Minemrys:

If the film is good, people won't care about the run time. Your fears are the reason studios like WB ruin directors work. Have faith. It ain't all about the money, but creativity and entertainment. Endgame did well, didn't it?
Show the audience some confidence. Have faith.
Although I ain't going to see it. Will be here waiting to hear from you guys.

AnfieldFan:


Lol....If you read those (X) things you didn't know about this actor/actress....They like including this thing for Cruise own Wella..

SMUAG:


I think people manning WB DCEU unit are finally coming to their senses... If it did well, don't be surprised to see a 3hrs for The Flash movie.
Movies with prominent or notable characters need better screen times...
Definitely. Positive words of mouth and long legs will definitely cover any movie with a long run time if the movie is compelling.

Minemrys:

If the film is good, people won't care about the run time. Your fears are the reason studios like WB ruin directors work. Have faith. It ain't all about the money, but creativity and entertainment. Endgame did well, didn't it?
Show the audience some confidence. Have faith.
Although I ain't going to see it. Will be here waiting to hear from you guys.

SMUAG:


I think people manning WB DCEU unit are finally coming to their senses... If it did well, don't be surprised to see a 3hrs for The Flash movie.
Movies with prominent or notable characters need better screen times...
Definitely. Positive words of mouth and long legs will definitely cover any movie with a long run time if the movie is compelling.

VerifiedStalin:


It won't do well, and there won't be a 3 hours Flash movie.

SMUAG:

Hmmm...... What makes you think it won't do well...?

VerifiedStalin:


The writing is plainly visible on the walls. The average casual moviegoer has a relatively limited attention span, and unless the film is action-packed/humorous, they are unlikely to be interested in seeing sulky Bruce prance around Gotham, in a noir dim lighting. There's a reason why WB executives want to trim it. They've seen it, and they know the length won't go down well with the casuals.

Xavier5:


And how was Batfleck performance against those super powered being? Did he engage in physical combat or he was just running around with a shooter doing nothing, letting his colleagues do the job. Which is exactly what I'm saying, Batfleck was powerless when he went against super powered beings.

Putting this into consideration, it laughable how people will claim Batfleck is a better fighter or is better than Bale's Batman because of the warehouse scene. If you want to compare, compare properly by considering the circumstance involve rather than just picking a scene and assuming a version of a character is better because of that.

Don't also forget, WW was the one that saved him from being barbecued by Doomsday. Also Batfleck has a team to fight along side with unlike Bale's Batman that is solo.

Powerless bane, seriously? As for the dogs, we're talking about huge dogs (I don't know the breed though), and we all know how fast, strong and fierce those kind of dogs are. Put Batfleck against such dogs and lets see how he will fare, and do not forget, everything boils down to the Director.

Anyway, we move.

#Xavier
#DCian

Nickshrapnel:
Okay, let’s make this comparison. Compare when Bale was fighting Joker’s goon to when Affleck was fighting regime soldiers in knightmare scene. Which is more badass?

Kaycee7:
Interstellar wasn't action-packed/humorous and yet grossed $700 million.
The storytelling just needs to be compelling. And that's not exactly impossible for a Batman story.

VerifiedStalin:


To compare The Batman to a thought-provoking film like Interstellar is absurd. For one thing, Interstellar is a hard science fiction film that provides a unique viewing experience. It has a phenomenal soundtrack, amazing visuals, a sympathetic theme, a great cast, a well-written script, a brilliant director, a well-paced story, and a premise that is firmly anchored in well-researched science. It's difficult not to fall in love with a film that emotes so sincerely and truly.

The Batman, on the other hand, is a full-fedged detective noir story. It's a given that there will be a lot of jawing and brooding and a lot less action and humour. Any intrigue in it will be lost in the muck of the muddled drivel. It's a disaster waiting to happen, and I say this as a DC fan.

VerifiedStalin:


To compare The Batman to a thought-provoking film like Interstellar is absurd. For one thing, Interstellar is a hard science fiction film that provides a unique viewing experience. It has a phenomenal soundtrack, amazing visuals, a sympathetic theme, a great cast, a well-written script, a brilliant director, a well-paced story, and a premise that is firmly anchored in well-researched science. It's difficult not to fall in love with a film that emotes so sincerely and truly.

