THE BATMAN deep-dive review and round-table | KNIGHTS WATCH
Вставка
- Опубліковано 2 жов 2024
- If you like the content and want to support the channel, you're welcome to do so through patreon or subscribe star:
/ shadbrooks
www.subscribes...
Be sure to check out Shad's other channel: / shadmbrooks
Check out Nathan's channel here:
/ nathanrohner
Awesome Shirts and chainmail print clothing: teespring.com/...
Shad's novel, Shadow of the Conqueror Audio Book affiliate links:
US: www.audible.co...
UK: www.audible.co...
CA: www.audible.ca...
AU: www.audible.co...
Ebook, Paperback and Hardcover available from most major book retailers, here are a few of the main ones:
Amazon affiliate link (be sure to navigate to your country's amazon site):
amzn.to/2XErUaR
Barnes and Noble:
www.barnesandn...
Kobo:
www.kobo.com/a...
Community run discord server: / discord
Shad's official website: www.shadmbrook...
I think u guys completely missed the point of the riddler leaving clues. He wasn’t sabotaging his own plans and giving Batman the chance to stop him. The riddler thought Batman was on his side. He thought Batman agreed with him about the corruption in Gotham and how it needed to end. Like when Batman bought the corrupt guy into the light to kill him, he thought Batman was willingly helping him with that. He literally said when they met in Arkham that he wanted to be friends and that they can watch things unfold together. He then realised that Batman was trying to stop him not help him and had a breakdown cos that isn’t how he wanted it to be. But then he realised that Batman had actually failed to figure out his plan so was then happy because Batman wouldn’t stop him. But obviously he then did figure it out and did stop him. The reason Batman didn’t figure it out is because he thought Riddler had figured out his identity (he hadn’t, he just happened to be after Bruce) so stopped his investigation because he thought it would reveal his identity, and went to see riddler before figuring out Riddlers plan. He then realised Riddler didn’t know his identity and that he had something bad planned, so went back to finish the investigation, figured out the riddle, and then stopped the Riddlers plan.
So yeh, I thought it was really cleaver, and it seems you guys completely missed that and thought Riddler was trying to beat Batman. So why was he leaving clues? Cos he wasn’t trying to beat Batman, he was trying to work with Batman to beat corruption in Gotham, it’s just that he didn’t realise that Batman was actually trying to stop him until they met.
Right. The clues were his way of trying to communicate with the Batman without the corrupt figures knowing what was about to happen to them.
Yeah he was a pathetic Gimp. Zero charisma and presence. Overacting and acting like a spaz. Who even needs Batman when I could break all his limbs myself.
Yeah, I think you guys missed that. The riddler wasn't angry because Batman figured it out. He still thought it would work out (and it did to some extent) even if he does. However, he expected praise for his "detective" work and for unmasking the conspiracy. Then batman called him terrorist, killer and so on. He was fully expecting a welcoming hug, not the classic " nobody will remember you " line.
I think you’re absolutely right. The complaint then is that is seems like happen stance “bad luck” that Batman didn’t stop The Riddler in time. Had he just not gone to see him and finished the investigation he then could have actually stopped his plan.
I agree they're too focused on the politics to even see the bigger picture
Oz needs to go back and watch Batman: The Animated Series. The definitive Batman, and he is definitely a symbol of hope for people. Both as Batman AND as Bruce Wayne.
If I can't imagine your depiction of Batman comforting a dying child, it's not a good depiction of Batman. Thanks to his character arc, Battinson now fits that prerequisite.
On the argument at 57:00, Batman, in his dark hidden form, is a symbol of hope. He doesn't need to be rosy or shaking hands with civilians like Superman to embody hope. He's the hope in the dregs of Gotham. He's the hope in the shadows. That's what makes his character aspirational. Superman is the Day. Batman is the Night. Both are aspirational.
Oh God please
His whole spiel is that he makes the Criminals hesitate. The boogeyman of criminals
Hey guys! Around a half hour in, you're discussing how the Riddler was expecting Batman to figure out his plan under the carpet and that if he had figured it out, the plan would have been stopped. I agree that is the outcome that would have happened, however, from the Riddler's perspective, he believes that Batman is on his side, that he is helping him out with all these cases. He said he didn't have the muscle to handle this sort of thing & Batman went along with it perfectly from his perspective. That is also why he does not know Batman is Bruce Wayne. It is framed in a way that makes us assume what he may or may not know, but the following scenes confirm weather it's true or not. That is why he was upset when Batman was not on his team, & Batman didn't know there was more to plan with the Carpet clipper, because he was convinced the Riddler was planning to reveal his identity to the world since things seemed to point to that direction with sins of the father and what not. That is what I got from it anyway.
I read the Twilight books at the request of my wife. They made me appreciate the movies, because the movies were over faster.
Good man, rest in piece
And better.
I asked my wife for an abridged version and I just spent half of it in complete confusion.
I thought Twilight films were a monster genre movie. Man was I proven wrong when I saw the 2nd one in theaters. I wish I never heard of the genre.
Shad enjoyed twilight.
I must admit sir, your credibility has been brought into question 🤔
Great content as always though
Twilight movie had one plus - over faster than the book.
@@docstockandbarrel ah ha true. I suppose one can always find at least one positive, even in a trash can
You know, i heard some really controversial things from you guys, but LIKING the twilight movies is going too far.....way too far
Honestly, it makes the simplistic prose in Shad's book make more sense. Hes more concerned with the greater story, world building etc. I can't see how anyone who cares about the substance of prose and writing could sit through listening to those books without getting pissed off at line after line being useless, ham-fisted, crap.
That was one of the big things that annoyed me in Shads book, lots of describing useless things or stating direct actions as opposed to description in scenes. This bothered me to the point I actually read an essay by another writing going over the flaws in his writing style in depth and offering VERY valid criticism.
Hearing he likes Twilight makes me think he just doesn't care at all about prose.
@@cop5144 Feel the same way about Sanderson. I don’t need extremely complex prose but page after page of blurting on-the-nose obvious stuff… just gets boring to read. I think these guys could learn a thing or two from Hemingway with the iceburg technique - you can say a lot, by not saying it at all.
