The Batman Movie

[DarkKnight85]

Finally saw The Batman on Friday. Overall I really liked this film. It definitely has a reason to exist and enough to distinguish itself from other batman movies, even if some of it is a little derivative from the Nolan movies. That said, I'm not sure this movie is better than any of the Nolan movies. It was good, I'd say a B+, maybe an A-. But not a definite one.

What I will say is that this movie really, REALLY needed to be a rated-R movie. I'm not usually one of the people who screams for things to be Rated-R and that it would automatically make it a better film, but this film has Rated-R elements built into it's very being that are kind of purposely held back. You can tell the "suits" in the room really had their hands pressing down on Reeves shoulders doing the production. I mean when you look at how the film opens with the ominous shots of the criminals afraid of what's in the shadows, or the introduction to the Riddler as the light keeps flickering on and off until he appears in the background. Or the very moody and detail orientated crimes of passion type scenes. This movie just wanted to be Rated-R. I think they made a serious mistake not going all the way with this new iteration of the franchise. Especially when they open up the first of the franchise with a portrayal such as this.

I don't even see why not. I get that the "suits" felt it was mandatory for this to have mass appeal and be accessible to the widest audience. But even in it's pg-13 form, it's not designed to appeal to the masses. Especially with its run time and the way the movie is designed as this atmospheric/moody and methodical detective story with only limited action. I mean that Joker film showed everyone that a serious R-Rated movie can work and sell big. This Batman movie very well may not ending up making more money than Joker, and that's somewhat of a serious problem I'd say. Sure some will say it's because of the pandemic, but that didn't stop the whole world from seeing Spiderman No way Home. That proved if the appetite was there, people wouldn't care about the pandemic.

A lot of people are happy with the box office so far, but I'm not so sure I see it as a victory. Sure it's successful, but if Spiderman can do 800 million domestically, this should have had 600 million domestically, ideally. Both of the last two Nolan movies, pretty much did that ten years ago and before. This one looks like it will prob come in at 350-400 domestically.


Not trying to slam the movie or anything, just speaking my mind. I think this was a worthy adaptation to the previous mantle of Nolan films, and I'm looking forward to what they build upon here. I actually will see it again in theaters, or just watch it on HBO max, but it definitely warrants a re-watch.

**Update - Looks like I was off slightly with domestic with Nolan films. But The Dark Knight came close to that number.

[TheKryptonMan]

Finally saw The Batman on Friday. Overall I really liked this film. It definitely has a reason to exist and enough to distinguish itself from other batman movies, even if some of it is a little derivative from the Nolan movies. That said, I'm not sure this movie is better than any of the Nolan movies. It was good, I'd say a B+, maybe an A-. But not a definite one.

What I will say is that this movie really, REALLY needed to be a rated-R movie. I'm not usually one of the people who screams for things to be Rated-R and that it would automatically make it a better film, but this film has Rated-R elements built into it's very being that are kind of purposely held back. You can tell the "suits" in the room really had their hands pressing down on Reeves shoulders doing the production. I mean when you look at how the film opens with the ominous shots of the criminals afraid of what's in the shadows, or the introduction to the Riddler as the light keeps flickering on and off until he appears in the background. Or the very moody and detail orientated crimes of passion type scenes. This movie just wanted to be Rated-R. I think they made a serious mistake not going all the way with this new iteration of the franchise. Especially when they open up the first of the franchise with a portrayal such as this.

I don't even see why not. I get that the "suits" felt it was mandatory for this to have mass appeal and be accessible to the widest audience. But even in it's pg-13 form, it's not designed to appeal to the masses. Especially with its run time and the way the movie is designed as this atmospheric/moody and methodical detective story with only limited action. I mean that Joker film showed everyone that a serious R-Rated movie can work and sell big. This Batman movie very well may not ending up making more money than Joker, and that's somewhat of a serious problem I'd say. Sure some will say it's because of the pandemic, but that didn't stop the whole world from seeing Spiderman No way Home. That proved if the appetite was there, people wouldn't care about the pandemic.

