I saw The Batman... and it's really, really bad

I'm very confused about the public reception of the newest version of Batman's story.

I don't have a problem with Robert Pattinson as Batman, except for the fact that I view Batman as a person who is much, much older than I am. In my opinion, if DC wants to create a new Batman film with a younger protagonist, they should Dick Grayson. Fans have been clamoring for the rest of the Batfamily to be included in the cinematic universe for years, and yet the film industry insists on sticking to the same story, told over and over and over again.

Even with all of that, I still might have enjoyed it--if the execution had actually been enjoyable.

It was not.

Part of it's me--I don't like the dark and gritty tone these filmmakers love to go for. Yes, yes, I know that Gotham is dark and gritty. Batman has always had a spot of light to him. A yellow symbol on his chest. A bright light shining in the sky. A sidekick with flashy, recognizable colors.

It might seem a bit tacky, but it brought life into his world.

It's a stylistic choice, yes--but I like plenty of stories that have a subdued color palette. You do not have to sacrifice lightness and nuance in order to adhere to your film noir aesthetic.

One example is the Umbrella Academy. It's very dark and gritty--and it's utterly compelling. I stayed away from it for a while because I thought I wouldn't like it at all, but I was hooked from the first episode. There is light and hope in the series as well as grit and grime, and overall it feels very fleshed out.

The Batman feels monotone. The only points of light are swallowed by a stubborn refusal to embrace the lighter points of Batman's source material. Selina in particular is downplayed throughout--which leaves me wondering why the people I follow, who normally are so thoroughly critical of the way media treats its women, love this movie so much.

Selina and Bruce are not on equal footing. Writers have often overly sexualized Catwoman, but she's always been more or less Batman's equal. He's fascinated by her because she's so good at what she does, and when she escapes it's only narrowly, after giving him a fight on par with his own.

This version of Bruce doesn't even know her as a criminal. He sees her working for The Penguin, stalks her to her house, spies on her with binoculars, peeps on her as she changes clothes, overpowers her within minutes, manipulates her into a situation she's very clearly uncomfortable with, shows no concern for her safety, and expects her to adhere to his strict belief system in spite of the fact that he's been nothing but a toxic bully the entire time.

Selina has no reason to kiss him. The tension between them is because they don't trust each other, and although this often turns sensual in movies, neither of them gives any indication that they view the other with anything other than suspicion. She was calling her roommate baby, and then that roommate disappeared, and she frantically searched for her while the man in the mask showed absolutely no compassion or empathy and pushed her to complete his mission instead--and this is reason for a kiss? Really? On what grounds?

It wasn't even framed a spite kiss.

The Riddler's part in the story is tired and boring. I don't know why these filmmakers insist on painting a picture of the violent extremist idealist. It's more fictional than Superman in most cases. It's extremely rare-- you're much more likely to find a violent nationalist.

Yet they trot the overused trope out time and again, almost as though they're pushing a specific narrative instead of merely writing a character.

The Riddler is just Nolan's Joker with a different schtick.

I think it's an example of overcorrecting. Writers are told that audiences need to be able to connect with the characters, so they think they have to give every single villain a relatable backstory.

They don't need to. Villains do not have to be relatable for the story to be good. Villains can just be bad.

The Riddler in particular is usually a person who just wants to have a good time. He doesn't really care about the fallout, so he involves the entire city in the process, but he's in it for a laugh.

Which, yes, once again sounds familiar, but the Joker's schtick is a lot more flexible.

If you're going to honor the story of the Batman, include the flash--and I don't mean from a bomb blast.

Otherwise, the consumers are just wading through your muck.