@@christianbjorck816 100% agree with everything you said.
Tbh with Shad's case in particular it feels like hes writing more for a screenplay than a novel. Too concerned with getting out every action he see's in his head, as opposed to helping the audience see the same.
Heres a perfect example from the essay of a couple sentences rewritten:
Shads version: "Daylen’s dark brown eyes slowly focused to his hand, which lay on the desk. Wrinkled and age-spotted, it was a constant reminder of how old he was."
Spooners version: "When Daylen recovered from his reverie, he was staring at a liver-spotted hand. Much like the ancient desk beneath it, the skin was riddled with seams and blotched with stains. He sighed, and the sound too was like the skin, thin and cracked."
I really wish I could get Shad to read this essay before his next book, though his style of writing does make me excited to see the short film of the novel!
Posted a longer variant of this comment, but it doesn't seem to have went through, it seems that youtube won't let me link to the blog that the essay on Shad's work is from. If you google the line by Spooner you'll find it. I felt my original comment came off a bit harsh. I enjoyed Shad's book, but his writing certainly could be better.
@@cop5144 Yes, in comparison Shads seems more like a first draft where you just jot down what has to be there, and Spooner seems to be the edited version.
Then aside from the prose you can cut unecessary content to make for a more leaner and effective story. I like when you can get more depth and link themes in a story. If I take Hemingway again, his ”Hills Like White Elephants” is masterfully crafted where the setting and all the detalis point thematically to the core of the story. Nothing is there by chance, all is deliberate and calculated. Which I feel writers like Sanderson or Shad do not really plan out as they just want a lot of cool stuff.
@@christianbjorck816 However, consider Shad's line if its a screenplay. If you are just trying to describe the actions, the presence, and essentially what you see as the shot in your head. It reads as a great outline for a story - would love to see him revisit it and rewrite the thing.
He had good ideas, but just put them onto paper without worrying about details.
Still not a bad book, but I cringe when people in the comments or on his discord call it a masterpiece.
I feel like the perspective presented about the Riddler missed some important points about the meeting between the two where Riddler seemed to think Batman was working with him, and it's strongly implied that that's why Riddler kept leaving Batman notes.
Yea it’s an issue with the reviews. I agree with a lot of what they say but they miss a lot. They dismiss things as bad storytelling or plot holes when they just missed or misunderstood things. Reason I think they need someone more willing to fight Oz when he says bullshit or when Shad misses something. I like Nathan I just wish he was able to give more input.
@@FeArmizare 100%, the Oz guy was so triggered by the film he basically just made up reasons to hate it. And Shad was just outright misstating key plot points the entire time. I would not recommend this review to people who haven't seen the film yet.
@@gwell2118 yea i think the main issue is that these guys havent really figured out how to be good movie reviewers. Shad is obviously somsone who has to see the movie more than once since this isnt the first time that he has gotten stuff about a movie or show outright wrong. Oz is so politically addicted than he will dislike anything if he feels like it has a political message he doesn;t like.
@@FeArmizare but this definitely had the politics that ruined the experience
@@frankie3010 if one bad line ruins the experience for you then thats on you not the movie.
The arc with the earthquake cutting off Gotham is called No Man's Land
Imagine they actually made that movie
I can imagine Fox News finding the 25 follower twitter accounts to get their material for an exposé on how the woke mob hates the word "Man" already
That's part of the riddler's psychosis. He can't make a plan without a means to thwart it. He can't make a riddle without an answer. He can't make a puzzle that can't be solved. That's consistent even through the comics. And it's always his hubris that leads him to believe he's so smart no one can figure him out even if he lays it out. When he's proven wrong is when he gets so upset.
Leaving himself vulnerable and then getting upset when his enemies take the opening.
No surprise, Gotham is well known for its population consisting largely of the mentally ill.
A Gimp mask wearing, pathetic incel that I could personally break in half irl. Who needs Batman 🤣
I agree that his invulnerable armor taking impossible hits took away the immersion from an otherwise more realistic Batman.
Others have already mentioned that you guys missed how the Riddled left the clues for Batman because he thought they were on the same side, and broke down when he realised he was mistaken. I really liked the clue with the carpet tool, because Batman fails to understand specifically due to his wealthy upbringing not giving him experience with such things. The Riddler of course didn't know about Batman's upbringing.
I am always disappointed by Hollywood's insisntence upon cramming romance into movies when they clearly don't know how to write romance. "Sexual tension" they call it, but it's just the tension of people almost getting murdered all movie, and they just so happen to be of opposite sexes, and therefore kiss at the end for no reason. Needs to stop.
Going after Bruce was a way of punishing the son for the sins of the father and because in the Riddler's view Bruce didn't even try to fix the charity funds misappropriation. But Bruce didn't even know about it.
I think Riddler wanted to work with Batman, and when he freaks out and starts screaming in Arkham, it's because Batman refused him. It's not that he wanted to 'win' exactly, just that he wanted validation
Exactly. The Riddler even exclaims, "This is not how this was supposed to go at all!" He had delusions that Batman was his partner in crime. Face with the truth, he just broke down. And after he realized that Batman hadn't figured out the last puzzle, that was the point where he felt like he had "won."
@@HongKongPhooey89 I know right I am shocked they missed this. And that’s not even the worst thing they got wrong about the film.
Firstly, I love Oz’s haircut and the way he’s shaved. I don’t know if he’s lost weight or what but he’s looking great, and if it’s a weight loss thing then well done mate!
Secondly, I loved the Batman’s portrayal here, brooding Bruce Wayne and all, because I see it as part of the beginning of a larger arc. Both the director and actor have stated that they wanted to show Bruce as a broken man who hasn’t learned to exist in society and maintains the reclusive weirdo billionaire reputation due to his lack of social behavior. He’s early in his journey, and still working out his psyche and finding his way. They said that future installments will feature largely Bruce Wayne learning to balance his public persona with his true self (since Batman comics have long maintained that in Bruce’s mind, his real identity is Batman and his fake persona is Bruce Wayne). Future movies should show him being pressed with the importance of learning to bottle up enough to make appearances in public and such, so I think leaving him at that level of reclusive brokenness in the first movie is warranted as it was solely to set up a larger character arc over the course of a coming trilogy.
