@KaiHouston-m6j Well the problem is that there's enough of an audience that have made comic stories lucrative. Ripping out the fantastical elements helps sell them to people who don't read comics.
I knew a guy whose last name was Nerf and every time we played a game where something got nerfed we would say dang it nerf. And he'd laugh even he would make those jokes and his dad who's a gamer started making the same joke. Names of all kinds exist.
There is a lot of unrealistic things about Batman: 1) A billionaire that cares about other people 2) A fed up citizen just straight up shooting The Joker to death 3) Why anyone would want to be a henchmen for The Joker 4) Batman being a master of *ALL* martial arts 5) Anyone deciding to live in Gotham 6) Internal Affairs not gutting the GCPD for collaborating with a vigilante
You think that a guy taking a whole magazine of bullets from an AK to the chest at point blank range while having his lower face exposed and living to talk about it was less realistic than a man not sleeping?
Way back in the Seventies, Richard Donner was told that adapting Superman to the big screen was impossible. Too ridiculous, too unrealistic, too hokey, no way anyone would buy it. His response was to look the skeptics in the eye and say, "You will believe a man can fly." And he pulled it off. He did it not by grounding Superman - something he theoretically could have done if he cited the older comics as his source - but by simply applying verisimilitude to the Man of Steel. Modern filmmakers could learn a thing or two from that.
@josesarango3408 It was still a good movie. Honestly, looking back on it, it's not as good as everyone says it is, and I think it's very overrated, but there was still a lot of stuff it did right.
David Mazzucchelli (the artist of Batman: Year One) said it best, "The more realistic you make superheroes, the less believable they are." There is a reason a Batman type doesn't exist in our world. It is impractical and stupid and is only badass in a fantastical setting.
True. Plus the more realistic you make a movie, the more plotholes the fantastical elements about the character becomes glaringly obvious. For example. I remember seeing both "Pete's Dragon" movies. The original was a light hearted over the top comedic musical that didn't take itselt that seriously. But the remake? The remake was grounded so much into realism that I kept asking myself if this story takes place in modern day, and the dragon is always flying out in broad daylight while not being invisible half the time, then how is that hardly nobody knows about his existence until Pete is adopted by a local family? That makes no sense. At least in the original, it was presented as so much of an over top cartoonish fashion that you never really took it that seriously. But the more grounded you make a story, the more you have to either have to explain the fantastical elements to your audience in a plausible way, or you do away with the fantastical elements entirely.
@thewolfofwallstreet627 exactly, these Hollywood directors need to start thinking like the cartoons. The cartoons have actually managed to give us the definitive versions of these characters, and they did it by making them both somewhat grounded and campy.
Except Nolan kept majority of what was important about characters- Ra's al Ghul was still head of shadow secret organisation which racked havoc against humanity for centuries and had supervillain plans and aspirations, Joker was still brilliant wild card criminal who had funny dark sense of humour and was obsessed with Batman, Bane was still really strong masked dude but also smart, etc.
They were alright @josesarango3408 looking at them now they were on the same level as the The Batman. They feel like a multipart episode of a modern Batman tv show would be like. Which honestly HBO should be doing with The Batman just episodic 45 min adventures for 10 installments per season.
Yup, these directors need to start thinking like the cartoons because those have actually given us the definitive takes the DC characters. The live action content chooses either grounded or campy. Never finding a proper balance.
I see where youre coming from, but at that point i would just read the comics and watch the cartoons if they already have exactly what im looking for. Film is a different medium, in a different context, with very different limits. Thats why i dont feel as hung up about changes like this.
@@euro51116 In my other comment, I mention that Superman was considered unadaptable pre1978 for being too unrealistic, weird, and old fashioned. We all know what happened when Richard Donner was told it couldn't be done.
@omniviewer2115 exactly, it's been done plenty of times. I wish they would do what Raimi was able to do with Spiderman and balance the campiness and groundedness. Also, I think Raimi would be a great pick to direct a Batman movie.
I swear if the James Gunn dcu batman doesn't succeed I'm gonna be mad like c'mon how hard is to make one batman movie that's not grounded, look i don't have a problem with matt reeves batman universe i think it's good but like really, I'm just sick and tired of grounded BATMAN MOVIES Like for once give Us a fantastical batman movie, to those who want fantastical batman y'all better watch batman brave and the new bold movie James Gunn DCU when it comes out
They should stick to animation, it's the ultimate form to bring superheroes to life. There's no discordance with real life rules and they can do the fights and emotional beats justice, as many movies and shows have proven.
That's my problem with the Reeve Batman universe - we've already had a realistic take on the character with Nolan's trilogy and to see it done again is just so boring imo.
It's boring to y'all because you're immature men-children who can't handle slower, atmospheric Noir crime stories, you can only be diverted by big spectacle and fighting.
Was it realistic though? It was very serious in tone, but far from realistic as far as set design, lighting, and even the fashion and technology at times. It felt grounded, but not really that realistic. It was extremely atmospheric, slower to fit the detective/noir elements, which made it very different from the Nolan movies and unique from other batman movies imo. A character with a vast stylistic history like batman's universe can be intrepreted a variety of ways, she just wants an entirely different movie which is fair, but thats not really criticism of the movie itself.
That's why he's endured for nearly a century too. If he was only a "grounded and realistic" character, he would have faded to obscurity like the other Pulp characters of the early 20th century.
PREACH. The grounded-in-reality approach to Batman has now stagnated Batman as a character. It strips too much away from him so the writers can justify the mob and serial killer-type villains can stand a chance against the watered-down Batman. If they tell you he should only be street level they're not very bright. Batman is the most versatile fictional character of all time and they want to continuously ground him but then cry because they want something fresh as well 🤦🏿♂️. That's why he's on the Justice League and their go-to when they need a scientist and or tactician to get them out of a bind. Reminder: all of the founding 7 JL members have god-level and above abilities except for Batman, whose intellectual and combative prowess is on that level to make up for not having abilities. He's Doctor Doom without magic. Here are some villain examples Ra's Al Ghul, Poison Ivy, and Kobra Cult. Ra's Al Ghul is a 1000-year-old super genius polymathic ecoterrorist warlord who wants to rid the world of crime, corruption, and pollution by wiping out 90 percent of the human population so nature can take over again. Poison Ivy is the same without the crime part, but now she is a human-plant hybrid, and Kobra wants to enslave the world to their deity after releasing the deity from their prison. All have been thwarted by Batman, and they consider him to be THE MAIN THREAT to their plans. He's even so intimidating without powers that god-level beings like Darkseid admitted that Batman is 10 times smarter than all of the members in his service COMBINED. That includes the immortal million-year-old scientific super-genius known as Desaad. You freshen things up by not grounding him and look to Grant Morrison's 2000s Batman run aka Bat-god era, Mike Mignola's Batman run, and Chuck Dixon's 1990s Batman run for inspiration We have stories where He's fighting Lovecraftian cosmic horror creatures, 13ft Killer Croc, a 10ft zombie walking around in Gotham sewers, and now stories Offworld where he's learning from Aliens. These provide a TRUE challenge for Batman because they take him out of his element of the natural into the supernatural, metahuman, and cosmic realm. How can you take him seriously as the world's greatest detective if some of his greatest villains are Riddler and Two-Face? Two-Face, because of his obsession with the number 2 and duality, will rob the 2nd National Bank of Gotham on 22nd Street on February 2nd at 2 am. Or with the Riddler who gives easy Riddles for people to Google. I can give you one; riddle me this, Batman; it isn't east or west but the opposite of south. How can I take him seriously when these are some of his most iconic street-level villains? Writers have to nerf him so they can stand a chance and it's annoying. The TV show Batman Brave and the Bold 2008 showcased this the best. He's a scientific match for Ted Kord's Blue Beetle, a deductive match for Sherlock Holmes, and a greater warrior than the immortal warlord Ra's Al Ghul while still being defeated by Bronze Tiger in combat prowess. This show knew how to test Batman by MIXING IT UP. Usually, the street-level crime was left to Robin/Nightwing because being trained by Batman made him so capable that the League of Shadows members, such as Talia, couldn't defeat him. The same league that is stated to have the greatest warriors on the planet. The Terrible, in my opinion, Batman Caped Crusader series had one good episode, and it was the Gentleman Ghost one. It's because we got to see Batman out of his element TRULY testing him with the supernatural. It gives him a chance to be a novice in an area and grow understandably. I'm going to end with this Batman and Supernatural/Lovecraftian cosmic horror mysteries are made for each other. It allows him to be at his finest as a warrior and a super genius polymathic intellectual while keeping him close to his roots as the world's greatest detective. Hopefully, this answers your question.
There are plenty others comic characters that deal with supernatural stuff, get that shit out of my Batman. Batman is Noir, it's crime fiction, he's a detective fighting crime in Gotham.
@@vee1766respectfully, no, he isn’t. He is all of it. People forget that since the 1950s, he's been dealing with science fiction and the supernatural since, I believe, the 1970s. The most versatile fictional character of all time is stuck in one area because they are afraid to do something different. I got one for you. Taking inspiration from 1982s The Thing. Batman has to fight Blob Clayface using practical effects as much as possible. Batman ACTUALLY allowed to be the world's greatest detective without advanced tech will have to pay attention to people's mannerisms to determine whether or not they are who they say they are. Batman is investigating why Clayface is murdering Daggett executives and senators while defeating assassins like the enhanced assassin Philo Zeiss hired by Daggett to stop Clayface and Batman. Batman will also showcase his legendary scientific knowledge to develop a cure for Clayface after discovering that Clayface's condition isn’t sustainable and will soon kill him.
@@FriendlyBatDoom This versality is exactly what ruins Batman. I always considered Justice League Batman to be an abomination. Yes, Batman can have to deal with more supernatural/sci-fi threats once in a while but it's essence is to be a street level hero, a vigilante, a detective protecting Gotham. Batman is a its best when its grounded in crime/Noir vibes. Batman shouldn't be for kids, it shouldn't be cool and fun, the very concept of Batman itself is mature in its controversy.
