The fandom are responding to the fantastic world that evokes the comic book. It blends the dark, brooding atmosphere with the fun of the comics.
Shrek joins up with the Penguin because he (a) fears for his life, and (b) he sees an opportunity to use the circus gang and the Penguin to create a dummy candidate and replace the mayor who stands in Shrek's way with projects like the "power plant".
Selina Kyle isn't necessarily dead, having had her fall broken by several awnings. Anyway, it's not going for full realism, so Selina's recovery - which might or might not be miraculous - isn't outside of the established norms of the comic book universe.
Okay, yeah, they should have explained how the Penguin has Batmobile blueprints.
Catwoman's nine lives are, again, not definitive. They're just times she "should" have died. Did she literally die nine times? Maybe...again, not a realistic world. But it's more likely that they're just close-calls.
I think they're supposed to be pushing him with their flippers.
The penguin missiles weren't the best climax. True.
I thought the circus gang were stylized and creepy.
Batman is portrayed by Burton and Keaton through what he doesn't say rather than what he does. He's active through the movie. He puts together pieces and assembles the evidence to take down Shrek and Cobblepot. He falls for Selina and struggles with the duality of his world.
What people are responding to is how this feels like a different reality. It's comic book mythology brought to life. The production values are marvelous, yes, but the real heart of the story is Bruce trying to find balance in his life. It's kinda tragic, too, because his goals are antithetical to each other. He can't love Selina unconditionally because he has a mission as Batman. That's classic "Bat" stuff.
reply
share
arflexit (2376)
4 years ago
I agree with you almost 100% and you state some points even better than me; like: "(b) he sees an opportunity to use the circus gang and the Penguin to create a dummy candidate and replace the mayor who stands in Shrek's way with projects like the "power plant"." That is a great point about Shrek taking the opportunity. What a great villain he was; IMO he was far more interesting and compelling than Penguin was.
One thing I sort of disagree with is this: "He's active through the movie. He puts together pieces and assembles the evidence to take down Shrek and Cobblepot"
While agree he is active it does not seem to be from any kind of deep or emotional connection or motivation. It comes across as 100% him just doing a job and they don't really explore any kind of struggle or internal conflict he has. There is a certain level of emotional disconnect he seems to have with the plot that sort of lowers the interest you have in his activity. I am not sure if I am explaining this well. He seems like he is not invested in the plot (outside Catwoman anyway) and therefor from the audience perspective it is difficult for us to be invested in the plot. And I was not a big fan of the 'chemistry' between Bruce Wayne and Selina Kyle in this; not as bad as it was in Dark knight rises but it didn't 'work' for me.
reply
share
Ace_Spade (9345)
4 years ago
He's definitely invested in the Catwoman stuff. I thought their chemistry worked, but to each his own.
Wayne's connection is revealed through Alfred's observations. "Must you be the only lonely man-beast in town?" Bruce sees something of a sinister mirror of himself in Cobblepot. Shrek observes this, too, when he notes, "...you two might've been roomies at prep school." So, I think Batman is unsettled by his darker nature.
I think that's what's going on with him and Selina, too. He knows he's playing with fire there, with his attraction to her. The movie is a lot about the masks we wear and who we are in different contexts. The duplicitous nature of politics is naked here, as is the faux-altruism of Shrek's industrial aspirations (the power plant is actually draining electricity from the city). What makes us who we are? Are we monsters?
I do know what you mean. Batman does seem a little extra aloof here and is a bit distant. That's the risk that's run when they don't make every villain tie back to the hero's personal life. Maybe he should have seemed a little more worried about the fate of the city, though, to give the story some gravitas and personal heft.
reply
share
arflexit (2376)
4 years ago
"I do know what you mean. Batman does seem a little extra aloof here and is a bit distant. That's the risk that's run when they don't make every villain tie back to the hero's personal life. Maybe he should have seemed a little more worried about the fate of the city, though, to give the story some gravitas and personal heft."
You make some good points about Bruce having a bit of a more subtle and not 'out in the open' type of investment and 'internal conflict' but I think you catch the essence of what I meant. I think the words "extra aloof" capture my meaning. He just seemed like he was passionless about his 'calling' and about fulfilling his duty. And it kind of made him a drag to watch in this film compared to the first. but then as you said there was a lot more subtle conflicts that are expressed through the visual story then heavy exposition (Nolan's style)
Man now I want to go back and take another look at it. Been years since I last watched it.
reply
share