A lot of people are happy with the box office so far, but I'm not so sure I see it as a victory. Sure it's successful, but if Spiderman can do 800 million domestically, this should have had 600 million domestically, ideally. Both of the last two Nolan movies, pretty much did that ten years ago and before. This one looks like it will prob come in at 350-400 domestically.


Not trying to slam the movie or anything, just speaking my mind. I think this was a worthy adaptation to the previous mantle of Nolan films, and I'm looking forward to what they build upon here. I actually will see it again in theaters, or just watch it on HBO max, but it definitely warrants a re-watch.

**Update - Looks like I was off slightly with domestic with Nolan films. But The Dark Knight came close to that number.

I finally had a chance to go see it this weekend and really loved it !!!
It's really a mystery crime kind of movie and really great.
It does focus a lot on Batman much more than Bruce Wayne. We really see more of Pattison as Batman than Bruce .
I had doubts that he could pull it off, but I feel that he does.
It definitely deserves a sequel hopefully soon.
As far as how it will do at the box office, I think that it'll do really well. But it's not going to be Spider-Man numbers, due to the nature of it being a darker movie.
With so much happening in the World , I think that people for the most part want some happy movies more.
I definitely want to see The Batman again in theaters .

[Bad Witch]

Finally saw The Batman on Friday. Overall I really liked this film. It definitely has a reason to exist and enough to distinguish itself from other batman movies, even if some of it is a little derivative from the Nolan movies. That said, I'm not sure this movie is better than any of the Nolan movies. It was good, I'd say a B+, maybe an A-. But not a definite one.

What I will say is that this movie really, REALLY needed to be a rated-R movie. I'm not usually one of the people who screams for things to be Rated-R and that it would automatically make it a better film, but this film has Rated-R elements built into it's very being that are kind of purposely held back. You can tell the "suits" in the room really had their hands pressing down on Reeves shoulders doing the production. I mean when you look at how the film opens with the ominous shots of the criminals afraid of what's in the shadows, or the introduction to the Riddler as the light keeps flickering on and off until he appears in the background. Or the very moody and detail orientated crimes of passion type scenes. This movie just wanted to be Rated-R. I think they made a serious mistake not going all the way with this new iteration of the franchise. Especially when they open up the first of the franchise with a portrayal such as this.

I don't even see why not. I get that the "suits" felt it was mandatory for this to have mass appeal and be accessible to the widest audience. But even in it's pg-13 form, it's not designed to appeal to the masses. Especially with its run time and the way the movie is designed as this atmospheric/moody and methodical detective story with only limited action. I mean that Joker film showed everyone that a serious R-Rated movie can work and sell big. This Batman movie very well may not ending up making more money than Joker, and that's somewhat of a serious problem I'd say. Sure some will say it's because of the pandemic, but that didn't stop the whole world from seeing Spiderman No way Home. That proved if the appetite was there, people wouldn't care about the pandemic.

A lot of people are happy with the box office so far, but I'm not so sure I see it as a victory. Sure it's successful, but if Spiderman can do 800 million domestically, this should have had 600 million domestically, ideally. Both of the last two Nolan movies, pretty much did that ten years ago and before. This one looks like it will prob come in at 350-400 domestically.


Not trying to slam the movie or anything, just speaking my mind. I think this was a worthy adaptation to the previous mantle of Nolan films, and I'm looking forward to what they build upon here. I actually will see it again in theaters, or just watch it on HBO max, but it definitely warrants a re-watch.

**Update - Looks like I was off slightly with domestic with Nolan films. But The Dark Knight came close to that number.

Matt reeves has said that the film was always going to be pg13. He never envisioned anything else. So no, warner bros were hands off. Also , R rating is essentially titties, which batman does not need. If you're screaming for an R rated batman you're basically saying I need nudity, heavy drug use and sex in my batman film. Which to me would indicate you don't read the comics.

[exile001]

What I will say is that this movie really, REALLY needed to be a rated-R movie. I'm not usually one of the people who screams for things to be Rated-R and that it would automatically make it a better film, but this film has Rated-R elements built into it's very being that are kind of purposely held back... This movie just wanted to be Rated-R. I think they made a serious mistake not going all the way with this new iteration of the franchise. Especially when they open up the first of the franchise with a portrayal such as this.