Making Batman realistic means that 90% of the stuff I like from the comics and cartoons will never show up. And I’ve had to deal with this for 20 years!
@@itsme-uw8vmexcept he just skipped right to Damian Wayne as Robin. Doesn't even bother to build up the Batfamily. I don't want their origins to be referenced in conversation, I wanna see it. And it's also weird that Batman is so far in his career and Superman is seemingly very new
I really enjoyed the Penguin series so far but I wish they'd lean a little more into the comic stuff. Why on earth can't he just be Oswald Cobblepot! I also want him with his weapon umbrellas at some point too. As much as I love The Dark Knight, it has cast an annoying shadow over DC now where it all has to be a bit too ''realistic'' and gritty. Sapped of color and it's comic book roots.
The Gotham comic stuff, like you said, has always been grounded and gritty, i don't know what y'all blabbing on about. Y'all pretend to read comics but it sure feel like you don't. The very best Batman/Gotham comics have always been the most "street level" ones.
@@vee1766 My fave Batman comics are from the late 80s/early 90s and I haven't read any new comics for a decade now. I also love the DCAU. So that's all my go to material.
@@vee1766 boy I sure loved the grounded time a dude from a prison (who was born there and left to die as a boy) came to gotham, immediately figured out who batman was and then let out a bunch of psychopaths to wear him down just to break his spine. Boy I sure loved how grounded it was how in that same story said guy went and fought a crocodile man to establish dominance over the villans of gotham and put himself as the strongest. Boy I sure thought it was grounded when batman fought a deranged cult who's cult leader bathes in blood to stay young. Boy I sure thought it was grounded when batman was mine controlled for 3 months by some lady who controls plants. Boy, I sure thought it was grounded when batman had to fight an undead zombie who keeps saying a nursey rhyme for some reason. Come on bro. Come off it.
@@lastmanstanding7155 I never said Batman stories can't have the occasional superfreak psycho encounter. But those should be rare and they are not the best Batman stories. Also y'all are confusing grounded and realistic. Of course it doesn't have to be "realistic", the whole concept of Batman isn't realistic, but it has to be grounded, Batman should be a street level vigilante, not a superhero.
@@vee1766 not the best? Dude, in my references I cited nothing but all the top batman stories. Bane with knightfall and I mentioned his confrontation witj Croc. I then also mentioned the long halloween twice with poison ivy and Salomon Grundy. I then refrenced Deacon Blakfire from his comic called the cult. These are examples of what us fans considered the best. I did it to deliberately prove you wrong. Rare? Come off it. Long halloween is literally about how it changes from mafia crime to freaks in costumes causing chaos. Rare my tookas. It's part of batman's mythos. Clayface is just as much a legit villan as Joker or Riddler. Point is, fans besides you exist and want these stories adapted without it being watered down to be "realistic." I don't mind the changes they did for riddler in the batman movie. But I do have issues with saying "it's unrealistic to have Robin. It's too unrealistic to have clayface the monster shape-shifting criminal." You know what else is unrealistic? Freezing someone and they don't instantly die. Yet that doesn't stop me from enjoying any stories with Mr. Freeze in it.
Make Comic Book Movies Again! The early MCU was like that, and they were beloved and successful, because that's what the audience wanted. Nolan Trilogy was successful despite the only comic book-y one was the last. But it was Nolan and Bale, so nobody minded. The latest Batman should have just been an original story, not about Batman but just a vigilante or a cop. If you don't want to adapt a comic, don't.
I can't wait for a new "realistic" Superman movie, where he has literally wings on his back so he can fly, an optical Xray/laser device he wears on his eyes so he can use his sight powers and a super advanced body suit that gives him his super strength and invulnerability. He'll also wear a mask to hide his identity and have a dadbod with early onset diabetes because he's a middle-aged man. And the best part about being so realistic is Lois Lane will be perfect in every way and will have to rescue Superman because she's an independent and powerful female who don't need no man to rescue her.
I have been going back through and rewatching the Animated Series and the world of Batman is so much better with all of the fun fantasy elements. I hope with Reeves doing the realistic stuff, James Gunn and Andy Muschetti will take that as an opportunity to go full on ahead with the fantasy elements and be proud to be Comic Book movie, much like how Superman seems to be.
@@gloriathomas3245but those shows are fun. Reeves is relying only grittiness and realism. That's boring. That can only capture a few aspects of Batman, but it can't capture all of the character. It holds back Batman.
I’m bored to death with realistic Batman to the point I find myself revisiting Batman Forever a lot these days. I also think it’s ironic considering that Batman is a dark character but there are so many shades and colors that can be taken with him thematically and narratively. But nope, Hollywood’s always like, “We need to go darker. Let’s make him even *more* real”, which is so limiting and uninteresting.
Tell me you've never read a Batman/Gotham comic without telling me so... Being grounded and dark is Batman wether you want it or not. If you don't like it there are plenty other comic book characters to satisfy you, why would they change what Batman is about for y'all ?
@@vee1766no, those are only very specific aspects of the character. Did you forget about the decades of campiness that's part of Batman's history? The character is a mix of campy and grounded. Choosing one or the other means you won't be the character in his entirety.
Look at the penguin they did in the Gotham TV series He did a very good job of that penguin in that TV series It was grounded and realistic somewhat.. I have no problem with that one at all.. And his name was still Oswald cobblepot.. He looked the part for penguin in his younger years.. They don't need to change penguin. He's great the way he is..
@@DavidMartinez-ce3lp I'm not sure about that I haven't gotten that far all the way into the seasons.. I've only done enough to maybe like the season 3 or 4 I think.. I'm trying to finish the rest of the seasons but Too much on my plate..
There's nothing realistic about Batman, especially in films but these directors who don't read comics will warp him into something that they can sell as realistic. James Gunn was right when he said we've never gotten a proper Batman movie.
Agree completely. Making batman ultra-realistic takes away a lot of the gothic glamour of the character. Nolan's, for example, lost Gotham - the city was Chicago in all but name. And once you do that, batman himself looks ridiculous. Why is he wearing a suit? Why is he driving an insane care? Surely he should just be a man in a balaclava and leather jacket... Batman's operatic. His villains, his environments, everything about the world leans in that direction. Trying to strip it back to basics loses a lot of great stuff along the way.
If I were making a Batman live action movie, i would start with Batman adopting Dick Grayson after the death of the Flying Graysons. Make it about Batman trying to investigate who killed them and why. All while trying to balance being a father and being Batman. Teaching Dick Grayson to not allow his thirst for revenge consume him. To choose to bring the man who killed his parents to justice. Dick earns the name Robin, and the dynamic duo go off to have many adventures.
Kinda off topic but I wish dc would stop reusing only their big name character and give some of the lesser known characters a show/game/movies. One I'd love to see is the Crimson Avenger3 (Jill Carlyle) such a cool concept sitting right there collecting dust.
Then you should watch Creature Commandos, Swamp Thing, Booster Gold, and The Authority when they come out soon. Those guys are either B or C tier DC characters.
The best example of a "realistic Batman" is Batman Earth-1. The comic opens with Bruce being a complete fuck up as Batman, but as the story progresses he begins to learn from the people around him and they, in a way, help him become a better Batman. If you havent read it, give it a go. Its a great read and is just wild enough to be entertaining. But with all that being said, Batman will NEVER be realistic, no matter what. Theres nothing realistic about a man in a Batsuit punching criminals. There's nothing realistic about recruiting a kid to fight dangerous criminals. And theres nothing realistic about his Rogues Gallery. So Hollywood should just fucking run with it! Add villains like Killer Croc, or Mad Hatter, or Maxi Zeus. Give us the Bat Family. I liked the Dark Knight and The Batman as movies, but lets delve into the more comic-esque stories!
I agree, and I've been saying this for years. Batman isn't grounded. He's not a street level character. A true balance of campy and grounded is key to capturing Batman. Something like what Raimi was able to do with Spiderman in his trilogy. Honestly, Raimi would be an amazing director choice for a Batman movie.
My favourite batman film is "batman returns" mainly because of Catwoman's supernatural origin and Gotham mystical aesthetic. I wish that origin would make its way into comics. I am bored by the grounded stuff too😅 also I think Matt reeves also said that a superman and a wonder woman don't have place in his universe 🥴
It’s weird hearing that Matt Reeves may have a problem with fantastical elements in movies, when he has directed two movies about intelligent talking apes.
I’m really annoyed that people keep saying his name’s been changed to Oz Cobb. Cobblepot is the only part of his name that was changed. He’s literally referred to as Oswald Cobb in the first five minutes. Oz is just the nickname that he has in both the show and the comics.
I would normally agree, but a high fantasy Batman would be redundant when Brave and the Bold Batman is released. I don't mind a pocket universe with CSI Batman.
Saying that Matt Reeves is just trying to copy Nolan is kind of insane to me. The Dark Knight trilogy and the Batman could not be more different with their approach to Batman as a character or the style of the films. Them both being more “realistic” takes on Batman doesn’t mean they’re doing the same thing.
They have to make these movies for the average person that dosen't like comic books sadly. If they make it to much like a comic book people complain it looks like a videogame. I just want a movie where Batman has existed for 10 years and villains already exist. No more origins
Speaking on behalf of non-comic book enthusiasts, there’s a lot more that we can handle in comic book adaptations then you think. The 2002 Spider-Man had a scene where Green Goblin turns people into skeletons with his bombs. The movie’s still great and had mainstream appeal. These movies can be corny without suffering for it. (Also, I don’t view superhero origin movies as a problem at all.)
@matityaloran9157 A lot of average viewers like "grounded" batman because most don't know anything outside the movies. They don't understand Batman exists in a fictional universe like Spider-Man. I get these movies have to be made for everyone which is why we have to see Batman's parents die in every movie. It's like when "reviewers" complain about the '84 Tranformers movie which takes place and not knowing who the characters are.
