The Batman Spoiler Discussion Thread

[Captain Tired]

In fairness, if you didn't have the character laugh, I'd imagine the implication would be lost on a great many more people than it already was.

 

[Boom]

I guess my big issue with it is the riddle wasn't even funny. Certainly not that funny. Yet these two were dying laughing over it.

Just odd.

 

[AndyTrevino]

The more I think about the Joker cameo (and I also rewatched it on Twitter) the more I feel like it was the only really big misstep of the whole movie. It feels like something mandated by the studio, rather than something Reeves wanted. It feels so out of place within the context of the movie it’s in. And it’s such a by-the-numbers, rote version of the character. Did we really need the big, forced, repeated laughter? We all know he does it. Couldn’t we have had a much calmer, more monstrous Joker? More ambiguous? It felt like I was watching something from an entirely different movie. A considerably campier one. Poor choice.

To be fair, we don't really know how much they've refined their version yet. He could act differently in sequels for all we know.

Then again, some people were able to make out a mouth wound on his cheek so our wishes for a monstrous Joker may yet come true. And I'd argue the contrast between a hideous, disfigured Joker acting like the BTAS iteration would be very interesting.

 

[antsman41]

One is psychotic and the other is schizophrenic…

Pretty sure that scene was spot on.

 

[AndyTrevino]

I guess my big issue with it is the riddle wasn't even funny. Certainly not that funny. Yet these two were dying laughing over it.

Just odd.

I'm thinking Nashton was just off the rails by that point, knew Joker was probably an insidious influence, but just didn't care anymore and took the bait.

Joker was laughing because he's got him wrapped around his finger now and he didn't even know it.

 

[kolyid]

I guess my big issue with it is the riddle wasn't even funny. Certainly not that funny. Yet these two were dying laughing over it.

Just odd.

They are both psychos with a few loose screws of course a normal person isn’t going to think it’s funny.

 

[Captain Tired]

I imagine they're not laughing at the actual riddle per se, so much as the implied understanding that they're both going to team up and **** with the Batman. That was my reading of it.

 

[J.Drangal]

So there were two scenes with the Joker initially. Reeves told the French press about it here:

The Batman : la surprise du film expliquée par le réalisateur Matt Reeves

Translation of Reeves' statement:

“Does the film introduce us to the main antagonist of the next film? No, that was not the intention”, affirms Matt Reeves to our microphone. "I don't even know who the villain will be in the sequel. The character was supposed to appear earlier, in another scene, but it's all about the context: I didn't want to do a Batman origin story, because I had the feeling that it had been done, and very well, in several other films."

"Instead, I wanted to show him in his younger years as a vigilante. Like a 'Batman: Year Two'. And as I delved into the comic books, I discovered that a lot of his enemies emerged as a reaction to the presence of this masked individual called Batman in Gotham, and I realized that's where their origin story lay. "

"This character in Arkham goes back to the Joker before he was the Joker. He hasn't decided to claim that concept yet. But I wanted to make him someone that Batman met in his first year, and that he had him locked up because he was a killer. And because Batman was disturbed by the Riddler writing to him, he had to go to Arkham to try to establish his profile, see if he could succeed in entering his state of mind to understand the reasons for these letters."

"When he goes to the asylum, the Joker who is locked up - but who is not the Joker because there is none - manages to read in Batman: 'Why do you wonder why he's writing to you ? You are exactly the same, both masked vigilantes.' He draws a comparison between the two, and Batman is so pissed off by the idea that he rejects it."

"The scene was originally in the movie, and Barry Keoghan was great, as was Robert Pattinson. But seeing how big the movie is, I ended up realizing it didn't need to be there. I Still kept his second scene. Because it marked the end of the Riddler arc, but also because it showed that more trouble was coming."

"When Selina tells Bruce in the epilogue that the city will never change, removing the scene [with the future Joker] changed the stakes. Because you didn't have the feeling that something was already brewing. Even if the intention wasn't to say: 'This is where the next film will go!' The idea was more to give some context to this world, and to show that even if the stranglehold of corruption has been broken to some degree, trouble is not going to stop coming."

"And that explains in part why Bruce doesn't go with Selina. Why he can't. He is forced to do what he does, and that's why I saved this scene. Anyway, all this to say that this character is the one you're thinking of, but that doesn't necessarily mean he'll be the next movie's villain."

___​

I have to say I don't find that justification for keeping only this second scene very convincing. The movie ends showing how a part of the citizen had quickly followed a murderous psychopath, we know that Oz is becoming the new crime lord and obviously we're not gullible enough to think you can stop corruption and crime just by taking some people off...
I wonder if WB asked him to kept at least one of the two when he decide it hasn't really its place in the movie. I would have deleted both or just kept the other aha. On paper, it just seems so much more relevant to the plot in several ways. Also, I would have been curious to see Keohgan in this one, as I found the little snippet we got rather sterile (but like I said, I won't condemn his casting, the apparition was too short to be fairly judged).