Why? All Reeves could have added is more blood. Maybe some sex. Nothing that would have actually enhanced the movie.

Sure some will say it's because of the pandemic, but that didn't stop the whole world from seeing Spiderman No way Home. That proved if the appetite was there, people wouldn't care about the pandemic.

A lot of people are happy with the box office so far, but I'm not so sure I see it as a victory. Sure it's successful, but if Spiderman can do 800 million domestically, this should have had 600 million domestically, ideally. Both of the last two Nolan movies, pretty much did that ten years ago and before. This one looks like it will prob come in at 350-400 domestically.

I'm sorry but there is no comparing this to Spider-man.

It was a Marvel release, a brand that has Disney/Star Wars level of rabid, obsessive and devoted fanbase after 14 odd years of hit after hit after hit. Marvel sells on the brand name alone. It was the BIG Marvel release post Covid. It was Spider-man, Marvel's most beloved property (especially now that he's in the MCU). It was the final part of a trilogy of beloved movies. It was pure fan service bringing back beloved villains from past movies (and also The Lizard/Electro) and then the other Spideys. It was a kids movie with all that implies - bright colours, quippy dialogue, mostly mild stakes (someone died, yes, but that's not uniquely adult), family friendly, no swearing, no dark or disturbing themes. I went to showings with kids way under 10 who loved it (except the length). This is a PG movie that added just enough to hit the PG-13 rating.

Also, it helps that Spider-man: No Way Home is a bloody good film.

The Batman was a big release, but for a character that had been harmed in public perception by the last few releases (BvS and Whedon's Justice Avengers). It is the start of a new version of the character. No Joker (yes it fucking sucks to say but you want Spider-man money, you use the clown). DC's brand is a bit of a joke in the mainstream. Batman's brand is a bit of a joke in the mainstream. A LOT of people still see Robert Pattinson and think Twilight. The weird Marvel vs DC narrative that has grown in the last decade. This is a dark, adult looking movie that skipped under the PG-13 rating (here in the UK it is a 15 rating).

The Batman is excellent, but going in it has so much going against it compared to a Marvel release that it's not even sensible to compare them. Both conceptually and just as a film.

The only real thing they have in common is that they're based on comic book characters.

[The True Detective]

Finally saw The Batman on Friday. Overall I really liked this film. It definitely has a reason to exist and enough to distinguish itself from other batman movies, even if some of it is a little derivative from the Nolan movies. That said, I'm not sure this movie is better than any of the Nolan movies. It was good, I'd say a B+, maybe an A-. But not a definite one.

What I will say is that this movie really, REALLY needed to be a rated-R movie. I'm not usually one of the people who screams for things to be Rated-R and that it would automatically make it a better film, but this film has Rated-R elements built into it's very being that are kind of purposely held back. You can tell the "suits" in the room really had their hands pressing down on Reeves shoulders doing the production. I mean when you look at how the film opens with the ominous shots of the criminals afraid of what's in the shadows, or the introduction to the Riddler as the light keeps flickering on and off until he appears in the background. Or the very moody and detail orientated crimes of passion type scenes. This movie just wanted to be Rated-R. I think they made a serious mistake not going all the way with this new iteration of the franchise. Especially when they open up the first of the franchise with a portrayal such as this.

I don't even see why not. I get that the "suits" felt it was mandatory for this to have mass appeal and be accessible to the widest audience. But even in it's pg-13 form, it's not designed to appeal to the masses. Especially with its run time and the way the movie is designed as this atmospheric/moody and methodical detective story with only limited action. I mean that Joker film showed everyone that a serious R-Rated movie can work and sell big. This Batman movie very well may not ending up making more money than Joker, and that's somewhat of a serious problem I'd say. Sure some will say it's because of the pandemic, but that didn't stop the whole world from seeing Spiderman No way Home. That proved if the appetite was there, people wouldn't care about the pandemic.

