Hollywood's obsession with trilogies is limiting the expansive potential of Matt Reeves' "Batman" universe, as the second installment, "The Batman Part II," raises concerns about the pace of its script and the overarching structure of the series. Fans are right to worry; this film will mark the character's second trilogy within just over two decades, potentially stifling one of the most ambitious portrayals of Batman since Christopher Nolan’s "The Dark Knight Rises".
Set against the backdrop of Hollywood's trilogy trend, which has gained momentum since the days of iconic series like "The Lord of the Rings" and "The Dark Knight," Reeves' take on Gotham and its caped crusader deserves much more than the confines of three films. With Robert Pattinson as the titular hero, this interpretation has breathed new life and satisfying complexity to the character. Yet, it is on the brink of becoming just another finished triad.
Trilogies have long been the darling of Hollywood, offering filmmakers the chance to explore their narratives through the three-act structure, which allows for setup, conflict, and resolution. While this format may work wonders for certain stories, it is not universally applicable. Some narratives, such as the darker lore of "George R.R. Martin’s Fire and Blood," favor more than one cinematic treatment to do justice to their complexity and nuance.
Lessons from earlier adaptations could also demonstrate the need for more expansive storytelling. For example, "The Hobbit" was drawn out over three films, yet it struggled with pacing and left audiences wanting more depth. Similarly, spin-off series like "House of the Dragon" have shown how vast lore is often mishandled during restricted movie adaptations.
Reeves’ vision for his "Batmanverse" showcases his potential for layered storytelling. Critics argue this Gotham is deep, rich, and full of characterizations and narratives begging to be explored over several films rather than crammed within the limitations of three. This layered exploration could add depth not only to Batman but also to his extensive rogues' gallery, giving viewers more of the renowned villain dynamics.
Many fans are still haunted by the disappointment of the conclusion of Christian Bale’s Batman saga. The longing for cinematic depth is palpable, creating urgent expectations as Pattinson's Batman faces his own demons and the corrupt world around him. Unlike Nolan’s trilogy, Reeves’ narrative architecture could sustain far more than simply three films, analogous to sprawling tales like the "Twilight Saga," which took its time to cultivate emotional arcs over its available films.
Warner Bros. alongside DC executives James Gunn and Peter Safran have seemingly hitched their wagons to the concept of traditional trilogies, with few avenues for extending the storytelling. With Pattinson likely to age out of the role by the time the third installment is released (estimated around 2029 due to script delays), the studio could incur potential losses from truncation if they don't push Reeves to develop more films.
The idea of 'Batman fatigue' looms large, with the franchise having cast new Batmans every seven years since the turn of the century. While the casting of Pattinson was strategic, the continuation of the character should not be flip-flopped with new interpretations abruptly replacing each other every few years.
Beyond just actor concerns, the overarching creative risk remains. Matt Reeves' musical and visual odyssey with Gotham deserves to be explored through multiple films, where he can lay out the sprawling web of intrigue involving Batman. Until now, Pattinson’s portrayal is seen as groundbreaking, with each film serving as potential touchstones for comic book adaptations. The director is already pushing boundaries creatively, commanding audiences' respect with his cinematographic style and storytelling.
Interestingly, Ben Affleck, who portrayed Batman during the DC Extended Universe era, had the opportunity to direct the standout film "Man of Steel," yet he turned it down. Going from acting to directing may have deterred him, considering the mixed reception of earlier superhero films. Affleck's later association with the character largely came through his performances, which garnered significant attention.
Jesse Eisenberg, who brought Lex Luthor to life during Snyder's "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice," revealed how the poor reception of his film impacted his career. Despite the film grossing nearly $875 million worldwide, Eisenberg's portrayal has been polarizing, creating lasting effects on his selection for future roles. He openly reflected, saying, "I was so poorly received... I genuinely think it actually hurt my career," drawing distinctions between being associated with projects deemed commercial successes versus those deemed failures.
Indeed, Eisenberg's experience raises poignant questions about accountability and the personal toll of working within high-stakes productions, especially when the outcomes are critiqued so publicly. The public reception or lack thereof of such films can redefine the careers of actors involved; and for Eisenberg, moving forward from being pigeonholed by disappointing projects was viable only through persistent exploration of independent films.
Just as Eisenberg steps aside for more independent ventures, the essence of Reeves' Batman should escape the constraints of conventional filmmaking and embrace the rich, complex narratives it harbors. By doing so, he not only fights against the current trilogization trend but opens the doors to broader cinematic storytelling.
With Gotham itself so richly detailed and laden with unforgettable characters, continuing Reeves' Batman saga beyond mere trilogy limitations is not just optimal but necessary. Warner Bros., by allowing this narrative evolution, could cultivate something truly extraordinary and redefine how superhero stories are told on the big screen.
