In the original version of the story and the vast majority of retellings, Batman's secret identity is Bruce Wayne, an American millionaire (later billionaire) playboy, industrialist, and philanthropist. Having witnessed the murder of his parents as a child, he swore revenge on crime, an oath tempered with the greater ideal of justice. Wayne trains himself both physically and intellectually and dons a bat themed costume in order to fight crime. Batman operates in the fictional American Gotham City, assisted by various supporting characters including his crime-fighting partner, Robin, his butler Alfred Pennyworth, the police commissioner Jim Gordon, and occasionally the heroine Batgirl. He fights an assortment of villains such as the Joker, Penguin, the Riddler, Two-Face, Poison Ivy and Catwoman. Unlike most superheroes, he does not possess any superpowers; he makes use of intellect, detective skills, science and technology, wealth, physical prowess, martial arts skills, an indomitable will, fear, and intimidation in his continuous war on crime.
***"The Dark Knight Rises" was good, but not great. The first time I saw this movie I thought it was pretty good. Then I sat down to watch it with my parents and realized how long and drawn out certain parts were and how predictable it got (based on my dad pretty much figuring out a good of what was going to happen about 20 minutes in). The best parts were Cat Woman and Blake (though they could've whittled his part down a bit).
ReplyDelete----
TDK the first time I watched it was amazing. Then after seeing it so often it was then 'just good.' TDKR to me was amazing the first time seeing it and STILL amazing after seeing it a few more times. I am going to watch TDK again and see how I feel about it afterwards.***
That is one of the reasons I've never seen any of these movies at the theatre! Since they whisper and mumble so much, the cineplex has to turn the sound up to ear piercing decibels! After all that damange, you still miss half the dialogue! I just bought TDKR yesterday and I'm not looking forward to it because of the audio, how preditable it will be, and of course the Dave Letterman spoiler with Ann Hathaway last year in mind! - I do love these type of movies and appreciate the classic soundtracks! I am looking forward to some heart pounding gladiator type heroic music to move me! I'll be back for commentary one of these days when I put it in the player and watch it! It took a couple months to get to "Quantum Of Solace!" These movies are so long! I have a very short attention span! I'll definitely watch it on my own so I can replay missed dialogue! It'll take a while to get thru! Wish me luck!
***One of the reasons the movie is predictable is because it's the 3rd movie of the series which has to deal with the ending of TDK.
TDK was a standalone movie, really no reference, no flashbacks; nothing. The writers have full control on taking the story where they wanted. They had more room and Joker just offers you so much.
Dark Knight Rises has to deal with the events of TDK, at the end of the day every one knew "BATMAN will become symbol of hope" and he will become good in the eyes of police, public.
See it's predictable, but that is mostly due to constraint set by TDK. Not that it means to defend anything but generally speaking 'Rises' being the closure movie had to follow the cliches and predictability.
I doubt people expected John Blake to turn out to be Robin or Tate as Talia unless you saw production pics. Making one believe that Bane being the child of Ra's Al Ghul that was very cleverly written although some people might have caught it but it was still great. All full circle things, great dialogues, lot of themes and undertones were all awesome writing.
The reason I liked it so much was the fact that it did justice to all the characters in this movie. It was epic, grand, and shows these are just not comic book characters. They are larger than life characters, dealing with events happening in real world scenarios. The way they added themes of "French Revolution, A Tale of 2 Cities, Knightfall, Dark Knight Returns, No Mans Land" makes me love this movie so much.
-->Was it great interpretation of Robin?? YES
-->Was it great interpretation of Catwoman?? YES
-->Was it great interpretation of BANE?? HELL YES
-->Was Bruce Wayne interesting?? YES ***
***Is that it's not really a Batman movie, it's a cop drama where people dress up like Batman cartoon characters.
ReplyDeleteHow to make a Christopher Nolan Batman movie:
Get Batman comic book villain and turn him into a sadistic criminal master mind.
Except now the Joker is just wearing makeup, Bane doesn't use Venom, and Catwoman is never called Catwoman once.
For the most part Batman is gone through most of the film, "The Dark Knight" being the exception.
Eventually their plans threaten the entire city of Gotham itself but Batman saves it.
----
Nolan's intention was to make it more of a 'real' crime drama using the Batman mythos. He did a great job IMO, but many Batman purists are awaiting an adaptation closer to the comics.***
Over the decades, comics have been all over the place; camp vs being dark, heroes who are either "on the edge" or saints underneath, and then production's decision to "go real" and stay serious or hit the fantasy button! Up until now, I think they've been as real as anything out there! I saw a "gadget show" on tv a few years ago where in "The Dark Knight" they actually had engineers working on that "bike" to put engine in the wheels/spokes so it was "real!" Superman has to be more fantasy based! A super human being is a bit of a joke in real life! We've gotten so pathetically weak as a society, peanuts can't be served on planes anymore due to some with a severe allergic reaction to them! My own dad who was this big football player in college can't eat strawberries or curry without getting hives! Anything having to do with super human beings is totally science fiction to me! Drugs can alter strength and alertness, but not sure anyone's going to be walking thru fire without protection or breathing thru gills underwater without a tank!
***I'm not sure if I fully agree with the apporach in making Superman become more dark and gritty. That approach wasn't used in the first two Superman films and they turned out fine by themselves. Not every superhero character is meant to be dark and gritty and it's plainly obvious they're trying to duplicate the success of The Dark Knight trilogy with this new Superman film.***
Not that I kept up with it for the last 40 years or so, but this era of "darkness" is only catching up to the comics! Superman and Batman went dark decades ago didn't they; even before I gave them up in the 70's? By the 80's they were nuclear freaks! Everything's cyclical so things may have changed, but from my perspective that's where we are!
***I'm hoping it's just the previews that are designed to capitalize on the Batman darkness. When the movie comes out, hopefully it won't be so full of crap.***
***As a Superman [fan], it pisses me fk off that people can't stop talking $hit about the character. I'm not talking about the people who saw Superman III as an in-flight movie once and didn't care for it, those who can't stop rattling off these ANCIENT clichés about how he's supposed to suck, and then go on to praise Batman for being a completely ordinary protagonist.
ReplyDeleteTop 10.
1)If it weren't for Superman, Batman would have never been created. That's the one thing that Superman will always have over Batman. Even if you don't consider him the 1st superhero (the Phantom, Mandrake the Magician, Siegel & Shuster's own Dr Occult) the FACT is that Kane saw how much money Siegel & Shuster were making (yes, they sold the character for a song, but were handsomely paid for the actual writing and artwork they contributed) and wanted some of it for himself. That alone should be enough to for real fans to at-least be grateful to the character; but no. Esp. since some of these people probably think Batman was created to rebel against Superman. But no. No rebellion. Sorry. Esp. since they're kind-of an incestuous duo b/c...
2)Until recently, Superman spearheaded most of what Batman did. Who was the 1st superhero in animation? Superman. ...his '40s cartoons seem to be among the 1st action/adventure cartoons that were at-least semi-serious. 50 years later, animators were borrowing from it in Batman: the Animated Series. That's not a knock, of course, and obviously their plots were much thicker, but it wouldn't have existed w/o the strides made in those cartoons. Oh, and what about the big movies? Obviously, the Christopher Reeve movies pioneered the idea that a superhero film could be at-least as serious, not to mention made on a big budget and promoted well enough to become one of the biggest films of all time. Until recently, the only thing Batman really "beat" Superman to was live-action b/c his serial came first; but Superman almost had a serial before Batman, but what-is-now DC Comics preferred the animated treatment. The dummy they were going to use for the flying shots went to the Captain Marvel serial, and the script was rewritten as a generic serial. Finally, the 1st superhero team-up outside of comics was Superman and Batman on The Adventures of Superman radio drama.
3)OTOH, Batman did pioneer a few things that Superman copied, most important of which was the boy scout thing. No really. When Superman and Batman were 1st introduced, they were both badass anti-heroes. But when Robin was introduced, they made Batman stop killing, and make nice with the cops. Seeing that parents might prefer that, they did the same thing with Superman, and that stood for a long time.
4)They each have such a huge part in each-others' histories. I mean, have these fake-fans ever heard of the Justice League? Or World's Finest? Heck, btwn the '50s and the '80s, they were portrayed as best friends. It wasn't until '86 that they thought, "hey! We're rebooting! Let's portray them as not approving of each-others' 'methods' (cuz their 'methods' are so consistent to begin with) and this bloated paradigm contributed to Superman's late '80s/early '90s downfall that was only stemmed by the death & return story (that thing the "Thriller" guy's son wants you to think was a failure) which--again--they did a variation of with Batman about a yr later (Knightfall-Knightquest-Knightsend) & that only hurt their message that Batman is such a badass anti-hero, b/c they used it to further DC's '90s theme of "someone put the hero out of commission, so some anti-hero replaced him, and now it's up to the hero to get back in the saddle and make everything right."***
(Cont., next post)
***5)The Dark Knight Returns? Basically, as influential as that GN was, playing Superman as some lackey for the Reagan AD. reinforced this stuff about Supe being some authoritarian character, which is not only a strawman version of what he was in the Silver/Bronze age, but COMPLETELY belies his leftist roots. If you read the early Superman comics, most of the stories were about him beating up war profiteers and business people who mistreated their employees, ...an early story had the idiotic premise of Supes tearing down a tenement so the government would build a new and better one. ...
ReplyDelete6)They always seem to contradict themselves. Superman-haters in general do this all the time. ...But you know how some people like Batman b/c he doesn't have powers and everything's a challenge for him? And how other people like Batman b/c he's so smart he can beat everyone? And Superman's supposed to be so powerful you can't hurt him, even though he's quite often fighting villains like Darkseid, Metallo, Parasite, Doomsday, Brainiac, and General Zod who, in fact, CAN hurt him? ...
This is esp. dumb b/c so many people key in on the fact that Superman's most famous enemy is also a mere mortal whose only "powers" are that he's a genius billionaire who has to create gadgets to fight Superman. Yeah...
Here's the deal: either you hate Superman b/c he's too powerful, and he could--nay, would--beat Batman, or Batman can beat him so you hate him for some other reason. Or you hate both. Or maybe *gasp* you don't have to hate either of them.
7)A lot of these same people--or at-least the same TYPE--went on the Avengers board last yr to pick fights. Really, can it be any more obvious that all the Batman fans picking fights with fans of other characters have some innate insecurity about their own fandoms?
8)Some people say they like Batman b/c he's "more realistic." As far as it goes, that's already a stretch. Batman may not have super powers (although some of his villains do) but while that may be true about the 1st 2 movies with Chris Nolan, it's not, esp. since in the comics, he's constantly teaming up with not only Superman, but all kinds of superheroes. Let's see, who's on the Justice League right now? Well, there's Superman, who needs no intro. Wonder Woman, who's the child of Greek Mythological deities. ...Is the Flash still on the team? Well, he was. Yeah, he has one of those Marvel origins where it's an implausible science accident.
9)Why is Batman so much more popular than the usual cops and spies of action movies? Could it be the costume? Why, yes! And while Batman's look has evolved over the yrs and has had many influences the tights with underwear on the outside that has generally stayed in comics and has been the case in EVERY animated version, comes from Superman.
10)A lot of people have stooped to saying "Thuperman'th tho gay," ...Well, politics aside, that's SO ironic given that Batman's the one who made a jr high boy prance around in hot pants for about 50 yrs. - It is a strange fate that we should suffer so much fear and doubt over so small a thing.***
***See, you're obviously not a Batman fan, b/c...
ReplyDeletea) Superman's greatest attribute would be paving the way for Batman.
b) You wouldn't need someone to make you look cooler.
c) The Batman's enemy is the Joker.
----
Batman has a far better rouges gallery than Superman and any other Superhero. - He has a more visually striking rogues gallery. A more famous rogues gallery. But better? I don't know, a lot of them are kinda the same: psychotic, disfigured serial killers.
Also, since Superman has also dealt with the Joker and Batman has dealt with Luthor, and both started out fighting generic bad guys; the rogues card tells me that you're more of a fan of the bad guys than Batman himself as a character.
----
In all honesty I think it's b/c they genuinely know nothing about Superman, or Batman for that matter. I see Batman and Superman as the comic book version of Yin and Yang. Both essentially forces for good, but they have opposing philosophies in how they deal with the criminal element or if you want to go all schoolboy "the forces of evil;" think the last point is more appropriate to Superman than Batman really. I think it has something to do with the Nolan franchise fanboy-ism than anything to do with the actual characters themselves, like it means something to just be a Batman fan and everything else sucks. Personally neither are my favourite character, I'm more partial to Nightwing, doesn't mean the other two are any less interesting or "gay."***
Have loved them both since I was a kid, but they have gone thru a lot of changes over the last 50 years; some good, a lot bad! They've weakened Superman and made Batman the most important because of his smarts/knowledge! He gets the most out of his hero position w/o real superpowers is the usual refrain!
***Part 1 was amazing. It was literally the comic book come to life on screen. I've heard part 2 is even better. They didn't hold back on the violence or any of the dark stuff with the Joker.***
ReplyDeleteThat's probably why after all these years I haven't been able to watch the entire movie! You can't reason with someone like Joker who has no limitations! If he blows up kids; NO BIGGIE! They make these movies too long as well! I have a very short attention span! I bought TDKR a few days ago! I still haven't taken it out of the case! This is going to take a while esp. after all I've read from here on the stroyline! Sounds just about apocalyptic! Money used to rule the day, but that seems to be the 1st thing Bruce loses! Interesting ending; per DAVE LETTERMAN misspeak w/ Anne Hathaway last year!
***Here are the approximate dates of the events of the Dark Knight Trilogy from what I've gathered:
1982-Ra's Al Guhl gets warlord's daughter pregnant and she gets condemned to the pit
1985-1987????-Bruce's parents get shot
1990-1992????-Talia Al Guhl escapes from the pit
2000-Bruce fails at killing Joe Chill, meets Carmine Falcone, then goes off to learn how to fight criminals
2007-The remainder of the events of Batman Begins
2008-The events of the Dark Knight
2016-The present day events of the Dark Knight Rises (not the flashback scenes)
----
The big conflict between Batman and most of his primary adversaries in this trilogy was basically how much the people of Gotham at heart were worth. THE DARK KNIGHT's finale had a major scene (The ferry bomb threat) where they made a big deal about the people of Gotham directly by letting us see them make major choices that are a part of that grand argument between Batman and his foes. By showing neither side was willing to destroy the other, and thus prove that even if not everybody in Gotham was good there were good people in it.
Here is the question though I'm curious to hear people talk about for this film based on a discussion my brother and I had about it. Bane decides to show Bruce Gotham's true colors by starting his lower class vs upper class revolution. And from what we are shown in the film a vast portion of the people join up in Bane's revolution. We are told some have taken arms and joined directly into his army, and in many places we see large hoardes of people ransacking homes, watching and supporting the mock trials put upon the elite, etc. Essentially presenting them as the corrupt people that Ra's Al Ghul and the Joker spoke of that Bruce argued against. Do you think they should have shown more of the people themselves, and perhaps even have the people do something to redeem themselves in the eyes of the main characters?
B/c as it stands the only ones who seem to take direct action in the plot are the ones who sided with Bane (the rest hiding in their homes, though it's hard to tell the portions of who's with Bane and who's not. But it sure looked like a helluva lot of people) being fought against really only by members of the wealthy (Bruce/Lucius) and by the cops rather than the common man. (The people that were basically being argued over) The only person from the lower class who did change and help fight Bane at the end was Selina with really nobody else involved being shown with remorse. So what's your angle on the situation? I think it would be interesting, and I'm not really sure on my position right now. Granted you should try to save as many lives as possible, but this from a pure philosophical standpoint about the soul of Gotham. Not about whether or not Bruce should have tried saving them at all.***
***Ok, so we know from an interview from Christopher nolan that they had shot in almost all of the city of chicago for the first 2 movies. - My question is did he miss a trick with this one not shooting there? I mean, I love the 3rd film, but to me the chicago city WAS Gotham; its appearance - it was almost like a character in the first two films. Now I know that Gotham is meant to be a lot bigger,
ReplyDeleteetc, but i just feel that using some of the similar city locations is a bit of a nod to earlier movies and really would have given the 3 films another visable connection that would have been really great in my view. Also I really didnt like a few of the set pieces in the 3rd(was probably one of my biggest gripes with it) - some seemed to lack a bit of character if I'm being honest in my view.
---
That's something that kind of bugs me about the trilogy in general; Gotham's identity dilutes from film to film. Gotham in Begins looks unique, with the Narrows, Wayne tower, and the transit system. You really felt that this was a place that Batman could identify with. With the Dark Knight and Dark Knight Rises they sidelined those elements and focused too much on making it (quote/unquote) "real" at the expense of its character.
In the end, in Rises, it just made the city feel so anonymous to me. - The city changing is something Nolan should've paid more attention to detail with. I like that each film has different "tone" but it shouldn't feel like a completely different city.***
I haven't taken the disc out to watch this latest epic yet, but hasn't time advanced some which might explain the scenery being a bit different! How much time has elapsed? I know living in California back in the 90's, totally barren fields between the valley and Bay filled in in less than 10 years! It doesn't take much! Being in Chicago again, it made me feel good my fave comic hero did his thing off "Lake Shore Drive and Lower Wacker Dr.(underground)!"
***Did anyone hear why they used Pittsburgh and NYC this time instead of Chicago? It seemed odd to me, too.
----
Another reason why it's cool that the LoS returns is because it gets Bruce thinking about the "immortality" of Batman. "There are many forms of immortality." Seeing what's become of Ra's al Ghul's legend, I believe, plants the idea in Bruce's head that Batman can too live on beyond him.
Ra's al Ghul was a legend. He taught Bruce to make himself more than just a man. And the death of Ra's wasn't the end of his legend. The LoS, and Ra's in a way, return to carry on that legacy. Seeing the hallucination of Ra's reminds Bruce that there are indeed many forms of immortality.
And I think this in part inspires Bruce to pass the torch. If Ra's can be an immortal force for evil, then Batman can be an immortal force for good. Batman faces the original legend in BB, and the legacy of that legend in TDKR, inspiring him to create a legacy of his own.
I swear, this movie gets more brilliant the more I think about it.
Batman Begins is about the creation of the legend. The Dark Knight is about the tragic life of the legend. And The Dark Knight Rises is about the end/rebirth of the legend. Fantastic.
----
----
I get what you are trying to say. But I don't think he plants that idea in TDKR. He had that idea earlier in TDKR and kind of in BB too. Both Nolan and Bale have said,and quite rightly so,the key scene in this trilogy is the scene with Bruce and Alfred on his return to Gotham, about becoming a symbol(which was kind of planted in his mind by Ra's).
In TDKR when Blake and Bruce are going in the car, even then Bruce says that the idea is that Batman is a symbol, anyone could be Batman (good foreshadowing and maybe Bruce saw something in Blake and believed that he would be his successor, the one to take up his mantle).
***Showdown from MY perspective.
ReplyDeleteBEST MOVIE: TDK > BB > TDKR
The Dark Knight is simply a masterpiece. As a movie in general I think its fair to call it the best of 3. Maybe it's because of the villains, maybe b/c of the tone, but it simply got everything right from the start. I just like the fact that it is grounded so much in reality and you can easily relate to most of the characters.
BEST STORY: TDKR > BB > TDK
This was very close to decide as all 3 movies have pretty strong story. TDKR takes the cake simply b/c it really dwells into deep human emotions. From chilling to happy experience, the movie takes us to a point of desolation, despair, and ultimately hope. Our planet would be a much better place if rich people could understand Bane and act as Bruce Wayne. But unfortunately we're still learning. Characters such as Blake (Nolan's Robin), Selina Kyle, Alfred, Dagget, Dr.Pavel etc got very nice treatment and some are truly inspirational.
BEST ACTING: TDK > BB > TDKR
Although I really think Heath's acting was the best of the trilogy, I think that BB has the STRONGEST acting. I know this might come as a surprise but let me elaborate a bit here. We all know BB is the first of the trilogy. Acting in that case is the strongest because it really had very difficult job to start this wonderful trilogy. If Bale hasn't done tremendous job creating his Bruce Wayne/Batman character in BB, we wouldn't have had such strong performances in the sequels. Also, the rest of the actors did phenomenal job, esp. Wilkinson, Oldman, Caine, Murphy and Neeson. Slightly off was Holmes but I didn't mind her. Now, Heath Ledger. Thats the best acting I've ever seen, and if the Joker hadn't been in TDK, BB would have taken this showdown.
BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY: TDKR > TDK > BB
Another close decision but TDKR prevails I guess. I really thought TDK would be imposible to top, but TDKR simply had tremendous shots. Those camera angles were simply magnificent. Batman/Bane first fight, the Bat through the buildings, shots of Gotham, Wall st. fight, etc etc etc simply brilliant.
BEST SCORE: TDKR > TDK > BB
Zimmer has really outdone himself. I know the most tracks in TDKR come as inspiration from BB, but he really stepped it up and just 'upgraded' already phenomenal score. This category is also close, but after listening to it TDKR simply describes the feel throughout the trilogy.
BEST BATMAN MOVIE: BB > TDK > TDKR
This is the Batman I enjoy reading in comics. More grounded, less 'car chases' and more frightening. It is just perfect adaptation from The Man Who Falls, Year One and many more comics that focus on Batman's early career.
All in all, this is my all time favorite trilogy. And I don't feel shame for listing this among the classics which I don't need to name here.
Anyway, The Dark Knight is my favorite of the three but both Batman Begins and The Dark Knight Rises come pretty close. Batman Begins for being amazing batman story and TDKR for wrapping this trilogy up on a epic cosmic scale!
Your thoughts on the subject?***
***BEST MOVIE: TDK > BB > TDKR
ReplyDeleteHeath Ledger's acting raises this movie from what would have been a distant 2nd to 1st place. It's incredible every time.
BEST STORY BB > TDK > TDKR
A little drawn out and weaker at the end, but this is the movie with the strongest arc for Bruce Wayne, with an ending that makes you feel like anything is possible.
BEST ACTING TDK > BB > TDKR
Like I said before, Heath Ledger's performance is amazing; it's beyond acting, he's a force of nature. Great turn by Aaron Eckhart, who is somehow able to sell the dumb plot contrivance of Harvey Dent suddenly turning evil. Gary Oldman is at the top of his game as well.
BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY TDK > TDKR > BB
My only category where TDKR isn't last, but I still prefer TDK. TDKR's shots were beautifully done, but emotionless; the camerawork in TDK sold a neo-noir world where darkness reigns and a watchful angel of the night is needed.
BEST SCORE TDK > BB > TDKR
Nothing like that eerie, piercing chord, announcing the joker's evil is near, to send shivers up your spine. The score for TDKR was bland and depressing.
BEST BATMAN MOVIE TDK > BB > TDKR
BB has a great story, but TDK rules this category as well b/c it not only does the best job of presenting a world where Batman exists, it contains the quintessential Batman story: Batman vs. The Joker in an elemental battle of good and evil, order and chaos, hope and nihilism. Perfect foils for each other and the stuff of primal drama.***
Great analysis guys! You all made the cut! Happy New Year, you've been immortalized on my Blog/homage to the Bat!
***Part 1 - Intro
ReplyDeleteThe purpose of this analysis is to point out crucial story elements, symbolism, character arcs, themes, and messages within the Dark Knight Rises. - In the very beginning of the film, we see cracks of ice forming the Batman symbol. The blurry nature of the ice could represent the distorted reality/viewpoint of others towards Batman as described the by the Mayor and propagated by Foley. Also, at the start of his journey, Bruce is frozen and stuck in a part of his life, and in a way Bane provides the necessary fire his spirit needs to make a second comeback and save the city he loves.
Bane: It doesn’t matter who we are, all that matter is our plan. Nobody cared who I was until I put on the mask.
The movie begins where the Dark Knight left off, Jim Gordon stating how he believed in Harvey Dent. We are then transported to a more remote location where a scientist (Dr. Pavel) and two hooded men board a CIA plane. Bane is introduced to us after his black hood is lifted and a terrorist operation ensues to fake Dr. Pavel’s death and crash the plane. From the get-go we get the impression that Bane is a master strategist with ferocious strength, who has followers that are extremely loyal to the bitter end. When Bane leaves with Dr. Pavel, he retrieves him in similar fashion as Batman extracted Lau from Hong Kong (In the Dark Knight).
Bane: No, they expect one of us to be in the wreckage
Hooded man 2: Have we started the fire?
Bane: Yes, The Fire Rises!
Bruce The Recluse:
We are then taken to a memorial for Harvey Dent occurring at Wayne Manor, 8 yrs after his actual death. Bruce Wayne is purposeless and thus depressed b/c of losing Rachel and his inability to be Batman. Fighting as the Dark Knight gave his life meaning and satisfied his need for Justice by proving that the citizens of Gotham were worth saving and not as corrupt or insane as R’as Al Ghul and the Joker would have us believe. Batman was his way of dealing with the ever longing pain, anger, and depression from his parent’s death. Bruce gets caught off guard when a burglar posing as a maid (Selina Kyle), steals his mother’s pearls. This is where the call to action for his new journey begins. Later on, it is discovered that Bruce neglected his company, Wayne Enterprises, which continuously lost enough money over the years to even fund an orphanage, a fact which Officer Blake discovers after finding the dead body of a boy who worked in Bane’s underground project (which employs disenchanted Gothamites). ...cont.,***
***Blake talks to Wayne after finding Commissioner Gordon shot and ranting about a new evil rising: A masked man named Bane and his underground army. Blake then tells Bruce he’s met him before and knows who he really is, in a heartfelt speech that anyone who has ever lost a parent can relate to:
ReplyDeleteBlake: See, my mom died when I was small. Car accident, I don’t really remember it. But a couple of yrs later my dad was shot over a gambling debt. I remember that just fine. Not a lot of people knows what it feels like, do they? To be angry. In your bones. People understand, foster parents understand. For a while. Then they expect the angry kid to do what he knows he can never do. To move on. To forget. So they stopped understanding and sent the angry kid to a boys’ home - St. Swithin’s. Used to be funded by the Wayne Foundation. See, I figured it out too late. You have to hide the anger. Practice smiling in the mirror. Like putting on a mask… I don’t know why you took the fall for Dent’s Murder, but I’m a believer in the Batman, even if you’re not.
After this, Officer Blake solidifies his role as an encouraging, truth-seeking ally by providing the necessary emotional motivation to make Bruce realize why he needs to become Batman again. Bruce sees a younger version of himself in Blake, who plays a very important role b/c he challenges Foley’s ignorance and cowardly ways when for example, the explosion from the sewer occurs, and he continues to investigate, which Gordon admires and promotes him to detective explaining: “You’re a detective now, you’re not allowed to believe in coincidences anymore”.
Accordingly, Bruce sets up apps w/ Luscious Fox (who provides further encouragement as a mentor figure) and a doctor to talk to Gordon. This shows he's starting to take action to re-establish himself and he's once again becoming driven by purpose. He finds out from Fox why his company is slipping. During his visit with Gordon, Bruce finds out how serious the situation is and receives further encouragement from Gordon to come back as Batman.
Bruce follows Selina to a charity ball Miranda Tate hosts in order retrieve his mother’s pearls. They talk during a slow dance.
Selina: I started out doing what I had to, once you’ve done what you had to, they’ll never let you do what you want to.
Bruce: Start fresh.
Selina: There’s no fresh start in today’s world, any 12 yr old with a cell phone can find out what you did. Everything we do is collated and quantified, everything sticks.
Bruce: Is that how you justify stealing?
Selina: I take what I need from those who have more than enough, I don’t stand on the shoulders of people who have less.
………
Selina: You think all this can last, there’s a storm coming Mr. Wayne. And you and your friends better batten down the hatches b/c when it hits you’re all gonna wonder how you could live so large and leave so little for the rest of us.
Selina criticizes the age of the internet and how too much is readily available to prevent one from escaping their past and starting a new life. With the emergence of the Internet and sophisticated gov't surveillance, Big Brother has a looming presence in our lives more than ever and how do we know what exactly is being collected and quantified and to what end? Bruce encourages her to start fresh and eventually provides her with the tool she wanted all along. She also is a mouthpiece for widening gap between the rich and poor which has been a growing problem in America for quite some time. ...cont.,
***Bad stocks and dumb cops
ReplyDeleteTrader 2: This is a stock exchange, there’s no money for you to steal!
Bane: Really? Then why are you people here?
...This scene was meant to show how stocks can and have been manipulated in the recent years and how supposed high-tech security measures through biometrics are faulty. Bane and his crew escape on motorbikes with hostages. Finally, Batman arrives on the scene and the police instinctively chase him instead and let Bane escape. ,,, Take note of the confused looks on some of the cops faces as even they are probably unsure of what do to with the Batman. After finding the mobile device executing the stock trades, Batman escapes the police and helps Selina escape Bane’s soldiers.
When Bruce returns to the Bat cave, Alfred challenges and criticizes his actions.
Bruce : I retrieved this. (Pulls out USB drive)
Alfred: Shouldn’t the police be gathering evidence?
Bruce: They don’t have the tools to analyze it.
Alfred: They would if you gave them to them
Bruce: One’s man’s tool is another man’s weapon
Alfred: In your mind perhaps. But there aren’t many things you couldn’t turn into a weapon.
Bruce: Alfred, enough! The police weren’t getting it done.
……..
Alfred: What about when you come up against him? Take a look, his speed, his ferocity, his training! I see the power of belief. I see the League of Shadows resurgent.
Here Alfred criticizes Bruce’s hoarding of his tech for his own needs above the law. There are many neutral instruments, tools, people that are manipulated for destructive purposes. The Stock Market (to bankrupt Bruce), the fusion reactor (which Bruce feared would be turned into a bomb), a rookie cop anxiously shoots Batman’s EMP gun, Dr. Pavel (his skills are exploited for the sake of his children), Daggett’s cement trucks, Jim Gordon’s speech, the Clean Slate program (Daggett lies about its existence, whereas Bruce gives it to Selena before she follows through with their deal), and Bruce’s armoury, which is “gratefully accepted” by Bane. In contrast, The Prison doctor and Prisoner who were just supposed to keep Bruce alive provide the necessary aid to help him in his escape. Plus Catwoman dances on the dividing line of good and evil as she works for Bane and Daggett but then decides to take up the fight with Batman.
Is Bane necessary evil?
Bane is a brilliant villain because he represents the sub conscious desires of the 99% who have been controlled and lied to by the upper class elites and powerful political figures (The Senator, the Mayor and Commissioner Gordon). He projects himself to the people as a fighter for the mid-low classes, by judging and exiling those who contributed the overall corruption. He succeeds at getting out his message via his speeches to the public and media in the football game and in front of black gate prison. He has a similar attractive quality as the Joker’s philosophy on Order vs. Chaos that may temporarily rally the audience to his side.
Bane can be interpreted as one who manipulates the manipulator, when he double crosses the greedy Daggett:
John Daggett: I've paid you a small fortune.
Bane: And this gives you power over me?
Daggett thought money was the ultimate power therefore he represents a truly greedy, hypocritical, corrupt oligarch (basically the opposite of Bruce Wayne).
Talia foreshadows his death in the earlier part of the movie when she says:
"I could try explaining that a save-the-world project, vain or not, is worth investing in, Mr. Daggett. But you understand only money, and the power you think it buys."
End of part 1***
***Part 2
ReplyDeleteBane is the polar opposite of Batman, however they share similar characteristics: indomitable will, peak human strength and speed, high intelligence, strategic ability and enduring life-long emotional pain and tragedy. He isn’t driven by money, but his own form of justice, vengeance and his need to protect Talia. Like Bruce, Bane is driven by anger and tragedy, but he's constantly enduring physical pain which is held at bay by his mask. During their fight, Batman is caught off guard again “Peace has cost you your strength, victory has defeated you!” and Bane is driven with the power of belief, the fear of death, and love which leads to him breaking Batman’s back after a desperate fight.
Batman is to Bane as compassion is to vengeance; remember in BB when R’as Al Ghul said to Bruce, “You’re compassion makes you weak”? Bane’s philosophy on justice is in line w/ R’as Al Ghouls in that exterminating the population is necessary to erase all the corruption modern society breeds. Batman is well known for his way of exemplifying justice without killing. Bane commands with fear and receives the loyalty of terrorist/cult leader as seen in the plane scene.
I wasn’t really sure why he interrupted a football game to begin his revolution, until I read an in-depth review by Gregory Hood called Order in Action : TDKR. Where else could Bane find the largest mass of civilians along with the ignorant Mayor? I believe the young boy singing the National Anthem is meant to remind us of the “America Dream” and what those who fought to create the country sacrificed. Thus in many ways, this movie is about the death of the American dream but also the passing of the torch of virtue (From Gordon and Wayne to Blake). ...cont.,***
***The Football game is meant to show America’s obsession with pointless distractions and Bane’s speech forces them to gaze their attention to “the next era of western civilisation” as he announces his revolution along with martial law. Similarly, like the Joker, he makes the citizens believe that one of them has the detonator.
ReplyDeleteBane is a fascinating villain b/c he holds a mirror up to society to reveal the lies and corruption of elites, leaders of justice (Jim Gordon), and even our financial institutions. He uses the power of the written word to reveal what Gordon meant to say at the beginning, while also proving Batman’s heroism and innocence.
Bane: Let me tell you the truth about Harvey Dent, from the words of Gotham's police commissioner, James Gordon:
"The Batman didn't murder Harvey Dent. He saved my boy and took the blame for Harvey's appalling crime, so that I could to my shame build a lie around this fallen idol. I praised the mad man who tried to murder my own child. While I can no longer live with my lie, it is time to trust the people of Gotham with the truth, and it is time for me to resign." And do you accept this man's resignation? And do you accept the resignation of all these liars? Of all the corrupt?
We take Gotham from the corrupt, the rich, the oppressors of generations who kept you down with myths of opportunity, and we give it back to you, the people. Gotham is yours. None shall interfere, do as you please. Start by storming Blackgate and free the oppressed. Step forward, those who would serve, for an army will be raised. The powerful will be ripped from their decadent nests and cast out into the cold world that we know and endure…
Bane attempts to project his image as a man of the people, who is fed up with the injustices the city has endured but only to manipulate the lower classes and criminals in the end for the purpose of the League of Shadows. But notice how he doesn’t reveal Batman’s identity because this would destroy the logic of his arguments within his propaganda.
Don’t forget that villains consider themselves to be the hero in their journey, which begs the question: Why is Bane necessarily evil? Because he is a product of his environment (a slave from Morocco) that wanted to save a little girls life by protecting and aiding in her escape for freedom. He is a tragic character that is clearly angry for being rejected but finds purpose in his life by embodying R’as Al Ghul’s philosophy and protecting the woman he loves. ...cont.,***
***How does Bruce make the leap to freedom?
ReplyDeleteBruce: Why didn’t you just kill me?
Bane: You don’t fear death, you welcome it, your punishment must be more severe
Bruce: Torture?
Bane: Yes, but not of your body………of your soul.
Bruce: Where am I
Bane: Home. Where I learned the truth about despair. There’s a reason why this is the worst Hell on Earth. Hope. Every man who has ventured here over the centuries has looked up to the light and imagined climbing to freedom. So easy... So simple... And like shipwrecked men turning to sea water from uncontrollable thirst, many have died trying. I learned here that there can be no true despair without hope. So, as I terrorize Gotham, I will feed its people hope to poison their souls. I will let them believe they can survive so that you can watch them clamoring over each other to "stay in the sun."
When Bruce makes his attempts to escape, it's very clear to me that one of the main themes is Success and Failure. The Confucius quote “Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but rising every time we fall” springs to mind. To make the leap to freedom, Bruce must show his spirit is ready to rise, by taking a huge risk and not using the rope (a form of security). Talia made it out because she was in a do-or-die situation. She had only one chance to make sure her mother’s death and Bane’s injury was not in vain. Earlier, Talia says “Suffering builds character” and Bruce must overcome the test without the aid of sophisticated gadgets and technology. He fails the first attempt, because he hasn’t learned the lesson necessary to wake up his spirit hasn’t been lit with the “will to survive”.
It’s not just his privileged upbringing and riches that shape his identity, because his life instantly changed the day his parents died and when he decided, forged Batman. He must embody the lesson his father taught him “Why do we fall down? To learn to pick ourselves up again”. He doesn’t make the second attempt because anger makes him unfocused.
Finally, Bruce makes the leap to freedom, because he decides to give living another chance, clearly personified as he stands tall after making the climb. His successful third attempt shows that its Batman’s incorruptible spirit, substantial character, and determination that make him a legendary hero, not just cool toys and vehicles. His character becomes further enhanced by this spiritual initiation and the prison is like a large version of the well he fell into as a child. We also learn from this inspirational scene that what makes Batman so powerful is his strong faith, that is stubbornly believes in the best of people (as even Bane’s prisoners assist and cheer him on) and his ability to make the hero’s choice by satisfying his need to save Gotham, find a girlfriend, and move on as Alfred wanted. ...cont.,***
***Bruce Wayne: People are dying, Alfred. What would you have me do?
ReplyDeleteAlfred Pennyworth: Endure, Master Wayne. Take it. They'll hate you for it, but that's the point of Batman, he can be the outcast. He can make the choice that no one else can make, the right choice. (From the Dark Knight)
I really enjoyed the relationship between Bruce Wayne and Selina Kyle as two wounded souls that are at first on opposite ends of the war and social spectrum (99 vs. 1%). Part of her character arc is about having faith in the right people and herself. At the bar incident she brilliantly comes in with a backup plan to counter Striver's shenanigans.
At this point she realizes maybe she didn’t want all this chaos and destruction. Bruce gives her the “Clean Slate” as his final indication of how much faith he has in her and she earns it by aiding him in the final epic battle. Interestingly, he admits he was a little disappointed for trapping him with Bane, but I suppose he realized the pressure she was under. Bruce (showing his good faith towards Selina) gives her the clean slate before her end of the bargain was even fulfilled thus motivating her to truly bring out her virtuous side and aligning with Batman’s fight for justice and protection of the innocent. He shows her forgiveness and thus gives her redemption to end her suffering.
Talia revealed
Like Bane, Talia was driven by vengeance to finish her father’s work. However, she may have been driven by a lie too, because Bruce didn’t exactly murder her father, he just decided not to save him, but Bruce did in fact rescue him after his training was complete. R’as Al Ghul brought his own death upon himself because he thought it was his duty to decide the fate of millions of innocent people. Talia despised corruption, but she ended up being the most corrupt of them all! The League of Shadows philosophy falls short b/c all it offers as an answer to the world’s problems is mass death, quite the opposite of Batman and Gordon’s idealistic form of justice. Bane and Talia were unforgiving and extreme, like fanatics. ...cont.,***
***The heroes in this film recognize their faults along with the faults of the system they work within, but they were able to adapt and persevere through their personal trials because of their commitment to the truth, their embodiment of virtue, and the value they attach to life. Bruce Wayne learns to give living a chance again, and that having true strength isn’t about welcoming death but learning to enjoy the sacredness of life. He fulfills his destiny as a savior and watchful guardian of the innocent.
ReplyDeleteSelina Kyle realizes the harsh realities of Bane’s revolution while learning to trust her virtuous side and assist those who need and deserve it most. She learns she can only be set free once she steps outside herself to help others. Jim Gordon learns to stand up for the truth no matter what, reject the lies of Bane (citizen having a detonator), and keep the morale of the remaining cops high, even eventually convincing Foley to stop hiding. Also, He realizes, in a heart-warming send off, how he was a true hero to Bruce.
Alfred is happy and proud that Bruce survived the personal battle of a lifetime while finding peace and contentedness with Selina. And Blake is rewarded with the honor of continuing a hero’s legacy as he rises to his destiny indicated all throughout the movie. The fire will rise and will be passed on to the deserving successors.***
Thanks! This will help a lot when I finally begin to watch this epic! It's so long I'm sorta waiting for a lot of free, dead time! ...Thanks again!
***I was more inclined to believe a year gap only between BB and TDK, but your post does present some compelling evidence. Anything for me to believe that Batman was around for more than a measly year is a good thing in my mind.
ReplyDeleteThis is my timeline anyway, I've traced Bruce's age using the fact that we saw Bruce's 30th birthday taking place in Batman Begins, and based on the post above, I'm happy to set The Dark Knight 3 years after Batman Begins:
1975: Bruce Wayne born. Ras Al Ghul impregnates the wife of a local warlord, who is subsequently imprisoned in the pit.
1975-1976: Talia Al Ghul born.
1984: Bruce (age 8) witnesses his parents being killed by Joe Chill
???-???: Talia escapes the prison, Ras returns (months, years?) after to free Bane
1998: Bruce (Age 23) leaves Gotham
1998-2005: Bruce travels the world to learn about the criminal mind, eventually is imprisoned, upon release travels to the League of Shadows Headquarters to be trained by Ras Al Ghul.
2005: Bruce (Age 30) returns to Gotham as Batman, events of Batman Begins
2008: Events of The Dark Knight
2016-2017(?): The events of The Dark Knight Rises
I find it hard to pin down the ages of Talia and Bane considering Hardy is 2 years younger than Cotillard, but in the flashback scene's we can see that Bane is around 10 years older than Talia. It's difficult to determine how old they really are. I could put Talia to be around 35-36, but that would make Bane aged around 40, and despite the fact we don't see his face beyond his eyes, he really doesn't look that old at all.
I've selected the year for Talia's birth given Wiki stating that the young Ras Al Ghul scene's took place 30 years before the events of Begins. This does make Talia 40-41, the same age as Marion Cotillard (who looks friggin amazing). As such that makes Bane in his late 40's at best given the age we see him when he's unmasked as Talia escapes! Tom Hardy is only 35.
I've also noted 2016-2017 as the time for The Dark Knight Rises considering the final act/s take place in winter, which would mean the December-Feburary period. - TFM ***
***30 yrs before BB: Bruce Wayne is Born to Martha and Thomas Wayne.
ReplyDelete22 yrs before BB: Bruce Wayne parents are killed by Joe Chill. Chill is captured the same night of the incident. Bruce is 8 yrs old.
Joe Chill serves 14 yrs in prison.
Eight years before BB: Bruce Wayne initiates his journey around the world. Bruce is 22 ars old.
Bruce Wayne spends 7 yrs in training and finding purpose, the latter part of that time span is spent with the League of Shadows.
One year before BB: Bruce Wayne returns to Gotham City to fight crime as Batman, with the intent of inspiring good in people. ...Then as Batman he takes out Falcone and the Scarecrow, while uncovering the League of Shadows' plan to destroy Gotham. Bruce is 29 yrs old.
BB: Wayne Manor is burned down by the League of Shadows on Bruce Wayne 30th birthday. Batman stops Ra's Al Ghul from destroying Gotham with the fear toxin by destroying the monorail. Bruce is 30 yrs old.
Batman Begins Ending: Sgt James Gordon is promoted to Lt., reveal of the Bat-signal and advent of The Joker.
...The consensus is that between Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, it passes from about 6 or 9 months to a yr. I'm counting the viral campaign for the Dark Knight, namely the Gotham Tonight segments, ...
The 6 Gotham Tonight segments are paced in intervals of two wks except the last one which airs just 1 wk after the one that came before, making a total of 9 wks.
Now, on the Gotham Tonight segments, is stated that between the fear toxin terrorist attack on the Narrows and the 3rd Gotham Tonight, 9 months pass. According to the airings of the episodes, 5 wks pass between the 3rd segment and the last (which happens at the same time of the bank robbery at the opening of TDK). So going by this, 10 months and one wk pass between the attack on the Narrows and the beginning of TDK.
10 months and one wk after BB: The Joker and his henchmen rob Gotham Nat'l Bank, setting in motion the events of TDK.
Now, the time span of TDK events could take about 2 or 3 months. The security camera showing the Joker has a time stamp saying that they were taken on July 17, 2008. It is also said that the court documents of the RICO conspiracy case confirm that this trial is also held on July of the same yr, but I cannot confirm that right now. IMO, the events of the film could stretch at least into Aug.
But as I said before, I'm trying to not take into account the yr, but the time span.
Roughly a yr after BB: The Dark Knight's ending: Joker is incarcerated in Arkham Asylum, Two-Face dies in a confrontation with Batman, and Batman takes the blame for Two-Face murders to ensure Gotham well being. At some point after this events, Bruce turns 31.
Now, it is said that The Dark Knight Rises is 8 yrs after the ending of the previous film, the last reported sighting of the Batman.
8 years and 6 months after BB: The beginning of TDKR: Bane kidnaps Dr. Pavel on a CIA plane.
9 years after BB: Harvey Dent's Day celebration. Bruce is 39 yrs old.
Now, this is pure conjecture on my part, but before Bane defeats Batman and sends him to the pit, you could say it passes a month, more or less.
9 years and a month after BB: Bane sends Batman to the Pit.
Then the 5 months of Bane holding out the city passes and then, after Batman "dies" with the bomb on the ocean.
9 yrs and 6 months after BB: Batman saves Gotham by taking the bomb to the ocean.
Then an unspecified amount of time passes in the last flashback until the very end. You could say that Bruce is 40 yrs old.***
***Top 10 superhero movies
ReplyDeleteMy top 10:
1. The Dark Knight
2. The Avengers
3. Spider-Man 2
4. Kick Ass
5. X-Men 2
6. Thor
7. Batman Begins
8. Iron Man
9. X-men: First Class
10. Batman (89) ***
Ya'll make me seem like I'm gonna waste my time! Only current movies are allowed I suppose? In no particular order! It's late for me! Anyway:
1) Batman Begin - epic story and musical score
2) X-Men - great casting and effects, all star cast
3) Iron Man - well cast and made, but not a fan. The Avengers s/b better.
4) X-Men2 - a sequel that was better than the original.
5) Batman (Michael Keaton) - who would have thought a comedian in the role
6) TDK - well made, dark story, and well cast.
7) X-Men: Wolverine - still haven't watched all the way thru but made well
8) Superman (Christopher Reeves) - Made flying cool again
9) X-Men: First Class - still waiting to hit cable
10)TDKR - only b/c I haven't seen it yet! It's in the player though
***If you guys are going to trip about these things then why aren't you guys tripping about some of the stuff in The Dark Knight?
ie) Joker just standing on the sidewalk waiting for his ride at the beginning of the movie. What did he walk there and why hasn't anyone spotted him yet?
Two-Face walking around getting back at the guys who betrayed him. Why hasn't anyone spotted him and said "hey it's Harvey Dent". It's like Bruce Wayne, the city is way too small for him to just walk around without anyone spotting them.
Harvey Dent couldn't survive a giant scar like that on his face. He had no skin grafts, no pain killers or any type of a medication to help him. That amount of pain can kill you and the freshly burnt tissue will get infected really bad.
Gordan should have figured out that Bruce Wayne was Batman when he saved Reece from the car crashing. Or when those guys at the party saw Bruce go into his so called panic room and then Batman appeared right minutes after. That should have been a big sign to them or at least making them question if he's Batman. Everyone knows Bruce witnessed his parents death and what that could have done to him in the long run, interesting that there was no suspicion especially after all that I just mentioned.
I honestly don't care about any of this stuff at all because I loved the movie very much but they're no different than what you guys keep saying are plot holes in The Dark Knight Rises. Seriously just enjoy the movie!***
***It's not tech. official, but it might as well be. It's the most thoroughly researched and referenced timeline to date. Doesn't include specific times for TDKR yet, but will shortly. ...Here are BB and TDK:
ReplyDeleteBATMAN BEGINS
09-10-1975 - Bruce Thomas Wayne is born in Gotham City to Thomas and Martha Wayne.
08-05-1984 - While trying to hide from his friend Rachel, young Bruce falls into an abandoned well on the Wayne family property. He is attacked by a swarm of bats, which causes him to develop Chiroptophobia.
10-20-1984 - Bruce has another nightmare about the bats. His father explains that all creatures experience fear and then shows Bruce the new pearls that he plans to give to his mother.
10-21-1984 - Thomas and Martha Wayne are murdered by Joe Chill in Crime Alley. Just before Thomas dies he takes Bruce’s hand and tells him not to be afraid. After the shooting Bruce is comforted by Officer Jim Gordon at police headquarters.
09-21-1985 - Selina Kyle is born.
Point of reference: When Bruce is looking at Selina Kyle’s mugshot her birthday is listed in the details of the police report.
09-01-1998 - In his final year of college, Bruce is kicked out of Princeton. He returns home with a plan to murder Joe Chill. Bruce misses his opportunity for revenge when Chill is gunned down by a female assassin who was working for Carmine Falcone. Rachel helps Bruce understand the difference between justice and revenge. After turning against guns, Bruce pays a visit to Falcone. Bruce decides to leave Gotham to explore the criminal fraternity.
01-13-1999 - Selina is arrested for shoplifting in Gotham Palisades.
12-02-2003 - Henri Ducard visits Bruce in the Bhutanese prison. He remarks that a man like Bruce Wayne is only there because he chooses to be and then offers Bruce a “path” toward the fight against injustice.
12-03-2003 - Bruce is released from the prison. After proving his worth by collecting the rare blue flower and climbing to the top of the mountain, Bruce begins his training in the temple with the League of Shadows. Under the tutelage of Ducard, Bruce learns the purpose of theatricality and deceptions.
02-13-2004 - Selina is arrested on suspicion of burglary.
02-25-2005 - Bruce refuses to become an executioner and turns against the League of Shadows. During a duel with Bruce, Ra's al Ghul is accidentally killed. The temple is destroyed and Bruce saves Ducard's life. 02-28-2005 - Bruce makes his way to an airstrip just outside of Nepal where Alfred is waiting. After inquiring about how long Bruce will stay in Gotham, Alfred explains that William Earle, the current CEO of Wayne Enterprises, had him declared dead in order to take the company public. Bruce returns to Gotham after being away for seven years. His plan is to show the citizens of Gotham that their city doesn’t belong to the corrupt, but first Bruce must become a symbol.
03-07-2005 - Bruce spends several months wearing disguises to blend in with Gotham’s lower class as he gathers information on Falcone’s criminal organization. He records numerous places and people of interest with great detail.
06-07-2005 - While compiling his information on Falcone, Bruce is interrupted by a single bat flying around the ceiling. Alfred reminds Bruce that they nest somewhere on the grounds. Bruce uses his father’s rappelling equipment to go into the abandoned well. He crawls though an opening and finds a massive cave under the southeast wing of Wayne Manor. Bruce is attacked by the bats again, but this time he is not afraid.*** -cont.,
***06-14-2005 - Bruce travels into the city and surprises everyone at Wayne Enterprises. After talking with Earle about his shares, Bruce meets Lucius Fox in the Applied Sciences Division. Lucius introduces Bruce to the company's prototype technologies, including the Kevlar utility harness, the magnetic gas-powered grapple gun and the Nomex survival suit. Up until this point Alfred was the only person who knew Bruce was alive and back in Gotham.
ReplyDelete06-15-2005 - Bruce “borrows” and begins to modify the prototypes from the Applied Sciences Division in order to form his crime-fighting persona.
06-17-2005 - Alfred helps Bruce design a graphite cowl to protect his head. The parts are ordered separately from Singapore and China.
06-20-2005 - Gordon is held up in his office by a man with a stapler. The man is seen wearing body armor and a ski mask as he flees from the roof top of police head quarters. Even though Gordon believes that he's just "some nut", this man will be known as The Batman.
In his haste to jump from the roof top to fire escape, Bruce is slightly injured. He knows now that he will need some type of fabric to slow his decent.
06-21-2005 - Bruce visits Lucius again and asks if he has any light weight fabrics. As Lucius shows him the memory cloth prototype, Bruce spots the Tumbler. After test driving the bridging vehicle, Bruce smiles and asks if it comes in black.
07-01-2005 - Alfred discovers that the graphite cowls are defective and too weak. The specifications are changed and another batch is ordered.
07-15-2005 - Bruce completes his modifications on the remaining prototypes and finishes constructing the graphite cowl.
07-21-2005 - Bruce makes his first official appearance as Batman. He takes down Falcone and his men at the docks with ease. Batman saves Rachel from Falcone’s hitmen and gives her “leverage” over Judge Faden. Gordon and other officers find Falcone’s men on the docks. Falcone himself is chained to a spotlight nearby.
Commissioner Loeb tells his officers that he wants Batman off the streets. Rachel convinces District Attorney Finch to prosecute Falcone.
Point of reference: The newspaper that Commissioner Loeb holds up has the date printed on it.
08-03-2005 - Earle is told about a prototype microwave emitter weapon that has gone missing from a cargo ship.
08-12-2005 - Bruce begins to play up his playboy image by driving sports cars, dating models and rubbing elbows with Gotham’s elite. He isconfronted by Rachel and tries to explain that he is more than just this persona.*** cont.,
***09-03-2005 - Dr. Jonathan Crane visits Falcone in jail. Falcone threatens to talk to the police, but Crane shows him the Scarecrow mask and exposes him to the fear toxin.
ReplyDelete09-05-2005 - Dr. Crane talks to the judge and has Falcone committed to Arkham Asylum.
09-07-2005 - Batman interrogates Officer Flass and heads toward the narrows to check out the drugs from the docks. He is interrupted by the Scarecrow and his goons. During the fight Batman is hit with a lethal dose of the toxin, doused with alcohol and set on fire. Bruce experiences fear again, as the toxin forces him to relive his greatest fears all at once. After Bruce is rescued by Alfred, Lucius synthesizes an antidote to cure the toxin and save his life.
09-10-2005 - Bruce turns 30 years old.
Rachel visits Wayne Manor to give Bruce a gift. She also tells him that District Attorney Finch has been missing for two days and that her next stop is Arkham.
Earle visits Lucius and asks about the microwave emitter weapon. After Lucius inquires about the location of the weapon, Earle fires him and merges his division with archives.
Rachel sees Falcone at Arkham and discovers that Crane has been dumping his toxin into Gotham's water supply. Crane gives her a lethal dose of the toxin, but Batman arrives in time to save her. He gives Crane a “taste of his own medicine” and interrogates him. Terrified with the vision of the Batman Demon, Crane confesses that he has been working for Ra’s al Ghul.
With a little help from bats, Batman escapes the SWAT team at Arkham. In order to save Rachel’s life, Batman outruns the police and takes her to the cave beneath Wayne Manor.
During his birthday celebration at Wayne Manor, Bruce is confronted by Ducard, who reveals that he is the real Ra's al Ghul. To save the lives of his guests, Bruce pretends to be intoxicated and kicks everyone out of his mansion. After a fight with Bruce, Ra's and his mercenaries set fire to Wayne Manor.
Ra's attacks Gotham City using the microwave emitter to turn the city’s water supply into steam. Rachel discovers that Bruce Wayne is really Batman. With help from Gordon, Batman defeats Ra's al Ghul on the train and saves the city. Ra's al Ghul dies when the train crashes into the Wayne Tower Station. 09-11-2005 - Bruce’s reckless playboy image is personified when the Gotham Post credits him for being a drunken billionaire who burned down his own mansion.
Earle discovers that Bruce bought most of the shares when Wayne Enterprises went public. He’s also given Earle’s job as head of the board to Lucius Fox. Unfortunately, Earle never got the memo.
Rachel visits Bruce as he is boarding up the entrance to the abandoned well. She apologizes for being so hard on him, but explains that they still can’t be together. The man she loved never came back to Gotham, but maybe she will see him again when the city no longer needs Batman.
Wayne Manor has been reduced to nothing but rubble and ash. Alfred suggests that they make some “improvements” to the foundation of Wayne Manor.
10-12-2005 - Gordon creates a bat shape out of metal and attaches it to a spotlight on top of police HQ. This “signal” will give Gordon a way to contact The Batman. Gordon gives Batman an evidence bag with a Joker playing card inside.***
***The Dark Knight:
ReplyDeleteThe Batman wages war on crime as he works his way to the top of the mob. While hundreds of high-tech security cameras are being installed, several bunkers and access points are constructed in secret key areas within the city limits of Gotham.
The Joker commits random crimes and builds up his own legend among the criminals in the city.
Point of reference: The actual dates of the events listed above are currently unknown. They are believed to have taken place somewhere between October 13th, 2005 and July 14th, 2007.
07-15-2007 - Batman’s efforts are beginning to have an impact on the criminal element in Gotham.
07-18-2008 - The Joker robs Gotham Nat'l Bank. After the robbery several clown goons are found dead at the scene.
Point of reference: When Bruce is watching the security footage of the bank robbery the date is shown on the screen.
The Chechen meets with the Scarecrow about the effects of his “compound”. Their meeting in the parking garage is interrupted by a group of copycats posing as The Batman. The real Batman uses the Tumbler as a distraction while he takes down both groups of men. The Scarecrow is captured and Batman warns the copycats to stay off the streets.
During the fight Bruce’s arm is injured. He realizes that his neck is constricted and that his armor is too heavy. The Batman will need to be faster and more mobile in order to adapt.
Batman visits Gordon at the Gotham National Bank. They discuss the mob and this “Joker” guy. At this point in time Batman doesn’t fully realize the destructive force that the Joker represents.
07-19-2008 - After realizing that Bruce didn't sleep in the penthouse, Alfred travels to the main bunker located beneath Wayne Shipping Yard. He helps Bruce stitch up his arm and they talk about Gotham’s new DA, Harvey Dent. Alfred sees the scars on Bruce’s back and explains the importance of Bruce knowing his own limits.
The star witness against Salvatore Maroni recants his statement and attempts to kill Harvey in open court. With no one to testify, Maroni is able to walk free. Harvey meets with Gordon about the irradiated bills that he’s been using to track the mobs cash flow. Gordon asks him to back warrants on search and seizer for the mob banks. Harvey demands to meet The Batman. Bruce falls asleep during the LSI presentation at Wayne Enterprises. Lucius tells Bruce that Lau’s revenue stream is off the books and maybe even illegal. Bruce agrees and tells Lucius to cancel the deal. Bruce gives Lucius his diagrams for a more functional Batsuit.
Rachel and Harvey attend an evening dinner with Gotham’s elite. Bruce shows up with the lead ballerina for the Moscow Ballet and after discussing the future of Gotham, he offers to throw Harvey a fundraiser.*** cont.,-
07-20-2008 - Gordon and his men attempt to seize the bulk of the mob’s dirty cash only to discover they’ve been outsmarted. Lau flees Gotham and returns home to China.
ReplyDeleteThe key members of the mob meet with Lau to discuss the money that was stolen by the Joker. Lau explains that he was forced to move the rest of their funds before police could get to it. The Joker shows up and introduces himself to the mob. He uses a “magic trick” to break the ice and offers to kill The Batman. After being insulted by the Joker, Gambol puts a price on the clown’s head.
Harvey uses the Bat Signal on top of the MCU to call The Batman. Harvey and Gordon discuss Lau and the corrupt cops in Gordon’s unit while Batman watches. Batman tells them he will get Lau back and disappears from the roof.
07-22-2008 - Bruce meets with Lucius at Research and Development inside Wayne Enterprises. Lucius shows him some new equipment and explains the functions of the new Batsuit. Alfred and Bruce discuss the details of their trip to Hong Kong as well as an alibi for Bruce leaving town.
07-29-2008 - Bruce and Alfred set sail with cast of the Moscow Ballet.
Point of reference: Alfred tells Bruce that the Skyhook transportation can be up and running in a week.
The Joker pretends to be dead in order to gain access to Gambol. The plan works perfectly and after telling Gambol a “story” about how he got his scars, the Joker murders him in front of his own men.
07-31-2008 - Lucius arrives in Hong Kong to meet with Lau. Later that evening, Batman uses his new equipment and the sonar technology to raid LSI Holdings. He defeats several armed guards and takes Lau into custody.
08-01-2008 - Lau is found on the steps of the MCU with a note from The Batman. Rachel cuts a deal with him to testify against the mob. Harvey and Gordon decide to keep Lau in the holding cells at MCU.
08-02-2008 - Gordon and his men arrest key members in mob and bring them down to City Hall. As Judge Surrillo is reading the charges levied against them, she finds a Joker card in between her paperwork. The Joker kills one of the copycats and hangs him outside Mayor Garcia’s office. His first message is broadcast over GCN: "The Batman must take off his mask and turn himself in or starting tonight people will die."
Harvey and Rachel arrive at Bruce’s penthouse for the fundraiser. Bruce lands in a helicopter, apologizes for being late and gives a speech to endorse Harvey. Across town Commissioner Loeb is poisoned and Judge Surrillo is killed in a car bombing. The Joker and his goons show up at the fundraiser and terrorize the guests while searching for Harvey. The Batman arrives in time to save Rachel and the other guests, but the Joker manages to escape.
08-03-2008 - Bruce discusses the Joker's motives with Alfred. Richard Dent and Patrick Harvey are found dead with their faces covered in Joker makeup. Gordon finds clues that point to the Joker’s next target.
08-04-2008 - While doing diligence on the LSI Holdings deal, Coleman Reese discovers
irregularities in the budget at Wayne Enterprises. He confronts Lucius and attempts to blackmail Bruce. After pointing out a major flaw in Reese’s plan, Lucius wishes him good luck.*** cont.,
***08-05-2008 - During Commissioner Loeb's memorial service, an assassination attempt is made on Mayor Garcia. Gordon quickly jumps in front of him and is presumed dead at the scene. The Joker escapes the police, but one of his accomplices is wounded in the crossfire. When Harvey learns that The Joker plans to kill Rachel next, he takes advantage of the chaos and drives away with the accomplice in the back of an ambulance.