A lot of people are happy with the box office so far, but I'm not so sure I see it as a victory. Sure it's successful, but if Spiderman can do 800 million domestically, this should have had 600 million domestically, ideally. Both of the last two Nolan movies, pretty much did that ten years ago and before. This one looks like it will prob come in at 350-400 domestically.


Not trying to slam the movie or anything, just speaking my mind. I think this was a worthy adaptation to the previous mantle of Nolan films, and I'm looking forward to what they build upon here. I actually will see it again in theaters, or just watch it on HBO max, but it definitely warrants a re-watch.

**Update - Looks like I was off slightly with domestic with Nolan films. But The Dark Knight came close to that number.

Comparing The Batman to NWH is..not the best comparison, NWH is a sequel 1st of all and takes advantage of 20 years of cinematic former Spider-Men and villains. Would it have made $1.8b if the Raimi and Webb characters weren't in it? Of course not. NWH is an anamoly, no other solo superhero movie has even touched these numbers, it takes the grosses of the previous 2 MCU Spider-Man films combined to equal it. The sequel most likely won't reach these huge numbers since McGuire, Garfield and the villains probably won't be there for the huge nostalgia boost they gave NWH.

To compete fairly The Batman would've had to have Michael Keaton, Christian Bale, Ben Affleck, Joaquin Phoenix, Anne Hathaway, Tom Hardy, etc in it. The Batman is the 1st I'm a new Batman series, just like Spider-Man: Homecoming was. That's the comparison that should be made.

The Batman is on pace to finish with $850m or more with a shot at $900m despite it not releasing in Russia and with 30% of all theaters in China being closed thanks to a surge in COVID cases. Homecoming made $880m, $117m of that was from a much healthier Chinese market. The fact that this will get close to what Homecoming did despite not having Russia or a 100% China is very impressive. The sequel will likely become the highest grossing DC movie ever and fly past $1b.

[DarkKnight85]

Matt reeves has said that the film was always going to be pg13. He never envisioned anything else. So no, warner bros were hands off. Also , R rating is essentially titties, which batman does not need. If you're screaming for an R rated batman you're basically saying I need nudity, heavy drug use and sex in my batman film. Which to me would indicate you don't read the comics.

Actually, I've been reading and have a thorough collection of Batman graphic novels and have done so for a while. I will take a moment to clarify though. I think you're right that heavy drug use, sex, nudity etc wouldn't do anything to help the movie. I do think this particular adaptation of this film would have benefited from some more visceral violence, blood, and language though. And it's not necessarily that a Batman movie should have that, but that this version was already leaning in hard with that type of 'feel' and inspiration anyways. Batman in the comics can be very comic booky just like all the other heroes, but it's also one of those comics that can very quickly turn into a more CSI/ seriel killer type crime inspiration situation. And in the first 30 minutes of the movie, it looked like that was Reeves was going for. I feel that it did start to get dialed down as the movie went on. I'm just saying that I thought they should have gone all the way with it, and perhaps this was a good time to experiment with it. Like I said, it worked wonders with Joker. It showed audiences were open to something more mature, very dark, and serious. And I'm not even one of the die hard fans of the Joker movie, I liked it, but definitely not what I would call the definitive representation of the character. But more importantly, the film worked!! It had so much going against it in terms of being a huge financial success, but audiences were taken in by it. Critics were as well.

[DarkKnight85]

Why? All Reeves could have added is more blood. Maybe some sex. Nothing that would have actually enhanced the movie.



I'm sorry but there is no comparing this to Spider-man.

It was a Marvel release, a brand that has Disney/Star Wars level of rabid, obsessive and devoted fanbase after 14 odd years of hit after hit after hit. Marvel sells on the brand name alone. It was the BIG Marvel release post Covid. It was Spider-man, Marvel's most beloved property (especially now that he's in the MCU). It was the final part of a trilogy of beloved movies. It was pure fan service bringing back beloved villains from past movies (and also The Lizard/Electro) and then the other Spideys. It was a kids movie with all that implies - bright colours, quippy dialogue, mostly mild stakes (someone died, yes, but that's not uniquely adult), family friendly, no swearing, no dark or disturbing themes. I went to showings with kids way under 10 who loved it (except the length). This is a PG movie that added just enough to hit the PG-13 rating.

