The Batman VS Batman Begins VS Batman 1989.

[The Joker]

And yet it’s all being contradicted in Begins and TDK by how Bruce has his sights on passing the torch over to Harvey and retiring from being Batman so he can be with Rachel. Nolan’s Bruce has a bit too much of an Everyman quality about him and too much emphasis being put into his longing for the time after Batman and that contradicts the accusations being made to Bruce.

I don’t mind alternate depictions of a character, especially when they’re done well. I like Bale’s Bruce and I love his arc. But as a whole, the films just don’t sell me on that particular part of Bruce’s character and it frustrates me that Nolan generally just resorts to telling us that Bruce is lost in Batman, instead of consistently showing us.

That's not a contradiction. His goal as Batman is to save Gotham by inspiring hope and shaking them out of apathy. Passing the torch to Harvey is him doing exactly what he wanted to do for Gotham. Giving Gotham a symbol of hope. He just believed Harvey could do it better than Batman ever could.

Its not an alternate depiction of the character either. The comic book Batman wants to hang up his cape and just stay home and be normal too. Its not a life he enjoys and wants to do forever;

 

[C Prometheus]

That's not a contradiction. His goal as Batman is to save Gotham by inspiring hope and shaking them out of apathy. Passing the torch to Harvey is him doing exactly what he wanted to do for Gotham. Giving Gotham a symbol of hope. He just believed Harvey could do it better than Batman ever could.

Its not an alternate depiction of the character either. The comic book Batman wants to hang up his cape and just stay home and be normal too. Its not a life he enjoys and wants to do forever;

There's definitely a key aspect to Nolan's approach that makes it feel quite different and ultimately make Bruce come off far less as a man lost in his own creation and more as a guy who just can't wait to unwind. Likely because Nolan opts to zero in on the organized crime element and the idea that Gotham City itself isn't regularly plagued by irregular criminals or threats like the Joker, Scarecrow or the League of Shadows. So as a result, Bruce is focused on a specific, reachable goal for the first two films (Taking down the mob/Systemic Crime in Gotham), as opposed to the more common interpretation that Bruce is arguably fighting a war on Crime itself and that there's no real way of stopping that properly.

In general the Nolan Approach doesn't feel quite the same to me as what we see in the comics, animated series or other mediums. Obviously Bruce has the end goal of wanting to end crime in Gotham. But there's an inherent factor of "doom" present in those mediums, where we the audience and eventually Bruce himself realize that stopping Crime in Gotham has become something of an impossibility.

So yes, it is an alternate depiction. And that's fine, because again- I do love the Nolan films and they're a key reason for why we're all here. But there's just certain aspects that Nolan struggled with that have become more apparent to me over time. And that's fine too. The Nolan films never were and never needed to be "perfect."

Hell, I've said in the past that I don't think The Batman is perfect. Nor is Burton's approach. Or even BTAS, for that matter- and before anyone challenges me there, I'll go ahead and retort with asking your thoughts on the Bruce/Babs ship! Heck, the comics aren't perfect either.

Nothing is perfect. And that's fine. Art's subjective and ultimately we interpret things in various ways and have our various preferences for how certain beats or ideas are handled.

 

[The Joker]

There's definitely a key aspect to Nolan's approach that makes it feel quite different and ultimately make Bruce come off far less as a man lost in his own creation and more as a guy who just can't wait to unwind. Likely because Nolan opts to zero in on the organized crime element and the idea that Gotham City itself isn't regularly plagued by irregular criminals or threats like the Joker, Scarecrow or the League of Shadows. So as a result, Bruce is focused on a specific, reachable goal for the first two films (Taking down the mob/Systemic Crime in Gotham), as opposed to the more common interpretation that Bruce is arguably fighting a war on Crime itself and that there's no real way of stopping that properly.

In general the Nolan Approach doesn't feel quite the same to me as what we see in the comics, animated series or other mediums. Obviously Bruce has the end goal of wanting to end crime in Gotham. But there's an inherent factor of "doom" present in those mediums, where we the audience and eventually Bruce himself realize that stopping Crime in Gotham has become something of an impossibility.

So yes, it is an alternate depiction. And that's fine, because again- I do love the Nolan films and they're a key reason for why we're all here. But there's just certain aspects that Nolan struggled with that have become more apparent to me over time. And that's fine too. The Nolan films never were and never needed to be "perfect."