ReplyDeleteOfficer Stephens is sent to inform Barbara Gordon about her husband. She blames The Batman for her for her husband's death and for all the madness in Gotham. Batman goes to the Iceberg Lounge Nightclub in search of Maroni. After trying to force Maroni to give up the Joker, Batman finally understands what kind of force he’s up against.
After telling Rachel to go to a safe location, Harvey combines his coin with a game of Russian roulette to intimidate the Joker’s accomplice. The Batman arrives in time to stop Harvey and helps him understand the effects that his actions could have on Gotham. Batman tells Harvey that he will turn himself in. 08-06-2008 - Alfred and Bruce lock down all the equipment inside the main bunker. All documents and logs containing information on The Batman are destroyed in the furnace.
Harvey holds a press conference for The Batman to reveal his true identity. Before Bruce can surrender himself, Harvey steps forward and claims that he is The Batman.
Feeling betrayed by Bruce’s decision to let Harvey take the fall, Rachel gives Alfred her letter and leaves the safety of the penthouse.
Harvey is taken to the MCU where a SWAT team is waiting to transfer him to the prison. Rachel begs Harvey not to go through with the charade, but instead he tosses his father’s lucky coin to her.
The SWAT convoy is attacked by the Joker and his goons. The Batman arrives with The Tumbler and provides aid to the SWAT team. The Joker uses a bazooka to destroy the Tumbler and Batman is forced to use the Batpod to stop the Joker's semi-truck. Disguised in SWAT gear and back from the dead, Gordon leaps from the truck to stop the Joker and saves Batman.
The Joker is searched and taken to the holding cells at the MCU. The police can find no match on his fingerprints or dental records. Gordon is promoted to Commissioner by Mayor Garcia and goes home to comfort his family. Harvey is taken "home" by Office Wuertz.
Gordon returns to the MCU when he learns that Harvey never made it home. His attempts to question the Joker are met with sarcasm and mockery. Gordon leaves the room and the Joker realizes that The Batman is waiting for him in the darkness. He tells Batman that both Harvey and Rachel are wired to explode at separate locations. Batman and Gordon set out across town to save their friends.
Inside the MCU the Joker takes Officer Stephens hostage and asks for his phone call. He uses a cell phone to trigger a remote bomb implanted inside the stomach of one of his goons. The explosion incapacitates the remaining officers as the Joker kidnaps Lau and escapes custody in police car.
After arriving at the first location, Batman discovers that the Joker lied and switched the locations on purpose. He is able to save Harvey‘s life, but the fire from the explosion burns the left side of the District Attorney’s face. Gordon and his men arrive too late and Rachel is killed in the second explosion.*** cont.,
***08-07-2008 - Batman visits Harvey at Gotham General and leaves the scarred coin he found in the rubble where Rachel died. Alfred reads Rachel's letter and decides not to give it to Bruce.
ReplyDeleteReese steps forward to reveal the true identity of The Batman. Gordon visits Harvey in the hospital and apologizes. Harvey is bitter and blames Gordon for Rachel’s death.
The Joker meets with the Chechen to deliver Lau. He burns his half of the money and forces the Chechen to hand over control of his operation. The Joker call in to GCN and threatens to blow up a hospital if Gotham’s citizens don’t take action against Reese. Gordon and his men take Reese into protective custody. An attempt on Reese’s life is thwarted by Bruce's “vain” attempt to catch a stoplight.
During the evacuation at Gotham General, The Joker sneaks into the hospital and murders two police officers. He convinces Harvey to become an agent of chaos and take revenge on those who have wronged him. Harvey becomes Two-Face. The Joker blows up Gotham General and takes several people hostage. He forces Mike Engel to broadcasts a final message to people of Gotham: “If you don’t want to be part of the game, get out now.”
Two-Face confronts Officer Wuertz on his day off. After questioning him about who picked up Rachel, he uses his coin to decide the officer’s
fate. Wuertz loses the coin toss and Two-Face shoots him.
Lucius discovers that Bruce has used his sonar concept to build a device capable of mapping all of Gotham. Despite feeling conflicted, Lucius agrees to help him find the Joker this one time and then tenders his resignation.
Two-Face ambushes Maroni in the back of his limo. He gives up Office Ramirez and wins the coin toss. Maroni’s driver isn’t as lucky, Two-Face shoots the driver from behind and the speeding vehicle flips over.
With the bridges and tunnels backed up, thousands of people crowd the docks attempting to board the ferries. The last ferries depart and The Joker reveals his “social experiment.” The people aboard the ferries must choose who lives and who dies.
Two-Face forces Ramirez to give Barbara Gordon false information. Ramirez wins the coin toss and lives to fight another day. Gordon discovers that his wife and children are being held captive.
Using non-lethal force, The Batman takes down two SWAT teams, rescues the hostages and stops the Joker. Batman learns that the Joker has used chaos to brought Harvey down to “their” level. The Batman arrives in time to save Gordon and his family. When Two-Face attempts to shoot Gordon’s son, Batman tackles him and they fall off the scaffolding. Gordon finds Batman lying next to Harvey. Batman is alive, but Harvey’s twisted body lies motionless. Knowing that they must protect Gotham, Batman chooses to take the fall for Two-Face’s crimes. They make a pact and Batman flees the scene.
08-09-2008 - Gordon gives the eulogy at Harvey’s memorial service. Alfred burns Rachel’s letter to spare Bruce the pain of reading it. Gordon destroys the Batsignal with an ax. The Batman is now a wanted fugitive in the eyes of the public.***
***'The Dark Knight' was BY FAR my favorite of the trilogy. I was a little bit disappointed by 'Rises,' and since then it's occurred to me that 'The Dark Knight' fits much better at the end of the trilogy:
ReplyDelete-'Batman Begins': First and second act of 'Begins.' Bruce comes back home, and the rest of the movie is about his battle with Black Mask, corrupt cops and the Mob. He realizes he needs an identity to take on Black Mask and starts creating the Batman. Wayne Manor is burned down for some reason, Black Mask is captured and unmasked, but the identity is passed on and Bruce realizes he has a hell of a task in front of him.
-'Dark Knight': Third act of 'Begins.' Bruce starts investigating the fear gas Black Mask was using and traces it back to Arkham Asylum, where all the inmates complain of nightmares about a character called 'the Scarecrow.' Rachel finds out Bruce is Batman, Bruce finds out who Ra's Al Ghul is and crashes a train to stop him, finally exorcising the demons of his past. Rachel throws him a bone and Bruce goes back to the Manor, preparing to re-enter the brand new Batcave.
-'Dark Knight Rises.' Basically, 'Dark Knight' with a few tweaks (the new Batcave, maybe the Bat being used to abduct the Chinese accountant).
For my money, this is a better ending to the trilogy, and here's my reasoning:
-'Dark Knight' felt like an ending: Rachel dies, as does Harvey, and there's a sense throughout the movie that Bruce's hopes for one day hanging up the cape have come to nothing, and this is the start of the life he has chosen.
-'Dark Knight' gives us Gotham's first supervillain: The Joker definitively states that Batman has 'changed things forever,' and hints that they may be destined to fight like this forever. Batman starts with the Mob, but this is in keeping with the theme of 'escalation,' and this movie tells us that Gotham City has started a whole new game now.
-'Dark Knight' puts Batman on the run: Batman was created to strike fear into the heart of criminals. As contrived as Gordon's last speech was, it describes the legend of Batman very well, would've sealed off the trilogy nicely and created an interesting situation to carry on.
-'Dark Knight' is both an ending and a beginning: It gives satisfying closure to Nolan's story, but leaves the narrative intact. The next director in the chair wouldn't even have had to reboot; he could've just taken the story on in any direction he chose.
I'm probably repeating myself a little, but for my money, 'Dark Knight' felt more like a third act than 'Rises,' which felt more like a simultaneous attempt at resurrection and finale that ended up tonally uneven. Anyone else?***
***...What I mean is that "Begins" is the only, out of the entire trilogy that really treats Batman and his character as someone/something special, what the entire production revolves around.
ReplyDeleteIf you look at the amount of screen time that Batman, not Bruce Wayne, but Batman his actual persona has, it's not nearly as much as in Begins. Begins has more trademark Batman "moments;" the way he takes out goons from the shadows to how he enters/exits scenes. There was nothing nearly as awesome or grandiose as Batman using the sonic-emitter to call the bats from the cave to cover his exit in the other films. Sure, he had a few cool entrances/exits in the other movies, but none as distinctly "Batman" as that.
Moreover, in Dark Knight, it's really more of a Joker movie with Batman in it. I'm a Batman fan, I want to see Batman. The Joker is a great villain and was portrayed fantastically, but I feel that they could've scaled back some of the screentime devoted to him and included more of how Batman is reacting to him, and not just reacting directly but how Joker affects him psychologically. Considering that in this universe of Batman films, Joker doesn't have a defined/given backstory or any sort of motivation other than to cause chaos. I found Batman's character to still be the more interesting one, his persona developed from the first now being tested. Or rather, there was a position to show that but I felt the movie was more about The Joker.
On to Rises. Batman was hardly in the movie at all it seems. His entrance to fight Bane consisted of him simply walking up in the street to fight him. No zip-line, no grappling hook, no glide-and-land, no smokebomb to cover his entrance, nothing. And don't say "well Nolan's films are more realistic" as the previous films, especially Begins, displayed Batman using all of these techinques. If Batman really is a master of strategy and uses any tactics beside killing to win, why in god's name would he simply walk up the street to take on Bane, a guy who has done more physical damage to him than anyone else?
It didn't work for the character and just wasn't "Batman" in the sense of style.
Rises spent more time on politics and Gotham reacting to their assault, and then Bruce off in Bane's prison. I'd say out of all the films, Rises felt least like Batman was something truly important.
In short, imo, Begins seemed like it's focus was on Batman the most, it was interested in Batman the most, and the filmmmaking techniques, the action they gave him, and the overall attention paid to the character seemed much greater in Begins than the others. As a Batman fan, that's why I said what I said. Hope that clears things up as to what I was trying to say.***
***The funny thing about all of Nolan's main villains is they didn't see themselves as the bad guy. Even Joker said "I'm not a monster. I'm just ahead of the curve."***
ReplyDeleteThat was definitely the case at the time! It was hard to be more corrupt with 2 cops "on the take" shooting a DA like that with no repercussions in sight! The 2nd movie was too hard to watch due to the corrupt nature of everyone concerned! Incompetence ruled! How else would you explain Joker's minion being arrested with a bomb implanted set to go off "in lock-up" and no one noticed?
***The ferry with the 'good' people voted to blow the other one up. And the poster pointed out that the only reason they didn't go through with it is that no one had the guts. Whereas on the prisoners' boat, nobody wanted to blow up the other ferry. So, the prisoners were the more noble of the two groups.***
I noticed it! The Joker was right for the most part! The so-called elite were about as corrupt as any criminal! They were ready to blow up those prisoners without a thought! I liked that the true criminals seemed to have more conscience, maturity, and rational behavior! I still don't understand why Bruce would have had faith that everyone would act right and ignore Joker's challenge? If that detonator had been on the other side of the room, esp. with some mother who thought it would save her and her children, that other ship would have been history!
***David Goyer said if Heath Ledger were still alive then it would have been a no brainer about The Joker being in TDKR. No doubt he'd be back, but I doubt he'd be the main villain two movies in a row.***
I'm still wondering how the character Bane was elevated to this status at all? He was always secondary to other super villains in the past!
***Aaron Eckhart's career after Da Dark Knight....I thought his career would kick off and some talented directors would be wanting him in their films. ...***
I've seen Echhart going back to Agatha Christy film he appeared in over 20 years ago, "Death On The Nile!" He's been around for ages and this role in TDK was not some kind of introduction that should propel him along! This was more like a "has been" getting tossed a bone! "No offense!" I didn't expect him to go on to do bigger and greater things! He always was well established; no junior actor here!
***Django Unchained is the Highest Grossing Tarantino Film...as it should be...too bad Tarantino got snubbed for best director***
I have a very short attention span so I don't watch many movies! If I do, they're viewed piece meal! TDKR is still just sitting in the player! After all these years, the only Tarantino movie I've watched from beginning to end was an import; "Iron Monkey!" Very well made for that genre!
***The Scarecrow was not very scary at all. - Tell me, dude, what way are we used to seeing Crane portrayed as opposed to a guy who wears glasses? Unless you mean you wanted him in the mask in every single scene, which defeats the purpose of the character in the story. He couldn't walk around Arkham like that lol.***
If and when they do an Arkham movie, maybe they'll have Crane in complete "Scarecrow" straw constume! lol!
***I was thinking the other day about how Blake is a combination of the first 3 Robins and why Nolan didn't just go and play it safe with Dick Grayson when I thought of a theory that really plays with my mind on how good this will be. - What if Blake is the first apprentice Batman had before the Robin's, for instance at the end of TDKR; very apparent that he will don the Batman suit rather than the Robin one as no suit is visable and it is unlikely that his legal name will be his crime fighting name. He's not a boy, something Bale would feel very uncomfortable about taking on as putting a boy out there; very risky.
ReplyDeleteWhat if he sees Blake doing well in the Batsuit and when he decides that Blake wants to hang up his cowl, he has his name as inspiration of what to call his first sidekick after his first apprentice: ROBIN. - Also he sees the quality's in the Blake, as the quality's he sees in his Robin's for instance:
Blake seems to be a combination of the first 3 Robin characters in the comics. Like both Dick Grayson and Jason Todd, he is an orphan who suffered the loss of both his parents at a young age. Also like Grayson, Blake joined the Gotham City Police Department, eventually being promoted to detective, and seems destined to take over the mantle of Batman. Much like Todd, he is an angry young man who first met Bruce Wayne near the latter's car, and was revealed as Robin late into a story arc. And like Tim Drake, he discovers that Bruce Wayne is Batman on his own. Well ...?
----
This is good, you have some very astute observations here. Additionally, like Tim Drake, he works quite effectively on his own, something the previous Robins didn't do nearly as much of. Hmm... he is also demonstrated to have considerable leadership and organizational skills, which would be one of Dick Grayson's traits (he led the Teen Titans as both Robin and Nightwing).
A John Blake actually does make an appearance, in a Batman coloring book. He is a small boy, on his way home with his report card (looking proud b/c it's all As and Bs). When the Joker comes running by and snatches his report card, John starts crying, much to the Joker's delight.
----
This is a bad idea. While Heath Ledger's Joker was phenomenal, it would be akin to what they did with the X-Men for a while, after the first film came out, disposing of their colorful costumes in favor of black leather. - The artists didn't start drawing the Joker like Jack Nicholson after the Burton Batman came out. He's always been more or less drawn the same way, with a narrow face, prominent cheekbones, pointy chin, and cheshire grin. To change that would be a mistake. After all, Heath Ledger is (at least) the 4th actor to portray the Joker. His deserved tribute came in the form of the Oscar. His death may have been sad, but (intentional or not... I believe not) he brought it on himself.***
***An Arkham Asylum movie? - It would be like the Avengers, only with villains instead of heroes, and you know, not shitty.***
ReplyDeleteAfter so many other games have become movies, it only makes sense for "Arkham" to have their turn in production! It'll probably have to be the next generation of Batman and Robin, but the cartoon has already gone there!
***Christian Bale is a bad Batman - He single-handedly stopped me from watching the Dark Knight Rises, and Batman Begins. For all I know there are 4 Batman movies. I just find him so unwatchable as Batman.***
You're reaching! To have the stories told, I'll take whomever they throw out there to portray him! We believed again in '89 with a comic actor in Keaton! The character is bigger than the actor!
***To me, Blake's 7, Babylon 5 and Firefly were the best Sci-Fi series on tv ever***
Never watched B5; surfed by a couple times! I have a faint memory of Bruce B. character (commander?) being conditioned to forget his captivity and or torture (sorta like what happened to Picard)! He went back to the station and had flashes of memory, but kept them to himself at season's end! I believe that "bird-woman" in white had instructions to knock him off if he seemed to remember anything! It's been well over 20 years so that's the best I can do with my limited recollections! lol! I was also partial to the original BG, so I didn't watch any of the new series either! The Cylons supposedly resembled humans too much from what I heard back then! I did get hooked on "Earth: Final Conflict!"
***The Beatles or Led Zeppelin?***
I guess I've always separated "bands" from artists! Bands are head-banging and loud noise-makers! The Beatles were artists that will thrive and live on for generations to come! I still appreciate bands and cherish Aerosmith's, "Dream On," Zep's, "Stairway To Heaven," Iron Butterfly's, "In Da Gada Vida," ELO, Journey, and many others!
***One problem with Nolan...Both Batman Begins and The Dark knight are two of my favourite movies of all time (TDKR not so much). On a tech level his movies are always great, his scriptwriting is almost near perfect (again, except for TDKR) which is as good as it gets.
ReplyDeleteBut there is something he misses. And that's the human element. I mean he's great at writing dialogue that sounds like monologues, and they are a great listen, esp. from Heath Ledger in TDK. But he isn't that great at writing simple human dialogue that makes you relate to the characters. I'm always left kinda cold from Nolan's movies. I'm engaged in the stories of his movies, but I'm not that emotionally invested. ...
But I really LOVE Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. They're what I always wanted in Batman-movies as a kid. I think they are near perfect movies.
----
Those really depressing hard hitting lows just don't work in thrillers or adventures. I don't think there are any thrillers or adventures that have any lows that drive the audience to tears. They are meant for another genre of films altogether. - Watch Michael Clayton and tell me you weren't moved, not necessarily to tears but simply moved.
----
'The Dark Knight' makes a better part three than 'Rises.' - TDK is by FAR the best movie in the trilogy. Bar none. The OP makes a lot of valid points. As much as I love Rises, and how it wraps things up, you could also have ended the series with TDK.***
I'd prefer TDK ending; at least he'd still be alive! This is the end of this incarnation! A reboot will have to be totally fresh, probably going very young! This is the first time I can remember this happening! With fantasy comics, Superman was knocked off all the time for different reasons, but Batman seemed to hang on until old age! I haven't seen any comics since the early 70's, but from reviews Superman and Batman had become nuclear, muscled freaks! So many incarnations out there I guess; missed them thank GAWD!
***Tell me dude, what way are we used to seeing Crane portrayed as opposed to a guy who wears glasses? Unless you mean you wanted him in the mask in every single scene which defeats the purpose of the character in the story.***
If and when they do an Arkham movie, maybe they'll have Crane in complete "Scarecrow" straw constume!
***Doesn't have to be an Arkham movie for that. Any time they do Scarecrow again in any Bat movie they can do it that way.
----
2 hours in Arkham Asylum? Ehhh not feeling it.***
You're kidding right? An entire movie can be produced with 3 hours of footage but actually span 5 min.! Alfred Hitchock's, "The 39 Steps" didn't exactly have action spanning months and years like this last Batman Epic! An absolutely horrible movie, "The People Under The Stairs" had all kinds of things going on and most of that action happened in one night! I think Batman can somehow keep a storyline going for 24 hours in Arkham, power is out so all the Super Villains are out, while the remaining staff try to help Batman and Robin as best they can!
***Actually that would go to The Avengers. It was hilarious when Banner rides up on that bike! - At least we know how Banner got to the city for all the movie showed us Batman can magically teleport to the city while also wasting precious time gathering enough fuel, using said to paint a giant bat symbol over the bridge, and finally lighting said fuel to signal his return.
---
Although I respect your opinion, Batman Begins is the best Batman movie, followed by TDK. This movie was IMO a major step down, and while a worthy ending to the trilogy, it's not a great ending.***
***People seem to forget that 'the Joker' is the villian in the movie - They seem to root for the Joker more than Batman.***
ReplyDeleteThe same bizarre hero worship was observed after Tim Burton's, Batman; '89! Casting Nicholson in the role of The Joker seemed more paramount, getting all kinds of special deals on the "back end!" He must have cleaned up with all the memorabilia!
***I am a huge fan of TDK and I thoroughly enjoyed The Dark Knight Rises, but I have never really taken to Batman Begins. Don't get me wrong, I think it is a fine film, but compared to the other films it feels very underwhelming. The story isn't as interesting as in the latter films, the villains are not as memorable, ...I am therefore always a bit surprised that people that dislike Rises praise BB b/c, despite Rises flaws, it is for me a far better and more memorable film.
---
I think the pacing and editing in this one is the best. Visually I like it more than the sequels and I also prefer the character dialogue. ... The blue-snowy mountain Bruce climbs in the beginning immerses me and the whole film feels like a journey, going from there to eventually Gotham. So when he first appears as Batman, the payoff is satisfying.
...If Scarecrow had a little more screentime I'd consider him just as interesting as The Joker. Maybe not as well acted, but I still really enjoy the character. The most important point is that I like the movie more and more each time I see it. I've gotten that somewhat with The Dark Knight and not really at all with Rises.
Despite how closely the combat scenes are filmed, I've come to see advantages in that over how he pulled the camera back more and more for TDK/TDKR. Nolan never had great choreographed fights, but they looked better when you could barely see them. It feels like Batman is just taking out multiple people in a flurry of blows which is cool and very Batman-like.
Oh and I like Katie Holmes despite the bad rep she's got. Thought she did fine as Rachel. - So the big things:
- Visuals. Asia scenes are beautiful. Gotham looks unique and interesting.
- Pacing. Story knows where it's going at all times, never feels stretched or bloated.
- Dialogue. Not as many quotable lines, but feels natural. Less cheesy one-liners.
- Music. More use of strings, varied, softer compared to the more bombastic soundtracks of TDK/TDKR.
-Editing. This is less to do with BB's being so good, as much as TDK/TDKR's being so amateur. ...but I feel like if TDK/TDKR were re-edited with leftover footage/alternate shots they could flow much better.
What TDK got better was the main villain (The Joker) and the Batpod was cool. TDKR, I'm not sure if it got anything better. I like the soundtrack more than TDK but that's about it. I'm not a Two-Face fan. In the games, movies, etc., he's lame.
And OP, if you don't mind me asking a question. Do you enjoy the Batman mythos over Batman himself? My sister didn't like Begins b/c she said she isn't interested in Batman as a character. I'm not really either, but that didn't stop me from really liking the movie. She likes TDK more b/c she likes The Joker and Heath Ledger's performance. You mentioned the villains in Begins being lame so I was wondering if that's the main reason you like Batman to begin with.
----
I wouldn't call the villains in Batman Begins lame, but compered to the Joker and Bane they don't feel as threatening as the other two. I think the plan that The League of Shadows has in Batman Begins is a little far fetched, that is to use a Microwave Emitter to vaporize the water supply to spread a toxin that makes people loose there mind, this is too comic bookie for my taste. I think that TLoS plan in Rises is more believable, that is to simply blow up the city. And it is also clear that Bane and his people are on a suicide mission... He wants to spread anarchy and chaos and to see society crumble, but he doesn't want these things to happens for his own personal gain.***
***Conroy can diss C. Bale all he wants about the voice, but to me until both put on muscle and don the batsuit and actually 'acts' as batman, he will never be better than Bale. Of course you can argue that his voice is better, but voice acting is a hell of a lot easier than acting. The same goes for Mark Hamill's Joker vs Ledger's Joker.
ReplyDelete----
I've never been in a Batman movie and I still reserve the right to call Bale's Batman voice stupid, which even fans of the trilogy often concede. In fact, taking your statement into account, Conroy has a better right to critique Bale's Batman voice than both of us, since I presume you've never played Batman either.***
I've never had to say "HUH?" listening to Conroy! There's dialogue I still haven't really heard and understood after all these years of Begins and Rises w/ and so many repeats on cable! I see and hear something different, new, or "more" each time! Too bizarre! I don't go to the real theatres anymore with how loud they blast it trying to make sure every whisper is heard! Haven't been since taking kids to "Poppin's Penguins" a year ago! I don't miss it! I just bought TDKR, it's in the player, but waiting for dead time to watch it! The last Star Wars prequel took me a week! Sleep Apnea has been a real killer for the last 10+ years!
***How does Batman get back to Gotham City?***
Just bought TDKR and haven't put it in the player yet! Got a preview here so I can watch for certain things! The dialogue can be "trying;" volume wise! Bale does love to whisper! The same question of Bruce's jouney back to Gotham has been asked 20 times at least? What's the deal? Am I missing something, or is the movie incomplete in some way?
***Bane and Talia Were The Weakest Villians In The Trilogy - Nolan should not have picked Bane to be Batman's enemy. I know this has been discussed here, but I will share my reasons:
1) Bane is a superhuman. There should be no place in him in the realistic Nolan-verse. Yes Ra's is supposed to be immortal...but the Lazarus Pits were taken out and Liam Neeson succeeded in making a realistic Ra's work.
People have been asking questions as to why Batman never even gave Bane one bruise in that first fist fight. While Bruce's injuries in the trilogy are shown up close to us. Or how Bane can punch that concrete pillar without any bruising on his fists. Now I know in the comics he has metal plates inside him...but again it seems that Bane belongs in another superhero flick. Realism remember?
2) Bane's voice was a hit or miss. A few times it came across okay depending on the atmosphere and environment. Other times...not so much. A few times many people could not even understand what he was saying.
3) Like Ebert said Bane lacks personality with his mask on:
- http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120717/REV IEWS/120719981 -
Ebert concludes that the movie needed a better villain. And he gave a perfect score to the other two Batman flicks I might add.
4) The Gotham Exchange flight scene was weird. When Bane and his cohorts flee it is daytime. When they come out of the tunnel...it is nighttime. Did Batman ask the Christopher Reeve Superman to spin around the Earth and fast forward time? Batman after all only comes out at night according to TDK.
Miranda/Talia was not the best villain either. Although I can't say why exactly.
--------------------------------
Best villains in Nolan's trilogy:
1)Joker
2)Falcone
3)Ra's
4)Scarecrow. You can relate more to him than Bane. Scarecrow is better than Talia overall in the trilogy.
I would have suggested the Riddler for this movie. Maybe the League could have used him to distract the police and Batman while they went ahead to destroy Gotham.
For me there will always be Batman Begins.***
***One of the few comic-books movies where some of the main villains (i.e. Ra's Al Ghul and the Scarecrow) actually existed before the central character became a superhero. As much as I love say Spider-Man and the early Batman films, it always seems that the superhero is responsible for his enemies' existence in those films rather than emerging as a response to bigger and badder foe.
ReplyDelete----
As far as the X-Men films go, I'd say that Sebastian Shaw was the main threat prior to the heroes forming. Magneto starts off as a fellow X-Man in 'X-Men: First Class'. However, 'Captain America' is another rare example of where the hero emerges in response to a super-villain (i.e. the Red Skull) and one could say the same thing with respect to Daredevil and Kingpin.***
OT perhaps, but the Daleks in Doctor Who series have become stronger in fear of him! Sorta like criminals and The Batman!
***Well Batman Begins and TDK seem to suggest that Batman's presence has provoked a proliferation in certain types of villaniy, but at least one can argue that this Batman emerged as a response to 'supervillains' that already existed (i.e. Ra's Al Ghul and the likes of the Scarecrow).***
It's amazing how far back this theory has been looked at! My first memory of such a thing was more "camp" with the old Batman series! The Penguin Burgess Meredith) was supposedly running for mayor and one of his arguments for his selection over Batman was that Batman was always seen with criminals and reprobates while he was always in the company of "law enforcement" and the police! It got him a lot of cheers; are we that dumb? lol!
***Which Batman movie was Bale at his worst acting wise? - I don't think he was poor in any of them. I thought he showed his non-impassioned nature well in TDK to be honest. Are you saying you think he was wooden in the scenes where he was grieving? I didn't get that impression at all.
I prefer him in Begins, but that's just b/c it's my kind of film. I thought he showed seething, slow building anger well in the training scenes on the ice when Ras was antagonizing him about his father's unwillingness to act in the face of danger. This is the only sort of anger Bruce Wayne really carries; he's not a hot head or a loose cannon. His parents' death instilled a cold sadness in him and the rage takes a long time to surface. That was done perfectly for my money. In continued defense of TDK, he has a stronger mastery of his anger so you don't get this from Bruce, so I think the more stoic portrayal was appropriate.***
There's a reason this guy has a colossal ego! Bale's acting goes back to when he was a child! I seem to remember him playing a very controversially intimate role when he was around 12 or so! Had something to do with a returning soldier! The first movie I remember him in is "American Psycho" of course, but his range and debt rivals Johnny Depp! I'm no expert since I watch so few movies these days; short attention span! I still haven't watched "X-Men: First Class" and the latest and great of this series, "TDKR!" One of these days I'll open the cases! The last Star Wars prequel took me almost a week! Today's movies are just too damned long!
***My take on the trilogy - Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, & The Dark Knight Rises:
ReplyDeleteI would leave Batman Begins exactly like it is. The only thing I would remove, Gordon giving Batman the Joker-card. Imagine that The Dark Knight Rises was the second movie in the trilogy. Set only a year after the first movie, not 8. Take out Wayne being a recluse and crippled for the first part of the movie, the subplot about the lie about Harvey Dent (since Harvey appears in TDK) and character of Blake.
Bane and Talia (Talia could still be undercover as Miranda) come to Gotham to finish what Ra's Al Ghul started. They blow up the football field and keep the city hostage as they do in the movie as it is now. They break Bruce's back, crippling him (it would be more powerful if he was in his prime instead of having being retired and injured for 8 years) and he has to RISE, evolving from simply being the Batman and truly become The Dark Knight. Not rise only to retire as it is now.
Rachel would still be alive too and seeing what Bruce goes through would only push her even further away from him since she doesn't want him as long as he's Batman.
He saves Gotham from Bane and Talia and is now considered a hero, all though still a vigilante. I wouldn't have Batman trick the city into thinking he sacrifices himself in the end, he would simply jump out from the Bat-plane as soon as he cleared the city limits and let the auto-pilot do the rest.
Now The Dark Knight is the third movie, closing the trilogy. It begins as it does already, but perhaps the spirit of Gotham is even more broken down in this version b/c the city is still limping since Bane almost destroyed it.
People now fully believe in the Batman and trusts him, which would kinda explain how Batman can visit Gordon in the bank-vault w/o any cop busting him and why they let him in the interrogation room. All the more to strengthen what The Joker says about that the cops need him now, but as soon as they don't, they're gonna cast him out.
Rachel has now moved on from Bruce and is dating Harvey Dent of course and their fates would be the same. Wouldn't change a thing.
And the movie would also end in the exact same way as it does. Batman taking the blame for Harvey's crimes (even more powerful this way b/c of the trust Batman has gained from the people in the previous 2 movies and how his refusal to reveal his secret identity on The Joker's demands already has started to make that trust from the people shatter. He has to make the ultimate personal sacrifice.
That way, Only Gordon is on his side in the end, he is wanted, he will truly become The Dark Knight, as he is the hero they need him to be, despite of how they hate him. I would think that it would make for a much more exciting and thrilling ending. It would leave you with the knowledge that Batman will truly continue and it would make The Jokers's line about how he and Batman is destined to fight each other forever much more powerful.***
***I like BATMAN 89 a great deal, but I have complicated feelings towards BATMAN RETURNS. Heck I'll even admit to liking BATMAN FOREVER (which in my honest opinion I think is very underrated) more than Burton's second movie. Though that doesn't mean I hate RETURNS, I just don't think it's the formerly misunderstood masterpiece a lot of people claim it is. It's definitely got it's strong points as well. But I do think Nolan's films are the best live action BATMAN films overall personally. They were definitely stronger in the story department. Whether it be the basic plot lines themselves (though that's pure opinion on my part, as well as their execution and coherence. (which is more of an objective complaint).
ReplyDeleteRETURNS' plot really is a mess in places. And while I don't think faithfulness to the source material should necessarily make or break a movie, I'm also going to give more credit to Nolan's films for doing so more than Burton. Are Nolan's the greatest Batman films we'll ever have? I don't know, they could be, but we're going to have to wait and see. Though I'd hope that we'd have a Batman films up to their caliber of storytelling that didn't shy away from the more fantastical nature of the comic book world. Still though, Nolan's tell a great story over all (even if I personally think there were a few hiccups in the third installment).
The other big issue I have with RETURNS other than an unfocused story, is that it started the trend that plagued and ultimately destroyed the original set of BATMAN films and that was renovating the tone and visual style of the film that came before with bare minimum plot connections. And that continued on in the latter two movies as well. It hardly connects to BATMAN 89 at all. Two almost throw-away lines to Vicki Vale and that's it. Gotham looks different visually. The film in tone is also darker, more whimsical (feeling like a Gothic fairytale more than the comic book like heightened reality the first film felt like), more vulgar, and much more over-the-top/silly than it's predecessor. (Those things don't make it a bad thing on it's own, but it sure as hell hurts it as a sequel) It all but ignores the first film really, and sidelines a good deal of the characters from the first movie. (in some case even more so than they were side-lined in 89). Batman, Alfred, and Gordon (and it's really saying something in his case) all have much less to do, the latter two having hardly anything to do within the actual story. Not to mention that other major supporting players in the first film are just outright dropped and ignored as if they didn't even exist (Alexander Knox and Harvey Dent in particular is who I'm thinking about, esp. Dent since the end of BATMAN 89 was clearly setting him up for a bigger role as Batman's ally as is done in the comics and THE DARK KNIGHT).*** cont.,
***And as I said, narratively it doesn't do anything with the events of the first one. Like how does it effect the characters? How does Batman feel after taking down the assailant of his parents, etc. That combined with the tonal and stylistic changes just makes it feel too dissociated. Think about all the great superhero film sequels. SPIDER-MAN 2, X-MEN 2, SUPERMAN II, and yes also THE DARK KNIGHT don't up and ignore their predecessors and renovate the franchise. They build up on what came before them. Though they're overall conflicts may be different (Like Spidey fighting Doc Ock rather than the Green Goblin), there were undercurrent plot threads and character arcs that flowed through them. And they made sure to keep consistent supporting casts that had greater purpose rather than outright dropping them or giving them the shaft. Not to mention they all look and feel like they belong in the same universe as their predecessors.
ReplyDeleteAlright, I have a point with all this. I know this is supposed to be about which films I prefer and it has just turned into me ranting about RETURNS. (which still don't get me wrong. I like it for what it is. I just find it to be a VERY weak sequel). What I'm just trying to say is that Nolan told a more grand story in a trilogy that builds itself up and has strong narrative connections.
Making it much stronger as a set of films compiled together than the two Burton films do. So yeah, my answer about whether or not I think Burton's films are better than Nolan's films is no. Do I think we've reached the peak of Batman in cinema? Again, I don't know. But I'd love to see a Batman film series with stories as strong as the Nolan films, but presented in a more comic book like setting such as the 89 film.
For reference my personal ranking of all seven of the Batman films since 1989 goes:
1. The Dark Knight
2. Batman Begins
3. Batman 89
4. The Dark Knight Rises
5. Batman Forever
6. Batman Returns
7. Batman & Robin (a ranking which I'm sure doesn't surprise anybody)
---
That doesn't prove anything. Are Batman Begins and TDK not connected b/c Rachel Dawes is played by two different actresses?
---
What kind of logic is that? You really should read what you type before you post. Batman Begins and TDK are obviously connected b/c TDK was designed to share a connection with Batman Begins and we have returning cast members reprising their roles of course. Why does the recasting of the Rachel character be to any conflict with this? Second, if you're going to make a reboot meant to be in a different continuity to distance it from the previous movies, you're not going to have actors from those movies play the same roles here. We would have not been seeing Pat Hingle and Michael Gough playing their same roles from the Burton movies if Batman Forever was meant to be a flat-out reboot.
Also, the fifth movie to the original series was to feature the Joker's daughter getting revenge for her father's death in the first movie. So, that obviously shows the Burton and Schumacher movies were meant to take place in the same universe.***
***In a recent article, Nolan said the plan was to always bring the League of Shadows back in TDKR. This is because Bruce needed to revisit those challenges before he moved on from Batman. Thematically, the LoS's return is crucial to the plot of TDKR. If they wanted to end the Batman legend, it would have been hard to do so without their return. At least within the context of this trilogy. Here is why they needed to come back:
ReplyDeleteRa's teaches Bruce in BB to make himself into a legend. Why does Ra's do this? Well, Ra's isn't just some random guy. He is clearly a legend himself. He made himself "more than just a man" long before Bruce did.
A major theme of TDKR is legacy. Just as Ra's leaves his legacy to Talia (and Bane), Bruce leaves his legacy to Blake. TDKR is about legends living on through others. That's why Ra's says, "Did you not think I would return, Bruce?" Also, "There are many forms of immortality." He gets Bruce thinking about the future. Ra's lives on through his daughter and her friend. And Batman will live on through Blake. Ra's teaches Bruce in TDKR how to make your legend everlasting. It goes on through your heirs. And just as Talia and Bane ran the LoS differently than Ra's, it's likely Blake will be a different Batman than Bruce. But their goals and ideals are the same.
In TDKR, Bruce faces the legacy of the legend who created him. And in doing so, he learns to create a legacy for himself.
If the LoS didn't return, we would miss this entire theme. We would sacrifice this very crucial theme of the entire trilogy just so Bane could be more "unique."
This is why people shouldn't complain about Bane's connection to the League. But they still will.***
Well I've only seen the movie once and been out here for just a couple weeks, but I'll need to ask; "why this blind loyalty to Ra's, esp. since he turned his back on both Bane and Talia? Maybe I missed something, but it just made little sense to fullfil his obseession of bringing things "back into balance" by destroying Gotham! I understand Talia's loyalty to Bane, but why were both willing to die for this idiotic plot with all that carnage! How did Blake figure out by Wayne preserving The Manor, the Batcave was available underneath? Alfred tell him? lol! Funny I joked about Alfred being the orphanage caretaker! He's ancient so they better find another one!
---
***Batman Forever is a pretty good movie ruined by Jim Carrey. - I concur, he was the only one of the two villains that gave off any menace. Two Face's first scene started off promising when he is talking to the security guard, then it goes to camp hell when his scarred side is revealed and he goes over the top with his dialogue.***
I lived thru having Carrey camp it up, but I also could have done without him! The Superman movies were ruined after going comedic with Richard Pryor! It was enough Lex Luthor was so satirical and campy! Pryor with Robert Vaugh just about killed the franchise!
Part of the Justice League series had Dana hanging in there with Terry all grown up and about to propose! It was that episode where the CCH Pounder character, head of Gov. secret. agency confessed she had tampered with his DNA so he was destined to be Batman! Terry was getting fed up with the job, wanted to have a life with Dana, and Bruce was on his last legs! Very nice futuristic episode! What was with "Artifact?" It was so strangely produced, but got me weeping at the end with Batman speaking from the grave, "state the nature of the emergency!" It was great! I actually feature it on my mini homage!
ReplyDelete----
***You could also chalk it up to the fact that Bruce conceals his identity as Batman through his actions and mannerisms, as well as through his mask. If you watch the movie, you'll see that Bruce "acts" like an arrogant playboy who takes women out to fountains to swim and kicks guests out his own birthday party. These childish acts would eliminate any suspicion in anyone's minds that Bruce could be Batman. He'd be the last person anyone would expect, including Rachel.
The precedent of the behavior difference is also shown in Christopher Reeve's version of Superman. In those movies, he plays Clark Kent as a bumbling, clueless, and clumsy pushover, to purposely hide the fact that he could be the Man of Steel. In those movies, Lois Lane usually gets the suspicion that he might be Superman, but then puts it to rest because she can't believe that someone like bumbling Clark Kent could ever be Superman.
----
Agreed. That's why he puts on that playboy act. He doesn't want people to become suspicious about what someone like Bruce Wayne does with his time and his money. It's also good for alibis too. He used the cruise trip he took with the Russian ballet women as an alibi for when he went to Hong Kong as Batman and took Lau back to Gotham.***
How paranoid was Bruce to believe he needed an alibi when Lau was being snatgched? That just didn't make a lot of sense! lol! I guess if you were a super genius like Egg Head, maybe he could figure it out since Fox was in Tokyo at the same time and in Lau's building! It worked; who cares?
***Batman Begins is hands down the best Batman movie out there. The other 2 films I would say are films that are better at reaching it to a wider, more adult, non comic book fan audience. I love Batman Begins because everything was perfect from the look of Batman, to the right amount of darkness, the story and the way it flows (a more personal story), and it was the first time that they really made a "serious" Batman movie that portrayed him as the epic monster he should be.
IMO the TDK & TDKR are not as strong. They have stories that try to be less "comic-book" and more "realistic" which will appeal more to some people but not as much to others. I enjoyed the films but nowhere near as much as Batman Begins. I remember being so excited for TDK when I saw it for the first time because I loved Batman Begins so much and I remember coming out being dissapointed because of how much the tone changed. The films are very different.
The only thing Rises has in common with Begins is particular story events & characters that tie into the first movie (kind of like how Die Hard 3 tied into the original Die Hard)... but the tone of the film is pretty much the same as TDK.***
***So I would be very curious to hear why so many people love this film and esp. why it is in some people's mind better then Rises?
ReplyDelete---
I think there's a number of reasons for me. First is that Batman Begins feels like it was written for Batman fans, as if to atone for the sins of Schumacher and Burton. The two following films feel like they were written more for the general moviegoing public. So, BB had a more intimate feel. When I was watching it for the first time, I thought "Finally they've made a Batman movie for grown ups." I also was relieved that the filmmakers played it straight with no camp and no "interpretations" by the director. It had respect for the material and for the fans.
The second is that it clears up a lot of the inaccuracies about the character. Batman does not kill, but in Tim Burton's movies he casually kills countless bad guys. Also, Batman is not out for personal revenge. He's doing this for justice, and they spell that out clearly throughout the movie. Otherwise, he'd be just another gangster.
Batman Begins was also the first movie to explore the tormented Bruce Wayne. We finally got a movie that really explained what makes him tick. Without explaining this, Bruce Wayne comes across as a megalomaniac with a lot of expensive toys.
There were other aspects that I felt they did realistically and thus correctly. They seemed to model the public Bruce Wayne persona after John Kennedy Jr. I don't know if you remember JFK Jr., but he was the kind of guy you could never imagine doing anything serious in life, let alone engage in hand-to-hand combat with street criminals. Handsome, athletic scion of a legendary family, and a nice guy, but probably not vigilante material. What better disguise than a guy whom the public could never imagine doing anything responsible in life. The problem with the Keaton portrayal as a wealthy eccentric is that he'd be the first one people would suspect once they realized Batman would need a huge fortune to finance all his gear. As Katie Holmes points out at the end of BB, Bruce Wayne is the mask; Batman is the real person now.
Charles Roven, the producer who's really been the soul behind the Nolan reboot, said when they started the casting process, they weren't looking for someone to play Batman. Rather, they were looking for someone to play Bruce Wayne. Batman Begins was about Bruce Wayne.***
***"Heath Ledger’s Joker -- no question it was an amazing performance. And if he were still with us, we could ask him about his various inspirations: what did he watch, what did he read, what did he observe, how did he inhabit his character? Well, one of the clues he left us was his Joker diary, which he kept four months before shooting.
ReplyDeleteIn it, there’s a list of what would make the Joker laugh – including AIDS, landmines, geniuses suffering irreversible brain damage, brunch, and sombreros. “It gave me this chill,” Grant Morrison said, because it was word-for-word what Morrison had written in one of his Batman stories.
[b]“There’s a Batman [Batman #663, “The Clown at Midnight”] that I did last year that hardly anyone read,” Morrison said.
As a response to his own "Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on Serious Earth,” Morrison had continued his themes of the duality of Joker and the Batman in “The Clown at Midnight.” Having established with “Arkham” that the Joker had a sort of “super-sanity” and that he shifted between personalities,” Morrison explored the idea further in “The Clown at Midnight,” by showing that each time the Joker escaped, one of those new personalities would emerge.
“It’s a really good story,” Morrison said, “but because it was prose, people didn’t want to read it.”
Except, apparently, Heath, who saw Morrison’s list and put it in his Joker diary. “He actually had a whole list -- blind babies, doctors, accidents -- really horrible stuff,” Morrison said. “Heath wrote it all down. So yeah, I can see there’s a lot of [‘Arkham’ and ‘Midnight’] in his Joker.”
The filmmakers have taken great pains to acknowledge the original comics they drew from, Morrison pointed out. With those shout-outs, sales for the originals have skyrocketed – not just for “Arkham,” but also Alan Moore’s “The Killing Joke,” Frank Miller’s “Year One” and “Dark Knight Returns,” and Jeph Loeb’s “Long Halloween.”
“David Goyer has said they owe a debt to us,” Morrison said. “And it’s really easy to see our influence. But at the same time, they also created something quite new and extraordinary.”***
***Is this one a classic? - Ending was a bit weak. May be reflection of times I think (American economy was nearing a small boom after 2001 slump). Otherwise it's as good as other 2 barring a magnum opus from Joker! - A classic comic book film.***
ReplyDeleteThe series had to be re-booted with something! I think it was a great effort; production, story, music! It worked for the ones getting most of their fix with the daily cartoons back then! lol! Batman Beyond & The Justice League can only take you so far!
---
How paranoid was Bruce to believe he needed an alibi when Lau was being snatgched? That just didn't make a lot of sense! lol! I guess if you were a super genius like Egg Head, maybe he could figure it out since Fox was in Tokyo at the same time and in Lau's building! It worked; who cares?
***It's probably b/c he used Fox in his mission to get Lau. Someone might put two and two together and find it suspicious that Fox would travel all the way to Hong Kong just to tell Lau their business deal was on hold just before Lau is kidnapped by Batman and taken back to Gotham City, the hometown of Fox and Bruce Wayne. So they might start to wonder if Bruce Wayne has some connection to Batman or possibly is Batman. Having an alibi of partying somewhere with a whole ballet full of beautiful women fixes that.
---
Why didn't Catwoman just leave the country? - They had her fingerprints and probably her DNA, but she could have gotten a fresh start if she really wanted to (as long as she didn't resort back to her old activities, which if she were caught she would be found out). Why couldn't she go to Italy or elsewhere to begin with?***
Did you see that file on Selena Blake plopped down on the table? It could have been a transscript for the movie it was so large! That was why she was looking for that "fresh start!" This movie is a little futuristic snd there are records of everything that happens and who perpetrated it! You saw how easily Bruce came up with her name and picture after she ripped off the pearls! The net is eternal and that was her reasoning for not assuming another id just to have it trashed so easily!
***Has anyone here seen the original Batman serials from the 40's? - Is that the one where the batmobile was just a convertible with the down up but when it was bruce waynes car it had the top up? I saw that on the special features. I may have to find it, but it will be hard to find.***
I have a faint memory back in the 60's being at the local theatre! It was a Batman epic on the cheap; B/W, this costumed person wtih horns is sitting at a table in a cold desolate cave! I didn't realize he was alive at first! Another scene had the bad guys on the run@ They got ahead of Batman and Robin enough to press a button to change the paint job on their car and change the licence plate! Hmmm! Where have I seen that recently?
***I think it is on Youtube...but I know it is on Columbia DVD. ...and yes, the Batmobile is a convertable...but I still love it. - The Joker is dead.***
Really? How so? Burton's Joker was killed in the end, but not Nolan's; I thought! Only watched TDKR once; may have missed that with stop and starts of disc!
***the Joker died in 'A Death In The family.' Every other appearance (either in comics or movies) from then on you see is pretty much Alfred's imagination. And no, that helicopter at the end didn't have autopilot.***
ReplyDeleteSorry, I pretty much stopped serious comic book buying in the early 70's when they were just 12 cents in the machine! I've picked up a couple Graphic Novels here and there just to say I have them, but I only peripherally paid attention to that nuclear era where Superman and Batman were adversaries and looked like musclebound freaks! In my era, the heroes didn't die! DC produced fantasy storylines allowing Lois to marry Superman, Robin dying, and Superman disfigured with a combination of a red, blue, & green Kryptonite explosion!
I did watch those A & E comic book look-backs that were very interesting! I recognized them as propaganda, but mmore suttle in my day! When it started getting serious with Black ghettoes, Lois going thru a machine so she could experience being Black, etc.; stopped being entertaining! Living thru Viet-Nam, Water-gate, 3 assasinations(2 Ken's and King), I didn't need my comics to go that heavy!
***Which comic book(s) do you think best defines who Batman is/stands for? - A few I think.
Batman: The Ten Cent Adventure
Batman: Ego
HM:Batman: Year one(though I think I like Gordon's story even more in that), The Autobiography of Bruce Wayne.
So which comic books according to you best defines who Batman is? A few recommendations could be good.
---
Comic wise: The Dark Knight Returns or Rise. Although I believe Batman in the Timmverse (the animated series, Beyond, Justice League) is THE definitive Batman.***
***Don't get me wrong, even as I don't read any comics except Batman, I'm a huge fan of the comics. So in that case, I'm no prejudiced towards comics in general. Now this is all kudos to Nolan and his marvelous storytelling and unbelievably inspiring dialogues/monologues.
ReplyDeleteBatman fans know that the character itself is perfect opportunity for filmmakers to dig deeper beneath the layers of comic book. And this trilogy does that so well unlike the previous directors.
In much shorter version:
In Barman Begins we have Ra's and his plan to clean the city of the corrupt. Now this is true to comics b/c Ra's is always trying to bring ecological balance to the world.
So does it really take extreme measure and violence to clean up the city? The morals in us, the reason in us (Batman) tells us it's the wrong way.
We see Batman not only fighting criminals out of vengeance, but he made a job out of it, to become the voice of the reason and justice.
The Dark Knight tells us that any man under sever pressure or tragedy can turn evil. Even someone as inspiring as Harvey Dent. You always have ignorant people who are so much into politics that they put so much unnecessary faith in them and are close minded. Now imagine if Harvey Dent was their hero, he's so popular that the majority likes him. How would ignorant people react to his transformation?
And we have the Joker who is exact opposite of Batman, but sharing almost the same sense of justice. Trying to ruin his vision of good proving that people are easily manipulated and brainwashed.
To be honest though, I'm not sure that the scenario of the ferry scene is realistic lol. I'm almost sure in real world, one of those ferries would go off :)
TDKR tells us of inner battle of every man. Reaching the bottom of their lives. Desperation, desolation and suffering. We all sometimes lose a will to live, so what takes us to 'Rise' again?
Plan is somewhat similar to BB, so I won't get too much into that.
Now, how this movie can inspire someone? How about rich snobs sitting on their money, while some parts of the world don't even have electricity?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not liberal at all and don't approve the whole Occupy Wall street movement, b/c I think it's a wrong approach. Junkies running around like crazies even forgetting why they are doing it.
Bruce leaving everything behind, like donating his house to the children in need is an awesome way of ending this Bruce Wayne Saga. He's doing something to the world, and he's not wearing his cape and cowl!
Many more hours could be used to bound this trilogy to the realistic nature of everyday life, but this is the shortest version possible.
This is one of the reasons why I think this trilogy is a masterpiece on his own. Unlike 2001, which is based on human evolution and the ambiguity of it, this trilogy certainly raises some important questions on the society and moral in general.
---
Good post:
I sort of agree and (only slightly) disagree with it. But certainly agree that these are better in theme than the standard comic book movie.
Generally I agree that this is about how Batman would navigate and react to the trials of today's modern issues. And on this level it works really well.
Where I disagree, is that there is a coherent political message in Nolans Batman. I just don't think that is what he is trying to get across. However he does raise a few themes as ideas, possibly just to ground the story in a modern context, even if no answers to the political questions are given.***
***I am not sure [these films] lose all [political] coherence once you scratch the surface, but these are, after all batman films.
ReplyDeleteI see them as Batman flicks that simply 'touch on' a few current ideas, not as films that are supposed to contain any detailed analysis or meaningful 'message' beyond. I am not sure the intention of these films was ever to provide answers to these ideas (for that matter I am not sure Nolan has ever provided clear answers to themes he raises - even in Memento, Insomnia or the Prestige).
It is, after all, quite hard to find a relevant and meaningful subtext in a story about a character born from what was a much simpler age: nowadays it is difficult to visualise a real and clear social benefit in a man who would dress up as a bat and meet out his own brand of violent, vigilante, autocratic 'justice' using his fists and his boomerangs.
Batman is a product of a more dogmatic age, rather than todays more sensitive postmodern society, where the lines between good and evil are much less clear. Even an 'all good' 'boy scout' character like Superman is more likely to be feared than revered in today's society, were he to exist (a theme touched on in Moore's Watchmen).
Even the hardest tryers (for example Miller and Moore himself) struggle to give traditional superheroes a true social relevance in their own comic book medium in today's society (and their groundbreaking comic book stories were written just 30 or so years ago). What they produced are certiainly among the best of the bunch in this respect (although not necessarily the best comic books, btw). But they are still seen best now as simple entertainment, and I see nothing wrong with that myself.
The best questions Nolan asks (and the nearest he gives answers to) include: "what if Batman was a real person?", "How could he become so?" and "what problems might he face, as a real phenomena?"
To me, this is the level on which these films work best. Nothing more.
These questions, I believe, he deals with rather well; by grounding the character, making him human, explaining his technology, the phenomena of escalation and his desire to eventually retire or subside as a real person, but remain as a symbol of long lasting justice.
Yes, along the way Nolan scratches the surface of a few current issues, but I don't think he ever attempts to provide an exhaustive commentary on them (after all in real life there are still no real answers to the problems he touches on).
This approach alone elevates these movies above comic book movie standard fare, and this is enough to entertain me as well as raising the odd thoughtful eyebrow, if only fleetingly.
Seen this way, even the desire to scratch the surface [of the politics of] these movies ... is a mark of their relative success: no comic book movie I can think of asks the audience to do so, even if you include X-Men's as-hamdistedly-obvious-as-the-source-material's commentary on racism.
---
Well I agree, your post is almost nothing different than what I said. My intention wasn't to try and find out political meanings of the trilogy.
Simply put, it is about the guy in a bat suit and how could he work if he was a real person, and what drives him to dress up like that, and to do what he does?
But that sentence alone needs to scratch the surface of the politics. Not sure if you understood my context of politics, because I hate it.
So, Batman in the real world would need to deal with it. With the corruption that is so deep, and by that what kind of villains it produces.***
***Ranking the Burton-Schumacher era Batman film villains:
ReplyDelete31. Bane (Batman and Robin) - Played by: Jeep Swenson
Yikes. Bane isn’t the only character on here dumbed down into a henchman (Sabretooth and Juggernaut show up soon), but he’s certainly the worst and most egregious. One of Batman’s deadliest and smartest villains turned into a mute strongman for Poison Ivy. At least the movie tried to make Freeze and Ivy somewhat similar to their comics counterparts and not freaking mutes. One could argue that Bane is a more important and deadlier villain than those two in the comics, and turning him into some mute thug is a travesty. A strong contender for the last slot, but as great as Bane is in the comics, he’s not at Doom’s level.
30. Mr. Freeze (Batman and Robin) - Played by: Arnold Schwarzenegger
“The ice man cometh!” What more needs to be said that hasn’t already? Just 6 yrs after Paul Dini and Bruce Timm resurrect Victor Fries and turned him into one of Batman’s most compelling and tragic villains, Schumacher comes along to ruin it. One of the worst and most embarrassing performances of all time, the future Governor simply spits out bad pun after bad pun. The filmmakers try to incorporate his tragic history into the story, but it doesn’t work at all – Fries should be cold, distant and haunted by his condition and his wife’s illness, not constantly making stupid jokes. Schumacher has probably tainted this character forever – everyone associates Freeze with this movie and the bad ice puns now, and if Nolan decides to put him in the next movie, that’s all anyone will be talking about (whereas people kind of forgot about Tommy Lee Jones’s Two-Face when Nolan decided to adapt him). The only redeeming factor is that I actually think the costume looks kind of visually impressive.
29. Two-Face (Batman Forever) - Played by: Tommy Lee Jones
The next couple villains are actually more embarrassing and harder to watch onscreen, but Schumacher’s Two-Face goes here b/c they ruined the potential of a fantastic comics villain. This is an utter misfire of colossal proportions, both on the part of Schumacher and Jones. Two-Face is a haunted, tragic figure – he shouldn’t be acting like an over-the-top Joker ripoff. Jones spent the entire movie acting as campy as possible, chewing the scenery and trying to out-Joker Jim Carrey – it kind of made sense for the Riddler to be over the top and humorous, but having Two-Face join in was a horrible idea. Wouldn’t it work better, cinematically, to have one humorous and one serious, threatening villain? Plus, he looked absolutely horrible visually – the scarred side of his face looked like chewed up pink bubble gum, and don’t get me started on the leopard print. Also, casting Jones made no sense – Harvey Dent was supposed to be a handsome and successful DA, but Jones is most famous for his grumpy looking demeanor and his acne scars.
28. Poison Ivy (Batman and Robin) - Played by: Uma Thurman
This character is a complete embarrassment to watch, and Thurman is probably the worst actor in the movie. The actual cinematic character onscreen is equally as bad or worse than the previous 4 entries, but she goes ahead of them b/c the other 4 are incredible characters in the comic books and Poison Ivy doesn’t have much too potential to begin with. Still, there’s not much to be said that hasn’t been – from her ridiculous origins to her gorilla suit strip, Thurman tries to camp it up as much as possible and is a major contributor to Batman and Robin being considered one of the worst films of all time.*** cont.,
***22. Penguin (Batman Returns, 1992) - Played by: Danny DeVito
ReplyDeleteSo as you can tell, I didn’t really like the original Batman movies. This is probably where my opinion deviates from a lot of peoples: I know a lot of people who actually love this movie and like this portrayal better, and I can see where they’re coming from, since the Penguin of the comics isn’t particularly interesting. But…I freaking hate this movie b/c of this ridiculous Penguin. The Penguin is supposed to be a sophisticated upper class mob moss, and Burton actually took the reverse route one usually takes and turned a plausible and realistic comic villain into over-the-top and ridiculous. This character completely disgusted me, with his grey oversuit and nose biting and unnecessary weirdness. Roger Ebert put it best when he said “I felt sorry for the Penguin, but did not fear him, or find him funny.”
20. The Riddler (Batman Forever, 1995) - Played by: Jim Carrey
Another freaking Batman villain! After this one however, the rest are actually pretty good or great. Batman Forever probably could have been called “Batman fights Ace Ventura.” Schumacher just let Carrey say or do whatever ridiculous things he wanted, and the entire film is basically about Carrey doing his shtick. Whenever he’s onscreen, the other characters stop whatever they’re doing and watch him. I guess it kind of makes sense in some incarnations for the Riddler to be over-the-top, but this was way too much. At least, I guess he does look like the character, is kind of funny sometimes, and follows the clue-leaving thing pretty well. Still, I wanted a Batman movie, not a Jim Carrey vehicle.
7. Catwoman (Batman Returns, 1992) - Played by: Michelle Pfeiffer
Once she steps into action, everything about this character is perfect. A sexy criminal who Batman finds intriguing, can fight him to a standstill or mesmerize him. Not really a bad person, she occasionally fights crime, and is a little off balance. Lots of cat themed puns and sexual innuendo, a little over the top, but that’s exactly how Catwoman is supposed to act. I don’t really like this movie, but have to admit they got Catwoman and Batman’s relationship pretty much perfectly. The “nine lives” stuff at the end is a little weird, but sort of makes sense in the context of the character, and she’s not really a cat burglar, but that’s all well and good. Personality wise, look wise, performance wise this is pretty much the perfect portrayal of Catwoman on the big screen. There’s just one major problem: Her origin. Creating a brand new origin for the film is perfectly fine, since Selina Kyle’s background keeps changing in the comics anyway. But the origin in this film is the stupidest thing I’ve ever seen….they make her a freaking ZOMBIE! A ZOMBIE who is resurrected by cats after she dies! The scene where the cats come and revive Pfeiffer’s dead body is one of the stupidest things ever. And then they devote 10 minutes to showing her tearing up her apartment in a bizarre scene. The worst part is, the casual viewer now thinks that’s the real origin of Catwoman. Yikes. That being said, after the origin scene, everything is perfect.*** cont.,
***4. The Joker (Batman, 1989) - Played by: Jack Nicholson
ReplyDeleteAsk anyone who isn’t a comics fan (like, say, your dad) what the greatest comic book villain performance of all time is, and they’ll probably say Nicholson’s Joker. An iconic character who has stood the test of time and been one of the most resilient screen villains in motion picture history for almost 20 years. Making him the killer of Batman’s parents was kind of stupid, and unnecessary- they had already built up enough animosity at that point. But some people seemed to like it. Giving him a real name and a detailed origin story was kind of lame, but not a stretch – the Joker’s origins aren’t definite, (he wants his past to be multiple choice, after all,) but there were many versions of the story where he was a petty criminal known as the Red Hood and falls into a vat of acid, so having him be a mobster wasn’t a huge stretch. Really, I’m not a fan of the Jack Napier origin they gave him in this movie, but its serviceable, and not horrifyingly stupid like the one Burton gave Catwoman, so I can live with it. The most important thing is, once he becomes the Joker, Nicholson gives an all-time performance here. Funny yet deranged, perfect adaptation in the looks department, some all-time classic one-liners. He’s over the top, but in a controlled way. It’s not fair that people are dismissing this great performance because of Ledger’s recent portrayal – this one is great in its own way. The only problem is that he’s more entertaining than scary, he’s more of an eccentric mob boss with established goals than a true deranged psycho, and the scene where he smashes stuff in the museum to Prince music is pretty lame. But still, this is an amazing performance – Nicholson takes over the movie, switches from point to point (amiable to threatening to hysterical, etc.) seamlessly in some scenes, and delivers a classic performance that ises above the just okay script.
