I'm Sick of "Realistic" Batman

So, The Batman Part 2 is on its way. And with the premiere of The Penguin, I'm super excited for the future and what Matt Reeves is gonna bring to the rest of this world. I loved The Batman.

It's easily my favorite of the live action Batman movies and Penguin is shaping up to be equally fantastic. But after this, I have to say, I'm ready for the realistic Batman stories to be done with and for us to hang up the cowl and that vision for the Caped Crusader. Because more than just the inherent silliness of a guy dressing up as a bat to fight crime, so much of Batman's rogues gallery and supporting characters hinge on the supernatural and comic book elements and confining this universe to the real world feels creatively limiting and puts these stories in a box when they can be so much more.

If we really wanna tell realistic Batman stories, I say we create an entirely new character, one that's set firmly within the bounds of reality. We'll call him Man. See, now that's a movie I can get behind.

(dramatic music) One of my favorite little bits in The Batman is the scene where Bruce just puts on these sunglasses out of nowhere when talking to Alfred. He has them on for like five seconds, but God, was it memorable? Which is why this video is brought to you by Warby Parker.

Warby Parker provides high quality glasses and eyewear, but at an affordable price. They design every frame in house and with a collection of glasses and sunglasses made to suit every face shape. Their website has a virtual try on feature that lets you see how each frame looks on your face when shopping online, and they also have more than 250 retail locations across the US and Canada.

I really like this parrot that I got from them. I wear them out like everywhere now. I literally put them in a thumbnail a while ago.

It's funny, I kind of went like my whole life thinking that the round shape wasn't really for me, but honestly, I really like these and I wouldn't have done it without that try on feature. Their glasses start at $95 and include prescription lenses with anti-reflection and scratch resistant coatings with free shipping and free 30 day returns. And many of their locations offer comprehensive eye exams starting at $85, making Warby Parker your all in one, one stop shop for prescription eyewear, contacts, and eye exams.

For every pair of glasses sold, a pair is distributed to somebody in need. As of 2023, over 15 million pairs have been distributed through their Buy a Pair Give a Pair program. Add a second pair and save 15% when you purchase two or more prescription pairs of glasses or eyeglasses both online and in stores.

Thanks to Warby Parker for sponsoring this video and thanks to my patrons for being able to get all my videos early and ad free for just $1 a month. Before we really get into it, I wanna clear up what I mean by realistic. The terms realistic, gritty, and grounded tend to be used pretty interchangeably and while there's some overlap in there, they don't necessarily mean the same thing.

Gritty is more about tone. It's darker, dirtier, grimier, and usually the stories take a lot of inspiration from neo-noir elements with corruption and seedy underbellies. And grounded is more about the scope.

The story is more personal and relatable while keeping things relatively small. And so when I say that I'm sick of realistic Batman, I'm not talking about gritty Batman or grounded Batman or Batman hitting the gritty. In a lot of cases, I think that those tones and those scopes are the best ways to use this character.

And so to me, realism is more about the setting. It's attempting to take place in the real world as much as possible, including all the limitations of real life and sticking to that. Not everything can be one-to-one or perfect by any means, but at the very least with that goal in mind.

And so I'm also not saying that I'm sick of serious Batman. While I do love the more fun and silly adventures like "The Adam West Show" or "The Lego Batman Movie" or "Batman Universe" by Brian Michael Bendis and Nick Darrington, which was a ton of fun, I fully believe that you can have the more outlandish comic book elements while still taking the story and the characters seriously. Take a look at things like the animated series or the Arkham games or the decades worth of comics that inspired all these adaptations.

There is 100% a place for all kinds of stories and artistic visions. If everything were the same style and tone, there wouldn't be any variety and everything would just be schlock to pump out for the content farms. But at the same time, we've had 20 years of realistic Batman and it would be kind of nice to get a break from it for a while.

When Tim Burton's "Batman" released in 1989, it kind of took the world by storm. Burton crafted a Batman world that was gothic and hyper stylized. Everything is draped in dark, harsh shadows.