Hell, I've said in the past that I don't think The Batman is perfect. Nor is Burton's approach. Or even BTAS, for that matter- and before anyone challenges me there, I'll go ahead and retort with asking your thoughts on the Bruce/Babs ship! Heck, the comics aren't perfect either.

Nothing is perfect. And that's fine. Art's subjective and ultimately we interpret things in various ways and have our various preferences for how certain beats or ideas are handled.

I don't think it feels different. A city plagued with crime seeping into all its foundations - Police, judges, businessmen etc. Batman's presence inspiring/causing theatrical reactions e.g. Joker, the copycat Batmen. The League of Shadows making several major attempts to destroy Gotham etc. Bruce have a definite clear goal he stays 100% focused on doing to the point that everything he does revolves around it. That's Bruce lost in his Batman mission.

Bruce having a reachable end goal is the only element that feels unique because I can't think of any other medium that gave Batman a conclusion. The comic books are never going to do it because they're an ongoing medium. Just like they'll never kill off fan favorite villains like the movies have done. Movies can do that because they're not going on forever. Same with BTAS. Its an animated medium that went on for years, and still gets resurrected and continued in other forms (Justice League, Batman Beyond etc).

So its not an alternate depiction. Its just a depiction that follows what the comics do, but instead of continually going on forever, it shows Batman reach his end goal. If they did something that defies the intrinsic nature of Batman as a character, then that would be an alternate depiction because we would be sitting here saying Batman wouldn't do that. Its not who he is.

If we wanted to split hairs we would say movies themselves are an alternate depiction because they all change things about the characters in some shape or form, but as long as they get the core characteristics and general spirit of the characters, then for my money its as valid an interpretation as any.

Pre 2008 would you ever have thought a non perma white make up wearing Joker would be considered one of the greatest Jokers of all time? I sure as hell wouldn't have. These days it seems to be the norm. Phoenix's Joker did it, and now it looks like Reeves may be too. Nobody cares because we know how amazing that kind of Joker can be and still be the Joker we love.

 

[BatLobster]

Exactly. The reason Batman's mission is indefinite in the comics is inherently tied to the nature of the medium and how it's built around perpetually selling the next issue. Nolan seized on a rare opportunity to tell a finite story with a beginning, middle and end.

Know how I know there's ultimately no definitive Batman? A lot of people think Batman's story is fundamentally a tragedy. I disagree. Dark Knight Trilogy ultimately tells a story for Bruce with more of a hopeful conclusion to it and it resonates very strongly with me. But for people who prefer a more tragic version of the story...I don't say you're wrong. It's just that if fans can't even agree on something that fundamental then it illustrates to me how there is no "right" Batman and this character is far too open to interpretation for that.

FWIW...I wouldn't put it past Reeves to have Batman die at the end of his version after seeing this film. It feels like a dark enough take where I can see it going that way. Not saying he will, but I can't rule it out as this point.

 

[BatsAndNights]

Exactly. The reason Batman's mission is indefinite in the comics is inherently tied to the nature of the medium and how it's built around perpetually selling the next issue. Nolan seized on a rare opportunity to tell a finite story with a beginning, middle and end.

Know how I know there's ultimately no definitive Batman? A lot of people think Batman's story is fundamentally a tragedy. I disagree. Dark Knight Trilogy ultimately tells a story for Bruce with more of a hopeful conclusion to it and it resonates very strongly with me. But for people who prefer a more tragic version of the story...I don't say you're wrong. It's just that if fans can't even agree on something that fundamental then it illustrates to me how there is no "right" Batman and this character is far too open to interpretation for that.

FWIW...I wouldn't put it past Reeves to have Batman die at the end of his version after seeing this film. It feels like a dark enough take where I can see it going that way. Not saying he will, but I can't rule it out as this point.

Here's the thing with Reeves vs Nolan. Nolan ultimately took these comic characters and his main focus was making fantastic films first, comic adaptations second. And he absolutely knocked it out of the park. Second doesn't mean not a focus, I wanna preface that. There's a difference between faithfulness to the comics being your second priority...and Zack Snyder. TDK trilogy is still easy top 3 live action comic book adaptations of all time for me and that's coming from my biased ass who also has a very obvious number 1 and Spider-Man 2 in there

Reeves, however to me, felt like he took more a Sam Raimi approach. In the same way that Raimi's Spider-Man movies felt like an old school Lee and Ditko Spider-Man comic come to life, Reeves' Batman feels like a Batman graphic novel come to life. Get a quality writer, with someone like Lee Bermejo doing the art? It'd practically be 1:1. Reeves, I felt, was more focused on making an utterly fantastic comic adaptation first and a fantastic film second. Once again, second doesn't mean that's not a focus. But with Reeves' intent to try and adapt so many key aspects of Batman comics that haven't really been done yet, namely the detective elements which he himself has even said he found extremely difficult to do and even little things like trying to replicate the comic narration with the journals, that to me felt like he was prioritising the adaptation of the comic much more than Nolan did who was more focused on translating the characters into a really damn good movie trilogy. Reeves is a lot more holistic in his approach, trying to adapt many of the significant elements of the comics that Nolan would've and arguably did leave on the cutting room floor in order to make that translation as cleanly as possible.