---
1. Jack Nicholson as The Joker
2. Jim Carrey as The Riddler
3. Michelle Pfeiffer as Catwoman
4. Danny DeVito as The Penguin
5. Uma Thurman as Poison Ivy
6. Tommy Lee Jones as Two-Face
7. Arnold Schwarzenegger as Mr. Freeze
8. Jeep Swenson as Bane ***
Thanks! Good enough to steal! lol! Congrats; U made my blog! Good job and very informative! Thanks guys!
***Why Batman just didn't Joker fall in Dark knight? - B/c Batman doesn't kill. With the Joker, it was Batman who threw him down so that would be Batman killing the Joker, executing him ... that is why he doesn't kill him; saves him. - Well he does really, Batman blew up the train tracks in Begins (knowing the train could no longer stop) which killed Ra`s. He killed Harvey Dent and he killed Talia when he shot at the truck, so saying he doesn`t kill isn`t really true, which makes the decision to leave the Joker alive very stupid.***
ReplyDeleteNo one's mentioned that Joker had a backup plan with Dent/2 Face! If The Joker had died, so would Gordon and his family! We forgot all about that huh? Blake also felt guilty after killing a couple guys and threw his gun saway in TDKR! He will be a perfect successor to The Bat; vigilant who doesn't kill!
***Ra's stopped the train and put himself on the train, which altered his own desiny in which killed himself. Batman did not cause his death, he just chose not to save him.
The Joker, Batman directly threw him off the edge so saved him.
Two-Face death was accidental, did not wish to klll Dent, but he died in the scuffle.
Talia was indirect death fired at the truck, but she caused it to sway off course on off the track.
---
Batman saving the Joker is actually more in line with the comics. Batman doesn't kill people. That includes the Joker. If the Joker had tripped and fell off the building, then Batman wouldn't have saved him b/c he got himself into the situation. In Tim Burton's Batman movies, Batman killed quite a few people. Thats not anything like Batman has been portrayed.
---
Just Realized I Only Saw 3 Movies in Theaters Last Year - There were a couple I would have liked to have seen; Looper, Django Unchained, but going to the theaters is a real drag nowadays. Too much noise, texting, people talking to each other at full volume. Anybody else see so few movies?***
More than I have in decades! I've probably been to the theatre about 5 or 6 times since '84! Today's ceni-plexes are small, too loud, and expensive; nee afternoon matinees! I took my nieces and nephew a year ago to see Poppin's Penguin! I vowed never again! My ears are still ringing trying to make sure people can hear the whispering that today's actors love to do! Batman is barely audible, so I'd lose what little hearing I have left if I went to see any of these epics! I prefer to wait for the disc or cable! Sorry! lol!
***If You Could Have re-casted characters in the Burton/Schumacher films - What would you have done? I started thinking about this when talking on the BATMAN RETURNS board. At the time, actors who I think could have done better in certain roles in these films would have been:
ReplyDeleteTommy Lee Jones as Commissioner Jim Gordon:
-As we all know he played the character of Two-Face in BATMAN FOREVER. And as it has been said a lot of times around here, he was the film's biggest letdown and weak. Could he have been a great Dent if he portrayed him correctly? (or potentially written better). I don't know. He doesn't come off as being too Harvey Dent to me when I get to really thinking about it. The role of Gordon I think would have suited him so much better, and probably would have been more fitting for the part than Pat Hingle. (and hopefully they would have given him more screen time)
Mel Gibson as Harvey Dent/Two-Face:
-This was the casting idea I talked to somebody about on the BATMAN RETURNS board that got me really thinking about this, as well as the one that still intrigues me the most. He was considered for the role of Two-Face in FOREVER, but turned it down due to him making BRAVEHEART instead. (a decision I'm sure he doesn't regret). But if he was casted back in '89 I think he could have easily played the charismatic, pretty boy crusading DA with a dark edge who would eventually become the villainous Two-Face. And hopefully the character would have also been implemented better if done so. He was treated alright in BATMAN 89 (even if he could have used some more screen time) but he got dropped completely from the first sequel and re-casted in the second. (and wasn't portrayed well as Two-Face). Again, if they had done the character properly with one actor over the course of a couple films it would have all been a lot more effective.
Patrick Stewart as Victor Fries/Mr. Freeze:
-Do I need to say anything about this? He would have been perfect. Though the character should have been in a much better film than BATMAN & ROBIN.
Arnold Schwarzenegger as Bane:
-He would have been much more fitting for this role than Mr. Freeze. Sure they'd have to change his country of origin (which DARK KNIGHT RISES did as well), but I think if written and directed right he could have been a pretty cool Bane. And if they did have to use the character in this series of Batman films, than he should have been saved for a fifth movie rather than being shoehorned into a movie that already had two other villains. And as a mindless crony no less.***
I don't see any complaint with Val so I guess him being Batman was appropriate! lol! I like him in the film, but already knew he wouldn't return! He had decided The Saint was a better franchise vehicle to be a part of; OOOPPS!
***The League of Shadows lessened the realism of the trilogy - A lot of people complain that Nolan's Batman films are to realistic well contrary to this assertion in my view they are not realisitic enough. For me the realism and plausibility of the trilogy was lessened by the League of Shadows who I didn't find remotely believable.
ReplyDeleteI did not agree with using the LOS as a literal organisation b/c they lessened the realism of the trilogy and the existence of a centuries old secret society who attempt to destroy a city with a 'water vaporizer' and a 'neutron bomb' seriously undermines the believability of the films.
For me TDK is the only great film in this trilogy b/c the Joker is able to bring about chaos using only crude weapons and the inherent corruption of people to achieve his ends. TDK has only one minor tech lapse in realism and that is the sonar phone while on the other hand both the plots of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight Rises are built around unrealistic tech.
Back onto the LOS it is my view that they where overused in this trilogy and personally I would have preferred that the LOS be an idea and a concept used by Ra's Al Ghul to inspire Bruce to create the Batman legend.
The very notion of a real centuries old secret society that has brought down every major civilisation in history is absurd.
The trilogy would have been stronger without the inclusion of the LOS at all and Nolan should have used a plausible villian to bookend both sides of the trilogy.
Whether or not Ra's Al Ghul could have worked without the LOS by just being the mentor and ideological extreme of Bruce I'm not sure but Bane certainly could have worked without being involved with the LOS.
I would have liked the trilogy to be completely grounded in realism and dispense with the questionable plot devices such as the 'water vaporizer' from Batman Begins and the even more absurd 'energy bomb' from Rises.
If so much emphasis hadn't been placed on the LOS the trilogy could have took on an altogether more realistic shape. Also without the burden of the LOS and having to bring the trilogy full circle back to them other more interesting adversaries could have been used. The LOS along with Rachel Dawes are the weakest part of the trilogy.
---
--The Dark Knight has only one minor tech lapse in realism and that is the sonar phone while on the other hand both the plots of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight Rises are built around unrealistic tech.
No they aren't, they're built around tech that actually exists. Both microwave frequency lasers (which were actually the first lasers) and neutron bombs exist. These are decades old technologies. The 1st maser was built in 1954 and the W66 warhead was first deployed in '75.
--The Dark Knight has only one minor technological lapse in realism and that is the sonar phone
Again, no. This is also a feasible use of the tech. High frequency pulse tracking has been used to age the universe (using cepheid variables) and give us details about objects thousands of light years away. It is a very diverse scientific methodology and could very potentially be used in a similar manner.
--The very notion of a real centuries old secret society that has brought down every major civilisation in history is absurd.
First of all, this is never stated so it's basically a non-point. But the concept of an age old order working clandestinely is not absurd in any kind of objective way, only absurd in your mind. Such a society does not exist in real life (at least, I don't believe the theories of them). But it doesn't make the idea unfeasible. It just happens to be one you personally don't like. Which is fine, but it's purely subjective.***
***Anybody else just LOVE how Batman says that line = I hated his voice when he said "This city just showed you..." - It's better in TDKR when he repeatedly screams "WHERE'S THE TRIGGER?!?!"***
ReplyDeleteI guess I need to watch it again! I thought he was screaming "who's the traitor?" Then Talia stabs him! He seemed to go on with little problem! This is why kids feel so invincible! They see their favorite stars stabbed, shot, bludgeon, but continue on! Bane was pulverizing those columns, but Bruce survived that as well! Just pushing a spine into position with no fusing is also do-able! lol!
***This moronic Canadian wanted a chance at a Roger, and Roger gave him the spank down that he
deserved. Little boy don't call out a champion like Roger, until you have actually won something.***
Funny he has the game and reminds me a lot of another giant killer, Richard Krajicek! He had the same raw game and talent, tall and lanky, and had unbelievable success against other top players including Sampras! He broke up Pete's run to 8 Wimbledons half way thru in '96 winning over Mal Washington in the final! PK also gave that immortal comment about the women's tour; "80% of them are big, fat pigs..(thought about it a moment)..ok 75%!" lol! Raonic just needs to keep his mouth shut and stop being so predictable with his shots! You can hit the best shot imaginable, but if his opponent knows where it's going, a potential winner can end up coming back! He should have at least taken a set of Roger last night!
***Favourite Superhero - Who's your fave from Marval or CD? Mine has to be Captain America and Black Widow! Also, who is your favourite supervillain? Again I have 2: Loki and the Joker***
Maybe this just makes me old at 55, but I see this as an overall brainwashing exercise by the powers that be in this area! When I was a kid, Superman was "The Man!" There were no ifs, ands, or buts about it! He had few weaknesses and overall played the saint; never lying, trying to never make a mistake, and to save cats from trees! Batman was perceived a villain in league with the underworld, only a handful who knew he was a force for good! He watched over Gotham while others slept comfortably in their beds! It's flipped quite a bit with Superman becoming weaker over the years, almost needing a ship going into deep space for oxygen, can be shocked with high electricity, and brainwashed into helping DarkSide! Batman's seen as the greatest of the DC comic book heroes now, actually saving the world several times over with no super powers, using his mind and deductive skills, and being an initial member of the Justice League who shunned them at times seeing their compromising at time for the greater good! He's supposedly the moral compass of us all now even though he's haunted by his own past and will probably never find his own true happiness! I'm sold!
DC Hero: Batman
DC Villain: Brainiac
Marvel Hero: Doctor Strange
Marvel Villain: Magneto
***The Dark Knight Rises. Bruce Wayne giving up the mantle of Batman adds a far greater touch of finality than a couple of X-men being killed (even if they are Charles Xavier or Cyclops).***
ReplyDeleteIn the grand scheme of things, how can the destruction of one city compare to the battle between mutants and humans? TDKR is obviously a bigger film, but if you just look at the story and the stakes, there's no comparison! Love both trilogies! Add Blade and Underworld 3's and I'll be complete! Btw, you forgot about the loss of Jean Gray/Phoenix! Charles may have survived though if you look past the credits!
The Dark Knight Rises - A
X-Men: The Last Stand - C
Underworld: Rise Of The Lycon - C
Blade Trinity - B
***Is Blake Robin or Batman? - 'Batman is just a symbol' It can be also interpreted that Blake COULD become Nightwing, taking Batman's steps in fighting crime on his own. Option of being Robin is totally off, more off then thinking he'll become a hero on its own (Nightwing) - But there are plenty of reasons to believe he'll become the new Batman.
---
The film only leaves us with 2 options as to what he'll become. It's either Robin or Batman. NOTHING suggests that he will become a vigilante called Nightwing... Let's examine the evidence for Robin and Batman:
Robin: His real name turned out to be Robin.
Batman: "Batman could be anyone." Restored Batsignal. "But as a symbol, I can be everlasting." THE DARK KNIGHT RISES title card as Blake rises. The evidence clearly favors him becoming Batman. That's the whole point of TDKR. Legends can live on through heirs. Ra's al Ghul lived on through Talia. Batman will live on through Blake.***
I would take it as something more legendary; sorta like Zorro or "The Phantom" where someone, usually a son or daughter keeps the legend going thru several generations! I say Batman, but Nightwing would work too as part of the new generation of Justice Leaguers to come! I know Batman was an original member, but histories are changed all the time! Maybe someone else will take up that mantle of Batman! Who knows?
***Comic Bane isn't that great, but at least he's more than a brainless follower (or was anyway) and that's something that all media adaptations of the character lack, his intelligence. In the cartoon and video game versions he's just a hopeless venom addict. In the movies he's a glorified bodygaurd***
It would have gone totally scifi/unrealistic with me if they had gone with Bane as originally written! Taking on 'venom' and assuming super strength would have run me off as comical! I'm glad they just went with him as a brute and a product of his surroundings (The Pit)!
***Proof this is the best trilogy ever - Frankly to me a great trilogy is one that planned out pretty well from beginning to end. The original Star Wars movies fit together very well.***
ReplyDeleteI loved the "Blade" trilogy and "Aliens" went 4 movies, but great w/ S. Weaver! I'll never be as knowledgeable as others here since I've still refused to watch the entirety of TDK! I've seen a lot of it, but there are so many things that are too unbelieveable to watch over and over again like in "BB:"
- Only the Joker could have no fear of being arrested because he always has a contingency plan; this time a hood has a bomb surgically implanted in his body and just happens to be in holding!
Unbelieveable no one sees these works! In the future, are cops that incompetent to even pat down?
- In the finale, no hostages killed with masks and taped weapons on each of them!
- No pot-shots taken of Batman who's allowed to kick those cops over the side of the building!
- I'm one of those stange people who requires a motive of the criminal, not out of some blind psychotic personality! Even in "Friday The 13th" series of films had a plot; retribution! "Saw" series make no sense to me! The Joker burning up that cash after demanding so much made no sense! At least pay your minions!
I could go on, but one of the main reasons I hesitate so often is "today's movies are too freakin' long!" Why do they do this? Suffering from sleep apnea, I can't keep my eyes open long enough to watch 2 1/2+ hours too often! The last prequel of Star Wars took me a week! lol! I have a very short attention span!
***Dude, did you watch this movie with your eyes closed? Joker stole $68M at the start of TDK from one of the mob banks to fund his operation and pay his men. He had plenty of cash to pay his minions. Not to mention he was taking over the Underworld. There would be more cash to come. He was only burning his half as he said. Not every cent the mob have. - Burning his half of the money was a statement he was making that he's a better class of criminal who doesn't just care about money. There's his insanity.***
I said I haven't watch the whole thing yet! Your point?
***How did Bruce get back in Gotham? - Well since this version of Bane was just a regular dude who was a little buff and was technically handicapped, Superman kind of figured Baleman could handle it. When he came back and saw Baleman was actually losing and about to die because he screwed it up so royally, he saved his sorry ass.***
Hey, no crossovers! Superman can't help out with Bane, Catwoman, Penquin, or The Joker and Batman can't help Superman with Brainiac, Lex Luthor, Mitzelplik, or ZOD!
***I didn't know that Batman and Superman had jurisdiction zones.***
I liked when they worked together! The Animated Superman series back in the 90s had Batman/Bruce coming to Metropolis a couple times! There was a great 2 parter with their foils being Lex and The Joker! Bruce was following up on a theft of Kryptonite thought to be just Jade!
***Why does everyone hate the Schumacher films so much?***
Even though I thought the Schumacher films more juvenile, echoing the camp of the 60's series, they were very entertaining! Every time they come on cable, I watch a few minutes here and there! It's iconoc even if done poorly! What killed me was when I found out that "Arnold's" scenes were stretched! It was sorta on par with the old Superman movie! Marlon Brando probably filmed 10 min. of video, but you would think he starred in the picture! Same happened with Schwartz; maybe 11 min. if that! They just spread his appearance thru the film like fertilizer!
***Why did Batman take the blame for killing Harvey Dent? - ...and refuse to have the blame pinned on the Joker or have it all buried under the rug (I do understand why he didn't want to blame Harvey Dent for the 5 dead officers and civilians)? It would all make sense if the Joker was blamed and Dent and Batman were heroes.
ReplyDeleteOn the surface, it seems like Batman made a good sacrifice by telling the Commissioner to blame Harvey's death on him. But if you scratch beyond the surface, I think it makes little sense, for 4 reasons:
1. I understand they didn't want Gotham City to know that Harvey had done those killings, but do the writers honestly expect me to believe that Batman and Gordon couldn't have come up with a better story than to blame it on Batman? How about blaming it on one of Joker's men or even saying they don't know who did them?
2. Noble noble Batman doesn't want Gotham to lose faith in justice and goodness by finding out that a good man did bad things. Well, that's understandable. But Harvey's dead now, and the people do still have Batman to look up to. The city needs someone living to look up to, more than the memory of a good man. Some people in the city wanted Batman gone, but others loved him. Is it somehow better for them to believe that a good man that is still alive has gone bad than it is to believe that a good man now dead did some bad things? The citizens will now hate and fear Batman; what's the point of the good citizens thinking Batman's a murderer? It's ridiculous, in my opinion.
3. I really believe Gordon never would have agreed to do it, because of his friendship with Batman.***
If you're going to prosecute the Joker, you can't accuse him of things he didn't do! True enough, he murdered plenty of people, blew up buildings, but he did not kill the ones Batman took responsibility for! The system would be even more corrupt and Gordon went above and beyond by just keeping his silence for 8 years! It would have been more criminal to prosecute the Joker with a lie I guess!
***They need to stop giving Batman plastic looking Armor. ...The cowl was awesome in Nolan movies, but the suit just looked like a Halloween costume with all the pieces. Why not go with whatever kind of material that all the new 'supers' are Using; like captain America, Superman returns, and Spiderman reboot have.***
Shouldn't they go minimalist with something black & sleek? "Batman Beyond"-like?
***I would like to see the Arkham City suit in live film. Dark gray and black.***
***Harley Quinn? - I always wondered where she was in the film, wasn't she Joker's girlfriend or something?***
ReplyDeleteWe'll get to Harley when they create a movie inside Arkham! She's supposed to be a doctor analyzing him, but of course he works it to his advantage! It'll happen sooner or later!
***She wasn't needed. The J-Man was better single and solo. - During the big car chase scene, one of the SWAT guys gets all scared and yells, "I didn't sign up for this."
Ummmmmm, yes you did. You are f-ing SWAT! You signed up for exactly this!***
The Joker is more "The Joker" when he can play off someone else! He can only have one-sided conversations with the jackels for so long! - The cop that took out the last bridge with a busload of kids needs a new vocation as well in "TDKR!" Situations change and thought has to go into police work! Even soldiers are supposed to use some good judgement; I would hope! lol!
***I just watched the scene where Batman's in the Bat and is meeting the truck Talia is in head on; firing and getting direct hits to the front of the truck multiple times. And after each direct hit, and subsequent huge fireballs, there's no damage whatsoever. lol! And after she crashes, and we get to witness the most brutally over acted death scene in recent memory, you can see the windshield clearly has no damage at all; Not even a crack. It's not even dirty! What was he shooting out of those cannons exactly? The guns on the Bat-pod are obviously far more powerful as they can take out a tumbler with one shot. Hmmm...***
She wasn't wearing her seat belt!
***Do you think the joker will return in the remakes - I don't think they'll remake the Dark Knight, but if they do, Joker would have to be in it or it really won't be a remake. ...And yes Joker should be the reboot series at some point. Joker is an American icon. Heath did a great job, but no actor can be the "definitive" Joker and is so important to Batman mythos. Just b/c one performance of the character gives you a hardon doesn't mean the character should never be done again.***
Joker is iconic! Even in 'Batman Beyond' they found a way to bring him back in the future! When I was a kid, they waited until the 3rd week to feature Cesar Romero as THE Joker after the 1st 2 introduced Batman to semi prime-time w/ Frank Gorshin's Riddler, then Burgess Meredith's Penguin! It was camp, but stars must have been calling to volunteer their services! If I remember correctly there were 3 Mr Freezes alone (all stars); George Sanders, Otto Preminger, then Eli Wallach! Sorry, just waxing back to the 60's! Will a program like that ever be produced again? Doubtful!
***I have been a fan of various incarnations of Batman since the '66 TV series with Adam West. I loved the first big movie with Michael Keaton and Jack Nicholson. Some of the follow-ons were so-so but watchable. One of my favorites was "Batman Forever" with Val Kilmer, Jim Carrey, and Tommy Lee Jones.
ReplyDeleteI liked the first Christian Bale "Batman Begins," because of the Zen hokus pokus, plus the re-imagined batmobile as a military-style Hum-Vee. So, that brings us to the "The Dark Knight" (dull) and "The Dark Knight Rises" (even duller). Who can watch this stuff -- FOR THREE HOURS -- no less?
It just keeps looping and looping. Boring speech after boring speech. No cool costumes and sets anymore, either. No humor. Just repetitive scenes filmed on city streets, like any other cop movie.
And, no discernable interesting plot that I can tell. I saw "The Dark Knight" in the theater years ago, and was surprised at how little I liked it. I had no interest in re-watching it when it finally showed up on cable.
Last night, I spent $1.30 on a one-night Redbox rental of "The Dark Knight Rises." My wife and I got about 45 minutes into it before we gave up, fast-forwarded, at 8x speed, to watch the predictable, nuclear bomb blast conclusion.
This is the #1 movie of 2012? BIG DEAL!
---
I saw Batman Begins twice in the theatre b/c I loved it, then maybe 3 more times on DVD.
I saw The Dark Knight once in the theatre, loved it mainly for the Joker, but it was too long and the last half hour was bullshit, so I waited for DVD. I have since watched it 3 more times, and still enjoy the hell out of the first 2 hrs.
I saw The Dark Knight Rises in the theatre, cursed its name at the end. As time went by, I began to think I was too hard on it. Well, as luck would have it, someone gave me the Blu-ray for Xmas. I watched it Christmas Day and disliked it exactly as much as I had in July.
It takes all the worst parts of The Dark Knight (the final act), stretches it out to almost 3 hours, but leaves out the best part of The Dark Knight (a highly entertaining villain). It is mediocre.
---
I agree. The first was pretty good b/c it was still Batman for the most part. I liked the second mostly b/c of Joker. But this third one just just a horrendous mess.***
***Top Ten Scenes In The Dark Knight Trilogy
ReplyDelete1. Bruce climbing the Pit
2. Interrogation scene between Batman and Joker
3. Batman and Bane first fight
4. Bane's prologue
5. Bruce and Ra's sword fight on glaciers
6. Ra's and Bruce conversation at Bruce's b-day party
7. Gordon's monologue at end of TDK
8. Joker crashes Dent fundraiser
9. Batpod chase in TDK "hit me"
10.Gotham Police and Batman vs. Bane and his army
Honourable mentions:
Talia's reveal scene
Bruce discover's the batcave
Robin John Blake rises***
Only 10? J/K; can be watched over and over b/c there are so many great scenes! I agree w/ all the above, but climax of BB is the best with Batman's final comments to Ra's; "I won't kill, but I don't have to save you!" Blowing off the back of the train and flying out just breaks me up even thinking about it!
***Did anyone else like Bane's voice? - I thought his voice was fantastic. It had a mix of world-weariness, calmness, suppressed violence and pure menace. At times he was a raconteur, at others pure menacing and evil, and at others almost like a teacher or a doctor telling you something inevitable. Also impossible to place geographically.***
Only seen movie once a couple weeks ago, but I have a faint memory of it being very much like George Sanders; Mr. Freeze in '66 Batman series! He was noble, classy, with a touch of sarcasm or irony in everything he said! A person in complete control and knows it! Just an impression from that one viewing!
***I, too, love everything about Watchmen...except its length. Still a great film though.***
Yep! That's what keeps me from watching a lot of movies! My attention span is much too short to deal with near 3 hour epics! lol! My other fave past time is watching tennis and that's being bastardized into 5+ hour classics!
***Whats the purest 'comic book film'? - Either Superman The Movie or the first X-Men movie.***
For the first time out, I think they did a great job with X-Men! Superman was the best back in the late 70's with Christopher Reeves; truly mainstream! Batman still my favorite though; esp. Burton's 1st effort w/ Keaton!
***Things you want from a reboot that you didn't get from TDK-Trilogy***
ReplyDeleteWent thru an entire incarnation without a partner on the street; well catwoman at the end! No Robin, NightWing, BatGirl, or other "superhero" from out of town! lol!
***Batman Begins is by no means the lesser film of the trilogy. All 3 films are equally well made, but BB made significantly less at the box office. I think that is simply due to a few factors.
1. Batman & Robin completely trashed Batman's reputation in live action films and most people thought this was another sequel to that horrid film. The concept of a reboot was completely unknown at the time.
2. Batman Begins used a rather obscure villain, Ra's al Ghul, who only hardcore fans know about. Even Marvel fans know about The Joker, for example. Unfortunately Burton and Shumacher made Batman films that revolved around the villains rather than Batman himself.
3. Stubborn Burton fans gave this film a bad word of mouth b/c it was nothing like their beloved version of Batman. Even to this day they are in absolute denial that Nolan's films are far superior. Many people heard this and passed on seeing the film at the theaters.
---
No and I'll tell you why:
BB was built in the ashes of the travesty that came before it.
Hearts were seriously shattered from B&R...the Franchise became a huge joke and careers were destroyed from that movie(O'Donnell/Silverstone) Clooney and his Charisma licked his wounds and came back stronger though, but the studio considered it a waste of time and let it rot.
Then Catwoman bombed years later..So that's another awful one too...But it's a joke by this point. We're at the point that we want them to fail cause the respect is gone.
So BB comes along...It's successful, but more marketed on the down low. It was like the studio didn't have the faith in it to spend the money for huge marketing, but again there's still many people that just don't believe in the franchise anymore. Maybe even the studios aren't putting in the effort they should either.
Then the TDK...Bigger budget with a bigger marketing campaign that explodes off the Back of Heath Ledgers death. Everyone starts looking at and respecting these movies including the snooty critics. Then the Oscars get involved and make people really pay attention. As horrible as it is to say, and may he rest in peace, but Ledger's death for the studio was an excellent marketing campaign.
TDKR has an even bigger budget and an even bigger marketing campaign than the TDK, but look back at BB to see the smaller effort from the studio.
Ironically though, BB has sold millions upon millions of DVD'S/Blu Ray's. The most out of any of them proving that people went back to check out what flew under their radar or wasn't of interest to them at the time.
Even though Burton's first Batman was a huge success, his second didn't make as much as the first. Making the studio boot him off the project to bring in a director who could make it more 'mainstream' and finally bottoming out with B&R's 'toy' franchise movie with the skates and the puns and the credit card and the bad acting and the gay stuff and the nipples and the camp and the more gay stuff (more shudders)***
***Bale was magnificent in TDK. Out shone any performance given by Keaton, Kilmer, and Clooney, too.
ReplyDelete---
Agreed. Bale and Caine were at their best in Begins for me. That film had more raw emotion in it than TDK though. TDK's cast took a different approach and performed in a more subtle way. I think this was deliberate as both films were intended to convey somewhat different feelings in the audience. Both approaches are very difficult, and require expertise from the direction and acting.
This is not to say that TDK didn't have its intense moments, but I got a sense of seething aggression and fear throughout Begins; TDK's cast delivered a more reserved sort of performance, so that in the end when the tide of emotions burst you got a contrast to the previous repression of true feelings (allowing for Harvey Dent's fall to have more impact). ...
For me, Gary Oldman was spectacular in TDK. Of course he was excellent in the other two films, but his performance in TDK is nothing short of legendary. IMO he elevated every single scene in that film. Watching him keep Gotham from falling to pieces, simultaneously remaining even handed while mobilizing the entire Gotham PD is always a pleasure to watch, among many other moments.
---
It seems to me that Nolan/Bale understand the character/universe on a deeper level than the fanboys do....Nolan and esp. Bale went deep and darker with Batman than ever before...In their universe Batman is not a hero but more of an 'anti' one.
"This Bruce is 'damaged goods'..There's the animal part of him that comes out in the suit. A different kind of beast. The kind that loves the carnage and the sound of the bones cracking and wants revenge as justice, but realizes that's not really justice. And that's what keeps Batman from becoming a Joker/Riddler type villain. His Father's 'philanthropy' in his ear....and it's a constant struggle to rein himself in cause he really just wants to unleash that beast of rage/pain. ..."
We finally got the right Batman/Gotham/universe after so many disappointments..Mock Bale/Nolan all you want, You'll end up having to acknowledge one day that 2 people came along that gave a damn about the franchise and brought a respect/depth/humanity and most importantly an 'emotional core' that none before them did.
I go back now and watch the others and the only ones I can enjoy on a slight camp/entertaining level is the Burton ones, but I'm not delusional enough to say 'oh these are better' cause they're not They're of their time, but have aged terribly. ... There's no topping Nolan's.
...
An actor of Bale's caliber brings his chameleon/method approach to give the character a real weight/depth. He didn't approach Batman like 'oh this is a popcorn movie with loads of action.' He approached Bruce/Batman the same way he would have played Patrick Bateman/Trevor Reznik/Dickie Eklund etc. He put the same dedication/experience/research into this and it shows.
He seamlessly plays 3 core facets of Bruce(Arrogant Playboy/Lost little boy/The beast) throughout the trilogy, and then add the other types of Bruce he had to play in BB/TDK/TDKR. Mock the voice all you want dude, Bale killed it. ....
Then you have Nolan who approaches these big budget movies like he would an independent one and doesn't get the credit he deserves IMO. He's a rare type of director who prefers the old school method and tells a damn good story in the most intelligent/interesting ways, and is just a class act overall. And then throw in all the other excellent performers that color the trilogy and the seasoned veteran actors like Oldman/Freeman/Caine.
But this is always the way. Build things/people up so they can be torn down with glee, but this trilogy will outlast all that BS and there's always nitpickers/haters everywhere...***
***So the Joker wins, right? - When neither ferry is blown up, Batman tells the Joker that Gotham just showed him that they're good people, etc... But they voted to blow up the other boat, it's just that nobody had the guts to do it themselves. If anything they showed they were selfish (they voted to kill the other boat) and cowardly (they wouldn't do it themselves).
ReplyDeleteOn top of that, he clearly drives Harvey to insanity. So the Joker won, right? Everything he set out to do/prove, he did. The underlying theme seems to be the Joker's theories are correct.
---
Essentially, yes. By pushing Harvey Dent over the edge, the Joker proved his point. That's why Batman is forced to take blame for Dent's crimes, b/c they couldn't let the people of Gotham know the Joker had won. All of Dent's work would be undone and hope would be lost. - Spot on, dude. By covering up what Harvey did, Batman stopped Joker from winning that battle for Gotham's soul.
---
Erm no. Joker's point was that human beings are monsters who pretend to be decent and polite b/c it's required in today's society. But when the chips are down, everyone will show their "true" nature and start killing each other. Basiclly the people on the ferry's had their chips taken down and sure, they fantazised about blowing the other boat, but at the end no one was cold enough to actually do it; not out of cowardice, but because they realized those people on the Ferry's were actual human beings too.
I quote Gandalf: "Sometimes true courage isn't about when to take a life, but when to spare one" So no, the Joker lost. He had Batman and co. check-mate with Dent, but he still lost the game.***
Joker should have passed out more detonators! Someone would have done it; believe me! He is so right; when the chips are down, people will always act selfishly and not care about their fellow man! I keep asking myself, why would Bruce have faith no one would push those button? It wasn't realistic! He lucked out really! Most of them were gutless and if there had been more detonators or if they could do it w/o getting blame, it would have been a done deal; on both sides! The criminals wound up looking better if you ask me! Tiny was great in the part throwing it out the window! The cop wanted it done, but couldn't do it himself! Hilariously sad if you really think about it!
***The Justice League movie will suck without Batman in it.***
Agreed! Even though Batman and Superman had a falling out, B was still a founding member with Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Hawkman, Flash, & Green Laturn! Did I get them all? I think there were just the 7! I'm going back to that animated episode where there was an alternate universe and Superman had "lit up" Luthor as President! The Justice Lords were oppressive in their tactics to serve justice after Flash was supposedly knocked off!
***No Batman until 2017 - Actually I think 2017 is about right, and please note about that he will *not* be in JLA.
ReplyDelete- http://www.scifinow.co.uk/news/34983/batman-reboot-wont-happen-until-2017/ - ***
Another thread mentioned that about no Batman in JLA; esp. letting Superman shine after "Man Of Steel" exposure! I can wait until 2017; GAWD willing! Seeing the reboot in '05 was worth the wait!
***Batman Returns is one of my favorites but I know it's not faithful to Batman's comics. That's ok, I still love it.***
Ditto! I can watch it over and over! It was on again a few days ago! I'm still trying to resolve the scene after Penguin scares the Princess on the roof; she falls! As high up as they were, Batman is pointed at and being accused of pushing her! The cops are up there in seconds to take a shot at him! He slides a little, hits another roof and has a tete a tete with Catwoman before gliding off to deal with a sabotaged Batmobile! Where are the cops that just shot at him? What did they say, "oh well, he's history" and moved on? That was so weird!
***As the Ice Princess was falling Batman ran over to the ledge. He's very recognizable in his batsuit with the emblem on his chest. I think he was also in the beam of the spot light for a time. I believe the cops were already on their way up to the roof of the building as soon as the Ice Princess was seen to be standing on the ledge. Fortunately for Penguin they only arrived on the roof after he had made his escape. Unfortunately for Batman he was still on the roof though and had been seen by at least one person on the ground standing right near where the Ice Princess had been standing just seconds after she fell.
As for after Batman fell off the roof the cops had to make their way down to whatever level he was on.
I guess they didn't make it in time before Batman and Catwoman left. Catwoman ended up meeting with Penguin in another part of the building. Maybe the cops didn't know he fell on another floor though.
Maybe they thought he had fallen to his death. Or maybe they knew he landed on another floor, but they didn't know where. The cops are pretty stupid in this movie, so I don't expect great work from them. I see this movie as a darker version of the Adam West Batman movie and TV series where the cops are pretty stupid and can't do anything without Batman's help.***
I guess my questions made sense afterall! It's not a deal breaker, but it seemed so weird; esp. Selena falling again and again! "Saved by kitty litter;" fine, but the others had her falling hundreds of feet onto a solid surface!
***Michael Mann has retired from filmmaking. - A sad day that we will never see another film from this master director.***
ReplyDelete"Manhunter" stays with you after 30 years! The music made it haunting! One of the first movies I collected back then! Who would have thought Harris' "Red Dragon" would generate so many great movies! Hannibal is forever!
***Ledger wasn't the same Joker that was in the Batman universe. That's why Harley wasn't with him. - Ehh Joker went 52 years in the comics without a Harley Quinn.***
Well it had gone animated with those psuedo storylines and characters! Harley's quite prominant in them starting with her origion being a doctor of psychiatry at Arkham!
***Indeed, and Joker had not been sent to Arkham yet. This was Joker's first appearance. There was no reason for Harley to be here. She would have been a distraction. She wasn't needed.***
That's why I mentioned Harley! We'll probably see her in the new incarnation if they stick with the animated storylines!
***Favorite Batman villain? - Most will say the Joker, but I always thought Two Face was the best. The Dark Knight made a great representation of both and I loved Two Face in the film.***
I'm shocked, most stuck with the true psychos! No analytical minds craving something a little more sophisticated than total mayhem and gratuitous bloodshed? Thinking back to the 60's, I grew up with The Bookworm, Clock King, King Tut, Marsha (Queen of Diamonds), Zelda, Archer, Black Widow, and other more intellectual villains!
***No Batman until 2017 - that's still early. I feel the reboot shouldn't happen until the next decade, give it 7-8 years to rest.***
Another thread mentioned that about no Batman in JLA; esp. letting Superman shine after "Man Of Steel" exposure! I can wait until 2017; GAWD willing! Seeing the reboot in '05 was worth the wait!
***Batman`s fighting skills in BB and TDK! - In Batman Begins before he become a Batman, he could easily kick 7 guy at the same time. After the traning he could kick 60. But in The Dark Knight when Joker came on Dent´s party, he couldn´t beat even 4 of them. How could that happen?***
ReplyDeleteKeaton seemed to have more 'hand to hand' battles with street scum! He was agile enough and it seemed to work out; esp. against the swordsman at the end of Batman '89 before encounter with the Joker!
***Heh, you mean the fight where the Black guy who looked like Ray Charles whupped Keaton's ass like a wimp?***
Hey, even Bruce Lee lost some! lol! I'm remembering Keaton going thru the streets in 'Batman Returns;' could have bit it anytime with that gang of thugs and Catwoman on the prowl!
***...I'm a fan of Nolan and think his best works are The Prestige and Batman Begins with TDK being a close third. I've seen this film a few times and really wanted to like it. I was only somewhat disappointed the first time, but with closer examination I realized it doesn't make any sense, it isn't that entertaining, and it betrays the first two films. It's not just the story flaws/plotholes, it's the characters, atmosphere and themes that have been completely ruined. It's not a horrible movie like some people say, but I can easily see why they would say that.
1. Opening is inconsistent with previous two films. After the Bat symbol flew into the screen the movie should have cut to Bane’s intro, just like Joker’s intro TDK and Bruce’s intro in Batman Begins. Instead there was an oddly placed snippet of obvious dialogue about Harvey Dent in a scene we would end up seeing about 10 minutes later.
2. Stupid CIA agents don’t even check or ID the prisoners they just picked up and are bringing aboard plane. They are also supposed to be protecting this important scientist.
3. Airplane cover up makes no sense to me. Nobody will believe the doctored evidence that the league of shadows left. The CIA will most likely know it was a hijacking, that Dr. Pavel was captured and that Bane was involved. The league could have taken the plane with all the evidence onboard. They could then hide it all or destroy it. I think this would have left the CIA more confused about what happened at least.
4. 8 years have passed and Bruce isn’t being Bruce or Batman. In fact it seems like he isn’t doing anything at all. Just moping around his mansion and not enjoying anything. Brooding in his room alone like a teenager. This is not the Bruce Wayne that I saw in first two films. He should at least be happy that organized crime has disappeared. He could be continue in his father’s footsteps and become a philanthropist.
5. Batman was only Batman for less than a year and a half his whole career. This is just wrong.
6. The crime that sets Batman into action is his mother’s pearls being stolen. This seems kind of selfish and goes against the idea of Batman as he doesn’t care about other minor crimes being committed. Selina Kyle and her friend must have been stealing for years but he doesn’t care. He doesn’t arrest them either and leaves them to continue stealing.
7. Very bad shootout in alleyway. Very quick, unexciting and badly edited showcasing that Nolan can be bad with action scenes which I hate to admit because he can be such a great director. (cont.,)
8. Gordon says Bane is raising an army in the sewers where he was knocked out and Bane’s name was never mentioned.
ReplyDelete9. Gordon was carrying around the letter detailing Harvey Dent’s crimes for 2 days in his jacket. This is such a nitpick, but it does seem really stupid to me.
10. Gordon and the police seem incompetent if a whole army has been operating under their noses living in the sewer for years while planting explosives throughout the whole city. I thought Gordon was still in “war” mode but he is actually acting like its peace time, so why the hell should he be fired? Why do they really need to fire Gordon at all, is he causing any actual trouble?
11. Gordon in the worst tactical decision foolishly sends all police officers, on and off duty in the massive city of Gotham into the sewers all at once. Nobody questions this crazy decision either even Blake who is going to be the next “Batman." There must have been thousands of officers for a city the size of Gotham. We only see maybe a dozen cops that aren’t in the sewer.
12. How does Blake know Bruce Wayne is Batman from seeing him once from BEFORE he became Batman? Wayne becomes Batman just less then 10 years ago in the timeline and Levitt is in his early 30’s thirties. Even if the character is supposed to be in his 20’s, he says that he saw Bruce in the orphanage when he was a kid, so this has to have happened before he became Batman. It gets even trickier if you consider the fact that Wayne was gone for 7 years right before he became batman. So as a young child, Blake deduced that Bruce who’d be in his early 20’s would one day become a Batman like character.
13. Why the hell would Talia Al Ghul have sex with Bruce Wayne? She hates him and wants to kill him for killing her father. She also has the opportunity to do all types of serious harm to Bruce as he is completely vulnerable during this scene. Wouldn't Bane be furious and confused if he found out about their night together?
14. Batman doesn'nt use enough weapons or martial arts to try to defeat Bane.
15. Would people really believe Bane when he read Gordon’s letter about Harvey? Nobody questions it and everyone just believes Bane who is threatening to kill everyone.
16. Blake throws away his gun after killing two criminals in what appears to be a moral decision to not kill. Yet he in the next scene he quickly picks up a shotgun to go rescue Gordon. He doesn’t end having to use the gun and there is no other instance where Blake’s feelings on guns & killing come up again.
17. Bane is full of shit when he makes all his long winded speeches. It’s all a pack of lies and he is no revolutionary. He is just following Talia’s agenda to get revenge on Bruce. All the political themes and ideas are wasted because of this.
18. Bruce’s back is fixed instantly by apparently the best chiropractor in the world. This guy doesn’t do much either he simply push Bruce’s back into place and everything in fine. Not only is this unrealistic it completely defeats the point and impact of Batman having his back broken. Basically Bane defeats Batman and throws him in a prison. If he hadn’t broken Bruce’s back nothing would have changed. There is absolutely no consequence to Bruce’s back being broken. If there a consequence it’s that is seems to make Bruce stronger as he later defeats Bane the second time, but that doesn’t make sense.
19. You would think more people would escape the prison over time. Sure it’s a one fatal big jump but partially crippled Bruce and a little girl were able to do it. This little girl was also born in the prison and would have undeveloped muscles and maybe malnutrition. They never mention if other people have tried to make the jump without the rope and died. I would certainly try eventually as I would rather die than live in that prison for the rest of my life.
ReplyDelete20. The way to escape the pit doesn’t make sense. From what I see, there is no reason you can’t use the rope to make the jump. The rope looks long enough to me and the movie never says it isn’t either. Why does Bruce decide to jump without a rope, after only two failed attempts and only one of those he got to jump? Shouldn’t he climb with the rope at least to the edge after he fell climbing before? Do mountains climbers not use a rope because the fear of the death will help them climb? Bruce decides all this based on one old man. There must other ways to escape. They have food, utensils, clothing and a freakin rope! They could just build a rope combining some of with their clothing and the rope. Attach some kind of hook to the rope, then climb to the top ledge, throw the hook to the top until it is secure. They could make a hook using the bones of prisoners if they couldn’t find anything else.
21. Batman is supposed to be world’s greatest detective and yet he’s a total fool in this movie. He uses no detective skills and is oblivious to everything going on. He gets completely fooled by Miranda. They spent so much time in TDK looking at Lao’s business, making sure it was a legal business. Did Bruce and Lucius even bother looking in to Miranda’s background? After Bruce and Miranda had sex, Bruce says he thought she came from a wealthy family. She tells him that’s not true at all, while he notices a weird scar on her back. Does Bruce know anything about her; this weird foreign woman who he has just entrusted a nuclear bomb to after he was so paranoid about it. But he doesn’t want to trust any of the board members who he probably knows fairly well. You know these old guys who live in Gotham and probably have their own families. Bruce should have dismantled the bomb because there were too many fishy things occurring in Gotham and then he learns he's going to have to give up the bomb.
22. Miranda allows Lucius to keep living and he informs everyone that the bomb is going to go off in 23 days. This forces a resistance to be formed to attack Bane, yet she takes no steps to stop this resistance until a day before the bomb is about to go off. The League of Shadows could have killed all these people in 23 days or she could just trigger the bomb.
23. Bruce Wayne, billionaire is somehow broke. This is not believable at all to me. They immediately shut off his power to his mansion. From what I understand, this would not happen to even the poorest of people in the US. I’m sure Bruce could sell some of his possessions and get enough money to pay his power bills.
24. Why are the league of shadows so suicidal now and they don’t mind Bane killing them? “Search him and then I will kill you.” I didn’t think Ra’s and his ninjas at the end of Batman Begins were planning to die if they could escape. Ra’s was actually someone I could see people following to their deaths. I find it harder to believe people would dedicate their lives and sacrifice themselves to Bane and Talia. Why do they all have to die in the nuclear bomb? Isn’t the League of Shadows supposed to live on through centuries to stop injustice all over the world? It seems Talia is not really into that agenda and is willing to destroy the organization just for revenge. She didn’t really even like her father until Batman killed him. She is all about revenge. (cont.,)
25. Why and how did Talia Al Ghul become the leader of the League of Shadows? She and Bane weren’t a part of them when Ras was leader. She only rejoined them after her father was killed from what I understand. Then she was able to bring Bane back to the League. Wasn’t there someone next in command to became leader if Ra’s died?
ReplyDelete26. Lucius Fox should have been killed by Bane after they armed the bomb. The reason being he is one the few people who could stop the bomb and they have no more reason to keep him alive. He is also one of the few people who know that the bomb will go in 5 months. This also would have been an unpredictable dark turn killing off a key character that is so likeable.
27. When chasing Bane, all the cops stop following him and pursue Batman because Foley ordered them. This is a stupid "put all our eggs in the basket" moment that top Gotham police officers seem to love. Gordon may have been in the hospital at that point, but he's still in charge and would want Bane arrested much more than Batman. So any police officers who ignored Foley’s orders would likely not get in trouble. Even they did in trouble, I’m sure some cops would follow Bane because he’s the real criminal who just committed a major crime, they are not going to just ignore that.
28. It’s unbelievable that Alfred never tells Bruce about Rachel’s letter for over 8 years and that’s not just because it’s the right thing to do. If Bruce wasn’t moving on with his life and the main problem was his hang up over Rachel, Alfred would realize that Bruce would need to know the truth to move on.
29. When Alfred tells Bruce about the letter, it seems Bruce very quickly comes to terms about Rachel not loving him which doesn’t seem emotionally true. I think Bruce would be more pissed, more heart-broken, maybe storm off and at least he would probably tell Alfred that he doesn’t want to see him right now. Alfred doesn’t give him anytime to let it sink in either, he just says here’s a double "fuck you;" I’m leaving you also. Nolan just forcibly resolves this whole plotline in one scene.
30. Alfred leaves Batman which goes completely against the Batman mythos. Alfred is supposed to stick by Bruce until the bitter end. His plan that he's helping Bruce by leaving doesn’t make sense. Bruce is in rough shape and is more likely to die without Alfred’s help. But even worse is the fact that Bruce was going to reveal himself as Batman in TDK and also stop being Batman, but Alfred strongly advised against that. He wanted Bruce to keep being Batman and make the right choice as he put it.
31. Bane leaves Bruce in the pit, free to escape with no guards and no cameras. Bruce was Ra's greatest student and he’s freaking Batman! He could have left cameras or some kind of surveillance to check on Bruce’s progress. Bane should have known that Bruce could have found a way to escape. All you need is the will to do so. “The will is everything!”
32. It’s ridiculous that Alfred runs into Bruce at the end exactly the way he imagined at the very same restaurant he always went to.
33. How exactly does Alfred receive all this information and background on Bane and the League of Shadows? It’s never explained in the movie. Why doesn’t he give this info to the police?
34. The change from 'day to night' after the wall street scene is unbelievable. This should have never been allowed to happen in any movie like this.
35. The whole idea of the device, Clean Slate that destroys all your past is ridiculous and seems pointless because there are always still physical records. (cont.,)
36. The flaming Bat symbol at the top of the bridge seems impossible to create given the time limit and the fact that it’s on top of the bridge where everyone can see. It would have been way more believable if Bruce had another Batsignal(He did actually have one, as we saw at the end, but they never used it) and just simply turned it on. It would have been nice to see the classic Bat signal one more time. This would have also allowed more people to see Batman had returned.
ReplyDelete37. All you have to do to defeat Bane is to hit him in the mouth piece or maybe you could just shoot him which no policemen or citizens try to do.
38. Selina is known criminal and master jewel thief who has stolen from Bruce. Selina betrays Batman, he gets his back broken, and is imprisoned in a hell-hole to slowly die. He also gets to watch Gotham die because of Bane’s takeover which is in large part due to Selina’s betrayal. Bruce in the prison says he’s angry. He should be really angry at Selina and yet he forgives her for all her sins without a thought. The plot called for her to be a villain and then suddenly a love interest.
39. Gordon still has not figured out who Batman is until Batman tells him. It should have been so obvious to Gordon for many reasons. There are only so many people who could be Batman and he should know Bruce perfectly fits the bill. He knows what Batman looks like up close and can see his eyes. He saw Bruce Wayne save Reese’s life in TDK. When Joker attacked Bruce’s penthouse to capture or kill Harvey, Bruce knocked out Harvey and put him in his safe room. Then Bruce Wayne disappeared and Batman conveniently appeared. When Lao was captured in Hong Kong, Bruce left the city and then came back when Lao and Batman came back. Bruce starts having a limp after TDK where Gordon saw Batman took a nasty fall and limped away. Bruce reappeared in Gotham right when Batman returned. It’s just so stupid that Blake magically knows who Batman is, but Gordon is clueless. His reaction when he finds out is so bad.
40. Bane should have had all the cops killed in the sewers. There are many ways he could kill all them. There is no reason for them be alive, they are just a liability. They would die anyways in the bomb, so there no point in keeping them alive. It’s not like the public would really even know if they were killed.
41. All the cops in the sewer are able to remain clean shaven for months. Is this really a priority for these cops? They should be focused on trying to escape and any supplies they get should be used towards that goal, yet they are being given razors for some reason. It would have been cooler and grittier if all the cops were unshaven. The fact they are clean shaven probably means nobody paid attention to these plot details or they were kept clean for typical Hollywood vanity reasons.
42. Foley’s death scene was horribly edited. He is seen firing a machine gun and the next shot he lying dead which really cuts the tension. In some cases that could be an artistic choice to do so, but its seems obvious here it was cut to avoid R rating.
43. Batman does not destroy the two other tumblers at the end for no reason. He leaves them intact so he can have a chase scene with them later. Why don’t the other two Tumblers fire on the hundreds of cops coming down the street. (cont.,)
44. Catwoman was riding the batpod through the streets and then she enters City Hall. She must have had to kill many criminals along the way to get inside City Hall as there were hundreds fighting in the streets in front of City Hall. We don’t get to see any of this.
ReplyDelete45. It’s not possible that Batman was able save Gordon on the ice and then Blake, like a second later who was much further away about to killed. The villians are waiting a long time to execute Blake for no reason. There are also way too many moments were someone is about to die and but they get rescued at the last second.
46. How the frak does Bruce get back into Gotham? The movie offers no explanation and it spent so much time establishing that it would impossible for anyone to enter or leave. It doesn’t mention how he gets back to the US with no money either.
47. What kind of sicko built this prison and who the hell keeps running it? There must be someone running it because the prisoners must be getting food sent down. What’s stopping anyone walking by from just throwing the rope down from the top? It’s not neccessary to know the answer to these questions, but it’s more interesting that the convoluted backstory they gave for Talia & Bane through endless exposition.
48. How could Ra’s Al Ghul and the League allow the prison to continue to function. They may commit evil deeds, but I never got the impression they were inherently evil or took pleasure in suffering. The prison can really only bring about suffering assuming you can’t escape. The prison is a horrible injustice and a terrible place. When they rescued Bane, Ra's would have freed all the prisoners, recruited them, or killed them all. Then they would have destroyed the prison and sealed it up for good.
49. When Bruce was climbing out of the prison, a lot of bats came flying out of the wall. This just reeks of stupidity IMO.
50. Talia Al Ghul is a terrible villain. She has no motives or characterization other than revenge which is not really that believable considering what we barely know about her and Ra's. She doesn’t do anything. She talks a bit and then she dies. End of Story.
51. Why the hell do they tell people that the bomb will be riding around in a truck? There are only a few trucks driving around Gotham, so it’s very easy to find. They don’t even have much security. (cont.,)
52. Alfred is barely in the movie which is a huge problem. He is one of the best characters and actors in the trilogy and everybody likes him. Hell, he gets second billing in all the movies, even this one, yet he receives much less screentime than Gordon, Fox, Bane, Blake or Catwoman. I can only assume Nolan wanted to introduce all these new characters and decided to give Alfred the shaft to give them more screentime because as I already mentioned his departure is not natural. I thought we would be seeing more of Alfred in the movie because we get to see more of Bruce and go back to focusing on them. Alfred and Bruce have the closest relationship in this trilogy and I wanted to see it continue and payoff in a natural fashion. Even if Nolan really wanted Alfred to leave it would have made sense if Bruce met up with Alfred after he escaped the prison assuming Alfred had left the city before Bane’s takeover. Alfred and Bruce could have devised an epic plan to get Bruce back into the city and would have cleared up this massive plot hole. They could put the past behind them and reconnected which I think would have been emotionally satisfying for most of the audience. Wherever the hell Alfred is during Bane’s takeover I’m sure he's kicking himself for abandoning Bruce. Now if Alfred was in the city during Bane’s takeover, you would think we would see him at least. He would probably team up with Gordon and/or Bruce and offer whatever support he can give.
ReplyDelete53. Bruce has been completely ignorant about what is going on in Gotham. He hasn’t noticed anything about the League of Shadows or an army in the sewers. He was always watching important people and events in Gotham either directly or through monitors. He is supposed to be a “Watchful Protector." That's what he and Gordon said at the end of TDK, but now they throw that idea out the window.
54. Catwoman has access to the prisoners, including Bruce Wayne and Lucius Fox which allows them to escape. It’s like she is considered one of the League of Shadows which I didn’t think Bane would go for.
55. Why do Bane and Talia decide they have to die in the nuclear blast? There is no reason they have to, so why the hell would they want to? The movie gives no real indication they are suicidal, but there are moments that showcase how stupid they are. They are very stupid villains.
56. The change of look and shooting location for Gotham was a horrible idea. It takes you right out of the movie as you realize it’s not the same city. They lost all the atmosphere from TDK and especially Begins. Atmosphere was a big part of the first two.
57. There is no fight scene for Talia which is incredibly lame. A large part of her character is that she's trained in martial arts by the League of Shadows, but we don’t get to see her do anything. Bruce vs Talia would have been epic and would make a lot of sense. Talia vs. Catwoman could have been really hot and fun.
58. Batman ends up directly killing at least a few people during the final chase, but he doesn’t acknowledge it any way and nobody mentions it. The previous movies spent a lot time focusing on how Batman doesn’t directly kill anyone and now they just throw that all away. It feels like Nolan just got lazy here, just wanted to end the movie and hoped nobody would notice. It could have been at least interesting to show Batman being morally conflicted and then deciding he has to kill in order to stop the bomb from going off. This could have actually been a good reason for him to stop being Batman.
59. Both Talia and the driver are killed in the truck at the end, but somehow Gordon, a much older man who was recently hospitalized survives in the back without any injuries.
60. Talia’s death scene is horribly acted and looks like she is going to sleep. It has no impact at all and many people find it funny. It’s like Nolan forget to tell her she was actually dying. (cont.,)
61. Bruce should have died. That would have been a much better ending, it would have made sense and would have justified the weak title: The Dark Knight Rises. What does he rise to but the exact same position he had before, which is being Batman. He falls and learns to pick himself up again and again and again. Yes it’s thematic, but we’ve seen all this before and done much better.
ReplyDelete62. I think the Joker should have been mentioned at least once. The previous villains came into play here. Ra's is important to the story and Bruce sees him in a dream. We see Scarecrow twice as judge. Harvey Dent is also fairly crucial to the story and we see flashes of Two-Face near the beginning. Rachel, Bruce’s parents, and Gordon’s family were all mentioned.
64. People in the city would likely experience severe nuclear radiation poisoning and the water’s ecosystem would be destroyed. They said the bomb’s radius is 6 miles. Considering Batman had only like 45 seconds when he starting flying over the water, I don’t even understand how the blast didn’t hit the city. None of this is mentioned. I would have at least accepted some techno-babble explanation that Batman was able to limit bomb’s range of radiation. The way the nuke is handled is almost similar to Kingdom of The Crystal Skull where Indy survives a nuclear blast. Basically the nukes in these movies have no real world effects.
65. What an asshole Batman is! He disappears at the end so he can fake his death when there are still hundreds of criminals still roaming the streets including Scarecrow and potentially the Joker! It could even be argued that he somewhat was responsible for these criminals as he created the lie which created the Dent act. People have been living in fear for months. Many people especially cops would be dead and wounded. Batman can easily fake his date at a later date.
66. The timer on the bomb is not consistent. For instance, we see the timer at 11:37 then a few minutes later, it’s only 11:03. It happens again a few more times although not as bad.
67. Bruce surviving the bomb is not believable in the least. It shows him inside the Bat seconds before the bomb goes off which means he would die for sure. Now people say the shot is showing him well before the Bat is over the water and that he ejects at some point. If this were true it would be a cheap trick, but it doesn’t make sense anyways. The look on his face (mainly his eyes here) is dire and he looks more like he’s about to die, not that he’s escaped death and everything is fine. This almost makes me think he was originally meant to die, but some producers didn’t like that. So they quickly shot the ending where Bruce is alive. It makes me think of every cliché ending where the hero somehow survives when he shouldn’t. The reason being simply because he’s the hero and I can hear the money grubbing producers talking to the audience saying “you didn’t really think we would kill Batman did you? This is just a stupid Hollywood action movie and we wanted a feel good ending because that makes more money.” (cont.,)
68. There is a massive lack of action in this movie. The only action scenes were Bane’s intro, alleyway shootout, Wall Street/Batman’s return, Batman & Catwoman on the roof, Batman vs. Bane pt.1, Batman vs. Bane pt. 2 and then the final chase. Many of these scenes were so brief and unexciting. Usually in the final of movie of a series you want the stakes raised higher, but in this movie, they only do that through exposition instead of action.
ReplyDeleteLook at Batman Begins: Bruce vs. Prisoners, Bruce vs Ducard in temple, Bruce vs. Ducard on Ice/Training, Bruce vs. Fake Ra's, Batman on the docks vs Falcone’s men, Batman in the narrows vs Scarecrow, Batman in Arkham, Batmobile chase, Ra's attacks Wayne Manor, The Narrows climax, Batman vs Ra's on train.
Look at TDK: Bank Robbery, Batman takes down Scarecrow and dealers, Batman in Hong Kong, Batman in club vs Maroni’s men, Joker attacks Bruce’s penthouse, escorting Harvey Dent in armored truck, the race to save Harvey and Rachel, hospital threat and chaos, Bruce vs. Joker and his goons.
69. If Bruce has decided to stop being Batman and people think Batman died in the nuclear blast, he doesn’t need to pretend he's dead? He can continue to be Bruce Wayne and live the rest of his life however he chooses. I think he would have got his money back from the Wall Street robbery, even though I know nothing about Wall Street. He can also keep in contact with people like Alfred, Lucius and Gordon if he wants. If Bruce Wayne somehow dies right at the time Batman dies, the people of Gotham will easily make the connection. It’s almost like he just wanted to announce to the world that he was always Batman. This never seemed to be something he wanted or needed to do in the first two movies.
70. John Blake can’t become the next Batman or Nightwing if he has no training, money, weapons, equipment, vehicles, etc. It would have been better if we actually saw him doing some Robin like moves and action scenes. He barely does anything physical. As far as we know he will get killed in his first night out. I also thought Christopher Nolan and Christian Bale said Robin would never be in the trilogy. There is very little screentime between him and Batman and there really should be. They are supposed to be the dynamic duo, WTF. Why does Bruce really even trust Blake to be Gotham’s new “Batman?” He really doesn’t know much about Blake.
71. Why does Bruce decide to end up with Selina Kyle? He barely knows her. They haven’t spent much time together or had sex. It would have made more sense if Bruce and Selina had sex than Bruce and Miranda. The movie didn’t spend much developing their relationship. If feels like such a forced love story and that since Hathaway is the young hot female star of movie, Hollywood rules dictate that she must end up with Batman. Think of how many people died because of Selina Kyle in the 5 months Gotham was under Bane’s rule. Not only did she betray Batman, she knew about Bane and his plan. She allowed it to happen. She is a criminal and Batman does arrest criminals, even Catwoman. It would have been awesome if she thought she would be free at the end, but Batman slaps the cuffs on her and says, “you’re going to jail, b1tch!” (Laughing my fucking ass off)***
I've only seen the movie once so far and you've noticed things I never did! lol! The end where Batman appears to die, I take it he did! Alfred only imagines Bruce alive and well with Selina enjoying a cafe setting somewhere! You mentioned Blake might get knocked off his first night out on the prowl, but the same could have been said about Bruce! I could go on, but I have a life! Thanks!
