Alien Loves Predator Forum Index
         
FAQFAQ    SearchSearch    RegisterRegister    ProfileProfile    Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages    Log inLog in 
Dark Knight announced as sequel to Batman Begins

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Alien Loves Predator Forum Index -> Movies & TV
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Smiley



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 721
Location: Inside the Beltway

PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 2:21 pm    Post subject: Dark Knight announced as sequel to Batman Begins Reply with quote

http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/722/722015p1.html

Heath Ledger as the Joker. Interesting. He's a very talented actor. I think he has the chops to pull this off


_________________
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
-Gallileo Galilei
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Frost



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 05 Jul 2005
Posts: 2442
Location: The Realm of Suck

PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I can't wait! I loved the first one!
_________________
You forget one thing: rock crushes scissors. But paper covers rock... and
scissors cuts paper... Kiff, we have a conundrum. Search them for paper... and
bring me a rock.
-- Zapp Brannigan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Simon_Says



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 17 Apr 2005
Posts: 6823
Location: Being generally opposing.

PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's old news.

I still think Jack Nicholson is, was, and will be the best Joker ever concieved.

And hopefully they're not reintroducing bat-nipples.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Frost



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 05 Jul 2005
Posts: 2442
Location: The Realm of Suck

PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 4:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Simon_Says wrote:
And hopefully they're not reintroducing bat-nipples.


I think that would be one of the signs of the apocalypse.

Funny thing though. I never even noticed the nipples on the suit the first time I watched that movie.
_________________
You forget one thing: rock crushes scissors. But paper covers rock... and
scissors cuts paper... Kiff, we have a conundrum. Search them for paper... and
bring me a rock.
-- Zapp Brannigan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Smiley



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 721
Location: Inside the Beltway

PostPosted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 9:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Simon_Says wrote:
That's old news.

Well maybe it was to you...

Simon_Says wrote:
I still think Jack Nicholson is, was, and will be the best Joker ever concieved.

Surely he was better than Cesar Romero, but he was always the wrong body type for the Joker. Too old, too heavy. The Joker is a skinny guy, or at least every single comic book iteration of him has been slim. Jack is a great actor who brought a lot to the role, but he was just not right in my book.

Simon_Says wrote:
And hopefully they're not reintroducing bat-nipples.

That was 100% Joel Schumacher. He's a tool who damn near ruined the franchise for all future efforts. Batman Forever and Batman and Robin were two of the worst comic-to-movie adaptations ever created. Even Jim Carey's Riddler couldn't save the first one, and there was just too much going on the second one (Awnuld as Mr. Freeze? Uma Thurman as Poison Ivy? Fatass Alicia Silverstone as Batgirl?). Just horrible, both of them.
_________________
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
-Gallileo Galilei
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Sal



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 29 Jul 2005
Posts: 4628
Location: home and such

PostPosted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 8:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

why oh why do they want to spur the inevitable storm over who was better Joker/who was cooler Joker/who was more like comic Joker/ whose Joker had greener hair?
couldn't they just leave it alone and do something else? there's still a few Bat-Enemies left, we really don't need another Joker movie.
i really wanted to believe that the last scene of Begins wasn't a clumsy, tasteless, and totally finesse-free harbinger of the sequel. well, i was wrong again.


i'm still waiting for someone to make use of Scarface/Ventriloquist, he's such a complicated character, or rather could be with a good script.
i'm sure he'd be great if united with Scarecrow but they unfortunately wasted him in the Begins which didn't really need any of the super evil guys gallery.

why won't they just let me be the head of the Batman movies department?
_________________
i have no time for anal love
Simon_Says wrote:
Sal, you're my favourite member again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Smiley



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 721
Location: Inside the Beltway

PostPosted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 8:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Salvatore wrote:

i'm sure he'd be great if united with Scarecrow but they unfortunately wasted him in the Begins which didn't really need any of the super evil guys gallery.

