Films you'd give a second chance?

[Cherry Pepsi Maxil]

I've been thinking about giving The Batman (2022) another watch in the next month or so. To be honest, I actually liked the depiction of a constantly wet Gotham City compared to Nolan's one which I found quite bland. Unlike with Superman, I'm not opposed to a gloomy and dour Batman film. The character suits a film with that sort of tone in so many ways. I think my issue with the film was that it seemingly went on forever and my phobia of rats made it hard to sit through. I haven't seen it since May last year and now that it will be getting cold and dark in the next month I think it's probably a good time to give it ago again.

[iank]

Most times if I don't like it the first time, I still won't like it. I remember giving Scream 5 a second chance after being surprised at enjoying 6 so much. It was still shit.
About the only exception I can think of is the absurd 80s horror flick Chopping Mall, which I thought was awful when I first saw a (not very good, which may be partly responsible) copy on YT. Then I saw it again on Shudder and had such fun with it I ordered the Blu ray. That's pretty rare though.
I'd rather get my toes sliced off than try to sit through The Batman again, sorry.

[Ludders II]

Sept 15, 2024 16:39:39 GMT Cherry Pepsi Maxil said:

I've been thinking about giving The Batman (2022) another watch in the next month or so. To be honest, I actually liked the depiction of a constantly wet Gotham City compared to Nolan's one which I found quite bland. Unlike with Superman, I'm not opposed to a gloomy and dour Batman film. The character suits a film with that sort of tone in so many ways. I think my issue with the film was that it seemingly went on forever and my phobia of rats made it hard to sit through. I haven't seen it since May last year and now that it will be getting cold and dark in the next month I think it's probably a good time to give it ago again.

I liked it better than The Dark Knight, to be honest. It's biggest fault is that it's too long. It could easily lose half hour, if not a whole hour. But I did essentially like the film. There's some good actual detective work in it and it doesn't just rely on set pieces. I also enjoy Paul Dano's take on the Riddler.

[burrunjor]

Sorry couldn't get with the Batman. Found it dreary and an uninspired rip off of the Nolan movies in terms of tone to be honest. I also prefer the more fantastical Batman, though to be honest these movies don't even get the gritty aspects right. Gritty down to earth Batman can be done, but if you are going to do that, then you have to get rid of the colourful villains like Joker, Riddler, Penguin etc.

Night of the Stalker and It's Never Too Late are prime examples of that. These movies meanwhile can end up being the worst of both worlds where on the one hand the OTT villains stop it from being gritty like Night of the Stalker, but the down to earth quality can make them boring. The Nolan movies I think got over that and merged the two styles together well, with cool new twists like the Joker being a terrorist etc and but sadly I think that The Batman fell into the former category. Its Catwoman for instance though sexy didn't really capture the fun aspects of the character, same with its Penguin that was just a bloated kingpin unlike say Robin Lord Taylors spectacular version.

I also was not keen on that version of The Riddler. I do appreciate not having the Joker as the main villain again. As much as I love the character it's time that other villains got a chance in the limelight, however this version of the Riddler was basically a Heath Ledger Joker expy. A mad man who wants to spread his message of anarchy who is two steps ahead of everybody etc. You could have made him the Joker and it would have made 0 difference.

Also they chose the next most overused villains after the Joker anyway.

Penguin, Riddler and Catwoman. All of these villains have been used as much as the Joker in popular culture, arguably more via Gotham he first proper live action batman show since the 60s where the Joker only appeared fleetingly, whilst they were all main cast members.

Let's get foes like Clayface, Manbat, the Mad Monk, a more serious genuinely unhinged Poison Ivy, Solomon Grundy, a Ra's Al Ghul that is genuinely an immortal etc that we haven't seen before in live action at all and would bring a totally new type of Batman adventure to mainstream audiences showing the character can be so much more.

However we can't get any of these because oh no we have to have a gritty, down to earth Batman, so yeah it's the same old villains again reimagined in the same old way. Joker and Riddler are crazy so they have to be a metaphor for shooters or terrorists who think "we're living in a society", Catwoman is an actual cat burglar who just happens to like cats, Penguin is like I said just an average kingpin with a few pet birds etc. 

I may give it another chance as Batman is my favourite character after the Doctor, but I'm not holding out hope for it to be any better.

[iank]

I too find this 'realistic' stuff eyerollingly inane. It's a series about a guy who dresses up as a bat ffs. The Burton movies are still the only ones I think had the tone right. The Schumachers were just dumb (sorry Maxil) and since then it's been nothing but dour, miserable and boring as f**k.

[burrunjor]

Sept 16, 2024 6:10:15 GMT iank said:

I too find this 'realistic' stuff eyerollingly inane. It's a series about a guy who dresses up as a bat ffs. The Burton movies are still the only ones I think had the tone right. The Schumachers were just dumb (sorry Maxil) and since then it's been nothing but dour, miserable and boring as f**k.

[iank]

Bonkers. Why not just make something else altogether?

[Cherry Pepsi Maxil]

Buttwoman does Budapest (2000)

I struggled to get into it. The male performer clearly didn't have any problems getting into it, though. Might be worth giving it another go.

[Cherry Pepsi Maxil]

I'd change it to Oz Gobblecock instead.