***The villains in this trilogy were reflections of Batman. - Ra's al Ghul is what Batman could have become had he let his lust for vengeance consume him. The Joker is the antithesis of Batman. He represents everything Batman is not. Bane is basically an evil version of Batman. They came from opposite circumstances, but both he and Bruce Wayne were formed by tragedies that would come to define them. They were both attracted to the message of Ra's al Ghul, and both had a falling out with him. And they both achieved legendary status.
ReplyDelete---
What's Scarecrow - Just focusing on the main villains. But yeah. Him too. Scarecrow uses fear for selfish reasons such as monetary gain. Batman in contrast uses fear towards a bigger goal, and more altruistic reasons. If we're going to include secondary villains.
Scarecrow uses fear, just like Batman, but for selfish purposes.
Two-Face is what Batman would be if he were corruptible.
Talia is a parallel to Bruce Wayne, because she is seeking to carry on her father's legacy, just as Bruce is with his father. - In the comics at least, Harvey Dent/Two Face also mirrors the duality of Bruce Wayne/Batman.
---
wHY DO YOU THINK HE DIED. DID YOU NOT SEE THE PART WHERE IT IS EXPLAINED TO FOX THAT BRUCE WAYNE HAD SOLVED THE AUTO PILOT PROBLEM AT THE END?***
I only watched the once a couple months ago, but I thought I heard the auto pilot was not working when it should have worked which signaled to me he sacrificed himself on purpose! I'm probably the worst person to ask questions about this movie! Love all things Batman, but these last 2 movies were difficult for me to watch; besides being too long! When it hits basic cable and is replayed again and again, maybe I'll get a handle on WTH is going on!
***A little clue confirms that Bruce lived - ...they might tell you, you need to make your own interpretation, but it's clear he's alive. Alfred wound up at that same moment with Bruce because of the missing pearls. Remember they had a tracking device. He probably used it to be at the cafe he told Bruce about and there you go. Selina's wearing the pearls and Bruce is right there.
ReplyDelete---
That's a very good point, the tracking device I mean, but Alfred didn't know about Selina being with Bruce, and he knows that she stole the pearls, but it's still possible, and Bruce knows where the cafe is, as I recall, Alfred told him where it is when they were at the Batcave.
Bruce is clearly alive without of clues to confirm that, but with the existance of haters and trollers, you'll always need the clues to at least keep the experience of the movie from being ruined.***
I wouldn't consider myself a "hater" because I thought Bruce was killed, but I've only seen the movie once, a month or so ago! That was my feeling that he sacrificed himself on purpose when he could have sent that bomb away on remote! I guess you can interpret the ending the way you want:
-1 He died saving the city because the remote on 'The Bat' didn't work; Alfred only fantasizing about Bruce and Selina together at that cafe
-2 He saved the city and survived somehow! It was his way to pass the baton on to Robin/Nightwing
-3 He saved the city and survived somehow and made it appear the remote didn't work
***Who else thought TDKR was better than TDK? - I prefer this to TDK, but I prefer Begins to both of them. TDK sidelines Bruce too much for Harvey Dent and I felt the narrative kind of skewered after Joker escaped from jail. Too many sub plots going on and tried to be a crime drama. I liked TDKR more. I just think the middle gets a bit bogged down once Bane starts taking over and Bruce is in jail. Tighter editing in those sequences would have made it a far better film IMO. Begins is still my favorite though. It had a dark tone, but stuck to it's comic book style. Whichever way you dress it up, it's a fantasy about a guy dressing as a Bat and working with the police as a vigilante, and I just felt that the second two movies took themselves way too seriously at times.***
They're both hard to watch for different reasons, but still in my collection!
***Did anyone notice TDK is mostly night scenes and TDKR is mostly daylight scenes?***
Normally criminal acts occur under the cloak of darkness with Batman actively working against those enterprises! With him locked away and Bane's plan above board, why should they resort to action going on at night? No one was really moving around, the cops were trapped, and the elite Gotham-ites sequestered in a luxury hotel! I'm glad most if not all the main action was during the day! You can finally see what's going on! lol! Unfortunately Talia's death was a little lame and that couldn't be helped with better lighting!
***What do you mean 'hard to watch?'***
Besides plotholes and the utter waste of having a police force it seems, most of these movies are just too long! I have a very short attention span and eventually have to go away from these 2.5-3 hour epics! Loved the premise, the cast, the acting, & most of all the musical score! I'll probably have more analysis when it hits cable and it's repeated over and over again! I'm not one to attend a screening at the theatre (my ears appreciate that), it's too easy to stop the disk while playing on my laptop, and I can't stay awake that long at times! Sleep apnea/narcolepsy can be a real drain on your energy, emotions, and cognitive thought processes!
***What plot holes do you mean in TDKR?***
ReplyDeleteI don't have to live on this board to know "plotholes" have already been discussed to death! If you're looking to battle over old drama, check back with old posts and drag them back into that snare! I don't have the will, energy, or time to debate something you'll only see as ridiculous, nit-picky, or a refusal to "suspend disbelief!" With this many millions of people, you're going to have to deal with many interpretations of this movie! Fresh eyes might enlighten you sooner or later, "but not today!" (per 'Gladiator')
***Who was more evil; Bane in TDKR or the 'Wet Bandits' from Home Alone?***
Definitely "The Wet Bandits!" Going after a kid for little reason but to prove "I'm smarter than you kid!" Bane wiping out Gotham; more a public service! It's unfortunate there are a few innocent, but few if you really think about it! That 1st movie, BB is still shocking in that 2 cops can blow a D/A/prosecutor away with impunity and go after another; Rachel!
***The wet bandits. They were robbing homes on their accord and wanted to murder that kid. Bane was just serving talia's wishes. He was not evil at all, just pussy whipped.
---
Seriously; concerning the Lazarus Pit - No I don't believe it resembles the prison or the Lazarus pit at all. One is a mystical pool that rejuvenates youth and allows immortality. One is a pit of despair and false hope that once a child broke free of and once Bruce broke free.
---
The prisoners in the pit are put down there to rot, so they're more or less already dead to the world. Sometimes someone rises up from this "hell on Earth" (hell being a place you go after death), but the lucky ones who escape are essentially reborn. As I said, totally a Nolanized Lazarus pit.
---
Do you think that The Joker was at Arkham enjoying Bane's revolution? - I think Joker was watching it but I don't know if he was happy with it. He would be happy Bane told the truth about Harvey Dent to everyone.***
It's probably been discussed already, but I can imagine another movie, running parallel to what was going on in Gotham and Arkham! Heaven knows the animators have utilized the sight so many times in storylines and plots! Even the Doctor in charge of the place was given to some villainy trying to unmask Batman for some reason!
***If it was Chris Nolan's Joker then he would be happy. If it was the Joker from the comics, he'd probably be jealous of Bane because he had no part in it.***
***It wasn't until TDK did people start saying that it was really dark and gritty and changed the comic book movie industry forever. I disagree. I think that there are plenty of comic book movies that came out before hand that did much more for that genre than DK did. ...
ReplyDeleteThere were plenty of crappy superhero films during the 90's that would naturally rebound the new century into making darker films. ... Spider Man wasn't dark or gritty but it pushed comic book movies the most to be made. I think everyone can agree on that.
Superman 2 and Spider-Man 2 both gave the plot of superhero's losing their powers and were much more "psychological" than TDK was. The DK didn't really talk about how much of an impact Batman made on society in a new way. In the comic books and TV show, they always said that Batman helped create criminals, but IMO that's about as far as it went in the DK through the Joker and Two-Face.
X-Men and X-Men 2 had the allegory for mutants being the same as Afro-Americans in being discriminated against and being separated away from society. Constantine is a comic book movie that is pretty dark and slow paced, but it's just a bland and forgettable movie. It still has it's fans though.
Daredevil wasn't well received, but it was very dark and had dark characters. It's still a movie that knows it's a comic book based film, but still goes to new places that a typical comic book movie would stray from.
Iron Man had the whole military question going for it and the war in Afghanistan and Tony Stark has a better character ark than Bruce Wayne does in TDK. Watchmen came out a year after TDK so that means that it was in production around the same time TDK was and it was even darker with it's alternate reality. Personally, I feel like it's the best comic book movie of all time for it's atmosphere and the story. It was a greater challenge to make it than TDK. ...
Like I said before Batman Begins was first, but nobody really gives it credit like TDK did for "grittiness." I feel like it was just as dark if not darker for the death of Bruce Wayne's parents. TDK had the silly concept of blowing up the two boats which is pretty comic book like in a situation regard, had a guy with an implanted cell phone bomb in his stomach, the whole joker character was goofier than the scarecrow, and the god-like Batman beating everyone up. The tone of film differs from what happens in the film, unlike Batman Begins where the atmosphere fits the film.
...300. Another Zack Snyder film. It was pretty big back in 2006. In terms of what films changed because of TDK. Pretty much none. A new Superman film was always in the works and Superman Returns was supposed to be in the style of Superman and Superman 2. I feel like they would have went the darker route anyway because of that disappointment. I feel like Man of Steel isn't really going to be dark, just a more emotional take on the character. With a new age like this, they would have to make him "darker" otherwise people would laugh at it.
We had the Batman Animated Series and the previous Batman films which are darker and more surreal than TDK Trilogy in my opinion. I don't find the Trilogy that dark. Dark in color composition but that is only in the visuals. The Joker being a terrorist doesn't really phase me as being dark considering how cartoony he is.
---
BB: The basis for most reboots nowadays.
TDK: The most successful dark superhero film that deals with real terrorism and post 911 fears.
TDKR: After some previous disappointing conclusions to superhero trilogies and a few more to come, studios might as well follow its structure.***
***Do Nolanites still think Nolan is in the same league as Tarantino? - Both are fine directors, but Nolan's movies have more variety to them. Ever since the Kill Bill's, every single Tarantino movie had some kind of revenge plot to it where the protagonist is never in real danger and always survives insurmountable odds.***
ReplyDeleteI don't do movies very often and the ones I've seen must be memorable just to me! The only Tarantino film I've watched from beginning to end, that I know of anyway is "Iron Monkey!" I think he produced it abroad and it was more an import for us! I loved that kind of genre; esp. with the acrobatics, wire work, and extensive use of weapons and explosives!
***Batman + Robin SUCKS , but admit it ...- They both had too much neon on them. They were too bright. That movie was too bright in general. Nearly everything was lit up.***
The driving bikes, cars, and RV's on anything, including statue finger tips was too much for me; "I can make it, I can make it! Aaarrggg!"
***There were rumors that Leonardo Dicaprio, Johnny Depp, Robin Williams, and Angelina Jolie were all going to be in the third Batman movie. Did any of those come true? There was a rumor that Nolan would produce the reboot of Batman in a few years. He came out and denied it. Is that going to be true? It's not a guarantee this rumor will become true either.***
I think for those cameo, bit parts, those stars were too big! They'd rather go back to the "has beens" and less than relevant actors of today, but still well known! Michael Caine is probably done though!
***No. Dicaprio and Depp were rumoured to be playing the Riddler, Williams to okay Hugo Strange portrayal, and Jolie to play Catwoman. Obviously none of those came true, which is why it's not definite a rumor will became a fact.
---
But as for main characters dying. I don't really care for that kind of story-telling. It can be good, but when people rail on about "it's more realistic if the hero dies," I feel it's wrong. It's morbid.
It's kind of a rebel-teen phase where you think heroes need to die because it's "darker." I can't really see why I would've preferred that at age 15. I don't really care for a character to straight up die now so much as I'd like to see a lot of closure first.***
My head was bitten off when I thought Bruce was "gone" and Alfred only imagined him in that cafe with Selina at the end! One of these days I'm gonna have to set aside a day to watch this movie again! There's so little agreement on the same things we've all seen!
***Why would you think Alfred imagined it? I'm not trying to criticize you, just asking. I didn't think for one second that Alfred imagined Bruce. Nothing in the trilogy suggested that Alfred was senile, or even that this was the type of movie to feature an abstract ending. It's a Hollywood blockbuster.
On the other hand, there is so much evidence that Bruce is alive.
- multiple mentions of the broken autopilot; then it's fixed at the end. Was that just a goodbye present to Fox? Like "hey I'm dead, but by the way I fixed the autopilot like you asked!"
- The epic, swelling music at the end which came to a crescendo when, you guessed it, Alfred saw Bruce.
- The mention at the end of the lost pearls, which leads to...
- Bruce being with Selina, while she wore his mothers pearls...
If Bruce is dead, then all these scenes/plot points have ABSOLUTLELY no meaning at all.***
I just wasn't sure! That was my interpretation from just the one view on my laptop while babysitting a couple months ago! It would be nice, but I was thinking Bruce had had it and sacrificed himself even though he could have flown that bomb away by remote!
***"Bane is her FRIEND and PROTECTOR (Talia's own words). And because of his status as friend and protector, HE carries out THEIR plan on HER behalf." - Couldn't agree more...I'm with you now buddy.
ReplyDeleteGlad we see eye to eye, I thought you were saying Bane is in charge, plans, and does everything, and Talia does nothing, or saying that I see Talia as master and Bane is a random mercenary/servant...***
Hard to believe Bruce so taken in by Talia's "wolf" in sheep's clothing! He literally signed over everything to the worst possible person and wondered til the last "who the traitor was?!" Only seen it once a couple months ago, but that's what I remember! Call me a snob, but how does some barbarian born in a pit turn into a socialite "bred" enough to fool an elitist like Bruce; not to mention one so jaded and worldly?
***How is it so hard to believe? Did you know she was Talia, or the leader of Bane and his mercs? W/o seeing the spoiler pics of her before the film came out? I mean he does fall for her before he signs it over. And when does he wonder "who's the traitor?" I don't remember Bruce ever thinking that there is a traitor... And she's not some barbarian in a pit, she escaped as an innocent child, then was raised by her extremely wealthy father who taught her about deception. She's a beautiful, extremly wealthy woman, that knows how to deceive someone. It's quite believable... I mean Bruce was born in Hell and deceives everyone in Gotham. He's some eccentric, happy, playboy; why can't she?
It's not like she's wearing a mask like Bane and Bruce just puts her in charge. Plus she's been working at Wayne Enterprises for years, and Alfred, and Fox are both telling Bruce to go out with her, and trust her. He's concentrated on Bane. It's hard to imagine he would suspect her affiliating with Bane.***
Maybe after it hits cable and I see it a few more times, I'll be as informed as you! [laugh] I thought she was an outcast and was doing all this work on her own; in her father's name even though he didn't care for her! I really need to watch it again sometime, but my attention span is so short! [laugh] Today's epics are so freakin' long with unnec. filler; esp. this one!
***Ok, it's really becoming stupid and annoying when the writer, director Nolan, and Michael Caine all say that Bruce and Selina were actually in Italy. That means he's alive. ...it's obvious that the haters are hardly trying to trash this movie.***
I didn't think I was being a "hatah" just because I thought Bruce was dead! If they say he survived, I believe it! It really looked like Alfred was just imagining him being happy, away from being Batman, with Selina in tow! I stand corrected; maybe!
***My dream 90's JLA cast - Overall not impressed with your choices. Dean Cain, Kevin Sorbo, Lucy Lawless, and Teri Hatcher? Not very original choices.***
Mon Dieu, could these old fogies even maneuver around enough with their walkers, alert necklaces/bracelets, and hearing aids? Maybe Ray Walton can come back as "The Martian!" Boy am I old!
***Anyone excited for "Man Of Steel?" - To be honest, nope. Never cared much for Superman. Although I'm just a bit curious to see how it turns out...***
ReplyDeleteSuperman was "The Man" when I was growing, but over the last couple decades, Batman has taken over! Superman has a huge ego, needs adulation and constant stroking, and goes out of his way to "be perfect!" Batman did his thing under the cover of darkness, didn't care if thought a criminal or vigilante, and did so much without powers outside of his intellect and trained human will! The Superman movies over the years progressively got worse! By the time of S3 and Richard Pryor was brought on, Lex was little more than a standup comedian in Superman IV; terribly disillusioned! "Superman Returns" was not worth the tape used to include it in my collection! Poor Lex lost his edge except in the animated versions!
***Rank The Dark Knight Movies
1. The Dark Knight Trilogy (Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight Rises)
2. Batman Returns
3. Batman
4. Batman Forever
5. Batman & Robin
6. Batman 1966
* Batman 1966 Half A *
* Batman ***
* Batman Returns ****
* Batman Forever **
* Batman & Robin *
* Batman Begins *****
* The Dark Knight *****
* The Dark Knight Rises *****
---
Batman (1966) - 2/5
Batman (1989) - 4/5
Batman Returns - 4/5
Batman Forever - 2/5
Batman & Robin - 2/5
Batman Begins - 5/5
The Dark Knight - 5/5
The Dark Knight Rises - 5/5
1. The Dark Knight Trilogy (Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight Rises)
2. Batman Returns
3. Batman 1989
4. Batman Forever
5. Batman & Robin
6. Batman 1966***
1. Batman Begins 5*
2. The Dark Knight 4*
3. The Dark Knight Rises 4*
4. Batman ('89) 4*
5. Batman Returns 3.5*
6. Batman Forever 3*
7. Batman & Robin 2.5*
8. Batman ('66) 2*
***If TDK Trilogy is the best superhero trilogy, what is second best?
ReplyDelete"1. Dark Knight Trilogy
2. X-Men Trilogy
3. Iron Man Trilogy (Looking forward to IM3)
4. Spider-Man Trilogy (first two films were great but the third was terrible)"***
Adding my 2 cents; not as obvious of course:
5. Blade Trilogy
6. Aliens Saga (wasn't Riply a superhero by #4?)
7. Underworld Saga
***Please don't mix up things, ...and these things (clues) are right and absolutely confirms that Bruce lived, but leave the damn clues, Bruce appeared in front of you.***
That was my feeling that he sacrificed himself on purpose when he could have sent that bomb away on remote!...
***Enough of this garbage, Fiero. Bruce's fate is not open to interpretation. The script makes it clear he's alive. The official novel by Greg Cox confirms he's alive. Greg Cox himself said that people at WB and Syncopy made it clear to him that Bruce is alive. Now JGL and Michael Caine have come out and said that Bruce is alive.
Hell, the movie itself makes it clear that he's alive. The entire point of the movie is that Bruce has to get back his will to live. The ending sums it up perfectly: That's why we find out that the AP was fixed and that pearls are missing again (the same pearls that Selina is wearing at th end), and that's why Nolan uses upbeat music when Bruce's face is shown.
---
Wouldn't it be great if Bales returned as Bruce Wayne in 25 years to train a new Batman? That would be AWESOME! Lol***
If Bales alienates all of Hollywood, he can resort to that scenerio in "Batman Beyond" in 20 years! lol!
***Why would he alienate Hollywood?***
Oh well, to answer your question, you must not be paying attention to behind the scenes gossip; what a jerk he is, etc., etc., etc.! You can't of been that sheltered! You're questioning his alienating Hollywood, he's been alienated from his own family for years! I knew that and wasn't even looking for the info! It's hard to be humble and nice when you've been an accomplished actor since childhood!
***There's Two Kinds Of People... You're Either A Batman Fan Or A Joker Fan - I think it's more fair to say You're either a Batman fan or Batman villains fan. Batman has some of the greatest and most iconic villains in superhero history.***
ReplyDeleteHave to be more a Batman fan preferring to see how he handles a situation; esp. in larger group with The Justice League! With no powers, he pretty much takes over and does so much! They even provided a legacy in animation form when they created a 2 parter futuristic saga called "Artifact!" Long after Batman was gone, a 1000 years in the future, Mr Freeze is brought out of suspended animation! The "powers that be" look for a solution to dealing with him by checking out old Batcave! Batman knew his computer chips wouldn't survive so imprinted binary code on the walls of the Batcave! Transcribing the data, they could ask him how to deal with "Mr Freeze!" Even after he was gone, he didn't leave New Gothom unprotected! "Brought tears to your eyes!"
***The Joker and the League of Shadows? Joker doesnt even know how to fight. - He showed decent skills throughout the movie.***
You mean running and hiding behind a skirt, dumping Rachel out a window to cover his escape? Then on another occasion sicking 2 dobermans on Batman while beating him with a stick! Yeah, real skill he has there! lol!
***Did I say he was really skilled? No. I said he had decent ones compared to previous interpretations of the character.***
Touchy, touchy! Take a chill pill babe! Cesar Romero really mixed it up as Joker! He got right in there every time, unlike others who "sick" their goons on the Caped Crusader and Robin! Concerning Heath's interpretation, it's hard to root for him in any way! You expect him to be ruthless, but he lacks any character when he decides to blow up the ships when the occupants didn't fall for his ploy to get them to do it! Even though criminals like Joker, Penguin, and the like are the worst, they aren't always dishonest; esp. with clues! This Joker is obviously wandering around in his own reality with no conscience at all! No wonder there was no Harley portrayed! He'd have to at least pretend to appreciate her! lol!
***What's your top 3 Superheroes and 3 villains of each superhero?***
Batman is #1 - Joker, Ra's al Ghul, & Two Face (dishonorable mention of The Riddler & The Penguin)
Superman #2 - Darkseid, Braniac, & Lex Luthor (dishonorable mention of Mr. Mixelplix) Oh why do we bother? We all agree on the same characters! We're already programmed! lol!
***This generation's Star Wars? - From what I've seen, I'd say 'LOTR' has a considerably bigger impact than 'TDK' trilogy does and appealed to a wider audience. I'd say 'LOTR,' Harry Potter and The Avengers are the closest things to this generation's Star Wars.
ReplyDelete---
You had me until you said "The Avengers." - No... just... no.... And "Harry Potter" is more like "Star Wars for Kids." But I can see your point on that.***
I still haven't seen "Iron Man" all the way through! "The Avengers" will be intriguing since I grew up with the animated versions, but I won't go out of my way to see it! 'SW' will always be bigger than Batman unfortunately! You have to look at it "world-wide," not just through our limited perspective! "The Body Guard" stunk here, but world wide it was a huge hit! The rest of the world loves our movies, even the bad ones! If successful here, that doesn't mean a whole lot in the grand scheme of things! "Harry Potter" & 'LOTR' are huge even though I have no idea what's going on after all the publicity! I've successfully avoided the books, movies, hype, and blogs! That didn't stop them from being something with a life of their own! Sorry, as much as I love Batman, he's just not that HUGE! "The Avengers" probably won't hold up like Batman though! He's only gotten bigger over the years!
***Isn't "Star Wars" this generation's Star Wars? - I wasn't part of the generation that saw when it first came out in theaters, but nothing has replaced it for me and I doubt anything will for a long time.***
I wasn't too happy with the final addition of the prequels! Like some, I question it even being a movie with 75% of it using "CGI" technology! What do you say to that? Still part of my collection, but too long and got away from the story! So we saw the creation of Vader! That takes almost 3 hours? Having a short attention span, it must have taken me a 5 days to watch that movie back in 2001!
***I was talking about Star Wars, not George Lucas shitting on his legacy.***
Well that's the way I felt about it! What was he just desperate to get it done before he croaked? Now I hear they're trying to get the old cast back together for a reunion of sorts! What is Ford, 70? Too old to play Yoda's son if he had one! lol!
***I'm cautiously optimistic for the sole reason that George isn't involved at all.***
Really? He finally gave up some control? Cool! Sometimes you need a fresh approach! I would have said the same about Roddenberry!
***So, Batman takes the blame for Dent's murder... how does this collate? - I'm not even sure. But Batman did actually kill Dent if you remember. Probably because so many people thought he was dangerous, they didn't trust him.
ReplyDelete---
No yeah, I remember he killed him. He didn't murder him, though. I actually should have taken it one step further and said that he also took the fall for all of those other murders from Dent.***
I haven't even watched these movies all the way through and I know Batman took the "rap" to preserve the reputation of Harvey Dent! A new law had been established which put criminals away for long stretches and they didn't want to hurt that legal effort! If the people had known Dent was the one responsible for murders, including 2 cops, the legislation with his name on it would have fallen by the wayside! Gordon and his family stayed quiet for 8 years until guilt made him write that speech Bane discovered on his person!
***Also, remember that Batman did this so the people of Gotham didn't know that Dent hadn't turned. - What I'm wondering is how the Dent Act could come into play and have Gotham worship a man who was killed by somebody who he worked with himself in standing up against corruption. Why would Gotham think that they are now in a better place and that Dent was "all good" if Batman "wasn't?"
---
John Blake to be introduced into comics continuity this fall***
Shocking! It helps some of us with failing memories that we can go from one medium to another and it all seamlessly relates! The animation of Batman over the last couple decades have influenced the movies and visa versa! Loved "Batman Beyond's" futuristic take on it, but he only left the city once; Superman's Fortress of Solitude! Preferred his Justice League stints usually outdoing heroes who have powers! We're getting conflicting info on Superman and or Batman utilized in the upcoming "Justice League" venture! Anybody?
***I noticed the Joker was absent. Does this mean he was deceased? Just to clarify, when all was said and done, was the Joker no longer amongst the living.... At the end, of all things, was it true that the Joker has passed away? The Jocker, was he dead at the end?***
I only half watched TDKR, but didn't hear any reference to the Joker! Someone may have though; I miss a lot! I'm hoping for a Batman with POV of Arkham one day, Hugo Strange trying to find out who the Dark Knight is, and criminals working out of the sanitarium unbeknownst the attendants and doctors! My last serious chat out here had Batman a lot older with him guiding and backing up Blake; ala "Batman Beyond!" Anybody?
***Your favorite 5 superhero movies and 5 of the most hated***
ReplyDeleteNo X-Men anywhere? I'm disappointed! Never saw any of the Thor movies; maybe a little of a cable one that was pretty lame! Nothing like the comic; more Nordic!
5 favorite:
Batman Begins (The best)
Avengers (Still haven't seen; not even much of Iron Man) X-Men replaces them
Spider-Man 2 (Never got to #3; too long)
Blade 2 (I thought he was a hero, but some didn't think so! Great trilogy)
Thor (Pass; loved comic as a kid and don't mind animated Avengers)
5 least favorite:
Ghost Rider 2 (Bad)
Daredevil (It was ok for the music)
The Punisher (pick one) (If nothing else is on)
Green Lantern (Love Ryan Reynolds, but just can't imagine this being any good)
Batman and Robin (Bad, but still had to see because it's Batman)
***John Blake in the comics?? Will this happen? - Yeah him being Batman and kind of continuing the John Blake story from TDKR for fans. It can be a what if story or an altered version of Batman after The Dark Knight Trilogy.***
I'm looking for the movies to go "Batman Beyond" with Bruce the old mentor of The New Batman!
***Just because a movie has plot holes, Don't mean it's a bad movie. - Plot holes don't kill a film, but they do detract from the experience.***
Only if you really care! In that instance, why would we? When they filmed in Chicago, it was nice to see paths I've taken, but continuity to the way I perceive it to be isn't relevant to the movie!
***People complain so much about Bane's voice...- I thought he sounded like someone doing a very corny impression of Sean Connery.***
I was thinking a hint of an accent like George Sanders', Mr. Freeze" (1966)
***When Batman '89 came out, all I remember seeing people wear were...Batman shirts. Everything was all Batman, all the time. I haven't seen one Batman shirt being worn by anyone when these movies came out.***
ReplyDeleteBatman '05 influenced me to buy a "Fathead" Poster with all the fixin's; Batsignal, Bat Emblem, Bat-a-Rang, etc.! Takes up a complete wall! In '89, the reason it was "all Batman," all the time was because of the biggest advertizing campaign ever with 2 soundtracks by 2 of the biggest producers at the time; Prince and Danny Elfman! You heard so much about the commercialization of Batman before the movie even came out including Nicholson's deal to take part in all the franchise revenue! It was obscene all the hype, but it was very well done! The only thing I knew of Burton was that he had directed Keaton in "Beetlejuice!" I wasn't hopeful even though it was a huge production being premiered in London if I remember correctly! There was rampant rumor and speculation right away about the sequels including that weird period with Sean Young looking to play Catwoman!
***wow! haha!! Is it still up? - Honestly I see people about every day; kids, teenagers, adults, middle aged guys, tons of girls, goth, regular, hot, etc etc wearing Batman clothes, hoodies, shoes, jackets, earrings, ALL THE TIME. I'm a manager at a grocery store so this isn't like comic shop crowds.***
Of course; even though I'm about to turn 56 later this month! He's been "the man" since I was reading the comics back in the 60's! I could have retired quite wealthy if I had saved even half of those bad boys! I was paying 12 cent out of a machine until '71! Memories!
***We need a homosexual Batman - Batman has been paralysed and addicted to stimulants before, very arguably is disturbed, and you can't prove he isn't homosexual.***
The bio or history of Batman has always had the undertone of a relationship between Batman and Robin, but of course it's never been realized; not even with Alfred! One day maybe! Happens with most of the hero genre; esp. if they have a side-kick!
---
Sorry, I think Maggie Gyllenhall was miscast! She had too many miles on her and far from innocent which is called for! M's a seasoned actress! They needed another younger, more unassuming girl like Katie! I felt the exact opposite way about Winona Rider portaying the female lead in Dracula! She wasn't seasoned enough and looked like a little girl being molested by Oldman! They should have swapped roles but for the 10+ year time difference!
***I think you're right, but Maggie Gyllenhall would be perfect as Harley Quinn. I would *beep* LOVE to see a Francis Ford Coppolla Batman trilogy.***
***Rank all the Batman films - TDK, TDKR, BB, ...Mask of the Phantoms ...Batman '89, Batman '66, BF, BR, then B & R***
ReplyDeleteBatman '89 - Burton did it right! A great Re-Boot
Batman Begins - an even better Re-Boot with epic music score; quite moving
Batman Returns - Keaton's 2nd outting as the Bat was still working; great addition with Catwoman and Penquin
Batman Forever - got a little comical, but Kilmer did a good job! As usual, film saved with the over the top performances of main villains, Riddler & Two Face
Dark Knight - very well made, but not in love with it! Joker crimes too much to watch; even for me
Batman And Robin - got too comical even for me! No Arnold or Uma fan so their villain portrayals of Victor Fries and Poison Ivy respectively fell flat
Batman '66 - It's a classic all-star tv movie with multi-villains and constant comedic/drama
Mask Of The Phantasm - Been a while since I've seen it, but a nice little film lasting about 75 min.
Dark Knight Rises - just didn't do it for me! Still only seen once! Maybe after it hits cable, I'll watch it more and feel differently! Too long! Short attn. span here
***For the next movie: Name it Batman Beyond:
Bruce Wayne - Clint Eastwood
Terry McGinnis - Thomas Dekker
Dana Tan - Jamie Chung
Warren McGinnis - Hugh Laurie or Bryan Cranston
Mary McGinnis - Mariska Hargitay or Julianne Moore
Matt McGinnis - Zachary Gordon
Barbara Gordon - Helen Mirren
Sam Young - Delroy Lindo
Maxine Gibson - Jessica Lucas
Chelsea Cunningham - Saoirse Ronan
Blade Sommer - Aly Michalka
Nelson Nash - Chris Zylka
Willie Watt - Christopher Mintz-Plasse
Derek Powers/Blight - Jon Hamm
Spellbinder - Michael Pitt or Matthew Gray Gubler
Inque - Moon Bloodgood or Morena Baccarin
Mad Stan - Henry Rollins (who else?)
Directed by Joseph Kosinski ***
Interesting choices! Not familiar with Dekker, but he's appropriate even thought 25; cute! I would love for this movie to be produced! I was thinking the 4th Batman movie could be "Batman Beyond" with Bruce aging, being the backup support for Blake instead of Terry! Anybody?
***I agree. It should lead up to and show us Terry in his prime like how we saw him in that episode of the Justice League. That was awesome. Did they plan when they were game planning this series to make Terry, Bruce's genetic father from the start? - No, it was a dumb last minute idea. I hated it. Genetic engineered. So damn stupid.***
Hard to believe anyone thought they could recreate another Batman with DNA and knocking off his parents; crazy in a word! Wow!
***How many characters that appeared on Batman: The Animated Series made appearances on Batman Beyond?
---
There are plenty of villains who resemble old time bad-doers from The Animated Series but are not the same people, not to mention the featuring of all the relics and costumes in Bruce's Batcave.
But directly...these are who I can think of off the top of my head.
From Return of the Joker:
Bane
Joker (obviously)
Harley Quinn
Tim Drake as Robin
Barbara Gordon as Batgirl
Bruce Wayne as younger Batman
From the series itself:
Rha's al Ghul, in the creepy form of his daughter, Talia
Mr. Freeze ***
Was "Artifact" a part of the original series or "Batman Beyond!" I love that episode; making me a bit "verklempt" seeing Batman save the future from the grave! A shame it was taken off YouTube! I featured it on my blog at the time!
ReplyDelete---
***Name a movie that you would love to see a prequel to. - I pick "Face/off." It would be fun to see Nicolas Cage play the badguy for the entire movie cause he was flipping crazy awesome. Add on "Drive!"***
Real classics here! lol! I'll stay in the juvenile genre and go "Blade!" We've already seen it done with "Underworld!" He was a child vampire, trained to control himself and hate other vampires b/c they victimized other people! That might be interesting to see the younger versions of Blade and Whistler and their complete story rather than abbreviated history at the beginning of the movies!
***That's funny I was gonna post Blade as well.***
It only makes sense! How many times do they tease us with his history in the beginning of each movie? He's out of jail now! Do they have a plan in the works for Snipes? Does he?
***So, what is the deal with people in the film; "TDKR?" - The kid that Blake knows still is impressed by him, and the one officer got a charge seeing him zoom down that tunnel. I'm taking it they chose to ignore the 'story' that this vigilante was 'responsible' for the murder of Harvey Dent. Doesn't that make some of these people a little deranged? It's kind of like saying about a guy, "yeah, he mowed down 6 people, but man, could he charm your socks off!"***
Gordon's son knew the truth and probably passed the word around surreptitiously in school!
***A little clue confirms that Bruce lived ...LOL @ people thinking Bruce Wayne died in the Dark Knight Rises...***
{raises hand}...but if you say he survived, cool! Only watched the one time several months ago! That was what I got out of it; self sacrifice, but more just tired of living! On to "Batman Beyond" with Bruce growing old, withering, but backing up Blake in the Batcave!
***Confused Matthew's review of this movie - I agree with this review. Overall I enjoyed the Dark Knight Rises and it's conclusion. It was decent, but the first act of this film is way stronger than the 2nd and 3rd:
- http://confusedmatthew.com/The-Dark-Knight-Rises-Miniview.php -***
I've only watched this movie once for those very reasons; too much isn't explained! The only reason I knew about Talia is b/c of the animated series! Most people haven't if they're adults! Gordon made no sense, Bane made no sense, and there was a total lack of logical continuity! It's truly lost, but it's still in my collection! Good job Matthew!
***Why no Barbara Gordon? - I like to think that she becomes Batgirl when she's older. Jim Gordon did have a daughter. She just didn't say anything. - She was there as a child in TDK when Two Face takes the Gordon family hostage.***
ReplyDeleteRegardless if she fit or not, she existed! Talia was an animiated Batman character! Where's the logic? Those are the facts, people know there's a Barbara Gordon! No one had a clue who Talia was, thrown in at the last moment with no explanation!
***There's an explanation of who Talia was in the movie. Everything you needed to know about her as far as the film is concerned is explained. Barbara fitting in the story has nothing to do with anybody knowing who she was.***
Well now you know! Someone asked about Barbara and she's well established in the genre already! Talia was some after-thought thrown in at the last moment! She's born hating her father, but is willing to die for his ideals later! That isn't even nsync with the cartoon where she was devoted to him from birth!
***Still nothing to do with Barbara being in the film and whether she would have fit into the story or not. And please explain how Talia was an afterthought? She wasn't born hating her father, not sure where you get that from. And she was a part of The League so obviously she shared her father's beliefs. And what do the cartoons have to do with anything? No wonder you think things weren't explained. Doesn't seem like you were paying much attention while watching the film.***
What? You think she adored the man that cast her mother into some dank hole to give birth to and live her adolescence? Please! I don't need to watch to know she couldn't have had much love for the man until after he died! It only makes sense!
***Just as I thought. You weren't paying attention. Ra's didn't cast her mother into the pit. If she hated her father since birth why did she turn to him when she escaped the pit? Why did her and Bane join The League of Shadows? When you watch a film try paying attention. She said she couldn't forgive her father for casting Bane out of The League, not hate; couldn't forgive until he was murdered.***
Well you got me! I won't try and make a point with people who've seen this movie a thousand times! Once was enough for me; for now! We'll see how I feel about it when put on a loop on cable! Right now I agree with Matthew! Too much made no sense; Bane's speeches of freedom, the people's reaction to being threatened for a 3rd time, and esp. how Bruce got back to Gotham!
***It doesn't surprise me that you found so many things that didn't make sense. I apologize for correcting you. I should just let you keep making arguments that aren't accurate simply because you didn't pay attention to the film you were watching. But since you only saw it once I guess it's ok for you to make up your own version of the movie.***
***Spielberg Vs. Nolan - Both are masters of their craft, but personally, I prefer Nolan. In short, I just really love his style of filmmaking as a whole.***
ReplyDeleteThere's a difference in preferring one over the other and who's more creative and has had more substantially historic work! "Shindler's List" is an educational tool used in this country believe it or not! Batman just doesn't cut it for others outside of it's fanbase!
***I've never seen "Schindler's List." Shocker, I know. I do plan on seeing it some time in the near future though. Anyway, one could argue that your quote could be associated with any form of art or entertainment. Although the rules might slightly skew for a movie like Schindler's List. ...Schindler's List is broad, but I don't think it's THAT broad. I love Batman. I love what he stands for, and what he represents. No, Batman is not based on a historic figure, and the situations and events he endures are the works of pure fiction; however, that doesn't make Batman or the TDK movies any less in quality or its message.***
Babe, seek serious help! You're taking this much too seriously! lol! I've never seen "Shindler's List" either and probably won't ever watch it! I don't need the history lesson! In real life, I know how evil intent has blossomed around the globe! Batman is just a diversion, making it seem like we have a real chance to stay ahead of the criminal element! The fact is, most just don't care unless it affects them personally! The gun debate makes no sense to me! How do you argue with trying to keep track of and keep guns out of the hands of criminals and psychos? There are many who listen to the NRA's slippery slope argument which is basically insane, but no one said we're that smart as a nation! Let those same people find out their 5 or 6 year old was riddled with bullets, they might change their collective minds!
***Your loss if you dont want to watch one of the greatest films that has ever been made.***
No doubt it's a classic, but I've told you before, I have a very short attention span due to a sleep disorder! Very little sinks in, I bore easily, and a lot of times just pass out! Epics these days of 3+ hours are just too long! It took me a week to get thru the last prequel of the Star Wars movies in 2002! I still haven't touched the 2nd Iron Man or Spiderman 3!
***Rather than have Blake's middle name be Robin, they should have just said how he legally changed his name from Dick Grayson to John Blake. I like the idea of him becoming Nightwing and working out of the cave, but him being Batman would work too, since he was so astoinished and agreed with Bruce on Batman being a symbol. If he introduced a new hero it wouldn't be as effective. He could take in a sidekick and have that be Tim Drake, which would be Robin. But then the whole "Robin" name would be defeated, and you can't very well name Tim, Nightwing, maybe Red Robin, but then again, the Robin part.
ReplyDelete---
The thing i like about Blake is the fact he has been Robin the entire time but rather than him dressing up in a red and yellow jumpsuit they had him done in a more realistic fashion and then at the end he will become wither the new Batman or Nightwing? - Will they actually continue the story? Or just leave it to fan fiction to fill in the rest?***
It appears that this was the end, but we've given scenerios where it could be continued; "Batman Beyond!" I thought Bruce could come back as an old man being the back up in the Batcave for the new Batman/Nightwing!
***So who was Batman's greatest challenge? - Bane literally took over Gotham, so he wins.***
You could say the same about The Joker taking over! It just wasn't as overt with a self pronouncement at a sporting event! He certainly was running things unbenounced the mayor, police, and populous! He could be taken into police custody, but it didn't seem to bother him in the least with many contingency plans working!
***The Joker [by far]. The damages he did to Batman were longer lasting, and some of them irreversible. For example, Bruce lost Rachel forever thanks to Joker. He turned all of Gotham against Batman. He forced Batman to take the blame for crimes he did not commit. Everything Bane did against Batman was solved within "Rises" itself. The Joker's actions were not. Joker took on Batman when he was in his prime, not when he was 8 years out of practice. BB never meant to be a trilogy!***
Not being a homer and is proved by me only watching "TDKR" once in it's entirety with clips on cable, "Batman Begin" is the best reboot of a project ever! I hope it's not hyberole since I'm so tired, but I still have great memories of seeing this movie in '05; a day early in fact! It moved me and that's no easy feat; the story, the music all worked for me! It gave me chills and had the feel of a real epic film! It's unfortunate I've never seen it at a theatre! Besides having a very short attention span, my ears can't handle it! Took my nieces and nephew to see "Poppin's Penguins" a couple years ago at the local Cineplex! I told myself; "NEVER AGAIN!" It was an early show so it was just us! Are they blowing it out so people can hear on the street? My ears still throb just thinking about it!
Anyway, I hope they go for #4 with my idea of staging in ala "Batman Beyond" with Blake getting support from Bruce in his later years! Arkham would have to be involved since there's a game I keep hearing about! Probably won't happen, but I'm hopeful! Waited out the trilogy here and "Aliens" before that going 4! If done well, it's a great idea and should be a moneymaker!
---
You should be my age where I saw some old b/w short of Batman & Robin set in the 40's or 50's! Zeroing on what I thought was a Batman dummy during the credits, it really was him sitting at a table in a dark, dank, but small cave! He was so still for so long I couldn't believe he was alive! Regular cars were used in chase scenes and I remember the bad guys getting ahead enough to push a button to change the paint color from black to white and flip the license plate! Batman actually had horns instead of ears IIRC!
***It has been widely reported that Christian Bale is not interested in returning to star as Bruce Wayne/Batman in any future live action movies as the actor having stated that he thinks he's taken the character as far as he can and should pass the torch to a new star. This likely means that DC and Warner Brothers will reboot the franchise again as let's face it, any potential Justice League movie simply MUST include the Bruce Wayne version of Batman.
ReplyDeleteIt would be cool if they got the new Batman underway with a villain in tow who hadn't yet been seen in a big screen adaptation of the Caped Crusader's adventures. This would rule out the likes of The Joker (who has been portrayed by two different actors), Bane (who has also been portrayed by two different actors), The Riddler, Mr. Freeze, Poison Ivy, and The Penguin; as well as a few others, of course. So, having delved in to Batman's extensive rogues gallery, I've chosen 5 who I think would be great if they were to appear in a live action movie.
- http://whatculture.com/film/batman-reboot-5-great-new-villains-that-co uld-be-used.php -
---
Clayface definitely needs to be done eventually, that's one of my very favorites. Joker, Clayface, and Scarecrow are my 3.
---
I'd love to see The Black Mask and Dr. Hugo Strange. I don't really want to see any of the villains who are more fantasy based.***
I agree about avoiding fantasy based villains like Clayface! The animated series featured Dr. Strange a couple times with "The Black Mask," a huge and devious character! He had so many situations covered with a massive operation/organization!
***Still can't beleive after one year all those stupid ending questions! I mean seriously after all those interviews with the cast and crew and Nolan himself who said Bruce is alive, some morons should really understand this.
---
I agree. It never looked ambiguous or anything. When it happened it seemed obvious to me that Bruce was really there because Selina was with him, too.***
I guess I can accept it now since Alfred obviously didn't know anything about Selina even though he chose her to take meal up to Bruce!
***Multiple members of the cast confirmed that Bruce is alive. For me, there was never any doubt. It was obvious.***
I don't watch or listen to much outside of the movie! From what I watched, I thought there was a good chance he sacrificed himself; tired and fed up with how things were descending in Gotham and elsewhere! Just my opinion!
***That was the arc of the film. He wanted to die at the start and then slowly got back his will to live. That's why we find out that he fixed the autopilot. That's why the pearls are mentioned as missing (The same pearls Selina has around her neck at the café). The whole reason Alfred leaves is because he wants Bruce to wake up and understand that he doesn't have to be a martyr. Glad to see that you understand the ending now.***
***Did anyone else think Christian Bale wasn't a very good Batman? - Bale was the best live action but Conroy has the voice down pact! He is Batman in my book!
ReplyDelete---
The "Swear to me!" scene in "Batman Begins" really put him on the map. That was my idea of Batman. Aggressive and scary to the criminals! He's probably the best Batman of the lot, although they all nicked Keaton's Batman voice!***
I think Val did a very credible job and should have continued! What I heard at the time, he seemed to prefer making "The Saint" franchise his most noteworthy work! It didn't happen, therefore making a huge mistake! It may have been totally different if Clooney hadn't taken over!
***Who are the villains that were perfectly cast in superhero movies?
Heath Ledger's Joker (TDK)
Tom Hardy's Bane (TDKR)
Liam Neeson's Ra's Al Ghul (BB)
Cillian Murphy's Scarecrow (BB)
Aaron Eckhart's Two-Face (TDK)
Marion Cotillard's Talia (TDKR)
Ian McKellen's Magneto (X-Men)
Liev Schreiber's Sabretooth (Wolverine)
Michael Shannon's Zod (Man Of Steel)
Mickey Rourke's Whiplash (Iron Man 2)
---
Harvey Dent - What if he had been in Batman Begins? - They were originally planning for Harvey Dent to appear in BB, but they changed his character to Rachel Dawes and had her be Bruce Wayne's love interest. They didn't think they could do him justice.***
In the animated series, Bruce and Harvey were good friends! Fine, they could have had him in BB, but should have waited until the TDK to turn him into Two-Face! BB was already an epic so long, it's hard to get through! With another villain, it would have been too much to take in; as far as I was concerned!
***Does Selina know that Bruce is Batman from the beginning Or does she only find out when Bane calls Batman by his true identity (Bruce)? I'd like to think that she's intelligent enough to realize that Bruce and Batman are the same person, but she looks genuinely surprised when she hears Bane call Batman "Bruce" when they are in the sewers.***
There's no reason to believe anyone outside of Alfred, Fox, and Rachel knew who Batman really was until that fight with Bane! Even Gordon didn't know until he was given a hint at the end of the movie!
***I'd say Nolan's movies had the best supporting characters. Who in Batman '89 was better than Oldman's 'Gordon,' Caine's 'Alfred,' Freeman's 'Lucius' and the rest?***
I don't consider it so, but most think the Joker carried that 1st film! I was quite hesitant to accept Keaton as Batman, but he did a very credible job and was sorry he moved on after "Batman Returns!" I really liked Val Kilmer in the role in "Batman Forever," but from what I heard, he thought "The Saint" franchise would be more his speed; 'wrong decision!' It tanked even though I liked it!
***1 thing each Batman movie did the best - (opinions)
ReplyDeleteBatman: The Movie (1966)
- Best sense of humor about itself
Batman (1989)
- Best supporting characters
Batman Returns
- Most unpredictable villain (Catwoman)
Batman Forever
- Most tight and well-written story
Batman & Robin
- Alfred was loved and appreciated
Batman Begins
- Bruce is more flawed and real
The Dark Knight
- The best descent to villainy (Two-Face)
The Dark Knight Rises
- Gotham City needed Batman the most
Too bad we can't mix and match, huh?
---
I really can't pinpoint once specific thing over other things. I really love these films, and love too much about them to pick and choose.***
I agree! I watch each and everytime these movies come on cable! I don't want to choose the best either! Each has something I really like seeing again and again!
***Describe every installment of the trilogy - The soundtrack made it for me
-Batman Begins: the perfect begining to the perfect trilogy
-The Dark Knight: astonishing, prepare to be wowed
-The Dark Knight Rises: the epic conclusion (and my favorite in the trilogy)***
Truly a great score; epic, haunting, memorable!
***Bruce Wayne inspired to be Batman because of Superman? Thoughts on this possible angle to be used in "Man of Steel 2"?***
True enough Superman was a trailblazer! Since Bruce was human, he had to train hard to be the elite detective and protector he became!
***Do you think Blake would have become Nightwing or Batman? - Nightwing. Gotham thought Batman was dead. They memorialized him.
---
I think it was left up for interpretation: Bruce isn't dead since he is spotted by Alfred at the end at that cafe. Blake doesn't become Batman b/c a.) There was a statue immortalizing Batman and the legacy he left behind - Blake will respect that b.) When Blake entered the Bat cave there were no remnants of Batman's suit. The lady also didn't just say that she liked the name Robin, but also 'you should GO BY your other name' - insinuating that he BECOMES Robin and that it's not just a 'shout out' to the character. So I'm choosing to interpret it as he becomes Robin and at some point Bruce returns and picks up the mantle as Batman - thus forming the greatest partnership in pop-culture history.***
Either way, I suggested they go "Batman Beyond" with Bruce in the Batcave as support for Blake! He's not that smart yet and needs a lot of training!
***Bane, what I can't get over about the character - On first glance Bane's mask could be interpreted as a protective helmet; it'd be like seeing someone wearing a bullet proof vest and then targeting the vest by shooting it.***
ReplyDeleteWell it was better than taking on classic Bane persona of a weakling, dependant on venom to give him super strength I guess!
***Why is Bane so much stronger than everyone else? - That does not make much sense; it's not like he lifts any weights or does exercises during or before the movie that we can see. He has the mask on his face and it would make it very hard for him to eat at all and people that muscular require a large amount of food and protein to maintain a body like Bane has. it also seems like the mask with it's constant supply of pain suppressing drugs might explain it too, maybe he feeds in ammino acids and other things to keep himself unnaturally strong, or maybe the pain suppressants enable him to do things that other people cannot do, b/c his body does not feel the pain as much as most people's bodies.
But they never explain why Bane is so much stronger than everyone else in the movie, what he does to maintain his muscular build, why he is so powerful, and can break a man's neck with his hand, or why he can destroy anyone in combat and break concrete easily. His mask should make it hard for him to eat at all, which would make him a skinny guy in reality, not muscular and imposing. Nolan must not have been thinking this through, unless Bane takes the mask off to shave his head and eat and work out, then puts it back on, on a regular basis, but the movie implies that he is not able to freely remove it.
---
Ehhh, ever think he spent years training? He was ex LOS too mon ami. Grew up in a prison pit where he probably spent day and night pumping up.***
In another thread, supposedly an anesthetic was supplied to him in that mask; hense his imperviousness to pain and acquisition of super strength!
***Rank the live action actors who've played Batman. Christian Bale - Michael Keaton - Adam West - Val Kilmer - George Clooney***
Bale, only by a hair due to having a broken back incompacitating him!
Kilmer went through a lot in the 1st 5 min. of hanging onto a helicopter and fighting with maniac before it crashes into the S Of L diving into the ocean! He's buried alive after getting past being incinerated by Two Face as well!
Keaton was shot with a silver platter underneath his clothing, but his plane was also shot down by Joker!
Clooney & West was more comedic relief, barely taking punches from villains and their hoods ever so often!
***Christian Bale - Michael Keaton - Robert Lowery - Lewis Wilson - Adam West - Bruce Thomas - Val Kilmer - George Clooney***
Thanks for bringing up the Batman from 60+ years ago in B/W! I saw them, but forgot their names! Thanks again!
***Why did Gordon's wife leave him and take the kids? Sure the event with Two Face was traumatic, but they should have had time to get over it.***
Only seeing segments of "TDK & TDKR" a few times, I didn't remember she had left and taken the kids, but I can understand what she was going through! The Two Face incident was just one of many occasions where Gordon is the target of his own cops who are just as criminal as the thugs they swore to uphold the law against! To hurt Gordon, his family was just sooo vulnerable and it only made sense to pack up and leave! Gordon actually thought he was making a difference! "I felt her pain!" If he wants to put himself in jeapardy everyday for people who don't appreciate it, more power to him, but it made her wanna run!
***What if Eric Bana was chosen to play Batman instead of Ben Affleck? - Yeah, I could see him as Batman.***
ReplyDeleteAfleck has just never impressed me, barely seeing him at all before "Daredevil!" Is that a new thing; actors who play one superhero gets promotion to another? I just heard Chris Evans is doing Captain America after being the Torch for 2 movies in The Fantastic Four" sagas! Ryan Reynolds (Green Lantern) in line to play Superman in 10 years?
***And he's a damn good Captain America if you ask me.
---
My top closures of trilogies, in order of how much they were satisfying to me.
*The Lord of the Rings - The Return of the King: Amazing, even without the Scouring of the Shire. Theatrical edition: 9/10. Extended edition: 10/10
*The Dark Knight Rises: Awesome conclusion of the Batman odyssey. 9/10
*Alien 3: The heroic sacrifice of Ripley was dazzling. I ignore Ressurrection. 8/10
*Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade: Sensational adventure of Indy and his father. I totally ignore The Kingdom of Crystal Skull. 7/10
*Star Wars VI - Return of the Jedi: Despite the Ewoks it was pretty cool. 6/10
*Back to the Future Part III: Despite the inconsistencies it rocked. 5/10
*Robocop 3: The final chapter of the saga was good but not amazing. 4/10
*X-Men - The Last Stand: Pretty dramatic but satisfying anyway. 3/10
*The Matrix Revolutions: Average but satisfying. 2/10
*Iron Man 3: Satisfying, but i expected more. 1/10
And now... *Terminator 3: Unsatisfying and unnecessary. T2 had been the perfect ending and they spoiled it. 0/10 - *Spider-Man 3: Horrible. 0/10***
"Aliens 3" was one of the rare occasions where the sequel was better than the original! Thanks for reminding me of it!
***Does the lack of visual continuity in the trilogy bother you in Nolan's Batman? - An 8 movie series with 4 different directors and spanning across 10 yrs (in real life, not the story's timeline) is bound to have lots of changes. We were lucky that Nolan's trilogy was directed by just Nolan, and didn't change directors. These changes were most likely made b/c Nolan was thinking "Hm, perhaps this would look better." So, throughout the trilogy, we have new Wayne Tower, new Gotham (change from Chgo to NYC, which bothers me because Chgo is awesome, new Batcave. What I appreciate is that in TDK Batman's costume/armor changes, but with explanation. If we were given an explanation for everything, it would have been better.***
I'm one that just accepts stuff like that; esp. when spanning so many years! I too was a little unhappy with the change of venue from my home of Chicago to NYC!
***The point is that Gotham's "peace" is built on a lie and merely a facade, waiting for whenever the other shoe drops and the people of th city realize that Harvey Dent was evil. Bane and the League of Shadows believe that Gotham needs to be destroyed. Just b/c it's relatively peaceful now doesn't mean that evil that Gordon and Bruce Wayne tried to bury isn't still there. It was Ra's plan to destroy the city; Bane was fulfilling his legacy. - Also, Talia's plan was to punish Bruce for killing her dad by forcing him to watch as she finished his work. That, to me, is the main motivation. They returned to punish Bruce Wayne and the people of Gotham for their sins.***
Great thread and thought provoking! Everything was a lie by the time of "TDKR;" peace, equality, and even the symbols were a lie!
***Trust me, some people still in fact consider the Tim Burton films to be superior. Only Batman '89 was well liked among audiences. "Returns" had a very mixed and controversial reception, but even that film seems to have built a cult following recently.***
ReplyDeleteI didn't have a problem with the Burton incarnations of Batman! I had reservations about Keaton only b/c of his limited exposure at the time with "Beetlejuice" his last major work! He worked out fine and the producers went all out in advertizing, getting 2 musical scores attached to the project, and of course sticking to the formula of these kinds of films, making sure the villain was a major star; Jack Nicholson! Months before it came out he had a very generous cotract, with a percentage of the movie and its merchandise sales! I couldn't have been happier; esp. since the sequel with Devito and Pfeiffer was even better, w/ a cameo of Pee Wee Herman who had been disgraced a short time before for lewdness! People were pushing for Adam West to have a part in the movie so it had a huge splash!
"Batman Begins" outdid all my expectations being produced as an epic film with music that really uplifted the audience like in some kind of gladiator movie! It was well made and screamed for sequels! Luckily we got a couple! We'll see what happens with Afleck! Right now I'm not hopeful, rarely seeing him in much besides "DareDevil!" I'm just not a movie goer, only seeing this one b/c I babysat a house and dog for a cousin this past winter!
***Why didn't Val Kilmer come back for Batman + Robin?***
I loved his portrayal of Batman, but if IIRC, he chose "The Saint" as the franchise he thought would be more successful! Needless to say it was a mistake! I liked the movie enough, but it didn't catch on and a sequel was never produced that I know of!
***Him and Schumacher didn't get on heh.
---
Dark Knight Rises, Alien 3, Return Of The Jedi, Godfather III - WHAT is it about the 3rd in a trilogy that pisses people off. Its almost always the 3rd movie that gets heavily criticised.***
It's hard to follow; way out there! A lot of plotholes, but I love anything Batman; even the animated versions! I don't always think #3 is bad; love X-Men 3, Blade 3, & Alien 3! I think with the Alien franchise, they got better as they went along believe it or not; even #4! Still haven't seen Spiderman 3!
***Meh, don't feel much about Alien 3. Don't hate it like AVP.R, nor do I like to ever watch it again. It's cool you think the movies got better as they went along, I have a friend who thinks just like that. Me myself personally thinks only the first 2 Alien films were masterpieces, after that they only went downhill. I actually love X-men 3 just as much as the rest of the franchise. It took me a while to admit that, since bad reviews and a loud majority can work sort of brainwashing on you. After I gave it a rewatch recently, I found myself enjoying it a lot more then I expected. I haven't seen any of the Blade movies unfortunately; keep missing them whenever they're on TV and I'll admit I'm not THAT interested.***
---
Loved Cavill since "The Tudors," but I'll wait for "Man Of Steel" to hit cable; patient and cheap! Besides that, I hate the new cineplexes! My ears can do without the abuse! They blast the sound, often hearing the damn movie on the street! lol! Been to maybe 6 movies in the last 30 years! I'm hopeful it's good enough to wait for! Still haven't seen "X-Men: 1t Class!" I hear a sequel is in the works already!
***Tom Hardy - A bad mistake, the voice of Bane. In many of the scenes he was unintelligible. The mask got in the way of his performance.***
ReplyDeleteI thought they had dug up George Sanders; (Mr Freeze from the old series)!
***OMG, that's it. George Sanders played Mr Freeze? Mind = blown!***
If memory serves, they couldn't get the same actor to play Mr. Freeze back in the 60's! They wound up with 3 that I can remember; Sanders, Eli Wallach, & Otto Preminger of all people ("WILD" was OP's catchphrase)!
***Rank ALL Batman movies you have seen; both live action and animated. My goal is to watch all of them soon.
The Dark Knight
The Dark Knight Rises
Batman Begins
Batman: Under the Red Hood
Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker
Batman: Mask of the Phantasm
The Batman/Superman Movie: World's Finest
Batman (1989)
Superman/Batman: Public Enemies
Batman (1966)
Batman Forever
Batman Returns
Batman & Robin
---
1) Batman Begins
2) The Dark Knight
3) Batman: Under the Red Hood
4) Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker
5) The Dark Knight Returns Part 1
6) Year One
7) The Dark Knight Rises
8) Batman (1989)
9) The Dark Knight Returns Part 2
10)Batman Forever
11)Batman Returns
12)Batman and Mr Freeze: SubZero
13)Batman and the Mystery of the Batwoman
14)Gotham Knight
15)Batman (1966)
16)Batman & Robin
---
Batman's 'No Killing' Policy - Why does he insist on not killing anyone? People are trying to kill him, yet he insists on fighting them straight up and shows far more mercy than he gets. His adherence to this absurd moral code only leads to more death. If he had any balls/brains he'd kill his enemies to ensure that other innocent people lived.***
I always figured with his vigilante tactics, he could still work with the police if he just captured them! If he was killing them, he would be just as much a criminal as the people he's trying to apprehend!
***Top 5 Superheroes - 1. Batman, 2. Superman, 3. Spider-Man, 4. Wolverine, 5. Iron Man***
ReplyDeleteFunny how the comics and animators have elevated Batman and Spiderman to the top of their respective genres! Superman used to be "Top DOG," but not anymore! Even Wolverine has assumed a leadership role regardless of his animal insticts to survive! I can't accept Iron Man, even though he's been great in the past! His egomania and obvious mental instability of late casts a lot of aspersions on his ability to lead at times! He really can't be trusted since he seems to distrust all concerned! His weakness outside of the suit is a real pain as well; heart trouble and just weak w/o his suit!
***Top 5 Supervillains - Loki, Scarecrow, Darth Vader, Lex Luthor, Magneto; honorable mention of Megatron & The Joker***
Scarerow? His only weapon was fear and he had to use a drug to illicit that! At least Lex had a super intellect! The others had true power; just saying!
***yeah...but I'm going with the Cillian Murphy version
---
1. The Joker - 2. Magneto - 3. Lex Luthor - 4. Darkseid - 5. Dark Phoenix***
Now you're talking; Darkseid, Magneto, & The Dark Phoenix! You're talking real power now; devastating and uncalculable power!