Scarecrow wasn't wasted. I thought they used him quite well. Cillian Murphy did an excellent job embodying the character. It was nice they used a bad guy like him who the general public (non-comic fans) wouldn't have been that familiar with.
_________________
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
-Gallileo Galilei
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Sal



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 29 Jul 2005
Posts: 4628
Location: home and such

PostPosted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i'm not saying Scarecrow was badly portrayed or badly acted. quite on the contrary. i mean he was wasted in that his role in the story was marginal, while normally the Bat-Enemies, and their wicked agendas constituted the axis around which the whole movies revolved. most often we witnessed the emergence of their evil alter egoes, their development and their inevitable downfall brought on by the still rather mysterious Batman. and it was such a good recipe.
this time around, however, the emphasis was shifted from Batman's superhero endeavours onto Bruce Wayne's personality and his background, it was his own emergence that mattered now; he himself became the movie's axis thus rendering the usual supervillain story slightly superfluous. you could feel that the script would do allright without any Scarecrow at all. unintentionally the supervillain's role was diminished, because the movie didn't really need one.
Ras Al Ghul would have been quite enough, as the special figure in Batman's past who returns and blah blah.
look at the movie's finale. it is not the Scarecrow's evil plot that is the climactic challenge for Batman. it is a mere episode after which he finally takes on the real threat - Ras Al Ghul.

in this sense i mean Scarecrow was wasted, he's such an interesting character, and was acted so well (i agree) that he deserved his full-fledged storyline in which he would be the star of the show like Joker, Penguin and Riddler in the past.

phew... i hope i made it clear now.
_________________
i have no time for anal love
Simon_Says wrote:
Sal, you're my favourite member again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Simon_Says



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 17 Apr 2005
Posts: 6823
Location: Being generally opposing.

PostPosted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 5:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

^ Totally agree.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Smiley



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 721
Location: Inside the Beltway

PostPosted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 5:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I see what you mean, but I don't think it's fair to compare this movie to those that came before it. I thought that it was from beginning to end a spectacular direction for which the series to go. If a baddie ends up being a pawn in a larger baddie's plot, e.g. Scarecrow ending up only serving Rahs Al Ghul's sacking of Gotham, then I don' see it as a waste of a supervillain. I more see it as a means to an end for the whole story. It did give us some insight into how this particular iteration of Scarecrow developed his fear toxin: it came from those Tibetan flowers. Considering Rahs was the only thing that Falcone was afraid of, it seemed fitting that Scarecrow would also be serving him.

But that's just me.
_________________
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
-Gallileo Galilei
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Sal



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 29 Jul 2005
Posts: 4628
Location: home and such

PostPosted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 7:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

okay, leaving Scarecrow aside, i have one more thought concerning the new Joker, which no one has apparently mentoned yet.

think about the consequences in terms of the series' continuity. to put it short - there will no longer be any!
instead we will get an alternative Batman-Joker battle, presumably alternative creation of Joker too.

this will in a way kill the series, because we won't be able to treat all the movies as a whole Batman Saga any more. B.Begins still fits into the larger picture nicely, because it doesn't really introduce any retroactive changes (heh, even the house burns down, so that we can imagine they will now build a new Batcave the way we saw it in the '89 Batman (or was it '88 maybe)).

the series will unfortunately split into two, and this may not be a giant problem after all, but i hope most of us agrees that it will spoil the fun a little bit.

Smileypen wrote:
I see what you mean, but I don't think it's fair to compare this movie to those that came before it.


and why shouldn't we?
your words here only prove my thesis. it already feels like a different series of movies, doesn't it?

moreover, if we already have alternative Joker and consequently alternative Batman altogether, why not make the next movie with Two-Face or Catwoman again? (only let's have some young and hot actors play the parts)
i know this is absurd. but i'm not so sure they wouldn't come up with this. they're Hollywood after all.
_________________
i have no time for anal love
Simon_Says wrote:
Sal, you're my favourite member again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Complex_Number_States
banned


Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 08 May 2006
Posts: 639
Location: Flyover Country, USA

PostPosted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Overwriting, and thus trivializing the previous series of Batman movies is a wonderful thing IMAO.

The Jack Nicholson as Joker movie was cool because of Nicholson, and because there was nothing really to compare it to, but other than that it was rather lame. The rest of them SUCKED. Even Uma Thurman couldn't save it.

I haven't seen Batman Begins yet, but from everything I have heard it is much better.
_________________


What if the 4th dimension became lava? You could map our physical location with the coordinates: X, Y, Z, and ARRRRG SO HOT, IT'S SO HOT
- Chloeee
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Simon_Says



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 17 Apr 2005
Posts: 6823
Location: Being generally opposing.

PostPosted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The new batmobile would automatically make Begins better than Forever/& Robin.
_________________


Last edited by Simon_Says on Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:19 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Smiley



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 721
Location: Inside the Beltway

PostPosted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Salvatore wrote:
think about the consequences in terms of the series' continuity. to put it short - there will no longer be any!
instead we will get an alternative Batman-Joker battle, presumably alternative creation of Joker too.