The city of Gotham and its architecture was a huge part of that movie's identity. It was a far cry from what casual audiences were used to from the '60s TV show. It's not my favorite movie in the world or anything.

It is far from perfect, but the style and the tone of it was top tier. And that showed in the box office because that movie was a huge [freak]ing success, inspiring the arguably even more iconic Batman the Animated Series. It was so popular that Batman became the face of the company and WB wanted nothing more than to just pump out more Batman, Batman, Batman.

For its sequel, "Batman Returns," Burton may have gone a little bit too far and traumatized a few too many kids, which caused a panic for WB. And so they gave the third and the fourth movie over to the late Joel Schumacher, who at the time was best known for movies like "Flatliners" and "The Lost Boys. " I think that they saw that he made a movie about vampires and they said, "Hey, he's perfect for the Bat guy.

" And Schumacher came in with a totally different approach, focusing more on the bright neon colors and the hyper eroticism of the Caped Crusader, which if you've seen "The Lost Boys," yeah, no [freak]ing [crap] he did. In an attempt to overcorrect from returns and the outcry from parents who went to that movie after buying a happy meal toy, Warner Brothers stepped in during the production of "Batman Forever" and forced Schumacher to make the movie even brighter and more kid focused to sell more toys. "Batman Forever" was pretty successful despite its faults, but then the sequel, "Batman and Robin," was pretty universally panned by critics and audiences alike.

And in typical WB fashion, once again, they overcorrected. For eight years, the Batman brand was essentially dead for DC. Before Christopher Nolan came in with "Batman Begins," an origin story that was meant to be a realistic approach to Batman followed by its sequels, "The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises.

" And that's where it all started. I love "Batman Begins" is actually my favorite of the Nolan trilogy, but with the absolute gangbuster success of "The Dark Knight," that movie not only revitalized the Batman brand, but also created a whole breed of Dark Knight ripoffs, trying their hand at dark and realistic superheroes. That was literally the pitch behind "Man of Steel.

" Nolan even produced it with David S. Goyer writing the script. It was WB's attempt at the Dark Knight, but Superman, before they once again, course corrected and made it the starting point of their whole Snyder-verse and the DCEU.

Despite that, the rest of those movies weren't nearly as realistic as Nolan's and that universe as a whole can of worms, but the comic bookiness wasn't the issue there. But you can't deny that the realistic Batman has had kind of a massive grip on the character ever since the Nolan movies that they weren't able to shake. It's really funny, in the summer of 2008, there were two movies that released.

I guess there were more than two, but I'm gonna talk about two. "The Dark Knight" and "Speed Racer," directed by the Wachowski sisters. And I think every day about what could have happened if the bright and colorful trip that was "Speed Racer" became that year's smash hit and every studio copied them instead.

"The Dark Knight" [freak]ing rips, don't get me wrong. It's absolutely deserving of all the hype. It is a great, fantastic movie.

But like, if that's not a cultural watershed moment, I don't know what is. It makes you kind of look back at the Schumacher movies and wonder what would have happened if WB hadn't overcorrected like that. Me, I've grown to have an appreciation for those movies.

I don't think they're perfect or anything, but they feel like big budget versions of the Adam West show. "Batman Forever," especially, has some really fantastic scenes and a great understanding of Bruce Wayne's character and doesn't get enough credit. And I think a lot of the reason that those movies were so hated by fans decades later is because they didn't fall into the same tone and style that was expected from the Burton movies in the animated series.

And that brings us to 2022 with the release of Matt Reeves' "The Batman. " I love this movie. This is my favorite live-action "Batman" movie, period.

It so perfectly understands Bruce Wayne's character, elevated further by Robert Pattinson's electrifying performance, specifically with his eyes under the cowl, the dark and gritty neo-noir detective story with the visuals by Greg Frazier and Michael Giacchino's score, all on top of the final message about what "Batman" is meant to be. I could spend forever talking about how much I love this movie. [freak] it, I've made kind of a lot of videos about it.

Even if we never got another "Batman" movie ever again, I would be perfectly satisfied. I see the criticism a lot that this movie is just retreading what Nolan did with his trilogy only this time three hours long. And while there's some overlap in some of the ideas and the realistic approach, I think stylistically in the story that it tells makes the two visions stand completely apart.

