DownBrush

First of all, I am not a historian so I don't really care about historical inaccuracies in this case. There are some core points where this film gets hate (apart from historical inaccuracies), one of them being that it feel messy/choppy whatever you may want to call it, as if it should have been longer. In some ways I do agree, there are many parts where they just decide to jump in time, and then once again.

Some people find this film boring, I disagree. It is no Gladiator but I thoroughly enjoyed all battle scenes and most of the "private-life" stuff along the way, sometimes I wondered where the film was heading but I didn't consider it to be boring in any case.

The film may be bad for people who wanted a realistic depiction so those reviews make sense, but if you just want to watch a grand-movie at the big screen then this is one, especially cause of the battle scenes, and of course Phoenix too.

Young director Robert Eggers is back at it again with his most recent take on a movie based around vikings, now first of all I have to give full credit to the film when it comes to capturing the brutality of vikings because it is done spectacularly. The film itself is entertaining and the cast delivers great performances all around, this role shows that Alexander Skarsgård has what it takes to be a top tier dramatic actor as he arguably delivers a career-high performance.

Now for people contemplating whether or not they should see the film because Eggers' films so far have been "too artsy" and "not for the general audience" should put their worries aside and purchase their tickets because there isn't much to worry about even though there will be many classic Eggers shots he is typically known for.

As for the small negatives about the film; I felt disappointed in how little we got of Dafoe as he often shines with these types of directors. I do also have to say that the movie isn't exactly how it is shown in the trailers (less action in the final product), some people claim the trailers are superior and even though I enjoyed my time in the cinema I slightly agree with those claims.

After consecutive years of average and less than average movies DC has gone and shown that they are capable of putting out excellent films too. Matt Reeves' The Batman is alongside movies like Joker and The Suicide Squad a piece of work showing the quality of DC if they actually don't hinder directors from creating what's on their mind.

The Batman is a dark and brutal movie really pushing its PG-13 rating to the limits with Robert Pattinson with a great performance alongside the likes of Paul Dano, Colin Farrell and the rest of the cast. The cinematography and score is excellent too but I do feel like I wanted to see more of Paul Dano.

All in all The Batman is a major stepping stone toward the right direction for DC and comic book movies and it is a perfect example that taking risks pays off, it is the first time we see the dark and gritty side of Batman this clear and it doesn't disappoint.