The Batman, on the other hand, is a full-fedged detective noir story. It's a given that there will be a lot of jawing and brooding and a lot less action and humour. Any intrigue in it will be lost in the muck of the muddled drivel. It's a disaster waiting to happen, and I say this as a DC fan.

Kaycee7:
Well, someone's gotta be pessimistic, I guess.

Nickshrapnel:
This 'disaster' will outgross any movie WB put out this year.

VerifiedStalin:


To compare The Batman to a thought-provoking film like Interstellar is absurd. For one thing, Interstellar is a hard science fiction film that provides a unique viewing experience. It has a phenomenal soundtrack, amazing visuals, a sympathetic theme, a great cast, a well-written script, a brilliant director, a well-paced story, and a premise that is firmly anchored in well-researched science. It's difficult not to fall in love with a film that emotes so sincerely and truly.

The Batman, on the other hand, is a full-fedged detective noir story. It's a given that there will be a lot of jawing and brooding and a lot less action and humour. Any intrigue in it will be lost in the muck of the muddled drivel. It's a disaster waiting to happen, and I say this as a DC fan.

Lmaooo, the biggest Marvel/MCU apologist on NL is "saying this as a DC fan"

I would like to see how you'll backtrack when the movie makes big bucks in the BO.

PurpLChi:


Lmaooo, the biggest Marvel/MCU apologist on NL is "saying this as a DC fan"

I would like to see how you'll backtrack when the movie makes big bucks in the BO.

VerifiedStalin:


Faith? WB's track record in this area doesn't offer much room for optimism, chief.

For the amount of money spent on creating this film, one would think there'd be enough ingenuity to fit in a tale under 2 hours, but hey, what do I know, I'm just some pleb who's too focused on not getting bored to death watching a Batman movie play out for 3 hours like some Ph.D. Dissertation presentation.

VerifiedStalin:


Whatever makes you happy, chief.

PurpLChi:


Lmaooo, the biggest Marvel/MCU apologist on NL is "saying this as a DC fan"

I would like to see how you'll backtrack when the movie makes big bucks in the BO.

Minemrys:

That's how it starts, the fever, the rage the feeling of powerlessness that turns good DC fans into marvel trolls.

VerifiedStalin:


To compare The Batman to a thought-provoking film like Interstellar is absurd. For one thing, Interstellar is a hard science fiction film that provides a unique viewing experience. It has a phenomenal soundtrack, amazing visuals, a sympathetic theme, a great cast, a well-written script, a brilliant director, a well-paced story, and a premise that is firmly anchored in well-researched science. It's difficult not to fall in love with a film that emotes so sincerely and truly.

The Batman, on the other hand, is a full-fedged detective noir story. It's a given that there will be a lot of jawing and brooding and a lot less action and humour. Any intrigue in it will be lost in the muck of the muddled drivel. It's a disaster waiting to happen, and I say this as a DC fan.

VerifiedStalin:


A realist is often misinterpreted as a pessimist. It doesn't give me pleasure to bash The Batman, but it is what it is.

VerifiedStalin:


The writing is plainly visible on the walls. The average casual moviegoer has a relatively limited attention span, and unless the film is action-packed/humorous, they are unlikely to be interested in seeing sulky Bruce prance around Gotham, in a noir dim lighting. There's a reason why WB executives want to trim it. They've seen it, and they know the length won't go down well with the casuals.

VerifiedStalin:
Great! 3 hours of dark lighting. Just what we need. /s

Kaycee7:
Realism takes in both sides of the equation. Spelling doom for a movie that has a fair chance at delivering the goods is pessimism.

Minemrys:

You basing it off the trailers. Besides, interstellar didn't have the kinda humor you claim. It just needs a story that engages, great acting, characters and pace. Scenes shouldn't be dragged.

Minemrys:

Don't believe everything you see from the trailers son.
The Batman may actually have a story that you may not know. It could have everything that keeps audience glued, a mystery, humor, interesting characters, suspense, action and puzzle pieces. What makes a movie entertaining is if it doesn't just tell a story but has audience involved in every way, it has you thinking, smiling, laughing, puzzled, scared and not a drag. That was interstellar. The Batman can also be this. It's just on the film makers and the studio.

Kaycee7:
Realism takes in both sides of the equation. Spelling doom for a movie that has a fair chance at delivering the goods is pessimism.