And when it comes to the length, yeah, it's really [freak]ing long. I can't argue with you there. But to me, it was worth it.

It was a movie that felt like Matt Reeves poured his entire heart and soul into it. Every fiber of his being and everything that he loves about "Batman" into this movie to truly call it the "Batman. " And for me, the realism was never part of the movie that I gravitated towards.

If anything, I think certain elements would have been elevated by just going a little bit further into the comic world, like with the "Batman" wingsuit in that gliding sequence. But with the way that Matt Reeves has been talking about things, with "The Penguin" and the future of this universe, I worry a little bit that the realism is creeping in a little bit too far, and it won't be able to break out of the standards that were set by Nolan in his trilogy. I honestly think that the straw that broke the camel's back for me on this was the decision to change Penguin's name from Oswald Cobblepot to Oz Cobb because it was too comic booky.

They did the same thing for the Riddler, changing Edward Nigma to Edward Nashton, but that wasn't really an issue for me since he's been Nashton a few times in the comics before, and it fit the serial killer angle that I really liked where he had like a bunch of different IDs and fake names. And I could see how Cobblepot is kind of an upper-class sounding name that might not fit for the story that they're going for here. But it's such a small and weird thing that I can't help but just be like, why?

Like it's not a deal breaker or anything. The show is still fantastic, but just like, why? I don't think that realism is inherently bad by any means.

Just like with anything, it's a stylistic decision. And I think that it worked fantastic for what Nolan did and for this first movie. If you're gonna make a comic book real life, Batman is probably one of the better characters to do it for as opposed to someone like Superman or Spider-Man.

And maintaining consistency within your own world and those rules is one thing. Something like Sam Raimi's Spider-Man movies have established that this world is a little bit sillier and campier. People run into burning buildings or get pumpkin bombed to the face and survive.

And it doesn't take you out of it because it fits the tone in the rest of that world. Also, people are just built different in that universe, I guess. It's easy to confuse realism with maturity.

I think that there's been this push away from the comic book roots of the characters in an attempt to seem more adult, especially for the live action adaptations. A big part of that is the misconception that animation and comics are for kids. You can have talking crocodiles, people made of clay, and plant controlling gingers as much as you want in animation and nobody really bats an eye.

But the second you wanna have those characters in live action, it becomes about translating them to the real world. Not to mention the most unrealistic thing about Batman as a character, the idea of a billionaire being a good person. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.

Touched a nerve there. Serious and comic booky are not mutually exclusive. There are plenty of serious comic books in the world.

And I worry that sticking so hard to that realism is gonna limit what these movies are capable of doing in the stories that they can tell. Namely, when it comes to the villains, Batman's rogues gallery is probably the most famous in all of comics. He has such a wide array of fantastic and incredibly iconic villains, and it feels like his movies have barely scratched the surface.

But within the confines of reality, there's only so many that they can pull from and we're stuck with the same handful of villains that we've already seen before. I mean, we've already done Two-Face twice. That's a whole four faces right there.

That was not funny, don't laugh at that. Don't do it, don't laugh at that one. And we kinda saw the limits of the realistic approach with something like Batman Caped Crusader.

That show was great, don't get me wrong. And I love the reinterpretations of some of its villains, like Harley Quinn, but the fact that they had to pull from green arrow villains with onomatopoeia kinda shows that realism can only get you so far when it comes to Batman rogues. Granted, it's not a problem because I [freak]ing love onomatopoeia, but that's not the point.

It's really funny that onomatopoeia was in a Batman show and a Superman show, but he wasn't in the green arrow show. I guess that shows that the green arrow show wasn't really a green arrow show. But I wanna see characters like Mad Hatter, Clay Face, Solomon Grundy, another attempt at Poison Ivy.

God, I just want a man-bat movie so bad. Give me like a legit monster movie, it'd be so cool. There are some exceptions that we haven't seen like Clock King or Calendar Man who can fit into that realistic setting.