I'm fine with that.

Salvatore wrote:
this will in a way kill the series, because we won't be able to treat all the movies as a whole Batman Saga any more. B.Begins still fits into the larger picture nicely, because it doesn't really introduce any retroactive changes (heh, even the house burns down, so that we can imagine they will now build a new Batcave the way we saw it in the '89 Batman (or was it '88 maybe)).

I completely disagree with you here. Batman has changed countless times since his debut in the 1940s. He's constantly changing to suit the world the comic readers live in. If strict continuity were a defining factor in his development, he would still be driving a 1940s era Batmobile, still living in a 1940s era world, and thus he would be less easy to relate to by the average reader. I feel the same goes for the movies. The ones made from 1989 - 1997 are outdated, outmoded, and don't seem nearly as timeless as this current one.

Salvatore wrote:
the series will unfortunately split into two, and this may not be a giant problem after all, but i hope most of us agrees that it will spoil the fun a little bit.

Again, I find myself disagreeing with this mindset. I already consider the 1989 - 1997 movies to be a different saga necessitating a new sensibility in the execution of the production and character development. The Batman of 1989 is not going to be the Batman of 2007.


Salvatore wrote:
Smileypen wrote:
I see what you mean, but I don't think it's fair to compare this movie to those that came before it.


and why shouldn't we?
your words here only prove my thesis. it already feels like a different series of movies, doesn't it?

Exactly! Now you understand where I'm coming from.

Salvatore wrote:
moreover, if we already have alternative Joker and consequently alternative Batman altogether, why not make the next movie with Two-Face or Catwoman again? (only let's have some young and hot actors play the parts)
i know this is absurd. but i'm not so sure they wouldn't come up with this. they're Hollywood after all.

Let me break this down:

When you're dealing with a character like Batman that's been around since the 1940's, you need to be mindful of how many different styles of art and writing have been used to protray him. You have the strange and mysterious yet wholey beneficent original, the campy and bubblegum 1960's version (which informed the creation of the horrendous, psychedelic, and cartoonish Adam West/Burt Ward TV show), the dark and moody 1970s dark knight, and the 1980s-90s style that contained elements of several previous iterations.

There may be some semblance of continuity in the comic, but there are so many side stories, trade paperbacks, miniseries and other special editions in the comics that have nothing to do with the story and characters of each other. Batman is more than just a superhero; he's a legend who has stretched beyond the tiny confines of his original universe. No two artists draw Wayne Manor the same way. Hell, even no two movie Wayne Manors were the same. The Batmobile, the utility belt, the cave, the height of the ears on his cowl, even his gauntlets and boots are imagined in varying ways. Nipples on the uniform?!? One of the worst ideas ever, but that was that artist's vision of the caped crusader and his boy wonder.

Considering the great amount of history involved with Batman, I don't see the changes and breaks from other iterations as a spoiler of fun; I see only elements that allow the character to remain fresh and new and keep him from becoming stagnant.
_________________
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
-Gallileo Galilei
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Smiley



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 721
Location: Inside the Beltway

PostPosted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Simon_Says wrote:
I have yet to see Cesar Romero's performance as the Joker, but since I hear he refused to shave hsi mustache for that series, I think it had to be damn good, in a B-class sense.
It's pretty lame. The makeup people just painted right over it.






_________________
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
-Gallileo Galilei
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Sal



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 29 Jul 2005
Posts: 4628
Location: home and such

PostPosted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

okay, i get your point although my stance is that it would be nice if the movies maintained some sort of continuity after all.
a matter of personal preference, as always.

still, one thing remains. your argument is that of different approaches by different artists with different visions. fine by me.
but then why would Nolan borrow so heavily from the Burtonesque atmosphere of the first two movies? the fact he did (i would argue he did, i wonder if the rest agrees) was (at least to me) an indication of his intention to establish a common ground, a link between Begins, and the original B., as if he really planned it to feel like a prequel.

and if he did want it to be read as a prequel (i'm not saying he definitely did, but that's what my impression was), the decision to do an alternative Joker movie is strange at best. i say either-or, Nolan.
that's all i'm saying.
_________________
i have no time for anal love
Simon_Says wrote:
Sal, you're my favourite member again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
AmberEyez_Proclaims



Gender: Gender:Female
Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 139
Location: New York City

PostPosted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 5:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I liked Cesar Romero. 2 points for NOT shaving the 'stache, and he had the best evil giggle around. Then you've got the whole Catwoman thing. And Adam West - come on, that whole TV thing was pure fun / camp / insanity. You kind of had to actally watch it in real-time in the 60's (I did) because so much of the silliness and in-jokes are lost on anyone under 40, sorry kids.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Crotchfire



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 06 Jun 2005
Posts: 527
Location: You wouldn't believe me if I told you.