 

[C Prometheus]

I guess my big issue with it is the riddle wasn't even funny. Certainly not that funny. Yet these two were dying laughing over it.

Just odd.

My read on the scene is that Joker is laughing because he's manipulating Ed into thinking he's a friend. Heck, the riddle itself isn't even necessarily a good one, because while "a friend" certainly works as an answer, it's not like there aren't alternatives that'd also suit the question. Which could very easily be the point for Joker- it's all just a joke to him. If I'm right, essentially Joker is secretly laughing at Ed. He's got him hook, line and sinker.

Ed, for all we know, might be laughing more out of a need for companionship and solidarity after being soundly rejected by Batman earlier in the film.

I imagine they're not laughing at the actual riddle per se, so much as the implied understanding that they're both going to team up and **** with the Batman. That was my reading of it.

This also works quite well IMO.

 

[Primal Slayer]

Personally I'm still a little conflicted about the Penguin Rata Alada scene. I loved the scene itself but at the same time I feel like that's something Batman would've figured out himself.

Still a great movie to me.

That's part of the reason why I enjoyed this film. Bats is smart but he still needs help with various things from riddles to fights, etc

 

[legendkillin]

Edit: one more thought occurs… does Joker’s inclusion mean those thugs at the beginning were in fact people taking after him? Similar to the Todd Phillip’s movie? Could Reeves be hinting at the makeup style without even showing it on Joker?

Maybe not. Just a thought.

Yeah that is what I believed when they showed in the trailer, they were followers of Joker. They weren't from his inner circle though since they didn't know Batman when he cam to beat their ass but they liked what Joker did I guess.

 

[BatLobster]

There are two fundamental things kind of nagging me about this film. Curious if anyone can offer any insight, because admittedly, only seen it once, I could've very easily not picked up on things.

1. Batman obviously knows Carmine Falcone and the mob exists. Up until this point has he really made 0 attempt to bring him down? I know it's a different take, but literally in Batman Begins the very first act of Batman is to take down a crime boss. And that just makes a lot of sense, if your goal is to clean up the city. I get that this Bruce is more 'damaged', but the fact that he thinks beating up petty thugs is going to solve anything when you know there are bigger fish...I dunno. This Batman clearly isn't afraid to put himself directly in harm's way either. I get that it's pretty much exactly where Keaton's Batman started, but we still saw that version save the city from a major threat in order to earn Gordon's trust. I'm not exactly sure why this Gordon would trust this version of Batman so implicitly to the point that he's already set up a Bat-signal and invites him to crime scenes. It could be there in the backstory, but I'm just left wondering about it.

2. How exactly does Riddler know all the dirty secrets that he does? This is something I feel like I maybe need to watch more closely for.

 

[legendkillin]

In fairness, if you didn't have the character laugh, I'd imagine the implication would be lost on a great many more people than it already was.

Yeah considering the face was all messed up and Two-Face is known to have a messed up face.

To a lesser known extent it could be viewed as Clayface without a laugh as his face could be dripping or just whatever.

They needed the laugh as he is locked up so couldn't go with a Joker card or something else he is known for.

 

[legendkillin]

There are two fundamental things kind of nagging me about this film. Curious if anyone can offer any insight, because admittedly, only seen it once, I could've very easily not picked up on things.

1. Batman obviously knows Carmine Falcone and the mob exists. Up until this point has he really made 0 attempt to bring him down? I know it's a different take, but literally in Batman Begins the very first act of Batman is to take down a crime boss. And that just makes a lot of sense, if your goal is to clean up the city. I get that this Bruce is more 'damaged', but the fact that he thinks beating up petty thugs is going to solve anything...I dunno. I get that it's pretty much exactly where Keaton's Batman started, but we still saw that version save the city from a major threat in order to earn Gordon's trust. I'm not exactly sure why this Gordon would trust this version of Batman so implicitly to the point that he's already set up a Bat-signal and invites him to crime scenes. It could be there in the backstory, but I'm just left wondering about it.

2. How exactly does Riddler know all the dirty secrets that he does? This is something I feel like I maybe need to watch more closely for.

For 1 I think he may have let his father friendship with Falcone cloud some judgement. He was a friend of the family and covered up somethings so maybe Bruce as a kid just trusted him whenever he was around. Regarding the Bat Signal yeah it must have been a rough year whatever Joke did for them to set up the signal early. It was just a warning to help establish fear in the small time crime people.

2. I am just guessing Riddler was one of the conspiracy theorist types growing up. He was in the orphanage that Thomas was giving his speech in, so he heard the speech and the promises. He may have latched on to the hope and when he got old enough decided to dig into why it never happen. Probably consumed a lot of his time researching and stalking those involved.