Now, neither approach is necessarily better than the other, it's apples and oranges as it is with most of these discussions on differing director approaches. But I could really see Reeves taking the approach to essentially have his Batman's mission carry on indefinitely. I feel like killing him off would be too similar to what Nolan did. While Bruce Wayne still lived, Batman (or at least his version of Batman) died in The Bat. And given Reeves being a lot more focused on being faithful to the comics first, I think there's a pretty realistic chance he has an ending indicative of the comics.

 

[The Batman]

To be honest, I think people somewhat exaggerate how faithful to the comics Reeves has been so far. To me, he's not that much different than Nolan in terms of adaption,and at best, if his or Nolan's Batman is any "Batman comic come to life", it'd be an elseworld Batman comic, not any "Canon" version of Batman.

 

[OnLeatherWings]

To be honest, I think people somewhat exaggerate how faithful to the comics Reeves has been so far. To me, he's not that much different than Nolan in terms of adaption, and at best, if his or Nolan's Batman is any "Batman comic come to life", it'd be an elseworld Batman comic, not any "Canon" version of Batman.

100% agree.

Reeves doesn't seem more or less faithful. Just different. And as a Batman fan - I've learned to embrace that, fully.

But every new Batman director is always proclaimed 'the most faithful' until the next guy.

 

[Gothamsknight]

100% agree.

Reeves doesn't seem more or less faithful. Just different. And as a Batman fan - I've learned to embrace that, fully.

But every new Batman director is always proclaimed 'the most faithful' until the next guy.

Yup. I think it's certainly a generational thing too. I can't even begin to count how many people think Batman hasn't been done "properly" till Reeves, which is just baffling to me. But again, I think a lot of that has to do with generations and this being their first Batman movie they probably were old enough to see in the cinema.

 

[BatsAndNights]

Yup. I think it's certainly a generational thing too. I can't even begin to count how many people think Batman hasn't been done "properly" till Reeves, which is just baffling to me. But again, I think a lot of that has to do with generations and this being their first Batman movie they probably were old enough to see in the cinema.

Nah, I watched TDK and TDKR in cinemas. I don't think it's a case of Reeves doing it "properly", I think that's relative. But in terms of how The Batman feels, in terms of the core of the characters in the comics vs in The Batman, Reeves is the best we've had so far (for me personally). Every director has gotten closer to the source material since Burton, in my opinion, when it comes to Batman solo films. Do I believe Reeves has made the best film overall? No, that's still The Dark Knight pretty much hands down. But as I said before, I think Reeves' intention was comic adaptation first, movie second, while Nolan did it backwards.

 

[OnLeatherWings]

I'm just overall happy.

This film gave me a good Batman film but I also feel like it gave the Dark Knight Trilogy back to me, somehow too.

Heck yeah.

 

[Rick190293]

I'm just overall happy.

This film gave me a good Batman film but I also feel like it gave the Dark Knight Trilogy back to me, somehow too.

Heck yeah.

That's so me! I loved Battinson and can't wait to watch it again, and to expand the universe. But as a lifelong TDK trilogy fan it made me appreciate the trilogy even more. No competition, just appreciating both adaptations, in the end, the 'best one' always depends on personal tastes.

 

[BatsAndNights]

I'm just overall happy.

This film gave me a good Batman film but I also feel like it gave the Dark Knight Trilogy back to me, somehow too.

Heck yeah.

And that's totally valid, man. I can't state enough, this is just my experience and personal preferences. I think for me what it ultimately comes down to is that for a lot of people in here, they got their Batman with TDK trilogy. And that's cool, good on y'all, glad you did, it's a wonderful feeling. But in terms of what I love about the character, where I've come from in my life to get this love for the character, nothing has ever been my Batman. They've all had something missing, in that regard. Something too important to allow them to be that. This version of the character though?

Yeah, this is my Batman.