***What does Terry Call Bruce Wayne? Does he call him Bruce or Mr. Wayne? And what does Bruce call Terry? it seems in the series they never call each others name.***
I'm sorry, but what are you talking about? They both and all names were used for each of them! Bruce called Terry, "Terry and McGinnis!" Terry called Bruce, "Bruce, Mr. Wayne to outsiders, and 'old man' under his breath!"
***Anne was the best Catwoman - Agreed. Only Newmar and Meriwether rival her.
---
She made me forget Michelle Pfeifer and Halle Barry.***
I didn't really think Halle should have been counted as a "Batman" Catwoman! She was portrayed more like a superhero other than a thief!
***I don't believe Ms. Hathaway was the best Catwoman in the Batman series, Eartha Kitt already carries that mantle, but I felt that she was a very irresistable, if not a resilient interpretation of the character.
---
I feel more & more sorry for Bane - Maybe I'm a pussy...ok yes, I am. Yes this isn't the best movie ever made...and I still think Bane's voice is AWFUL... But...Bane saved Talia in the pit when she was a kid...so that's something good...did she brainwash him or something?
clearly there was some good in him....and all this stuff about blowing up Gotham had to be from her...
So anyway...Bane...did he do all this for a woman? AND WHERE THE HELL CAN I FIND A MAN LIKE THAT?***
***Bane is one of the best tragic figures in superhero films. - Bane had a crappy life, but I don't think he fits a tragic archetype. He doesn't have a defining character trait that both makes him great and ruins him. The loyalty that's a big part of this interpretation of Bane didn't make him lose, getting punched in the face a lot and shot with a cannon did.***
ReplyDeleteDefinitely! Harvey was a good guy turned bad! Nothing more tragic than that between the two! Bane was a soldier of a terrorist group! Being somewhat noble protecting Talia doesn't change that! The Joker was already a bad guy, so there's nothing tragic about his escalation of evil either! They're all still killing innocent people; well people! No one's really innocent in these films! Gotham was decadent and needed something to turn it around! Knocking off so many wasn't the way though!
What gave Al Ghul the right to exact revenge or punishment on a lone city anyway? He wasn't insane, but his plan still made no sense! The rest of the country was still as corrupt! The plan made about as much sense as 911 back in '01! We went on about our business as if nothing had happened! We haven't learned anything from it either!
***If everyone did things that made sense, we wouldn't have bad guys.***
You can be a bad guy and still make sense! Ra's wasn't as much a bad guy as much as an egomaniac who thought he could run things better than anyone else! I wouldn't even call it evil intent, but killing innocent people to get that power was his undoing IMO!
***Ra's was a terrorist and an extremists. People like him actually exist in the world; same w/ Joker, Bane, and Talia. - Anyone wish this film was never made?***
Out of the 7, I've only felt that way about "Batman & Robin!" It was the worst in so many ways!
***I totally agree with you. Not only was it one of the most disappointing movie experiences (along with X3, Spiderman 3 and others) of all time, it also takes away so much from the earlier movies. I still couldn't bring myself to watch TDK again since, although I LOVED that one to death. By making such a ridiculously dumb and pretentious finale, Nolan seriously hurt the whole trilogy. How ANYONE is able to overlook the MASSIVE flaws of this mess of a movie is totally beyond me.
---
Talia was the one who killed herself because she would not stop driving into the blasts of The Bat.***
That's how I felt about it; same as her father! They killed themselves by not giving up their notorious plans to annihilate innocent people! No sympthy or regret was forthcoming!
***Exactly; Batman didn't fire rockets at Talia's truck in order to kill her, he did it to stop the truck so that he could get the bomb. Her dying was an unfortunate consequence. Just like with Two-Face, Batman didn't tackle him in order to kill him, the tackle was to save Gordon's son; never intended Dent to fall off the building.***
***TDK is and always will be the best of the Nolan Batman trilogy. It raised the bar. "Begins" will probably always be the underdog b/c it keeps getting eclipsed by the sequels. It should get as much attention as they do.
ReplyDelete- http://batman-news.com/2013/09/21/dark-knight-trilogy-ultimate-collectors-edition-review/ - ***
The way I see it is if "Batman Begin" wasn't so good, the sequels might never have been made! I'll always think of BB being something epic; almost as much a classic as a gladiator film! The score really enhanced that feel, reverence, and emotion I have for the initial reboot!
***The earlier Batman Beyond episode "Heroes" featured the Fantastic Four pastiche "The Terrific Trio" along with other subtle Marvel Comics nods (an overbearing authority figure with a narrow mustache like J. Jonah Jameson), and quite a bit of the "futuristic" look of this series is clearly influenced by Jack Kirby's artwork (like the huge circular discs dominating all the circuitry). I think that Batman Beyond liked to wear its influences on its sleeve.***
Marvel and DC comics have been ripping each other off for as long as I can remember! Watching X-Men animated series, they had a superman character who was the Shi'ar Queen personal body guard in "The Phoenix Saga!" He could fly thru space without oxygen, had super breath to blow you away, and was invulnerable for the most part!
***I think "ripping each other off" is putting it a bit strongly. The character you're referring to, Gladiator, was created in the X-Men comics in the '70s, along with the Shi'ar Imperial Guard as an homage or pastiche of Superboy and the Legion of Super-Heroes. This happened in large part b/c X-Men artist Dave Cockrum had come to Marvel from having just done a long, successful stint on the Legion. I've always had the impression that things like the Gladiator/Superman thing, ...comparison are really more a matter of good-natured fun btw colleagues. You have to remember, while Marvel and DC are separate entities, the guys who work for them are often the same.***
Well the 70's was about the time I stopped buying comics and I definitely didn't keep up with the writers and artists! I was DC all the way thinking Marvel was the minor league! In my day I thought you were blackballed if you went over to the dark side! They were the only game in town back then! Comics had just gone to 25 cents after paying just 12 cents for years! Boy am I old! What are they clipping from people thesee days? I have bought a couple collectors items, but I haven't seen them out of the box in years! The graphic novels seemed to be taking over! After all these years, I still rate Batman and Superman king of the comics, but things could have changed! I don't know anyone that really cares anymore! Animated programs have Batman #1 while Marvel has gone hard for Wolverine after Spiderman ruled! Is that still the case?
***Marvel was definitely more of a risk-taker back in the 70s, experimenting with magazine formats, monster and horror titles, kung-fu books, minority characters, sci-fi space opera, sword-and-sorcery, etc. DC did manage to craft some very good treatments of their classic characters. Batman, Superman, and the Legion all changed and evolved with the times. These days, new single-issue comics are going for 4-5 bucks apiece and most of those "graphic novels" you see on the shelf are just collected runs of multi-issue story arcs.***
***...I'd go with The Shadow, the hero that influenced Batman! What an underrated film. Critics must have been smoking something when this came out.
ReplyDeleteComic Book Flicks #1: The Shadow ('94)
Before Batman picked up his cape and cowl, The Shadow was the ultimate vigilante. Originally appearing in pulp 30s magazines and later a radio serial starring Orson Welles. The character would become an undeniable influence on the Caped Crusader, yet he largely fell into obscurity himself when DC and Marvel went on to dominate the market. He has appeared in several comic books over the last few decades, incl. a '12 revamp by Garth Ennis, but most will remember him best – if they remember him at all – from this '94 motion picture. It was critically panned by many at the time and didn’t become a hit for Universal, but I find The Shadow to be one of the most underrated superhero films out there, and one of the finer entries in what is now a subgenre of period-specific comic book flicks.
The wealthy Lamont Cranston (Alec Baldwin) is a man with a shady past. Somewhere in Tibet after the WWI, Cranston has fallen into the darker recesses of his soul and becomes a barbaric warlord. After being abducted by priests of the powerful Tulku, he is shown the error of his ways and learns how to “cloud men’s minds,” a form of hypnosis that allows him to control people’s thoughts and perceptions. Seven years later, he returns to his native NY to right wrongs as the Shadow. But his skills are put to the test when the villainous Shiwan Khan (John Lone) arrives in a coffin at the city museum. Shiwan also has the ability to control people’s minds, and plans to destroy Manhattan with an atomic bomb. What’s an anti-hero to do?
It occurs to me that the world wasn’t ready for The Shadow when it was released. Now we have hits like X-Men: First Class and Captain America: The First Avenger, the period comic book film seems like a sure bet. The Shadow was one of 3 such projects in the 90s that failed to interest audiences, including The Rocketeer ('93) and The Phantom ('96). I enjoy all 3 quite shamelessly, although the latter is w/o a doubt a guilty pleasure. The Shadow is 2nd best to Joe Johnston’s Rocketeer (a film that got him the job directing the aforementioned First Avenger). But that isn’t a knock against Cranston’s 1st (and so far last) screen appearance. This film plays like a weird hybrid of Raiders of the Lost Ark and Tim Burton’s Batman. I don’t know about you, but that’s my kind of movie.
As directed by Highlander‘s Russell Mulcahy, The Shadow really revels in its throwback universe. What I love about these pulp settings is the fact that it allows for all the hyperbolic gunplay, explosions and vast cityscapes you expect from this stuff, but is also set so far back in history that it takes on a level of fantasy that is really appealing. Plus, I totally dig old-school detective stories and Film Noir; you almost need a love of these tropes to fully appreciate it. Mulcahy shakes the elements around and pours them into an intoxicating blend of top-level cinematography and enjoyable plot twists. Some call it cheesy, but I call it accurate to the source material.*** (cont.,)
***The Shadow ...cont.,
ReplyDeleteWhat was most surprising on my revisit, however, is how much this movie mirrors Christopher Nolan’s Batman Begins ('05). Cranston learns the rules of the game via an Oriental master before returning home to fight crime in NY – the prototypical Gotham – as a rich crusader. The Shadow’s reveal is also similar to the Dark Knight’s in that movie. On the Brooklyn Bridge. Cranston interrupts some mobsters trying to dispose of a timid doctor. His booming voice surrounds them, intimidating the crooks and raising the tension until he moves in to attack. His visage is also uncannily close to the magazine covers that created him, although, humorously, the facial prosthetics make Alec Baldwin look more like William Baldwin. If there’s one thing that separates the Shadow from Batman here, it’s the fact that he begins his intimidation with a maniacal laugh. There’s a touch of the Joker about this most intriguing of crime-fighters.
Mulcahy has great confidence in peeling back the layers of the Shadow’s world, which feels satisfyingly complete. He works in tandem with 100s of agents across the city – many of whom owe him their lives – incl. his personal taxi service, Moe (the late and sorely missed Peter Boyle). Cranston even has a secret hideout with a delightfully intricate entrance that brings to mind Bruce Wayne’s wonderful toys. Even if you don’t buy into the character himself, you buy into the world Mulcahy has painstakingly built. If you’re a fan of cinematic style, and I most certainly am, The Shadow will scratch your itch. Production design, lighting and CGI effects are fantastic for a film of its age and budget (a relatively modest $40 M).
The characterisation is also fantastic. It goes without saying that Baldwin is a fine actor, and his increasingly rare lead performance here is perhaps as unappreciated as the film. As the millionaire, he is effortlessly debonair. As the haunting Shadow, he treads the line wonderfully btw hammy and creepy, fully embracing the character’s pulpy roots and darker undercurrents. This is man who slaughtered people on the battlefield to sate his own blood-lust, and behind Baldwin’s charm is something quietly sinister. Screenwriter David Koepp (Jurassic Park) wisely parallels the anti-hero with the villain. Lone overacts to an appreciable degree as Khan, but Mulcahy makes the most of the contrasting stars, summed up elegantly in a nightmare sequence where Cranston rips off his own flesh to reveal Shiwan’s face beneath. The antagonist keeps our hero on his toes throughout, even breaking into Shadow HQ mere moments after entering the picture. The two adversaries are perfectly matched, and how often can you say that in a superhero film?
Performances are fair to great across the board. There’s some obligatory eye candy from Penelope Ann Miller as the telepathic Margot Lane, some well-played comedy by Ian McKellen as her scientist father, and Tim Curry showing us what he might have done with the Joker in Batman: The Animated Series as the cackling Farley Claymore. Film buffs will be in heaven with this ensemble.
...If The Shadow hadn’t underperformed, his career might have turned out very differently, depriving him of the chance to work on more prestigious projects. His muted return to bigger budget filmmaking with the disagreeable Resident Evil: Extinction ('07) at least gives us the hope that he lands another gem soon.
I saw The Shadow at the cinema when I was 9, and to this day I have no idea why it is so frowned upon. The film’s 5.7 score on IMDb is an absolute travesty. This is a sumptuously shot superhero outing that does complete justice to the character’s sizeable legacy whilst having some fun with the genre. In an era where these films dominate the box office, Mulcahy’s picture happens to be greater than many of them. Although “the weed of crime bears bitter fruit,” as Cranston tells us, some of it wouldn’t hurt when watching this. Fingers crossed that Sam Raimi can get his long-touted reboot going so that, one day, The Shadow can rise again.***
***Bruce's goal was always to save Gotham as a whole entity; from corruption and the mob. It was never about street crime and helping someone that can't help themselves.***
ReplyDeleteI believe Batman fought petty criminals all the time just to let them know he was out there; hense lesser crime on the street! He excelled at dealing with the mob by using disguise and informants to infiltrate them, but he made his name dealing with run of the mill criminals on the street!
***The movie does no justice to the character of Batman/Bruce Wayne and makes him out to be a cry baby who gives up being Batman for 8 yrs. Only the all magical "Harvey Dent act" got rid of crime. Sure, the character has retired before in the comics, but the reasoning behind them were better written and executed. Above all else, they make it seem like Bruce Wayne hates being Batman and treats it like a chore. In "BB" it gave us the impression that Bruce Wayne was his true mask and Batman was his true self, not the other way around. Having him quit being Batman & leaving everything up to John Blake; sorry fanboys, but the Batman I grew up on doesn't quit that easily and is not nearly as selfish either. 'Batman Beyond' handled his retirement better where he had to give up the cape and cowl b/c he was getting too old and was losing his edge.
Bane could've been a great villain but instead he's just a retread of both The Joker and Ras Al Ghul, and without his venom he isn't nearly as threatening as he's made out to be. I'm sorry, but w/o the venom aspect, this Bane doesn't stand toe to toe with his comic counterpart. ...He broke all the inmates out of prison in Gotham City in an attempt to weaken Batman and later at a fundraiser he was able to tell who Batman really was behind the mask by paying close attention to how Bruce Wayne was walking. Making Batman so weak, he beat him to a pulp and broke his back, almost retiring Batman forever. Bane couldn't have cared less about giving "hope" to the people of Gotham or giving the inmates of Arkham or Blackgate their rights back, he just wanted to break Batman's body and spirit and own Gotham's criminal underworld with an iron fist. This movie's version of Bane is closer to home than his Batman & Robin counterpart, but like his Batman & Robin counterpart he is also a lackey, a messenger, an over-glorified henchmen to Talia Al Ghul.
John Blake was the only character I liked, but I would've liked him far more had Nolan and his brother hadn't made his actual name "Robin;" that bit made me groan and face palm in the theater. The action scenes, while better than Nolan's previous efforts, aren't even that good either. I have every right to criticize this movie as I do with any other. It's amusing though that some of these same people keep saying the exact same thing I just said to others when they discuss how other films got better ratings and reviews, how hypocritical is that?
As controversial as this may sound to a lot of people, I actually prefer "Batman & Robin" over this. A movie like B & R was easy to come by in those days. Back then you had other superhero/comic book blunders that were just as bad, if not worse like "Steel, Barb Wire, Tank Girl, Judge Dredd, & The Phantom." Nowadays comic book movies, esp. superhero ones have reached their peaks and are above and beyond such childish associations and are taken as seriously as any other film genre. Many thanks for this go out to the original "Blade, X-Men, Spider-Man (2002), Batman Begins, Sin City, The Dark Knight, Iron Man, & The Avengers" for raising the bar so high and leaving strong impressions on movie goers and studios. Films like "Green Lantern, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, both Ghost Riders, and TDKR" have no excuse for being lazy, childish, and pretentious. For those reasons alone I think they, not just TDKR, are worse films than "Batman & Robin."***
***The Batman-Joker dynamic ended perfectly in TDK. We got to see Joker's reaction to his death if he had been killed, and yet Batman refrained from letting him die. We had our cake and ate it too. It also ended in a stalemate in many ways. This was the perfect "resolution" to these two characters in that there was no resolution. It was written so well, anything afterward would ruin it.***
ReplyDeleteI keep seeing this same muse of Batman allowing Joker to die without taking into consideration he let Batman know about Harvey/Two Face and Gordon's family! Duh, again!
***It would be tragic, but then again, if Batman had killed Joker at the party for Harvey Dent, then Two Face wouldn't have been disfigured or had the hospital talk with Joker, Harvey would have gone on living, Gordon's family wouldn't have been in danger, Rachel would have lived, the ferry incident wouldn't have happened, the hospital wouldn't have exploded, several more cops would have lived, etc. The more Batman draws out his little game, the more everyone else pays. Batman and Joker keep on living, everyone else around them dies.***
As Bruce/Batman would say to Robin eventual, "when would it all end?"
***Considering what a cerebral villain The Riddler is, he would be perfect for Nolan. ...I do think Nolan was wrong to say Riddler had too many similarities to Joker. Riddler is about riddles and challenges of intelligence trying to prove how smart he is. The Joker couldn't give two hoots about that kind of thing. ..***
I could be exaggerating, but as cerebral as The Riddler has been, he's still little more than a petty criminal; all about money! The Joker, Penguin, and others are a lot more complex, often not caring about money at all; ie) Joker burning up a load of it in 'TDK!'
***I think Riddler can have been fitted in somehow. A megalomanical OCD type laying puzzles Jigsaw (Saw) style.
---
Bane voice is awful - Whether you hate it or not, it's become iconic in pop culture, just like Batmans voice. - "Iconic" doesn't necessarily mean "Icon" and doesn't even necessarily mean "good."***
I instantly thought about them digging up George Sanders for the "voice-over" of Bane! It certainly sounds like him; originally Mr. Freeze back in the 60's! He was such a popular villain, he was brought back with 3 different actors in the original series; Sanders, Eli Wallach, & Otto Preminger!
***Bane voice is awful - Whether you hate it or not, it's become iconic in pop culture, just like Batmans voice. - "Iconic" doesn't necessarily mean "Icon" and doesn't even necessarily mean "good."***
I instantly thought about them digging up George Sanders for the "voice-over" of Bane! It certainly sounds like him; originally Mr. Freeze back in the 60's! He was such a popular villain, he was brought back with 3 different actors in the original series; Sanders, Eli Wallach, & Otto Preminger!
***Hate Iron-man; barely got halfway through the 1st one.***
ReplyDeleteSame here! I only saw a few scenes and the conclusion of the first and second film; the 3rd hasn't hit basic cable yet! The overacting and banter of Downey just gets on my nerves! He's a great actor, but that kind of talking to oneself is more than a little much; along with the ego! If I do any Marvel viewing, it'll be the Avengers; loved the animated series way back when! Skipped the last 2 Spiderman serials as well!
***Yes, I agree about Robert Downey, jr. overacting; esp. in the 3rd...
---
The Dark Knight Trilogy Awards:
Best Movie: The Dark Knight Rises
Best Batman Performance: The Dark Knight
Best Performance by a primary villain: Heath Ledger, The Dark Knight
Best Performance by a non-Batman hero: Michael Caine, The Dark Knight Rises
Best Leading Lady: Anne Hathaway, The Dark Knight Rises
Best Music: Bane Chant, The Dark Knight Rises
Best Performance by someone outside the main cast: Rutger Haur, Batman Begins
Best Action Sequence: Interrogation/Race to save Dent and Rachel
Best non-action scene: Dark Knight Rises ending
Best story: The Dark Knight Rises
Most realistic: Batman Begins
Best Cinematography: The Dark Knight
Best Quote: "Ah yes I was wondering what would break first, your spirit...or your body?" - Bane, "TDKR"
Best Script: The Dark Knight (basically anything Heath Ledger says)
Best Costume: The batsuit in The Dark Knight/The Dark Knight Rises
Best Sound Effects: The Dark Knight Rises
Best Visual Effects: The Dark Knight
---
Batman's officially supposed to be around 31-32 in the New 52. He's 25 in the new 'Zero Year' origin which is set a little over 6 years in the past. As far as the Robin's go, yeah, that is a stretch. But this is broadly the timeline as far as the sidekicks go-
6 yrs ago: Batman debuts
5 yrs ago: Dick becomes Robin
4 yrs ago: Barbara becomes Batgirl
3 yrs ago: Barbara is paralyzed, Dick becomes Nightwing, Jason becomes Robin
2 yrs ago: Jason 'dies', Tim becomes (Red) Robin
1 yr ago: Jason returns and becomes Red Hood, Red Robin goes solo, Damian becomes Robin
0 yrs ago: Barbara returns as Batgirl, Damian dies
---
As an ending to a trilogy, this is fantastic; well written and thought through. As a stand-alone film it lacks some of the excitement and tension of the previous instalments, but it's still one of the best examples of blockbuster filmmaking of the last few years. Bruce Wayne’s story is complete, Batman is dead, Bruce Wayne lives on. The Dark Knight legend endures.***
I've been saying for at least a year now, the series should go the way of "Batman Beyond" with Bruce working the Batcave in support of Blake!
ReplyDelete***Batman Beyond? Now that's definitely something I want to see, and it wouldn't even have to be canon to any of the films. People say this a lot when fantasizing about who'd be in a "Batman Beyond" movie, but hands down Clint Eastwood as an old Bruce Wayne would be epic.
---
What is your take on the "no-kill" policy of the Batman? TBH, it's his most common foes (like the Joker) that do kill the most innocent in Gotham, over and over again. So all the innocent bloodshed after their first breakout out of jail (yet after the first time Bats finds them after breaking out) of all of Gotham's innocent people, is on the Batman's hands. Getting them behind bars doesn't seem to work in other words. If killing these mass murdering psychopaths is the only thing that works, I believe he's in a way entitled to do it.
I would have liked to see the Batman doing what needs to be done, when it needs to be done, even if he doesn't want to do it. To be the bearer of all negativity from the public, yet be the sole, uncrowned redeemer for the entirety of the greater good in Gotham - that to be his prize and his burden (if we by "greater good" mean less innocent deaths, terror, misery and suffering). That, to me. would be fitting for the name the Dark Knight.***
I always thought the reason Batman never killed anyone or even carried a gun was due to him being a vigilante! He didn't want to give the police any reason to hunt him down for arrest; even though older commissioner before Gordon didn't appreciate making his force look bad! It didn't have much to do with compassion IMO! I think it's more than a little disturbing to actual save a criminal who does nothing but cause death and distruction again and again! Superman the same way; being more politically correct than having a moral issue!
***...I have to say The Avengers is better than "TDKR" by miles. The characters are better written, the action scenes are PHENOMENAL, Whedon plays with genre convention so incredibly well, every character gets their moment to shine, and the thematic core of people overcoming their personal goals and egos for the greater good is one that I found as endearing as the thematic content in The Dark Knight. "Rises" was just a waste of potential and talent, esp. after the 2 great Batman films in the trilogy.***
Agreed; in so many ways! I haven't even seen "The Avengers" yet, but I'd take it over this very long-winded and meandering tale! Love Batman, but it could have been so much better; and shorter for that matter!
***Would have been better w/o Robin and just had Catwoman? - I felt the obvious. Blake was a very one dimensional character while Selina was actually an intriguing and layered character.
---
I agree. Not only is it a boring character, but he's not very important. They could have easily written him out and focus more on Catwoman like you said, or even Bruce or Gordon.***
...but having Blake, esp. at the end of the movie, gave it potential to go on; maybe "Batman Beyond!" Someone mentioned Clint Eastwood playing an old Bruce in support of the new Batman; maybe after Selina dies or runs off missing her criminal past!
***They were and still not going down that road.***
***Why couldn't they CGI the Joker in this? - ...I feel like it would be disrespectful to Ledger's legacy to just replace him with a CGI puppet and an impersonator.
ReplyDelete---
Joker was probably convicted of terrorism and is in some offshore prison - far removed from Gotham. Perhaps a shot of the Joker watching what was happening to Gotham on tv (like Bruce) would have been a decent cameo, but anything more wouldn't have made sense since he's probably far removed from Gotham.***
Going back to old Batman series of the 60's, Ma Barker, played by Shelly Winters had been caught with her boys (or so Batman thought)! After being incarcerated (or so Batman thought), she took over the prison! While giving a speech to the "yard birds" inside, we saw and heard Julie Newmar as Catwoman reference Penguin and The Joker locked up in solitary confinement! What would it have hurt to at least do that in "TDKR?" Oh, I forgot, Milton Berle who portrayed Louis "The Lilac" had been made a guard and was protecting the wall; catching Batman and Robin breaking in!
***Some people would say Man of Steel is a better superhero film than TDKR. - I agree about TDK trilogy being the superior films. TDK trilogy are the best superhero films, but that doesn't mean "Man Of Steel" isn't worthy of being in the same league. "MOS" isn't flawless, but what film is flawless? ...It's a very impressive Superman film. It's the best I've ever seen and it also happens to be 1 of the best superhero films I've ever seen.***
Still haven't seen "MOS," but it has to be better than the original series of films by Reeves! They were good enough for the time, but are a colossal joke to most people these days; esp. #3 with Pryor and #4 with Hackman! The effect of flying was a huge step up from George's portrayal in the 50's series! It was almost comical; the wires, jumping out windows, and the landings! I wonder did he suffer from shin splints near the end?
***Why does Bruce change his voice to lower and gravelly while being Batman?***
This thing with the voice instantly made me think of George Hamilton's duel role in "Zorro, The Gay Blade!" Nuff said? ;-)
***Rank these superhero franchises:
1. The Dark Knight Trilogy *****
Batman Begins *****
The Dark Knight *****
The Dark Knight Rises *****
2. Marvel Cinematic Universe ****
Iron Man ****
The Incredible Hulk ***
Iron Man 2 *** 1/2
Thor ***
Captain America: The First Avenger ****
Avengers ****
Iron Man 3 ****1/2
Thor: The Dark World N/A
3. Spider-Man Trilogy ****
Spider-Man ****1/2
Spider-Man 2 *****
Spider-Man 3 ***
4. X-Men Anthology ****
X-Men: ****
X2: *****
X-Men: The Last Stand ***
X-Men Origins: Wolverine ***
X-Men: First Class ****
The Wolverine ****
5. Superman Anthology ***
Superman: ***
Superman II: ***
Superman III: *
Superman IV: *
Superman Returns: N/A
6. Batman Anthology ***
Batman ***
Batman Returns ***1/2
Batman Forever **
Batman & Robin * - ***
***I'm a hard core Trekkie since the mid-1970's. ...Of course there are plot holes and of course Zephram Cochrane is radically different than ZC as he appeared in TOS. Plot holes abound in the Trek franchise, such as in WOK, why the devil do they have to load torpedoes manually? Despite this, as an overall space opera and Trek film, I think it's awesome. A rating of #6 is classic of typical IMDB ratings inflation, perhaps even orchestrated by fans. Batman fans rigged IMDB ratings in '08 to make the ridiculous Batman film 'The Dark Knight' achieve a #1 rating.***
ReplyDeleteFew are more a fan of "ST" and Batman, but I always have a problem with these so called rankings! I still haven't been able to watch but bits and pieces of "TDK" for some reason! Ledger's performance may have been great, but I had a real problem w/ the premise of this guy being some sort of genius that could foresee any circumstance; always ready to thwart the best efforts against him! Having another prisoner sitting in lockup w/ a bomb strapped to him was the height of ridiculousness! He was like a profiler that got into the head of all cops, 2-Face, and of course Batman; just too hard to watch from beginning to end! "BB" can be watched over and over, even the questionable "TDKR," but I can't get through "TDK!"
***The bomb was surgically implanted inside of him. I just watched TDK a few weeks ago. Great film. BB and TDKR are stupid films though. Not a Batman fan anyway though. But TDK is brilliant. I like guys who just want to watch the world burn. Probably why I find '24' watchable.
---
The problem w/ ALL of the Batman films is that they can't seem to escape the stupid writing. The animated series (and Mask of the Phantasm) managed to take itself seriously and had dynamite, crisp writing. Sure, Nolan up'd the game quite a bit and delivered superior Batman movies, but even he couldn't get away from the plain dumb stuff that most people think is excusable since "it's just a comic book movie dude; don't expect so much." BB and TDK had serious logic oversights and some flat out absurd moments. TDKR was nearly pure crap. It had no less than a cringe every 5 minutes starting right from the start. The only thing I liked about TDKR was the one thing I thought was going to suck: Catwoman.
Like I said, I liked BB and TDK even though they were flawed. I liked TDK so much that I expected a great film from the next one. Turned out to be one of the worst and most overrated movies ever. Had it been at least as good as BB, I would have put this trilogy among the greats despite the ubiquitous corny departures. I wish the roles were reversed and the animated series team had made the movies. Then we finally would have had a respectful Batman movie.
---
The Animated series is universally loved by Batman fans. There are plenty of them that hate Nolan's trilogy, despite being in the minority. The animated series has been regarded as the definitive Batman to many fans even over the comic book. Kevin Conroy's name often appears in arguments of who plays the greatest Batman and all he offers is his voice. The episode "Heart Of Ice" was actually integrated into the comic story for Mr Freeze's origin story as was the character Harley Quinn. I can't imagine Rachel Dawes or John Blake getting the same attention.***
Even at my advanced age of 57, I still prefer the animated series; esp. Justice League! It was there that Batman became KING of DC comics when most thought no one could beat Superman out! Over the years there was a juxtaposition of their worth, courage, and of course intellect! Superman was all brawn and felt invulnerable even though they weakened him more and more as time went on! Going into space he needed oxygen at times, a spaceship just in case he came across a red sun I guess, and in general things got tough w/ the villains created to thwart him!
***The Dark Knight Rises if Heath Ledger hadn't died? I don't think they would have gone with a Joker revisit at any rate, honestly. TDK was more than adequate in completely telling the "Batman vs the Joker" conflict. Philosophically, it goes on forever. The repercussions rippled throughout the rest of Bruce's life.***
ReplyDeleteIf Ledger had lived, they might have gone the route of dealing with him in Arkham like the animated series; creation of Harley Quinn and the obsession of Doctor Strange!
***I always kind of thought the Rachel character changed from one film to the next w/ the changing of the actress. Katie played her as more of an earnest woman while Maggie gave her more of a snarky edge to her. I like the version that Maggie played better, however I found Katie's version to be more believable as Bruce's love interest.***
Agreed! Katie a bit more innocent IMO! Maggie's been around the block a few times; actually standing up to the Joker! I can't imagine Katie's characterization doing that; ya stay quiet and hope for the best!
***Why exactly did Bruce himself need to fake his own death? Only less than a handful knew he was Batman. I realize this has probably been asked before, but if someone could explain it to me in a sentence or 2, I'd appreciate it.
---
I think there could be a few different reasons. One, and probably the main reason, is probably that he did not want the temptation of being Batman anymore. Alfred had alluded to this earlier. He said the world did not need Batman, but needed Bruce Wayne. However, since the two went hand in hand for Bruce, he could not be one and not the other. The best way for him to trust Gotham was to leave for good with no reason to go back. Bruce had also been presumed dead once before (Batman Begins), so if he ever did want to go back he likely could. I think another reason is that he wanted to be w// Selina and it would be kind of hard for her to stay considering her history. I know she wanted a new identity and that would help, but when the police know what you look like you might want to get out of town.
---
Metaphorical and thematic work just fine, I think. Watchmen did it pretty well. Esp. through Rorschach and the Comedian. Never read a "Tale Of Two Cities," but I've heard a lot about it. From what you two have said, it makes more sense now that Bruce would want to start over. He wasn't Bruce Wayne pretending to be Batman...he was Batman pretending to be Bruce Wayne. Bruce was only "Bruce Wayne" b/c he needed to be someone dissimilar from Batman. Once Batman "died", he lost the need for his eccentric snobbish alter-ego.***
True enough! I don't know how you could trust someone that turned you over to Bane like that; walked away so easily!
***Is Dent the Spiritual Successor to Thomas Wayne? "Your stand against organized crime is the first legitimate ray of light in Gotham for decades." Is it possible this line of dialog was supposed to imply more, but is written a bit more subtly than most of the other themes? My thought is that Bruce Wayne's admiration for his father was coming through in that moment. In the first film it is explained by both Ra's and Alfred that the Waynes' deaths galvanized the city to act against corruption (but from differing perspectives). It's no secret that Batman's motivation is strongly influenced by his father and by his two "surrogate fathers" Alfred and Ra's. Is this last ray of hope decades back implied to be Thomas Wayne?
ReplyDeleteIf one is to take the analogy a little further, then that "ray of light" was cut short and only allowed to illuminate Gotham for a short time. As Ra's states "Gotham has limped forward ever since" (or something very similar) which implies that light was nearly completely extinguished, enabling the League to infiltrate so deeply that they could destroy the city from within. It basically put Gotham on life support until someone like Dent can come along to pick up the torch. I think that makes Batman and Harvey's role slightly more nuanced as they both seem to emerge from the same chrysalis, keeping in line w/ the white and dark knights of Gotham theme.
The fact that Batman had to kill Harvey in the end actually bears even more weight for me b/c of it. In a way he relives the death of his father w/ Dent's demise, which explains quite a bit more of why he felt he needed to take the blame. And I definitely don't think it stopped there.
In the 3rd film, Gotham is galvanized by a heroic citizen's death once again, but it wasn't what Bruce envisioned as it comes in the form of a veiled but palpable police state. It is a corruption of the justice Harvey championed, but probably nothing Two Face would find objectionable (though I think it's a stretch to argue that the incarceration of individuals w/o trial was like flipping a coin on their alleged guilt). Still, I think that's a big part of why Batman was so charged about Harvey Dent; much more so than his desire to be w/ Rachel (and I think she could sense that too). Harvey was carrying on Thomas Wayne's legacy in a way Batman never could, which I can at least say explains why he was so broken in the 3rd film.
---
You could be right, I mean Dent was really the first legitimate person to actually have an acceptable way of fixing Gotham since the passing of Thomas, so maybe.***
I like it too! Those scenes w/ Thomas and his son w/ that music still gets me every time! Most people think of affluent people being too busy to care as much for their own offspring! It really affected me seeing that interaction!
***Was Peguiun always in Gotham City? - No, he traveled cross country w/ the Red Triangle Circus til they were shut down b/c of the disappearances of all the children who attended their shows. As for why he didn't resurface earlier, perhaps before Batman showed up and more bizarre characters began to pop up, he didn't see any need to. Max probably didn't cross his mind at the time either.***
ReplyDeleteThey've tried to insinuate Batman created these super villains for quite a while! I doubt Penguin would have stayed underground indefinitely just b/c there may not have been a Batman to thwart him! He had already planned a return to society IIRC!
***...This was the case with the 90's batman films. The film always revolved around the villains. Batman always seemed to take a back seat in his own film.***
That's been the case since they started this genre with Superman 35 years ago with a no-name like Reeves! The movies was made a blockbuster by the villains and of course cameos of Marlon Brando! Even Superman III and IV which were awful featured the villains more; Richard Pryor and Robert Vaughn!
***Vivaca Fox saved this movie! - Saved the movie? I don't think this movie was ever saved. - It could have been Ashton Kutcher instead of Affleck in "Superman vs Batman." So be grateful. That is all.***
True enough! This addition was more a caricature of what it should have been! More a comedy with the "flip" attitudes of the villains; Fries and Ivy! - That's true! lol! Kutcher is gorgeous, but his acting chops are about non-existent!
***He definitely can act, but that's a story for another time. And plus he was closer to getting Superman than he was Batman. I think he was considered, but the whole "Christopher Nolan wanted Bale, but the studio wanted Kutcher" thing is just a rumor. Kutcher actually talked once about how he auditioned for Brett Ratner's Superman and they offered him the part.***
He wasn't bad in that "Butterfly Effect" offering! I heard he auditioned for a movie, made it, then was fired promptly; been years since I head of that! Anybody?
***Yes, that actually has happened twice. Once it was for a Woody Allen movie, I think maybe "Anything Else," not sure the role (maybe it was Jason Biggs character), but yes. He was fired and Woody Allen told him to take acting lessons. The other time wasn't as bad, but he got the lead role in "Elizabethtown" and before filming began Cameron Crow (the director) decided he'd rather go w/ an actor from Shakespearean background, and so he cast Orlando Bloom.***
***I'm writing this to stimulate genuine discussion and would like to keep the ever present Nolan vs. Burton crap out of it and just discuss this film as is.
ReplyDeleteThe Batman character was one I grew up with. The first Batman experience I ever had was "Batman Returns" and til this very day it's one of my favorite superhero movies ever made. Not long after the animated series, the original '89 film followed. The animated series, naturally and to the surprise of no one at all, ruled my world as a kid and I share the almost universal opinion that it's one of, if not the best American cartoons ever made.
"Batman Begins" was the film that got me to start diving into comics...not just Batman, but the entire, endless world of comics and I haven't looked back since. During my childhood, my decent collection of Batman action figures got some of the best playtime sessions from me, and "Returns" and TAS was a constant presence. B89 though, was never something that stayed w/ me. I watched it from time to time as a kid, but I never really took to it like I did the follow up. I remember liking the film in spurts, and tuning out in others. I just found it kind of boring and all of these later, I still do.
I can't deny the impact of the film on both the character and the film industry, but it's just not all that good. I actually adore aspects of it. Keaton is still the best live action Batman imo, Nicholson is a riot to watch as The Joker, the score is legendary and the design of everything is spot on. But on a writing, narrative and pacing level, the movie falls largely flat. I won't deny being a Burton fan, considering it's a cool thing to hate him now, but he just wasn't cut out just yet for a production as big as "Batman" was.
Burton tried, he busted his butt, but it never truly all came together perfectly. The film feels like it takes place on set. The direction and editing just doesn't mask the sound stage look of much of the outdoor scenes. "Returns" still has that look, but it's masked SO much better with stronger directing and editing. On top of the flat sound stage feeling and look, the narrative has no real forward momentum, no drive. The movie shuffles it's feet for a long time. It meanders. There is no real sense of urgency to much of anything outside of the last 20 minutes or so. I think much of this is due to Burton trying to make his own kind of film while also trying to deliver a standard (not a bad word) action/adventure type of film. With "Returns" he was able to do his own thing (to some fans this is a bad thing, to others it's magic. "Batman Returns" is one of the most interestingly polarizing superhero films ever), which for me makes that film a much more fulfilling movie narratively and character wise.
Outside of Batman and the Joker, the side characters bring nothing to the proceedings. Vicki Vale is dull and lifeless and Knox is just superfluous and pointless. I can forgive extraneous characters in films if the movie is a good time, but considering I find large patches of B89 to be dull, said superfluous and characters drag the film down more in my eyes.
There really is much else to say, I wish I loved this film like many other fans do, but I just never saw the appeal. Visually, the film is wonderful, but the directing, editing, and pacing leave the film feeling flat and directionless most of the time. "Batman" is a mixed bag.
---
Nice review. I personally love "Batman" '89 just as much as "Batman Returns," but I will say that "Returns" is the easier movie to watch again and again. I have to be in the mood for "Batman," but I can watch "Returns" any night, maybe b/c of some of the things you've mentioned and just not noticing it.
Keaton will forever be the live action Batman for me :-) and tbh I feel the same about Nicholson, DeVito, and Pfeiffer. I find it hard to imagine anyone else topping those roles.***
***Rank the Villains - How would you rank the villains of the Batman films?
ReplyDeleteHere is mine:
Joker (2008)
Joker (1989)
Bane (2012)
Catwoman (1992)
Two Face (2012)
Poison Ivy
The Riddler
Catwoman (2012)
Penguin
Ra's al Ghul
Mr. Freeze
Max Shrek
Scarecrow
Two Face (1995)
Talia al Ghul
Bane (1997)
---
Bruce and Barbara - Did Bruce and Barbara have any interaction outside of being Batman and Batgirl? I don't think there is ever a conversation btw just the 2 characters in the entire film. - No they didn't. Either Dick, Alfred or both Dick and Alfred were present when Barabra talked to Bruce. Oh and speacking of Dick, Dick and Barbara acted like siblings in this movie which I found was a nice change. Then again this version of Batgirl was Alfred's niece so it made sense.
---
Yeah that was good; when they're having that little 'oh I know how to use a computer' at the end was a very brother/sister thing and Batman just stood there watching them like a father would in "Batman & Robin." lol. What was also good was that Dick was acting a little less like Robin and more like Nightwing too at times. Yeah the movie is terrible and Chris O'Donnell actually said that he felt like he was making a toy commercial - but he wasn't terrible in the movie.***
In a "Batman Beyond" episode related to the return of the Joker, she admitted to Terry that they took up w/ one another before she became Commissioner of Gotham!
***"Batman & Robin" is the only movie where Batman doesn't try to reveal his identity to anyone on purpose.
Okay in "Batman" '89 he wasn't expecting Alfred to bring Vicki to the cave, but he did want to reveal himself to Jack Napier at the end (though Joker doesn't specifically say 'Bruce Wayne,' it must have been on his mind that he said the phrase 'Ever danced with the Devil in the pale blue moonlight(?)' to someone recently).
In "Batman Returns" he inadvertently reveals his identity to Selina Kyle during their dance, but I think he did it on purpose. He even rips his mask off in front of her at the end.
In "Batman Forever" he intended to tell Chase Meridian that he was Batman - and she found out from a kiss.In "Batman & Robin" he makes no effort to tell anyone he's Batman. Barbara found out through Alfred....way to go Alfred!
Then in the Nolan movies he tells Rachel in "Batman Begins," in "The Dark Knight" he tries to reveal his identity to Gotham and in "The Dark Knight Rises" he 'tells' Gordon who he is on purpose. Blake guessed who he was, Bane and Talia already knew who he was, and Selina just heard Bane say 'Mr. Wayne'.
So there you go - in "Batman & Robin" he doesn't try to tell anyone he's Batman.
I forgot about the 1966 Adam West Batman movie....he doesn't try to reveal his identity in that. Okay so I guess it's just in the 2 uber camp movies Batman doesn't try to tell anyone he's actually Bruce Wayne.
---
When I saw TDKR in theater, I could hardly understand what Bane was saying. Watching it again w/ captions, I can see now what he said, but noticed how ridiculous his voice sounds. Exaggerating certain words and ending sentences w/ a question, so he sounds like Dr. Evil from Austin Powers movies. I love Robert Hardy, but this character was overdone; even for Batman.
---
I think the stupid voice was partly due to him dubbing all his lines in afterward. I just can't imagine that he would have used the same voice if he was actually speaking it when shooting the scenes. Imagine the strain it would have brought upon the other actors. How could you keep a straight face when acting alongside a guy who's supposed to be scary, but sounds like he's doing an intentionally cheesy Sean Connery impersonation?***
I keep telling you guys, they dug up George Sanders to dub that voice!
***Did Bruce and Barbara have any interaction outside of being Batman and Batgirl?***
ReplyDeleteIn a "Batman Beyond" episode related to the return of the Joker, she admitted to Terry that they took up w/ one another before she became Commissioner of Gotham!
***Yes, that was the real Barbara Gordon in the DC Animated Universe (who never became Oracle in that universe). She told Terry that Dick Grayson and her dated briefly before he became Nightwing - and then revealed that her and Bruce went out too, but all he ever cared about was being Batman and it got old. It was in the episode "Touch of Curare." I remember that b/c I watched the complete series boxset recently.***
Even at my age, I love those animated series; esp. Batman in "Justice League" episodes!
***Anyone Remember Seeing This in '92? ...I can recall many people weren't happy. anyone remember the hype and then the backlash after?***
For me, Batman was a real event like the release of the latest James Bond epic! A huge deal was made of Batman back then w/ it being filmed, premiering, w/ 2 musical scores; 1 by Danny Elfman and one by Prince! It was even a comeback of sorts for Pee Wee Herman!
***Who doesn't love Pee. ....I mean Paul Reubens in the pivotal role as Penguin's father?
---
The 1st Blade movie was what rescued the comic book film after "Batman & Robin" almost buried it. And the sequel helped set the trend for comic book sequels to raise the bar higher. "Blade II" was directed by Guillermo Del Toro, who kept some of the same tone as Stephen Norrington’s 1st film, but then upped the ante. W/ stunning visuals, action, and Ron Perlman playing a villain, "Blade II" easily became the best film in the franchise. Del Toro was supposed to direct a 3rd Blade film, however he had finally been given the opportunity to direct his dream movie—Hellboy—and so he passed. Other directors were considered, but then David Goyer, who wrote the scripts for all 3 films was able to step into the directing chair for the 1st time. And man, does it ever show.
The film is called "Blade: Trinity," but you’d be forgiven for being surprised at how small Blade’s role actually is in this film. Goyer was so focused on throwing in new characters b/c he wanted to create a Nightstalkers spin-off that he forgot this movie was still supposed to be about Blade. This caused a lot of drama on the set w/ Snipes and Goyer fighting a lot. Ryan Reynolds is really the only good thing about this movie, providing some much-needed humour to help ease the pain of the script and direction.***
It was a mess, but the movie was still entertaining! Biels going "toe to toe" w/ multiple vampires was the only thing that really bothered me! Same w/ Reynolds fighting and winning hand to hand over "Triple H!" People don't realize how "little" both of these actors really are!
***Yeah! I agree with you to an extent...but this sort of stuff happens in most action films at some stage. One of my pet annoyances, which bobs up frequently in this film, is the showering of broken glass, where nobody ever gets hurt/cut/severely injured. It's only done to dress up scenes, b/c it looks and sounds spectacular. There's Ryan Reynolds and Triple H rolling around in all this broken glass for instance, but do they get serrated which naturally would happen IRL? Course not!***
*** - Batman vs Robin - Part 1 -
ReplyDeleteWhat if instead of the movie being "Batman 'and' Robin," the title of the film be "Batman 'vs.' Robin" w/ plot focus on Batman and Robin turning against each other and fighting each other at the very end? Using most of the same characters from the original film, this is my idea of how the story and plot could be altered to make it about the fight btwn Batman and Robin:
Batman and Robin fight Mr. Freeze in the opening act. He gets away. Due to a bizarre science experiment gone wrong b/c of an explosion by deforestation from a rogue division of Wayne Enterprises, Dr. Pamela Isley is transformed into the mentally unstable, attractive plant-woman Poison Ivy. She discovers that she can control and communicate w/ plants and has the biological and chemical capabilities of the deadliest plants in the world. She decides to use this to her advantage as she plans to reclaim the Earth for plant-kind.
Ivy comes to Gotham w/ the intent of producing mutant plants to take over the world. Under the guise of Pamela Isley, she seduces Bruce Wayne and starts a relationship w/ him in order to access his money and resources at Wayne Enterprises to help finance her world domination. She steals his Wayne Enterprise ID while they make out at Wayne Manor. Bruce sees the Bat signal and leaves Pamela to suit up as Batman. Pamela uses the opportunity to suit up and goes to gain access to Wayne Enterprise to steal supplies and money needed to produce her deadly plants.
Batman and Robin go fight Freeze as he attempts to gain access to Wayne Enterprise to retrieve the Frozen body of his wife. Just as Freeze makes his way to the lab where his wife lies, Batman and Robin arrive and fight him. Ivy also is inside Wayne Tower and uses an explosive chemical to break open a vault. The resulting explosion destroys Freeze's wife's life support killing her. Freeze is enraged. Batman deals w/ Freeze while he sends Robin to investigate the explosion.
Robin discovers Ivy and the two fight. Batman apprehends Freeze and lets the police deal w/ him as he goes to help Robin. Ivy flirts with Robin while they fight and gives him a kiss to knock him out and make him fall for her. She gets away as Batman arrives. Ivy is attracted to Robin and decides to pursue a secret relationship w/ him to her advantage of breaking up Batman and Robin. She realizes that the 2 are the only ones who could stop her so intends to pit them against one another. She meets w/ Robin in secret and poisons his mind into believing that he does not need Batman and she is the one for him.
So there is a love triangle as Poison Ivy is in a relationship w/ Robin while Pamela Isley is in a relationship w/ Bruce Wayne w/ none of them knowing of each others' secret identity. Bruce and Dick start to fight over the fact that Dick is going out w/ Poison Ivy and letting her get away.
- tbc... -
***Batman vs Robin - Part 2 -
ReplyDeleteBruce begins noticing something's off about Pamela and through research of his finances and missing lab equipment, he eventually makes the realization that she is Poison Ivy. He confronts Pamela and the 2 fight at Wayne Manor. Dick comes in and is given the choice btwn siding with Bruce or Ivy. He chooses Ivy and knocks Bruce out cold. Ivy and Robin steal from the Batcave and destroy everything that remains.
Ivy and Robin invade Wayne Tower and grow mutant plants to consume the building into an Ivory Tower as their new lair. Ivy chemically alters the security guards into working for her and Robin. Her plants begin to consume the city and grow rapidly and uncontrollably. Gotham becomes a rainforest of deadly plants that kill people. Ivy and Robin move into the penthouse of Wayne Tower and consummate their relationship. As Ivy had planned, their sexual encounter leads Ivy to become pregnant with human/plant hybrids that grow rapidly.
Bruce awakes from his fight and realizes the danger Gotham faces. With no aid, Batman must turn to Mr. Freeze for help. He convinces Freeze to help him after revealing that Ivy is the one who killed his wife and he can avenge her death in helping him. He breaks Freeze out of Arkham and gets him past several guards and inmates. Freeze and Batman go to Wayne Tower and fight out the brain washed security guards and plants. They make their way to the penthouse and find large pods spread throughout the area. The pods open to reveal the human/plant hybrid children of Robin and Ivy now fully grown. They fight the mutants off and make their way to the "throne room" of Ivy and Robin. Ivy is in the process of birthing plant/human hybrids. Batman fights Robin in a climactic fight and uses a chemical to snap Robin back to his normal self.
Ivy grows uncontrollably powerful and is enraged that Batman took Robin from her. Freeze agrees to sacrifice himself by releasing an ice bomb that will kill Ivy and all her plants. Batman and Robin jump from the top of Wayne Tower as Freeze releases the bomb and is reunited with his wife in death. Batman and Robin become allies again and forgive each other for their issues they had due to Ivy.***
***If you prefer DC, chances are you're a very big fan of Superman or Batman who are some of the oldest and most iconic comic book characters in exsistence. Batman, is also extremely popular just by himself, and arguably, the most popular/preferred comic book superhero in the world. DC has these 2 very special very iconic characters in the world backed by a bunch of other superheroes that are good, but not great. I personally happen to prefer DC, b/c they may not posess the largest group of solid comic book characters, but imo, they have the 2 best heroes. I think it's just the iconography of the characters, and how incredibly simple yet effective Batman & Superman are. DC's strength lies in Batman & Superman and I think they shine best during solo Batman offerings, solo Superman offerings, or Batman/Superman team up offerings. I'm not quite as fond of the Justice League as a whole unit, but once again, the presence of Batman & Superman in the JL is what makes it popular and helps DC's other characters to shine.
ReplyDeleteMarvel is the company that has a very large group of solid comic book characters; many of whom have human qualities unlike anything DC has to offer. Marvel has many great characters that are a couple steps up from all of DC's characters (aside from Batman & Superman), but IMO they don't have any that are as special as Batman or Superman (No... not even Spider-man or Wolverine). Marvel works best as a shared universe where you can take all these interesting well written characters and bring them together. It's when you start to team all of these characters up that Marvel starts to shine, but their properties don't work quite as well by themselves. The reason the characters don't shine as well as DC's best is b/c their best characters lack that very "classic," very timeless quality that Batman & Superman have. It's Batman's and Superman's simplicity that makes their characters so approachable, fun, and timeless. The 2 characters work well as campy characters, or as more serious and mature.
I prefer DC b/c I believe they have the strongest gun of both comic book companies; that's Batman. I'd take a Batman comic book of graphic novel over any Avengers comic book any day of the week. Batman is such an interesting concept. James Bond in a halloween costume. I can't put my finger exactly on why I'm not as big of a fan of Marvel as I am DC, but I think what it comes down to is that when it comes to comic books and movies... the best material that I have seen/read came from DC so I tend to lean towards them.***
I agree totally!
***I don't see the problem. He may have been a natural in chemistry and enjoyed learning more about it. I mean look what he achieved w/ it, I imagine he was always interested in using his knowledge for evil purposes. A criminal can't study something they like and enjoy studying?***
Fine, study all you want, but it was in the dossier Alfred pulled! Who would know that info? I hardly believe Napier would volunteer it to the cops!
***I don't see why that's so hard to believe. He needed a chemistry background in order to be able to work with chemicals and create Smilex.***
Why would a super criminal and lifelong thug need or have a chemistry background? At least in the animated series you had Harley as his psychiatrist before her conversion! You obviously are having trouble understanding this as a serious "plot hole!" Napier was a criminal; thief, murderer, and extortionist! I hardly think he went off to med school to pick up pointers before going on a crime spree as a kid! Please!
***Currently I'm watching a lot of superh"ero animated series. So far I've watched "Spider-man (90's) , X-Men (90's), Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes and now I'm watching the "Batman Animated Series." Cartoons I've yet to watch are; "Superman TAS, Batman Beyond, Justice League and Young Justice." My question to you since they are very similar in drawning style... Which cartoon do you prefer the most... Is it X-men or Spider-man? And Why?
ReplyDeleteIMHO I think X-Men is the winner. Alhough Spiderman was very enjoyable, it sometimes felt very rushed and a little bit too much. X-Men blew my head off w/ its 1st 2 seasons and there are storylines in it which are far more interesting than the Spiderman cartoon.***
Since Spiderman was a loner, he had to talk to himself too much! Much preferred X-Men since they were a team! Watching one of my faves on tape now; "Time Bandits" w/ Cain and Bishop transported from the future to deal w/ a plague Apocalypse was devising to take out all of humanity and mutants alike! I wonder why they haven't created a movie centered around him yet? The latest edition could I guess; haven't seen it yet! Not that he's a favorite villain, but his rants and ravings are so maniacal and humorous! "I can not be touched, I can not be harmed; watch me and tremble! Annoying insects! I will not forget this impudence!" I should go ahead and create a homage to the X-Men like I have for Batman!
***I thought there was a movie in the making called "X-men: Apocalypse." I hope they refer to the villain. "Time Fugitives" is indeed one of the better episodes. All the episodes involving time traveling I do like a lot :D ***
Yeah, I looked at Wiki, and "Apocalypse" is in the making for release in 2 years!
***X-Men. Such a good strong plot and storyline, characters strongly built, and the X-Men are truly a team here. However the quality started to drop towards the end of the series. I liked Spider-man, but I felt things seem a bit rushed at times. And there was a poor use of the villains. I mean 2 of Spidey's top foes, Green Goblin and Venom both only get 3 episodes against him (not counting the episodes where Harry is the GG). Doc Ock appears in 12 episodes, which would have been cool if he wasn't Kingpin's lackey after his debut episode. Meanwhile Kingpin appears in over half the episodes and Morbius (a C-list villain) appears in 8. By season 2, he already appeared in more episodes than Green Goblin and Venom would ever do throughout the entire series.
That's why Season 1 of Spider-man was my favorite. Good strong episodes, good use of the villains who get to shine in their own episodes solo w/o being tied to Kingpin (who is also used only when necessary in this season and wasn't forced in any of the episodes). We rarely got that afterwards. Season 2 was good, but the decline started here w/ Kingpin being over used. Both shows did have poor animation at times; esp. Spider-man. Starting from the 2nd season, episodes would constantly reuse stock footage and it got worse as the show went on.***
***The Statue of Liberty in Gotham City? - For a history of the term “Gotham,” one doesn’t have to go much further than Edwin Burrows’ and Mike Wallace's Gotham: A History of New York City to 1898. Always one of our most popular reference books in the Milstein Division of U.S. History, Local History, and Genealogy, Gotham is a massive but fascinating chronicle of NYC. It is here that we learn that the term Gotham is tied to the author Washington Irving, famous for his short stories “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow,” and “Rip Van Winkle.” It’s also here that we learn Irving was being less than flattering when he nicknamed the city in 1807.
ReplyDeleteThe term “Gotham” as a nickname “has gone in and out of favor, having great currency in one decade, falling into desuetude the next” when he discussed the resurgence of the term as it is associated with Batman. He quotes an [unnamed] Batman editor in saying that “Gotham is New York’s noirish side... whereas Superman’s Metropolis presents New York’s cheerier face.”***
...and Metropolis; maybe even Central City's home for Flash! How they manage that w/ all 3 characters always throws me!
***The Joker...who is the best?***
The best animated voice for the Joker goes to Mark Hamill, but for acting the part, getting in there and punching Batman instead of sending in goons, I go all the way back to Cesar Romero! He was the best!
***BB vs TDK vs TDKR - Which movie do you prefer? Me I love "The Dark Knight" better than the other 2 b/c it had more emotion and obviously The Joker played a big part of it as well. I also love the overall acting in it. I thought in "The Dark Knight Rises" they made Bruce/Batman more weak and" Batman Begins" is just not good enough for my liking.***
I've said it many times before; "BB" is the most iconic! You saw Bruce evolve from a child interacting with his dad to the development of his legendary persona with classic music and tear jerking emotions! It felt as epic as any classic movie like "Gladiator;" very moving to me! I have a very short attention span and "TDK" and "TDKR" was just too long and cumbersome!
***From what I understand, Batman '89 was a major undertaking for WB and Tim Burton did not have "full control." He was given more for the sequel when "Batman" blew the roof off the box office (Can you believe a 1989 film took in 250+ mil DOMESTIC?). This I believe to be one of reasons "Returns" is a bit more out there...it's more Burton...like "Beetlejuice."***
I was surprised Burton was even selected; both he and Keaton had just collaborated on "Beetlejuice" which I can't claim as some kind of historical classic!
***Burton was working on "Batman" before "Bettlejuice" was released. The studio was waiting to see the box office #s of "Beetlejuice" before they officially signed him on to direct it. Jon Peters was a huge player on the '89 film. Burton had creative control of the sequel; it was the only way the studio could convince him to return, hence the film not very Batmany.***
***I remember when "Batman Begins" came out, I was under the impression that it was a prequel. I didn't see it until years later and I can almost see it as a prequel until the end when we find out about the Joker. If it had been a prequel the Joker wouldn't have even existed at that point.***
ReplyDeleteW/o a doubt, "BB" was one of the best reboots I've ever seen or can remember! I loved the story, the music, and content!
***Couple of people i knew thought BB was a prequel to Bat'89 and thought the end tied into the Nicholson Joker and that it was just a one off prequel movie filling in the gaps. They were a bit shocked when I explained it wasn't connected and was a 'reboot' of the series although I don't think they understood and still thought it was a prequel... at least until they saw TDK, but then they probably didn't even remember BB by then.
---
Why do you say that the Ledger Joker was more evil than Nicholson's? - ...So are you saying that the Ledger Joker was more aware of his actions than the Nicholson Joker?***
I didn't particularly care for either, but Ledger's Joker didn't even laugh much! That was a key part of his personality to laugh maniacally at his own machinations! Ledger was much too serious, was always thinking ahead, and planned accordingly! He always had a backup plan meaning he thought of failure or accomplice betrayal a lot; JMO!
***I don't think Batman 'quits' right after Dent's death. - People seem to be under the impression that Batman consciously chose to retire the night Dent died. After all, that was the "last confirmed sighting of the Batman." Upon returning home, Bruce probably contemplated his future as Batman. He wanted to see what was going to happen in the wake of Joker's capture and Dent's death. If Gotham still needed Batman out on the streets, he would have been there. But the city quickly passed the Dent Act to honor Harvey's legacy. W/ the police now cracking down on crime, and w/ no other villains arising to threaten the city, Bruce decided that Batman will remain idle until the city needed him again.
Do people REALLY think that if someone like Mr. Freeze or The Riddler had started threatening Gotham in the weeks following Dent's death that Batman wouldn't be there trying to stop them? Was he just "over it" after that night? Come on... Dent's death shook the good people out of apathy. It didn't take long for Batman to become unnecessary. But that doesn't mean that Bruce consciously decided to retire the night Dent died.
---
What did Selina and Penguin think of The Joker? - They never spoke of the Joker in this movie that I know of. The only person they mentioned from the 1st movie that wasn't in this movie was Vicki Vale.***
Joker was supposedly dead; why bring him up? I remember Dr. Chase in the 3rd movie referencing Batman's past femme fatales; Vicki and Selena! That was a little amusing!
***Well in the 1960s TV series he has an Aunt Harriet who lives in Wayne Manor w/ him, but she doesn't know he is Batman. I am sure he has other relatives, but as Bruce mentioned in the 1st movie, Alfred is his family. Alfred was the one who raised him after his parents died. His grandparents must have been dead already.***
ReplyDeleteThat always seemed to confuse me unless The Waynes designated Alfred as his main caretaker if anything happened to them; The BUTLER? Confusing to this day!
***Bruce's parents were killed when he was a kid, but shouldn't he have some grandparents, cousins, and aunts/uncles still alive that he is close w/? Do any of the comics, movies, or TV series mention or feature Bruce's extended family?***
Not that I can remember! AS a kid, I always took Aunt Harriet as being Dick's relative who came to live with them after he was taken in! Bruce needed a female around for the kid, not him! He was busy fighting injustice and super criminals the police couldn't handle!