And aside from turning Condiment King into some serial killer who shoots mustard gas, the biggest is Hugo Strange. But even his character is fundamentally rooted in the fantastical from the comics. A lot of Hugo Strange stories tie into the rest of the Batman Rogues gallery and how Strange blames Batman for their creation, how Batman's existence created these larger than life characters.

And that story works best when those rogues are as colorful and fantastical as they can be. When it's just a bunch of regular guys that doesn't really hit as hard. Not to mention Batman number one, literally Strange's second ever appearance, has him testing on patience and creating an army of 25 foot tall monster men to rob banks.

So much of Batman's rogues are fundamentally horror movie villains. Their core identity and what makes them so interesting is founded upon the same pulpy inspirations that created Batman as a character. And so taking away their inherent weirdness and silliness just to fit into the real world just makes them boring.

I mean, realistic Rachelle Goul is just a guy. Like that's just Liam Neeson right there. It was easily the best part of the Gotham TV show.

That show started out pretty rough, but once they realized that the villains were the main selling point and went all in on the silliness is when it started to pick up and was able to find an identity of its own. And I was under the impression that the future of the Batman universe was going to at least to some extent delve a little bit more into the weird with its future villains. Starting out in this grounded realism, but over time growing and changing it to something more true to the comics.

Most notably that ending scene with Riddler and Joker. That scene when I first watched the movie felt really out of place. Like it was just there as like a studio mandate, a teaser of the popular clown guy.

But after hearing Reeves talk about it more, namely in the behind the scenes interviews and commentary tracks, I grew to actually really like it. This scene wasn't just a tease for Sabrina Carpenter's boyfriend as another dark and [freak]ed up society man, but instead it was to show the birth of the supervillain. It was the transition from serial killers and crime bosses into clowns and wacky characters with the future promise of the more colorful Batman rogues that we've come to know and love.

But now if these movies stay within the realm of the real world, that birth doesn't have the same impact and it feels more just like a scene to show off the Joker. And so if the Penguin, arguably the most quote unquote normal Batman villain being named Oswald Cobblepont was a stretch too far and too comic booky and had to be changed, then what does that say about the rest of these characters? Hell, what does that say about?

(upbeat music) I've talked about this before, but WB [freak]ing hates Robin. Ever since the Schumacher movies which put Dick Grayson at the forefront and the overcorrection after the reception, WB has done everything it can to keep Robin out of the movies. - You should use your phone name.

I like that name. Robin. - What does that even mean?

His name is Robin? Like his first name? It's on his driver's license?

Is he just gonna be running around using his actual birth name? Oh, and the movie's over. Okay, so I guess we'll never know.

And this tirade against the boy wonder has led to a lot of people thinking that Batman doesn't need a Robin, that he's better off alone, which is far from the truth. It's the classic Holmes and Watson dynamic, the world's greatest detective and his assistant. He's a character that brings the light out of Batman.

So much so that after Jason Todd's death, Tim Drke literally figured out Bruce Wayne's secret identity and forced him to take him on as Robin because he knew that Bruce was being a little too much of a sad emo boy. You can try and argue that Robin was only created to appeal to younger demographic. And while that very well might be true, the fact is that Robin first appeared in "Detective Comics" number 38 in 1940.

That means there is a grand total of 10 issues with solo Batman, literally less than a year of stories. He's been around for longer than Catwoman or The Joker, and is nearly just as much publication history as Bruce himself. He's on the cover of Batman number one for God's sake, I mean, like, come on.

Also, fun fact, I just learned this recently, not based on the bird. Like seriously, if you look at his first appearance in his earliest stories, they don't mention him as the Robin bird once. And he was actually based off of Robinhood, which kind of explains why there's nothing really bird themed to that costume.

Score another point for the Green Arrow fans, I guess, how we looking boys, oh my God. And given the arc that Bruce goes through in the Batman and his realization that he has to be more than the dark and angry vengeance and instead be a symbol of light and hope for the people of Gotham, he's practically begging to have a Robin alongside him. I don't need it to be in the second movie or anything.