Hey shad , I think it’s really cool that your breaking gender roles and enjoyed twilight, that’s really cool of you. That being said, I don’t think anybody wants you to do a video covering twilight.
Actually, I want him to do a video on it so I can hear his reasoning and check his credibility
Batman can absolutely be symbol of hope to the innocent, AND be a creature of the night, the Dark Knight. Alot of older stories in the 70s, ( when Denny O'Neil and Neal Adams made Batman dark again.) has shown Batman acting with compassion, like Batman making sure orphaned siblings stay together. Sadly not as many stories like that now, but you get some here and there. Like on Justice League Unlimited, Batman famously stays with dying Ace. Honestly it makes sense for his character, Batman isn't simply making criminals pay, he's fighting so one else will suffer as he did. So yeah, I agree Batman can be a symbol of hope. That's MY BATMAN.
That episode of JLU still chokes me up. Batman to a 'T'!
The issue with this idea of batman being a symbol of hope is that it goes against the ethos of the construction of his character. It entirely sells out the core of the character.
Doing things like 'making sure orphaned siblings stay together' or 'acting with compassion' does not make someone a symbol of hope.
A symbol of hope is one that will put themselves out there as an idealistic ideal that people can look towards, model themselves after, or think of as an idea of reassurance. You could argue that batman is a symbol of hope for the individual to the see the extent of what man can do, however that is only for the audience. The people in the world see Batman as a mythological figure.
If you want to see a direct contrast look no further than Bruce Wayne. He (in later batman mythos, once hes come to terms with his trauma) is a symbol of hope. His father was a symbol of hope. They were Gotham, they were the symbol of good and decency in Gotham, even though they were wealthy. Once his parents were killed, hope in Gotham died.
Batman can NEVER be a symbol of hope as long as he resides in the shadows. Making him one would also sell out the juxtaposition of the Batman helping individual people and reducing crime through fear as opposed to billionaire Bruce Wayne funding the police, funding anti-corruption initiatives, and helping reduce poverty. Things which are countered well in early Batman stories such as Year One, by highlighting the corruption prevents regular mans of one man, even a man as rich as Bruce, to make lasting change.
We actually see this play out directly in Nolans dark knight series where Batman fights corruption, then as Bruce tries to support Harvey cause he can cause the most good that way.
Honestly, you just don't seem to understand what a symbol of hope means? You are viewing it from the audience saying batman the hero makes you hopeful, you are not viewing it from the view of the people in the world that batman lives in.
That one scene with Ace has made Batman one of my favorite DC heroes for years. It shows that Batman is always fighting in darkness full of twisted monsters and yet inspite of that and due to his own morals and sense of will he still remains human and compassionate when he needs to be.
@@cop5144 Tbh, people do need to show Bruce using both his IRL person and his alter ego to fight the good fight. But I disagree with you to some extent. Batman is at his best not when he becomes some vengeful monster, but when he shows he still remains human despite having to fight monsters in the dark and become something even monsters are scared of. Those moments of humanity are when he shines as a beacon of hope, but ultimately Gotham's opinion of Batman changes as frequently as the tides and he goes from symbol of hope to terrifying monster pretty regularly. Which is where the Harvey dent idea comes in, Batman does and becomes whatever necessary to help Gotham. That's what he truly is. Not a vengeful dark knight or a symbol of hope, but Gotham's vigilant protector.
@@mcdiscret9632 Sure, but he still cant be a symbol of hope while retaining the core of what makes him Batman.
This is definitely my favorite Batman because I love the detective thing, although I also thought that they should've looked for where the picture was taken from, except I didn't think about it until dude was shot. I think the emo Bruce makes sense during a time that Batman has taken over Bruce's whole life because he hasn't learned how to turn on the billionaire persona yet.
I think Oz should definitely introduce himself as THE OZ 😂😂😂 I just watched the movie last night and I loved it!
I think that would be awesome!
My native language doesen't have a word for "the" otherwise I would be doing this.
I liked where the plot was going with the corruption and such and when they got to falconi I thought they were gonna go the route that there was an even bigger conspiracy like the court of owls and it would lead him to realize that Gotham also needs Bruce Wayne not just Batman to fight the evil of Gotham
And this could've been a great way to link where the riddler was connecting it to Bruce by thinking Thomas Wayne was apart of it when he was trying to fight it and that's why they were killed
Selina Kyle being Falconi's kid is canon in the comics. It isn't something new. Watch the Long Halloween animated movies based on the Comic even of the same name.
In The long Halloween she THINKS she’s Falcone’s daughter, but she was wrong.
@@josenaranjo_26 It's still a plot point that isn't completely out of the blue. They didn't invent it specifically for the movie.
I think using "the" makes sense up until a point. If there was a lizard man running about town you would refer to him as "the lizard man" because of how unique it is. Only after hearing about him or seeing him about would you drop the "the" and just call him "lizard man" since he's normal now and needs a name. "The" Batman makes sense until he becomes recognised.
Well said. Batman is mostly an urban legend for a long time, that’s how people think of him, a creature more than a person.
In Doctor Who, nobody refers to *the* Doctor as "Doctor" in third person, but they do in second.
The Doctor is in the TARDIS
Doctor, you are in the TARDIS
Similar logic follows *the* Batman
34:08 Riddler does want to win and left the clues for Batman because he thought Batman was "on his side" and that they were working together. He explains this to Batman when they meet in Arkham.
I like shad more and more. I didn't hate Twilight either.
Also, shad I would advise you too ask somone whom you know has actually been in combat situations with guns. I think you actually would learn from it, i have spoken with others and they rightfully point out, it's extremely hard to shoot in the dark and in general. And most aim for the center of mass, because it's the easiest part too shoot.
Yeah these guys use their deductive reasoning a lot with opinions but they clearly don’t have actual combat experience with weaponry, especially firearms. Defiantly don’t take them as actual experts.
@@gwell2118 nathan did 8 tours in vietnam.