***Growing up as a kid, I loved "Batman Forever!" It may not be as good as the other Batman films, but it has the most re-watchability value in terms of being fun and exciting to watch. It actually feels like a comic book w/ its good balance of dark gothic drama and over-the-top comedy. There's never really a dull moment and the film hits all the right beats to make a good blockbuster film.***
I agree about "Forever" and watch bits and pieces every time it comes on cable! I love Kilmer in the part and was sorry he left to take on "The Saint" franchise that never happened! He blew it and could have saved us from Clooney in "B & R!"
***They should have had Chase Meridian instead of Julie Madison as Bruce's girlfriend in "Batman & Robin."***
Like most women who have cops for BF's or husbands, she's apprehensive about what Bruce was doing; risking his life daily! That runs a lot of them off eventually! Her being a doctor doesn't necessarily preclude her having that feeling!
***I wasn't talking so much about her being a doctor, but her being a martial arts expert too. She could handle herself in a crisis. I was even hoping she could have been Batwoman.***
Exercise and defense is a lot short of going out and dealing with crime!
***Joker = most overrated villain of all-time - so by default; Batman = most overrated hero of all time***
Whatever! If Batman's over-rated, where does that place Superman? He's been weakened so much over the years and made insignificant in comparison to Batman! B's the man and has done so much more, has all the answers, and sacrifices more w/o the advantages of invulnerability!
***Both "Man of Steel" and "Batman & Robin" are disliked by many superhero fans. "Batman & Robin" gets a lot of heat for being too campy, colorful, and over-the-top, and it seems that the trend became for every superhero movie to try to be realistic, gritty, and dramatically serious. This has worked great for movies like "The Dark Knight." However, "Man of Steel" is a good example of the opposite extreme for the film being too gritty and serious to the point of being lifeless and dull. ...I would prefer the Joel Schumacher Batman films to "Man of Steel" any day b/c at least those films are lively and exciting to watch. As a movie, "MOS" is just lifeless, dull, and boring. It goes to show that trying to be too hyper-realistic and serious can make a disappointing superhero movie.***
ReplyDelete"Batman and Robin" and "MOS" aren't even close to being comparable! "B & R" was meant to be campy and silly while MOS was more a serious blockbuster with a new Superman; the handsome Henry Cavill! I hadn't seen him since "The Tudors" finished up a couple years ago! He was great in what little I saw of the movie when my building had a free preview of HBO!
***Henry Cavill looked great as Superman the 1st time a photo of him in the suit was released, and the trailers looked very promising as well. Then the movie came out... and was a huge letdown, just like nearly all of Zack Snyder's films.***
It's not unusual for a movies' first outing to come up short; give Cavill a little time to make the part his own!
***One of the biggest differences for me btw the older and newer Batman films is that Nolan's films are more compelling as drama than either of Burton or Schumacher's. I like Batman '89 (mainly for nostalgic purposes - it doesn't hold up that well on its own terms, I have to admit) and think "Batman Returns" is by far the most interesting of the older series (even if it gets a little overly silly with the marching penguins). I like the dark tone that Nolan did w/ his Dark Knight trilogy, while taking the story and characters seriously, but still making it thrilling to watch. Burton's films are dark and campy fun. Both can be appreciated for what they are w/o getting into these pointless arguments on internet message boards over who's a "real fan" or not based on what films they like.
---
Batman is 75 years old, and what's amazing is his always been publicly active all those years. I don't recall a time when they weren't at least making Batman comics.
---
Vicky is a gold digger and Bruce is a rapist - She's purely interested in him b/c he's rich and to counteract this, he gets her drunk and takes advantage. Wtf***
Sex occurs between drunks all the time! The jails would be overrun with so called rapists in your example of a crime! It may be true, but it's one of those things normal people take responsibility for; "I got wasted on my own!" If you're drugged, that's another story!
---Batman Series '66---
ReplyDelete***Who would you consider Batman's #1 villain in this series?
Ok throw out the comics, the 89-90s movies, and BTAS, The Joker was hands down the #1 Bat Rouge. During the Super Friends cartoon it was the Riddler (mostly b/c another cartoon series had exclusive rights to Joker & Penguin. This series I guess tried to make it a 4 way tie btw Joker, Penguin, Riddler, & Catwoman; then at the conclusion of S3, the writers seem to want to add Egghead & King Tut and make The Big 4 become the The Big 6. But if this version had to have a #1 villain who should it be?
1. Joker-appeared in several eps and had some good plots (ex His attack on Robin's School) but played 2nd fiddle to Penguin in the feature film & to Catwoman in S3. Also his plots in S3 got too silly even for this show (Martian Invasion, & being King of Surfers)..
2. Penguin-I might be wrong about this, but I think he appeared in more eps than any other villain, acted like he was the boss in the feature film, had many clever plots & became the1st villain to deal w/ Batgirl. Did take a backseat to Joker in a 3-parter, but became boss baddie in another 3-parter w/ Marsha, QOD
3. Riddler-During the 1st season, he did have more appearances than any other villain, had plots that were worthy of the comics' Joker (wax works & silent themed capers). While extremely strong in the 1st season, was reduced to 1 adventure a piece in S2 & 3 and Gorshin who had to be replaced by John Astin & The Puzzler in 2
4. Catwoman-Appeared in many eps, did have some smart plots, was boss over Joker in a 2-parter and I think came the closest to killing Batgirl. Her downsides-played 2nd banana to Sandman in one 2-parter and at times seemed reluctant to kill Batman b/c she has a crush on him
5. King Tut-Appeared more times than any other of the villains for the show. Usually has a strong army of henchmen and the 1 villain who discovered Batman's true identity
6. Egghead- I'm listing him b/c he has that world's smartest criminal/Lex Luthor type gimmick (at least in S2). Batman even said Egghead is his smartest foe. The downside is that he wasn't featured as the previous 5 on my list and was reduced to a whipped bf to Olga in S3
7. Ma Parker gets on the list b/c of her "mother of criminals" gimmick and that Gordon said to Batman "She could be the greatest menace of your career"
8. Minstrel-He is a one-time villain, but gets on this list b/c he is suppose to be Batman's equal w/ electronic gadgets
9-10. Bookworm and False-Face. They too were one-timers, but both really put Batman to the test.
11. Mr Freeze-B/c he got that revenge against Batman; stick better than anyone
So who should be Batman's #1 foe in this format. I'm going to say Penguin, but I'm curious to see what ya'll think. If you want to mention a villain not on this list (Shame, Olga, Puzzler, etc) then go on. Who should this Batman's #1 foe?***
***Joker appeared in 22 eps to Penguin's 21 - b/c in the 3rd season, they started doing previews of next week's villain in the last scene. Both Joker & Penguin appeared in 3 stories in the 3rd season, but since Penguin led off the season, he only got 2 previews, while Joker got 3.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of actual stories involving them, Joker and Penguin are tied at 10 each, followed by Catwoman (8), Riddler (6), King Tut (5), and Egghead and Mister Freeze (3 each).
As for who is Batman's #1 foe--going only by this series, I'm not sure there is 1. The obvious answer is the Joker, but all the things that would have made the Joker Batman's main arch nemesis--killing Jason Todd, crippling Barbara Gordon, Frank Miller's series--were far in the future and wouldn't have fit w/ the more lighthearted tone of the series.
---
Going by the comic books alone here's my ranking:
Archenemy-Joker
1. Penguin
2. Catwoman
3. Two Face
4. Scarecrow
5. Ra's al Ghul
6. Riddler
7. Poison Ivy
8. Clayface (many versions, though recently DC seems to have settled on Basil Karlo-the original-as the "ultimate" one)
9. Bane
10. Mr. Freeze
Now I think that's a fairly standard list, w/ some room for debate on a few choices. Joker as #!, w/ Penguin perhaps a distant 2nd. Of course, we all can have personal faves which even incll. names not in the "top 10." In my own case, these might be Black Spider, Professor Milo, Cavalier, Cornelius Stirk, Captain Stingaree, Spook, Signalman & Quakemaster.
Anyway, not all of the above appeared on the '66 series; Ra's and Bane weren't created until later. Though each has since surfaced in live action media w/ the exception of Clayface...possibly the character's makeup was regarded as too difficult, not quite a big enough "name" in the rogues gallery, as well as confusion over "who he really is," Karlo, Matt Hagen, Preston Payne etc. to bother with (yet).
As to who was #1 in the series, the vote here goes to Penguin. He just was shown as the one in command when the villains got together, not so much the 3-parter w/ Joker, certainly the movie. Cesar Romero and Burgess Meredith were the only actors whom the producers would "hold their spot" for (likely due to their seniority in show business) which made them stand out. Also, Meredith's portrayal (at least as Penguin, he could ham it up as much as anyone in other roles) tended to be more understated when compared w/ Romero's Joker or surely Gorshin's Riddler; his was the one major villain actually depicted a bit more serious than in the comics. Making him arguably a greater menace. So he gets the nod, Romero as Joker following. Agreed that Riddler/Gorshin started out as arch-enemy (1st ep, his energy & previous knowledge of the character), but lost momentum.
---
Which one feels the Sixtiest of them all? - The Joker surfing episode. Beach party movies were very much in fashion in the 60s.***
If you just look at Blaze with that huge wig, episode with False Face would register in some people's minds! The episode with the Joker haunting a high school was right up there! The first episode with The Riddler had Batman dancing with Jill St. Johns! Very 60's! "You shake a mean cape Batman!"
***They had mostly adults doing kid shows and it was campy. Now they know not to make the shows so goofy and stupid. Now they actually hire kids to do kid shows and be funny. I couldn't pay my niece 10 yrs old and nephew 13 yrs old today to watch Batman, the 60s version; they'd beat me up. I still like it cause now I sit back and laugh at how my brother and I would run home from school in the late 80s and watch and enjoy this and actually tune in to it the next day to see what happens to the dynamic duo...lol***
ReplyDeleteLucky me, my brother and I saw them "first run" in prime time! We didn't have to run home to see huge stars playing the weekly villains! It was strange to have a half hour show, wed. and thurs. in prime time for the whole family to watch! I still wonder how they got all those people to lower themselves to do it? We had Cesar Romero as the iconic Joker, Burgess Meredith as the Penguin, 3 different Mr. Freeze's (Sanders, Wallach, and Preminger), and of course 3 different Catwomen if you count the film, (Newmar, Kitt, and Merriweather)! Even when the show had "jumped the shark," we still got Barbara Rush, Zsa Zsa Gabor, Joan Collins, and Ethel Merman! Too bad the spinoff w/ Batgirl never got produced!
***U lucky - U got that right; how did they get all them big names to do this at that time? They probably had to have a tv show to show for their resume I guess lol
---
Schumacher thinks Kilmer was the best Batman - I'm not sure myself. Keaton, Kilmer, and Bale all added something, but I personally have yet to see a truly great live-action actor pull off Bruce Wayne and Batman. I do love how Kilmer's Bruce Wayne embraces Batman as a way to do good in the world as opposed to Bale who fakes his death and goes into hiding b/c "symbol".***
Val was great in the part! It's unfortunate he thought "The Saint" franchise would be more enduing; "WRONG!" I would have enjoyed "B & R" a lot more with him in the role as opposed to Clooney!
***B/c 'Forever' was such a hit he assumes everything in it is great. He made 'B&R' campier than ever b/c he and the studio thought the wackiness of Forever made it a huge success.***
"B & R" turned into a parody of itself! The rocket trip, then surfing back to Earth was over the top enough! They surpassed themselves throughout with the comedic license of a "Robin Williams!"
***The villains are unbearable in Batman Forever.***
Ever since Superman with Christopher Reeve in the late 70's, the villain has been featured! They're usually the big star which is supposed to get the people into the theatre! At the time, I guess they thought they couldn't do better than Carrey and Jones!
***Attachment of big stars usually makes casting and marketing easier, just their presence is often enough to get people into cinemas, but it can also create problems. The issue in hiring the likes of Jim Carrey and Arnold Schwarzegger in a Batman film people are only gonna see them than the characters they're playing.***
***I don't know about anyone else, but Julie Newmar and Yvonne Craig suited up is my reason for liking this crap in '66.***
ReplyDeleteI could take or leave 'em; Catwoman was a great camp banterer w/ Bats and I knew the end was near w/ Craig! The scripts were lame and the villains even worse; Ethel Merman, Zsa Zsa Gabor, Joan Collins, Barbra Rush, ...need I go on? I still never missed it in '66, Prime Time at 6:30, wed. and thurs. every week! A show so great they had 3 Mr Freezes; Sanders, Preminger, and Wallach!
***Cesar Romero was 59, 60 when he played the Joker! I was a bit surprised to look up Cesar Romero, Burgess Meredith; to find out they were both born in 1907. And do the math, that means that they were about 59, 60 years old when they were playing The Joker and The Penguin! Now I know 59 and 60 is not old ages at all, but I imagine back in the 60s, that was considered pretty old back then. And I've heard people say that they thought Jack Nicholson [at age 51] was too old to be playing the Joker in the 1989 Batman movie. But yet Cesar Romero was older than him and did a good job playing the iconic Joker character.***
Most of these so called stars were in fact "has-beens!" It made the show, bringing back actors we knew as kids; in this case the kids were our parents! The list of actors and actresses going back to the 30's & 40's were prevalent as villains of the week! From Uncle Milty to Zsa Zsa Gabor, many were "past it!" Tallulah Bankhead? This show gave them a return to fame! Vincent Price was huge 30 or 40 years before! lol! Don't get me wrong, I loved it; tying my late night viewing of movies they performed in before I was born! lol!
***Really very few such as Rudy Vallee go back 30 or more years in Hollywood. Cesar Romero and Burgess Meredith both saw their greatest success back in the 1940's prior to Batman. Vincent Price and Uncle Milty had their best days in the 1950's so not even 20 years prior to Batman. Victor Buono who played King Tut was still a very young man. Frank Gorshin and Julie Newmar were still in their 30's when they appeared on Batman and still were early in their careers. Actors such as Cliff Robertson were early middle-aged and were achieving their greatest triumphs during the 1960's.***
It's called hyperbole darling! I know they aren't or weren't that old, but many were like Milton Berle, Tallulah Bankhead, and Rudy Vallee! George Sanders as Mr Freeze really took me back! Eli Wallach playing Freeze was more current since I had seen him starting in the 60's with "The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly!" Joan Collins and Barbara Rush were also still kinda young! I just find it amazing so many stars, past and present did this show!
***Batman Returns - The cinematography is insane and I would love to live a week in this film. So fun!***
This was a lot more realistic than the futuristic skyscrapers they constructed for "Batman And Robin!" By then, it was more "Batman Beyond" than the iconic Batman we all know and love!
***Maybe my all time favorite set. It's spectacular. - First look at the NEW Batmobile from Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice:
- http://i.imgur.com/nBZU3Ch.jpg - More pictures here:
- http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2014/09/10/new-images-of-batmobile-and- millennium-falcon-swoop-online/
I like it, a badass combination of Burton and Nolan's Batmobiles.***
I don't know why I've never cared for any of the new Batmobiles; going back to '89! They look like a cross btw a "Funny Car" and a "Humvee Tank!" I would want something close to the animated series w/ the long HOOD, but the '89 movie was close; had those batwings on the back I didn't care for though!
***What's your fave Batmobile? Mine is the one from "Batman: The Animated Series." It was a very stylized, long, cool vehicle. I had the toy version.***
ReplyDeleteI haven't read any Batman comics since '71 so I can't tell you exactly, but I have a faint memory of Batman using a small 2 seater of some sort when Dick went off to school! I remember him sending it off by remote, making it seem like it crashed by having smoke come out as a diversion! It's just been too many years to come up w/ the storyline no matter how long I think of; just picturing the car! It was white, kinda small and square; more "Speed Racer!" Nothing like a Bond car, but slick! - If going for a formal Batmobile, the turbo one from the animated series was the best!
***W/O Gorshin in the '66 pilot, the series may not have gotten off to a good start and the other Season 1 Riddler adventures were most likely the best from that season. But as much as he contributed the studio's position was his name on the opening credits, so he did not "deserve" top scale.***
Funny I thought Jill St. John made that episode for me! I was only 9, but her impersonating Robin, then moving away from Riddler with that "mincing walk" stayed with me! It's never even discussed, but I can't forget it and Burt's willingness let himself go!
***I think they jumped the shark when they turned Freeze into a cyborg spiderhead, but all in all his comeback and finale was great. I loved his pimped out freeze suit and his updated freeze ray gauntlets that took the stead of his old freeze ray gun.***
I didn't particularly care for the cyborg, spider-head either, but I loved the episode, "Artifact!" Not sure if it was supposed to be a fantasy episode like Action Comics or what! "Freeze awakens a 1000 or so years later after his last run in w/ the BAT! He thinks it's Batman-free, but police archeologist find the Batcave and get help from the past to deal w/ him!" It was quite moving for some reason! The episode opened up w/ Alfred even older, Barbra as Oracle in a wheelchair, Robin is more Nightwing, and Batman's all bulked up like a futuristic "atomic" hero!
***Val Kilmer. He was hotter than Clooney.***
By a lot! I've never understood the fascination with Clooney! He hasn't done anything for me since he played Snake on "Facts Of Life!" lol!
***He's a nicer guy to work w/ than somebody like Val Kilmer, which is probably part of the reason why they were more than willing to recast Batman for "Batman & Robin" when he was off doing "The Saint."***
JUST LOOK AT HIM! I'm sure people couldn't do enough for him! Val's ego has to be out of control! I absolutely melted the 1st time I saw him in "Top Secret" and "Real Genius!" "The Doors" cemented the deal that he was something special; looks, talent, and no dirt that I'd heard OF!
***First look at Ben Affleck as Batman! That Affleck pic does make him look chubby. He doesn't look as good as Bale or Keaton in the suit. BUT I'm passing judgment from seeing one promo still.
- http://i.imgur.com/3hRU6px.jpg - ***
They've been doing that for that last 30 years; the future of superheroes is them bulking up! Either through age or radiation poisoning, they seem to get huge later on in life! Remember in the animated episode called "Artifact;" Batman was massive! Spidey better subsist on "Ensure" and "Weight watchers" so he can continue scaling walls and swinging on webs! lol!
***"I like 'Batman Begins' more than the other Nolan Batmans. 'TDK' is decent, but full of plot holes and a dumb ending w/ the Joker and Two-Face. 'TDKR' is laughably bad."***
ReplyDeleteThe last 2 movies were hard to watch! I still haven't seen them all the way through; just bits and pieces! "BB" the best and can be on a loop as far as I'm concerned!
***...I really think that Timothy Dalton could have been equally fit for the role as Liam Neeson playing Ras Al Ghul.***
Anyone else think there are parallels in Liam's role to his Jedi Knight performance in "The Phantom Menace?" The only real difference in the level of "good and evil!"
***Batman didn't Kill Ra's at the end - I don't know why people don't understand the difference btw actively killing a person and say "not helping a drowning person?" You'd probably be culpable, but it's a lot different to the definition of murder. And if you want to be technical, then it was Gordon in the Tumbler that destroyed the railroad that caused Ra's "death." All Batman did was escape unharmed from the impending wreckage.***
Save him so he can precipitate another heinous act? I'm a big fan of "Doctor Who" and he keeps saving the life of a rival who has destroyed planets! Why actively try to save a HITLER type just so he can perpetrate crimes against humanity like global genocide? - Well if you want to get "super" technical, Batman sent Gordon and made it possible w/ equipment supplied by Wayne Industries! A hitman may be sent, but the one giving the order is just, if not more culpable! That's why so many "machanics" get a 2nd and 3rd life giving evidence after so many assassinations!
***Any mention or discussion on the '66 show about Batman's vigilantism? - Anyone who is summoned by the police to solve crimes is hardly a vigilante. It wasn't that kind of show.***
It was the vigilante aspect that I think influenced his non-use of guns! It's explained later that his parents were killed by a gun, but like Superman, no matter how many times you save the planet, if a mistake is made and someone is hurt or killed, loyalty, trust, and admiration fall by the wayside!
***I think you are referring to 'in-universe' explanations. But in the publication history of the character, it is a fact that Nat'l Comics (later called 'DC') very early on started toning down Batman from a pulp-style vigilante ala The Shadow into a more kid-friendly property. In the first year of publication (1939) there are several stories where Bats uses guns (and takes lives), and he had guns mounted to the front of the Bat-plane (which premiered before the Batmobile).
But by 1940, the editors decided no guns for Bats. Then a few years later, Gordon 'deputized' him and he got all respectable. Later writers created rationalizations, such as the fact that Bruce's parents were murdered with guns, hence Bats doesn't like them.
...The 1943 Batman movie serial had Bats posing as a vigilante as far as the cops were concerned, but in reality he was a secret agent getting orders from Uncle Sam. There was a major war on, and US authorities didn't want kids idolizing vigilantes, so Columbia pictures came up w/ that little bit of tap-dancing.***
Believe it or not, I remember that old tv show w/ Batman! He had horns, in a real cave, shot guns, and drove a car anyone could own! lol! What do you expect in the 40's I guess!
***Story/theme/plot: I've never read a single DC comic, so I know nothing of the history of Batman. I have seen Burtons 1st Batman and the Nolan trilogy. About the Blake character being an amalgam of Robins or other characters, or the fact that after so many decades Batman finally gets a happy ending etc. That’s fan service. I found the story for this film, like many (if not all) of Nolan's films to be tied in closely w/ theme, to the point where plot contrivances occur in order to support it. ...Evidence of this can be found in the sudden shift from day to night at the stock exchange heist in "TDKR." ...Why not have Bane hold hostages for several hours, then leave on bikes at night? I see it that Nolan either thought nobody would notice/care, or he himself did not care. It happened because 'it had to happen that way'. Why doesn't anyone believe the Commissioner when he says there is a terrorist building an army underground, esp. after a rather hairy shootout w/ heavily armed men who ran into the sewers. Why? B/c it's too early for a police investigation, so they can’t believe him. Bane would be discovered. Plot makes no sense, but Story can continue.
ReplyDelete...The conclusion is that Nolan sees this as a 'you have been told, now you know. My job is done' kind of deal. He does not linger on these things because he thinks all he needs to do is tell us something happened and we will accept it, w/o him following it up w/ some visual/emotional weight. That is the difference btw knowing something happened and feeling the impact, we may as well be reading an essay.
This can be said for the numerous 'plotholes' people keep mentioning. On that note - I agree that most, if not all, are not actual plot holes. They are sometimes jarring gaps of story never explained, and as people have shown, they can be filled w/ assumptions. However, does that let the filmmakers off the hook? No. The big one is "Bruce Wayne arrives back in Gotham... somehow." However, it seems like an arduous journey, right? Does it feel like it - no. He arrives quite chipper, almost like he does this all the time. Even the Special Forces guy 'Captain Jones' is shown sneaking in on a food truck, why not Wayne? Why not just one single shot of him jumping off a boat or something to indicate what happened. That is why so many people hate that scene - b/c it does not FEEL like he made it back to Gotham.
Blake knows Batman's identity. How? I can see the thematic implications of 2 angry orphans recognizing each other, and again "It just had to happen so other stuff can happen later", but how it's explained plot-wise is not good enough. Surely at least 1 other orphan has lost his parents to a killer and is angry. Why is Blake the only 1 to work it out (as a child, meeting him once - never meeting Batman to draw a connection, not knowing Batman also lost his parents which seems the main bit of necessary info, etc). ***(cont.)
***...Next we have the Tahlia al g'hul plot - or the 'League of Shadows' in general. This plot really does repeat a lot of the story of BB. Bane and Tahlia want to blow up Gotham to restore balance. Batman has to 'repeat his training' in some respects and stop the League. While there's nothing tech. wrong w/ this plot, it's charted territory for this series. They needed to follow up TDK w/ something big - and they had potential w/ Bane the Rev. Warrior - but they retreated to familiar waters and it's noticeable.
ReplyDeletePacing: The pacing is all over the place, and once again, the structure is completely secondary to Nolan's idea of building to a huge climax. The 1st act is very slow, despite some rapid editing and fast exposition of new info - which makes it bloated, thus drawing out and seeming even longer. This section arguable contains the most heavy story stuff, yet it feels rather rushed after the 1st hour and half dragged on. This is mainly b/c Bane's whole revolution takes up almost 20 minutes of that, mostly in the form of a montage. And of that, only about 2 actual mins shows citizens in action - rioting etc. The rest is of explosions or of Bane and his men talking/giving speeches. It makes it feel like such a brief little thing. Then 3 months flashes by an around half an hour. Wayne returns at almost exactly the 2 hour mark. Why not make all of that 50 min sequence part of the rev?
Writing: "The Blank Slate" - Daggett's dialogue is just awful here. Catwoman has him pinned and demands the device. His exposition is intended to explain everything to do w/ the device in 1 handy bite sized packet, but it could be softened w/ a simple re-ordering of lines. In the film: Daggett explains the device in unnecessary detail - even mentioning 'just type in your name, date of birth' (why do we need to know that? ...Had he started w/ the line "doesn't it sound a little too good to be true?....." he could proceed to list (some of) the details of the device, and it would feel more like a taunt.
Second, is when Capt. Jones arrives, moments before he's killed, where Fox and Blake explain the Bomb. Blake actually says "This bomb is a time bomb." Not only is that line kinda goofy in such a dark movie, it's something that we, as an audience, have had explained to us already - w/o expository dialogue.
Characters: Bane (not Dagget) bankrupts Wayne. He will entrust Miranda w/ the location of the Reactor. It's pretty flimsy considering Dagget’s motivation was secondary to this (simple greed) and Bane would have bankrupted Wayne no matter what (symbolically ‘breaking’ one of his great powers) – so if he was to trust Miranda regardless, there was no need to have Dagget leaning over his shoulder. All that aside, if he MUST be part of the story in order to overcome the plot hole “Wayne his hidden the reactor, so how can Bane find it later?” Why not flesh Daggett out into a real character? Why kill him so early when he could play a part in later events - perhaps as the rich are targeted by the 99%.
Captain Jones: I checked how long this guy is in the film. Its less than 5 mins. Why is he in this film? He arrives - then talks to Gordon and we see how they hope to locate the bomb. Then he visits Fox and Blake for the aforementioned awful and unnecessary ‘time bomb’ exposition, then he's shot and Bane crushes his neck. What was achieved there?
Tone: If you see it as an intellectual film, then it's stupid and nonsensical a lot of the time. If you see it as simple fun, then it’s pretentious. The mid point is just a strange film that does not know what it wants to be.***
***What is the difference btw all of the Robins like Grayson, Todd, Drake and Wayne? I asked different people and got different answers. Obviously Drake and Wayne are the most extreme of the Robins b/c they have no qualms about killing, but btw Grayson and Drake the lines are more blurred. Thoughts?
ReplyDelete---
Richard Grayson - the original Robin. He yearned to get out from the Bat's shadow and forge his own identity. He's the closest to being Batman's equal.
Jason Todd - the violent Robin w/ issues. He will kill and isn't opposed to using firearms.
Tim Drake - the independent Robin who made it his own. Batman didn't choose him to be Robin. He became Robin and chose Batman.
Damian Wayne - Bruce's biological son raised by the League of Assassins. He's often torn btw his upbringing and keeping his father's code b/c despite his bravado he yearns for Bruce to be proud of him.
---
Well it's true Tim Drake and Richard Grayson are quite similiar Robins to me. While Richard is still a genius, he's more focused on the physical side. Of all the Batman family, he's most agile and best at certain forms of combat. While Tim Drake is more focused on the mental side and his main drive is to be suceed Batman as the worlds greatest detective.
---
Dick Grayson- The 1st and most iconic Robin. Batman's most trusted ally in the field and Bruce Wayne's eldest "son." Unchallenged leader of the Titans and latter day Outsiders. He eventually grew into his own and became Nightwing.
Jason Todd- The 'problem child.' Found by Batman while trying to steal the tires from the Batmobile, Bruce Wayne saw potential to channel Jason's anger in a new direction by training him to become his new partner in the war on crime in Gotham City. Jason was violent, volitile and above all else headstrong which eventually got him killed at the hands of the Joker.
Tim Drake- The brains of the outfit. Tim was present the night Dick Grayson's parents were killed and the event left quite an impression on him while still at a young age. ...He sought out Dick Grayson and made a plea for him to re-assume his identity as Robin, but Dick, now Nightwing refused, but did agree that Batman needed help. Eventually the 3 took down Two-Face and after much training Tim earned his rightful place as Batman's partner.
Carrie Kelly- Carrie served as an elder Bruce Wayne's crimefighting partner, Robin in TDKR storyline. ...recently introduced in NEW52 continuity as Damien Wayne's acting teacher. ...Currently its rumored that this character will assume the role of Robin in Batman v. Superman film.
Stephanie Brown- she became quickly asso. w/ Tim Drake's Robin, eventually the 2 even had a romantic relationship. Sometime later after finding out Tim's secret identity, Tim briefly quit his role as Robin and Stephanie was reluctantly put into his boots. ...Eventually Stephanie got better, then assumed the role of Batgirl for a time.
Damien Wayne- AKA the "Brat" Wonder. Bruce Wayne's "biological" son. In some versions Bruce was drugged and literally raped in a tryst w/ Talia al Ghul and Damien was the result. In another version he willingly made love to her, and in another version Damien was genetically grown in a test tube and brought together using the DNA of Bruce and Talia. Damien is highly trained and basically a cold blooded killer, highly self-entitled, and dismissive of those who he does not consider on his "level". Damien was killed (by a bigger, stronger clone of himself) and just brought back to life and now has super powers, to be continued...***
Haven't extended myself outside the movies and animated series in the last 40+ years so I've never heard of Damien! Please continue...
***When it essentially comes down to the reason why "B & R" film is disliked, it's Schwarzenegger as Mr. Freeze. If Freeze and everything related to him were removed, there would be a good movie. Uma Thurman as Poison Ivy makes for a great villain and is one of if not the best part of 'Batman & Robin.' If another villain is nec., maybe the Riddler could appear in the film as well since the ending of 'Batman Forever' left the character alive. Ivy could break Riddler out of Arkham instead of Freeze and the 2 could team up to wreck havoc on Gotham. Regardless, Freeze is the worst part of 'B & R,' and the removal of his character could benefit the film significantly.***
ReplyDeleteSupposedly, Arnold appeared as much as Brando's, "Jor' El" in the original Superman back in the 70's! His 10 mins. of camera time could be easily erased and reshot w/ an another villain in jail to be released! Never a fan of his outside of Conan! He should have stuck w/ what he knows b/c he was so corny in this movie!
***Maybe they could have re-edited the opening sequence so Batman catches Freeze at the museum so he could be eliminated for the remainder of the film.
---
The ending of 'TDKR' looked exactly the way that Alfred had pictured it. He might be dreaming or fantasizing. Just a thought.***
It's been hashed out many times! I thought the same, but someone observed what we thought of a dream from Alfred; Selena had on the pearls! Not sure he knew about the significance of that so you have an argument Bruce was still alive and living happily w/ her! I'm probably the worst person to discuss anything about this movie; only seen it once on my laptop while housesitting! Unfortunately the last 2 offerings haven't been "watchable" for me! The plot holes are so big, the Bat Jet could fly through them! I know you're supposed to suspend "disbelieve," but this was taken to a level even I couldn't let go!
***I thought it was good, but not as good as the 1st 2. - Actually I think it's very overrated. However it is better than "Man Of Steel."***
I'll give you that! I was terribly disappointed in "MOS!" The cinematography just wasn't up to snuff; seemed very "B" movie like! Too many stars to flop like that! I'm a big fan of Cavill since "The Tudors!" I think the choice was good, but he deserves better in story, directing, and producing! That all matters no matter the talent! I'm still remembering a clunker that changed scripts and directors in the middle and wound up being awful; "Spacehunter: Adventures In The Forbidden Zone!" It had Peter Strauss for Gawd-sake and I was so disappointed! Molly Ringwald was still young, but it's probably one of her biggest regrets! "MOS" will only be a footnote unless there's a great follow-up!
***I grow tired of the saying "Superman can't be dark." Superman damn well can be dark. A Superman movie CAN be dark and depressing. It's just that "Man of Steel" did it WRONG by focusing too much on the CGI action/slamfest and not enough on character development and emotional content. But that doesn't mean the initial concept isn't a good one.
And that really annoys me - A good concept is tainted by a bloody awful movie and now can no longer be associated w/ the character again. In the same way "Superman Returns" tainted the concept of it in any way being associated w/ the Reeve films which meant "MOS" had to take the extreme opposite approach to "right the wrongs" and simply put the character in the same bad position, only under different circumstances.***
I don't think Superman can be played dark either! His power comes from light; The Sun! Years ago in "Batman Beyond," there was an ep. entitled "The Call" where Supe' dropped the cape and wore basic black, but he was still something that couldn't be interpreted as "dark!"
***When I saw "Batman Forever" as a kid I had a mega crush on Nicole Kidman playing Dr. Chase Meridian - in fact I'd say she was my 1st crush. Oh and she's not useless like Denise Richards in that 007 movie. Some people say that Nicole played a useless character that you wouldn't buy as a psychologist. Well I thought she played it well - in that 40s Femme Fatale style.***
ReplyDeleteBoy was that a stretch; Denise Richards as a nuclear physicist? Please! "The World Is Not Enough" went right to network; skipped cable it was so bad!
***I think casting Denise Richards was part of the fantasy. Let's face it, the pre-Daniel Craig films never had much time for credibility. Even Nicole Kidman as a 27-year-old published psychiatrist in this was clearly indulging in OTT comic-book fantasy. Like Schumacher said, he didn't want his psychiatrist to look like Dr Ruth.***
To me it was to reflect the comic books where the women were insanely attractive; the Kathleen Turner, siren-like "Jessica Rabbit" character comes to mind!
***To me, a good Superman movie would not feature a dark Superman but dark Superman villains since they, being antagonists, are privileged w/ the full spectrum; anything goes. Few moviegoers would complain over a noticeably dark Lex Luthor, unless it was embellished to the point of absurdity that turned the whole audience off. Superman can still possess a wide range of emotions w/o being too much of the Blue Boy Scout, but the audience has to feel reassured when he appears to set things right.
Example of that being when the Joker was caught in TDK. All that chaos, killing people, having too much fun doing it...I was HAPPY and actually pumped my fist when Gordon finally got him. Why? B/c it was a welcome relief -- even if I did know that the Joker would only come back to wreak his brand of havoc.***
This sounds a lot more practical! - Batman series began w/ Riddler, then the Penguin, followed by The Joker; maybe Mr. Freeze done by George Sanders after that, then Catwoman! There were 3 btw; Sanders, Otto Preminger, and Eli Wallach! Strange how some of the biggest stars wanted to be involved w/ this series!
***FRANK GORSHIN was ELECTRIC and RIVETING in his scenes as "The Riddler;" so he'd be #1! No. 2 would be JULIE NEWMAR's sexy, sexy "Catwoman" (and even EARTHA KITT's "Catwoman" would be located somewhere near the bottom of a "top 20" guest villain/villainess list!), CESAR ROMERO was gleefully evil, and a lot of fun in his role of "the Joker," BURGESS MEREDITH, therefore, as "Penguin" would easily place 4th among the 4 characters you mentioned! Once you get past the ubiquitous "quacks," Mr. Meredith didn't bring much that was memorably inventive the role! His eps (to me) were easily always the most missable!***
***"Batman Begins" is 1 of my fave movies, and I enjoyed "The Dark Knight" and "TDKR," but I thought the sequels departed too much tonally from the 1st film and squandered a lot of the potential it set up. I would have had 5 films instead of 3:
ReplyDeleteI’d have kept the aesthetic of 'Begins,' kept Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes while reworking the character, had Batman keep an improved 'Begins' batsuit throughout the series w/ the occasional modification, kept the focus as much on Bruce/Batman in all 5 movies as was the case in 'BB,' and kept each movie to about 2 1/2 hours. The clumsy allegories about terrorism and capitalism would be gutted, and Gotham would keep its surreal, cosmopolitan Gothic quality instead of transforming into Chgo and Phili. Wayne Tower remains the building it was in the 1st film.
The 2nd film is similar to "TDK," but narrows its focus on Batman escalating his war on the mob instead of drawing it to a conclusion and spends less time on characters like Harvey Dent. There is no Bruce-Rachel-Dent love triangle — Dent has a pregnant wife whom The Joker kills instead of Rachel. Sal Maroni is a stronger leader of the mob. The Joker succeeds in killing the mayor, throwing Gotham into a panic, and there’s no Gordon fake death subplot. There’s no Lao/Hong Kong subplot. Wayne Manor has been rebuilt w/ new Cave. Scarecrow is captured in the Narrows. The Joker’s final scene plays out similarly to its counterpart in "TDK," but the movie ends w/ Dent having become Two-Face and disappeared. Rachel, having developed stronger romantic feelings for Bruce, but intimidated by The Joker and the fact that her 1st boss was killed and her 2nd was disfigured, admits to Bruce that he was right about the limitations of the law and decides to leave Gotham.
The 3rd film sees Batman facing The Penguin, who hires 3 assassins to kill him: Deadshot, Poison Ivy; a killer disguised as a socialite, and Mr Zero. Two-Face hasn’t been seen since the night he disappeared, but he resurfaces and starts killing off the people responsible for his wife’s death and his disfigurement. The assassins are incapacitated. Two-Face is revealed to be backing The Penguin and to have helped him hire the assassins. The Penguin is captured. The ending scene from "TDK" in which Two-Face holds Gordon’s family hostage and Batman takes the fall for Dent’s crimes occurs at the end of this movie.
In the 4th film, Batman is wanted for Harvey Dent’s murder, but has still managed to almost defeat the mob. Alberto Falcone, the son of Carmine Falcone and his lover Lucia Viti want a peace treaty btw the mob and the police merging their crime families into a legitimate business. A FED investigator, Edward Nashton, nickname The Riddler (Johnny Depp), is investigating Dent’s murder and Batman’s identity. Rachel Dawes returns to Gotham and Bruce proposes to her, saying he can retire when the Falcone-Viti deal is done. But The Joker escapes from Arkham and wrecks havoc, ultimately killing Alberto and Rachel, pushing Batman into a final confrontation w/ him. ...The Joker lets himself fall to his death. Lucia Viti negotiates the legitimization of the mob’s few remaining assets. The Riddler clears Batman’s name. Bruce is left victorious, but broken and alone.
The final film plays out similarly to "TDKR," but w/o the Dent angle. John Blake is the child Batman saved in the Narrows in "BB." Scarecrow wears his mask in the court scenes and gets taken down by Batman.***
I like it!
***Better Casting: 'Avengers' or 'Justice League?'
ReplyDelete"Avengers"
Robert Downey Jr. - Iron Man
Chris Evans - Captain America
Chris Hemsworth - Thor
Mark Ruffalo - Hulk
Scarlet Johansson - Black Widow
Jeremy Renner - Hawkeye
Plus: Paul Bettany-Vision, Elizabeth Olsen-Scarlet Witch, Chris Pratt-Star Lord, Paul Rudd-Ant Man, and more
"Justice League"
Henry Cavill - Superman
Ben Affleck - Batman
Gal Gadot - Wonder Woman
Jason Momoa - Aquaman
Ezra Miller - The Flash
Ray Fisher - Cyborg
Green Lantern - Unknown
Shazam - Unknown
So at 1st glance, Marvel clearly wins by a mile, but DC has a very strong cast of supporting actors and villains. Their strategy w/ the Justice League seems to be to cast relative unknowns and make them into stars, sort of like the Star Wars films.
Marvel turned Hemsworth and Pratt into A list stars. Do you think DC can do the same w/ the lesser known members of JL? Personally, I'm not a big fan of Chris Evans or Scarlet Johansson, and I think Jeremy Renner and Ruffalo are under used.
---
Robert Downey Jr. - Iron Man - Perfectly embodies Tony to a T.
Chris Evans - Captain America - He was Johnny Storm and I remember people not being too happy about that - Even though he's PERFECT for the role now.
Chris Hemsworth - Thor - Chris WHO? He was only in Star Trek and not much else.
Mark Ruffalo - Hulk - Replacing Ed Norton. Even though he has always been a good actor, replacing any pre-est. version of the character is still walking on thin ice.
Scarlet Johansson - Black Widow - I didn't hear of her before Iron Man 2. The only other movie I'd seen her in is Home Alone 3.
Jeremy Renner - Hawkeye - I don't think people would have had much of a problem.
Plus: Paul Bettany - Vision - Already Jarvis. Made sense.
Elizabeth Olsen - Scarlet Witch - Didn't know her. She did fine.
Chris Pratt - Star Lord - Didn't know him before Lego Movie.
Paul Rudd - Ant Man - Same.
"Justice League"
Henry Cavill - Superman - My God, I remember the hate this decision caused. Mainly b/c he was a Brit playing an American icon. ...When it was announced, I literally was leaping for joy since in every "fan" casting list, I had him top-billed, but only really b/c I thought he looked exactly like Superman, not necessarily b/c I knew he was a good actor. He did well in MOS.
Ben Affleck - Batman - Hated. Both myself and pretty much everyone else. Hate is dying down, but it's still strong. I think he'll do great now.
Gal Gadot - Wonder Woman - Looks good, but obviously hasn't shown much acting range as of yet.
Jason Momoa - Aquaman - Again, looks good but hasn't shown much acting range.
Ezra Miller - The Flash - Don't know him, never heard of him.
Ray Fisher - Cyborg - Same.
Green Lantern & Shazam - Unknown
Avengers wins for now, but only b/c now we KNOW they're all mostly good.
---
I don't see this being much of a competition. Firstly, we haven't seen anyone but Cavill in action yet. But just based on name value alone, Marvel is incredibly far ahead. Each of their "risky" castings have hit the nail on the head. If you think about it, they didn't go for any est. names at all. RDJ was a very risky casting which ended up paying huge dividends for them. Who was Hemsworth before Thor? ...Cavill did not make the impression that DC whb hoping for. He did not stand out the way RDJ did in Iron Man or Bale did in BB or any of the other Marvel heroes. Then there is Gal who is not known for her acting at all so far. So just based on what we have seen from Marvel, plus casting news of others like Black Panther, Dr. Strange, Spider-man etc...***
***Whycome DC don't just create more new characters for theatrical release? I'm not trying to diss on Green Lantern, Flash and others. If DC has decided that only Batman & Superman can have the biggest support, cuz other characters are riskier it seems logical.***
ReplyDeleteThat is their problem. I'm more a Superman and Batman devotee and understand they have to be included each X a new character is created; normally relying on those 2 again and again. When I was a kid Superman was "THE MAN" w/ few weaknesses. Over the decades he's been normalized to such an extent, he needs to wear protection and use a ship in space missions. In some animated eps, he actually needs oxygen and it had little to do w/ him being in a red sun region. Villains could run him off w/ parasitic or electrical power. He even had serious physical shortcomings dealing w/ Darkside.
Batman's gotten more "dap" over the years b/c he's accomplished so much w/ no real powers excepts his brain, wits, and mere human body. Supposedly if you couldn't protect yourself in a space mission, you weren't sent, but Batman is the 1 human that they felt was always needed in the Justice League and others like GL had to look after his needs for life support. I expected them to go young, but hear they've gone to old man Affleck. Hope it works out.
***Well I think of a lot of successful films that people want sequels to. A lot of them had modest budgets, but people's support has grown them into franchises. How don't they do that w/ super heroes? ...There are financial risks, so start small and build a fanbase and grow a billion $$$ franchise from there. You don't have to be stuck trying to make old, undermarketed, non-cinematically viable characters.
---
I liked val Kilmer as Batman. He's one of my faves. I like him better than Bale in how he didn't talk w/ that corny voice. And I liked that he was bigger than Michael Keaton.***
I agree, but he was thinking ahead! IIRC, he thought he would do better w/ the franchise of "The Saint!" Big mistake; never saw a follow-up to that awful movie!
***I'm glad he wasn't in "Batman & Robin." That movie was terrible. He fit in "Batman Forever," but not that movie.***
You have to take into consideration, the star has a lot to do w/ the direction of a film! Val might have stopped a lot of that awful camp of Arnold and Uma! You just never know!
***Joel Schumacher also grew to hate working w/ Val Kilmer, so that also had a lot to do for why he didn't come back for a 2nd Batman movie.
- http://lebeauleblog.com/2011/05/05/what-the-hell-happened-to-val-kilmer/5/ - ***
- (Edited version below in the next post)
By now, Kilmer had paid his dues. W/ 1995’s 'Batman Forever,' it was finally X for him to make the A-list. When Michael Keaton decided he was rich enough not to have to deal w/ any more *beep* Batman movies, Val Kilmer was picked to usher in the Age of Schumacher.
ReplyDeleteOpinions on Kilmer’s turn as Batman are divided. For my money, he looked okay in the Batsuit. But he slept-walked through his scenes as Bruce Wayne. Jim Carrey and Tommy Lee Jones played the villains, the Riddler and Two-Face. Nicole Kidman played the love interest and Chris O’Donnell played Robin, the 20-something Boy Wonder.
In recent interviews, Joel Schumacher picked Kilmer as the best screen Batman. Over Keaton. Over Bale. Even over Adam West. You might think this is unsurprising given that Schumacher cast Kilmer in the role. But remember, Schumacher would go on to fire him before 'Batman and Robin.'
Despite the fact that nobody really liked it very much, 'Batman Forever' was a huge hit at the box office. It was lighter and more kid-friendly than the previous Batman movie which gave Joel Schumacher a lot of pull w/ Warner Bros when it came X to make a sequel.
This was unfortunate for Kilmer. His on-set antics put him at odds w/ Schumacher. Schumacher claimed that the fights escalated into a shoving match. He called the actor ”childish and impossible.” The end result was that Kilmer was out as Batman after only 1 film.
Kilmer has said that he dropped out of the Batman franchise due to commitments to 'The Saint.' Schumacher sums up the situation as follows: ”He sort of quit, we sort of fired him. It probably depends on who’s telling the story.”
According to an unnamed Warner Bros insider, Kilmer’s contract required him to make a 2nd Bat-film. When Kilmer announced that he w/b making 'The Saint' for Paramount until mid-July, leaving only days to prepare for 'Batman and Robin,' Warner Bros. reminded Paramount that Kilmer was due on Batman Aug. 1. “They went insane and said they’d make 'The Saint' w/o Val. Suddenly Val says, ‘Then I won’t do Batman,’ thinking we’d say, ‘Oh, come a month later.'” Instead, Warner Bros quietly released Kilmer from his contract. Schumacher recounted working w/ Kilmer on "Batman Forever." “He was being irrational and ballistic w/ the 1st AD, the cameraman, the costume people. He was badly behaved, rude and inappropriate…We had 2 wks where he did not speak to me, but it was bliss.”
Here’s Kilmer on Conan O’Brien in '13 talking about his exp. filming "Batman Forever:"
- https://youtu.be/Iy9MIAnbLPY -
- http://lebeauleblog.com/2014/01/30/what-the-hell-happened-to-val-kilmer-part-deux-a-retrospective-alternate-look-at-one-gifted-talented-complicated-challenging-actors-career-on-and-off-the-screen-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worry/4/ - (see next post)
Tim Burton and Michael Keaton exited the Batman franchise after 'Batman Returns.' Joel Schumacher took over to lighten up the tone. They needed a new Batman. Apparently everyone was considered Adam Baldwin, Kurt Russell, Daniel Day-Lewis, Ethan Hawke, Johnny Depp, and Tom Hanks were considered among others. Interestingly Jude Law, Leonardo DiCaprio, Matt Damon, and Christian Bale all auditioned or screen tested for Robin. They all lost. To Chris O’Donnell. I’ll just leave that there for you. Schumacher saw Tombstone and though Val was dark and sexy for Batman. Kilmer was doing research in Africa for a project he was working on, and accepted the role while in a batcave w/o ever reading the script. He thought it sounded fun.
ReplyDeleteThe shoot turned out to be anything but fun w/ Schumacher and Kilmer hating each other. Rumors swirled that Kilmer and Jim Carrey weren’t speaking either. Kilmer refutes those reports and says the 2 were close, as they had both recently lost their fathers. Schumacher says Kilmer terrorized the crew. Kilmer wanted direction, to understand Batman and Bruce Wayne. Schumacher screamed “You’re Batman. Just go be Batman.” Schumacher said Kilmer was the most pscychologically disturbed person he’d ever worked w/. Kilmer said he took it personally that Val turned down 'Batman & Robin' and 'Time to Kill,' so launched into a tirade in the press over it. Reports of a shoving match between the 2 were reported. ...Since then Schumacher has recently turned tail and said Val was the best Batman.
Critics weren’t anymore impressed w/ 'Forever' than they were with 'Returns.' Audiences however loved it. Schumacher turned Gotham into a neon-lit campfest, and seemingly couldn’t get his villains to go big enough, while Val underplayed everything. I stand by the fact that Val is the 2nd best Batman behind Christian Bale. I never liked Keaton. If you put Val in a better movie, he would really shine, as is, it’s like he’s in a different film. After seeing the Nolan trilogy, Val said that was the movie he wanted to make, but couldn’t. I also read somewhere that when they were rebooting w/ Aronofsky and then Nolan that Val expressed interest in returning, it obviously didn’t happen. As Bruce Val was appropriately tortured within, but just debonair enough and faux charming to hide his pain. As Batman, he’s passable, but never gets a chance to be scary in a film that doesn’t go for that. Val shrugged off the film saying he’d done an absurd film that means he might get another job he wouldn’t get before. Val intended on doing 'Batman & Robin' but they rushed the production schedule, and he wouldn’t back out of 'The Saint.' Since then, Val has suggested that he, Keaton, and Clooney play the villains in the next Batman film.
- http://lebeauleblog.com/2014/02/17/what-might-have-been-val-kilmer/14/ -
Kilmer accepted the role of Batman in 'Batman Forever' w/o knowing who the director was or having read the script. He said he thought it sounded like fun. But it turns out, no one had fun. Kilmer clashed w/ co-star Jim Carrey and w/ director Joel Schumacher.
'Batman Forever' was a hit at the box office. So Warner Bros wanted a sequel fast. Instead of waiting the usual 3 years, they wanted a 2-year turn-around on 'Batman and Robin.' Kilmer had to choose between reprising his role as Batman (as he was contracted to do) and making 'The Saint.'
When Kilmer announced that he would be making' The Saint' for Paramount until mid-July, leaving only days to prepare for 'Batman & Robin,' Warner Bros. reminded Paramount that Kilmer was due on Batman Aug. 1. ...
Fall Out: George Clooney stepped in to play Batman. He was the 3rd Dark Knight in the 4-film franchise. Unfortunately, 'Batman & Robin' was universally panned, disappointed at the box office and essentially killed the franchise until Christopher Nolan rebooted it.
***Batman Begins - Review:
ReplyDeleteLargely credited w/ putting the Batman film franchise back on track after director Joel Schumacher had turned the last 2 films in the 1989-1997 series into a bit of a neon-lit circus, Christopher Nolan’s more sombre take nevertheless drowns a little in its own stew of high drama.
Taking a realist approach after the campy comic-book feel of Tim Burton & Schumacher’s outings, Nolan sets his film in a real world plagued by terrorism, where Batman/Bruce Wayne’s Gotham City is more London’s Canary Wharf or NY’s financial district than a gothic storybook fantasy.
This shift mirrors the changing times of the economically and politically optimistic ’80s and ’90s giving way to an altogether grimmer world in the wake of 9/11. Unfortunately, grim times make for somewhat dull films.
What is presented in Nolan’s reboot is very much a men’s movie, with posturing, action and aggression, presumably appealing to the notion of a “real man.” whatever that is – all tortured soul searching, misplaced aggression and getting bruised and battered in the process.
Retelling the Batman origin story played out in 1989’s Batman, Nolan’s film adds plenty additional plot threads, and he takes his time to tell a rambling, sprawling tale that can at times try a viewer’s patience.
Orphaned after his parents are killed in a mugging and panicked by a childhood incident with bats, an adult Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) travels the world learning the inner workings of the criminal mind, then trains w/ the martial-arts savvy League of Shadows to fight injustice until their conflicting ideologies put them on separate paths.
As the narrative unfolds, the script by Nolan and David S Goyer explores deeply the concept of justice versus revenge while Wayne tries to find a balance in his fight against crime. Once he returns to clean up Gotham, which has been plunged into corruption by crime overlord Falcone with the help of super-creepy psychiatrist Dr Crane/Scarecrow (Cillian Murphy), the stage is set for multiple showdowns w/ Gotham’s crooked kingpins and their enemies.
To aid in Batman’s quest, Wayne smuggles new technologies from his father’s company, Wayne Enterprises, w/ the help of developer Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman). Fox is Q to Wayne’s Bond as he shows Bruce all the gadgets, materials and vehicles he is working on. Their trawl through Wayne Enterprises’ cool toys plays like what appeals to the most generic straight male stereotype who enjoys FHM or Men’s Health. Not that there’s anything wrong w/ generic straight males – they’re just generally not much fun to watch.
Every now and then a wry wisecrack is thrown into the mix, but it’s not enough to lift the general overly dramatic tone. In keeping w/ this feel, the Batman persona is now also the scariest it’s ever been on film, w/ Bale barking in low growls and scowling a lot, rather than being a fun, sexy, charismatic hero, while the overhauled bat symbol is more angular and ominous than the more rounded oval logo of the previous film franchise.
Following a flabby midsection, the long, convoluted plot involving the contamination of Gotham’s water supply eventually takes a few unexpected turns to liven things up in the last act, during which Nolan has Batman assume Superman’s mantle as Christ, come to save Gotham from wrathful destruction.
The accompanying score by Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard is as bombastic and heavy as the overall vision brought to life by Nolan, and as such is perfectly appropriate.
All is a prelude to the showdown btw Batman and the Joker in The Dark Knight (2008), alluded to in the closing moments of Begins. But audiences and fanboys had to wait 3 more years for that chapter.***
Nice review!
*** - http://www.superman-universes.blogspot.it/p/thebat-verse-chronology-by-unisol-gr77.html -
ReplyDelete'53 - Ra's Al Ghul is born.
'59 - James Gordon is born.
'72 - "Bane" is born.
'76, 19th Feb. - Bruce Wayne is born.
'78 - "Talia" is born in the Pit (Joey King is 12 yo in TDKR).
'80 - Ra's Al Ghul becomes the definitive leader of the League of Shadows.
'81 - Ra's Al Ghul sparks the economical depression of Gotham City, setting in motion the tragic events which will eventually create the Batman.
'84 - Joe Chill murders the Waynes. Bruce is just 8 yo. Gordon is 25 yo and just a cop.
'85, 17th Sep. - Selina Kyle is born. In the future to come, she will become known as THE CAT.
'90 - Bane saves Talia from certain death. Talia escapes from the Pit.
'91 - Ra's Al Ghul finds Talia and then comes to rescue Bane from the Pit.
'92 - Bane and Talia start their training as LOS young recruits.
'93 - Robin John Blake is born.
'98 - 14 yrs since his parent's brutal death, Bruce quits Princeton Univ. and comes back to GC for his silly "revenge" against Joe Chill. At the end, he fakes his death for the very 1st X.
'99 - Bane is "excommunicated" by the LOS. He becomes a mercenary.
'01 - Bruce enters in the LOS and is taught by "Henri Ducard"/Ra's Al Ghul.
'05 - BATMAN BEGINS. Bruce returns to GC again and starts as "Vigilante". W/i months, he gradually develops the brand-new persona known as THE BATMAN.
'06, Feb. - Bruce turns 30. After 1 month since the "Arkham Asylum incident", The Joker starts his career as a criminal, gradually climbing & leaving his "mark" everywhere.
Robin John Blake meets Wayne for the 1st X, realizing he's The Batman.
'08, Aug./Dec. - TDK. The Joker finally reveals himself as a supreme genius of chaos. Dent is "killed." The Batman takes the blame.
NOTE: at least a 2 yr timeline btw BB and TDK makes more sense. First off, b/c the actors look older since there was a 2 yr gap btw these films, in turn the characters look older. Also, 6 months to a year is just far too short of a period for all the things to happen such as the rise of Harvey Dent, Harvey and Rachel's courtship, the falling of the mob, the rebuilding of a 42,000 square foot mansion that w/b fully restored brick by brick.
Finally, the spirit of Ra's al Ghul tells Wayne that he fought the decadence of Gotham for "years."
'10, Mar/Dec. - 'The Dent Act' finally goes into effect. The Batman quietly retires after a long string of "unconfirmed" deeds since '08. Bruce now solely focuses his energy on the Reactor Project.
'13 - The Reactor Project turns off as a total failure. Bruce retires from public life and becomes a hermit. Miranda Tate starts working for WE around this X too.
'16 - TDKR. Bruce is 40 yo. Gordon is 57.
'23 - John Blake, now 30, becomes The BATMAN II.
NOTE: Joker made his presence known at the end of BB, but I don't necessarily think it was his 1st move. During the X btw BB and TDK, however long that was, he was laying the groundwork for his ultimate attack on the city, which we see play out in TDK. But since his plan was so intricate and precise, I don't think it's unreasonable that it would have taken maybe 1+ years to get everything just right. Only 6-9 months is a pretty short amount of X to work out such a successful attack on the city. It took Bane and Talia years to get theirs ready.
Taking all this into consideration, I've come to the conclusion that BB takes place in '05, while TDK takes place in '08. TDKR takes place in '16.***
***My cinematography blog just did a post on Batman. I post a new film every day presenting a visual breakdown of the film by way of over 60 still images. It's a fast growing and hopefully some of you guys will find it helpful, or at the very least enjoy browsing, also always looking for suggestions for films to feature.
ReplyDelete- http://film-grab.com/2015/02/23/batman/ -
---
Should the Joker have a "set, defined history?" I prefer that the Joker's backstory is a complete mystery (something that Heath Ledger's version was closer to being). It isn't necessarily j/b of being a "comic persist", it's just that the an otherwise unpredictable villain like the Joker's a scarier opponent for Batman when we aren't trying to "humanize" or rationalize why he is what he is. Having him start off as Jack Napier
(and let's not even get into how in Tim Burton's world, he not Joe Chill, is the one who killed Thomas and Martha Wayne) just kills his mystique in my eyes.***
You may prefer it that way, but IMO "cannon" had The Joker actually being created by Batman! It was often used as ammunition against his vigilantism b/c a # of these so called super criminals oft became worse after being brought to justice by The Bat! His secret ID became a focus of The Joker, The Riddler, King Tut, Egghead, Catwoman, & The Penguin; using it as a bargaining chip as part of the deal not to annihilate Gotham or the world!
***Has anyone already said this, but are the Avengers just fighting the Justice League?
Hyperion = Superman
Zarda = Wonder Woman
Speed Demon = Flash
Dr. Spectrum = Green Lantern
I'm not sure who the others are, but I don't follow DC comics. Is this right or am I delusional?***
It's pretty pathetic when they actually went as far as to change the color of the Sun to blue so Hyperion would lose his powers! Lame! lol!
***I have thought this for quite some X, but when I watched the ep. where Thor says to Zarda, "you have an invisible jet;" I just thought it was hilarious.***
The same thing went on w/ "X-Men!" If you remember "The Phoenix Saga," a whole host of superheroes had to be created to battle "the power of the crystal!" So many of them were just copies of DC character w/ 1 little more than Superman w/ a Mohawk and blue skin! That kind of plagiarism has been going on for decades going back to the comic book wars! lol!
***You're not wrong. It was an pathetic version of JL. They're doing it b/c Justice League is the best superhero team ever.***
Even though Marvel's able to put out more movies and animated series, DC heroes are more iconic IMO; esp. Superman & Batman! They're clean, always on the side of right, and are team players! I've always preferred DC over Marvel going back to my childhood w/ 12 cent comics! They offered more; fantasy stories of Clark and Lois being married or disfigurement through a combo of red, green, & blue Kryptonite! They dealt w/ topical issues like racism, war, drug issues, and more, unlike Marvel when it was more implied than an outright outrage!
***Exatcly. I grew up w/ Batman, Superman, JL & Hellblazer series. DC has more character depth on it's comics and that makes their characters iconic and recognizable. 5-6 years ago, almost no one knew Iron Man. And 5-6 yrs after the MCU over, people forget him again. But heroes like Batman, Superman, & Wonder Woman will never be forgotten. That's why DC is better.***
***Is the X-Men series an allegory for how humans treat each other? It seems to me that mutants are just a symbol for anyone who dares to be different. People who dare to think independently, oppose the gov't, oppose the status quo est. by society are always labeled a 'threat.' Such people have been persecuted throughout history by every society and gov't; happens in our country on a daily basis even today. I think the message of these movies may be that we should see the good in everyone and learn to live together in harmony, not try to fear or eliminate those who we don't understand. Its a really powerful message if you think about it.***
ReplyDeleteYou got it! I thought it started w/ "Star Trek" as well w/ the different aliens and being wary of them! Hell, people still freaked out Nichelle kissed Shatner on screen in 1 of the eps!
