The Batman: better than Dark Knight?

By Sophia Doshi

Everybody knows Batman: The Dark Knight as the greatest Batman film—if not, comic book film—of all time. I wholeheartedly agree. However, that particular film is perfect for the entertainment of audiences, with an attractive, sturdy man playing a secure Batman. However, Christopher Nolan overlooked the fact that Bruce Wayne would have been broken long before he ever got ahold of himself. 

This is where Matt Reeves' The Batman comes into play. Robert Pattinson surprisingly does an amazing job of being a brooding and isolated young man who lost both of his parents when he was young and has grown up around only his butler and too much money. Everything about him is accurate, from the dark eyeliner that he applies before every bad-guy-beating to his difficulty seeing in the sun. He speaks sparingly and in low tones, and his complete lack of social life has left him quiet and completely lacking in social etiquette. He is concerningly unhinged and falls for a woman whose father had a man killed, that Bruce's father only wanted to be scared into shutting up about his wife's asylum residence. That was a mouthful. 

All in all, while I like Dark Knight because of Christian Bale's great acting and interesting storyline, as well as the everlasting impact that Heath Ledger made as the terrifying Joker, The Batman is a more accurate portrayal of how Bruce Wayne would be. He would not be a financially and mentally stable man hitting his mid-thirties, still fighting crime, and keeping up with the tribulations of owning a prominent enterprise. While they are both amazing movies, Bruce Wayne would more likely be a young man, still reeling from the deaths of his parents, barely able to take care of himself outside of his vigilante alter-ego. Yes, both films have the super-technology and combative skills of someone who has trained most of their life to be a vigilante, but The Batman simply makes more sense. 

Cover image from Alpha Coders