You asked for my opinion so here it is, unassailable: Oz saw a lot of “bad” that wasn’t actually bad. This was a solid movie. With minimal issues. Also, you can like the Nolan films and this film at the same time. And I hope Oz digs his heels in deeper after reading this. This is the way.
in the games at least, the riddler comes across like a lonely psycho who just wants to force batman to play his games with him. he wants the clues to be found, he wants batman to solve his riddles, he just wants to extend how long batman has to interact with him.
Nathan wanting a bike or muscle car is awesome to me and now I can't stop imagining him on a Harley with a big beard and stash with is black leather jacket with a skull or somthing on it
"I enjoyed the twilight movies"
Unsubbed.
Here's how the finale should have gone:
While Batman and the cops are picking though Riddler's lair, they find the first murder weapon and assume like in the movie now, that it's a chisel.
Cop: "No, that's for pulling up carpet."
Gordon: "Carpet?"
Batman: "That can't be a coincidence, let me see."
So the reveal happens, but Batman realizes that there are too many bombs to realistically stop, so the most they can hope for is to slow down the flood by disarming some of them. Then the rally fight scene happens, but instead of that final ride with Catwoman, the movie ends with Bruce Wayne, hair swept back in a nice suit going to a meeting with a small smile on his face.
I dont know if it's the haircut but it looks like Oz has lost weight, if you have, GREAT JOB! If not, godspeed my friend.
Like the review though there are many things the guys miss. Case in point they directly point out the amount of noise Batman's footsteps make in the movie, but they miss that at certain times they don't make any noise. The sound from his footsteps is an intimidation factor. Whenever he is walking up on the criminals his footsteps become all they can hear. But when he walks through any of the crime scenes with the cops his footsteps are less noticeable. The bat symbol in his chest being made from a melted down gun with the subtle hint that it's the gun used to kill his parents is another thing they miss. As to their critique of his cutting the electrical cable there are a few things worth pointing out. One Shad is right there is part of a sign attached to the cable lower down. But worth noting is the fact that do to a weird trait of body mechanics trying to cut something you are hanging from below your hand requires more of a sawing motion than cutting. Making the cut above your hand allows for more of the normal cutting movement rather than sawing. Also, the only real issue with the phone is that the cop with the broken nose didn't delete the message. Everything else with the phone was explained in subtle clues the guys missed. Even the kiss happened after Batman agreed to help her get justice for her friend and they missed that. But overall, a pretty decent review. I happened to like the movie and that there was so much subtle story telling done. Though there are problems within the movie they weren't enough to ruin my enjoyment of the movie.
Very interesting about the cutting, I'll have to try that.
@@biggidousthethird2672 Tie a rope up with two knots in it one for your hand and one for your feet. Stand on the bottom knot and hold above the top knot. Then try to cut the rope below your hand. You'll notice that even with your weight on the bottom the rope and your body will move forcing you to use a sawing motion. Trying to cut above your hand Will allow for a striking cut that if your knife is sharp enough will cut through the rope. Generally it doesn't work in one shot.
Something that didnt sit perfectly with me is that thomas wayne built a skyscraper and moved in, then turned his mansion estate into an orphanage that for some reason turned into a shit hole. Nothing wrong with that, it just feels like waynes could have built a new facility for an orphanage rather than give up ther family home for generations.
Could be lots of reasons, the symbology of them giving of something precious to them for the people, would be a good look for a mayoral candidate. And let’s face it who knows how much they even liked that house anyway. Many old estates are creaky, drafty and require constant maintenance and a fortune to maintain. Perhaps he simply got tired of it and wanted to move. There are a ton of reasons.
@@gwell2118 true, change is just hard to embrace
Oz’s speech on how “batman beats up people for fun” leads me to believe he doesn’t understand who batman is, batman t up criminals so that no one had to go through loss he had to. He isn’t expressive but he does care about people and does do it to protect innocents.
Loved the review, it's always fascinating to watch Oz and Shad interact, but I'd like to hear Nathan talking like when it's just him and Oz. I especially liked the ending, and I can't help but agree. The bible says that true gold has to be tested by fire, when you don't allow your suffering to destroy you, you end up becoming stronger.
One of my favorite quotes is from Ernest Hemingway: "“The world breaks everyone and afterward many are strong at the broken places."
I always keep it close, so I don't forget.
I feel sorry for these recent generations who don't know how to deal with suffering, who are so ungrateful, so lost.
Your channel, and others like it, give me hope for a better future.
15:30 i promise aiming is really hard police (in America) miss roughly 50% of shots while aiming for the torso. It's why you can't just shoot at the leg. a no training panicked henchman will not hit.
edit: I guess I should point out It may be different if they are using fast firing guns. this stat is with pistols
Yeah and half those rounds are being discharged when they draw their fire arm.
Not to mention that hitting the femoral artery in the leg can cause someone to bleed out in seconds.
The accuracy would be even worse with automatic firearms.
@@FebbieG yeah but there are a lot of shots
16 minutes in, I have a theoretical answer to your question about why goons don't just aim for Batman's mouth. It all comes down to general firearms use. Unless your goons are trained regularly, in the same style as SWAT teams and military infantry, it's more reliable to aim for center of mass, as a target's more likely to duck or move their head if they even hear a whizz or a snap. So when you combine that with the mythic level body armor Batman's wearing, you get a better understanding of why the various baddies in the film are so terrified of him. Even the best armor on the market now can only take up to half a dozen hits from 5.56 before it just fully starts to crack and deform, so if I was to mag dump into a guy point blank, and he doesn't even stagger on his way to punch me into a coma, that would scare the day lights out of me.
The guy in the red is simply there to shit on everything the guy in the middle says.
I thoroughly enjoy how none of these gentlemen are afraid to speak critically about political themes like white privilege.
I hope UA-cam doesn’t run them out of town.
There's some salty comments upset that a family of devout Mormons don't agree with far left post modern trash lol. No crap they don't. Modern leftist politics is materialistic. It doesn't even believe in absolute truth or morality.
Did batman use Venom to dope himself when he was collasped on the scaffolding when catwomen was being grappled?
