Well, well, well ...
I've mentioned before that I do tend to think of myself as one of the web's oldest fans of DC Comics' Batman character. I read my first comic book circa 1970/1971 -- indeed, a Batman tale -- and I was hooked as a young guy. I read the Batbooks fairly regulary for quite some time, but the rising costs of the multitude of titles eventually pushed me out of collecting, though I do still pick up the occasional graphic novel. I could probably pen a piece or two about how the evolution of storytelling eventually drove me (and countless others) away from that industry, but I've really no interest in such cultural examinations. What matters really is that the character endures -- the caped crusader continues to resonate with audiences in any medium he inhabits -- and I still think that's grand.
In any event ...
I saw The Batman on the silver screen. I mentioned what I thought was good about it and what I thought was bad. While it wasn't my cup of tea (surprised?), I did think that it was finally one of the versions to truly get the world's greatest detective proper for the movies. In fact, I believe I wrote that the first 15-20 minutes of the flick are damn legendary ... but then I thought it devolved rather quickly into an emo-based yarn that spent too much time in endless subplots that ultimately didn't make as much sense as the central premise ... and I got bored real quick.
I know, I know. I hear you out in cyberspace crying, "Dammit, do you like anything?"
Still, I am surprised by the flick's ongoing business at the box office and beyond. DC titles are thematically vastly different from Marvel's, and I didn't think audiences would embrace it the way they have ... so go figure. I'm glad they did because it was announced just yesterday that Matt Reeves and Robert Pattinson will be returning for a theatrical follow-up, though I'm really unclear on the dates. (2024 would seem to be the most reported year, but some folks are speculating the change in ownership at Warner Bros. and the continuing search for a head executive behind the DC properties might prove otherwise.) I'll be watching, and I'll happily report more details as they become available.
So even though The Batman wasn't the film I thought it would be, I do think it makes for a great experience. It's just too long and too unfocused in its second half for my tastes. I applaud the effort, and I'll sit through a sequel. Here's hoping the second go-round surpasses the first.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
I've mentioned before that I do tend to think of myself as one of the web's oldest fans of DC Comics' Batman character. I read my first comic book circa 1970/1971 -- indeed, a Batman tale -- and I was hooked as a young guy. I read the Batbooks fairly regulary for quite some time, but the rising costs of the multitude of titles eventually pushed me out of collecting, though I do still pick up the occasional graphic novel. I could probably pen a piece or two about how the evolution of storytelling eventually drove me (and countless others) away from that industry, but I've really no interest in such cultural examinations. What matters really is that the character endures -- the caped crusader continues to resonate with audiences in any medium he inhabits -- and I still think that's grand.
In any event ...
I saw The Batman on the silver screen. I mentioned what I thought was good about it and what I thought was bad. While it wasn't my cup of tea (surprised?), I did think that it was finally one of the versions to truly get the world's greatest detective proper for the movies. In fact, I believe I wrote that the first 15-20 minutes of the flick are damn legendary ... but then I thought it devolved rather quickly into an emo-based yarn that spent too much time in endless subplots that ultimately didn't make as much sense as the central premise ... and I got bored real quick.
I know, I know. I hear you out in cyberspace crying, "Dammit, do you like anything?"
Still, I am surprised by the flick's ongoing business at the box office and beyond. DC titles are thematically vastly different from Marvel's, and I didn't think audiences would embrace it the way they have ... so go figure. I'm glad they did because it was announced just yesterday that Matt Reeves and Robert Pattinson will be returning for a theatrical follow-up, though I'm really unclear on the dates. (2024 would seem to be the most reported year, but some folks are speculating the change in ownership at Warner Bros. and the continuing search for a head executive behind the DC properties might prove otherwise.) I'll be watching, and I'll happily report more details as they become available.
So even though The Batman wasn't the film I thought it would be, I do think it makes for a great experience. It's just too long and too unfocused in its second half for my tastes. I applaud the effort, and I'll sit through a sequel. Here's hoping the second go-round surpasses the first.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
RSS Feed