It’s called comic book ADAPTATION! So there’s multiple stories about one character and INTERPRETATION. Like in the comics one character but hundreds of variations of the character and his/her world. You understand that? That’s what is being done here. Dcu Batman and Reeves’ Batman are INTERPRETED differently. Come on guys think 😂
I personally do not care what form a Batman story takes… I just want a good Batman story, and that’s what The Batman was. In fact, my two favorite Batman movies are The Batman and The LEGO Batman, so a Batman comic adaptation can literally have any tone as long as it is executed well.
The thing is that because of the disastrous way in which WB handled DC, Gunn can't go back with Reeves Batman even if he wanted without causing an uproar. The Batman already happened and it was successful so if Gunn even dared to cancel it for the sake of having only one Batman, people would jumpt to his throat for it, especially without receipts to show for his own, or if it wasn't on part with Reeves' version. So we'll have to live with two Batmans, each with their own approach, for people to enjoy both or the one they prefer more. The only ways I see Reeves' Batman going away are 1) he stops after a certain number of movies or 2) Rob doesn't renew contract and we're left only with DCU Batman 3) his version somehow starts flopping and audiences themselves stop wanting his Batman.
I'm not trying to be mean here, but I feel like a lot of this is projecting. We don't know if Reeves is copying Nolan because it was successful, it could be Reeves' is more comfortable with something more grounded, we don't know if The Penguin was another script adjusted for the property, and the comment about painting in all black and thinking you're the greatest artist ever, come on! I don't think Matt Reeves thinks he's the greatest ever, I mean idk lol. I feel like The Batman, while similar to say The Dark Knight in that sense of 'lets make it somewhat realistic,' it has such a wildly different tone than any of the Dark Knight movies. The Penguin does seem very inspired by Joker in "let's take a comics book character and put him in taxi driver/the sopranos" but when the results are this good I can't really fault it
OMG YES!! I thought the same thing, it was so stupid!!! How is Oz Cobb more realistic? To me it sounds like Oscorp from Marvel lol. He's the freaking Penguin, let him have the freaking OG name cause no one would mind. They created a problem NO ONE had. Also, people could still call him Oz to shorten his name, even if the longer name was the legal one. There was no need to make that stupid clarification about using a realistic name.
People seem to confuse wanting dark with wanting realistic. Sure batman is dark, but its also goofy as hell. You've got a rich orphan with high tech gadgets dressing up as a bat and fighting evil ppl who dress up like clowns, scarecrows, cats, etc. Thats one thing i didnt like about the batman movie. They tried to make the riddler look and seem more "realistic." What they fail to realize is it can still be dark even if the riddler is a guy dressed in a green tuxedo with a question mark cane
In hindsight I wish they would have just done the DCEU batman movie because the batman is a very divisive film. It's not universally loved. Some people love it, some are bothered by it. If the DCEU batman had gotten made it would have kept people united. Walter Hamada seemed to want to movie away from a connected universe though, so he ordered the batman to be its own universe.
Not with you this time, I like this approach for Batman films an series, that said Im not a Batman comic fan. A serious, grounded, dark kind of realistic Batman is the only Batman will take me to the theater
Honestly, if these directors and creators aren’t going to using the actual source material in their adaptation works, then why go into comic book adaptation movies. I mean even Zack Snyder had issues with some of the fantasy elements of the source material comics.
I hate how a fan like yourself, who expresses why they like what they like and wants the things about what they like to be present in the adaptations of those things, is referred to as a "toxic fan" for expressing their frustration that those things are absent. Our like of the things being adapted is what made them successful and popular in the first place. The people who make the changes to those things for their adaptations aren't embarrassed of the source material, they're embarrassed of the fans of that source material and they don't want us, they want to attract a different audience with their takes. This is why we see so many beloved IPs floundering in current day, because people who don't like those IPs are being sought out to make them. They want to purge the already existing audiences from those IPs. It's happening across all mediums of entertainment. Upset that a game is making drastic changes to core mechanics of storytelling and gameplay? You need to accept that they're adapting to reach a broader audience. Frustrated that a show adaptation about a beloved IP made drastic changes to characters and events? You're a toxic fan and your toxic opinions are violence. Confused why a well known IP was so altered from it's source material for a movie to the point that it's virtually only recognizable as that IP because it has the same name? Well, that because it wasn't made for you, but when it flops, it's your fault because you didn't pay to watch what wasn't made for you.
That's the main reason I'm curious to see what Gunn does with DC Studios, he doesn't shy away from fantastical/weird characters or settings and DC needs to finally lean into the comic roots instead of trying to make everything "grounded."
The original trilogy of Arkham games and the Batman Animated show are the best adaptations of the spirit of the Batman comics, they are different but both respect the spirit of the comics and characters.
Completely agree. I've always felt this way. Batman is a fantasy character. When you remove that part, the character and stories lose something important.
This is what I don’t get. These folks adapt these characters. These stories. These worlds/universes but then decide to change certain aspects of them because they deem them too whatever. Not realistic enough. Too goofy, too colorful, too whatever. You clearly don’t have respect for the original material so why even make a project from it? Why even adapt it? The show is called “The Penguin” but they won’t even use the name Penguin in the entirety of the series.
Because they just wanna do their version of it. They only care about very specific aspects. They don't care about bringing the characters to life, only certain elements of the character.
Even Nolan's trilogy wasnt realistic. It just had a mask of realism. The Batman was visually stunning but boring. The Riddler is the most forgettable Batman villain in Batman live action movie. He was like a CSI baddie.......... Why is no one making a Batman v Deathstroke movie???
I'm not a fan of Oz Cobb, (this is what I get for making fun of Caped Crusader's 'Oswalda') but the issue isn't realism, so much as just over-doing it. Even Nolan's movies still had hallucinative fear toxins, and tech that looked like future sci-fi. But Reeves has Batman driving around in a car anyone could make themselves! He's going TOO realistic. And there's a reason this is happening. What's the most acclaimed X-Men movie? It is "Logan." What about Marvel shows? It's Daredevil. These works strip away the fantasy elements for something more grounded and realistic. There's no denying the power in making comic books more mature, and a lot of creators want in on that. And since this is a stylistic choice, there is no "right" or "wrong" to it, only a matter of preference. I'd just like to not hear "no" when it comes to what can and can't be done. I don't want to hear "We can't do Omega Red, he's too silly." Then make him serious. If Poison Ivy has elements that don't work, find the ones that do- Eco terrorists are a real thing. Use that. If that means Bullseye is in street clothes, rather than the iconic costume I want, so be it. Just make it work. Cobbelepot can work.
finally someone that rationalize insted of thinking "realistic batman is boring because is not as fun as deadpool and wolverine". Look if we don't have a realistic batman or a realisitc wolverine or even a daredevil. what we will got insted? the mcu shitting boring as safe movies per year with the marvels and quatumania and we keep complaning that "comic book movies should be more serious without quips"? people will never know what they really want untill the loose it, and they will all look ridiculous when they say shit like "rememeber the good old way when everybody use to hate this but now we are smarter 10 latter we love it?"
I thought so too. I also thought they were saying Cobb as short for Cobblepot. Plenty of people with long surnames get nicknamed with a shorter version.
The Batman was a safe bet for WB. They took absolute no risks with that film. It's about as skippable and forgettable as Spiderman: Homecoming. Skipping the origin story, only to done anyway. What was the point? Everything Reeves did, Nolan already did but in a much more fun way.
@garrettmurphy2447 I can understand that, but he did make people take Batman seriously again. Hollywood learned the wrong lessons by trying to make Batman only a dark and brooding lone wolf. It gets boring when that's all we've seen for the last 3 modern live action adaptations. I want someone to do something different. A true balance between campy and grounded.
I couldn't disagree more. The best Batman has ALWAYS been the more grounded, street-level Batman, the vigilante/detective who fights against criminals, gangsters, corrupted politicians, conspiracies and the occasional weird freak with a touch of supernatural. THAT is Batman at his best, not the bullshit Justice League superhero who fights aliens, clashes with Superman and outsmarts cosmic villains with his "supercomputer" brain.
This is why I despise Nolan and Reeves, and prefer Tim Burton and Michael Keaton. They both understood Batman so much better by remembering that Batman is fictional and there's a limit to how seriously you can take him.
I feel like there's room for both. I really enjoy the realistic take on Batman but I'm open to the fantastical elements too. I'm glad we're getting the Reeves verse and Gunn verse at the same time.
As much as i love the batman it irritated me that the batman aesthetic i wanted i got but they made it realistic, you could easily fit grundy, clay face, man bat and killer croc in the reeves world, they’ll always say their fav batman stories are the long halloween or The Dark Knight Returns. They don’t care about shit else, it seems.
I don't mind a grounded realistic approach to Batman per se. If anything, I think you can tell a lot of great batman stories from a grouned realistic point of view. However, I do think you can also tell a great batman story that still incorporates the fantasy elements about the character as well. The 90's "Batman: The Animated Series" proved this. It not only told serious dramatic stories, but they did it while incoroporating the larger than life fantasy elements to it as well. Heck, they even modernized a few characters too just to make them more appealing. Mr. Freeze for example used to be nothing more than a crook that used his freezing abilities to rob banks like a common Saturday morning super villain. Yet, "Batman the Animated Series" took that character, and added a new backstory that made him more complex and nuanced as a character while still staying true to the fantasy elements about him. I don't mind Matt Reeves take on the character. Even though the grounded realistic approach to Batman has already been done with Christopher Nolan's take, I do think Reeves adds enough there to make his potential trilogy different than Nolan's trilogy. For example. Apart from some of the video games, and some of the comics, we've always seen Bruce Wayne's parents being described in cartoons and movies as being these prominent hollier than thou figures that Bruce can only dream to aspire to. By making his parents somehow just as corrupt as the criminals that Batman fights, and the fact that Alfred knew about it and covered it up from Bruce, it adds a new layer to the story that the previous Batman incarnations never dealt with. Plus, we've never seen Batman act like much of a detective in the previous live action films. Yes, we saw glimpses of it in Nolan's trilogy, but Matt Reeves' version seem to be more or less more bought into the detective aspects of Batman moreso than the previous incarnations. However, I do think that if Gunn wants his new Batman to stand out, it would be wise for his DCU Batman to incorporate the more fantastical elements, as that would even lend itself to making it easier for his canon DCU Batman to do crossover films too with Justice League and etc.
