Rivas
        May 1, 2017
        My comment instantly disappears lol, as usual. Anyway, here's my thoughts, great talking to you.
        https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
      2. Edgar Rivas
        May 1, 2017
        Hmm, interesting.
        To think of it, if the iteration of Batman is the one that still upholds 'no-kill' code, wouldn't it be surprising that he went against Superman? It makes sense that this Bruce would.
        I can agree to an extent that the 'flipping car' sequence is a bit overkill but I still think that it works with how the movie presents his rage and powerlessness. The Batwing though, where he shoots back, I justify it wholeheartedly as my reasoning being that Bruce has sudden flood of emotion and shock as funnily, after all these years, he can finally redeem himself and save the one thing he can't, poetic isn't it? BvS is really is the modern revenge tragedy and felt like an expensive indie film for me, at least.
        Apology, I think I make a terrible comparison because Nolan's Batman hasn't had the luxury to encounter god-like alien and how the history is much differ between the two.
        Well, we can part ways then. I understand where your coming from and it's refreshing to see someone that isn't a sheep and knows the material. I, myself, clearly not as deep as yours lol. I just think its blatantly ignorance to call movie 'bad' because it deviates from source. A movie has many aspects beside characterization. Hell, why didn't the critics blast Civil War because it takes 180 degrees turn? Let's hope that the debate would end by the time we get to Justice League. When all the arcs in the wold finally realized! And I hope you'll be happy by then!
      3. Edgar Rivas
        May 1, 2017
        It's a conclusion to character(s) origin perhaps such as Bruce and Diana (IDK about others). But JL acts as a rebirth in my opinion, with MoS 2 in development, and potentially Aquaman is set after JL?
  3. OGmacrazy
    May 1, 2017
    JESUS FUCKING CHRIST; this is my favorite comment chain of all time. We were able to determine that this scene, which even superficially is terrible, is one of the funniest things ever put to movie form. Not only was all of it unnecessary, given the tracker, Batman attacked them first, they acted in self defense (basically a gang fight, like LegendInMyMind said), Batman murdered (not even debatable), and all of it to get his hands on a super weapon to kill a super being.
    Jesus fuck, Snyder. I don't think anyone else could fuck up this badly, if they tried.
6. pw1x
  April 30, 2017
  Thanks for posting.
7. Edgar Rivas
  April 30, 2017
  I can tell you're in "Not Muh Batman" syndrome.
8. Jack Thorne
  May 1, 2017
  It's only self defense (and therefore, justified) if one's live is at risk. It's clear though in the two scenes (Batmobile and Batwing) that Batman's life was not at risk.
  It's good to contrast this with TDKT, as because pretty much all the kills by Batman were done because he himself, or someone else was at imminent risk - whether that was a child or a whole city. Therefore, it was justified.
9. Jack Thorne
  May 1, 2017
  These videos miss the point of why Snyder gets it wrong so often and why BvS was a terrible film.
  Firstly, the narrator thinks that by merely explaining what Snyder was trying to do will somehow show why BvS was a great film. But the point is the film does an extremely poor job in showing this. You don’t give marks to a film for what it was trying to say, you give it for what it did, which leads me to the second, more important point.
  The narrator assumes that what makes a good film is alluding to historical allegories, classical authors, symbolism, themes or parables. That’s not the case; while these things can augment a film, turning it from good to great (eg. TDK), they are not sufficient for good films. A compelling story, a coherent plot and well-defined and developed characters are sufficient for good films.
  I suggest these videos. Not only will it provide a greater understanding of the flaws of BvS, but by giving good examples from other films, the videos also educate as to what makes a good film – something that the videos above fail to do.
  https://www.youtube.com/wat...
  https://www.youtube.com/wat...
  https://www.youtube.com/wat...
  https://www.youtube.com/wat...
  1. OGmacrazy
    May 1, 2017
    "The narrator assumes that what makes a good film is alluding to historical allegories, classical authors, symbolism, themes or parables. That’s not the case; while these things can augment a film, turning it from good to great (eg. TDK), they are not sufficient for good films. A compelling story, a coherent plot and well-defined and developed characters are sufficient for good films."
    One of the most laughable arguments in favor of BvS. By this brilliant point of view, then these guys would go bonkers for pretty much every student film ever created.
    Oh well, I doubt they'd ever take the time and watch these videos, though. It's funny, really. I barely ever see anyone replying to these comments with videos that are on our side of the equation explaining our point of view, but theirs always have answers by us, who actually took the time to analyze those videos and respond accordingly... Seems to me that someone doesn't want anything trying to invade their little bubbles.