PostPosted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 8:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm sorry, but there is no one on earth who deserved to get the part for the Joker more than...

MARK HAMILL!

Mark Hamill has been the voice of the animated joker for over a decade... especially the brilliant "Batman, the Animated Series".

If anyone can pull off the joker perfectly, it has to be Mark Hamill. Get him on a treadmill, give him some make-up, and watch him take off.
_________________
The official MILF-masta of the AlP forums.
In addition to my well-documented exploits, my first two initials are MF. Seriously, I'm not making that up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Smiley



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 721
Location: Inside the Beltway

PostPosted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 8:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Salvatore wrote:
still, one thing remains. your argument is that of different approaches by different artists with different visions. fine by me.
but then why would Nolan borrow so heavily from the Burtonesque atmosphere of the first two movies? the fact he did (i would argue he did, i wonder if the rest agrees) was (at least to me) an indication of his intention to establish a common ground, a link between Begins, and the original B., as if he really planned it to feel like a prequel.

Easy answer: he didn't borrow from Burton. Gotham in Begins was a shining beacon of civilization in its design. There were three joined islands that made up the city and there were rough parts that had crime and destitution, but from all outward appearances, the Gotham of Nolan's vision was much more grandiose and classical in its design than the gothic, dark, cruddy Burton Gotham. Burton's Gotham was more edgy and caricaturish; it seemed to be a fantasy oriented locale that was suited to a comic bookish atmosphere. Nolan's Gotham was more realistic, in that it looked like it could actually exist in the real world somewhere. And I think that was the whole point of Nolan's great experiment. It seemed to me that he was recreating the Gotham universe as a more believeable place.

All you have to do is watch Batman (1989) and Batman Begins (2005) back to back and see the incredibly obvious differences in style, mood, and overall influence.

Look as the architecture: Burton borrowed heavily from Alan Moore and Neal Adams, not to mention injecting it with his unique twisted feel; Nolan took his cues from the real cities of New York, Chicago and Sydney.

The Batmobile in Burton's opus is largely based on the hot-rod 1940's version of the car, while the half-Lamborghini/half-Hummer Nolan Batmobile is more practical and derivative of the tank Batman used in Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns.

The look of the Burton world as a whole (costumes, set design, color pallette) was more like a cross between an anachronistic, film noir setting while Nolan's seems rooted in the practicalities of the present day and age.

I don't believe he ever intended this movie to be a prequel. It was conceived as a reboot, and do-over, a second chance to make a great screen adaptation of one of the legends among the superhero throngs. He wanted to tell the greatest story never told: how did Bruce Wayne become the Batman? No one, certain, definitive origin story had ever been done. He did it in such a way that he left himself open to explore the many facets of the character available to him from the decades of source material. And thus begins anew the saga.
_________________
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
-Gallileo Galilei
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Complex_Number_States
banned


Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 08 May 2006
Posts: 639
Location: Flyover Country, USA

PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 12:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AmberEyez wrote:
You kind of had to actally watch it in real-time in the 60's (I did) because so much of the silliness and in-jokes are lost on anyone under 40, sorry kids.


*complexnumbers does the Happy Dance when he discovers someone else posting on this forum who is old enough to have been tuning in at the Same Bat-Time, Same Bat-Channel, back when it was really happening.*

Wow, I feel soooo much better now.

Thanks AmberEyez!!
_________________


What if the 4th dimension became lava? You could map our physical location with the coordinates: X, Y, Z, and ARRRRG SO HOT, IT'S SO HOT
- Chloeee
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sal



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 29 Jul 2005
Posts: 4628
Location: home and such

PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 4:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

alright Smiley, with that recreation of Burton style thing, maybe you're right, i admit i haven't seen the old ones in quite a while and my general impression after Begins might have been off track. possibly the reason was that Nolan's Gotham was such a u-turn from Schumacher's (ugh!) flashy neon-filled Gotham, that it felt like a return to Burton's idea on the first glance. fine, that's settled.