The batman is grounded the way 'Year one' comics does...Not totally grounded but also he is not fighting Superman...It's something in the middle....so calling the makers ashamed of the source materials is dumb...As for the name change yeah it's stupid...But that doesn't mean the show is shit or Makers are ashamed of the source materials...come on
I like the Penguin show, but these attempts to make Batman super realistic always bothered me. The best thing about Gunn coming in for the new DCU, is that he's more likely to embrace the fantastical elements of the Batman corner of DC.
Well said. If "The Penguin" is unrealistic as a villain name, I'd like to know how "The Batman" is realistic as a name. What did you think of "Batman Returns"? It certainly played fast and loose with the source material, but no one can accuse Tim Burton of shying away from fantasy.
In all honesty I don't mind Matt Reeves Batman being grounded and realistic because we still are going to get the DCU's Batman which I believe will be more fantastical because of the world it's going to be set in
@@gontse1386 That iteration of Batman was killed well before the TDK trilogy. It could not survive Batman & Robin (the movie, not the characters), although arguably it died even earlier, when the studio refused to let Burton move ahead with his own sequel to Batman Returns, and Keaton declined to return for Schumacher's take. Nowadays we are used to the concept of a very belated sequel though (look how many years since the first Beetlejuice) and so arguably the possibility existed even post-TDK for the B89 iteration of the character to return. Which in fact happened in The Flash movie. Of course, that movie didn't do too well (not Keaton's fault) and by the time it came out, the studio had already pretty much decided he wouldn't be part of things going forward.
You are always complaining about everything. Why don’t you just enjoy and be grateful that we are getting what you and many other batman fans the fanatical elements in the dcu. How are you complaining when you know what you are going to get??😂
I watched the first episode and I heard "Oz" and "Cobb" but I assumed these were just abbreviations and that his real name was the same as always. Guess not.
I think it was unnecessary but he’s still the penguin and the show is really good so far. I get this issue of people straying from the source material because they think it’s goofy or whatever but in this case, Reeves had an idea for a Batman world that was somewhat grounded and a detective story. That’s what we got, that’s what was greenlit. It was never intended to be anything else and it works. The DCU is coming and all the fantasy stuff will be there.
Batman lends itself to realism because of 2 factors - Batman doesny rely on supernatural abilities - so EVERYone can relate to him in thinking the best of themselves "yeah, if i was a billionaire, i would do that too!" And, also because of no fantasy powrers being needed also means it can use the Robin Hood effect of you believing someone in real life today could do the same thing if they were a billionaire. Nothing is more powerful to an audience than immersion in believability because it is chiefly what sucks an audience in. If you want someone to blame, blame Joel Schumacher, who made the early batman movies SO cringe-inducingly over-the-top comic-y that everyone rolled their eyes.
Every movie version of Batman is a direct response to the previous version. The last one was fighting aliens, so now he's brought back to the streets. Don't worry the pendulum will swing the other way back towards something more fantastical in the next one (which I guess is James Gunn, and that looks to be his goal)
The thing about Robin also inevitably takes you to the people that are pro realistic Batman wanting Death In the Family to be adapted if we got a Robin. But Death In the family should NEVER be the first Robin experience UNLESS you have decided NOT to have any more Robins. See the reason why a Batfam even exists, and why a there can even be another Robin after Jason is BECAUSE there's a Robin that LIVED! Dick Grayson is THE success story, not just cause he lived to adulthood, but as you said, because he didn't turn out like Batman either. He is the living proof that not all sidekick could end up like Jason. If, instead, you have your first Robin die, then Batman should NEVER take in another child let alone make him Robin.
I’m a hard core lifelong Batman fan and I actually agree with Matt Reeves on this. I really struggle with the idea of having someone like Mr Freeze, poison Ivy, clay face, man bat and others existing in THE BATMAN universe. It just conflicts with the atmosphere and genre that he set up in the first film and would take me out of it and I’m sure others as well. Even in a show like Gotham that I really loved it felt odd having Mr Freeze and Poison Ivy there and they were some of the weakest points of the show. Scarecrow, firefly, mad hatter, hush, court of owls, Scarface, black mask, Ra’s Al Ghul, Shiva and professor Pyg are villains that would fit better in this universe. Now with the name change of the penguin though I wouldn’t say is unrealistic but more fitting for what type of penguin he is. In most iterations, the Cobblepots are an extremely wealthy family that are in the same league as the Waynes and Arkhams. Sometimes even one of the founding families of the city. Having him be Oswald Cobb makes more sense for where this version of him is in this story. He’s a nobody that comes from nothing and has to build a name for himself. Even when Gotham did the same thing they ended up revealing in the second season that he came from a wealthy family and he didn’t know about it. If we have to have fantastical Batman villains then that’s what the James Gunn DCU Batman should be about and honestly the only reason to have a separate Batman film series.
In realtion to the idea that only drama can be cinema, I wanna believe that Scorsese, while critical of the current Hollywood, wouldn't be so arrogant to not consider the OG Star Wars for example "not cinema". George Lucas, and others like him, such as Spielberg or James Cameron, are also responsible for some of the BEST cinema has given us, and it's because they didn't limit themselves to what was realistic or achievable with realism in cinema, and they especially didn't limit themselves to drama. So yeah, you're 100% correct that limiting themselves to realism and drama is ridiculous. Cinema wouldn't have progressed or been revolutionized if not for people going against that notion.
Exact same here. I am fed up with waiting for more creativity and character additions in various adaptations. Waiting SO long that it seems less and less likely that they will be utilized more. Plus, Robin can work in a realistic setting anyway. There are real people who go out of their way to be actual vigilantes, using various gadgets and what-not. Dick, or even a group of teens, can become such a vigilante *without* Batman, but run into Batman at various parts of the city during criminal activity, and grow some bond from there. The new DC Shared Universe needs to step up for Batman's fantastical aspects!
If you hate comics, don't do comics stories.
Hollywood would follow your advice if there wasn't so much money to be made off of it.
I don't think they'd have much viewership if they only target people who read the comics.
They don't want to studios hate them. But the only thing that were a safe bet.
@KaiHouston-m6j
Well the problem is that there's enough of an audience that have made comic stories lucrative. Ripping out the fantastical elements helps sell them to people who don't read comics.
@@BaithNa then again they're doing their best to end that money.
There's people literally named 'Apple' in the real world lol... Oscob is ridiculous
I knew a guy whose last name was Nerf and every time we played a game where something got nerfed we would say dang it nerf. And he'd laugh even he would make those jokes and his dad who's a gamer started making the same joke.
Names of all kinds exist.
This is a universe where a man dresses as a bat to cope with trauma & they worry about a name being unrealistic?
What's funny is his name isn't really that unrealistic last names like that do exist.
There is a city named Batman in my country (Turkiye).
Es ist das Universum von Superman!😀
They'd have Batman wear a much different, more realistic "costume" if they thought they could get away with it.
I was just about to make that exact same point. If you're worried about being grounded, then you should just stay away from superheroes.
"Oz Cobb" sounds INFINITELY more ridiculous and cartoony than Oswald Cobblepot.
I agree. It sounds silly honestly.
Oz Cobb sounds like it fits right in with weird celebrity baby names
@@DeftCrackerGaming sounds like a musician Lil Oz Cobb
@@DavidMartinez-ce3lp but is he as good as Paul Bufano?
@@Ididtherightthing the answer is in the question
The most unrealistic part of Batman is him not sleeping at all. You cant fix that in live action without doing something unrealistic.
Exactly man remember when in the comics he used to have power naps some times it gave him like a adrenaline rush
There is a lot of unrealistic things about Batman:
1) A billionaire that cares about other people
2) A fed up citizen just straight up shooting The Joker to death
3) Why anyone would want to be a henchmen for The Joker
4) Batman being a master of *ALL* martial arts
5) Anyone deciding to live in Gotham
6) Internal Affairs not gutting the GCPD for collaborating with a vigilante
@@daustin8888Actually most of them can be explain with poverty and corruption.
@@anthony5128Not to mentoined how he still beign buff with that level of sleep.
You think that a guy taking a whole magazine of bullets from an AK to the chest at point blank range while having his lower face exposed and living to talk about it was less realistic than a man not sleeping?
Way back in the Seventies, Richard Donner was told that adapting Superman to the big screen was impossible. Too ridiculous, too unrealistic, too hokey, no way anyone would buy it.
His response was to look the skeptics in the eye and say, "You will believe a man can fly."
And he pulled it off. He did it not by grounding Superman - something he theoretically could have done if he cited the older comics as his source - but by simply applying verisimilitude to the Man of Steel.
Modern filmmakers could learn a thing or two from that.
There were Superman movies since the 1940s
Modern filmmakers are too busy trying to not look childish and addicted to "realism" to do something like that.
I liked The Batman, but this is as bad as the X-Men Leather Suits.
@GunnarVance those weren't too awful, the 2000's flared lower pant leg is what makes it bad haha
What’d you expect? Yellow spandex?
then why did you like The Batman? all that movie is worse than the black spandex
@josesarango3408 It was still a good movie. Honestly, looking back on it, it's not as good as everyone says it is, and I think it's very overrated, but there was still a lot of stuff it did right.
@GunnarVance If you like the actors Twilight cringe I suppose.....I felt like putting a nail through my hand 30 minutes into that bullshit
David Mazzucchelli (the artist of Batman: Year One) said it best, "The more realistic you make superheroes, the less believable they are."
There is a reason a Batman type doesn't exist in our world. It is impractical and stupid and is only badass in a fantastical setting.
