This was the worst Batman I have ever seen. Firstly, Robert Pattinson was the worst choice for the Batman role. In Twilight he was alright, but in Batman he definitely failed. He was more like a sad, depressed goth kid with no emotions. He tried too much to fit the role, but in fact we got this depressive, dead and empty Batman. Secondly, there were other small things that sucked about this movie, for example, Cat Woman had a very simple and stupid mask. Even older movie versions had a better mask than here. Batman's batmobile also sucked. Looked like a downgraded version. He also rode just a simple bike and lastly, he couldn't even glide with his default Batman suit. Also, don't know why but James Gordon was played by a black actor, while in every movie and even in every game this character is white. Riddler character also seemed stupid, wearing stupid mask and acting stupid and wasn't intimidating at all, but laughable. So, in general cast and acting was disappointing in this movie. Lastly, the movie itself... It was dull, boring and depressive. They tried to make it masterpiece with 3 hours long, but in reality movie became just plain boring and I almost fell asleep. Overall verdict: Disappointing.

The Batman is not a terribly bad movie, but it would be twice as good if it were half as long. How a film that likes to take shortcuts – especially with the Riddler’s ‘riddles’ – can still take almost three hours to get to where it’s going, I haven’t the foggiest (but then this is a rather strange enterprise that gives us Andy Serkis in the flesh and covers Colin Farrell in prosthetic makeup and a fat suit). Director/co-writer Matt Reeves very wisely avoids origin stories and takes for granted relationships, which have already been well established in a decades-long canon, between certain characters; on the other hand, he allows his movie to become bogged down at the halfway point in a deluge of backstory. The obvious problem is that there is enough material here for at least two films, and Reeves attempts to cram it all into a single one. Why? We all know there are going to be sequels, so why not save some for the next chapter? Or better yet, why not leave some of it on the cutting room floor? There is absolutely no reason for the Penguin to be in this movie; he might as well be the Imperceptible Man (an actual Batman villain, mind you) for all that he’s given to do. Catwoman has been pretty much played out, and as far as the Riddler, I can’t believe I’m going to say this, but Jim Carrey did a much better job with the role than does Paul Dano – an otherwise fine actor that inexplicably chose to play the character as the bastard child of Heath Ledger’s Joker and Tom Hardy’s Bane. That leaves Carmine Falcone (John Turturro), who provides the most intriguing plot points; why not make him the main, or even – dare I say it – only villain? Now, The Batman is long enough to try the patient of a saint, but at least it’s great to look at. Like the first Tim Burton Batman (as described by the unerring Roger Ebert), it “is a triumph of design over story, style over substance - a great-looking movie with a plot you can’t care much about.” Gotham City in particular is a winning combination of Burton’s faux noir texture and Christopher Nolan’s plausible architecture. The best scenes involve Batman (Robert Pattinson) and Jim Gordon (Jeffrey Wright) – and indeed Pattinson has an uncanny knack for playing off veteran character actors – as a sort of pre-Robin dynamic duo; their adventures are poignant because they appear to happen in the real world, or at least as real as a world can be wherein a grown man disguises himself as a giant bat (compare last year’s Zack Snyder's Justice League, with its unending CGI assault on the senses).

To be honest, this is a really good movie. Hang on? So why did I only give it 2 out of 5 stars? Well, this is really personal but, to me, it is not a good Batman movie. I really had problems writing this review because it is a very good movie. I just did not like it as a Batman movie. The movie is really dark, gritty and noir. Not really a problem. It works for some movies. But it is also quite slow at the beginning and the first quarter of the movie was actually boring. Remember, this is a three hour movie so a quarter is more than half an hour of “boringness”. The “boringess” was broken up by a pretty cool car chase. Some people seem to not really like the batmobile and I have to say that it was not very inspired but it was not all bad either. Unfortunately the movie turned rather boring for a while again after that. The movie tries to bring out more of the detective part of Batman than the previous movies, which is fine, but there is just too much moping around with Batman / Bruce Wayne walking around oozing sadness all around him. Actually, this brings us to my main gripe with this movie. The choice of actor for the Batman is just wrong for me. He is more like a sad puppy than the Batman. The script that makes him mope around, have emotional outbreaks and, occasionally, being downright stupid like just staring dumbfounded when explosives go off in his face does not really help of course. To me the Selina Kyle character had more charisma than the Batman, especially when the Batman was in his Bruce Wayne alter ego. And I really, really dislike that twist about Bruce’s parents. That was such a lazy Hollywood writer hack thing to do just to create (unwanted) drama. Then we have the Riddler. Compared to the charismatic villains that we have come to expect he is just a sad little psychopath with a bunch of equally sad fanatical internet followers. Now, all of this would have worked great if it had been a movie about some, unspecified, vigilante. The movie is really well done. The detective story, the action (especially towards the end) and the noir setting would have worked great. Even at its three hour bloated length it would have been great although cut down to two hours or a bit more would have been even better. If it had not been a Batman movie!