Summary
The Batman Part IIhas fans rightly worried about the pace of its script, but there’s a deeper, albeit not-so-obvious issue that looms over the film series. It is set to become the character’s second trilogy in a little over two decades, which ordinarily wouldn’t be a problem except it would be drawing the curtain to the most expansive and ambitious live-action portrayal of Batman sinceChristopher Nolan’sTheDark Knight Risesin 2012.
No stranger to trilogies—after successful work onPlanet of the Apes—Matt Reeves’ confirmed attempt to do the same withThe Batmanwould not only restrict the filmmaker’s brilliantly grim Batman-led Gotham to just three movies, excluding spin-offs, but it would be a waste of a solid actor in Robert Pattinson. Pattinson’s Batman and Reeves’ Gotham are simply too grand to be told in a trilogy.
Hollywood Has an Obsession With Trilogies
Althoughtrilogies are not a new concept,it’s apparently becoming a Hollywood obsession. And it’s easy to see why. Their three-act storytelling structure—setup, conflict, and resolution—which comes with the bonus of cohesiveness and narrative focus, makes them the star kids of the cinema party. And since the days ofThe Godfather, film series with “trilogy” added at the back have always spoken to the bias of the film audience.
The 2000s heralded a golden age of trilogiesin Hollywood, from Peter Jackson’sThe Lord of the Ringsand Sam Raimi’sSpider-ManHunger Gamesto Christopher Nolan’sTheDark Knighttrilogy. As far as comic book trilogies are concerned,The Dark Knightis considered the messiah, even moreso than Sam Raimi’sSpider-Man. Not only did it birth the first comic book movie to gross $1 billion at the box office in 2008’sThe Dark Knight, it’s one of the highest rated on Rotten Tomatoes.
Trilogies Are Not One-Size-Fits-All Storytelling Shoe
Not every story fits a trilogy’s three-act structure. Some, likeThe Hobbit—due to its source material being a short book—The Matrix,and50 Shadeswere arguably better off as a single film; others, such asThe Hunger Games—which had four movies—needed more.
George R.R. Martin’sFire and Bloodis a solid example of a lore that would be disadvantaged by trilogies. Its “Dance of the Dragons” (the Targaryen war of succession) storyline could be theoretically done as a trilogy—with King Viserys’ reign and death as the first part, the actual civil war in the second, and Rheanyra’s execution and near-extinction of dragons in the final part. But that would mean missing out on many epic battles that are impossible to cram into a three-hour movie without painful compromises. Not thatHouse of the Dragonis the best, or only, way to tell such a story (The Lord of the Ringsexists), but a three-film structure would severely undermine it.
Matt Reeves’s Batman Is Worth More Than Just Three Movies
Matt Reeves' “Batmanverse” has a lot more to offer thanFire and Blood. The filmmaker has built a Gotham that is realistic and captivating enough to grace the big screen for at least half a dozen movies. Yet, it will end as a trilogy. For fans still clinging to the nostalgia ofThe Dark Knight, there couldn’t be better news. But for those still unsatisfied by the conclusion ofChristian Bale’s Gothampost-2012 and yearning for a Batman pathos to be spread across multiple movies—a laTwilight Saga—it would be yet another waste of good Bruce Wayne/Batman.
The Caped Crusader’s interactions with his extensive library of villains is an enviably vast lore. Unraveling the mysteries behind each awakening inspin-off series likeThe Penguinonly sounds like a good idea when it doesn’t at the cost of more Batman films. Thus, a Catwoman series might be cold comfort for hungry fans. Besides, Warner Bros. has cast a new Batman every seven or so years for the big screen since the turn of the century; the upcoming Andy Muschietti-led DC UniverseBatman:The Brave and the Boldwould be the fifth in 26 years.
IfRobert Pattinson can’t be the DCU Batman, the least Warner Bros. and DC executives—which include DC CEOs, James Gunn and Peter Safran—could do is keep him around for at least five films before the DCU equivalent arrives. They might not get another chance due to so-called Batman fatigue. Plus, with Gunn signifying that Superman will head the new universe, an extensive exploration of Batman and Gotham, sans-Reeves', is not on the horizon.
Pattinson would likely be 43 years old by the time the third movie in the trilogy releases—which would be no earlier than 2029 given thedelays withThe Batman Part II’s script—and would still be ripe to don the cape and cowl for three more films. Fortunately, Warner Bros.’s track record suggests that there’s a glimmer of hope. Todd Phillip’sJokerwas meant to be one film, but the insanely successful box office returns quickly made way for a sequel—although that went horribly wrong. All this is to say, Matt Reeves’The Batmanshould follow the old-fashioned open-ended storytelling model and not be confined by the rigid structure of a trilogy.
The Batman
Cast
Directed by the visionary Matt Reeves, Robert Pattinson plays a dark, gritty and tormented caped crusader, looking to save his home from the corruption that eats at it, and the criminals looking to destroy it. With a stellar cast of Andy Serkis, Zoe Kravitz, Collin Farrell and Jeffrey Wright, The Batman takes a new approach to Gotham’s protector, one not seen since the Nolan trilogy.