 

[legendkillin]

So was what Bruce injected himself with in the end to give him that boost to save Kyle just like adrenaline? or was it like Bane type juice since it looked a bit green or that drug the orphan kids he said were on?

 

[J.Drangal]

There are two fundamental things kind of nagging me about this film. Curious if anyone can offer any insight, because admittedly, only seen it once, I could've very easily not picked up on things.

1. Batman obviously knows Carmine Falcone and the mob exists. Up until this point has he really made 0 attempt to bring him down? I know it's a different take, but literally in Batman Begins the very first act of Batman is to take down a crime boss. And that just makes a lot of sense, if your goal is to clean up the city. I get that this Bruce is more 'damaged', but the fact that he thinks beating up petty thugs is going to solve anything when you know there are bigger fish...I dunno. This Batman clearly isn't afraid to put himself directly in harm's way either. I get that it's pretty much exactly where Keaton's Batman started, but we still saw that version save the city from a major threat in order to earn Gordon's trust. I'm not exactly sure why this Gordon would trust this version of Batman so implicitly to the point that he's already set up a Bat-signal and invites him to crime scenes. It could be there in the backstory, but I'm just left wondering about it.

2. How exactly does Riddler know all the dirty secrets that he does? This is something I feel like I maybe need to watch more closely for.

On your first point, the Reeves' interview I translated a few posts ago about the other scene with the Joker the director finally deleted could explain what Batman has achieved before. Even though the character wasn't a full-on Joker yet, he was apparently still a murderer that Batman helps to catch. I guess he became close to Gordon through "little" cases like this, besides beating thugs here and there to warm-up haha

About the Riddler's sources, I also wondered. I guess it was through his work as an accountant, but I also have to check it when I'll go watch the movie again.

 

[Jermobooka]

So, I’m not going to go in depth with my thoughts on the film here, because if I did I’d exceed the word count four times over. But I do want to talk about one thing I really, really liked.

‘Ol Batsy’s gadgets.

For one, the concept of having the double grappling guns retractable from the gauntlets is AWESOME. It was really cool how much Bats used his grapples and all the different ways he used them (that move in the final fight where he gets two guys by hooking them and spinning around a bar??? BADASS).

The wing suit being the cape itself is a really neat way to keep the whole “gliding with the cape” thing in tact while still being believable.

I honestly hope that the suit doesn’t change at all in future installments. I think it’s perfect as is. Though, I would like to see some batarangs in the future.

 

[Ninjablade]

There are two fundamental things kind of nagging me about this film. Curious if anyone can offer any insight, because admittedly, only seen it once, I could've very easily not picked up on things.

1. Batman obviously knows Carmine Falcone and the mob exists. Up until this point has he really made 0 attempt to bring him down? I know it's a different take, but literally in Batman Begins the very first act of Batman is to take down a crime boss. And that just makes a lot of sense, if your goal is to clean up the city. I get that this Bruce is more 'damaged', but the fact that he thinks beating up petty thugs is going to solve anything when you know there are bigger fish...I dunno. This Batman clearly isn't afraid to put himself directly in harm's way either. I get that it's pretty much exactly where Keaton's Batman started, but we still saw that version save the city from a major threat in order to earn Gordon's trust. I'm not exactly sure why this Gordon would trust this version of Batman so implicitly to the point that he's already set up a Bat-signal and invites him to crime scenes. It could be there in the backstory, but I'm just left wondering about it.

2. How exactly does Riddler know all the dirty secrets that he does? This is something I feel like I maybe need to watch more closely for.

Yeah, I would've liked just a little bit more in terms of what Bruce's first year is like. Something considerably big must've happened in order for the police to be fully aware of his existence, but it doesn't seem like something big enough that got a lot of attention outside of that or had an impact on the crime world.

As for the second thing. I can't remember if it was in the prison or the following video monologue, but he states that when he was younger he found a ledger in the orphanage that had all the details of the money transfers regarding the Renewal Fund. So, that's how he found out about who was corrupt. Not sure how he found out about who was the rat unless that was also identified in the ledger for whatever reason.

 

[Kev4000]

Do we know what the after credit scene was about after the question mark. In the 0,2 sec it appeared, I coudnt read it..

 

[scorpius]

There are two fundamental things kind of nagging me about this film. Curious if anyone can offer any insight, because admittedly, only seen it once, I could've very easily not picked up on things.