BUT, i want to return to your previous thoughts.
1. you say our times need a new rendition of the Batman legend, because the older movies became obsolete. well, i don't agree at all. i don't know what can make you judge the Burton movies inadequate for the present day. i don't think we have had any great breakthrough in arts in the meantime (saying arts i mean film, literature, theatre, music - the branches that i claim to know something about, if it's different with visual arts please educate me).
as i see it, we are still pretty much where we were in the late 90's in terms of cultural canons, correct me if i'm wrong.
it's not the same situation as with the hilarious 60's TV Batman (btw, how i envy you, old people, the pleasure of watching it in real-time), and the late-80's Batman where there's a veritable cultural gorge in between.
Nolan and Burton are not that far aside. in fact an ignoramus like me might even see them similar in many respects. which in turn should prove (i hope) the times have not changed as drastically, and hiding behind the argument of adjusting the telling of a legend to the here and now, new Batman for new times, does not convince me at all.

2. every artist has a right to his own vision and his own interpretation of the subject, in this case the legend of Big B. fine, absolutely.
BUT, in some time (after the 3rd more movie would be my guess) when Nolan grows tired of B. (as he will), the almighty producers hire someone else to take care of the franchise, and the new and much inspired director starts making his own reading of Batman and decides the story of B.'s beginnings must be revised, because he has another brilliant vision of it. or maybe let's see the third round of Joker struggle (although he's dead twice already*). after some more time next director comes along and says "hey i got this awesome idea for a Joker movie"... you get my point.
unlikely, yes, but impossible?
all i mean is there should be some mastermind behind the development of the Saga as a whole (not individual movies - this is entirely in the hands of particular directors) so that it retains some scraps of internal logic, and does not become complete chaotic rubbish. a bit like Lucas, only to a smaller extent.
as i said before, i volunteer for the spot.


last thing
Smileypen wrote:
He wanted to tell the greatest story never told: how did Bruce Wayne become the Batman? No one, certain, definitive origin story had ever been done. He did it in such a way that he left himself open to explore the many facets of the character available to him from the decades of source material.


praise be him. but did he have to break from the previous movies to do this? did he have to start the saga anew, instead of inserting his own chapters into the existing saga smoothly? Begins fits nicely, it's the Joker thing that ruins it.


*assuming heath ledger dies in the end, of course. i see Joker becoming Batman's Kenny.
_________________
i have no time for anal love
Simon_Says wrote:
Sal, you're my favourite member again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Smiley



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 721
Location: Inside the Beltway

PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 12:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Meh. If the Joker thing is that much of a deal breaker, then I'm sorry you won't be able to enjoy the next film. I for one am really looking forward to it.

I wouldn't go so far as to claim that the Burton films and the Schumacher follow-ups were obsolete. I said they were outdated and outmoded. This is only my humble opinion, but I feel that a world in the latter half of the first decade of the new millenium could use a Batman universe that isn't either steeped in an anachronistic, quasi-1940s era world of noir/art deco (Burton) or stuck in some 1990s, flashy neon, larger-than-life caricature of L.A. (Schumacher).

I liked the choices that Nolan and the production designers made when constructing this new Gotham. It just seems more rooted in a real world type of area, which is what I really always wanted to see in a Batman movie. I was fourteen when the first Burton film was released, and I enjoyed it a lot at the time (except for the soundtrack by Prince, that is). But I've always thought that even with Tim Burton's cool, spooky ideas, the production could have benefitted from more reality. I think that's why I'm so partial to Batman Begins. It brings that sense of reality, practicality and believability to the genre.

All of Batman's gadgets are rooted in real-world applications or are explained in ways that make sense in this newest reimagining. The Burton Batmobile was awesome! It had a sweet look and feel; it looked menacing. It had all those cool things built in, like the pop-up machine guns, the hubcap bombs, the segmented carapace that extended out, and it looked like a Batmobile. I think, however, that I prefer the new batmobile because it seems like a vehicle that a real-world Batman would use. It's more functional and there's no mystery involved in where it came from. The Burton (and later ancestral models) Batmobile was straight out of a comic book. It's not that I dislike it because of a lack of backstory, I just find myself having a more sophisticated sense of practicality 17 years later. This is the Batman that I think most personifies what a live-action Batman should be.

