Seeing in the Dark Part 1: Dirtying up the frame

Friday 4th of April 2025 The images, the atmosphere, the sheer artistry of it all clung to me. And still does.

The cinematography of 2022’s The Batman. I don’t typically watch superhero films, I’ve long felt that the recent slate of Marvel movies exemplifies some of the most uninspired and lifeless cinematography in modern filmmaking. Shadows have been all but eradicated, replaced by an artificial, overly sanitized 'meh'. Actors stand, perfectly lit, in front of monstrous green-screen landscapes, swallowed by an overwhelming sea of CGI. The result? A hollow, weightless spectacle devoid of texture, grit, and escapism.

But what had DC’s The Batman done differently even with CGI and virtual walls? Its cinematography. It didn’t just present Gotham, it pulled us through the screen, immersing us in its rain-soaked, neon-reflected streets. Shadows loomed in every alleyway, stretched beneath every overpass, alive with menace and mystery. Within seconds of the first frame, the film had spoken its visual language, and we, the audience, understood it instinctively. The character of Batman, this mythic avenger clad in a crime-fighting costume, suddenly felt tangible, believable. Because his world was. The cinematography didn’t just frame Gotham; it convinced us it existed, lurking just beyond the edge of our vision, like a city glimpsed in a fever dream. Its gothic structures loomed high above streets awash in crime and rain, a place both surreal and undeniably real. Drawing us into the gloom, where, like Batman, we begin to get the ability of Seeing in the Dark.

Cinematographer Greig Fraser described his approach to The Batman as “dirtying up the frame,” a deliberate rejection of the pristine, hyper-polished look that dominates modern blockbusters. He embraced imperfection, using vintage lenses and even smearing Vaseline on the glass to create a dreamlike blur, allowing raindrops to cling stubbornly to the lens. Light leaks and lens flares weren’t just tolerated, they were encouraged, streaking across the sensor like the neon reflections of a restless city. The effect wasn’t just visual; it was all encompassing.

These choices weren’t just for aesthetics, they served to pull the audience deeper into Batman’s world. The ever-present rain wasn’t just seen; it was felt, dripping onto the camera as though the viewer themselves stood on the drenched pavement. Smoke billows from vents curling upwards to impenetrable clouds, wrapping the city in a ghostly haze. The slightly distorted, imperfect images mirrored the film’s emotional landscape, reinforcing the sense of detachment between Batman and those around him.

Beyond this, Fraser utilized shallow depth of field to isolate characters, making Gotham’s vastness feel overwhelming yet intimate. He leaned into darkness, letting shadows consume parts of the frame, enhancing the film’s noir influences. Handheld camerawork in key moments added a raw, documentary-like intensity, particularly in fight scenes, making every punch feel grounded and real. The low-light cinematography further deepened the film’s immersive, almost hallucinatory aesthetic.

Through these techniques, Fraser didn’t just shoot Gotham - he made us feel it, turning the city into a character as complex and haunting as the Dark Knight himself. Allowing us, like Batman to See in the Dark. Cheers. James Bradley

Have you seen this film?

• Yes, I loved the cinematography. I was so inspired by it.
• Yes, but I found the cinematography distracting.
• No, but I will put it on when I get some time.