 

[OnLeatherWings]

And that's totally valid, man. I can't state enough, this is just my experience and personal preferences. I think for me what it ultimately comes down to is that for a lot of people in here, they got their Batman with TDK trilogy. And that's cool, good on y'all, glad you did, it's a wonderful feeling. But in terms of what I love about the character, where I've come from in my life to get this love for the character, nothing has ever been my Batman. They've all had something missing, in that regard. Something too important to allow them to be that. This version of the character though?

Yeah, this is my Batman.

I feel you on that.

Personally, no Batman series has been perfect or my version, really. The Batman is more aesthetically my thing while the Nolan series is more my kind of quality (in terms of as films).

As someone (maybe you, can't recall) said, Reeves made an adaptation first and a film second while Nolan did the opposite.

My mileage varies on how much that's my thing, depending on the day.

At the end of the day, both are valid even if I've not yet 100% got my Batman.

 

[BatsAndNights]

I feel you on that.

Personally, no Batman series has been perfect or my version, really. The Batman is more aesthetically my thing while the Nolan series is more my kind of quality (in terms of as films).

As someone (maybe you, can't recall) said, Reeves made an adaptation first and a film second while Nolan did the opposite.

My mileage varies on how much that's my thing, depending on the day.

At the end of the day, both are valid even if I've not yet 100% got my Batman.

I think for me what's important is less that I got a Batman that perfectly matches how I envision it and more that I got a Batman who represents what I love so dearly about the character. That being this idea of turning your pain into something better. Which, while certainly present in other live action Batman, hasn't been told in a way that hit me this personally. In terms of my perfect vision, there's absolutely definite differences. He would've tried to save or at least been extremely outraged at the casualties on the highway, he'd be voiced by Kevin Conroy, he'd wrap the cape around him and have a more conventional bat symbol to give a few examples. But the core of this version of the character and what he represents is perfect for me. That's who the character is, to me personally and is ultimately what matters most to me. I get the reasoning behind why Batman was so tunnel visioned on the Penguin, I wouldn't replace Rob's voice for anything (even Conroy), the cape is a personal preference and the symbol makes sense for the purpose it has. I'm fine with those differences and can look past them, as I watch this Batman become the flare in the darkness that entered and saved my life so many years ago.

 

[TheVileOne]

Pros and cons really. I think The Batman does certain things better than both films. I think Batman Begins and Batman do certain things better than The Batman.

As singular Batman movies, I rank Batman Begins and Batman 1989 > The Batman. But that's just my opinion.

Certainly, I find most of the fight choreography and Bat-action shot better in The Batman than most of Batman Begins, which was usually one of Nolan's weaker areas.

 

[C Prometheus]

I've said it before and I'll say it again; Christopher Nolan shines particularly as a blockbuster filmmaker. After all, his focus with the craft is often in creating these massive, elaborate set-pieces. He struggles with most traditional fight choreographies, but throw a bank heist, aerial dogfight or a spaceship trying to dock back into a station and he comes to life in a big way.

Reeves is a bit weirder and more personal in his approach. He can do some pretty sick set-pieces, as shown by the car chase in The Batman or the car crash in Let Me In. He's also way better with fight choreographies than Nolan ever was IMO. But the sort of "larger-than-life spectacle" types of set-pieces that Nolan excels at aren't really where Reeves' head is at as a director.

Like Reeves says all the time in the interviews, his goal is all about putting audiences in locked perspective with a character through his filmmaking craft. As a result, it's more subjective and often more limited in conveying the scope of a spectacle that's happening in the narrative.

Personally, I much prefer Reeves' approach most of the time, because ultimately I find that method of filmmaking is typically a stronger way of communicating characterizations in a more fulfilling manner. Mileage will obviously vary though, and that's fine!

 

[Blade Hoarder]

The Batman is already losing to Batman Begins and we are still in the honeymoon phase. The movie is gonna get murdered when somebody makes another comparison thread four years later.

 

[C Prometheus]

The Batman is already losing to Batman Begins and we are still in the honeymoon phase. The movie is gonna get murdered when somebody makes another comparison thread four years later.

Nolan Nostalgia totally isn’t a thing either. Nope, no siree!

I can already tell that we’re in for a repeat of what Spider-Man fans are going through when comparing the Raimi films to Into the Spider-Verse.

 

[OnLeatherWings]

Nolan Nostalgia totally isn’t a thing either. Nope, no siree!

I don't know, man.