And I think there's actually a story where he has to realize he needs a Robin. But in early years, Pattinson Batman with the first year Dick Grayson is Robin would be such a great contrast to the experienced bat family that we're gonna be getting in the DCU. He doesn't have to be a full on 12 year old.

I don't need Wayne Industries sued for child endangerment. But if they play those cards, right? It's sort of fills in the gaps of the stories and can serve as kind of a prequel to the DCU despite not being in the same universe.

Matt Reeves took a lot of inspiration from "The Long Halloween" by Jeff Loeb and Tim Sale from 1996. Everybody and their mother has heard of this book by now. It is legendary.

But what a lot of people might not know is that it has a direct sequel. Batman's "Dark Victory" released three years later, continuing that story about Gotham's transformation and the fall of the Falcone crime family. But also introducing Dick Grayson as Robin with Bruce adopting him after his family was killed by the mob and showing his origin in the early days of the dynamic duo.

I'm still calling them Falcone. Like I know what's wrong. I know.

And I know like I make like a big deal about like Constantine and Rachel Guo and all that stuff. But like, I'm still calling them Falcone. "Dark Victory" isn't nearly as popular as "Long Halloween," but I think it's still just as great.

And it only makes sense to pull from it for future stories in this universe. Or if they want to pull from something a little bit more modern, there's always "Robin and Batman" by Jeff Lemire and Dustin Wen. That book also told the early years of Dick Grayson and how Bruce had to make the realization that he wasn't a soldier to fight in his war, but instead was a child who needed a family.

It's genuinely such a beautiful story and a fantastic love letter to the history of the Dick Grayson character with these gorgeous watercolors from Dustin Wen. This is the second video in a row that I've talked about this book seriously. It's so [freak]ing good.

And I never see enough people talking about it. It's only three issues. It's fully standalone.

You need to read this [freak]ing thing. The timeline of everything is a little bit weird with "Penguin" taking place right after "The Batman," and then "The Batman" part two gonna be taking place right after "The Penguin. " And I wish that there was some more space in between these movies for things like training and the natural progression of these ideas at the very least so he can like update his tech and stuff.

And after everything that's been coming out now about this universe and the direction, I'm a little worried that Robin just isn't gonna be in the cards at all. And that's disappointing. If Robin were to be taken fully seriously and given a genuine spotlight in the movies, I think in a few years' time, people would realize how crazy it is that it took so long.

For some reason, we've all become conditioned to think that a guy dressing up like a bat and fighting crime can be fully serious and realistic. But for some reason, giving him a partner is just a, "Whoa, that's all that crosses the line. " Now, with all of these worries, you might be asking, "Do I still like "The Batman?

" And am I still excited for part two? Hell yes. And hell yes.

I'm not trying to rain on anybody's parade here and [shoot] all over everybody's hype over Penguin in this movie and the rest of this universe, purely because I'm in the parade too. I just worry that going too far in the realism direction might be too creatively limiting and put these stories and these movies in a box that they don't need to be in. And so all of this is less about, "Will I like the sequels?

" and more about this world restricting itself too much. They don't have to have a crocodile guy or giant bats or the big clay monster. And those characters might not have ever been in the cards to begin with.

But it's the fact that those ideas feel like they're being immediately shut down now without room for the imagination. And that's a little disappointing. And I want to be 100% clear here.

I don't think, despite the delve into realism, that Matt Reeves hates the comics or anything. Actually quite the opposite. Prior to the release of "The Batman," Reeves was talking very specifically about his inspirations behind this movie and the comics that he pulled from when creating the story and this world.

And he didn't just say the basic picks like "Hush" or "Year One," like everybody else does, even though there was clearly some inspiration. But instead he talked at lengths about "Batman Ego" by Darwin Cook, which is one of my favorite Batman stories ever. That book is very overtly a deep dive into the Batman character and what makes him so special.

Ironically, it's a pretty weird premise and not at all realistic. With Bruce coming home after a particularly traumatizing night as Batman and having a conversation with a giant Bat-demon, the literal personification of his mission, about why he does what he does and why specifically he doesn't kill. I have a very good bull[crap] detector on this.

