I’ve been indifferent to superhero films since Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight Trilogy wrapped up in 2012. Indeed, it’s fair to say that Nolan’s trio of Batman films, so good in their own right, essentially ruined the genre for me. On the one hand, there were the Dark Knight copycats, whose attempts to match Nolan’s gritty verisimilitude came off as either cynical or lugubrious. On the other hand, there were those who sought to transcend Nolan’s achievement, fashioning gaudy, CGI-driven spectacles that Martin Scorsese famously likened to “theme parks.” Either way, I was disinterested and, if not for the proddings of my sons, would have happily ignored the latest reboot of the Batman franchise. As it happens, however, I’m glad they talked me into seeing it. Directed by Matt Reeves, the new film bears an unadorned title—The Batman. This is not insignificant. Reeves very much wants to recapture Nolan’s neo-noir realism, but he puts his own spin on the material. Whereas Nolan’s Bruce Wayne/Batman (Christian Bale) is a paragon of toughness and cool, Reeves asks his titular hero (played ably by Robert Pattinson) to exemplify wounded bitterness. Drawn into Gotham City’s criminal underworld by a string of political assassinations, Batman ultimately finds himself investigating his own background of wealth and privilege. The film even dares to meditate on the biblical concept of ancestral sin, literally posing the question: will the sins of the father be visited upon the son (cf. Exod. 34:7, Deut. 5:9, Jer. 31:29-34, etc.)? Without giving away any particular details, it’s worth underlining that this issue is set amidst an all too contemporary problem, namely, popular frustration with and vengeance against a corrupt socio-political order. What’s interesting is that Reeves suggests that Batman represents both parties. As Bruce Wayne, he belongs to Gotham’s institutional power-brokers; as Batman, he is trying to rectify the establishment’s failures. Is it possible to synthesize this duality? Must he choose between political reform or radical revenge? As The Batman comes to its exhilarating finish, Reeves implies that retaliation is not a legitimate answer and, in turn, puts Batman on a surprising path—that of a man of the people, who realizes that Gotham’s beleaguered citizenry needs hope more than anger or fear.
From The Batman: “Our scars can destroy us, even after the physical wounds have healed. But if we survive them, they can transform us. They can give us the power to endure, and the strength to fight.”