It was but in the last couple years, there's more of a Nolan backlash than anything.

I should know. I was in on the backlash.

 

[Blade Hoarder]

Usually a movie does its best polling in the honeymoon phase and starts free falling from there.

 

[The Batman]

This board was regularly nitpicking Nolan to death in the leadup to The Batman's release. Not to mention TB is a new, acclaimed flick. Something else is going on here, and it isn't nostalgia. That line of argument isn't a good one in the first place.

 

[C Prometheus]

I don't know, man.

It was but in the last couple years, there's more of a Nolan backlash than anything.

I should know. I was in on the backlash.

This board was regularly nitpicking Nolan to death in the leadup to The Batman's release. Not to mention TB is a new, acclaimed flick. Something else is going on here, and it isn't nostalgia. That line of argument isn't a good one in the first place.

No, I'm sorry to say that Nostalgia Factor is a relevant factor for these major IPs. I've seen it time and time again; Star Wars, Spider-Man, Pokemon and God knows how many other video game franchises too. Heck, it even happens with quite a lot of musical artists too. We can't help ourselves as people, we're routinely looking back at "better times" or something that came out at an important moment in our lives. That's why Nostalgia is a thing in the first place.

And I will agree with you all that Recency Bias is certainly real too. There's no denying that. But I find it increasingly obnoxious to see people just writing off the positives for The Batman compared to what Nolan did and that anyone can only prefer it because of "Recency Bias." Like, c'mon, that's just as obnoxious as I'm sure my harping on "Nolan Nostalgia" is for you guys.

And that's the tiresome thing about the whole debate; I hate feeling like I have to somehow become the villain in these talks because I'm pointing out that "Hey, Christopher Nolan made great Batman movies, but they're absolutely not perfect and there's plenty of bones to pick with them as there are for what Tim Burton or Matt Reeves have each done with the character too."

Especially when the Nolan films mean a great deal to me. But I'm not going to pretend they're pitch perfect. They're crazy great and I love 'em, warts and all. And as I keep saying in these threads, we wouldn't be here in this thread talking about The Batman were it not for the Nolan trilogy. But they're not inherently better.

They just do certain things better that appeal more to certain folks. Same thing applies for Burton or Reeves.

 

[The Batman]

No, I'm sorry to say that Nostalgia Factor is a relevant factor for these major IPs.

Sure, but acting like it plays a major factor in these poll results is pretty silly. Especially given that it's a poll in this particular section of the Hype.

 

[C Prometheus]

Sure, but acting like it plays a major factor in these poll results is pretty silly. Especially given that it's a poll in this particular section of the Hype.

On that front, I agree wholeheartedly! Fair's fair and it's clear from this poll and the previous TDK vs The Batman poll that Nolan's approach is certainly still a little more popular. However that doesn't mean that they're inherently better films or that the only reason people might prefer Reeves' take over Nolan's is purely due to Recency Bias either.

That said, I do think some folks here are blowing the poll results out of proportion a bit. Batman Begins isn't exactly trouncing The Batman here. It's up by two votes currently. Certainly nothing world-shattering.

 

[BatLobster]

I openly embrace my nostalgia for the Nolan flicks, heh. I think that kind of fondness is justified, given the quality of those movies-- it's always a great reminder of what is possible with the character and genre. Heck, DC could be capitalizing on it soon if this is happening and I'd be super interested to see what they'd do if it turns out to be what it looks like:

Ram V, Rafael Albuquerque, Dave Stewart On A Dark Knight Comic?

But look, as with everything in life, there is a healthy balance to be had-- I don't want to only be looking backwards-- as a fan, as a person, etc. Can't live in the past all the time. But part of the beauty of film is that it lasts forever and while also encapsulating a moment in time, and if a movie is good enough it may still find ways to resonate you in new ways as it ages. So far TDKT has stood that test of time for me.

The Batman was a very ambitious and impressive first attempt from Reeves. It's just too early for me to really have a grasp on where it will ultimately sit in the franchise's history. End of the day, this forum is a small sample size anyway. But yeah, Batman Begins along with Raimi's Spider-Man is one of the fundamental building blocks of this place IMO. It means a lot to people. And at the same time, most fans seem to really love The Batman. It got great reviews. I think the younger generation of fans is really responding to it and embracing it as their Batman, at least from what I can see. And if you're a veteran of the Nolan days and this is your new favorite, power to you. I think we can all probably objectively acknowledge that each of the movies here does something better than the others and it is as always is going to come down to taste and what you value in a movie.