Also, it helps that Spider-man: No Way Home is a bloody good film.

The Batman was a big release, but for a character that had been harmed in public perception by the last few releases (BvS and Whedon's Justice Avengers). It is the start of a new version of the character. No Joker (yes it fucking sucks to say but you want Spider-man money, you use the clown). DC's brand is a bit of a joke in the mainstream. Batman's brand is a bit of a joke in the mainstream. A LOT of people still see Robert Pattinson and think Twilight. The weird Marvel vs DC narrative that has grown in the last decade. This is a dark, adult looking movie that skipped under the PG-13 rating (here in the UK it is a 15 rating).

The Batman is excellent, but going in it has so much going against it compared to a Marvel release that it's not even sensible to compare them. Both conceptually and just as a film.

The only real thing they have in common is that they're based on comic book characters.

Some good points here. I agree that Marvel/Disney certainly has the good branding behind it. It's unfortunate though because even the 3rd tier marvel films will have made more money than this film when all is said and done. Including films like Captain Marvel. I do agree as well as the DC brand has been at the minimal somewhat damaged over what's been happening over the years with their cinematic universe. But I'm not so sure it's that bad of damage. But I do legitimately think its a problem when the Dark Knight makes upwards of 500 million domestically, and TDKR would have probably made close to 600 million domestically had the theater shooting not have happened in it's opening weekend. To see that this movie very well may end it's domestic run at 350 million, close to 10 years later with inflation on ticket sales seems very off to me. The Batman has always been a very hard hitter domestically in the States, not as much internationally. I'm hoping that you're right and that people will learn more about the current iteration and it's success continues to climb though.

[DarkKnight85]

Comparing The Batman to NWH is..not the best comparison, NWH is a sequel 1st of all and takes advantage of 20 years of cinematic former Spider-Men and villains. Would it have made $1.8b if the Raimi and Webb characters weren't in it? Of course not. NWH is an anamoly, no other solo superhero movie has even touched these numbers, it takes the grosses of the previous 2 MCU Spider-Man films combined to equal it. The sequel most likely won't reach these huge numbers since McGuire, Garfield and the villains probably won't be there for the huge nostalgia boost they gave NWH.

To compete fairly The Batman would've had to have Michael Keaton, Christian Bale, Ben Affleck, Joaquin Phoenix, Anne Hathaway, Tom Hardy, etc in it. The Batman is the 1st I'm a new Batman series, just like Spider-Man: Homecoming was. That's the comparison that should be made.

The Batman is on pace to finish with $850m or more with a shot at $900m despite it not releasing in Russia and with 30% of all theaters in China being closed thanks to a surge in COVID cases. Homecoming made $880m, $117m of that was from a much healthier Chinese market. The fact that this will get close to what Homecoming did despite not having Russia or a 100% China is very impressive. The sequel will likely become the highest grossing DC movie ever and fly past $1b.

I mean I hear you with it not having Russia and China. I think they would help push it to the billion mark, but not much more. I have to double check, but I don't remember Batman having a strong presence in the Chinese market. That said, I also want to bring up I think a Batman movie that is well received critically shouldn't have a hard time reaching the billion mark. Ten years ago, the billion mark was a major milestone, one largely set by the Dark Knight trilogy. Now with Marvel and their branding, almost all of their movies make close to that. (Except maybe the really really terrible ones). The real good ones now have the 2 billion milestone. I just am kind of surprised it's not achieving the 1 million mark as easy as it should, especially the domestic numbers.

[Alpha]

The Batman is on pace to finish with $850m or more with a shot at $900m despite it not releasing in Russia and with 30% of all theaters in China being closed thanks to a surge in COVID cases. Homecoming made $880m, $117m of that was from a much healthier Chinese market. The fact that this will get close to what Homecoming did despite not having Russia or a 100% China is very impressive. The sequel will likely become the highest grossing DC movie ever and fly past $1b.