    I also really love how most of the videos they post have bad narration, bad scripting and barely ever have any views...
    1. Jack Thorne
      May 1, 2017
      But dude, MATRIX REVOLUTIONS was amazing! You just can't deal with all that intelligence, you know, thinking and philosophy and stuff.
      The amusing thing is that one year on, I've not ONCE seen anyone on here that can explain to me why this film is great. We keep having these arguments, and every now and then someone will come along thinking they have an argument to defend BvS that we haven't heard before: "It's Greek Tragedy", "it's a modern Hamlet", "it's post 9/11 commentary" (that one makes me laugh). And all I say is the same thing over and over: story, plot, characters. Food. Drink.
      Closer to the release date for WW, I might post up guides on how to critique a film, lest we get another avalanche of fake outrage over negative reviews.
      1. OGmacrazy
        May 2, 2017
        On point!
        But I need you to understand that Wonder Woman will be great because it will be comic book accurate, and have DC properties in it. C'mon, dude!
        Do I honestly have to dig out comic book covers and panels and take stills off of the movie that look like those covers/panels to show to you how great it actually is?
      2. Jack Thorne
        May 2, 2017
        A masterpiece:
        https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
        But not a masterpiece:
        https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
      3. OGmacrazy
        May 3, 2017
        Again, you're failing to understand that a shot completely made up of CGI that only lasts 1 second so fanboys can blow their wads off while looking at it is a much better done scene than a completely practical, realistic and awesome interrogation scene where the plot is moved forward and we learn more about the characters through interaction and dialogue!
  2. Edgar Rivas
    May 1, 2017
    lol most of these points are nitpicky and not every movies need to be spoonfed. Character flaw though? It's their ideal characterization, the same criticism can go to MoS. Youtube caters to what popular, it's not surprising that these analysis certainly superseded the counter-analysis, especially in the wake of DCEU hate and BvS vs Civil War. Maybe if you dig more podcast or blogs. I've watched at least two out of four. I'll share my thoughts maybe when I'm done with all the four.
    1. Jack Thorne
      May 1, 2017
      You say the points are "nitpicky" but don't even go on to explain what "points" and why they're "nitpicky".
      Secondly, you create a straw man fallacy, suggesting that the videos want BvS to be "spoonfed". None of the videos suggest this, they give criticisms in light of what is expected of a film.
      I don't understand what the rest of your point was, but it seemed like you were trying to 'explain away' the videos in light of "DCEU hate", rather than explaining WHY they (two of them) were wrong in the first place.
      1. Edgar Rivas
        May 1, 2017
        It's clearly suggested on the first video though? I will use one example:
        The Author questions the legitimacy of the Indian Ocean scene and how would Lex even know that a rock could magically collapsed and has a stored Kryptonite inside. (Forgive me for oversimplification, I watched the video ages ago)
        If you paid attention to the movie, you can get the answer by the time Lex pitches his weapon idea to the senate. He said that he already have a small sample of Kryptonite, which theoretically, he has a good knowledge of the Kryptonite, and the Indian Ocean clearly not mere accident, it is intended, maybe the old dude is one of Lex's search party for the Kryptonite.
        https://www.youtube.com/wat...
        We don't need a whole scene dedicated to Lex finding the first Kryptonite, well, at least I don't. It's clearly there.
        The rest of my point was intended to the other dude lol, sorry for the mixed up. There IS plenty of counter-analysis out there if you look hard enough and it's well written as opposed to his logic.
      2. Jack Thorne
        May 2, 2017
        If you're referring to the point the video 'A Beautiful Lie' made, then it already revised its point in an edit on screen. Having said that, the video made other, more significant points around Lex Luthor's master plan, such as issues around the secret identities, the the frame job on Superman, Senato Finch, Lex' party, playing Batman, the Bat branding, and the actress and Wallace. The video also raises significant issues around the characters too. And that's just one video. Other videos raise similar and other problems, like pacing, plot and character development. I can't expect you to reply to every single one, that would take too much time, but raising only the issue about Lex sourcing kryptonite is a minut one for the film as a whole.
Orlando Furioso
April 30, 2017
So I guess he HAS scrapped the script. Sounds like he is going with his own vision.
1. residentgrigo
  April 30, 2017
  He kind of needed to. Establish filmmaker only make the films of "other people" if they need money.
  Him going all in means that he is serious.