True. Plus the more realistic you make a movie, the more plotholes the fantastical elements about the character becomes glaringly obvious. For example. I remember seeing both "Pete's Dragon" movies. The original was a light hearted over the top comedic musical that didn't take itselt that seriously. But the remake? The remake was grounded so much into realism that I kept asking myself if this story takes place in modern day, and the dragon is always flying out in broad daylight while not being invisible half the time, then how is that hardly nobody knows about his existence until Pete is adopted by a local family? That makes no sense. At least in the original, it was presented as so much of an over top cartoonish fashion that you never really took it that seriously. But the more grounded you make a story, the more you have to either have to explain the fantastical elements to your audience in a plausible way, or you do away with the fantastical elements entirely.
@thewolfofwallstreet627 exactly, these Hollywood directors need to start thinking like the cartoons. The cartoons have actually managed to give us the definitive versions of these characters, and they did it by making them both somewhat grounded and campy.
"Realistic" is the word they use instead of "Christopher Nolan"
except Nolan movies are actually great
Except Nolan kept majority of what was important about characters- Ra's al Ghul was still head of shadow secret organisation which racked havoc against humanity for centuries and had supervillain plans and aspirations, Joker was still brilliant wild card criminal who had funny dark sense of humour and was obsessed with Batman, Bane was still really strong masked dude but also smart, etc.
@@josesarango3408and fun. I miss when things could be both fun and serious.
@@anastasiazhdanova1578exactly, I was actually surprised how many stories Nolan was able to pull from and combine in his trilogy.
They were alright @josesarango3408 looking at them now they were on the same level as the The Batman. They feel like a multipart episode of a modern Batman tv show would be like. Which honestly HBO should be doing with The Batman just episodic 45 min adventures for 10 installments per season.
These are superheroes we like them because there unrealistic
People think that what Bat-fans want is "dark grounded and realistic".
What Bat-fans really want is the comics and the cartoons.
Yup, these directors need to start thinking like the cartoons because those have actually given us the definitive takes the DC characters. The live action content chooses either grounded or campy. Never finding a proper balance.
we want GOTHIC NOIR artstyle
I see where youre coming from, but at that point i would just read the comics and watch the cartoons if they already have exactly what im looking for. Film is a different medium, in a different context, with very different limits. Thats why i dont feel as hung up about changes like this.
@@euro51116 In my other comment, I mention that Superman was considered unadaptable pre1978 for being too unrealistic, weird, and old fashioned. We all know what happened when Richard Donner was told it couldn't be done.
@omniviewer2115 exactly, it's been done plenty of times. I wish they would do what Raimi was able to do with Spiderman and balance the campiness and groundedness. Also, I think Raimi would be a great pick to direct a Batman movie.
I swear if the James Gunn dcu batman doesn't succeed I'm gonna be mad like c'mon how hard is to make one batman movie that's not grounded, look i don't have a problem with matt reeves batman universe i think it's good but like really, I'm just sick and tired of grounded BATMAN MOVIES Like for once give Us a fantastical batman movie, to those who want fantastical batman y'all better watch batman brave and the new bold movie James Gunn DCU when it comes out
This is why we gotta go out and support stuff like Superman. I certainly know I will be there day 1 for Superman, as well as Brave and The Bold.
They should stick to animation, it's the ultimate form to bring superheroes to life. There's no discordance with real life rules and they can do the fights and emotional beats justice, as many movies and shows have proven.
That's my problem with the Reeve Batman universe - we've already had a realistic take on the character with Nolan's trilogy and to see it done again is just so boring imo.
It's boring to y'all because you're immature men-children who can't handle slower, atmospheric Noir crime stories, you can only be diverted by big spectacle and fighting.
Nolan movies were arguably "realistic" (I prefer grounded) but far from boring. That's talent
@@josesarango3408grounded gets boring when you don't allow it also be fun. I'd prefer a true balance of the two.
@@vee1766No it's boring because it's 3 hours with a terrible riddler performance.
Was it realistic though? It was very serious in tone, but far from realistic as far as set design, lighting, and even the fashion and technology at times. It felt grounded, but not really that realistic. It was extremely atmospheric, slower to fit the detective/noir elements, which made it very different from the Nolan movies and unique from other batman movies imo.
A character with a vast stylistic history like batman's universe can be intrepreted a variety of ways, she just wants an entirely different movie which is fair, but thats not really criticism of the movie itself.
Batman: The Brave And The Bold is just as legit a version of Batman as Batman: TAS. The beauty of Batman is the malleability of the character.
It also helped that it brought back a lot of characters from the big names to some you'd barely even heard of.
That's why he's endured for nearly a century too. If he was only a "grounded and realistic" character, he would have faded to obscurity like the other Pulp characters of the early 20th century.
That show is simply the best fr.
Shows that the most pure Batman & dcu *can* be really cool.
I'd also like to add The Batman series from 2004. The far better adaptation with the name "The Batman." I especially loved The Batman vs Dracula.
PREACH. The grounded-in-reality approach to Batman has now stagnated Batman as a character. It strips too much away from him so the writers can justify the mob and serial killer-type villains can stand a chance against the watered-down Batman. If they tell you he should only be street level they're not very bright. Batman is the most versatile fictional character of all time and they want to continuously ground him but then cry because they want something fresh as well 🤦🏿♂️. That's why he's on the Justice League and their go-to when they need a scientist and or tactician to get them out of a bind. Reminder: all of the founding 7 JL members have god-level and above abilities except for Batman, whose intellectual and combative prowess is on that level to make up for not having abilities. He's Doctor Doom without magic. Here are some villain examples Ra's Al Ghul, Poison Ivy, and Kobra Cult. Ra's Al Ghul is a 1000-year-old super genius polymathic ecoterrorist warlord who wants to rid the world of crime, corruption, and pollution by wiping out 90 percent of the human population so nature can take over again. Poison Ivy is the same without the crime part, but now she is a human-plant hybrid, and Kobra wants to enslave the world to their deity after releasing the deity from their prison. All have been thwarted by Batman, and they consider him to be THE MAIN THREAT to their plans. He's even so intimidating without powers that god-level beings like Darkseid admitted that Batman is 10 times smarter than all of the members in his service COMBINED. That includes the immortal million-year-old scientific super-genius known as Desaad. You freshen things up by not grounding him and look to Grant Morrison's 2000s Batman run aka Bat-god era, Mike Mignola's Batman run, and Chuck Dixon's 1990s Batman run for inspiration
We have stories where He's fighting Lovecraftian cosmic horror creatures, 13ft Killer Croc, a 10ft zombie walking around in Gotham sewers, and now stories Offworld where he's learning from Aliens. These provide a TRUE challenge for Batman because they take him out of his element of the natural into the supernatural, metahuman, and cosmic realm. How can you take him seriously as the world's greatest detective if some of his greatest villains are Riddler and Two-Face? Two-Face, because of his obsession with the number 2 and duality, will rob the 2nd National Bank of Gotham on 22nd Street on February 2nd at 2 am. Or with the Riddler who gives easy Riddles for people to Google. I can give you one; riddle me this, Batman; it isn't east or west but the opposite of south. How can I take him seriously when these are some of his most iconic street-level villains? Writers have to nerf him so they can stand a chance and it's annoying.
The TV show Batman Brave and the Bold 2008 showcased this the best. He's a scientific match for Ted Kord's Blue Beetle, a deductive match for Sherlock Holmes, and a greater warrior than the immortal warlord Ra's Al Ghul while still being defeated by Bronze Tiger in combat prowess. This show knew how to test Batman by MIXING IT UP. Usually, the street-level crime was left to Robin/Nightwing because being trained by Batman made him so capable that the League of Shadows members, such as Talia, couldn't defeat him. The same league that is stated to have the greatest warriors on the planet. The Terrible, in my opinion, Batman Caped Crusader series had one good episode, and it was the Gentleman Ghost one. It's because we got to see Batman out of his element TRULY testing him with the supernatural. It gives him a chance to be a novice in an area and grow understandably.
I'm going to end with this Batman and Supernatural/Lovecraftian cosmic horror mysteries are made for each other. It allows him to be at his finest as a warrior and a super genius polymathic intellectual while keeping him close to his roots as the world's greatest detective. Hopefully, this answers your question.
There are plenty others comic characters that deal with supernatural stuff, get that shit out of my Batman. Batman is Noir, it's crime fiction, he's a detective fighting crime in Gotham.
@@vee1766respectfully, no, he isn’t. He is all of it. People forget that since the 1950s, he's been dealing with science fiction and the supernatural since, I believe, the 1970s. The most versatile fictional character of all time is stuck in one area because they are afraid to do something different.
I got one for you. Taking inspiration from 1982s The Thing.
Batman has to fight Blob Clayface using practical effects as much as possible. Batman ACTUALLY allowed to be the world's greatest detective without advanced tech will have to pay attention to people's mannerisms to determine whether or not they are who they say they are. Batman is investigating why Clayface is murdering Daggett executives and senators while defeating assassins like the enhanced assassin Philo Zeiss hired by Daggett to stop Clayface and Batman. Batman will also showcase his legendary scientific knowledge to develop a cure for Clayface after discovering that Clayface's condition isn’t sustainable and will soon kill him.
@@FriendlyBatDoom This versality is exactly what ruins Batman. I always considered Justice League Batman to be an abomination. Yes, Batman can have to deal with more supernatural/sci-fi threats once in a while but it's essence is to be a street level hero, a vigilante, a detective protecting Gotham. Batman is a its best when its grounded in crime/Noir vibes. Batman shouldn't be for kids, it shouldn't be cool and fun, the very concept of Batman itself is mature in its controversy.
@@vee1766 Fantastical ≠ for kids
@@vee1766 when has Lovecraft and murderous shape-shifting Blob Men ever been for kids?
"Reality is boring. Nobody wants to pay for reality." - Ed Boon.
Mortal Kombat 11. PlayStation 4.
Oz Cobb is a salad I get when I visit the Emerald City...
😂
Oz Cobb has ties to the court of 🦉 that’s why they went with this name .
Making Batman realistic means that 90% of the stuff I like from the comics and cartoons will never show up.
And I’ve had to deal with this for 20 years!