I think it was just adrenaline
As in the drug
It was proto-venom. A reference to a comic story where an early Batman experiments with venom and gets addicted to it, later revealing that he was accidentally responsible for what became Bane.
It's 'chewing gum for the eyes.'
"err, no thanks, Ted"
The Riddler was CWC. Change My Mind.
Regarding the Riddler, it's both in-character for him to leave clues that give Batman a *chance* of solving the puzzles *and* for him to be upset when Batman actually figures them out.
The Riddler is meant to be a narcissist/megalomaniac motivated to prove that he's the most intelligent person around by making a riddle that can stump the world's greatest detective: Batman. His real goal isn't just to get away with the crime, but to humiliate Batman and validate himself. He purposely makes it an almost fair game because what he *really* wants is to prove himself.
Of course they took a lot of creative liberties with the characters. I didn't mind. It was refreshing.
However, I do think that the Riddler was maybe a bit *too* smart while Batman was a little *too* dumb. But I can take it with a grain of salt since this Batman is still pretty new and inexperienced. And this Riddler was much more enamoured with Batman, closer to how Joker sometimes is. This time, he was actually more upset that things didn't pan out the way he wanted; particularly that Batman wasn't as happy to play along as he thought.
But what's interesting is that the Riddler is almost like an anti-hero. As he says, he and Batman unmasked Gotham's corruption together. He definitely went way too far, but he still exposed the corruption and got Batman to help him. So he actually did kinda win in the end. Interesting stuff.
Oh this was uploaded today? Huh, I am this late really only because I thought it was that multiple month old video.
Guess Shad think's you can never have too much Batman. Well, he's not wrong.
In The Long Halloween, it is heavily implied if not stated outright, that Catwoman is Falcone’s daughter.
Not to burst your bubble Oz, but in the dark Knight trilogy he was a symbol of hope a lot. Especially in the third movie when he makes a burning bat symbol to instill HOPE, NOT FEAR.
Lol. What a bunch of casuals.
Absolutely no idea this Year 2 Batman. 2nd year on the job.. he's a rookie still figuring his two personas out. It was brilliantly done. Ok so parts were a bit slow but this ain't 20 year veteran Batman like Affleck.
Why can nobody figure this out???
Twilight is okay popcorn (chick) flick. The hysteria around it never made sense to me. 2010s had a lot of these hate bandwagons that didn't really make much sense, but would snowball beyond anyone's control.
I really feel like Oz looks for woke stuff even when it's not there. Apart from the white privilege comment I didn't see any wokeness in this movie.
I liked the review, good stuff. However Shad one of your books have fallen over and its really distracting.
I have to say I disagree on some key points here. Catwoman as Falcones daughter is 100% comics Canon. It comes up in Long Halloween and Dark Victory.
The reshoots for the end of the movie I don't think were for political reasons at all, I think they watched the movie and realised they didn't have a big action set piece to cap it off, nor a set up for the next film which is likely to be inspired by No Man's Land.
As for the Riddlers reason for going after the Wayne's, I think he is the reporters son, Thomas Elliot. The big HUSH caption over the video made that very obvious. I think they were going to go for it in this movie initially but decided it would make a better 3rd movie ending based on the Hush story arc
Main difference between The Batman batsuit and Dark Knight batsuit:
The Batman batsuit = Bat-tank
Dark Knight batsuit = Ninja-bat
Hey,big fan of u guys, but after watching this video I have some stuff I wanted to say. First of all, I think u guys are extremely entertaining, but in some areas I disagree with you in terms of politics. I do, however, agree with you all that wokeness on movies are terribly annoying and frustrating. However, I think you guys look too much for such aspects. For instance, the global warming point shad brought up was kind of ridiculous. Cities that r thousands of years old have had sea walls, so the fact that gotham has one is not indicative of woke messaging. Also, i rly dont think the fact riddler was a nerd who streamed was a big deal. I dont think its what the writers intended. Overall, i dont even think its that offensive anyways. Lastly, the catwoman line ab white privilege was terrible and completely out of place. However, i dont think u guys understand the concept of white privilege. The example that shad gave was not very good when he compared the obamas and a homeless white man. The point is that people in similar classes do not have the equal opportunity to grow. While there r always exceptions to the rules, this can be seen in african american neighborhoods that have poor and neglected infrastructures. Its not so much something that is done by people, but by a system. However, as I said catwomans line was terrible. I think you guys are always looking for this stuff, and you guys point it out when its not there. Thank you guys for ur time tho, keep up the good content.
Your analysis of white privilege is nonsense. You see the exact same thing in communities all over the world that don't have "race" as a convenient explanation. Championing racist ideas like white privilege will simply divide people and never allow you to solve the root causes of the problems you want to solve.
@@todd4411 I provided one example where there r many in abundance for the argument for white privilege. Nevertheless, if u were to ignore the concept in general, my point was also focussing on the fact that Shad completely mischaracterized the idea of white privilige. The example he gave of the obamas is obviously ridiculous in this context. Also, if u would like more examples of white privilege u can look at arrest rates of african american men comparatively to white men.
Oh yeah completely, these guys went waaaaay overboard trying to paint this movie the way they did. And their examples as you said were lacking to put it mildly. Honestly its typical conservative triggered ranting, using false equivalences and quite frankly inaccurate strawman arguments. I honestly laughed when the conversation somehow shifted to twitter and WW3. I mean seriously? lol
@@todd4411 No, that very statement is false as almost all societies have some form of either Race, religious or class discrimination. Race discrimination is prevalent in America just as it is in other countries like Indonesia, Sudan and all over Europe, Asia and Africa. And he wasn't championing it at all beyond actually mentioning rather than pretending it doesn't exist because its less awkward for some people. Showing you don't really know what that even is do you? Even in similar class structures in America their is disadvantages that cross racial lines. Whether you want to acknowledge it or not is a different story.
@@gwell2118 completely agree, great points.
Someone should make a super cut of every time Nathan spoke in this
‘I actually enjoyed the twilight movies.’ -Shade
This explains why shade is so into sword and spear play LMAO.
