The Batman

When Matt Reeves’ ‘The Batman’ was first released word spread quickly that this was a different type of Batman Movie. It was leaning much further in the character as a detective and not a carbon copy of what we have already seen from Batman. This is the anticipation that I walked in with when I saw the movie. Unfortunately, my disappointment set in quickly. While the movie did break new ground in showing a different side of Batman, in other aspects it lost ground that was gained in previous interpretations of the character and his rogues gallery.

The movie definitely has it’s high moments. First among them was the spectacular performances by the majority of the cast.

Zoe Kravitz is amazing in her portrayal of Catwoman. Her prior experience with the character from DC Animation served her well. She wields her sex appeal like a weapon while still exhibiting all the tenderness and loyalty that are the heart of the character.

Jeffrey Wright brings a sense of both gravitas and optimism that is perfect for a younger Lt. Gordon. One who hasn’t had the weight of the world thrust down of his shoulder.

Colin Farrell carries himself with malice and perversion. Desperate to gain the last little bit of power that is out of his control, but also loyal to the code of brotherhood that his mob lives by.

Andy Serkis brings something different to the character of Alfred. When he explains that he was not a good father for young Bruce, but “Taught you how to fight”. You can see his background in MI6 peaking through.

The second great adaptation that Matt Reeves has made with this movie is his focus on Batman as the world greatest detective. Having him come in and analyze the crime scenes, even against the best judgement of most of the Gotham Police Force. Not everything comes to him immediately, but slowly through the movie he puts more and more of the pieces together. The minute that he realizes that “You are el” actually means URL, you can almost see him working out more and more.

The most important change that Matt Reeves has made over previous Batman movies is the fact that he completely skips the death of Bruce’s parents in crime alley. While it is an important plot point and he could have easily felt that it needed to stay in, that scene has become redundant as the Death of Uncle Ben in the Spider-Man movie. Everyone has seen it presented over and over again. Reeves adjusts the deaths of Bruce’s parents enough to fit with the story he is telling without complete contradicting the information that we already know. This allow him to spend more time with the characters in the present.

Unfortunately, the problems in my opinion outweigh the strengths of the film.

The first is the fact that while I am aware that Robert Pattinson is definitely old enough to play Batman at the beginning of his career, this movie makes his appear as if he is barely in his mid-twenties. Bruce Wayne left to begin his quest to become Batman at the age of eighteen, if he spent ten years studying towards that end, then he would have first become Batman at the age of twenty-eight. They clearly state at the beginning of the movie that he has been Batman for a year or so. This would mean that he is almost thirty when we meet him. As I have stated I am well aware that Pattinson is thirty-five in real life, but the way he is portrayed makes him seem so much younger. The fact that he is referred to as “Kid” by several of the other characters only reinforces this.

I heard that Pattinson wanted to play the character as if he were emotionally stunted at the age that his parents died. The problem is that they make no effort to differentiate his physical age from his emotional age.

My most minor gripe with the movie is a dangling plot thread. In most Batman stories the biggest charity is the Wayne Foundation. In Matt Reeves world this is replaced with Gotham Renewal. This is clearly done because he decided to have the charity much like everything else in Gotham corrupted from the inside out. Used as a means of power for the mobs in Gotham. Since this is revealed by the end of the movie it would have been nice to see Bruce dealing with that issue or at least reacting to it.

The biggest issue I have with the film comes from the characterization of the main antagonist, The Riddler. This is a huge issue for me as The Riddler is my favorite of all of the Rogues Gallery.

When I think about Batman’s Rogues I draw parallels to the different psychological conditions that each of them represents. Joker is a psychopath, Penguin is a narcissist, Scarecrow deals with inferiority complex, Two-face is obsessive compulsive disorder, and the Riddler is a Sociopath.

The problem that I find is that most Batman movies portray any antagonist, no matter who they are as a psychopath. Of the nine Batman movies in the last thirty-three years (Including Batman v. Superman) only three have not characterized the main villain as a psychopath. Two of them were Nolan films, and one had no members of the rogues gallery in it. The biggest issue this creates is that all of the Batman movies begin to feel the same if you have the same motivation from all of the villains.

This frustrates me because with a few minor adjustments to the motivation to the character you could have had a completely different and more menacing Riddler. The biggest thing that motives the Riddler is his need to prove that he is smarter than anyone else. Intellect over emotion, cold and calculating. You can still keep the fact that he was an orphan living in an orphanage supported by the Waynes, but instead of being jealous of all the attention that Bruce Wayne was getting he could have felt that Bruce was feeble minded and didn’t deserve attention. insulted that his intellect and talent are overshadowed by Bruce who has never earned anything. He would also be offended that the men in Gotham rose to power not because they were the smartest, but because of their access to money. He would definitely use Batman as a tool in order to get Falcone out of hiding, however he would never consider Batman an equal or brother. He would certainly allow himself to get caught as a means of avoiding the flooding, but a major attack like the one preformed at the climax of the movie with all of the people in the Gotham Square Garden makes no sense. It feels added to the movie just to have a giant climactic action scene but bears no relation to the rest of the Riddler’s plot. Most importantly, if Riddler was to allow himself to get captures and placed in Arkham as a way to protect himself from the flood, then he would also have a plan to get himself out almost immediately.

Based on the way that Reeves ended the film it appears that he is not done with the character of the Riddler. Hopefully he is able to develop the character more to make him distinct from the Joker that he plans to use.

Overall, I think that Matt Reeves and Robert Pattinson have given us a unique look at a character that has been done a multitude of times. I’m disappointed thought that the advances that he gives with Batman come at the expense of the antagonist.