Super Overrated But Still Good

I want to start by saying I genuinely think this movie is good and very enjoyable, but only if you have the ability to look past the fact that it's one of the worst adaptations of the character. As aggressive and ill charged as that sounds, I do enjoy so many things from it. However; unlike Clooney, Keaton, or Kilmer where the adaptation is poor and the movie are just not as good, this adaptation clearly flip a lot of the core values of the Batman in a way that I think does a disservice to the character.

Amongst many of the issue I believe that one issue I can't look past is the lack of character growth. One of the things I loved, as many of us, is the Joker. They even go as far as to have him win, which they even clearly state it in the climax of the movie. But what does this do for Batman or Bruce? In the end it does not develop him in any way. To give a good example, in The Batman (2022) the Riddler also wins. He succeeds in everything he planned from the start, except for development of the main character. By winning in the end he created a pillar of hope for Gotham, which is the inverse of his ultimate goal. In TDK, the movie ends with Batman killing Harvey and going into exile. In this movie and the following installment, this does nothing for the character in any meaningful way. We don't see him grappling with the fact he broke his one rule, we don't see him change his viewpoint in the aftermath of losing. I would argue that the villain winning a movie doesn't make it bad by any means, but it should serve an overall purpose. In one of the most famous example, Avengers Infinity War, we see them all broken and try to pick up the pieces in their own ways for their understood character. Steve creates a support group for those who had loved ones blipped and taking a "we can't change what happened" approach, to end up being the main character to influence the team and try to change what happened. Tony feels let down by his team and his own guilt and separates himself from the Avengers to have his own life, which leads to his decision in the end. There is cause and affect. I personally see none of that from Bruce in his franchise.

One other large issue I have with this depiction is the character relies so heavily on his supporting cast to carry him through his own movie. From Lucious being his brains, Alfred being his moral guide, Gordon doing all of his investigation for him, and Harvey being the symbol for Gotham that he is supposed to be. In The Batman (2022) he always is the smartest person in the room, he is brought to crime scenes specifically, even considering GCPD's stance on his vigilantism, because he alone can go toe to toe with the Riddler in a mental battle. There is not a single point of the movie where he needs someone to do something in order for him to progress in the story, he is the one who takes action. Bale's Batman relies far too much on others, and while it may be a more "realistic" movie like many will say, that's not the point. So much of the character was brought down for this realism that it almost doesn't feel like a Batman movie anymore. Think of this also, in TDK the entire city of Gotham was against the Joker, the crime syndicates, GCPD, the local government, and the Batman. he had more elements working in his favor which should lead to his desired outcome. This is a starch difference to Reeve's film where every single force in the movie, other than Gordan, is working against Batman and his goals. This is why even though they both fail in their respective movies, at least it makes sense for Pattinson. He didn't fail because he wasn't doing enough, he failed because the corruption of the city and everything working against him is such a tall order for one man alone, it's believable and even feels more realistic. Bale often comes across as incompetent in TDK because of this, which I think we all can agree is not Batman. Needs a new suit or ANY tech? Lucious. Needs to catch the Joker or save the mayor? Gordon. Needs to do forensics on the bullet or break into the tower at Hong Kong? Lucious. Needs to be a symbol of hope? Harvey. If the Batman isn't a detective, doesn't showcase any intelligence or have self dependence with his tech, doesn't stop the Joker, and isn't a symbol, what is he? Sure these are issues I would be okay with if he moved past this and learned from. But he doesn't.

Side Note:

Imagine if they made a Spider-Man movie and Peter is influenced to not have his ideology of "with great power comes great responsibility" all for the sake of making a more realistic movie, it would be blasphemy to the character. It's the same as Batman killing Harvey against his code and having absolutely no development or characterization from it at all.

Two other major points that come up in the movie disservice his motivations as a character and made no sense at all. When he makes a proposition to give up his identity to the Joker and then asks Rachel for them to run away together, and for majority of the movie is trying to go into early retirement and let Harvey be the city's hero (despite saying early on to Alfred that he wants to be a beacon of hope for the city.). We for decades have watched Batman trust no one and dedicate his life to saving his city because of the trauma he endured as a kid, that's his cross to bare, and one he bares with his who heart. Another great example from The Batman (2022), Selina ask him to leave Gotham with her which is something he would clearly love to do, but he just responds " I have to try", which is crazy to her because she sees no hope for Gotham, but regardless he stays. Against everything the Batman puts his dedication to the city and its people above all. He would also do everything in his power to not give up his identity. One thing I do like in TDK is how well he plays Bruce Wayne, the reason the character utilizes this playboy persona is because that is his disguise. His identity is so important to the character, its who he really is and its sacred to him. So when Joker adds such a tiny bit of pressure and Bruce just so willingly will reveal himself, its a little unbelievable even for THIS depiction of Bruce Wayne. Let alone giving up his life's work to just hand over the city to Harvey, especially when it's showcased how much positive impact he has made on the city by being Batman. The whole reason he became the Batman is because the city's leadership has let them down for decades, so he decided to take matters into his own hands and do the things needed to make a positive difference. So why should I believe that after only 2 years as Batman, he sees his ex's boyfriend and just goes "yeah he's got this". It's just poor writing.

Aside from that there is so many more gripes I have like the characterization of Gotham itself, but I want to stick to my issues with the characterization of one of history's most favored heroes. Overall, I do like the movie a lot. I can understand people loving it, especially in the time that it came out. But these issues for me are really hard for me to look past, which make me appreciate the movie a little less.