Russia doesn't actually increase the box office very much.

EDIT:
In 2012 The Dark Knight Rises made
$17,480,637 in Russia
$52,785,334 in China

In 2016 Batman v Superman made
$12,683,409 in Russia
$95,769,365 in China

For a fair comparison
In 2018 Spider-man Homecoming made
$16,341,826 in Russia
$116,280,889 in China

In 2018 Black Panther made
$19,265,532 in Russia
$105,062,459 in China


For some reason, Joker made $37,290,347 in Russia, which is something I'm shocked by (although I do get why it might appeal to the audience)

[Alpha]

So like, my interpretation of The Batman 2022's version of Bruce Wayne is that he was deeply marked by the night that his father operated Carmine Falcone on a dining room table, despite knowing this man was a mob boss. The way he emotes when Carmine is recounting that story at the church seems to suggest a great amount of respect for what his own father did. Do you think this is what instilled in Bruce the no kill rule?

I know this scene comes from The Long Halloween, but I haven't read in a very long time, so I don't recall what effect this had on Bruce in that story.

And this is not to say that Bruce has a deep value for human life, since he even states at one point in the movie that one of the corrupt officials had what was coming to him (I can't remember if it's the police comissioner or the mayor.

[phantom1592]

Been tossing it around in my head. There were a lot of good ideas that I was really looking forward to... but I just don't think I liked how it worked out. Good ideas, but the end result was pretty meh.

Pattison was a mediocre Batman who looked incredibly uncomfortable whenever he was standing around... which was a LOT... I hated that he bragged about conquering all his fears... but constantly emoted fear everytime he came to a high building or someone pulled a gun on him... Even for Rookie Batman I feel he'd have played it cooler than that. This felt more like Kevin Smith's infamous 'bladder spasm' Batman. Hated his Bruce Wayne... or lack there of. He just felt... empty. Like a parody or a caricature of "Batman/Bruce Wayne" without really delving into it... and with 3 hours there was plenty of time to get into it.

Catwoman was also underused. At the end of the day we still know next to nothing about her. How does she know to fight so well... Is she a thief? or did she just want to steal the passport and that's it? Is she going to be called Catwoman at all?? Can't believe this is the SECOND Catwoman we've gotten in a row without having her actually called 'Catwoman' even in passing. Heck, 'Penguin' got his proper name and that's easy to skip. Again with 3+ hours there was time to get more out of her... but it was very shallow character development. They added in a motive for hating Falcone, but really everything else about her was just superfically glossed over. Alfred? I know nothing about this version. He's not happy with Bruce ignoring the Wayne foundation.... and that's about it. Doesn't have the depth of Caine or the heart of Gough. Not even as fun as Irons... he was just kind of there to be there...

Honestly with how little character development we got for ANY of the main characters... I'm not really sure what I spent 3 hours watching?!? Mostly atmospheric staring and music as they stared at skylines or something...

LOVED the detective work. I've been pushing for that for decades now. The last time we actually got to see a detective Batman was 1989... and I REALLY wanted to get back to that. But then he failed at the end and the bombs all went off, so again, mixed feelings. Loved him working with the cops... though those were awkward looking scenes. Gordon was great. Probably the best Penguin ever. Blew Devito out of the water. Actually, it's a toss up between him and Robin Lord Taylor in Gotham he was pretty awesome too. Riddler was great, I think Gotham did better, but they had years to play with. Otherwise this is probably my top Riddler. He played that Genius/insanity right on the edge that was perfect...

So yeah... I can see what they tried to do with a lot of it... and it's stuff I've been waiting for, but ehhhh... Just don't feel they nailed it right.

For me it ranks 'somewhere' in the middle. Better than Batman and Robin and Dark Knight Rises... worse than Batman 89/Returns and Batman Begins/TDK. Downside is I have a feeling I'll never bother to rewatch it. Even if I loved it, at 3 hours it would end up in a catogory like Lord of the Rings where I just don't put in the DVDs as much as much as I should. So yeah... at this point I don't regret seeing it, but I don't think I'll ever buy it.

[The True Detective]

Russia doesn't actually increase the box office very much.

