|
Post by Zombified Jeremy on Sept 7, 2010 19:51:33 GMT -5
We agree on a lot lately Jer Great minds think alike. Both of Nolan's Batman movies look great on Blu-Ray, especially TDK, as the IMAX sequences are shown in the proper aspect ratio. I hear a lot of complaints from the Burtonites about Nolan's movies not having enough comic book feel, but look where that got the franchise.
|
|
|
Post by Rebel on Sept 7, 2010 21:12:40 GMT -5
It brought boredom to the franchise as there was ZERO action until the last 30 minutes and it was over tedious. And box office wise it was going to do good regardless since if you put "Batman" on the big screen people show up. Batman and Robin may be the worst of the first 4 but at least it didn't put me to sleep. I actually prefer it to feel like a Batman movie as BB did not feel like one at all. I was fine with BB and TDK I just felt it lacked something, same with the Burton films. Either way I enjoyed the ones done by Nolan and Burton, both were fine, both are memorable and both treated Joker very well. I didn't mind Forever and as for Batman and Robin, blame WB. They wanted a Batman that could sell toys, this happens with every major superhero franchise at some point, example Spider-man 3. Sony wanted so many villains in 3 to sell toys and thus it became a joke. That's what happened with Forever, the original script was actually much better than the final version, alot of things were cut from Forever that made Two-Face much more disturbing, like there was a scene were Two-Face's cell had a dead gaurd inside on the floor and the words " The Bat must die!" written on the wall in blood. Not everything was Shumachers fault, in Forevers case anyway. Yep Warner Bros as always does there meddling. They did it by casting out Burton since that was too "dark" and not kid friendly. And I guess you could say to Shumacher regarding those movies. Hell I won't be surprised if they don't do it with the last one Nolan is doing.
|
|
|
Post by Leatherface on Sept 7, 2010 21:15:17 GMT -5
That's what I felt both of Nolans films were lacking, the feel. Burton's had it
|
|
|
Post by Rebel on Sept 7, 2010 21:16:47 GMT -5
That's what I felt both of Nolans films were lacking, the feel. Burton's had it Yep didn't feel Batmanesque. I loved Batman the animated series and I loved Mask of the Phantasm and all that so a Batman movie has to have some action >_> When I see Dark Knight I'll see if its deserving the hype I remember it getting.
|
|
|
Post by d3M0n on Sept 7, 2010 21:17:46 GMT -5
It brought boredom to the franchise as there was ZERO action until the last 30 minutes and it was over tedious. Lot's of younger people don't like the type of movie it was because it had depth and structure. Kids now just want to see action action action... Attention spans get shorter as kids have more entertainment in there back pocket and less time spent in libraries. Or just having conversations with bright individuals.
I for one loved every second of it. Just saw my BluRay last week and it still grips me right from the beginning. Liking action over what BBegins gave you is like liking gore over suspense in a horror film. People just have different preferences.
|
|
|
Post by Leatherface on Sept 7, 2010 21:19:11 GMT -5
Don't get me wrong I enjoyed both but it didn't have the gothic feel that Burtons had, a feel that is very key to Batman.
|
|
|
Post by d3M0n on Sept 7, 2010 21:21:25 GMT -5
Oh know I was just referring to lot's of teens I know who thought BB was too slow. This is not directed to anyone here. It's not a reason why anyone here wouldn't like it. Most people here have an attention span from what I could tell
|
|
|
Post by Rebel on Sept 7, 2010 21:23:58 GMT -5
It brought boredom to the franchise as there was ZERO action until the last 30 minutes and it was over tedious. Lot's of younger people don't like the type of movie it was because it had depth and structure. Kids now just want to see action action action... Attention spans get shorter as kids have more entertainment in there back pocket and less time spent in libraries. Or just having conversations with bright individuals.