I can tell when people are just pretending to read comics to get me to buy things. And this was not one of those cases. "The Batman" is such a perfect depiction of Bruce Wayne's character to me and such a perfect representation of all the things that I love about him.

And Matt Reeves' sheer love for the character and his source material shines through in every aspect. At the end of the day, if the realistic approach is part of his vision and what he wants to make as an artist, I'm not gonna stand in his way or anything and I'm still gonna be first in line. But moving forward after this universe and these movies, I think that the realistic Batman should be put to rest.

I'm still excited for "Batman Part II" and whatever they end up cooking with that story, whether it be Mr Freeze, Hush, Too Faced, or maybe even the Court of Owls. Hopefully the realistic approach doesn't hinder those characters too much, since even they have elements of the fantastical at their core, like with the course mind control or Mr Freeze's cold gun. And any more sequels or spin-off shows set in this world have a lot of potential to be amazing, just like "The Penguin.

" But I wonder what other sides of this world we might explore. The biggest question up in the air is gonna be the "Brave and the Bold" movie and James Gunn's DCU. As of now, Andy Muschietti is still set to direct that.

After "The Flash," I know he's lost a lot of credibility to a lot of people, but me personally, I don't wanna put all the blame on him for that movie and I still wanna give him the benefit of the doubt. I actually think getting a horror director on Batman is the perfect opportunity to bring in some of those more fantastical elements. But we still have really no idea what's going on and what directions are gonna go in.

The only thing we know is that Damian Wayne's gonna be Robin, but that could mean a lot of things. They can make a Dick Grayson as Batman for all we know, given that Damian was his Robin first after Bruce "died" in "Infinite Crisis. " As fun as that would be since I love me some Dick Grayson as Batman, namely "The Black Mirror" by Scott Snyder and Jock, I don't think they'll go that far from the norm.

But still, like who knows? Like it's all up in the air at this point. And that's kind of exciting actually.

At the end of the day, I trust Matt Reeves. The guy who made my favorite live-action Batman movie and his other work on things like "Planet of the Apes" is downright incredible. And so whatever ends up happening, I'm on board.

But I just want a Batman adaptation that can do it all without compromise. The style of Burton, the fun of Schumacher, the cultural impact of Nolan, the action of Snyder, the tone and detective work of Reeves, and to incorporate elements and villains from the source material that none of them have touched. And that exists.

It's called "Batman the Animated Series" or "Mask of the Phantasm" or "Return of the Joker" or "Under the Red Hood" or any of the other countless incredible animated properties that all have equal importance and equal impact to the live-action adaptations. And the live-action movies won't ever be able to come close to them until they feel comfortable with the entirety of the stories and the characters that they're adapting. Batman is a character who's defined by fear.

Not just the fear that he instills in his enemies and in Gotham's criminals, but also facing his own fears. He's a character who, despite how much people want to paint him as an unbreakable Bat God who never loses, constantly gets beat down, constantly faces overwhelming odds, whether that's greed and corruption or the monsters out of nightmares. He overcomes fears so that he can give people the strength to do the same thing.

But let me know down below, what do you think about the realistic Batman trend and what are some of the more fun villains you want to see in the movies? And if you liked this video, be sure to hit the like button and subscribe. Special thanks to AltoTheSting, Anz, Anus425, CabbageBoy, Cassidy, Carolyn Brenneman, Chicken McDufus, Dan, Danny Boy, Eden Kenna, Egan McFarland, Evan Bowers, FastestManDead, Finn Yates, Hannah C, Harper Sires, Howard Bell, if you know, you know, Iron Ninja, Jake Selig, Kai Dud, Ken, Glass Bear Productions, Morphee, Murno9, PopcornEater123, Raptor_77, Sherbet, Slapstick, Slush E, SpectacularKly, TDWfan, Theo Crouch, Tim Neufeld, Choices by ErasurezLame, Tyler Goodrich, and Yoshikapur for being Spectacular fanboys on my Patreon.

This has been ToriBoys17 coming at you live. Be responsible and I'll see you around.