***Ultron Personality patterned after Heath's Joker. - Heath's Joker is an anarchist of the worst kind. Ultron is just a cynic who didn't get the chance to see things more positively.***
I haven't seen 'A of U' yet, but since I'm a "Doctor Who" fan, he's had to deal w/ many AI types like Daleks and Cybermen! Their program isn't inherently evil; just looking for normalcy and peace in their own way! If everyone's like them, there w/b no war, illness, or strife of any kind if you look at it that way; sorta like the Borg in "Star Trek!" It's only logical! The Joker was insane; in more ways than one! His so called intellect was the only thing that set him apart from petty criminals!
***I was a huge fan of 'Captain America: The First Avenger.' I think 'Winter Solider' is the best Marvel/Comic movie period, well apart from 'The Dark Knight'and under rated 'Blade II.' I know that's a bold statement, but it's my opinion and I stand by it. I mentioned before, that I didn't enjoy 'Iron Man' 2 or 3 and esp. 'Thor 2' and hated 'Man of Steel' w/ a passion.
I can say it's the 1st X in a while that I walked out of a movie totally satisfied in every way. It ticked all the boxes. The theme has an uneasy mood of a 1970s paranoia thriller, which i loved. It had chock-full of the breathless cliffhangers dictated by the genre, but equally rich in the quiet, tender character moments that made the 1st film unique among recent Marvel fare. The title alone is misleading. Winter Solider only makes a cameo and Captain America's def the straight man in this flick, surrounded by such a diverse ensemble cast in the same vain as 'The Avengers.' W/ Nick Fury, Black Widow and others characters getting their fair share of screen X, it shb called 'S.H.I.E.L.D: Retaliation.' It's like them calling the 'The Avengers' movie, 'Iron Man: Avengers Assemble', as Tony Stark kind of played the central role in it. But we mustn't forget it was an ensemble cast, just as much as Captain America: Winter Solider is.***
Well said; thanks!
***I don't hate DC, but I think they got silly for a long X. Batman became ridiculous and Superman was over-powered. But, I hope their movie does well. I liked Superman 1 & 2, as well as Batman & Batman Returns. I also enjoyed Man of Steel; more so the 2nd time I saw it.***
Well w/ Superman they must have heard you; precipitous weakening him over the decades! Not enough to get killed, but abused and made to look foolish all too often! Back in my day he was only helpless to Kryptonite (red, blue, green), magic, and something called Virus X! Now he can be thrown for a loop w/ electricity, needs oxygen and a ship when traveling in deep space, and gets into physical altercations w/ the likes of Darkseid! Over that period, they enabled Batman w/ more intelligence and he's saved the planet almost as much as Superman when initially he only concerned himself w/ Gotham! Batman became "The Man" as it were; sorta like Wolverine talking over the mantel in X-Men!
***So all these movies are not based on actual stories at all?***
ReplyDeleteNever been a Marvel fan so I've always been at a loss w/ continuity and "cannon!" It can still be entertaining, but they seem to not care about it!
***Like all comicbook movies, they base some stuff on comics and other stuff they make up to fit. But, then again, they do the same thing for comics. They've quite often changed people's origin stories.***
Nonsense. Ultron was created by Hank Pym.***
That's what I saw in the animated series; like body guards for prison Pym had set up to monitor super criminals!
***"Avengers: Age of Ultron" opens in theaters on Friday, and IMO is better than the 1st one. A better script, more involvement of the characters who were not seen much in the original - Hawkeye and Black Widow, along w/ some interesting characters in Scarlet Witch, Quicksilver and the creation of Vision. Tony Stark aka Iron Man, believes the only way for Earth to remain safe is by his invention of ultra powerful robots, and things don't go quite as planned when Ultron is born and takes matters in his own hands - and his plan is to rid society of The Avengers and more. The film begins with a bang right away as you witness the team fighting bad guys and it is a good thing to see. The action scenes are what you would see in a comic book - and that is a positive statement. We see a more rounded version of The Hulk, and for the 1st X, we see the horrors of the wars the heroes are involved in from the citizens point of view. It's not all pretty or safe. Just the opposite. The same wonderful cast - Robert Downey Jr (Iron Man), Chris Evans (Captain America), Mark Ruffalo (Hulk), Chris Hemsworth (Thor), Jeremy Renner (Hawkeye), Scarlett Johansson (Black Widow), Don Cheadle (War Machine), Samuel L Jackson (Nick Fury), along w/ Cobie Smulders. Elizabeth Olsen plays Scarlet Witch, and she made the character come alive, along w/ Aaron Taylor-Johnson as Quicksilver. Plain and simple, if you watched the 1st one you owe it to yourself to check this out. If you love comicbooks, you will not be disappointed. This is 1 of the better superhero movies that you will get to watch. A strong *** out of 4 stars. Go to the theater and buy your tub of popcorn and enjoy this wonderful film.***
Thanks!
***These are the changes I would have made to "Age of Ultron:"
-make Tony see Thanos in his vision wearing the Infinity Gauntlet
-change the pace of the fight at the Avengers Tower
-Ultron destroys a whole city
-Thor sees the Infinity Stones in his 1st vision
-delete the Thor pool scene
-delete the emotional Barton room scene
-make Captain America's rescue to the people in the cars a failure
-give Bruce Banner more screen time
What would you change?
---
Thor did see the stones in his 1st vision (it's quick though, and is part of the reason why he leaves/goes to seek answers about what he saw/wants to go back into his vision to see what he missed) - if you delete the Thor pool scene, then you lose explanation of where he went and how he found his info out when he returns (or do you want him to not leave during the farm scene?). Personally, I thought the pool scene was fine (though it also whb interesting if they had gone w/ the original version of it where Thor is possessed by the Norns)***
***Do the bad guys ever win? - Watch 'S.H.I.E.L.D.;' they lose often.***
ReplyDeleteI've never watched, but in the animated series, HYDRA is relentless! You can't win them all; probably not even but a few w/ that much evil in the world!
***It's kinda like that in "Agents of SHIELD" too. They've shifted focus a little to Inhumans and whatnot, but HYDRA is still finding ways to come back. - In the films and tv series, Jarvis was Stark's father's butler (see Agent Carter), and in the Iron Man & Avengers films, Jarvis is
**CLEARLY** Stark's home computer. Sure, you can call it a cyber-butler, but it's NOT simply his "butler."***
From what little I've watched of the animated series, Ultron was Tony's father's baby w/ his ultimate overriding duty to protect his son! That's how Ultron was finally defeated by Tony trying to sacrifice himself and taking Ultron into the SUN! The AI's prime directive took over at that moment stopping his goal of taking over Earth I guess!
***And as an X-men fan I think they are lazy designs. Apocalypse doesn't look any different to the previous image released and the X-men are still in all black leather. They really need someone who is more of a fan of the comics involved w/ these films. He claimed no more black leather before the release of 'DOFP' and what did he use, black leather w/ a stupid amount of buckles. A better director w/b trying to adapt their individual comic outfits right now; Hell the Wolverine was terrible.***
Wearing the "all black" costume has been taking over all genres of films; even w/ the good guys! Started w/ those western trenches and has evolved into black leather! Not sure anyone wants to see Logan in those yellow tights or the Scarlet Witch in full cape, boots, and headdress! QS would look too much like Flash in blue if he were made to wear his comic's costume!
***Magneto is the only 1 that wears red and maybe Jean, but that is more about representing a symbol and not actual colour for the sake of colour. The Dark Phoenix wears the red costume and Magneto wears red b/c of his leadership, might and boldness. Let me illustrate how colours can be disastrous. In 'Avengers 2:' the scene where they all assemble and fight. they had different colours in appearance, then you add that to the visuals: it becomes messy, very fake looking and scattered w/ everything all over the place.
DOFP looks more polished and tided up and 'Avengers' is all over the place. Quicksilver from 'Ultron' is wearing blue which is fine, but to now have blue rays all over his body when he runs is overuse of colour. Colours are good, but it should not be overdone in a real life film b/c that can make the film look less like real life. I suspect Zack Snyder picked up on this as well. Look at all the DCCU characters; mostly Wonder Woman and Aquaman there is little colour there.
- http://abload.de/img/bvszused.jpg -
They are all in dark colours even Superman's blue suit is dark blue. 'XMEN' and 'DCCU' just want to look as real as possible and 1 of the ways to achieve that is not to use too much colour. Colours reminds me now too much of Power Rangers. It's fine to watch that on Disney XD, but not in an actual film. Green Lantern maybe.***
***I found 'AoU' to be bloated and boring compared to the 1st 1 and most of the rest of the MCU movies.
ReplyDeleteWhy?
i. WAY too many characters. This is what seems to kill most series. There was simply no X to develop the characters' arcs so that we cared.
When Quicksilver was killed, I felt nothing b/c his appearance in the whole movie amounted to little more than 3 or 4 quick scenes and 1 wisecrack. And, for the same reason, I couldn't relate to Scarlet Witch's grief 'cuz we never knew the guy.
The Natasha / Banner romance didn't engage me at all b/c it was reduced to 2 short scenes. Scene 1: We have this connection, this bond... I love you. Scene 2: It would never work between us. Goodbye. Done.
ii. WAY too much battle X. Related to i. above. The never-ending fight scenes dominated the movie to the point where I was yawning. One scene had me laughing though b/c it was so completely over the top. Every square inch of the frame was jammed w/ our heroes and an army of robots fighting furiously. It was verging into parody like those 70s-era chop-socky movies filled w/ scores of Chinese martial artists flailing away.
Except for the 'Hulk buster' fight, the rest of the fight scenes are just a big blur in my mind now.
iii. The dialogue. There was so much of i. and ii. above that characters' dialogue was often reduced to little more than ellipses… quick snatches of incomplete thoughts and sentences.
They were often trying to articulate these moral ambiguities and dilemmas, but w/ so little X in an already long movie they spoke in these sentence fragments that didn't quite connect the dots.
From what I read 'Civil War' is going to be even worse. And DC seems to be going down the same path by quickly jamming not 1, not 2, but 4 superheroes into their next movie.
Right now the small screen seems to be the best place to see properly developed human-scale superheroes. I'm really digging 'Daredevil' on Netflix. Maybe it's X for the movie producers to dial down the 'blockbuster' in their movies.
---
I agree... Unfortunately the movie is severely underwhelmed. The tone is flat, the villain is even more flat... I mean, a damn robot w/ a mouth? Ultron "pouts" his lips, it's bloody ridiculous! The newcomers character had no charisma. Only Vision was acceptable. I have better motivations to wipe out mankind than Ultron. The CGI is bad, similar to the 'Amazing Spiderman 2;' looks fake like a videogame.
...The fans s/b ashamed to support something like this; Marvel needs to improve. The kids are the focal point? So be it, but the mature fanbase needs some respect as well. I did not pay $15.00 to watch a comedy show -_- Marvel improved w/ the 'Winter Soldier,' soon after they regressed to this childish feast. The superhero genre itself is childsh, I understand that, but don't need to be exagerated like in this movie.***
Thanks!
***What do you think will be Apocalypse's reasoning for doing what he does? So far:
ReplyDelete--Magneto wanted to "cleanse" the world of humans so mutants could live in peace
--Stryker wanted to get rid of mutants that wouldn't be useful for him or for the military/gov't
--Shaw wanted to start a world war so mutants could take the world for themselves while humans would destroy each other
--Trask wanted to guard the world from mutant threats, and line his own pockets in the process
That said, what do you think will be Apocalypse's motive?
---
Shaw was a mix of Magneto and Apocalypse. He's all about the strong surviving and he saw that as mutants. And he wanted to get humans out of the way so mutants were all that was on the planet.
- http://www.ign.com/videos/2015/09/11/x-men-apocalypse-a-god-among-mutants -
I really don't like how they are making him out to be b/c he isn't suppose to be relatable or have heart. He's suppose to be a force of nature.
---
Here's the list of what we all considered to be the crème de la crème of the modern comic book movie genre:
#1) X-Men Days of Future Past
- The only superhero comic book movie to make the list, but it comes in at #1. "XDOFP" is a thoroughly impressive piece of work that works on all narrative levels. It's a film loaded w/ snappy dialogue, intelligent allegory, winking in-jokes, and a fistful of terrific performances that add a layer of emotional resonance and moral complexity, grounding the material even as it threatens to fly away in a blizzard of flying shrapnel. You can praise any aspect of this movie and you'll be correct to do so. (91% fresh) ...
---
1) The Avengers (10/10)
2) Captain America: The Winter Soldier (9/10)
3) Man of Steel (9/10)
4) Guardians of the Galaxy (9/10)
5) X-Men: Days of Future Past (8/10)
---
You know, 2016's shaping up to be a big year for superheroes. It'll be the year where we'll see superheroes fighting each other and get a glimpse of their sex lives. "Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice" and "Captain America: Civil War" are shaping up to be some of the top films of the year. Though, it also seems like Deadpool, X-Men: Apocalypse, and poss. Gambit w/b the films where we'll finally see superheroes having sex onscreen.
...In films like "Superman II, Batman, The Dark Knight Rises, Iron Man 3," this film, and "Guardians of the Galaxy," sex is implied in various ways. The only superhero movie I can think of that had a sex scene is Daredevil. And that was over a decade ago. ...
It was surprising and great to see that this film took a lot of liberties that a lot of superhero films don't do much. They up'd the ante on the violence (w/o much blood, of course due to the rating), profanity, drug use, and sexual and non-sexual nudity. As others have stated, there were X's where the film felt like it could've been rated R. It was definitely a hard PG-13 film. All it was missing was a sex scene and yet, it worked perfectly fine w/o it. These things didn't take away from the story and characters, and it ended up doing wonderfully. Now, this film's sequel that will be coming out next year, "X-Men: Apocalypse," is said to have a sex scene. ...It's said to be btw Hank/Beast and Raven/Mystique whose relationship is intended to be explored more despite having no interaction in this film. Though, their scene where they're making out in The Rogue Cut makes sense. Thoughts?***
***Basically Apocalypse is the conclusion of the character arcs started w/ "First Class" so that marks a trilogy, but it does sound like according to Singer and one of the X2 writers who worked abit on 'Apocalypse' that the next step is to continue w/ the new younger cast in some form or another; although I don't count Psylocke and Archangel since they could die.
ReplyDelete---
Since the focus of the FC trilogy is on Charlies, Erik, Raven, & Hank, I think the next trilogy (or series) could shift the focus to Scott, Jean, Storm, and Nightcrawler or something.
---
I'm pretty sure that's what that means. I'm done w/ Raven, mainly Jennifer Lawrence. I could care less if they kill that miscast Archangel. Hopefully Psylocke lives. My guess is the next step is to focus on Scott, Jean, Storm, Nightcrawler, and Jubilee and introduce Iceman and other essential characters. If Beast is still in this, I hope he's in full costume; can't stand that guy's face. Hopefully Xavier and Magneto are still around which sounds like it b/c they've extended their contracts.
---
Yeah, I think Holt could have been a good Cyclops. Then you wouldn't have to look at much of his face through the entire movie. - He does remind me of a young James Marsden.
===
Is it cause Fox let Singer be in control of X-Men stuff like 1, 2, The Wolverine (producer), First Class (producer) and DOFP (Director)? I believe so. "Fantastic 4" isn't meant to be w/ Fox as they made 3 terrible movies in a row. I think Fox should stick w/ X-Men and give up F4 already. X-Men is the only Marvel comics property Fox has done well except "Last Stand" & "Origins: Wolverine."
But F4 is definitely MCU and Marvel Studios material you know. I mean when Star Wars makes big money for Lucasfilm and Disney, I'm sure Disney will get F4 rights back from Fox to trade for X-Men TV show/animated show rights. MCU needs Galactus as the new villain for phase 4 and Silver Surfer in "Guardians of the Galaxy 3."
---
The 1st 2 FF movies were awesome at the X if you ask me. The 2005/2007 movies got a lot right, but failed at some points like what they did w/ Doom (metal/laser dude), Galactus (cloud) and Alicia (black woman cast for white character from the comics). As for this year's FF, they failed so hard. They took some many liberties w/ the characters and that didn't sit well w/ the comic book fans. IMO their worse mistake was to hire a Black actor to play the human torch. They should have known that fans wouldn't like that not one bit. For FOX Fantastic Four to succeed, they have to follow the comics as much as possible and don't take any liberties at all.
---
Is this movie the end of Phase 2?
Phase 1
X-Men
X2
X-Men: The Last Stand
X-Men Origins: Wolverine
Phase 2
X-Men: First Class
The Wolverine
X-Men: Days of Future Past
Deadpool
X-Men: Apocalypse
Phase 3
Gambit?? - I was wondering if Gambit belongs to Phase 2 or Phase 3.
---
No.
Phase 1
X-Men: FC
X-Men Origins: Wolverine
X-Men
X2
X-Men: The Last Stand
Phase 2
The Wolverine
X-Men: DOFP
Deadpool
X-Men: Apoc.
Phase 3
Wolverine 3
Gambit
New X-Men sequel featuring the X-Men team finally operative
Deadpool 2
X-CONTINUITY: FIXING THE X-MEN MOVIE TIMELINES:
- http://x-continuity.blogspot.com -
---
If anything you'd have to group them by timeline and relevance to each other. So more like...
X-men
X2
X-Men: The Last Stand
Origins: Wolverine
The Wolverine (b/c it directly follows 'TLS,' but acknowledges DOFP.)
First class
Days of future past
X-men Apocalypse
Deadpool
Gambit
Wolverine 3 (I imagine this will take place after all of the other films, the future.)***
***"Avengers: WS;" I still love this movie. When I'm looking for something to watch and enjoy, it's often my top pick. The score is incredible 1st off. Second, I think all of the actors did a fantastic job. I love Black Widow's personality in this one (much better than the sappiness she had in AoU bleh). Finally, it still gets to me, Steve's realization that his best friend is not only alive, but trying to kill him. It literally changes the way he fights. Ugh. It's all brilliant. Can't wait for more of it in Civil War.
ReplyDelete---
...And the only good thing in this film are the action sequences. Which exists about getting the bad guys their butts kicked, and the good guys saving the day. It's always the same. Very boring, and also didn't like the shacky cam, some of the action sequences were hard-to follow. Don't even understand the hype. Most of the film is just okay. Very overrated indeed. - TWS, like most Marvel movies, lacks a great bad guy. Most importantly, it feels like there are real stakes in The Dark Knight. In WS, people who s/b dead come back to life, and the plot is kind of outrageous.***
Well since I'm more a DCU fan, the action sequences are worth watching! Jackson's snappy retorts back to his car was terribly amusing in his escape from Hydra agents! Everyone living is part of comicbook lore; even when you think they're dead, they aren't! It happens again and again!
***Wow, SHIELD here is no better than Hamas or any terror group! I mean, flying ships w/ anti-aircraft miniguns hovering from country to country, killing people left and right, b/c some program ID's them as a POSSIBLE/FUTURE threat? That was Fury's explanation to Cap America in the
beginning, right? The ONLY problem (for Fury) was that HYDRA simply programmed that thing to target HYDRA's enemies, not SHIELD's.
Am I getting it right? B/c if so, how is then SHIELD any better than Al Qaeda, ISIS, Boko Haram and any other real life terrorist organization? For I must've missed the part where any an every one of those people SHIELD would target as threats would get their day in court to defend themselves. Talk about pre-crime and thought-crime on steroids!!
At least in the first Avenger movie SHIELD was given a reasonable rationale for developing HIDRA weapons (EVERYONE was scared crapless at the realization of Nordic gods like Thor and Loki being really real and able to drop in anytime to do whatever they wanted, so it's reasonable they went ballistic to come up w/ whatever they could defend themselves with). But the "hellicarriers" conception is just too extreme to justify. It's right out of any tyrant's wet dream (Herod killing the newborn to get Jesus comes to mind). And the makers of this see it that way (Cap America's outraged the second he's made aware of them, and clearly equates SHIELD w/ HIDRA when telling Fury he will only help if they agree to take down also SHIELD).***
SHIELD had to come down. How could you know who to trust wasn't a HYDRA agent? Any secret military or police unit is suspicious, doing things we wouldn't approve of. That's why CIA, KGB, MUSAAD, MI 6, and all the rest don't advertise too much of what they do. IMO, they're a bunch of mercenaries, killers, and terrorist in their own right.
***Fair enough. But since Fury is clearly OK w/ the idea of killing people whom MAY be a threat, why is Cap, agent Hill and Widow still by his side? What exactly makes him any better than say, Pierce (Robert Redford)? Making Fury pretty much just as bad as the bad guys (or the bad guys ambiguous enough they could very well be the good guys) makes me hard to root for anyone here. I'm not asking for black & white, just for a lighter shade of grey.***
***I think the story in 'Av: AofU' is unfairly being boiled down to "Stark screwed up again," and I can only blame the filmmakers for people walking away with that interpretation. The coding inside the mind stone-- used to create Scarlet Witch-- uses HER to drive TONY to create ULTRON. It's as if the mind stone births itself into existence. Pair this w/ the "Fine. I'll do it myself," from Thanos and you're left questioning-- Was this a back-up plan to the Battle of New York all along?
ReplyDeleteAs the story unfolds now, it all just seems like an accident with no connection at all to how Thanos knows what's happening on Earth or why he feels the need to finish something himself that he seemingly wasn't involved in in the first place.
Evidence...
In the opening scene, SW sees Tony. She's obsessed w/ getting revenge on him. And all she does is give him a vision of The Avengers dead? A Vision that just so happens to take place on a similar space rock to the one we've seen Thanos on before. One specifically telling him "If you do more right now, then this vision won't happen," AND willfully let's him escape w/ the scepter? ...
WHY does she give him just a vision? WHY does she hold Pietro back, smile and let Tony escape? The theme of birth and children is all over the movie...
- Hawkeye's expecting w/ his wife
- We see Black Widow and Hulk cannot have children
- The Maximoffs are orphaned and given a new "parent" in the scepter/mind stone
- Ultron says, "Everyone creates the thing they dread ... People create... smaller people? Uhh... children! Lost the word there. Children, designed to supplant them. To help them... end."
- A # of references to Tony being Ultron's Daddy/Ultron being his "Junior"
- Vision says, "You believe I'm a child of Ultron,"-- referring to the Maximoffs and effectively saying, "You believe I'm a child of the Mind Stone."
Here's the way it goes... The Mind Stone coding + the motivation to protect the Earth = Ultron as he is 1st "born." Ultron Prime + the internet's knowledge = Ultron as he is for most of the film. Vision = Mind Stone coding imprisoned/filtered by a Jarvis matrix.
I mean, the "chain of custody" to get to Ultron literally involves the mind stone creating the being that leads to its own creation as Ultron AND Vision. The Mind Stone creates Scarlet Witch, SW influences Tony, Tony uses that same stone to create Ultron. Beyond that, I completely agree it's all muddled and buried, but I don't think that chain is in dispute. And, if you think the Thanos tag scene is simply a follow-up on events from Guardians...
That would mark the 1st time any tag didn't tie into story points from the movie we just watched. Even the Iron Man 2 'Hammer' scene was a follow-up to Fury and Coulson's discussion of the southwest region throughout IM2. They've always been used to resolve threads, answer a ?? while posing a new one or spin-off in a context we understand from the story we just watched. If the Thanos scene was purely in response to Guardians w/o any connection to the events of Ultron, then this w/b the 1st Marvel tag to do that.
---
Apparently SW merely opens up the door to the worst fears people have, and have them think that's reality. She was amazed by what Stark's fears were and saw that he was already on a path of self-desruction, all on his own. That's why she let him have the scepter. But if your theory's correct, the scepter was sort of like the One Ring trying to get back to its master. And since her powers came from it...***
***I was watching a discussion on YouTube:
ReplyDelete- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgVKEJkLMsw -
They were talking about the character of Quicksilver from "The Avengers: Age Of Ultron" and the character Quicksilver from "X-Men: Days of Future Past" being the same character, and I agree, sort of, except there are some big differences that make me confused.
First, both characters are super fast, both have silver hair, but that's where the similarities end. QS in A: AOU is Russian and has a twin sister (The Scarlett Witch) and the character in XM: DOFP is American and has siblings, but not a twin. The character in A: AOU dies in the end, and the one in XM doesn't. Plus the character in XM is much older than the one in A: AOU. The one in XM is a teenager in the seventies and the other one in A: AOU is a young man in the present. Also, the QS in XM's father is Magneto, although it's only hinted at in XM: DOFP.
So I guess my ?? is, is he really the same character or is it just coincidence? They are both Marvel characters too. Did the movies just take the same character and make him their own for each movie? Confusion...
---
It all has to do w/ legal rights. Avengers can't say hes a mutant, so now they are miracles (more than likely inhumans) and they can't mention his parentage. Fox can use everything, but can't mention that he's an Avenger. Both those actors are respectively the same age so one isn't that much "older" than the other. These ARE the same character, just different unrelated universes and film franchises. Xmen franchise will never be a part of the MCU (maybe one day long from now)
---
The Winter Solider is the best villian of all X in Comic Book Movies. First of all there are only 2 heroes in all of comics who are unbeatable; The Batman and Captain America. They are the only 2 characters in all of comics who are incorruptible. The Winter Solider takes the award for being the coolest looking villain of all X, just beating Bane and the Joker. Most impressive still is that he is the most ruthless villain we have ever seen. He is willing to kill anyone, to gun them down at any 2nd. Not only that, but he owns Captain America, one of the most undefeatable fighters in the history of the Marvel Universe. Yes when DC and Marvel did a cross over to determine who saved the fate of the Universe, it was Captain American and Batman who did.
---
I think not. The "Winter Soldier" - the whole thing, the character and the story, everything about it - was a dumb idea from the get-go. He has no motivation, no charisma, and his superpower is a bionic arm. Weak sauce. He also gets beat like a little bitch and runs away after aiding his nemesis who just kicked his butt. Marvel shb smart and left Bucky dead. This movie did the best it could, but the material just wasn't up to par.
---
In case you didn't realise this wasn't a film about 'superpowers,' just normal men who have been enhanced. Besides the Winter Soldier is much more then just a bionic arm. He's a weapon, a tool of lethal efficiency used by the state to further their agenda. He gives us insight into what Rogers could have become if he never questioned his orders. I'd also say it's implied that he has had some sort of general physical enhancement aside from the prosthetic. I mean he jumped off the motorway bridge to land on and crush a car 20ft below. His bionic arm wouldn't help w/ that. He was part of the Soviet super-soldier program, so maybe they gave him a serum similar to the one used on Rogers.
---
He shoots CA w/ a rocket launcher, then takes an assault rifle and tries to kill him, then used his own shield against him, then uses a pistol against him, then uses a knife against him, then tries to use his hands to kill him; all in 1 fight. When has anyone tried so hard to actually kill someone as a villain?***
***Do you think Batman '89's better than The Dark Knight? ...as a superhero movie, I think it's far better. TDK may be a great movie, but it's a terrible Batman film on multiple levels. Batman is supposed to be the "world's greatest detective." ...Ras al'Ghul even gives Batman the honorific, "Detective."
ReplyDelete---
Batman ('89) vs. TDK ('08):
Fidelity (Burton) - Was closer to the comic books.
Visual Effects (Nolan) - Some of the effects in Burton's movies haven't withstood the test of X. The visual effects in Nolan's movie are some of the best in the business.
Batman (Burton) - Keatan was going for a likeable character and Bale was going for more of an outcast character. At least you could hear what Keaton's Batman was saying, and I feel like his character of Wayne overall had more dimensions.
Joker (Nolan) - Jack Nicholson's Joker was excellent, so it's not an easy decision. I feel like Heath Ledger's Joker was more terrifying and immersed in the role.
Gotham (Burton) - Nolan's did feel like a big grand city, but I think Burton nailed the seedy, sleazy dark-alley atmosphere better.
Story (Nolan) - Burton's story was a typical superhero movie. Nolan wanted to add some philosophical and moral subject matter to it (like the prisoner's dilemma).
---
Best part; worst part of the '89 Batman:
My best parts of the movie for me is, the set designs, costume, designs, and score.
Jack Nicholson as the Joker, and of course Keaton as Batman.
Worst parts or things I don't like. The relationship btw Gordon and Batman's completely absent from this film and the next 3 to follow.
There are 2 special effects shots that bug me every X I re-watch it. Just after Batman blows up axis chemicals and he looks up to see the Joker escaping in the helicopter. The helicopter looks like a model; shot looks bad and fake.
---
Worst parts:
Bruce/Vicki relationship forced and silly. Most of the awful dialog in this movie is b/c of these 2 together. Their silent scenes are very good.
The "let's get nuts" scene: very, very Keaton, not Batman so much. Batman not acting heroic in most if not all of the movie (Batman as a killer: the worst violation.)
Prince (whom I like). I'd like to see this movie w/o the pop music or at least such an obvious soundtrack plug.
The goons were a little too goofy at X's (like when they chased Batman out of the museum.)
Pretty much the entire 3rd act (from the point of Joker being revealed as killer and on).
Batman and Joker (during 3rd act) pulling out gadgets they only use 1 X (and are ridiculous and/or ??-able) ala Adam West/Cesar Romero.
Knox: cute comic relief, but nothing to him.
- - Best (most everything else):
Danny Elfman: classic music.
Anton Furst: surreal and wonderful (sometimes the city seems a little underpopulated though, but I guess it goes w/ the fantasy that people are scared to come outside).
Nicholson: perfect 80's comic Joker (on the fence about the prosthetic smile. I like that it's a Man Who Laughs reference, but I think Jack may have looked better w/o it and we could have gotten more less static expressions from him, esp. when he was mad. He doesn't always smile in the comics after all).
Keaton: turned in a great performance. Totally against type, but his character fit.
Bassinger: not as love interest, but as the audience guide through the movie.
Gough: dumb that he was outsmarted by Vale a couple of X's, but otherwise excellent.
Batmobile: my fave.
Opening scene: great homage/fake out of Batman's origin and a classic intro.
Parent's death scene: done really well and Jack almost kills the kid too, pretty dark.***
***Where would you have taken this series after "Batman?"
ReplyDeleteFor sequels:
1. Keep the visual aesthetic from 'Begins'...
2. Score is more like the score of 'Begins,'
3. Keep the batsuit from 'Begins'
4. Keep the Gotham from 'Begins'
5. Keep the Wayne Tower from 'Begins'
6. Keep Katie Holmes as 'Rachel Dawes'
7. Keep the story as centered on Bruce Wayne/Batman as is the case in 'Begins'
8. Keep the more hectic editing of fight scenes from 'Begins'
9. Make the runX the same as the runX from 'Begins'
10.The opening credits are the same as those in 'Begins:' B&W Warner Bros. and DC logos followed by a clip of bats swarming to form a at symbol
If a trilogy:
The 2nd film is similar to TDK, set a few years after 'Begins'
1. The Scarecrow gets more screen X
2. No dogs
3. Wayne Manor has been rebuilt w/ an improved Batcave
4. No Hong Kong/Lao plot
5. No Gordon faking his death plot
6. Sal Maroni has more screen presence
7. Harvey Dent is a stronger character
8. No sonar device
9. Bruce doesn't consider retiring
10. Batman doesn't take the fall for Dent's crimes or go on the run
The 3rd film is similar to TDKR, set a few yrs after the 2nd film
1. Batman never retired; instead Bruce becomes a recluse and only goes out as Bats
2. The Scarecrow gets more screen X, wears his mask and is the 2ndary villain
3. No "crashing this plane" scene
4. John Blake is the child Batman saved w/ Rachel in the Narrows of 'Begins'
5. Talia gets more screen X and a longer battle w/ Batman that includes a better death
6. The Bat has a cooler name
7. Bruce has flashbacks and hallucinates about his childhood, his parents, his life as Batman
8. Selina Kyle is referred to as "the Catwoman"
9. Bane gets a better death
10.The LOS more resembles its counterpart from 'Begins'
If 5 films:
The 2nd film from my trilogy version, instead of dating Rachel, Harvey has a wife whom The Joker kills, Rachel leaves Gotham instead of being killed, and Two-Face disappears at the end of the movie.
The 3rd film sees Batman trying to track Two-Face while going up against weapons dealer/crime lord the Penguin (Bob Hoskins), who hires the assassins Deathstroke, Deadshot, Poison Ivy (a seductress disguised as a socialite who favors poisoning her victims played by Eva Green) and Mr Zero (Mr Freeze meets Kevin from Sin City). Batman discovers that Two-Face has been backing the Penguin. The scene of Two-Face holding Gordon's family hostage takes place at the end of this film except that Batman doesn't take the fall for his crimes or go on the run.
The 4th film sees Batman attempting to mediate a truce btw the police and the remnants of the mob headed by Carmine Falcone's son Alberto Falcone. Rachel has returned to Gotham and Bruce is considering retiring to marry her. The Joker escape from Arkham Asylum and Batman having a final confrontation w/ him. Joker kills Rachel and torments Gordon The Killing Joke style. The final battle btw Batman and The Joker resembles their fight in the animated version of TDKR. Batman is left victorious against The Joker and the mob but broken and alone.
The 5th film is the 3rd film from my trilogy version w/ a few changes.
Whether a trilogy or 5 films, I'd want to make a few changes to 'Begins' too, in which case the trilogy version and the 5 film version would each be a little different than the above.***
***When did the "Batman" series 'Jump The Shark?'***
ReplyDeleteIt didn't stop us from watching every ep. until it ran it's course! I was disappointed many X's, but kept hoping until the last; even w/ the advent of Batgirl, awful villains like "Clavicle," and truncated eps to get it all in in 20 min.! The animated series filled the void until '89; some better than others! I don't ever want to see the Batmobile bringing up the rear of the Mystery Machine on "Scooby-Doo!"
***Oh, do NOT get me started on the 'Scooby Doo Movies;' cross-overs. Those were just sooo bad!
---
Batman ('89) vs. TDK ('08)***
It was huge IMO; right up there w/ a premiere of a "Bond" film! They had already heralded it as the next big hit years ahead of X! We heard it w/b a London opening, had 2 sound-tracks, and like the Superman franchise, more was invested in "the villain!" Supposedly they were trying to keep it under-wraps, but Pee Wee Herman was given a part in the sequel (Batman Returns) to bring him back into the limelight after his unfortunate troubles! I had doubts about Keaton; esp. since his last movie was a comedy in "Beetlejuice" w/ the same director of Burton! It was well worth the wait; done very well and still iconic! "GREAT JOB!"
***Batman ranked as DC Comics' #1 hero - The Justice League usually doesn't have a set Leader though. Superman may be seen as a "Leader" figure for the League, but he'd be the 1st 1 to admit that they're a group of ='s who work together and he doesn't command them.***
It took decades, but Batman supplanted Superman as the greatest DC superhero! Kal El was systematically weakened w/ a need of spacesuits, oxygen, & easily hurt/slowed down w/ electricity and percussion arsenals! In my day he only had 3 weaknesses/vulnerabilities while on Earth; Kryptonite (red, green, & blue), Virus X, and magic! Batman became almost omnipotent, knowing just about everything and could deal w/ magic w/ the help of friends! The same thing went on in the Marvel Universe w/ them having Wolverine taking over w/ the X-Men and Spiderman running the show among the others like Iron Man & Captain America!
***"Batman & Batman Returns:" After viewing the 2 movies again recently it's evident that although both are set w/i the same universe, it's clear that these are 2 very separate stories in terms of characters, style, etc. I believe there was a draft of the script that had referred to the Joker in passing, had a gift shop selling fragments of the batwing from the original movie, even featuring Vicky Vale.
My ?? is, would you have preferred "Batman Returns" to serve as more of a sequel w/ references to the previous story? I like that this movie holds its own, has a very separate story to tell, and doesn't reply on anything from the previous movie to carry weight. Saying that thought, it whb nice to have at least 1 reference to the Joker in there somewhere.***
I rarely think of such a thing; very well done together and on their own! It was a great reboot and wished it could have continued w/ Keaton and Burton! The 3rd and 4th movies were entertaining enough, but a joke in comparison to the 2 originals! Too bad Val was so hard to deal w/ and Clooney/Arnold not as funny as they thought! The Bat Card? Just plain bad!
***Scarlet Witch does not control what people see when she hexes them and I don't think she got any powers from the mind stone either. She got powers from Hydra's experiments. That's not to say they experimented on her w/ the mind stone. Ultron is not based off coding that was in the mind stone. He's based on coding that was in the scepter which housed the mind stone. You're swimming in conspiracy theory territory. The point of Ultron as a character is he is the Avenger's deep dark secret. The Avengers created their worst enemy. The irony is lost when you change the mythos to allow Ultron or Thanos to have been the ones who created him. Stark screwed up, but not really again. It's not as if every movie involves Stark screwing things up.
ReplyDelete---
Not every Marvel movie may be about Tony screwing up, but all the films featuring him sure are. Btw him creating Ultron and now trying to take away the civil rights and liberties of every unique individual in planet Earth, yeah, all of Tony's appearances are about him being a big screw up.***
I think what people are thinking about is Tony's overall persona of mistrusting "everyone," assuming the gov't and their agencies are bad, and doing things "he" sees fit which compromises all of the planet when it all goes wrong.
---
In the first 15 mins of WS, the Cap is fighting someone who is giving him quite a challenge; his adversary even taunts him, implying that he's nothing w/o his shield. In any case, the Cap's enemy is NOT genetically modified or engineered, and yet he's taking full-on punches to the face and kicks from the Cap. Captain America was using ALL HIS STRENGTH. His enemy s/b dead—he s/b dead. Now, if it were the Winter Soldier, I'd understand, but he's not. After the fight, I would have expected Cap to say at least, "Who WAS that guy?" But no.
---
No, CA wasn't using all his strength. As indicated by Captain America's abilities in every Marvel film he's been in, using "all his strength" would cave a normal human being's head in. He couldn't knock the guy out immediately b/c a) he was surprised and on the defensive, b) the guy was a superb hand-to-hand fighter, c) he wasn't a stationary target, and d) he wanted to teach the guy a lesson after he taunted him.
The same thing occurs during CA's fight w/ The Winter Soldier ... he's fighting a highly skilled guy, this X w/ weapons and a super-strong arm, who is also his best friend. He is holding back ... until the point where he simply grabs WS by the throat, lifts him off the ground using his super strength and bodyslams him; then puts him in a sleeper hold. The earlier fight with Batroc est.'s that a highly-skilled human can still briefly fight CA to a standstill, despite his superpowers. So a highly-skilled human w/ a few enhancements and the element of surprise, like The Winter Soldier's actually a credible threat to Cap.
---
The supersoldier serum boosted Cap's abilities to the peak of human potential or slightly beyond, but not to truly superhuman levels in the sense of Superman or Hulk or even Spider-Man. He's just a little stronger than the world's strongest weightlifter, just a little faster than the world's swiftest sprinter, has just a little more endurance than the world's most tenacious ultramarathon runner... et cetera. What really gives him such an edge in combat is that he is all of these things at the same X.
So I rather liked the fact that they made a point of emphasizing that an exceptionally fit and skilled fighter could in fact take Cap on... almost. Helps keep the character grounded and his abilities believable. And in a cinematic world w/ Gods and Hulks and talking raccoons, it's important to keep something believable. Cap's the bridge btw us mere mortals and the true superhumans like Thor.***
***I really dislike Anna Paquin as Rogue...Not to say anything about her as an actress, and no she didn't "ruin" the character for me. I just never thought she fit the role. Yes I do like the comic book version more, but I completely understand why they didn't give her the original outfit in any adaptation. However she just didn't come across w/ that Southern Bell Goddess that I loved so much.***
ReplyDeleteAfter studying at the academy, what excuse could she possibly have in "$UCKING" some other mutant's powers in access of her being able to "retain" them as in the comic or animated character? ;-)
***Lol, I feel like you're being nasty and I approve. - Anna Paquin has said herself many X's, she wants Rogue to fly and kick ass.***
I've commented that Rogue was so limited; how could they ever expand her powers? In the animated series, she supposedly absorbed all the abilities of Miss Marvel! Unless MM was dying, not sure how they could justify Rogue doing that again; even w/ her mother Mystique egging her on to "hold on!"
***They could have just given her those powers from the start, w/ or w/o Ms. Marvel being in the continuity. Rogue's a mutant. Aside from die hard comic fans, would anyone really have cared? Maybe the film-makers felt she wouldn't be as tragic a character if she could also fly and had super strength. Too bad b/c Rogue pretty much lost meaning after the 1st film. - Is Alex, Scott's father or older brother?***
Brother, but the only X I even remember Scott having a brother was in the animated series when they supposedly parachuted out of a plane to escape capture by extraterrestrials! Later we get to see Scott's father who was a bit of a space pirate leading the Star Jammers! I had no idea Havok was supposed to be Scott's brother! Still haven't seen the latest of the movies!
===
***In "The Avengers," I think Loki could've won if he just had the scepter the entire battle. - Now that I know the scepter has the Mind Stone embedded on it, I think Loki could've telepathically controlled and coordinate the Chitauri better. If Loki knew this, I wondered if he could've made the Chitauri a more efficient force to be reckoned w/.
---
I doubt it. In the end, he underestimated what the individuals would do as a team. If he could have controlled Tony, that would have made a difference.***
Obviously he was cognisant of the team and SHIELD; trying to create havoc on all fronts using Clint the way he did! I think the only person he underestimated was Widow probably! He was overconfident speaking to her!
***...He underestimated that the individuals would put their differences aside and even come to respect each other (Cap calling out Tony for not being willing to sacrifice himself - then Tony does just that trying to get the helicarrier going again). Tony seeing that Cap isn't special simply b/c of the formula, Banner knowing Hulk can be used for good and not just destruction.
---
How much did the cast make on this? - I can recall a voiceover saying he'd made X millions of dollars for like 20 mins of screen X in this movie. I think Downey's contract had a clause where he got a % of the take.***
Must be nice; just throw an electronic box over your head and do dialogue! Talk about cushie! ;-)
***There's a difference btw Tony Stark and Iron Man. One role requires the presence of Downey, the other doesn't necessarily -- it depends on if Iron Man has any lines (and VO, as you noted, doesn't require much X) or if the face is shown. Actual X that Robert Downey Jr was shown on the screen is not that much.***
***...uh, guys are you forgetting the ending to "DKR" is also very similar to the old Batman movie where he cant get rid of that bomb? I rolled my eyes when I noticed this. There are homages to the old tv series like Catwoman's costume.***
ReplyDeleteFrom "The Avengers" you can't beat guiding a NUKE through a hole in space w/ the possibility of being lost for those last few moments left of power remaining in Iron Man's suit! I've never even been a fan of his going back to the animated series; lack of trust in anyone, doing things his way or not at all, and thinking he KNEW best no matter what the situation! I have to "bow-down" to that climax and act of self-sacrifice!
***Now the truth is Apocalypse like Thanos is a hard character to bring to live action, but since FOX has succeeded in bringing other characters like Beast, Nightcrawler, & Mystique to life, I have faith that they can do it. It'll just look a little different from the films and from what I can speculate this Apocalypse will appear in 3 forms.
1. Oscar Isaac Form: Now since Apocalypse is basically a shape shifter and he will be walking around in 1980s USA, he will take on a human form to blend in which probably looks like the actor playing him. But don't worry, Bryan will probably take the same approach he did w/ Mystique which was that he will only show him in human form for brief periods of times.
2. Regular Form: This will be Apocalypse's normal unaltered form. Now this form will probably look like the one seen in the post credit scene from DOFP; only he'll be a lot bigger and really muscular, but I do think that for this form in terms of size, they will still keep him in the human range. Still very large and strong, but not Hulk level height and strength. He will of course have on a full set of armor that looks a lot like the comic version, but I don't think they'll keep the tubes that run from his elbows to his shoulders.
3. Brawler Form: Now this form actually looks a whole lot like the comics version and is roughly the same size or bigger and it will be the form Apocalypse transforms into whenever he gets into a fight. Now one way I'll think they'll do this form is that when he does transform, his skin will sort of turn into this organic steel type substance which I think is okay considering the comics have always drawn Apocalypse in his modern form as sort of robotic or at least techno organic.
---
You know how Msytique is basically naked throughout all of the X-Men movies, but when she transforms, her transformations create clothes for her to wear well? W/ Apocalypse I'm gonna guess that it will be the same thing where he creates a set of armor for himself VIA transformation and that his skin is just indestructible. Now if your talking about his origin story as in going back to ancient Egypt, then I dont think that version will look human b/c in the 'DOFP' post credit scene, already he looked sort of blue-grayish even when he was just a teenager. I'll believe they'll use practical effects to make that version work just like they did w/ Mystique and considering how cool she looked, I imagine Apocalypse will look real cool as well.
---
Apocalypse is no Apocalypse w/o the rubber, gum lips and grey skin. Damn it, ticks me off they tampered w/ it. Why does he look like a twink, cheaply painted blue; a hood? Pathetic, might as well of made Mystique some goth chick w/ heavy makeup and Beast have wolfman syndrome.
---
Who will be the Four Horsemen in "X-Men: Apocalypse?"***
In the animated series, The Four Horsemen were random mutants who were looking to have their "afflictions" taken away! Apocalypse aided by Mystique and a machine took over control of these mutants and made use of their powers; death, famine, etc.! Warren Worthington as Arch Angel was the only mutant w/ a name and storyline when he was converted to The Angel Of Death!
***Did future Magneto know and plan all along in "X-Men: DOFP?"
ReplyDeleteBefore they send Wolverine back, Magneto says, "You'll need my help as well."
But as the plot unfolded in '73, clearly they didn't. Magneto only caused them more trouble and almost ruined the mission. They would have done much better w/ Quicksilver or on their own. Did Magneto not believe in X and Wolverine's intentions, but he did believe in his past self and knew the types of actions he would take if given the chance to stop Mystique, Trask, Sentinels, etc. through his own devices?
He always wanted war w/ the humans. Getting 'past' Magneto out of prison & allowing him to 1. Kill Mystique, and 2. When that failed, manipulate the Sentinels and rally the mutants of the world on live TV against the humans, could have given him the edge on a war that 'future' Magneto had already seen as lost. So again: Did 'future' Magneto try to sabotage the mission from the beginning to fit his own agenda?
---
I'm not willing to believe he actually wanted to sabotage the mission or start a war w/ humanity - I still think he's finally seen that most of humanity is worth co-existing w/. But I could get on board w/ him thinking Charles' plan of getting Mystique to spare Trask was too soft and maybe even that they s/b trying to just kill/destroy Mystique like young Erik basically decided. I don't suppose we'll ever know, but it would have been cool to see some sort of scene where Charles (after the visit from his past self) confronts Erik about his true intentions etc.
---
I personally think that he saw this as a means for him to get out of prison, but due to the whole wobbly effect of time-travel he probably didn't know just what would happen from then. I don't think he thought of killing Mystique (seeing as he's agreeable to letting mutant enemies live, apart from Shaw), but I'm sure he would have agreed to it as being necessary to stop the Sentinels.
---
I think they are colleagues in war now. If you look at Xavier when Magneto suggests Logan will need his help also, he kinda gives this look. Xavier trusts his old friend now b/c they are fighting Sentinels. Not for integration/ segregation. I think if Magneto had a Brotherhood w/ him he would have sacrificed the X-men long ago to save himself. But he is alone and only has them for survival. Think about this: In all 3 movies of the OT, it was Magneto's fault something happened to Charles. X1- sent Mystique to poison Xavier. X2- could have warned him about Stryker, but let him get gassed and kidnapped. He also betrayed him by turning him on the humans he knew he wanted to be a part of. X3- his manipulations of Phoenix turned her even more on Xavier to the point she killed him. Also, future Magneto didn't wear his helmet. A sign of trust from Magneto, but also a manipulation.
---
Yes, maybe they should have featured some other members of the Brotherhood or something. Still, the AGE OF APOCALYPSE influence could mean that Erik has finally accepted peace and co-existence w/ humans, esp. since according to Charles and Logan, humans tried to help mutants against the Sentinels.
---
There was an Age of Apocalypse influence? I think if they had at least 1 "villain" character that was in the Brotherhood, in the comics, or even an Acolyte, it would have shown differently. Like that the whole time they actually were working for the greater good of mutants. Imagine if they would have used Scarlet Witch instead of, say, Sunspot?***
***I was mostly pleased w/ Apocalypse's storyline. His origins and Horsemen seem on point. However, I was actually disappointed to hear that J-Law w/b leading the team. Based on DOFP, as well as the upcoming Deadpool and Gambit movies coming out the same year, here's what I imagined when I heard that the final film in the FC trilogy was Apocalypse:
ReplyDeleteThe main plot would've been Apocalypse's rise (and most likely fall). Throughout the film, we would watch him recruit his Horsemen while also watching his powers grow. - The 1st subplot would have revolved around the formation of the X-Men. We'd witness Charles operate the school, w/ Hank's help of course, and be introduced to Scott, Jean, and others (Storm still would've been a Horsemen). And then, as Apocalypse's powers grew, we'd see Charles struggle w/ how far he'd go to keep his students safe (that's when Raven and Alex would appear). For some damn reason, I kinda hoped that Wanda would've been an attendee of the school in order to a) control her destructive powers and b) use Charles' resources to find her brother, Peter.
The 2nd subplot would've been Peter's relationship w/ Erik. I'd imagined that he whb captured by the gov't and experimented on by Weapon X. This would tie in the Deadpool and Gambit movies coming out the same year. ALSO, Sinister (a HUGE antagonist who I hope will appear 1 day) & Stryker (who's set to be in the movie) operate Weapon X. Sinister's involvement would've been addressed towards the end, thus acting as a Segway to the Gambit movie. Wolvierine, who was a test subject, whm his cameo then. Anyway, Peter was captured by Weapon X, but escapes the facility, leading him to Erik. Erik, who's living a normal life in Poland w/ a wife & kid, would've been shocked & annoyed that an escapee like Quicksilver is in his home, for he fears that this intrusion will pull him back into the life he left. But then, ever so slowly, Erik & Peter would have begun to bond. ...But then, something would have happened to Erik's family and Peter would've been re-captured by Stryker. Now in a state of grief & rage, Erik teams up w/ Apocalypse to avenge his family's demise & his son's re-capture & torture.
Eventually, Charles, who we saw being taken hostage in the trailer after Apocalypse infiltrated the mansion, would soon be used as a weapon against the X-Men, leaving Raven to lead the X-Men (including Nightcrawler). Soon, Logan (who escaped the Weapon X facility) teams up w/ the X-Men & suggests that Stryker let some of his test subjects (1 of them being Peter) participate in taking down Apocalypse.
And that's how the final battle would've begun: X-Men (Mystique, Beast, Quicksilver *w/ enhancements*, Wolverine, Jean, Cycolops, and others) vs Apocalypse, Charles (now possessed), and his Horsemen (Storm, Pyslocke, Archangel, & Magneto). What do you all think of my idea?
---
Mister Sinister wouldn't appear in the film. If he did, it whb in a post-credits scene. His role in Apocalypse would have t/b tiny (considering that the X-Men w/b dealing w/ Apocalypse, Horsemen, and possibly Charles). Adding Mister Sinister at the end would (I imagine) be the right move. Also, like I said, Gambit & Deadpool's ties w/ Mister Sinister (Weapon X and The Marauders) w/b mentioned in the other films. I feel like if they introduced him at the end, that would set up another plot for a new X-Men trilogy (which I hope they don't create for a while), as well as the other 2 films.***
***There seems to be many odd similarities btw the 3rd films respectively of the "Batman, Superman, and Spider-man" movie franchises. Notice:
ReplyDeleteAn actor known for comedy roles plays the villain
- In Batman Forever, Jim Carrey plays The Riddler
- In Superman III, Richard Pryor plays Gus Gorman
- in Spider-Man 3, Topher Grace plays Venom and Thomas Haden Church plays Sandman
The hero gets a new love interest
- Batman dates Chase Meridian
- Superman dates Lana Lang
- Spider-man dates Gwen Stacey
The hero battles inner demons
- Batman copes with flashbacks of his parents' death
- Superman fights the evil version of himself
- Spider-man confronts his black-suit dark side to remove the symbiote
A villain interrupts a joyous ceremony
- Two-Face interrupts the circus and the ball
- Gus Gorman interrupts Superman's award ceremony
- Sandman interrupts Spider-man's award ceremony
The hero gets a sidekick to help in the climactic battle
- Robin joins forces with Batman to stop Riddler and Freeze
- Gus Gorman reforms and helps Superman shut down the computer
- Harry assists Spider-man in defeating Sandman and Venom
---
The Blade movies follow suit pretty well:
An actor known for comedy roles plays the villain
-Ryan Reynolds as Hannibal King (he was sort of a villain, let's face it.)
The hero gets a new love interest
-Well, except this one...
The hero battles inner demons
-Other than the usual thirst stuff (unless you count the unrated ending w/ Blade turning evil), not this 1 either.
A villain interrupts a joyous ceremony
-FBI crashing Blade's meditation, eh—Drake crashing the Nightstalkers B-ball game? Ok, maybe I'm grasping for straws here.
The hero gets a sidekick to help in the climactic battle
-Abigail shoots the final arrow at Drake saving Blade from peril!
---
I always noticed how the decline of the Batman franchise mirrored the decline of the Superman franchise.
The 1st 2 were really good and respected by most, the 3rd leans more towards comedy, but there's an interesting personal subplot for the hero, and the 4th is just a complete mess that put a halt on the series. Only difference is Batman never got a "Superman Returns" type of film before the Nolanized reboot. Oh, they also both kind of had odd spin-odds focusing on a female character.
Catwoman isn't REALLY a spin-off, but it does imply that it takes place in the same universe as "Batman Returns" as you can briefly see a picture of the Michelle Pfeiffer Catwoman when the crazy cat lady is talking about the previous Catwomen throughout history.***
***"Batman Returns;" A truly great sequel to Batman '89 & the last great Batman from 90's - Keaton was amazing as Batman as well as Michelle Pfeiffer as Catwoman, Danny DeVito as Penquin, & Max Schrek. ...it genuinely had GREAT scenes:
ReplyDelete1. Bruce sitting in his mansion alone waiting for a reason to go fight crime, then the Bat signal turns on and he steps into the light. WOW!
2. Selina Kyles transformation into Catwoman. Beautiful scene & amzzing performance.
3. Penquins parents grave scene. Emotionally touching for some reason; his humanity comes out in that moment.
4. Batman & Catwomans 1st fight. Exciting, twisted, romantic, and every fanboys dream come true.
5. Bruce & Selina having dinner @ Bruces house & making out, but then pulling apart when the other remembers their scars.
6. Batman & Catwomans kiss.
7. Bruce & Selina at Max's party and them realizing their identities. AMAZING.
8. Bruce unmasking for Selina in front of MAX showing that he truly loves her.
9. Bruce finding the cat in the end. A twisted Breakfast at Tiffanys type ending where Bruce knows Selina is alive and Selina leaves behind her cat to give something to Bruce to remember her by. Heartbreaking end, but realistic; Batman fights on.
As you guys can see, I just love "Batman Returns" and still consider it 1 of my fave movies of all X.
---
Out of the 1st 4 action theatrical "Bat-Offerings," "BR" ('92) is my fave. I like how it explores the Penguin's and Catwoman's scarred psyches. There was definitely a playful and offbeat nature to the whole film. Danny Elfman's score provides a wonderful and engaging narrative throughout. Love the finale; dark and dismal w/ a hint of hope too. I was really disappointed that Burton didn't get to do the follow-up, as I can only wonder which direction he would have taken it.
The 1st film, "Batman" ('89), has always been something of a letdown for me. I remember walking out of the movie theater feeling that the movie was amiss. For a 126 minute film called "Batman," the title character is barely in it. Batman makes 4 appearances in the picture. The 1st 3 are brief cameos (1. Beating up rooftop thugs ; 2. Axis Chemicals sequence w/ Jack Napier -and- 3. Rescuing Vicki Vale). His 4th ap. consisted of Batman flying in the Batwing around the skies of Gotham numerous X's before taking any action against the Smilex gas balloons. All that and the mid-section of the picture really seemed to drag on and on.
I thought the follow-up "Batman Returns" ('89) did a nice job of getting me dialed into the world of Gotham City w/ intriguing characters and a great brooding atmosphere w/ brilliant cinema-photography. I felt this movie was infinitely more interesting and complex.
---
Having only recently watched all 3 films in the trilogy on DVD, I have a ?? about the Joker in the TDKR? At the end of TDK, the Joker is seen finally being taken into custody after Batman foolishly rescued him from falling to his death off the building. I am aware the actor who played the Joker, Heath Ledger passed away. What I didn’t catch or learn was what happened to the Joker character in TDKR? I did notice that the character of the Scarecrow from TDK was seen in TDKR. Please tell me what I missed about the Joker?
---
There's no mention of him. He's in a padded cell forever. Bane set all the prisoners loose from Blackgate Prison (sane criminals), not from Arkham Asylum (insane criminals), even if that is where he ended up. Joker w/b a rival for control of the city that he doesn't need.
We know the real reason why he didn't come back for a cameo at least, but it makes no sense for Bane to free him. If Ledger was still alive, I would have liked for him to get a cameo in Bruce's hallucination like Ra's did. He could come in after Ra's, mercilessly taunting Bruce about his failure to keep Gotham from going mad. Arkham Knight had a lot of fun w/ this idea.***
Nice!
***Biggest mistakes that Tim Burton made w/ his Batman movies:
ReplyDelete*Alfred casually letting Vicki Vale into the Batcave w/o any repercussions (sans a throw away line by Bruce in Batman Returns) or proper build-up. *Wasting Billy Dee Williams' Harvey Dent and Pat Hingle's Comm. Gordon.
*Trying to make us feel sorry for when the Penguin dies in Returns while at the same X, wanting us to root for Batman to defeat him. Basically, this all goes back to how Burton seemed t/b more indulgent in what went on w/ the villains instead of Batman in his own movie.
*Not showing more restraint w/ the weirdness, cynicism and somberness in Returns. In other words, not making a movie more in line to the semi-realistic, film-noir tone of the '89 movie. Returns for better or worse, plays more like a live-action variant of The Nightmare Before Xmas (a surreal, dark fairy tale) w/ Batman characters in it.
*Not making a more direct sequel to the '89 movie (thus, allowing more development for Bruce Wayne's character) and instead making Returns feel like it's part of a separate universe.
*Making Bruce Wayne/Batman a secondary character in his own movie (it was esp. worse, in Returns). I mean, you know that something is off when the Joker has more character development than Bruce Wayne.
*Making Joker responsible for the murders of Bruce Wayne's parents instead of Joe Chill. Maybe it's me being a purist or maybe I felt that it was way too incidental and contrived. Also, it sets up a bad precedent for Returns, from the standpoint that Batman simply has little else to go except "doing his thing", after avenging his parents deaths.
*Maybe this was something far out of Burton's control, but working thru the '89 film w/o a fully realized script (thanks in no small part due to the '88 Writers' Strike). Also, working w/ a script in Returns that lacked focus due (presumably b/c of all of the rewrites) simply having way too many subplots.
*Not having more "perspective" or "audience avatar" characters like Vicki Vale and Alexander Knox in Returns to ground things better into reality (if that makes sense).
*Since it's inevitably going to be brought up, Batman going around killing his enemies (which was probably closer in-line to the early Kane/Finger comics from '39) w/o any or little remorse (basically, making Bruce Wayne the Punisher in a Bat-costume) or caution/restraint.***
True enough, really thought they'd come up w/ a way to make it seem The Joker was a robot or android; Joker can't die this early! Besides that, "villains" always more developed than the hero going back to Superman where Lex is "the man!" That theory of making these movies started w/ the intro of Reeves as Superman and the characters around him more prominent and famous; including cameo of Brando as Jor El!
***There have been 10 Batman films released in the past 50 yrs; more than any other superhero. Batman's by far the best & coolest, requiring < special effects. The pt is w/ all these films, some get kind of forgotten or lost in the shuffle. While films like the Dark Knight or the '89 Batman are considered t/b some of the best superhero’s movies ever made, they're not the only good ones. "Batman Returns, Mask of the Phantasm, BvS, Dark Knight Rises," the 1 film I don’t think gets enough respect is "Batman Forever."
ReplyDeleteA lot of people lump this film together w/ "Batman & Robin," but that’s not fair. ...Anyone who owns the DVD knows they cut a lot of good stuff out; a lot darkness.
Val, while not being the best Batman, still did a pretty good job. He had an iciness to his character that I think fit Batman real well. There were a couple scenes where he looked real bad ass. And like the Keaton Batman, he didn’t talk much. When he had the costume on, he said very little and never spoke above a whisper. That’s 1 thing that bugged me about the Bale Batman; his Batman talked way to much.
...Even though I really like the "DKR," the whole thing w/ Joseph Gordon Levitt being Robin felt a little tacked on. This worked though in "B&R." They took their X, showed his progression; losing his parents & finding out about Bruce being Batman.