Superman is symbol of hope...
nah... now Batman is, cause we still don't know how to make Superman movie
Well at least Batman gor character arc and change
To reply to the remark at 34:00 all of Riddler's followers were desperately poor so they probably couldn't get there hands on expensive AR rifles
I mean, maybe?? However, black market AK's are significantly less expensive than a "hunting rifles" and would be WAY more useful in a combat environment than a bolt action rifle. I fear the writers just handled it poorly
@@darthvader6533 The average person doesn't have access to "the black market." If Gotham is like its New York counterpart, then gun laws are probably more restrictive there. Hence, the homegrown terrorists are left to use whatever their local sporting goods store will offer.
And I would argue that a bolt action rifle or double barreled shotgun are just as useful in a "combat environment" when a) the majority of people you are shooting are unarmed and b) you have the element of surprise.
@@HongKongPhooey89 Dont half of the villians in this show have illegal explosives and full automatic firearms? :p
Which would be semi automatic rifles, which are far and away superior against humans. Statistically the areas with the strictest gun laws have the highest gun crime and armed gang presence(most if not all of whom are armed with semi to full auto weaponry). Not sure what your point is there. These guns are clearly attainable, you can just leave the city and bring them in, or find a dealer which wouldnt be hard if you spend all your time online in edgy fringe groups.
Uhh no not really. A bolt action rifle is able to fire one shot before the gun has to be rechambered, a double barreled must be fully broken and reloaded after only two shots. Contrasts this to a semi automatic or fully automatic rifle which can fire its entire magazine (usually consisting of 30 rounds or more) without haveing to cock the firearm more than one. And it can be fully reloaded and rearmed by changing a magazine and releasing the bolt.
Double barrel shotguns are used today really for the cost and the style, they are inferior to pump or automatic shotguns which later replaced them in every professional enviroment. Bolt action rifles are usually used for hunting because it can more easily and cheaply chamber a larger round. There is a reason that every global military power uses neither as the majority of their arsenal. Both of those patterns are outdated and objectively inferior to their modern counter parts.
Are they effective? Sure, they can kill a person just like a semi auto or full auto can. Are they as effective or useful? Absolutely not. Last i checked it takes an average of about 12 bullets to take down a home invader. Both parties will have a high amount of adrenaline in their systems, and in this scenario the shooters are untrained. Professional shooters wouldnt take a single-double shot weapon into a crowd, because if anyone there has a semblance of training which is likely considering the number of ex military and police out there, they would simply rush you or pull out their own weapon. I dont recommend you do, but even in shooting footage unarmed people have almost been able to over power an armed attacker, taking upwards of 5 rounds to be neutralized.
Frankly, either the writers or the terrorists are moronic.
The reason Batman is sometimes called 'The Batman' is because he's a sort of Boogeyman figure to criminals. The Boogeyman's not a person, he's a creature. A myth. A bedtime story. That's why they call him the Boogeyman. Batman strives to be the same thing. Of course, it doesn't last, and to a lot of people he's a superhero called Batman. How he started, however, and how he still is to some in Gotham, is a monster. He's the Batman. (Sometimes even just called the Bat.)
Oz should introduce himself every time as, "I am The Oz, The great and powerful."
The Ignorant & Childish* fixed it for ya
Batman got translated to "Leather patch" in swedish 😎I'm Leather Patch.
I think Robert was not muscular enough for the role, at times when he is topless you mistake him for Riddler. The movie was pretty decent otherwise.
In suit you didn't notice though, due to his stature it looked amazing
Batman doesn't need to be a body builder to work, especially early Batman.
He's year 2 Batman. Relying on agility over brute strength.
@@benjaminencarmine THANKYOU!!!
So many morons can't figure that out.
Love the 40k quotes Oz throws in. The emperor protects brother
I actually liked this movie. It’s not very often you get to see the detective side for Batman on a live action Batman movie. They also don’t make many noir style movies nowadays.
Shad, I think the comic you are thinking of is “Batman: No Man’s Land”
Oz is papa warlock
oz. legs are a thing.. you should use them to walk more.
I was sure Oz's red light talk was going in another direction.
55:26 Sorry, Shad, but in the comics, the symbol of hope is Superman. Batman is fear, revenge against crime. Also, Bruce is the disguise, the true mind inside his head is that of Batman. Think of the relationship between Don Diego De La Vega and Zorro.
So it's no use Bruce Wayne showing up with a serious look on his face, always looking at everything and everyone as if he was analyzing a crime scene.
Tell me you don't understand Batman without telling me you don't understand Batman. Bruce IS Batman at his core; he is consumed by Batman hence why he acts stone cold even as Bruce Wayne in his EARLY days. He has not perfected the persona. And there's no way you can call yourself a Batman fan if you don't think Batman's a symbol of hope. You must like Synder's MurderBat.
As far as the carpet tucker and the map under the carpet and Batman not figuring it out, he would have if he knew what it was. I had no idea what that tool was until that cop pointed it out, and once he did it finally clicked for me. It's unrealistic to think that Batman knows everything about everything, especially this early in his career.
I can understand Riddlers motivations. I think he was wrong doing it they way he did. Jordan Peterson is equally crazy
44:55 are you guys going to look at die hard?
Best discussion of "The Batman" I've seen. Hats off.
Feel like most comments here are judging before seeing the movie lol. It was a great movie, but not perfect. The PC stuff is there but not to the extent it ruined the film. My biggest gripe was simply pacing issues, but the movie never got boring. 8/10 for me
i am very close to a 9 for me. I watched it two days ago.
Saw it last night. Pretty good flick I'd rate 8 or 8 and a half for me.
5/10 for me as I found it to be extremely slow and sadly quite boring. One point it got for the first riddle ’cause that was quite clever wordplay. I can’t quite put my finger on it but the whole thing just felt ”meh” and ”milktoast”. The mystery wasn’t intriguing and the Riddlers plan and motivation wasn’t that great either. The car chase that everyone is raving about was terrible guys…
As for the PC stuff… it does ruin the film. It’s there. Some poop in the moral ruins the whole thing.
I won't knock anyone for what they enjoy. However, when it comes to reviews I do consider what they have enjoyed in the past when watching a current review.