All because people are afraid of movies from 30 fucking years ago
Your getting DCU batman
@@itsme-uw8vmexcept he just skipped right to Damian Wayne as Robin. Doesn't even bother to build up the Batfamily. I don't want their origins to be referenced in conversation, I wanna see it. And it's also weird that Batman is so far in his career and Superman is seemingly very new
I really enjoyed the Penguin series so far but I wish they'd lean a little more into the comic stuff. Why on earth can't he just be Oswald Cobblepot! I also want him with his weapon umbrellas at some point too. As much as I love The Dark Knight, it has cast an annoying shadow over DC now where it all has to be a bit too ''realistic'' and gritty. Sapped of color and it's comic book roots.
The Gotham comic stuff, like you said, has always been grounded and gritty, i don't know what y'all blabbing on about. Y'all pretend to read comics but it sure feel like you don't. The very best Batman/Gotham comics have always been the most "street level" ones.
@@vee1766 My fave Batman comics are from the late 80s/early 90s and I haven't read any new comics for a decade now. I also love the DCAU. So that's all my go to material.
@@vee1766 boy I sure loved the grounded time a dude from a prison (who was born there and left to die as a boy) came to gotham, immediately figured out who batman was and then let out a bunch of psychopaths to wear him down just to break his spine.
Boy I sure loved how grounded it was how in that same story said guy went and fought a crocodile man to establish dominance over the villans of gotham and put himself as the strongest.
Boy I sure thought it was grounded when batman fought a deranged cult who's cult leader bathes in blood to stay young.
Boy I sure thought it was grounded when batman was mine controlled for 3 months by some lady who controls plants.
Boy, I sure thought it was grounded when batman had to fight an undead zombie who keeps saying a nursey rhyme for some reason.
Come on bro. Come off it.
@@lastmanstanding7155 I never said Batman stories can't have the occasional superfreak psycho encounter. But those should be rare and they are not the best Batman stories. Also y'all are confusing grounded and realistic. Of course it doesn't have to be "realistic", the whole concept of Batman isn't realistic, but it has to be grounded, Batman should be a street level vigilante, not a superhero.
@@vee1766 not the best? Dude, in my references I cited nothing but all the top batman stories. Bane with knightfall and I mentioned his confrontation witj Croc. I then also mentioned the long halloween twice with poison ivy and Salomon Grundy. I then refrenced Deacon Blakfire from his comic called the cult.
These are examples of what us fans considered the best. I did it to deliberately prove you wrong. Rare? Come off it. Long halloween is literally about how it changes from mafia crime to freaks in costumes causing chaos. Rare my tookas. It's part of batman's mythos. Clayface is just as much a legit villan as Joker or Riddler.
Point is, fans besides you exist and want these stories adapted without it being watered down to be "realistic." I don't mind the changes they did for riddler in the batman movie. But I do have issues with saying "it's unrealistic to have Robin. It's too unrealistic to have clayface the monster shape-shifting criminal." You know what else is unrealistic? Freezing someone and they don't instantly die. Yet that doesn't stop me from enjoying any stories with Mr. Freeze in it.
Make Comic Book Movies Again!
The early MCU was like that, and they were beloved and successful, because that's what the audience wanted.
Nolan Trilogy was successful despite the only comic book-y one was the last. But it was Nolan and Bale, so nobody minded.
The latest Batman should have just been an original story, not about Batman but just a vigilante or a cop.
If you don't want to adapt a comic, don't.
The Raimi Spiderman trilogy was like that, Blade, etc. There were so many fun ones that still took things seriously.
@@DavidMartinez-ce3lpWell put
I can't wait for a new "realistic" Superman movie, where he has literally wings on his back so he can fly, an optical Xray/laser device he wears on his eyes so he can use his sight powers and a super advanced body suit that gives him his super strength and invulnerability. He'll also wear a mask to hide his identity and have a dadbod with early onset diabetes because he's a middle-aged man. And the best part about being so realistic is Lois Lane will be perfect in every way and will have to rescue Superman because she's an independent and powerful female who don't need no man to rescue her.
I have been going back through and rewatching the Animated Series and the world of Batman is so much better with all of the fun fantasy elements. I hope with Reeves doing the realistic stuff, James Gunn and Andy Muschetti will take that as an opportunity to go full on ahead with the fantasy elements and be proud to be Comic Book movie, much like how Superman seems to be.
The new name sounds like a shortened version nickname of the full name...
The best realistic Batman I read is Gotham 1919-1939 that had Batman in a ww1 like setting wail also staying true to the character.
Being close to realism, is a failure of imagination.
No its not and shows like Stargate and Grimm proves that
I wouldn’t say that at all. But with Batman in particular its a waste of time.
@@gloriathomas3245but those shows are fun. Reeves is relying only grittiness and realism. That's boring. That can only capture a few aspects of Batman, but it can't capture all of the character. It holds back Batman.
@@DavidMartinez-ce3lp um, no Reeves taking Batman back to the way Bob Kane conceived the character and stories.
@@gloriathomas3245 and he's evolved over time. How about doing something different? A true balance of campy and grounded since that's what Batman is.
I’m bored to death with realistic Batman to the point I find myself revisiting Batman Forever a lot these days.
I also think it’s ironic considering that Batman is a dark character but there are so many shades and colors that can be taken with him thematically and narratively. But nope, Hollywood’s always like, “We need to go darker. Let’s make him even *more* real”, which is so limiting and uninteresting.
Tell me you've never read a Batman/Gotham comic without telling me so... Being grounded and dark is Batman wether you want it or not. If you don't like it there are plenty other comic book characters to satisfy you, why would they change what Batman is about for y'all ?
@@vee1766 🥱
@@vee1766 Tell me you’re gatekeeping without telling me.
Ya know the action in that movie was actually not bad.
@@vee1766no, those are only very specific aspects of the character. Did you forget about the decades of campiness that's part of Batman's history? The character is a mix of campy and grounded. Choosing one or the other means you won't be the character in his entirety.
Look at the penguin they did in the Gotham TV series
He did a very good job of that penguin in that TV series
It was grounded and realistic somewhat..
I have no problem with that one at all..
And his name was still Oswald cobblepot..
He looked the part for penguin in his younger years..
They don't need to change penguin.
He's great the way he is..
Didn't that show make him gay for Riddler?😂
@@DavidMartinez-ce3lp I'm not sure about that
I haven't gotten that far all the way into the seasons..
I've only done enough to maybe like the season 3 or 4 I think..
I'm trying to finish the rest of the seasons but
Too much on my plate..
@@DavidMartinez-ce3lpFor a time, yes, but they didn’t maintain that for all that long
❤️thank you for your unbiased review
Everyone has biases, including Jesterbell. It's not a bad thing, it's just a part of reality.
There's nothing realistic about Batman, especially in films but these directors who don't read comics will warp him into something that they can sell as realistic.
James Gunn was right when he said we've never gotten a proper Batman movie.
I’d say we’ve still gotten good Batman movies just not accurate
nah James Gunn is wrong
Agree completely.
Making batman ultra-realistic takes away a lot of the gothic glamour of the character. Nolan's, for example, lost Gotham - the city was Chicago in all but name. And once you do that, batman himself looks ridiculous. Why is he wearing a suit? Why is he driving an insane care? Surely he should just be a man in a balaclava and leather jacket...
Batman's operatic. His villains, his environments, everything about the world leans in that direction. Trying to strip it back to basics loses a lot of great stuff along the way.
If I were making a Batman live action movie, i would start with Batman adopting Dick Grayson after the death of the Flying Graysons. Make it about Batman trying to investigate who killed them and why. All while trying to balance being a father and being Batman. Teaching Dick Grayson to not allow his thirst for revenge consume him. To choose to bring the man who killed his parents to justice. Dick earns the name Robin, and the dynamic duo go off to have many adventures.
Keep the source material!😊
I like that Batman is grounded compared to other superheroes and is more of a detective, But he should still exist in a fantastical world
I've been waiting for Clayface.
Kinda off topic but I wish dc would stop reusing only their big name character and give some of the lesser known characters a show/game/movies. One I'd love to see is the Crimson Avenger3 (Jill Carlyle) such a cool concept sitting right there collecting dust.
Gunn is doing that with the DCU
Then you should watch Creature Commandos, Swamp Thing, Booster Gold, and The Authority when they come out soon. Those guys are either B or C tier DC characters.
Remember when comic book movies felt like comic books? Pepperidge Farms remembers.
The best example of a "realistic Batman" is Batman Earth-1. The comic opens with Bruce being a complete fuck up as Batman, but as the story progresses he begins to learn from the people around him and they, in a way, help him become a better Batman. If you havent read it, give it a go. Its a great read and is just wild enough to be entertaining.
But with all that being said, Batman will NEVER be realistic, no matter what. Theres nothing realistic about a man in a Batsuit punching criminals. There's nothing realistic about recruiting a kid to fight dangerous criminals. And theres nothing realistic about his Rogues Gallery. So Hollywood should just fucking run with it! Add villains like Killer Croc, or Mad Hatter, or Maxi Zeus. Give us the Bat Family. I liked the Dark Knight and The Batman as movies, but lets delve into the more comic-esque stories!
That actually sounds very interesting Ima have to give that a read.
I agree, and I've been saying this for years. Batman isn't grounded. He's not a street level character. A true balance of campy and grounded is key to capturing Batman. Something like what Raimi was able to do with Spiderman in his trilogy. Honestly, Raimi would be an amazing director choice for a Batman movie.
JesterBell hitting with the facts!
That's why I can't watch the sequel I can't stand realistic simping batman
Ozcobb sounds like they’re trying to say Oscorp lol
My favourite batman film is "batman returns" mainly because of Catwoman's supernatural origin and Gotham mystical aesthetic. I wish that origin would make its way into comics. I am bored by the grounded stuff too😅 also I think Matt reeves also said that a superman and a wonder woman don't have place in his universe 🥴
It’s weird hearing that Matt Reeves may have a problem with fantastical elements in movies, when he has directed two movies about intelligent talking apes.