EDIT:
In 2012 The Dark Knight Rises made
$17,480,637 in Russia
$52,785,334 in China

In 2016 Batman v Superman made
$12,683,409 in Russia
$95,769,365 in China

For a fair comparison
In 2018 Spider-man Homecoming made
$16,341,826 in Russia
$116,280,889 in China

In 2018 Black Panther made
$19,265,532 in Russia
$105,062,459 in China


For some reason, Joker made $37,290,347 in Russia, which is something I'm shocked by (although I do get why it might appeal to the audience)

Russia might not increase the box office by a huge amount but it's still money left off the table if this caught on there like Joker did $37m is a decent overseas gross. China not being fully opened is what really hurts it's box office, the average superhero movie makes around $100m there, that would've massively helped it potentially reaching $1b.

[Alpha]

Russia might not increase the box office by a huge amount but it's still money left off the table if this caught on there like Joker did $37m is a decent overseas gross. China not being fully opened is what really hurts it's box office, the average superhero movie makes around $100m there, that would've massively helped it potentially reaching $1b.

No reason to assume Batman would do Joker numbers in Russia, as opposed to the previous lackluster results in other Batman movies and Marvel movies.

[The Kid]

I think one thing is that although Batman is a big box office draw, Nolan's series particularly proved to be a big draw especially domestically. Just like a rebooted Iron Man would probably not do as well, it can't be expect for new Batman movies to do as well as Nolan. It's ultimately not the same series that got a billion a decade ago. Also, NWH was basically an event movie that brought back both live action Spider-Men (both those old films were huge hits, hell Raimi's Spidey made a billion adjusted for inflation). Would have been an easy 2 billion if it got a China release and I also feel like Spider-Man in general has been more popular than ever recently. Between the MCU, the Insomniac video game, and ITSV, it feels like Spider-Man is seeing the same kind of creative success synergy that Batman had in the late 2000s with the Arkham games, Nolan movies, and animated hits. I don't think any superhero is as big as him right now

[DarkKnight85]

I think one thing is that although Batman is a big box office draw, Nolan's series particularly proved to be a big draw especially domestically. Just like a rebooted Iron Man would probably not do as well, it can't be expect for new Batman movies to do as well as Nolan. It's ultimately not the same series that got a billion a decade ago. Also, NWH was basically an event movie that brought back both live action Spider-Men (both those old films were huge hits, hell Raimi's Spidey made a billion adjusted for inflation). Would have been an easy 2 billion if it got a China release and I also feel like Spider-Man in general has been more popular than ever recently. Between the MCU, the Insomniac video game, and ITSV, it feels like Spider-Man is seeing the same kind of creative success synergy that Batman had in the late 2000s with the Arkham games, Nolan movies, and animated hits. I don't think any superhero is as big as him right now

Yea, I agree with you at points with pointing out the domestic success of the Nolan movies. They were proven and earned the respect, and other types of Batman media certainly capitalized on that time period you mentioned specifically. I guess I am just really surprised to see only good results and not great results. Must have been me overestimating the situation. I just figured this Batman movie was DC's big gun at the moment and was almost a given for a billion mark, probably more. then when I started looking at the numbers compared to other movie, it just kind of seemed weird. It's starting to really make me double think how much DC hurt it's own branding over the recent years where as one of their big guns isn't crushing everything in it's path like it should. I mean, that's kind of serious if it's true. I think this next weekend will solidify for good the overall placement of it's box office. We'll have to see. DC just can't seem to really pick up traction. I mean Aquaman made over a billion, and while I enjoyed that movie, I do think The Batman was better made movie.

I wonder how good the advertising and marketing was for this movie. How much they put into it. If that was part of the reason or not. I also wonder what affect not having a lot of star power had on it. Sure Robert Pattison is well known, but the movie didn't really have that strong base of actors in the film. Not that the cast did bad by any means, but I don't see people raving left and right about seeing their favorite actors and actresses in the movie. That actually was something I felt strongly on before the movie was made. I also though the cast was a lot of underdog, not as well known actors with the mainstream.