A languidly-paced, portentous, self-consciously arty franchise movie. It borrows heavily, as so many of these do, from Ridley Scott's BLADE RUNNER and David Fincher's SE7EN. It has a high-calibre cast. But it also has Robert Pattinson.
How to explain Mr Pattinson's career? Here, in THE BATMAN, we have several superb actors. Paul Dano, John Turturro, Colin Farrell, Jeffrey Wright, Peter Skarsgaard, Andy Serkis...I hope there won't be anyone who doubts the excellent quality of that bunch. In movie after movie, they have proved their artistic worth. Zoe Kravitz hasn't had such a long career as those other guys but she is classy in this film and easily able to hold her own with them. And remember that this is a genre film, which brings its own problems for performers. As likely as not, they're going to have to speak convincingly many ridiculously melodramatic lines of dialogue. THE BATMAN is packed with such wannabe profundities, usually whispered in an attempt to disguise their banality. All the above-mentioned actors use their considerable skills to help us forget how hokey is so much they have to say. That's certainly one sign of a quality thesp.
However, in the leading role here, that perpetual knitwear model Mr Pattinson wanders around looking haunted without ever commuicating that there's anything at all going on behind the eyes. I've seen a lot of his films, not because I've wanted to see him in them, but because something else has drawn me to them and he happens to be there. Clare Denis' HIGH LIFE is an example. She makes interesting movies, but for some reason she chose Pattinson to be in that one, as did Antonio Campos for his THE DEVIL ALL THE TIME, in which Tom Holland rose to the challenge of conveying a complex character who goes on a tortuous psychological journey. Mr Pattinson took the role of a drunken preacher. A peach of part for an actor. Something to grab, something to chew the scenery with. Pattinson meandered through it as if it were catwalk show. To be fair, he rose to the challenge of Robert Eggers' THE LIGHTHOUSE, but I have a theory about that, which you can share if you read my review of that remarkable flim.
Anyway, here, our eponymous Batman, is Robert Pattinson, not a good actor. How does he get these wonderful parts? Is it because of his huge success with the TWILIGHT series, in which he had little to do but pose, and which, like Zoolander, is something he knows how to do? His name attached to a film brings his TWILIGHT fans with him, like casting Daniel Radcliffe guarantees a movie the worldwide Potterhead community. Radcliffe, like Pattinson, is not a good actor, and like Pattinson has been given many acting challenges because from a producer's point of view there's reduced financial risk for such projects than there might be due to the adoring fans. Baffling. I can't understand why, with so many wonderful actors out there, even artistically ambitious directors (it's debatable whether Matt Reeves is one of those) put their faith in the Pattinsons, the Radcliffes and the Emma Watsons. They may be lovely people, for all I know, but, honestly, they are not good actors.
So, THE BATMAN is ok, as such films go. But it would have been a whole lot better with a proper actor in the lead.
How to explain Mr Pattinson's career? Here, in THE BATMAN, we have several superb actors. Paul Dano, John Turturro, Colin Farrell, Jeffrey Wright, Peter Skarsgaard, Andy Serkis...I hope there won't be anyone who doubts the excellent quality of that bunch. In movie after movie, they have proved their artistic worth. Zoe Kravitz hasn't had such a long career as those other guys but she is classy in this film and easily able to hold her own with them. And remember that this is a genre film, which brings its own problems for performers. As likely as not, they're going to have to speak convincingly many ridiculously melodramatic lines of dialogue. THE BATMAN is packed with such wannabe profundities, usually whispered in an attempt to disguise their banality. All the above-mentioned actors use their considerable skills to help us forget how hokey is so much they have to say. That's certainly one sign of a quality thesp.
However, in the leading role here, that perpetual knitwear model Mr Pattinson wanders around looking haunted without ever commuicating that there's anything at all going on behind the eyes. I've seen a lot of his films, not because I've wanted to see him in them, but because something else has drawn me to them and he happens to be there. Clare Denis' HIGH LIFE is an example. She makes interesting movies, but for some reason she chose Pattinson to be in that one, as did Antonio Campos for his THE DEVIL ALL THE TIME, in which Tom Holland rose to the challenge of conveying a complex character who goes on a tortuous psychological journey. Mr Pattinson took the role of a drunken preacher. A peach of part for an actor. Something to grab, something to chew the scenery with. Pattinson meandered through it as if it were catwalk show. To be fair, he rose to the challenge of Robert Eggers' THE LIGHTHOUSE, but I have a theory about that, which you can share if you read my review of that remarkable flim.
Anyway, here, our eponymous Batman, is Robert Pattinson, not a good actor. How does he get these wonderful parts? Is it because of his huge success with the TWILIGHT series, in which he had little to do but pose, and which, like Zoolander, is something he knows how to do? His name attached to a film brings his TWILIGHT fans with him, like casting Daniel Radcliffe guarantees a movie the worldwide Potterhead community. Radcliffe, like Pattinson, is not a good actor, and like Pattinson has been given many acting challenges because from a producer's point of view there's reduced financial risk for such projects than there might be due to the adoring fans. Baffling. I can't understand why, with so many wonderful actors out there, even artistically ambitious directors (it's debatable whether Matt Reeves is one of those) put their faith in the Pattinsons, the Radcliffes and the Emma Watsons. They may be lovely people, for all I know, but, honestly, they are not good actors.
So, THE BATMAN is ok, as such films go. But it would have been a whole lot better with a proper actor in the lead.