I’m really annoyed that people keep saying his name’s been changed to Oz Cobb. Cobblepot is the only part of his name that was changed. He’s literally referred to as Oswald Cobb in the first five minutes. Oz is just the nickname that he has in both the show and the comics.
That's still changing his name and no one uses Oz as shorthand for Oswald, they use Ozzie.
@@BaithNa I can’t believe you could be so wrong with such confidence
I would normally agree, but a high fantasy Batman would be redundant when Brave and the Bold Batman is released. I don't mind a pocket universe with CSI Batman.
Saying that Matt Reeves is just trying to copy Nolan is kind of insane to me. The Dark Knight trilogy and the Batman could not be more different with their approach to Batman as a character or the style of the films. Them both being more “realistic” takes on Batman doesn’t mean they’re doing the same thing.
What's being done differently with the character of Batman then?
They have to make these movies for the average person that dosen't like comic books sadly. If they make it to much like a comic book people complain it looks like a videogame. I just want a movie where Batman has existed for 10 years and villains already exist. No more origins
Speaking on behalf of non-comic book enthusiasts, there’s a lot more that we can handle in comic book adaptations then you think. The 2002 Spider-Man had a scene where Green Goblin turns people into skeletons with his bombs. The movie’s still great and had mainstream appeal. These movies can be corny without suffering for it. (Also, I don’t view superhero origin movies as a problem at all.)
@matityaloran9157 A lot of average viewers like "grounded" batman because most don't know anything outside the movies. They don't understand Batman exists in a fictional universe like Spider-Man. I get these movies have to be made for everyone which is why we have to see Batman's parents die in every movie. It's like when "reviewers" complain about the '84 Tranformers movie which takes place and not knowing who the characters are.
It’s called comic book ADAPTATION! So there’s multiple stories about one character and INTERPRETATION. Like in the comics one character but hundreds of variations of the character and his/her world. You understand that? That’s what is being done here. Dcu Batman and Reeves’ Batman are INTERPRETED differently.
Come on guys think 😂
I personally do not care what form a Batman story takes… I just want a good Batman story, and that’s what The Batman was. In fact, my two favorite Batman movies are The Batman and The LEGO Batman, so a Batman comic adaptation can literally have any tone as long as it is executed well.
The thing is that because of the disastrous way in which WB handled DC, Gunn can't go back with Reeves Batman even if he wanted without causing an uproar. The Batman already happened and it was successful so if Gunn even dared to cancel it for the sake of having only one Batman, people would jumpt to his throat for it, especially without receipts to show for his own, or if it wasn't on part with Reeves' version. So we'll have to live with two Batmans, each with their own approach, for people to enjoy both or the one they prefer more. The only ways I see Reeves' Batman going away are 1) he stops after a certain number of movies or 2) Rob doesn't renew contract and we're left only with DCU Batman 3) his version somehow starts flopping and audiences themselves stop wanting his Batman.
I'm not trying to be mean here, but I feel like a lot of this is projecting. We don't know if Reeves is copying Nolan because it was successful, it could be Reeves' is more comfortable with something more grounded, we don't know if The Penguin was another script adjusted for the property, and the comment about painting in all black and thinking you're the greatest artist ever, come on! I don't think Matt Reeves thinks he's the greatest ever, I mean idk lol. I feel like The Batman, while similar to say The Dark Knight in that sense of 'lets make it somewhat realistic,' it has such a wildly different tone than any of the Dark Knight movies. The Penguin does seem very inspired by Joker in "let's take a comics book character and put him in taxi driver/the sopranos" but when the results are this good I can't really fault it
OMG YES!! I thought the same thing, it was so stupid!!! How is Oz Cobb more realistic? To me it sounds like Oscorp from Marvel lol. He's the freaking Penguin, let him have the freaking OG name cause no one would mind. They created a problem NO ONE had. Also, people could still call him Oz to shorten his name, even if the longer name was the legal one. There was no need to make that stupid clarification about using a realistic name.
Batman works best on film when you keep it grounded. It not like the movie are bad there the best movie we got.
People seem to confuse wanting dark with wanting realistic. Sure batman is dark, but its also goofy as hell. You've got a rich orphan with high tech gadgets dressing up as a bat and fighting evil ppl who dress up like clowns, scarecrows, cats, etc. Thats one thing i didnt like about the batman movie. They tried to make the riddler look and seem more "realistic." What they fail to realize is it can still be dark even if the riddler is a guy dressed in a green tuxedo with a question mark cane
In hindsight I wish they would have just done the DCEU batman movie because the batman is a very divisive film. It's not universally loved. Some people love it, some are bothered by it. If the DCEU batman had gotten made it would have kept people united. Walter Hamada seemed to want to movie away from a connected universe though, so he ordered the batman to be its own universe.
Not with you this time, I like this approach for Batman films an series, that said Im not a Batman comic fan. A serious, grounded, dark kind of realistic Batman is the only Batman will take me to the theater
Honestly, if these directors and creators aren’t going to using the actual source material in their adaptation works, then why go into comic book adaptation movies. I mean even Zack Snyder had issues with some of the fantasy elements of the source material comics.
I hate how a fan like yourself, who expresses why they like what they like and wants the things about what they like to be present in the adaptations of those things, is referred to as a "toxic fan" for expressing their frustration that those things are absent.
Our like of the things being adapted is what made them successful and popular in the first place.
The people who make the changes to those things for their adaptations aren't embarrassed of the source material, they're embarrassed of the fans of that source material and they don't want us, they want to attract a different audience with their takes.
This is why we see so many beloved IPs floundering in current day, because people who don't like those IPs are being sought out to make them. They want to purge the already existing audiences from those IPs. It's happening across all mediums of entertainment.
Upset that a game is making drastic changes to core mechanics of storytelling and gameplay? You need to accept that they're adapting to reach a broader audience.
Frustrated that a show adaptation about a beloved IP made drastic changes to characters and events? You're a toxic fan and your toxic opinions are violence.
Confused why a well known IP was so altered from it's source material for a movie to the point that it's virtually only recognizable as that IP because it has the same name? Well, that because it wasn't made for you, but when it flops, it's your fault because you didn't pay to watch what wasn't made for you.
It worked for TDK trilogy and I think it works for The Batman Saga but I would like a more comic book world adaptation for James Gunns Batman.
That's the main reason I'm curious to see what Gunn does with DC Studios, he doesn't shy away from fantastical/weird characters or settings and DC needs to finally lean into the comic roots instead of trying to make everything "grounded."
Oswald Cobblebot sounds way more badass. Why do they have to ruin a good thing happening.
The original trilogy of Arkham games and the Batman Animated show are the best adaptations of the spirit of the Batman comics, they are different but both respect the spirit of the comics and characters.
That poison ivy backstory came from Neil Gaimen I believe, which feels a bit different now considering what's come out about him...
The most unrealistic thing even in comics is that Penguins name sounds English, while he's ruling a Italian crime family
Completely agree. I've always felt this way. Batman is a fantasy character. When you remove that part, the character and stories lose something important.
I agree with your Reeves batman take... But you are getting James Gunn's comic version
it is my problem also with some of the MCU characres also i couldn't believe what they did with the Mandarin.
Preach it, sister!
Nolan changed the game forever
"Oz Cobb" is a stupid name.
best Jesterbell video
This is what I don’t get. These folks adapt these characters. These stories. These worlds/universes but then decide to change certain aspects of them because they deem them too whatever. Not realistic enough. Too goofy, too colorful, too whatever. You clearly don’t have respect for the original material so why even make a project from it? Why even adapt it? The show is called “The Penguin” but they won’t even use the name Penguin in the entirety of the series.
Because they just wanna do their version of it. They only care about very specific aspects. They don't care about bringing the characters to life, only certain elements of the character.
It's Oswald Cobb
No it's not
@@Dylanisa_BasketCaseit is
Even if that’s the case, the name change seems pointless
@@matityaloran9157 it is
Even Nolan's trilogy wasnt realistic. It just had a mask of realism. The Batman was visually stunning but boring. The Riddler is the most forgettable Batman villain in Batman live action movie. He was like a CSI baddie.......... Why is no one making a Batman v Deathstroke movie???
Umm Ben Affleck was going to make a Batman Vs Deathstroke movie and got canned for Matt reeves Batman movie
I'm not a fan of Oz Cobb, (this is what I get for making fun of Caped Crusader's 'Oswalda') but the issue isn't realism, so much as just over-doing it. Even Nolan's movies still had hallucinative fear toxins, and tech that looked like future sci-fi. But Reeves has Batman driving around in a car anyone could make themselves! He's going TOO realistic.
And there's a reason this is happening. What's the most acclaimed X-Men movie? It is "Logan." What about Marvel shows? It's Daredevil. These works strip away the fantasy elements for something more grounded and realistic. There's no denying the power in making comic books more mature, and a lot of creators want in on that. And since this is a stylistic choice, there is no "right" or "wrong" to it, only a matter of preference.
I'd just like to not hear "no" when it comes to what can and can't be done. I don't want to hear "We can't do Omega Red, he's too silly." Then make him serious. If Poison Ivy has elements that don't work, find the ones that do- Eco terrorists are a real thing. Use that. If that means Bullseye is in street clothes, rather than the iconic costume I want, so be it. Just make it work.
Cobbelepot can work.
finally someone that rationalize insted of thinking "realistic batman is boring because is not as fun as deadpool and wolverine". Look if we don't have a realistic batman or a realisitc wolverine or even a daredevil. what we will got insted? the mcu shitting boring as safe movies per year with the marvels and quatumania and we keep complaning that "comic book movies should be more serious without quips"?
people will never know what they really want untill the loose it, and they will all look ridiculous when they say shit like "rememeber the good old way when everybody use to hate this but now we are smarter 10 latter we love it?"
Why not just call him Oswald?
He literally gets called that with 5 minutes of the first episode
@@gontse1386 So whats this shit about his name being Corn Cob now?
Wait it's literally just Oz lol? I thought they were just saying that as short for Oswald.