So, in the end, it's still a matter of personal taste.

As for possible future iterations that differ from Nolan's vision, I can't comment because they don't exist yet. Nolan is the first one to do an origin story of Batman. Ever. No comic version exists, no film version was ever made. The events and struggles that shaped the man were taken from bits and pieces that were written over the course of forty years. I don't foresee Warner Bros. making another origin film, especially when you consider how phenomenally well this last one did at the box office compared to the last two...those movies really tarnished the franchise, and fans all over were ready to resign themselves to more crappy movies. Lucky for us that didn't happen.

I don't think they would introduce the Joker just to kill him off at the end a la Jack. One of the things that I liked most about Begins was that the Scarecrow lived. He wasn't brought in to die. I loved that! It's the perfect balance of real-world styling with that comic sense thrown in...you know he could be back for more mayhem later on.

Is it likely that WB will get someone else to continue a cash cow once it's original conceiver is done with it? You betcha. And you might have an instance or three where the director and production design team are jackholes with no sense of the gravity of the character or the history involved in his making. But we'll have to jump off that bridge when we cross it, eh?

As for your last query, yes. I do feel that it was necessary to wash away that which came before it in the sense of style, mood, feel, tone, whatever you want to call it. It's called Batman Begins because that's what this is...a new beginning.
_________________
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
-Gallileo Galilei
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Sal



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 29 Jul 2005
Posts: 4628
Location: home and such

PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 2:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Smileypen wrote:
Nolan is the first one to do an origin story of Batman. Ever. No comic version exists...


i haven't read it myself, but i know there's a comic (or maybe a series of comics) called "Batman: Year One." i seem to have a vague impression of having heard or read somewhere that Nolan partly took inspiration from this one. but i'm not really sure, so i'll let someone with greater knowledge comment on this.

i see the question of Batman-bathed-in-realism is really important to you, and i can understand why. i myself was impressed greatly by much of the down-to-earth approach to becoming a superhero, which came as a surprise, but certainly a pleasant one. and i really think Begins was an excellent job, apart maybe from that Scarecrow business i spoke of before.
it's just that if you put a gun to my head and ordered me to choose, i'd choose Batman by Burton.

Smileypen wrote:

But I've always thought that even with Tim Burton's cool, spooky ideas, the production could have benefitted from more reality. I think that's why I'm so partial to Batman Begins. It brings that sense of reality, practicality and believability to the genre.


exactly. while i, on the other hand, find myself partial to the original two because it is not entirely serious, even a bit surreal at times, full of black humour, and marked by this tongue-in-cheek attitude which is Burton's trademark.
when my girlfriend (whose contact with comic heroes/s-f/action movies had been next to nothing before she met me) saw Batman Returns (i didn't force her, honest!) she was shocked at how self-mocking and pathos-free and playfully theatrical it is. and that's what i mean.
i personally find this style suitable for Batman.
to each his own, naturally.


and just to make it clear, of course i will go see the next Batman, and if it's going to be at least as good as Begins i will be 100% satisfied. it's Batman after all. i'm glad they took it away from Schumacher and gave it to someone talented for a change.

i suggest we declare the topic exhausted and part in peace.
_________________
i have no time for anal love
Simon_Says wrote:
Sal, you're my favourite member again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Smiley



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 721
Location: Inside the Beltway

PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agreed! The only thing I'll clear up is that Batman: Year One was a recollection in present tense of the first year of Batman's exploits as told by Jim Gordon. the whole story is through his eyes, from his point of view. It's an excellent piece, written by Frank Miller, illustrated by David Mazzucchelli and painted by Richmond Lewis. Batman isn't even really the main character...Gordon tells an involving, captivating and heartfelt tale. It certainly informed some of the decisions that Nolan made, but it's a stretch to say he based the movie off the story.

Good debate!
_________________
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
-Gallileo Galilei
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Sal



Gender: Gender:Male
Joined: 29 Jul 2005
Posts: 4628
Location: home and such

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 6:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

damn, i see there's still a lot of really interesting Bat-comics out there which i don't know, i'll have to do something about it.

but for now
*takes a deep bow and waits for the curtain to fall, listening to the applause of an enthusiastic crowd...*
*when the curtain raises again takes an even deeper bow*
_________________
i have no time for anal love
Simon_Says wrote:
Sal, you're my favourite member again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Alien Loves Predator Forum Index -> Movies & TV All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group