Shad will now forever be tainted with a, "yeah, but he liked Twilight."
Well, at least that's what I'll think when it comes to supernatural "horror" films.
Someone should show him the reviews done by KrimsonRogue, and with any hope, he'd fervently change his mind. Krimson's reviews of the movies / books have been thoroughly enlightening on why the series in either format is so damn terrible, and dangerous for young girls / women in particular to look up to, as was the original demographic when the fandom was at its peak.
Twilight is legitimately fascinating as a character study of the author who wrote it. She’s incredibly Mormon, has a comical attraction to the characters she wrote, and has a strange/broken moral compass. With that in mind, twilight becomes pretty fun. Saying it’s bad doesn’t make you enlightened lol bad things can be fun sometimes
@@Mozay3D "Saying it’s bad doesn’t make you enlightened"
No, I'm enlightened because I have a full(er) context of the series. Before Krimson's reviews, I had near zero context on why the series is so bad. I always kinda knew it was, but with full(er) context, I was able to make up my own mind about the series. As an adult with normal sensibilities, once you realize what Meyer wrote, no one in good conscience can defend it as well-written art. People are free to like anything they want, but at least be honest on its utter lack of quality, and questionable moral implications.
Things in the Twilight series that I recall:
1) Meyer's surface level interpretations of other, more famous and well-written pieces of literature, and her attempt to compare her books to those works,
2) illogical power structure of the vampire species (newborns being physically stronger than ancient vampires is absurdly backwards. This point is only used in one "major" battle in the series, AFAIK, so it's ultimately meaningless and just ruined the notion of a physically powerful ancient vampire),
2a) inconsistent vampire powers, such as Alice's ability to predict the future changes from book to book in how it's supposed to work. Silly (useless) vampire powers, such as, knowing when to run away, and being able to sense relationships.
3) a flat protagonist with no real character or personality. Her only noted flaw is that she's clumsy, while being near universally loved / desired / wanted by just about every other character,
4) the inclusion of a trite love-triangle,
5) not to mention her painfully misguided views on love, fate, soul mates and what constitutes healthy relationships, as both of the love interests are awfully dangerous and abusive, albeit in different ways.
5a) Jacob finds his soulmate in a baby.
These last two points might suggest something about her strange/broken moral compass, as you've stated... but I personally think she can't distinguish what a healthy relationship is, in her fantasies. If she intended to portray abusive relationships as the goal to aim for, that in itself is another bag of its own problems
I did realize that she and Shad are both Mormons, but I don't think his faith has anything to do with him, "liking" Twilight; I believe it's because he just doesn't know the full context of the series.
And I do have my speculations on the author herself, though most of it is just common sense that just about any sane person already knows.
Her comical attraction to Edward and Jacob, is because Bella is a blatant self-insert character, and the Twilight series is just her repressed sexual fantasies manifesting itself through her books and movies. It's a bit sad when you think about what that might say about her marriage, and how she comes off as a sexually repressed housewife. Edward (and the vampires as a whole), glisten in sunlight because she went to the beach one time and saw some really jacked-up dude glimmering with all of his sunscreen (or something), and was turned on by him. (Admittedly made-up, but it's my head canon as to why glitter vampires exist in our literary world now.) Jacob is the clear "bad boy" archetype that Meyer has always fantasized about, but is the polar opposite of marriage material; he was always there just to fill a temporary void while her true "love," Edward is away.
So, I'm confused as to why you say it's fun, even though you also say it's bad. It's nowhere near the, "it's so bad, it's good" type of fun, like for _The Room_ . It's just so bad, it's confusing why / how it had / has so many defenders. You personally might call it, "fun," but with all the tripe, illogical and useless powers and plot, themes of abuse and creepy relationship stuff passed off as the norm and as acceptable, it's hard for most of us to call this series, "fun."
Sparkling vampires are never ok....
Oz were you quoting the Gorgon of the 10th legion?!
1:29:37 I really want to hear what had to be cut here haha.
I'm honestly glad you enjoyed it Shad
I will say, I am curious, and you may have mentioned these and I missed them, did you miss these:
- The scene where he's tailing Catwoman on his motorcycle and he's right behind her and expects her not to notice him following her
- The scene where Batman gets shot at the warehouse and somehow just falls over and faints, despite being perfectly fine getting shot in a couple instances before then
Then also somehow gets up within five seconds, off-screen, and runs past everyone with no one seeing him to his car. Despite having one person behind him who can see that field of vision, Catwoman next to him, and all those people shooting in the direction of him. So...no one saw him?
Followed by the Mulan repeat of, somehow he's all of a sudden in his vehicle
- Penguin then stares at said vehicle for a serious amount of time just gritting his teeth? And then runs off like a scares puppy because it drives 5 inches, despite having all the guns and no idea what tech Batman has on that car
Yeah...I sense many issues in this movie
I`m happy that Oz miss totally the story telling of the movie due to his very closed image of a character
Looking forward to seeing this film next week with my Dad. I’ve heard nothing but positive things about it so far and I was highly skeptical at first. Lol
Theres only like one woke moment, for a new film thats pretty great.
You didn’t notice the sound of leather, Shad? Every time he turned his head two degrees it squeaked, it was awesome!
The Knights Watch are rocking great hair today. Get a group photo boyos!
Hmm, I thought it was rather obvious that the riddler thought batman was on his side.
So ironically I actually do agree with Oz that a lot of the problems with this movie do seem to stem from reshoots, though for different reasons. I personally suspect that there was in fact supposed to be political messaging in the film of a different sort: namely when this film was first announced it was theorized that the secret villains of the film were going to be the Court of Owls, and that the Riddler was going to be exposing them through his riddles. This was even hinted at with one of his first cards in the film being that of an owl on the cover.
My theory is that the reason the reshoots happened is because someone or someones didn't like the idea of a cult of secret billionaires pulling all of strings behind the government and corruption in the city in such politically charged times.
And I say this as someone about as far on the opposite side of the political spectrum as I can imagine Oz stands. Hell I'm an anti-corporate socialist.