1. Batman obviously knows Carmine Falcone and the mob exists. Up until this point has he really made 0 attempt to bring him down? I know it's a different take, but literally in Batman Begins the very first act of Batman is to take down a crime boss. And that just makes a lot of sense, if your goal is to clean up the city. I get that this Bruce is more 'damaged', but the fact that he thinks beating up petty thugs is going to solve anything when you know there are bigger fish...I dunno. This Batman clearly isn't afraid to put himself directly in harm's way either. I get that it's pretty much exactly where Keaton's Batman started, but we still saw that version save the city from a major threat in order to earn Gordon's trust. I'm not exactly sure why this Gordon would trust this version of Batman so implicitly to the point that he's already set up a Bat-signal and invites him to crime scenes. It could be there in the backstory, but I'm just left wondering about it.

2. How exactly does Riddler know all the dirty secrets that he does? This is something I feel like I maybe need to watch more closely for.

I think we can easily imagine that he tried during his two years fighting criminals. But Falcone is as reclusive as Bruce himself(that's what he said at the funeral) controlling everything secretly. To bring him down you need him to be physically involved in criminal activities, or to have substantial proof. Which obviously Batman had in Begins.

Bruce definitely knows Falcone is dirty but he has no proof, noting that can be tied to Falcone. Until the events of the movie. He can't just beat down Falcone and drag him to a police station.

 

[OtherwiseKnownAs]

I’d really like to see the numbers on how long Bruce was in costume versus out. I feel like this is the first Batman movie where Bruce had more time in costume than out.

 

[BatLobster]

I think we can easily imagine that he tried during his two years fighting criminals. But Falcone is as reclusive as Bruce himself(that's what he said at the funeral) controlling everything secretly. To bring him down you need him to be physically involved in criminal activities, or to have substantial proof. Which obviously Batman had in Begins.

Bruce definitely knows Falcone is dirty but he has no proof, noting that can be tied to Falcone. Until the events of the movie. He can't just beat down Falcone and drag him to a police station.

I guess that makes enough sense to me. I just couldn't help but think, well shoot-- he has this cool tech that allows him to record everything and gather intel. I just get the vibe that this version of the character never put 2 and 2 together that he should focus his efforts more in that area, collecting evidence to help Gordon bring down corruption vs. beating up minorities in dark alleys. I'm not saying it's not a valid trajectory to set him up on, but it does mean that this is a version of the character that I dislike on a more fundamental level than I did Bale's version who has more of a vision that makes sense for what he wants to accomplish.

 

[Rick190293]

So, I’m not going to go in depth with my thoughts on the film here, because if I did I’d exceed the word count four times over. But I do want to talk about one thing I really, really liked.

‘Ol Batsy’s gadgets.

For one, the concept of having the double grappling guns retractable from the gauntlets is AWESOME. It was really cool how much Bats used his grapples and all the different ways he used them (that move in the final fight where he gets two guys by hooking them and spinning around a bar??? BADASS).

The wing suit being the cape itself is a really neat way to keep the whole “gliding with the cape” thing in tact while still being believable.

I honestly hope that the suit doesn’t change at all in future installments. I think it’s perfect as is. Though, I would like to see some batarangs in the future.

I liked the grapple but was expecting more use of gadgets. Specially, the batarangs. His most iconic weapon is actually the least used in live action

 

[dhandler01]

There are two fundamental things kind of nagging me about this film. Curious if anyone can offer any insight, because admittedly, only seen it once, I could've very easily not picked up on things.

1. Batman obviously knows Carmine Falcone and the mob exists. Up until this point has he really made 0 attempt to bring him down? I know it's a different take, but literally in Batman Begins the very first act of Batman is to take down a crime boss. And that just makes a lot of sense, if your goal is to clean up the city. I get that this Bruce is more 'damaged', but the fact that he thinks beating up petty thugs is going to solve anything when you know there are bigger fish...I dunno. This Batman clearly isn't afraid to put himself directly in harm's way either. I get that it's pretty much exactly where Keaton's Batman started, but we still saw that version save the city from a major threat in order to earn Gordon's trust. I'm not exactly sure why this Gordon would trust this version of Batman so implicitly to the point that he's already set up a Bat-signal and invites him to crime scenes. It could be there in the backstory, but I'm just left wondering about it.

2. How exactly does Riddler know all the dirty secrets that he does? This is something I feel like I maybe need to watch more closely for.

It doesn't sound like Batman was at a point he could take down the mob yet. He was focusing more on the crime he could handle like local gangs and letting the fear grow on the streets. Like Batman '89.

Riddler I believe said he worked as an accountant for the city or something so he was able to see the files on how the Wayne plan was corrupted and didn't work. He pieced it together from that foundation. (probably started stalking various people) Plus he lives across the street from the Iceburg.

 

[dhandler01]

I always find it interesting when people assume because there is a scene they didn't like the studio made the director do it. Reeves said he would only do the film if he had complete control I doubt he balked to add 2 scenes out of the blue. He filmed them because he wanted to and he kept the one he did because it will have the most relevance going forward. (whether on TV or future films)

This was Reeves' film...he gets all the accolades and all the criticisms.