I for one loved every second of it. Just saw my BluRay last week and it still grips me right from the beginning. Liking action over what BBegins gave you is like liking gore over suspense in a horror film. People just have different preferences. Oh I can handle a long movie. Remember Kubrick's "The Shining" 2.5 hours long is one of my favorite movies. I also love Rose Red which is far longer. Love movies I can watch but this one wasn't cutting the cookie doe for me. I tried it twice since I like to be fair. Hell I tried it drunk and that didn't even work ;D And Yes attention spans are far shorter now. My siblings are younger than me and they are pretty short on the attention. Behind X-men this was one of my favorite things to watch as a kid Maybe we'll find a topic that me and Demon will agree on before the year is out
|
|
|
Post by Leatherface on Sept 7, 2010 21:24:51 GMT -5
I know, many of the films were slow and dramaitic. Batman is an opera basically, he isn't Spider-man or Wolverine. He is a dark brooding phantom that stalks his prey and 89 nailed that perfectly.
|
|
|
Post by Zombified Jeremy on Sept 7, 2010 22:20:11 GMT -5
Thank you.
It isn't all about action scenes.
All of a sudden, only Tim Burton can make a Batman movie.
|
|
|
Post by Leatherface on Sept 8, 2010 5:23:13 GMT -5
To be quite honest Jer Burton got the dark gothic feel to Batman, whereas Nolan got the realism and detective side correct. Both directors were great for Batman but both lacked one thing that the other had.
|
|
|
Post by Zombified Jeremy on Sept 8, 2010 7:43:11 GMT -5
Comparing Nolan and Burton as directors is an apples and oranges situation.
Burton is very eccentric, while Nolan would fit the definition of "normal."
Both are very talented, with Burton getting the edge when it comes to experience.
Nolan wrote, produced and directed Inception, which is doing blockbuster numbers despite being an original film and not a remake or sequel.
|
|
|
Post by Leatherface on Sept 8, 2010 14:50:38 GMT -5
Fun fact, Michael Keaton ( The greatest Batman ever) is from my hometown, as well as Frank Gorshin who portrayed the villain The Riddler in the 60s show.
|
|
|
Post by Rebel on Sept 8, 2010 15:39:44 GMT -5
I guess "normal" and "real" is boring to me for a series that defies all reality for God's sake Oh and Mark Hamill . . . greatest . . . joker . . . voice . . . EVER!! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Zombified Jeremy on Sept 8, 2010 16:44:13 GMT -5
It is interesting that Batman has suddenly always been gothic, all the way back to the Detective Comics days. ;D
This is not true, as it is just Burton's vision of the source material.
Even he admitted that Nolan was closer to the comics then he was.
|
|
|
Post by Leatherface on Sept 8, 2010 19:41:28 GMT -5
Umm you do understand that Batman did indeed start off as a gothic creature of the night who even had a gun and shot criminals right? and that in the 70s he was made into a phantom of sorts, Burton used those comics from those eras for the 89 Batman. Nolan used the current Batman dand schumacher used the 40s-60s era. Each director used a different Batman from a different era, he has never truly been one specfic way or another same with other characters like Joker or Two-Face. So saying which one was more accurate or which one wasn't is kinda pointless mainly because they are all the same interpretation of that era.
|
|
|
Post by Zombified Jeremy on Sept 8, 2010 20:45:28 GMT -5
Yes, I knew that did use a gun and killed at one point, as well as the various ages.
Burton combined eras for Nicholson's Joker, although the role was tailored to his personality.
On the other hand, Ledger transformed himself into the role.
It just seems that people are disowning entire decades of material to suit their personal preferences.
|
|
|
Post by Leatherface on Sept 8, 2010 21:02:15 GMT -5
Fine, whatever. I like 89 Batman ok.
|
|
|
Post by Zombified Jeremy on Sept 8, 2010 21:09:33 GMT -5
No problems with that. That would especially be the case if you saw it first and grew up with that version of the material, as the nostalgia factor kicks in. In that regard, I can understand that there is a little bit of adjustment when someone else comes in (especially Schumacher) and doesn't apply the gothic sensibility. By no means do I dislike Burton's movies, especially since I was a kid when they came out and I had some of the toys.
|
|
|
Post by Leatherface on Sept 8, 2010 21:12:26 GMT -5
Batman 89 was my very first Batman thing ever, it introduced me to Batman and created a template in which I view Batman as a dark phantom eqse creature. To me that's how he should be, a phantom, a man made monster. Not just an ordinary man in a cape. Burtons made Batman into that creature.
|
|