The white privillage was about dying for them. I like Batmans reaponse. There was a message appropiate for these times. It wont necessarily age well, no matter how on point its messagibg might be. I appreciated a lot of the other stuff
Personally, I’m with Oz on what Batman represents. The reason Batman and Superman as a duo is so cool is because of their juxtaposition; Superman represents hope for the good guys, Batman represents fear for the bad guys. In methods they are polar opposites.
But Oz, come on, I don’t know if there were significant reshoots or if they were politically motivated, but you can stop attributing everything you don’t like in the film to them.
I know right. They went on a full rant about how people are too sensitive and it makes them weak. While getting so triggered by one line in the film they had to go on a 20 min tangent about it. Is that considered strength?
@@gwell2118 I concur. I dont like woke shit, but its not breaking my suspension of disbelief that a black woman from a lower class background could of bought into woke beliefs. Also, that very scene subverts what Selina said. She calls out Bruce Wayne, who is actually doing his best to bring justice to the city.
Also, Selina is a very feminine character in this movie. We dont see her overpowering men, at all really. Her strikes were completely ineffective against Batman, and she was almsot beat up by one of the terrorist's at the end. The best example is her beating up that crooked cop, but he is also restrained at that point. Selina gets further in this movie with her parkour and seductiveness.
@@sitnam9054 well it’s she still somewhat new to this. She doing pretty good already but just needs to improve her fighting techniques (and stealth abilities). Few more years and she’ll be the cat woman we all know. On the other note I’ve know enough martial artists to know someone like her can definitely take down guys. But right now she’s still just a small time thief and isn’t at that level yet. Similiar to Batman, who nearly lost to random thugs at the end. Like their portrayals in Year One, where she wasn’t really a cat burglar yet. Her thefts were more a coordinated effort against Falcone like we see here.
Yeah, it's also just wrong that the 'woke' parts something were shoehorned in later.
It was raining outside through the entire movie, there were wide shots of gotham with floodwalls filled to the brim, and in the Riddlers room he had newspaper clippings about hiw floodwall construction was going slowly. They wouldn't foreshadow something shoehorned in the movie at the end.
Its also not hard to belive that floods would be happening in a city based on new york, I don't know about new york specifically, but numerous US cities and states are busy building flood walls right now (including conservative states), and the Rhine flooding probably happend during the writing of the script.
I guess if you don't thinking climate change is real you think its a narrative being pushed, but flooding is just be in the public conscious right now because of the billions being spent on floodwalls and the recent disastrous floodings.
@@sitnam9054 Right, it didn't take me out of the movie that a young American black woman would offhandedly say something about white privilege. It didn't feel like it was shoehorned or had an agenda behind it, it just seemed like something that a normal young person in that situation would mention. I noticed it but it didn't phase me.
I’m sad ginger gordon doesn’t exist :(
With the sea walls thing it's likely a setup for an Arkham City type movie, where parts of Old Gotham were flooded by an earthquake.
That part made the movie feel like the 1984 Dune movie, where the first two thirds are well paced but the ending feels incredibly rushed.
Ok. Who farted at 35:34?
the part about batman being able to be this playboy is because he spend years learning how to control his mind his cause he spend year mediating in a Tibetan Buddhist monastery , there is even a animation movie,
My love for Shadiversity team only comes from their ability to reason with...... Do I completely agree withthem .... Not with all points...... BUT wherever there is reason...... I shall bent towards it.... And only cuz the reasoning is so legit with them.... I will stick to them till the time they are reasonable and justified!!!!
The white privilege line was much appreciated by me. I really needed to go to the bathroom and it gave me the perfect chance to leave.
I personally don’t agree about the fact that it makes more sense for Bruce Wayne to become the brooding type. That would mean he spent his whole childhood, teenage years, and start of adulthood just closing himself in, until he eventually decided to become a vigilante? He never sought help? Alfred never sought help for him?
And the dialogue line about The Batman being his father’s legacy is nonsense.
His father was trying on every board to help people in Gotham, and that’s what comic books Bruce does. He becomes the best philanthropist he can, and the best detective in the world, so he can’t honour what his parents were trying to achieve.
A shut-in Bruce just feels weak to me. But hey, maybe they are setting him up to actually become smart, strong, and work as Bruce Wayne to help the city too, who knows.
I totally agree with this. Him being a shut-in, to the point he is a full grown adult, for that long really throws things off.
IT WAS A BATARANG, how did the knights miss that?
I really enjoyed catwoman, which made that line really shitty, also falcone is the most evil person in the movie an he ain’t white neither is the penguin.
Could Shad do a review of the duel in "The Last Duel"?
I have stopped watching new movies, they usually suck big time, i have more fun watching the KNIGHTS WATCH ;-)
I haven't had any desire to watch a superhero movie since Endgame. Hollywood has done a great job of telling me they don't want me to watch their films. So I have been sticking to foreign shows (K-drama and anime) and shows like Knights Watch on UA-cam.
After the Riddler bombed wayne tower, why did Pattison have his shirt off and spray paint his floor? Looked like fanservice and bad judgment.
He was bearing all and looking at all evidence.
Next Batman, all villains ethnic Russians, da?
Oz is totally right. This movie is too long for little action, the action is only well done in the first fight scene, the rest of the fights are wonky, there is some subtle woke sheet all over it, the first car scene is like a c0ck-block, the car goes "brrr" and then stops...only to give time to the Penguin to run... The Riddler is so ridiculous, he looks like a female trans-Bill Gates.
And let's not forget how dumb Batman was by tooking so long to realize what "la rata alada" meant and to ask about the Riddler's crime tool.
This Batman is too dumb.
Sounds like a good movie but I really can't stand another batman movie
This is the quintessential Batman.
Year 2
Robert Pattinson as the new Batman who struggle with bulimia... Great!👎🏼👎🏼👎🏼👎🏼
Ok I absolutely love your guy's content a lot but Oz every time I see you, you got nothing on your mind except politics
I get the Catwoman quote was BS I agree. political messages shouldn't be in superhero movies. But do you think of nothing else but politics in every scenario. It's like you got nothing else on your mind except conspiracies.