UltimateEdition
April 30, 2017
It feels like this movie is coming together to make something really special... and this would not have happened if Ben did not step down from the directors chair... forget the technical aspects of directing yourself, especially Batman, it takes a lot of humility to be able to say "I'm not the best choice for this job"... and now we have a director that is a huge Batman fan who has the style and capability to bring this iteration of the character to life and a lead actor that wants the absolute best for his film and character...
residentgrigo
April 30, 2017
Can he make this Batman movie? Get Shane Black on the phone too:
https://www.youtube.com/wat...
PS: How the hell did The Nice Guys flop?
1. Alan Conn
  April 30, 2017
  Hahaha! What?! So bad.
  1. residentgrigo
    April 30, 2017
    Using Holly Hunter´s bits from The Incredibles was genius.
2. OGmacrazy
  April 30, 2017
  To answer that PS:
  Lack of marketing, released in a terribly busy schedule, made in the style of 80's/90's buddy cop movies, when no one is really clamoring for it, on a 50 M dollar budget. Awesome movie, maybe a smaller budget and a september release would have helped.
jrvc
April 30, 2017
exactly the same here
dugzino
April 30, 2017
Hoping he don't mess it up. Not saying he's bad, he just never did these kind of movies, so I'm nervous.
Which I am as well for Wonder Woman, which is 29 days away!!
1. Jokey
  April 30, 2017
  Based on your huge hard on for Snyder and calling Whedon a "shit director", I doubt that you know what quality reallyu is
  1. Joker
    April 30, 2017
    Whedon is a shit director though...
    1. Jokey
      April 30, 2017
      lol keep telling yourself that
      1. Joker
        April 30, 2017
        Oh I will, he's a horrible director. Very overrated by the half-wits like yourself. He delivered the most overrated comic book film to date: The Avengers and then a piece of trash sequel. The man can only do comedy, sorry I'm not easily amused by such trash.
      2. Jokey
        April 30, 2017
        Blah blah blah stay salty
      3. Kerk Lastnameless
        April 30, 2017
        I'm not big on Avengers, and would agree to an extent that it is overrated. But it is, nevertheless, a well-crafted and intelligently conceived movie.
      4. AKA Newtopia Rising
        April 30, 2017
        He did some good stuff with Buffy, Firefly, and Angel was awesome (but he was the least involved of the 3), but he's always been overrated and his feminism, one of the most unique aspects of him and something he's been proud of has often been flawed. But yes, Avengers was mostly mediocre filler, plot holes, cliches and conveniences, Loki and the Chituari were meh, he was great for Tony but bad for everyone else, especially Cap.
  2. Edgar Rivas
    April 30, 2017
    lol do you know that James Cameron has a hard on Snyder?
2. OGDickGrayson
  April 30, 2017
  He has more experience with blockbusters than Affleck
  1. Jokey
    April 30, 2017
    Not just Affleck, pretty much every director in this universe so far
    Wan might be an exception.
    1. residentgrigo
      April 30, 2017
      ...Snyder. He even got the luxury of gradually increasing budgets, MPAA ratings between PG to R and even credits in other mediums. Ads, animation, comics, scripts and one unmade Watchmen game. Wan comes second, i guess.
      War is Reeves´s 2nd blockbuster. Wan only made 1 such film with F7 but what a hard job that was.
Llwyd Antonius
April 30, 2017
nice
AKA Newtopia Rising
April 30, 2017
I don't know whether this is good or not, since I haven't really been happy with any of the Batman writing we've had in movies so far
it's always been off from what I love about Batman
Harvey Bullock
May 1, 2017
I'm glad he loves Batman, but he gives the same canned response everyone gives of "I love Batman because he's a regular human being with a tortured soul". Thats nice and all, but its all bullshit. For once I'd love someone to have the balls and just be honest and say "look, Batman is the most awesome superhero ever because he's got the coolest outfit and he drives the fucking Batmobile".
1. Kerk Lastnameless
  May 1, 2017
  You got a good point there. I'll even upvote.
Jack Thorne
May 1, 2017
I'm totally fine with Reeves taking as much time he wants to deliver a truly great film
This is The Batman -no more ridiculous rush jobs from WB.
Francois
May 1, 2017
Reeves : So this version of batman "kills" and has been operating for 20 yrs. Thanks for the challenge, Snyder.

Browse By Topic

Browse By Year

This is an archive of Batman-News.com from 2010 to 2025. For the latest news, check out BatmanNews.com