I got a kick out of Tommy Lee Jones as Two Face. It looked like he was having a blast. He brought a lot of energy to the role; a sort of manic intensity. It was over the top w/ the multi-colored outfits, the tommy gun carrying, ski mask wearing goons, but it was fun. He even referred to himself as we. They really pushed the whole X personality thing. He had some great lines. I love that part where he tries to blow up Batman in that fire pit. Val runs out w/ that bad ass look on his face. Tommy screams “WHY WON'T U JUST DIE?” He had a cool death scene. Like Keaton, his Batman was willing to kill when the situation needed it.
This Batman's interesting b/c he's 1 of the few (maybe only) version of the character that actually did murder the man who killed his parents. He gives that speech to Robin about how he went out for vengeance for his parent’s death and then 1 day he realized that his whole life had become nothing but vengeance. Val killed it in that scene. It’s a shame he never played him again, but frankly even he couldn’t have saved "B&R."
The only thing I don’t like about this film is Jim Carrey as the Riddler. I loved the Riddler from Batman the Animated Series. I would love to see him in a more serious capacity like in a Nolan movie or maybe in 1 of the future Ben Affleck films. Sadly we got this, just another over the top Carrey performance. I was never a fan of his. Plus his whole idea of using TV to read people's mind was odd. But I do like that scene where he blew up the Bat Cave. That was cool. Seal’s, "Kiss From a Rose," was never in the movie, but that's still a damn catchy song. All and all, it was fun Batman movie for a younger audience.***
Thanks for the concise review!
***...X-Men is not perfect. The genre has moved on a great deal since this film was made, and there are some silly moments that suggest that Hollywood was not quite over the Batman & Robin phase. ...You also get the sense that the studio was keen to push for a teen audience by introducing a “youth element” to the mutant woes. Rogue is fair enough, and well-played by Paquin, but the ice and fire/good and bad situation looks hokey now. And though Wolverine, Professor X and Magneto are there, this means that there's not a huge amount for Storm (Halle Berry), Cylcops (James Marsden) and Jean Grey (Famke Janssen) to do. This is not to say they are miscast (Janssen works esp. well), but this is a big ensemble w/ lots going on already. The high school element was not needed.
ReplyDeleteAnd, if anything, the film spends too much time with its characters. It both draws you in and spends a lot of time explaining everything to detrimental effect. ...The many special effects are still decent, although be warned: I watched the film on DVD, whereas those on Blu-Ray have reported they are looking rather ropey in spots. Quite simply, they don’t make superhero movies like this anymore. The lighting, costuming and script are not to the standard we desire now in translating texts like this. ...
This is not to say I don’t respect Singer as a director. The performances alone are a testament to his skill. I just don’t think that this was a genre being used to its full potential back then. The fact he got such a strong film out the system at this point was more proof that studios should take a gamble on caped crusader tales. And we could easily be making similar points about Thor in 12 years’ time.
This might sound like I am damning with faint praise, but X-Men shows that not every superhero movie made pre-2005 is out-of-date. Not only does it hold up by itself, but I would regard it as important viewing to enjoy Apocalypse to its full potential. Not bad for a film made pre-HD, eh? I am delighted that we will see these characters again. Apocalypse is a brave gamble for the series to take and the initial X-Men is reason enough to assume that this bravery will pay off.
◾This is the only film so far in the X-Men series t/b an original story; all the other films were based on one of the stories from the comic.
◾In the comics the X-Men wore a distinctive blue-gold uniform, but the filmmakers revised the uniform to black leather suits. Co-producer Tom DeSanto explained that test designs of the team in their blue-gold outfits were unsuccessful, and Bryan Singer noted that durable black leather made more sense for the X-Men to wear as protective clothing.
◾Rebecca Romijn’s make-up as Mystique consisted of 110 custom-designed prostheses, which covered 60% of her body and took 9 hours to apply. She could not drink wine, use skin creams, or fly the day before filming, b/c it could have caused her body chemistry to change slightly, causing the prosthetics to fall off.
◾Joss Whedon wrote a draft of the script, but it got rejected b/c according to Whedon it had a “quick-witted, pop-culture referencing tone” which didn’t fit the X-Men. Only 2 lines of dialogue from his script were used in the final film: the exchange btw Cyclops & Wolverine when Cyclops suspects he's Mystique; and Storm’s statement about “what happens to a toad when it's struck by lightning.” The finished screenplay is credited to David Hayter – the original voice of Solid Snake in the Metal Gear Solid game.***
It's still 1 of the best superhero films ever! Nice review!
***I liked "Winter Soldier" quite a bit more than "CA: Civil War."
ReplyDeleteWhat I liked about CW:
- The new Spiderman- very fun, great retro Spiderman
- Ant Man was great comic relief
- I liked the basic struggle btw the 2 groups- though I thought it was overplayed more than it was in WS. The pt was not about 'The UN's'- it could have just as easily be the US insisting on the control & regist. of the "Enhanced Individuals."
- And @ its base the movie showed 2 viewpoints of allowing individuals to decide what's best- Cap and his band ignore the gov'ts demands & pursue the bad guy- for the best of reasons.
- But the bad guy- is acting according to what he thinks is best for humanity- and in the end he's the 1 who permanently elim. super individuals who mhb able to beat CA or the WS.
- On the bad side- I thought the movie was too busy. I thought Avens 1 did a fine job of portraying each character well & Avens 2 did a good job- this movie much < so.
---
A few quick ??'s for a disc.
1-What was Zemo's plan? He framed Bucky. Cap & Tony divided. They fight at airport.
Zemo goes to super serum Winter Soldiers to do what? At the airport his plan was done.
So he killed the sleeping Winter Soldiers, but didn't know CAP & Tony are coming.
2- Why was CAP beating IM's suit ARC reactor? Bucky already damaged it & after Cap's shield got stuck in it. Nothing happens. Iron suit is still pretty much operational after Cap left. it seems Tony only backed out of this fight; CAP didn't de-power him or cripple his suit.
3-Zemo; code to Bucky contained "HOMECOMING," now Spiderman's new movie is also called "HOMECOMING." So is this ring a bell. ...his parents being part of the Shield type thing.
4- ...what was Spiderman's reason for being enhanced.
---
To answer your ??'s:
1. To permanently end the Avengers by breaking up Iron Man & Cap.
2. Cap destroyed the Ark Reactor powering the suit. Tony can still move in it, but all Cap wanted to do was save Bucky. He didn't have to kill Tony to do that.
3. The word "Homecoming" (certainly included as a nod to the new Spiderman movie) was part of a sequence of words that would activate The WS.
4. Though it wasn't shown in "CW," I think we can all pretty much assume Peter was bitten by a radioactive spider.
---
1. His ultimate plan was the file proving the WS killed Stark's parents. The accords & the fallout were secondary.
2. W/o the arc reactor the suit is a pile of scrap. It's the only way to stop Iron Man short of killing/knocking out Stark.
3. WS was not SHIELD, but in the comics Spiderman's parents were affiliated w/ SHIELD.
4. I'm hoping they just assume this is common knowledge & skip the origin story.
---
4. Not shown in this, it wasn't his movie so it will probably be shown later.
3. C/b a coincidence, c/b a not-so-subtle easter egg. I think that the timeframe's out for it t/b connected to Peter's parents as the WS has been operational for decades.
2. Cap disabled the arc reactor which impaired the suit. It didn't seem that operational to me, not to mention that Stark was battered inside it too.
1. Zemo's plan was to destroy the Avengers. Most of his involvement in the movie is him hunting down the info to do this. Framing Bucky was the easiest way to flush him out. He wanted info only the WS had. His plan wasn't to have them fight at the airport, that was just an added bonus - His plan was to get the info and expose it, probably publicly, but seeing as how he was followed by Cap & the boys, he decided to show it to them there.
The super soldiers were never part of Zemo's plan; were a red herring - everyone was thinking that there was going t/b this massive Super Soldier fight & Cap & Steve w/b friends again. WRONG!***
***My fave scenes in "Apocalypse" were:
ReplyDeleteThe opening w/ the ancient Egypt Horsemen & their abilities & bravely defending Apoc
Probably the most amazing scenes were when obviously Apocalypse took over Xavier/Cerebro and launched nukes into space, the music and Apoc's speech helped, Xavier freaking out, and the line "Wreak Havoc"
Then like 1 second later Apoc and buddies teleported right in front of the X-Men that was just insanely abrupt and like brought home the sense of overpowering doom
Obviously the Quicksilver saves (almost) everyone scene was incredibly well done, it was fun and although I think it's a bit ??able how someone who had never been to the mansion knew about every single person living there and where they'd be... it was still an awesome scene
The transition from the destroyed mansion to being trapped and rescue mission in the Weapon X facility was cool and dramatic. It kept things moving and showed who the main characters were going t/b
Quicksilver's and Nightcrawler's moments of humor thorughout the movie were good
I think the Wolverine cameo was ok; not awesome, but it was alright. I wouldnt say bad. If people thought it was great, thats good, but for me it was only ok/good, not great
The final battle vs Horsemen was kind of meh actually, except for the Blackbird jet sequence. That part was awesome, and the Nightcrawler / Archangel battle was pretty good. Beast vs Psylocke was eh to me. Storm vs Cyclops was barely even shown!
Quicksilver punching around Apoc and then Apoc's insane eyeballs figuring out what was going on and stopping it was super cool
Mystique nearly dying was amazing ( I dont hate J-Law, I just mean the drama of that scene ) w/ Apoc thundering out his yell "Charles come save your weakling" so good
THe Astral Plane sequence btw Xavier & Apoc was GREAT w/ Xavier being like "Welcome to my world," and then Apoc overpowering him anyway
The final all-out effort to beat Apoc w/ him holding back everybody until Jean blasted off his armor. IDK if I think it was good to make her go Phoenix so soon, this is still her introduction movie after all, but whatever it was dramatic at least
I also wish they had explained more about Apoc's armor, like what is it, where does it come from. The movie should have gone more into Apoc's back history and encoutner w/ an Alien Spacecraft where he gets the armor I think like in the comics
Showing Magneto and Storm helping to rebuild Mansion at end was a nice relaxing heart warming scene and then the Danger room training the new X-Men was a great teaser to future movies
The post credits was a bit eh/boring probably, but we'll see what it turns into in Wolvie 3 I suppose
---
For me it was:
The opening scene w/ Apocalypse being betrayed. I wish they could extended the movie w/ more of those scenes in the past.
The cage fight.
Apocalypse saving Storm.
Apocalypse recruiting all 4 Horseman.
Xavier & Havok visit to the CIA.
The Quicksilver scene saving everyone.
Havok destroying Cerebro
Cyclops, Jean, & Nightcrawler team up.
Wolverine cameo
Mystique & Quicksilver team up vs Apocalypse
Magneto, Cyclops, Storm & Phoenix final attack vs Apocalypse
The astral plane battle Jean helping Xavier.
Psylocke vs Beast
Cyclops vs Storm
Nightcrawler vs Archangel
Stryker kidnapping the X-Men.
Jean and Logan moment.
Magneto starting the destruction of the whole world.
Apocalypse disarming the nukes from all countries.
Magneto saying that he didn't betray Apocalypse, that he betrayed the X-Men
Xavier saying to Apocalypse that he's going to lose cause he's alone and he isn't. Jean showing up in that scene.
The Moira remembering Xavier scene.
Cyclops vs the tree.
Every display of power coming from Psylocke, Storm & Magneto were excellent.***
I can't wait to see it!
***X-Men: Apocalypse plot holes:
ReplyDelete-When Xavier & Moira are talking about Apocalypse and they saw he has 4 followers like the 4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse. They say he got that idea from the Bible. But then Moira says the Bible mhg it from him. So which is it?
-When Apocalypse recruits Magneto, he's about to kill a bunch of people. But then they all fall over, pretending t/b dead. They must have talked about it beforehand or something, but would that really fool Magneto? I don't think so.
-Why did Apocalypse ask Magneto to destory the world w/ magnetism instead of asking Storm to destroy the world with storms. That confused me.
-When Apocalypse fired all the nukes in the air, why didn't they fall down again?
-Xavier went bald from the Apocalypse transfer ritual. So then, why was the Xavier in the older films bald; Old age? Seems a bit unlikely.
-Why did those guys at the steel mill rat out Magneto? He saved that dudes life. Were they worried he would use his magnetic powers to run the mill by himself and make them all redundant?
---
I know people say how could Xavier be so benevolent towards Erik's bad behaviour and his massive killings?
To me, he always seen the innate good inside of Erik.
I love the scene where Erik actually falls in love w/ a human and had a child. And him saving the life of a human, jeopardizing his own cover.
It shows that Erik is completely capable of love.
But he's also a man w/ a very disturbed childhood. Which is what happen to people who come from bad upbringings. It's not that, there's no good in them, but their experiences taught them, it's more rewarding t/b bad.
And Xavier was just kind and compassionate and could see through the whole cause of that.
Erik is super lucky to have a friend like Xavier, that's for sure.
Most people lost their way and never found a guiding light.
---
Rank All 9 X-Men Films (Deadpool counts)
THE GOOD:
1. X-Men: Days of Future Past
2. X-Men: First Class
3. Deadpool
4. X2
5. X-Men: Apocalypse
6. X-Men
7. The Wolverine
THE BAD:
8. X-Men: The Last Stand
9. X-Men Origins: Wolverine
---
In "Apoc.," The Quicksilver scene & the Magneto scenes were definitely the highlights. But everything else felt very forgettable. The final battle was incredibly generic and seemed completely telegraphed. The Weapon X scene was very forgettable and just an excuse to get Jackman in the movie, totally unnecessary. Apocalypse was so boring and didn't seem like a real threat for most of the movie. It feels like they weakened him b/c he seemed indestructible in the comics. There were too many characters and none of them except for Magneto & Quicksilver really had great moments.
A big problem w/ this movie; it's a retread of same "destroy the human race so mutants can rule the world." It's essentially the same story as First Class; just Apocalypse's turn instead of Sebastian Shaw. FC worked better b/c it focused on Eric & Charles. There are just too many protagonists in this 1 w/o character arcs and writing to give them weight. It feels like they just had the same issue as BvS, trying to do too much and thus watering everything down. It's definitely better than BvS, but not by a whole lot.
---
It's a movie w/ a huge cast populating an entire school. Not every character is supposed to use their powers and have a big role. How many more active characters do you want for crying out loud? There were over a dozen featured characters who used their powers in significant ways. Why are you making the movie's asset, that it can have fun showing cameos of decades worth of characters in the school, as a deficit, j/b each cameo wasn't a major part in the film? It is impossible for that t/b done in a 2.5 hr film. And this movie had TONS of superhero action; more than in any other X-Men film, and better done. These weren't generic fistfights. They were truly driven by the mutant powers.***
***Rank the Catwomen:
ReplyDelete1. Michelle Pfeiffer in Batman Returns - 1 of my fave female movie characters of all X & my fave childhood movie. It's still in my top 10. Pfeiffer nailed the mousy secretary-turned vengeful anti-hero to a T. The costume, the voice, the attitude was all perfect. A tragic character that could have lived happily ever after w/ Bruce, but unfortunately she was beyond saving.
2. Adrienne Barbeau in Batman the Anim. Series/The New Batman Adventures/Gotham Girls - Barbeau's sultry voice was perfect for the character, & the writers did a good job w/ the character IMO.
3. Eliza Dushku in Batman: Year 1/DC Showcase: Catwoman - Growing up watching her play Faith on Buffy the Vampire Slayer, I always thought she'd make a great Selina Kyle. Although not live action, she does a great job w/ the voice in the stellar adap. of Frank Miller's origin story. Also, the DC Showcase Catwoman short was fun & the best solo Catwoman story we've gotten so far.
4. Anne Hathaway in TDKR - I was pleasantly surprised as I didn't think Christopher Nolan would include her in the trilogy. Although never referred to as Catwoman & sadly missing the trademark whip, Hathaway as Selina was a tough & sexy anti-hero whose costume was a mix btw the classic 60's look w/ a bit of the new. I loved this interp. of the character.
5. Lee Meriwether in Batman: The Movie - I grew up watching this movie as it was the only other Catwoman I had on VHS besides Batman Returns. Meriwether was my 1st 60's Catwoman & that's why she's above the other 2. You have t/b in the right mood to appr. the campiness, but on my last rewatch I had a great X remembering how fun & sexy she was. Although no Selina alter-ego, we got to see her pose as Russian reporter Miss Kitka & seduce Bruce; so much fun to watch.
6. Julie Newmar in Batman S 1 & 2 - I haven't seen all her eps yet as I just finally got around to watching it on Bluray. I skipped ahead to the 1st Newmar ep. & the 1st Eartha Kitt ep. Is it obvious that Catwoman's my fave character? I can totally she why she's so iconic. Loved the sexual innuendos & cat puns, & the way she toyed w/ Batman. That opening scene where you 1st see her whip come out of nowhere & then a closeup of her hand as her claws gut the class open, that was a great intro for the character.
7. Eartha Kitt in Batman S 3 - The writing in "Catwoman's Dressed to Kill" was pretty terrible, but Kitt owned this role. That voice...so iconic. It was very brave for them at that X to go w/ a black Catwoman after Newmar passed on coming back. The way I see it is that Julie played Selina Kyle, & this Catwoman is someone else who took her place after she was placed in prison for good.
8. Gina Gershon in The Batman - I have to admit ...I liked this Catwoman. I remember Gerson's voice being great & I liked the costume; shouldn't have included this 1.
9. Halle Berry in Catwoman - Everything about this movie is wrong. I don't completely blame Berry, I think she chb great w/ a better script. I like her as Storm in the X-Men movies, but here... the story, the directing, the look of the movie, the interp. of the character, the costume... everything is so bad. ...I don't understand why they couldn't just make a faithful Selina Kyle movie? And adding terrible hip-hop/r & b music j/b they cast a Black actress was pretty embarassing. Would that have been the music they went w/ if Ashley Judd accepted the role? Highly doubt it.***
Interesting; Thx!
***So are all the old villains dead in "Batman Beyond?"
ReplyDelete---
Bane is still around. So is Mr. Freeze. What happens w/ Robin is explained in 'Return of the Joker.' Dick is still around.
---
Well, it's 50 yrs later for him, too. That, + the fact that the Night Wing costume is on display next to the others of the Bat family in the Bat Cave, lead us to safely concluded that at some pt. he hung up the tights as well.
---
Here's what happened to the sidekicks.
Dick Grayson also retired after receiving X gunshots from the Joker which is shown in the "BB" comic: Hush Beyond & lost his right eye & now runs a school teaching gymnastics & acrobatics. The reason it happened was b/c Bruce hadn't worked w/ Dick for a while & they both went to try & save Alfred from the Joker to which Joker opened fire on Batman. When he used his cape to misdirect Joker's aim, the bullets ended up hitting Dick.
There's a future Cat Woman as well from the same comic, but she doesn't have any relation to Catwoman herself other than the name, but is the daughter of Danton Black aka Multiplex who had the ability to make numerous copies of himself, however his daughter is only able to make 9 copies (get it? cause a cat has 9 lives.
Tim Drake was also forced to stop being Robin after what happened to him in the Batman Beyond movie: ROTJ. He's a coms engineer IIRC.
---
Villains:
Joker - Killed off which was shown in a flashbk in "ROTJ."
Harley - reformed after Joker died, & is the grandma of the Dee Dee twins.
Talia & Ra's al Ghul - Talia sacrificed herself to allow her father to possess her body so he may live.
Two-Face - Unknown. Was last seen in an ep. of Batman where he completely snapped and developed a 3rd personality that may or may not have completely taken over both Two-Face & Harvey, or the 3 are constantly warring w/ each other in his head. He's likely still in Arkham as he no longer has the mental capacity to plan an escape.
Bane - Having lived on the Venom for so long, he's now immobile & living off a machine due to the Venom's side effects.
Mr. Freeze - He makes an appearance where he's seemingly returned to normal, but ends up reverting back. From what I remember, he dies at the end.
Heroes:
Batman/Bruce Wayne - Retired due to age. Is now Terry's mentor, assisting him from the Batcave.
Robin/Nightwing/Dick Grayson - Unknown, but's mentioned.
Robin/Tim Drake - Was captured & tortured into insanity by Joker & Harley, & implanted w/ a reprogramming chip containing Joker's personality, memories, & DNA, turning him into a Joker clone. Saved by Batman & Batgirl, but was no longer allowed t/b Robin. Eventually settled down & started a family until the chip reactivated in Return of the Joker, turning him back into the Joker clone until Terry destroys it, restoring him to normal.
Batgirl/Barbara Gordon - Retired as Batgirl and now works as Comsr.
Alfred - Deceased.
Catwoman/Selina Kyle - Her fate is unknown, but in an ep. of Justice League where Terry speaks to Bruce, he mentions that Selina "left." Some fans believe that she got pregnant w/ Bruce's child (Helena, who becomes Huntress), and so gave up being Catwoman, changed her name, and fled Gotham to keep her daughter safe since people knew her identity.
Phantasm/ Andrea - Was revealed in an ep. of JL t/b working for Amanda Waller. Was originally hired to kill Terry's parents to help shape his persona into 1 similar to Bruce's, but refused. Fate unknown.
Batwoman/Katherine Kane - Fate unknown.
Amanda Waller - Appeared in an ep. of JL. Retired from her position. No longer @ odd ends w/ Batman, & even admits the world needs a Batman. She helped shape Terry into who he is, even using DNA altering tech. to make Terry biologically Bruce's son.***
Thx!
***Justice League is set a few months after the end of "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice." Bruce Wayne's a changed man after the “death” of Superman and has a new sense of humanity. The 1st 1/2 of the movie w/b about Batman putting the team together, trying to find these metahumans he learned about in BvS. Batman needs their help b/c Superman's still dead (for now) & Batman has pieced together that Steppenwolf & an army of Parademons will soon be invading Earth. We see a glimpse of a Mother Box in 'B v S' during Cyborg’s brief scene. In Justice League, there are 3 Mother Boxes — 1 possessed by humans, 1 possessed by Atlanteans, 1 possessed by Amazonians — & this seems t/b what Steppenwolf is after. And there are hints that this all sets up the appearance of Darkseid, which will probably surprise no one.
ReplyDelete---
Does this sound familiar at all? Let me put it this way:
After the supposed death of (Phil Coulson/Superman), (Nick Fury/Batman) puts together a team of (superheroes/metahumans) to stop (Loki/Steppenwolf) & an army of (Chitauri/Parademons) who are trying to invade Earth. Also:
Infinity Stones = Mother Boxes
Thanos = Darkseid
===
I kind a find this movie ("TWS") slow & also forced.***
More a DC fan anyway, but of the Marvel series, I liked "TWS" the most! Sam's the best in his car chase; the quips kept on coming! Being a fan of the animated series, it was great to finally catch up to Bucky's return as The Winter Soldier! I still smile/chuckle in Cap's last fight w/ Bucky when he picks him up by the neck & you hear that gag! ;-)
***I loved 'Superman 1 & 2,' "Batman '89, & 'Returns." I thought 'Batman Begins' was pretty good, & even liked 'MOS.' OTOH, I hated both Hulk movies & thought 'CA: CW' was a little light. But they are better than 'The Dull Knight' & 'The Dull Knight Rests.' ...***
There's just something about "TDK & ..R" being unwatchable! Scenes like the recovery of Wang was entertaining, but the rest I can do w/o! The Joker hype was overdone IMO! "Begins" I can watch over & over again; a great reboot! I'd rather replay '89, "Returns," & "BF" over the latest incarnations! Still waiting to see "B vs S: Dawn Of Justice!"
***Why do you dislike "TDK?" - The pretentious attempt to pass eloquent exposition for substance, w/ all characters acting like narrators and constantly stating the obvious in a pseudo-philo, pseudo-psycho, pseudo-intel way in order to create the illusion of complexity & depth where there really is none, all at the expense of character & plot development. ...Characters like Batman & the Joker, no matter how watered down, feel out of place in the real world, & the rest of the cast taking them seriously despite the funny costumes & cartoony voices just adds to the ridicule. The plot falling apart during the final act w/ Harvey Dent, one of the main characters up until then, being pushed to the background during the defining act of his story arc only for the Joker to overstay his welcome & pull a deus ex machina device out of his ass. Very avg. & uninspired action scenes, resulting in an action adventure that fails t/b exciting. ...Finally, a protagonist that s/b the coolest guy in the room, but ends up making a fool of himself every X he opens his mouth.
---
I strongly enjoy most of the movie, but do find the last act a mess.***
A fan going back 50 yrs, but still not able to watch "TDK;" overhyped & Ledger appearance over-rated! Played well, but I just never cared for how DARK this thing was w/ a character totally devoid of conscience! He couldn't even keep his promise at the end to his victims concerning blowing up the ships!
"Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" is one film that may never stop being debated. Director Zack Snyder presented us w/ an event that many had long waited to see (Batman on the movie screen alongside Superman), but he did so according to his own unique vision - for better or worse. Seemingly the latter though, b/c since Batman v Superman hit theaters, it's suffered massive criticism for what's supposedly a convoluted & overly grandiose storyline.
ReplyDeleteNow the Batman v Superman: The Ultimate Edition is out, & debate has raged all over again. While the Ultimate Edition may not fix all of the problems w/ Batman v Superman's story, it does present a much bigger - and yet, more precise - thematic arc that arguably takes a gimmicky superhero team-up, & elevates into a soicio-political metaphor not only fit for the X's, but eerily predictive of where things would soon be headed.
For the purposes of this discussion, we need to be clear: as far as I'm concerned, Batman v Superman: The Ultimate Ed. is the only version of the movie worth discussing. Sure, people often try to argue that a "special edition" or "director's cut" of a film doesn't constitute the "real" version of the movie; that only the theatrical cut is considered canon. That m/b a fair pt, but I'm not here to argue canon. In evaluating Batman v Superman's merit as a smart cinematic work, I need the whole of Snyder & Co.'s vision, and not what Warner Bros. cut together to sell in theaters.
For those who have seen both versions, or are at least open to another interpretation of the film they saw, let's brk this down. The 1st thing to realize about Batman v Superman is that it's not just a comic book movie. This is not just a parable about how Batman and Superman came to respect each other after having clashing ideas of what heroism is; that's certainly part of the story, but it's not the major thematic subtext which drives it. To understand the thematic narrative of B v S, 1 must 1st look back at MoS.
Zack Snyder's Superman reboot was met w/ just as much controversy as B v S - particularly for its final act in which the city of Metropolis is decimated in a battle btw Superman & the Kryptonian militants led by Gen. Zod. That "Battle of Metropolis" rattled & angered many viewers who felt that Superman allowing such an excessive level of destruction in Metropolis was both uncharacteristic of his character, and in a larger sense, was a cinematic exploitation of Americans' post-9/11 fears. It was no surprise, then, to learn early on in Batman v Superman's development that the film would use the controversy over The Battle of Metropolis as the catalyst for its Batman vs. Superman conflict.*** cont.)
***...In short: Batman is the darker & more militant version of America as scarred by the tragedy of 9/11. He is, as Alfred clearly states, the cruel end result of unchecked rage & feelings of powerlessness (like many felt after 9/11). Batman's actions - inspired by those feelings - end up starting as misguided a war as... well, you get it.
ReplyDeleteSuperman, OTOH isn't so much a character in the story as he's a symbol - and that symbol is of the more left-wing, liberal, American ideal. Superman represents the classic American ideas of hope, justice & morality for all people; he believes it is his job to police the world & protect the defenseless, no matter their nationality; and in his Clark Kent guise, he spends most of the film trying to defend the civil liberties of the criminal branded by The Batman - a person who, to Clark, represents the poverty & desperation behind Gotham's criminals, empathy that he faults Batman for not showing to those he punishes so harshly. Clark is also none too shy about pontificating about the role of media & the civil responsibilities of journalists - a far cry from the "bumbling geek" persona of Christopher Reeve, but a clear metaphor.
As the film demonstrates, none of the ideas Batman & Superman represent are infallible. Batman's rage & need for retribution have him start the wrong kind of war, allowing greater threats to fester. Superman's actions, though noble in intent, cause political turmoil on a global level; his (excessive?) empathy & concern w/ maintaining moral high ground in the eyes of the American public, media & gov't prevent him from stopping a horrific terrorist attack; and his obsession w/ judging the other side of the aisle (Batman) stops both him & his political opp. from seeing the true threat facing them both. By the X both parties finally become aware, the situation has grown into a (literal) monster, & it costs the sacrifice of Superman in order to slay that monster.
In the aftermath, we see a world & a former political rival all transformed by the loss of the noble ideal (Superman), inspired to do better so that the ideal is not truly lost forever. It's almost eerie how resoundingly accurate a theme it is for the present moment, & that accuracy extends to the much-hated villain in this thematic opera.
Jesse Eisenberg's Lex Luthor was one of the most universally criticized parts of B v S. But while the character is eccentric & downright weird, his role in the thematic narrative is actually pin-point on the mark.*** cont.)
***If Batman & Superman represent to the 2 clashing political ideologies of a post-9/11 America, Lex Luthor is (clearly) the embodiment of the insidious opportunists who exploited the turmoil of a post-9/11, war-torn, world for personal gain. His criminal empire & machinations may seem vague & confusing narratively, but thematically, Lex's schemes actually invoke references to so many ugly things that have thrived in the post-9/11 world: arms dealing, human trafficking, an unchecked military industrial complex, political lobbying, bio-weapons development, corporate corruption - the list goes on.
ReplyDelete...On a more personal level, Lex confesses to a childhood of abuse at the hands of his father, an East German man who felt powerless from having to submit to the will of tyrants. For Lex, Superman is a threatening new socio-political paradigm, in which he, Lex (the top 1%), will experience a profound loss of power & control - something that Lex cannot accept. While criticized for its convolution, there is a sort of intelligent real-world parallel to how this bombastic tycoon manipulates events in foreign nations, in the prison system, politics, & stokes the fears of the public.
Sure, Eisenberg arguably may kill a lot of the smart metaphor to his character w/ an overly eccentric performance, but that that doesn't change the fact that it's an interesting framework the filmmakers have set up - & 1 that's deeper than most people give the film credit for. B v S is in many ways the story of how America has become violently divided in a post-9/11 world, & (@ least on paper) Lex Luthor serving as the unseen hand nurturing that division makes sense both thematically & characteristically. As does the turn that unravels Luthor's carefully guided plan.
Given the thematic framework we've identified, let's talk about B v S's much-hated, much-debated, climatic turn:
When the violent fight erupts btw Batman & Superman (those 2 1/2's of American political ideology) all sense of reason & comm. has been lost. These 2 men, heroes, each see "the other" as the symbol of something that must be fought: Batman hates the uncontrollable threat that is Superman, while the Ultimate Edition makes it much clearer that Batman is the intolerant bully that Clark/Superman knows all too well (remember Man of Steel?) - a bully that must be stopped by "a fist." B v S tried to add an ambitious level of thematic grandeur to its titular battle, & therefore, a great deal hinges on the resolution of that battle.*** cont.)
***Everyone who has seen the film knows "The Martha Moment" by now: Batman is about to impale Superman to death w/ a Kryptonite spear, but is stopped when Superman utters the phrase "You're letting him kill Martha!" When Lois Lane elaborates that Martha is Superman's mother's name, Batman remembers his own mother, Martha Wayne, & he & Superman become insta-pals.
ReplyDeleteHere's the thing: The Martha Moment isn't a bad idea w/i the thematic framework of the story (it's even kind of clever, since a lot of comic book fans probably never connected the thread btw Marthas Kent & Wayne). But even though it's smart in concept, the moment is executed quite poorly, & the whole thematic payoff nearly collapses as a result of that mishandling.
It's a problem of dialogue really: Superman saying lines like "You're letting him kill Martha," or "Save... Martha..." are so clunky & false, since no son that I know ever refers to his mother in X's of desperation by her 1st name. There's enough built into the character of Batman (and his thematic symbolism) that a line like "You're letting him kill my mother," would have just as much impact, & more importantly, thematic resonance (Lois Lane could've easily supplied the "Martha Kent" name that sealed the connection).
...When it comes to writing & dialogue, the devil is truly in the details. W/ a slight revision, B v S may have stuck its thematic landing.
Let's not forget where this all sprung from: right from the start of B v S' production, director Snyder let it be known that Frank Miller's DKR storyline (in which an older Batman comes out of retirement for a more brutal campaign vs crime) w/b direct inspiration for B v S. What is once again underestimated is how much of a socio-political commentary DKR was for its X - & just how well Snyder emulates that in his film.
TDKR was written in the Cold War mid-80s era of Reaganomics, the War on Drugs, & fear of nuclear winter; Miller used constant "cut scenes" of media news segments (the rise of the 24-hr news cycle), as well as personal anecdotes from 3rd-party citizens, which all help to flesh out the character & phenomenon of The Batman.
Obviously B v S exists in a much diff. world than the 1 DKR was written for, but the Ultimate Edition makes it clear that Snyder attempted to honor the spirit of Miller's story, w/ the multiple asides to other characters, anecdotal stories, & media broadcasts - all of which frame the ?? of who Superman is in today's world. Miller's story was also unapologetically political, & Snyder clearly sets up from the beginning of the Ultimate Edition (in a much longer segment of the Lois Lane incident in Africa) that politics are a definite part of his film, as well (hence the aforementioned political metaphors).*** cont.)
***This is all to say: Not only is B v S a generally smarter film than many give it credit for being; it's also a pretty smart adaptation of 1 of the most respected Batman stories out there.
ReplyDeleteDoes B v S Deserve Another Chance? No.
Yeah, it might seem strange that after 2000 words of arguing otherwise, I would arrive at this conclusion.
The bottom line is that I do believe B v S is a much better movie than people are giving it credit for being - but only in terms of its depth & ambition. As I already said, execution of those ideas wasn't the strongest, resulting in major issues like The Martha Moment or the confusing nature of Lex's plot. And in all this analysis, there still is the glaringly simple fact that the theatrical version of B v S takes all this depth & ambitious storytelling described above & mangles to high Hell until it's something unrecognizable.
More to the point: it seems as though WB trimmed away the very subplots & characters that helped to convey the more politicized thematic message of the film; purposeful reduction so that audiences wouldn't have to sit thru (or think beyond) anything more than a basic superhero team-up story. And for those viewers who won't even invest in watching the B v S: Ultimate Edition, the film will likely leave a much more negative impression than it would if they engaged w/ the full version.
Still, for those few of you on the fence, maybe this will help tip the scales toward getting to watch (or re-watch) B v S w/ a new subtext in mind - 1 that hopefully improves the viewing experience.***
Nice read! Thanks!
***How accurate is this movie compared to original story of Batman?
---
Out of all superhero origin movies thus far, "Batman Begins" is by far the most accurate adaptation in that regard. Its 1st half is almost replicating frame by frame stories such as "The Man Who Falls" & "Legends of The Dark Knight." There are some cosmetic & non-essential changes, but, overall, the movie is very faithful to its comic book material. - If you need more expanded answer, look for this article:
- http://gothamalleys.blogspot.com/2011/08/comic-book-references-in-movies-part-v.html -***
"Batman Begins was well done & gave backstory that had only been known to us rather than seen! The only misstep was him not knowing anything about The Joker when canon had Batman "creating" him! I'll take "Begins" over the sequels anytime! I still haven't watched either from beginning to end! Never impressed by "TDK" which people rave so much about; esp. Ledger's performance as the Joker!
***I know I'm biased, but I've always considered "Batman Begins" t/b the def. Batman film; partly b/c it pulls off his origins story perfectly. In Burton's Batman & Batman VS Superman, the death of his parents are only briefly featured and that's not bad, but I have a soft spot for 'Begins' in gen. ...I guess it's better to argue that 'Begins' is the definitive super hero origins film. While I love 'TDK,' we can for the most part agree that Ledger as the Joker was the real star. That's not a bad thing & again, I tend t/b biased towards "Batman Begins."
ReplyDelete---
Two Face mistake...Anyone think Nolan should have saved him to make him the main villain for the 3rd movie.***
Canon means lit'l to nothing to the studios! Killing off the Joker in '89 was insane since he's a reoccurring villain for as long as I can remember! I'm surprised they didn't make out Nicolson was really some kind of robot so he could come back in the future! Now they knock of Harvey when he shb able to get psyche care, work his job, then have a relapse like the "old King Tut" of '66 series! Why is it so hard for grown ups to understand & take note of?
***Well, you have to figure that these are movies which take 2 or 3 yrs to make, not comic books which have 12 issues a yr. You don't need to save villains b/c you'll have him in another story in 8 or 10 months. - Actually Nicholson was supposed to come back @ 1 pt. as an hallucination from the Scarecrow's fear gas. Still, you can't not kill a character b/c he has a recurring presence on a diff. medium. Unlike comic books that can just keep on coming, movies need t/b self-contained. Movies need a beginning, middle & end, & the main bag guy should always die when it comes, unless there are specific plans to bringing him back for a sequel; @ the end of which he should still die. Still, unlike Harvey's in TDK, the Joker's demise in B'89 was satisfying, it felt like a climax, & there was nothing left to do w/ the character other than give him one. Harvey, OTOH was pushed into the background during the most important part of his arc & awkwardly disposed of when there was still a lot to do w/ his character.***
I still haven't seen it, but I hear in the latest offering of "B v S: DOJ," they went so far as to knock of Sup! The comics actually did it a few X's, but always found a way to bring him back!
***Henry Cavill has all of the opportunities in the world t/b a good, no, great Superman/Clark Kent. The problem is that he just needs better scripts & a better director to work w/. Actually try to emulate what makes Superman a great character, an icon to many, & not this emotionless, dark & brooding Batman knock off along w/ a dull, lifeless expression.***
Superman's been falling in stature for the last 20-30 yrs as the most iconic superhero; weakening him when in my childhood he was only vulnerable to Kryptonite, Virus X, & magic! Now he has to go toe to toe w/ Darkseid, Electro, & so many other super villains he has to eventually overcome! If he goes into space, he flies a ship since it appears he needs oxygen looking back @ comics & animated series! Batman took over & literally saves the planet more using his wits over someone who's supposed t/b more powerful & iconic!
***Nolan's realistic approach was initially interesting, but got nonsensical in the sequels.***
My thought exactly; "Begin" was the best, but became something unacceptable in canon for me in the sequels; just call me old!
***It's what happens when you make something like 'Begins' where people look @ it as the way to go from now on & where everyone starts calling Nolan & Co. a genius. He thinks he can just take any old Batman character, strip them down, make them grounded in reality, puts them out & they're lackluster as Hell or unrecognizable in appearance.***
***Villains we would likely see in future movies; - just say had they made 2 or 3 more movies in this franchise. We all know 5th movie was going t/b Scarecrow & Harley Quinn. I think WB was going thru 'villains" in Batman the animated series & ones left were Ra's al Ghul, Talia, Madhatter, Manbat, The Ventriloquist, Scarface, Killer Croc, & Clayface. So here's how it whg:
ReplyDeleteMovie 5 Harley Quinn & Scarecrow
Movie 6 Madhatter & The Ventriloquist & Scarface
Movie 7 Talia & Ra's al Ghul's
Movie 8 Killer Croc & Clayface***
No Dr. Hugo Strange centering around Arkham or Black Mask?
===
***Why was Mr. Freeze always played by a diff. actor in the story arcs he appeared in '66 series?
---
IDK that George Sanders felt he was "slumming" as Mr. Freeze so much as the emotional & physical problems that would lead to his suicide a few yrs later caused him to decline further eps. While he did continue acting almost til his death, his generally poor condition mhb a deciding factor in limiting his roles. Otto Preminger, as noted by others, likely was available yet Adam West, Alan Napier & George Waggner among the cast & crew probably prohibited Preminger from being asked back. While West may have rolled his eyes at someone like Rudy Vallee, apparently Yvonne Craig disliked him even more. Adam felt no such deference to Otto (of course Yvonne wasn't present when he was on the set, AW was) & didn't want him back.
As far as any in-story reasons for 3 diff. Mr. Freezes, try this. George Sanders was the original "Mr. Zero," Professor "Art Shivel" (or Schivel or Schimmel, whatever) who had just started using "Mr. Freeze" as an alternate alias. W/ his incarceration, an associate, Victor Fries (though they weren't using the name yet in the comic books, Otto Preminger was Austrian-American like the latter Arnold Schwarzenegger), w/ a similar cryonic condition took up the freeze gun. When he in turn went to prison or Arkham Asylum, wherever, his brother, "Eli (Wallach) Fries," briefly filled in to attempt revenge.
Similar scenarios for the 2 Riddlers & 3 Catwomen. The "John Astin Riddler" has been suggested as the brother of the "real" Riddler Edward Nigma (or Nygma or Nashton, in other words Frank Gorshin). When Edward was ailing or incarcerated or just on the run, his less-successful brother, Earl, Earl Gomez Nigma (Astin) inherited the ?? mark...perhaps secretly directed by an offscreen Edward. W/ Earl's quick defeat, Edward then came back.
Catwoman, it seems evident now & was admitted by DC. Julie Newmar was indeed the "authentic" Catwoman, Selina Kyle. Selina was in jail the 3rd season or least thought t/b dead (she wasn't, cats having 9 lives), another woman (possibly a former cellmate as poster Tjanssen noted) filled in (her name may have been "Patience Phillips" or "Eartha Kitt," sounds catlike enough). As for Lee Meriwether, the character's name was in reality the Russian "Kitka," not merely an alias. In a way, this makes sense as I don't think Selina Kyle posing as Kitka could have fooled even the Adam West version of Batman for so long. He may not have encountered Selina Kyle/Catwoman often before the movie & never unmasked (??), still it's hard to believe he would not have made the connection btw an undisguised Kitka & Catwoman. Unless...it was a Catwoman/Kitka he had never met before (i.e. not Kyle/Newmar), a usurper. Once Kitka was arrested, well, she didn't have full diplomatic immunity yet; the US didn't want her...she was handed over to the Soviet Union who promptly threw her into the Gulag for "capitalist" anti-statist crimes.***
***"Batman Returns" a good anti-Xmas movie for yuletide haters & all around holiday curmudgeons. I mean, what turkey dinner w/b complete w/o black bile spewing Danny DeVito chewing off noses & ordering the death of Gotham's kiddies w/ gusto? Fa la la la la, feel the Xmas spirit.***
ReplyDeleteEven the Joker wasn't that cold-blooded; knocking off kids b/c he had a rotten childhood? That was absolutely obscene!
***Jack Napier almost killed Bruce Wayne as a child. And that was before he was as crazy as he was when he was the Joker. I love Xmas & think this is a great Xmas movie.***
Key word; "almost!" Penguin sent his goons out to round up infants & lit'l ones! We're supposed to have some compassion & empathy for a villain! After such an act, Penguin was done IMB!
***How did the Joker get his scars? He mentions 2 diff. ways he got his scars in "TDK;" 1st he says it was his father & then it was himself to show his GF that he didn't care she had scars. Does anyone know what the real reason is? - NOPE!***
A huge plot-hole for a film supposedly highly rated!
***This trilogy has a problem which another film would have easily solved - This trilogy consists of:
- Batman Begins, where we've seen Bruce BECOMING BATMAN
- The Dark Knight, where we've seen Bruce STOP BEING BATMAN
- The Dark Knight Rises, where we've seen Bruce BECOMING BATMAN again, only to STOP BEING BATMAN, then BECOMING BATMAN yet again, only to STOP BEING BATMAN yet again, and then, for John Blake to BECOME BATMAN.
So, during the trilogy, we've seen someone becoming Batman 4 X's, & stop being Batman 3 X's.
The series as a whole w/b better if there was a film set btw BB & TDK where we would just see Batman being Batman - no ''rise'' & ''fall'' & all that stuff.
---
I believe that there mhb a 3rd film idea when he was making the TDK, but ultimately the death of Ledger changed all that. You could see in the final scenes of TDK the subtle potential setups (ongoing Joker/Batman duel, fallout from Dent/Police & a new role for Batman as a result), the same way as he had done for BB, but far moe obvious of course. You could see these results in the extra X it took to get TDKR written & completed & how Nolan & Bale would talk about Ledger after his death.
They wouldn't touch/mention the Joker storyline at all for the 3rd film, which is strange considering how large that character loomed over the 2nd film & it's characters. ...I don't believe Nolan ever made these films w/ Batman in mind. These were more a Bruce Wayne story to him. He likes the parent/child theme, as you can see from some of other films.
---
If Batman: The Animated Series c/b modeled after the Burton Batman films, we could've gotten a new animated series modeled after the Nolan films. That's a show I would've watched.***
A lot of the elements of the animated series were utilized in the Nolan films! That's why I'm so surprised other plotlines haven't been included; there's so much! I'm still waiting for a Batman movie centering around Arkham since so many super villains have all day to come up w/ ideas & plans; sorta like Ma Parker in the '66 series when she took over the prison!
***Anyone else prefer Season 3 of the '66 series? Batgirl was sensational and added so much to the show!***
It was obviously "jumping the shark" to bring Batgirl into it, but of course @ the X anything whb preferable to the show being cancelled! It was becoming lame; full conflicts concluding in 1/2-hr slot instead of 2 or 3-parter, the stars becoming more in the way of "has-beens" or "never-weres" like Zsa Zsa Gabor, and the lame scripts teaming up supervillains more & more! They're still entertaining to me 50 yrs later; esp. really bad Green Hornet crossover!
***KEVIN SMITH DIRECTING BATMAN '89 THEMED EP. OF THE GOLDBERGS
ReplyDelete- http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/01/04/kevin-smith-directing-batman-89-themed-episode-of-the-goldbergs -
The thing is, Kevin Smith is not exactly an unequivocal champion of Burton's Batman & he once quipped in response to Burton's disdain for comicbooks, "that explains [his] Batman."***
I only watched a few moments of docu. of "The Death Of Superman" where Smith was supposed t/b involved in the project! Too bad it never came off; = w/ that ridiculous costume Nick Cage had to wear!
***Agreed. It might not have been the comicbook Superman, but I would've loved to have seen Burton's version of the character and how it complimented his take on Batman.***
I still can't believe they allowed Joker t/b knocked off in Batman '89! I figured something outlandish like a robot was in his place! How do you kill off the most iconic super villain of The Bat? I still just SMH! The reboot, "Batman Begins" did the opp; invoked Joker's calling card w/o Batman knowing who he was; "I'll look into it!" What has happened to "canon?"
*** - http://www.filmcolossus.com/single-post/2016/10/18/The-progressive-conservatism-of-BATMAN-v-SUPERMAN-DAWN-OF-JUSTICE -
This line, uttered by Batman to Superman near the end of Zack Snyder’s Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, defines the profound moral-spiritual-cultural conflict at the film’s center. It speaks to a man in crisis, but more importantly, it speaks to a world in crisis.
And the world is certainly in crisis in B v S. The presence of an all-powerful alien – for all intents & purposes, a god – has polarized the public. Yes, there are the political polemics as have been mined repeatedly in previous superhero films like CA: The Winter Soldier & The Dark Knight: Can we trust him? To whom does he answer? To reference a previous Snyder joint, “Who watches the watchmen?” But more to the pt, Superman has thrown humanity into existential turmoil, as laid out by Neil deGrasse Tyson:
...If Superman represents meaning and Luthor represents meaninglessness, then Bruce Wayne/Batman represents the middle ground. He represents humanity at large. He is conflicted, caught btw poles, torn btw extremes. He is trying to understand himself and his place in the universe. And in the chaos of existential confusion, darkness c/b an alluring force.
...Wayne's transformation into Batman encapsulates his subtle inner conflicts. He leads a violent, solitary life through which he continually exacts revenge upon the world's criminals for what they did to his parents (and his life), but this vigilantism also bears an element of care for his fellow human beings, as he tries to stop others from suffering the same tragedy he did. His very nature is a conflict: he is a violent protector, an angry hero, a figure of both darkness and light – vindictive and protective in equal measures.
...The titular battle ends on an appropriately quiet, humane note: just as Batman is about to kill Superman – as darkness is about to snuff out light – Superman ekes out the name “Martha.” Batman's resolve is pierced by this; coincidentally, the two men's mothers share a name. In this moment, Batman has an epiphany. Suddenly, the clash btw Batman & Superman – man and god – dissipates, and is replaced by Bruce Wayne standing over Clark Kent. Two men, two people. Wayne finds a human connection with Kent, and remembers who he is and what he believes in. He sees that he is no longer mankind's protector – he is someone about to kill someone else. He's someone who's allowing another person's mother to be killed. He's not a paragon of justice – he's adding to the world's darkness. ...***
We are currently in a golden age of Superhero Movies & TV Shows - & w/ the heroes comes the villains. Some of them have been great, some terrible, & a lot forgettable. I think one guy = won an Oscar. What are your faves on screen supervillains?
ReplyDelete10. Two Face - Tommy Lee Jones - "Batman Forever"
1st it’s not fair to lump this film together w/ 'B & R.' ...Schumacher wanted to make it darker, the studio didn’t want to do that. I love Tommy Lee Jones as Two Face. Is it over the top, oh yeah. But it looks like he’s having fun. I love the costume, the 1/2 black, 1/2 purple tiger striped suit. He’s got his henchmen in the gimp masks w/ the tommy guns w/ the neon trim. Schumacher loves his neon. The 2 GF's, Debi Mazar & Drew Barrymore in their slutty little teddy’s. But really it was the energy he brought to the role. “LETS START THIS PARTY W/ A BANG.” “WHY WON”T YOU JUST DIE!” ...Why? Why, why, why, why, why?” He had a bad ass death. Falls into that watery pit, & yet he still catches his coin.
9. Zemo – Daniel Bruhl - "CA: Civil War"
The biggest problem w/ the MCU's a lack of compelling villains. Still though, Bruhl did a great job here. He wasn’t over the top, no costume, no grand schemes; didn’t = enjoy what he did. Considering what happened, can we really blame him? The scenes w/ him on the phone, talking to the old VM's were devastating. And Bruhl killed it. He had a real slow burn intensity thing going on.
I love the scene where he’s in his lit'l bunker glaring @ Captain America. He wasn’t yelling or screaming or carrying on. But you could tell how much he hated him. I liked his last scene w/ the Panther. “I'm sorry about your father. He seemed a good man, w/ a dutiful son.” Hope we see him in a sequel.
8. Bane – Tom Hardy - "The Dark Knight Rises"
I had a hard X understanding some of what he said, still though, he was bad ass. The costume was great; that leather coat & mask. It was designed to look like the mandibles of a spider. And Hardy was ripped. That fight w/ & Batman in the sewers was brutal. I think Batman knew from the beginning of that fight that he was going to lose. And I love that speech he gave outside the prison when he had Harvey Dent’s picture. “Do you accept this man's resignation? Do you accept the resignation of all these liars? Of all the CORRUPT.” He definitely had the whole despot thing down. Still there was something kind of tragic about his character. That scene at the end where he had to put his mask back together while fighting Batman, it was both tragic & kind of pathetic. I know a lot of people didn’t like the twist, but I did. It was unexpected & who hasn’t done something stupid for a woman?
7. Ajax – Ed Skrein - "Deadpool"
This guy was great as Ajax. No costume, no big speeches, no grand scheme. He’s just a guy w/ a 9 to 5 job. A job he performs brutally & efficiently. He brought such a menacing presence to his character. That one scene where Reynolds is in the hospital bed & says, “How tough can he be w/ a name like Francis.” Just the moment where the guy Ajax looks up. I thought to myself, 'Oh this guy's in trouble.' Ed Skrien did a lot w/ just a lit'l look. The final fight w/ the axes was pretty bad ass. His #2, Angel, was pretty hot. A big girl & hot.*** cont.,
6. The Shredder – James Saito - "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles"
ReplyDelete...It had that dark 90s grittiness that you just don’t see anymore. And James Saito was great as the Shredder. I remember being a lit'l kid watching this movie. That scene where The Shredder was 1st introduced, it's burned into my mind. You see his shadow 1st, the music swells & then he comes in. W/ that long cape dragging behind him. Saito did a lot w/ eyes, that was really the only part of his face you could see behind the mask, but he still did a lot.
...But here it’s implied that the turtles really are no match for the Shredder; just teenagers after all. In the final fight, 4 vs 1, they still couldn’t stop him. The whole fight only Leo landed a blow. I love the scene where The Shredder finally took of his mask. Saito looked pissed.
5. Gen. Zod – Terence Stamp - "Superman & Superman II"
Richard Donner had grand plans for the Superman series. Unfortunately they were never fully released & we ended up w/ 1 1/2 films from Donner before the series was handed over to <er men. Still we got some pretty good stuff; esp. from Stamp. His character had such an air about him; not like the other villains. He carried himself like he was....well like he was a general & all that that entails.
Think about the scene in the beginning where he's getting sentenced to the Phantom Zone. ...And when he turns him down “You will bow down before me! No matter that it takes an eternity, you will bow down before me - you, & 1 day, your heirs!” That’s a great line.
4. The Joker – Jared Leto - "Suicide Squad"
People are too hard on the DCU. Granted some of the choices they’ve made are a lit'l odd. While I’m not a huge fan of the MCU, they did take their X making the movies. DCU is rushing things a bit. Still, I loved Suicide Squad. And I loved Jared as the Joker. Yes, yes, I know everyone loves Heath Ledger and he did do a good job, but the Nolan films were a lit'l to self-contained. They handcuffed themselves trying to make everything so super realistic. I like that the DCU is a bit more surreal. And Jared did that great. I loved the look; the tattoos, the teeth, the whole Pimp demeanor. It looked bad ass. ...It’s the Joker, he’s supposed t/b a crazy psychotic fk. And I really liked the relationship btw him & Harley. Margot Robbie killed it as Harley. I can’t wait to see both of them in a new Batman movie. Giving the Joker a love interest makes him more developed & more like a 3 dimensional character. I’ve heard some people complain that having the Joker care about Harley makes him less evil, but I don’t think so. Even Hitler had a woman. They weren’t married long, but by all accts they did love each other. Same thing here. And they had great chemistry.
3. Top Dollar - Michael Wincott - "The Crow"
Wincott looked so bad ass in this role. That head of long straight black hair. His vintage wardrobe. He had that nightclub headquarters, w/ his naked half-sister Bai Ling. It’s implied they had a sort of incestuous thing going on. Either way it was a sweet set up. Now the Crow was never really completed & the producers & director had to rush & scramble to finish the film for obvious reasons.
There were a lot of interesting scenes that were never finished. This film definitely could have been better if they hadn’t killed the lead. Still what we got was pretty good. Top Dollar is an interesting villain. It’s implied that he has been successful for so long & that he has been on ‘Top’ for so long that he has grown complacent & bored. Spending most of his X in hazy depressed malaise. Depression & malaise were big things in the 90’s & this movie is pure 90’s. It’s not overt, but it's there & it adds a lit'l more to his character.*** cont.,
2. Catwoman – Michelle Pfeiffer - "Batman Returns"
ReplyDeleteI loved this movie, = if I was horrified by some of it. I was only 5. And I loved Pfeiffer as Catwoman. She looked damn good in that costume. But more than that she played the part perfectly. That scene where she tore apart her apt. was heart breaking. And the scene where Walken tried to kill her was great. “It’s not like you can just kill me.” - “Actually it’s a lot like that.”
The costume was stitched together. It was supposed to look like she was barely held together. There was a real tragic element to her character, but there was also something playful about her. Think about that scene in Shrek’s dept. store where she’s wrecking the place. And then she starts using her whip as a jump rope. She comes out of the store. “Meow” & BOOM. The whole place blows up behind her. That was cool. Now a lot of X's w/ the Catwoman character, she ends up becoming an anti-hero. Think about the "TDKR," that awful Halle Berry movie or the Hush graphic novel. What is good about this is that = though there is a tragic sort of heroism to her character, she's still very much a villain. The end is esp. tragic. Where Batman is trying to reach her, and it seems like she is considering it, but she just couldn’t. Then comes out the Taser, “How about a Kiss Santa Clause.” That’s a great ending.
I also really liked the whole 9 lives thing. Granted it doesn’t make a lot of sense how she keeps surviving things that should have killed her, but to me it fits. This whole film really is like a giant surreal urban fairy tale. So the sort of quasi mystical element I think works really well. Like there m/b something mystical going on or maybe not. It’s better to keep it vague. The Catwoman movie w/ Berry, they took the mystical elements too far.
Honorable Mentions:
Stephen Dorff – Deacon Frost
Samuel L Jackson – Mr. Glass
Jesse Eisenberg – Lex Luthor
Christopher Walken – Max Shrek
1. The Joker – Jack Nicholson - "Batman"
Jack really is the man. Granted, we’ve had a lot of good Jokers. I loved Jared Leto as the Joker as prev. mentioned. Ledger did a really good job too. And in the animated world we’ve also had a lot of good Jokers like Mark Hamill & John DiMaggio. But Jack's still the best. He brought so much to the Joker = before the acid bath.
The whole retro 40’s look this movie had, it just fit Batman so perfectly. Burton really added so much to the Batman Universe. It’s a shame he only got to direct 2 movies. ...Okay the Prince songs were a lit'l odd, but this movie was made in the 80’s. Jack had some great lines:
“Tell me something my friend. You ever dance w/ the devil in the pale moonlight?”
“Never rub another man's rhubarb”
“And now, folks, it's X for "who do you trust! Hubba, hubba, hubba! Money, money, money! Who do you trust? Me? I'm giving away free $$. And where is the Batman? HE'S @ HOME WASHING HIS TIGHTS”
“Jack? Jack is dead, my friend. You can call me... Joker. And as you can see, I'm a lot happier.”
“I make art until someone dies.”
I do love that when Batman & the Joker finally square off, he’s totally unequipped to fight him. I know some people had a problem w/ the fact that in this universe the Joker is the one who killed Batman’s parents, but to me it’s perfect. For one, the scene where the parents gets killed is amazing. Now we’ve seen this scene many X's, in Gotham, Batman Begins & BvS, but this one was the best. And the guy they got to play the young Jack was great. It adds to the whole duality thing this movie pushes. You know the Joker created Batman & Batman created the Joker.
It served a practical purpose as well. W/ comics, you can tell a lot of stories over X & really build the tension & animosity btw the Joker & Batman. W/ a movie everything has to get condensed. And having the Joker be the one that killed Batman’s parents, right away that sets up why Batman hates him so much. Oh & the Joker also had a bad ass death scene.***
***"Why would the League of Shadows attack a peaceful city?"
ReplyDeleteThe LoS doesn't care if a city is "at peace" or not. They care about destroying centers of decadence and corruption. And in their eyes, Gotham had been that for decades.
The reason Gotham was so crime-ridden in BB was BECAUSE of the LoS. People often forget this. "Create enough hunger and everyone becomes a criminal." The LoS created the depression that allowed Gotham's underworld to thrive. People act like all the League cared about was crime. Nope. Crime was a TOOL that they used to try to destroy Gotham. But because of people like Thomas and Martha Wayne, Gotham had "limped on ever since."
All that crime-talk from Ra's in BB was just his way of getting Bruce on board (since Bruce cared about crime). But the LoS wasn't opposed to "crime" (in and of itself). It was opposed to decadence and corruption (which can lead to crime). This is made abundantly clear.
To review: The LoS identifies Gotham as the center of decadence & corruption in the world. They create an economic depression that allows Gotham's underworld to thrive (in an effort to destroy the city). Some of Gotham's rich decide to "fight back" by doing things for the poor. Gotham "limps on." Bruce is chosen by the LoS to finally destroy Gotham. He rejects this mission. Ra's al Ghul takes matters into his own hands. Bruce defeats him. Gotham survives... for now.
In TDKR, the League is operating under the same MO that they always have. Like their predecessors, they CAUSED the incident that would ultimately lead to Gotham's undoing (at least that's what they hoped). They used class warfare (& a bomb) to ultimately finish the job.
Plus, it's important to understand that the LoS wouldn't accept the narrative of the Dent Act. It was based on the OBVIOUS lie that Batman murdered the city's "white knight." So even if they didn't know the exact details regarding what actually happened when they put their plan in motion, you c/b assured that they intended to find out and use it vs Bruce.
When you take all of this into consideration, it makes perfect sense that the LoS wouldn't "give up" on their mission to destroy Gotham.
---
The LoS caused Gotham t/b the center of decadence & corruption, correct? So how could they have already viewed it that way? Or is it basically a case of "Let's make this huge city w/ one bad layer incredibly bad all around to excuse destroying it?" I guess they're written t/b contradictory & insane? They're bad guys after all so I guess that's fine. But even Batman's nutty plan seems like it would've occurred to them before "Let's put all our efforts into making this place 10X worse than it already is, then destroy it."
===
I can't believe they get Batman and Superman in the same film and make a mess of it. I've looked for one encouraging review to make me want to see it and haven't found a single word.***
I'll continue to wait for 'B v S: DOJ' to hit cable! They're stacking up on me; still haven't seen the last 2 Avenger offerings of "Ultron" & "Civil War!"
***-Fiero actually 'CW' falls under the Captain America series franchise although it's really had an Avengers Luke theme. It's by far the best of the Marvel Universe Superheroes movies or is on par w/ the '1st Avenger,' IIMO***
Just saw "B v S, SW: TF Awakens," & "Avengers: A of U" w/ a free preview weekend! Haven't watched many movies from beginning to end, but I did w/ these for the most part! Just need to see "CA: CW, ST Beyond," & "X-Men Apocalypse" & I'll be all caught up!