I thought so too. I also thought they were saying Cobb as short for Cobblepot. Plenty of people with long surnames get nicknamed with a shorter version.
The Batman was a safe bet for WB. They took absolute no risks with that film. It's about as skippable and forgettable as Spiderman: Homecoming. Skipping the origin story, only to done anyway. What was the point? Everything Reeves did, Nolan already did but in a much more fun way.
To me Nolan’s Batman is not my favorite.
@garrettmurphy2447 I can understand that, but he did make people take Batman seriously again. Hollywood learned the wrong lessons by trying to make Batman only a dark and brooding lone wolf. It gets boring when that's all we've seen for the last 3 modern live action adaptations. I want someone to do something different. A true balance between campy and grounded.
I couldn't disagree more. The best Batman has ALWAYS been the more grounded, street-level Batman, the vigilante/detective who fights against criminals, gangsters, corrupted politicians, conspiracies and the occasional weird freak with a touch of supernatural. THAT is Batman at his best, not the bullshit Justice League superhero who fights aliens, clashes with Superman and outsmarts cosmic villains with his "supercomputer" brain.
@@vee1766 You’re not a comic fan
A lot of old comics are unrealistically campy, including Batman.
This is why I despise Nolan and Reeves, and prefer Tim Burton and Michael Keaton. They both understood Batman so much better by remembering that Batman is fictional and there's a limit to how seriously you can take him.
I feel like there's room for both. I really enjoy the realistic take on Batman but I'm open to the fantastical elements too. I'm glad we're getting the Reeves verse and Gunn verse at the same time.
As much as i love the batman it irritated me that the batman aesthetic i wanted i got but they made it realistic, you could easily fit grundy, clay face, man bat and killer croc in the reeves world, they’ll always say their fav batman stories are the long halloween or The Dark Knight Returns. They don’t care about shit else, it seems.
I don't mind a grounded realistic approach to Batman per se. If anything, I think you can tell a lot of great batman stories from a grouned realistic point of view. However, I do think you can also tell a great batman story that still incorporates the fantasy elements about the character as well. The 90's "Batman: The Animated Series" proved this. It not only told serious dramatic stories, but they did it while incoroporating the larger than life fantasy elements to it as well. Heck, they even modernized a few characters too just to make them more appealing. Mr. Freeze for example used to be nothing more than a crook that used his freezing abilities to rob banks like a common Saturday morning super villain. Yet, "Batman the Animated Series" took that character, and added a new backstory that made him more complex and nuanced as a character while still staying true to the fantasy elements about him.
I don't mind Matt Reeves take on the character. Even though the grounded realistic approach to Batman has already been done with Christopher Nolan's take, I do think Reeves adds enough there to make his potential trilogy different than Nolan's trilogy. For example. Apart from some of the video games, and some of the comics, we've always seen Bruce Wayne's parents being described in cartoons and movies as being these prominent hollier than thou figures that Bruce can only dream to aspire to. By making his parents somehow just as corrupt as the criminals that Batman fights, and the fact that Alfred knew about it and covered it up from Bruce, it adds a new layer to the story that the previous Batman incarnations never dealt with. Plus, we've never seen Batman act like much of a detective in the previous live action films. Yes, we saw glimpses of it in Nolan's trilogy, but Matt Reeves' version seem to be more or less more bought into the detective aspects of Batman moreso than the previous incarnations.
However, I do think that if Gunn wants his new Batman to stand out, it would be wise for his DCU Batman to incorporate the more fantastical elements, as that would even lend itself to making it easier for his canon DCU Batman to do crossover films too with Justice League and etc.
We give joel Shoemaker batman movies crap but at least he wasn't afraid to embrace the comic book world of batman
@@karlmaxey I like those movies
Who cares, they are still trash
The batman is grounded the way 'Year one' comics does...Not totally grounded but also he is not fighting Superman...It's something in the middle....so calling the makers ashamed of the source materials is dumb...As for the name change yeah it's stupid...But that doesn't mean the show is shit or Makers are ashamed of the source materials...come on
I like the Penguin show, but these attempts to make Batman super realistic always bothered me. The best thing about Gunn coming in for the new DCU, is that he's more likely to embrace the fantastical elements of the Batman corner of DC.
when they made Twilight boy Batman I knew we was going to wrong direction😂😂😂
The movie was good tho
@@turnerburner922was it?
@@BaithNaYes
@@BaithNa Better than Throat Cancer Man and relying on a dead guy to be relevant, er I mean Dark Knight
I disagree Robert Pattinson did a great job ad Batman
Well said. If "The Penguin" is unrealistic as a villain name, I'd like to know how "The Batman" is realistic as a name.
What did you think of "Batman Returns"? It certainly played fast and loose with the source material, but no one can accuse Tim Burton of shying away from fantasy.
In all honesty I don't mind Matt Reeves Batman being grounded and realistic because we still are going to get the DCU's Batman which I believe will be more fantastical because of the world it's going to be set in
Batman 89 FTW
The dark knight trilogy victim
@@gontse1386 That iteration of Batman was killed well before the TDK trilogy. It could not survive Batman & Robin (the movie, not the characters), although arguably it died even earlier, when the studio refused to let Burton move ahead with his own sequel to Batman Returns, and Keaton declined to return for Schumacher's take.
Nowadays we are used to the concept of a very belated sequel though (look how many years since the first Beetlejuice) and so arguably the possibility existed even post-TDK for the B89 iteration of the character to return. Which in fact happened in The Flash movie. Of course, that movie didn't do too well (not Keaton's fault) and by the time it came out, the studio had already pretty much decided he wouldn't be part of things going forward.
You are always complaining about everything. Why don’t you just enjoy and be grateful that we are getting what you and many other batman fans the fanatical elements in the dcu. How are you complaining when you know what you are going to get??😂
I watched the first episode and I heard "Oz" and "Cobb" but I assumed these were just abbreviations and that his real name was the same as always. Guess not.
YES!!! SAY IT LOUDER FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE BACK!!!
🗣🗣🗣
You are serving face and fashion today we love it
I think it was unnecessary but he’s still the penguin and the show is really good so far. I get this issue of people straying from the source material because they think it’s goofy or whatever but in this case, Reeves had an idea for a Batman world that was somewhat grounded and a detective story. That’s what we got, that’s what was greenlit. It was never intended to be anything else and it works. The DCU is coming and all the fantasy stuff will be there.
Batman lends itself to realism because of 2 factors - Batman doesny rely on supernatural abilities - so EVERYone can relate to him in thinking the best of themselves "yeah, if i was a billionaire, i would do that too!" And, also because of no fantasy powrers being needed also means it can use the Robin Hood effect of you believing someone in real life today could do the same thing if they were a billionaire. Nothing is more powerful to an audience than immersion in believability because it is chiefly what sucks an audience in.
If you want someone to blame, blame Joel Schumacher, who made the early batman movies SO cringe-inducingly over-the-top comic-y that everyone rolled their eyes.
Every movie version of Batman is a direct response to the previous version. The last one was fighting aliens, so now he's brought back to the streets. Don't worry the pendulum will swing the other way back towards something more fantastical in the next one (which I guess is James Gunn, and that looks to be his goal)
The thing about Robin also inevitably takes you to the people that are pro realistic Batman wanting Death In the Family to be adapted if we got a Robin. But Death In the family should NEVER be the first Robin experience UNLESS you have decided NOT to have any more Robins. See the reason why a Batfam even exists, and why a there can even be another Robin after Jason is BECAUSE there's a Robin that LIVED! Dick Grayson is THE success story, not just cause he lived to adulthood, but as you said, because he didn't turn out like Batman either. He is the living proof that not all sidekick could end up like Jason. If, instead, you have your first Robin die, then Batman should NEVER take in another child let alone make him Robin.
I’m a hard core lifelong Batman fan and I actually agree with Matt Reeves on this. I really struggle with the idea of having someone like Mr Freeze, poison Ivy, clay face, man bat and others existing in THE BATMAN universe. It just conflicts with the atmosphere and genre that he set up in the first film and would take me out of it and I’m sure others as well. Even in a show like Gotham that I really loved it felt odd having Mr Freeze and Poison Ivy there and they were some of the weakest points of the show. Scarecrow, firefly, mad hatter, hush, court of owls, Scarface, black mask, Ra’s Al Ghul, Shiva and professor Pyg are villains that would fit better in this universe. Now with the name change of the penguin though I wouldn’t say is unrealistic but more fitting for what type of penguin he is. In most iterations, the Cobblepots are an extremely wealthy family that are in the same league as the Waynes and Arkhams. Sometimes even one of the founding families of the city. Having him be Oswald Cobb makes more sense for where this version of him is in this story. He’s a nobody that comes from nothing and has to build a name for himself. Even when Gotham did the same thing they ended up revealing in the second season that he came from a wealthy family and he didn’t know about it. If we have to have fantastical Batman villains then that’s what the James Gunn DCU Batman should be about and honestly the only reason to have a separate Batman film series.
In realtion to the idea that only drama can be cinema, I wanna believe that Scorsese, while critical of the current Hollywood, wouldn't be so arrogant to not consider the OG Star Wars for example "not cinema". George Lucas, and others like him, such as Spielberg or James Cameron, are also responsible for some of the BEST cinema has given us, and it's because they didn't limit themselves to what was realistic or achievable with realism in cinema, and they especially didn't limit themselves to drama. So yeah, you're 100% correct that limiting themselves to realism and drama is ridiculous. Cinema wouldn't have progressed or been revolutionized if not for people going against that notion.
Exact same here. I am fed up with waiting for more creativity and character additions in various adaptations. Waiting SO long that it seems less and less likely that they will be utilized more. Plus, Robin can work in a realistic setting anyway. There are real people who go out of their way to be actual vigilantes, using various gadgets and what-not. Dick, or even a group of teens, can become such a vigilante *without* Batman, but run into Batman at various parts of the city during criminal activity, and grow some bond from there. The new DC Shared Universe needs to step up for Batman's fantastical aspects!