Comment

Comment by Happy Birthday Roboto on September 18, 2012 at 2:16am

Magi,

Everything you've said about West's Batman (especially in regards to Bale's Batman) makes perfect sense, but to be honest you seem to be focussing on one aspect of Batman's character and missing the big picture. First of all one of the reasons that West's Batman spent so much time standing around figuring things out was due to television budget constraints, Warners are not going to invest $200million into a film where some spends his time wearing out carpet while solving the crossword puzzle! 

I know I'm going to get flak for this but when adapting material things need to change. Take a look at the South Park or Simpsons characters, they look great in two dimensions but they look like voodoo dolls in three dimensional plastic form. Super Mario works great as a video game sprite, he kind of works as a cartoon but would look ridiculous as a live action show no matter who was working on him. Comic book Batman looks amazing in his blue and grey outfit and kind of handsome too, but West's costume looks craptacular in live action.

In a similar way the amount of screen time devoted to showing Batman put clues together needs to be minimal showing him handling phone taps and fingerprints, using slight of hand editing to keep the flow of the film going. Also I always thought it was ridiculous that a guy with so many resources who refuses to take a break from crime fighting wouldn't outsource arsenal to someone else, he does so in the comics where Harold builds the Bat gadgets and vehicles. 

Comment by Gift of the Magi on September 17, 2012 at 8:24pm

When you look at the films the selves...sadly Adam West's Batman was the closest to the actual comic book character. Was the series full of stupid? Sure, but so was the comic at the time. The reason I picked him out was that during the show's run, West played Batman as constantly trying to outthink and outwit his opponents. There were always clues to find and puzzles to solve. Yes he could still fight, but that was secondary to solving the case. And again, that is what Batman really is about. He is a detective first and foremost.

Bale's version is the opposite. He's a thug first, a soldier second and arms dealer third. Any detective skills arE almost accidental, and usually done by someone else. He doesn't even design his own gear, save for paintng things black. To be honest, he's more like the Punisher with more money.

Comment by 31 on September 17, 2012 at 12:10am

to who wrote this, using the phrase "allowed total creative control over his projects" isn't something you should throw around. Having complete and total control over your film or series is very, very rare in the actual business. The studio always has some kind of restriction, even if they are small or a numbered of small things. To my knowledge, it known publically that Citizen Kane and The Simpsons are some of the only properties that are allowed full creative control to their creators. They have no restrictions, can do anything and everything. South Park might fall into that category, but again, its very, very, VERY rare for any director to have FULL creative control. 

Comment by Happy Birthday Roboto on September 14, 2012 at 2:51am

Magi,

There is a difference between a state of mind and a skillset, Magneto's basically a racist but a skilled tactician, Wolverine is a savage but also a trained soldier, by that same logic Batman is a nutcase but also a master detective. Although it's true the Nolan films focussed comparatively little on his detective skillset, they were there, surveillance in Begins and ballistics in TDK, which are actual detective skills and not that Miss Marple schtick! 

Bale's take on Batman is one interpretation of this character and is no more valid than Clooney's, the difference is Bales take was well received. You went too far when you tried to make the case that West's Batman was better, I remember one episode where West's Batman notices that the bad guys attacked the Gotham First National Bank, than the Second, then they stake out the Third and catch him! That's their idea of a logical plot and detective work. 

Although no-one can argue that the Nolan films have no flaws, especially the third, the truth is they're still by far the best live action version of Batman we've ever seen or probably will ever see! However I still believe the definitive Batman is The Animated Series. 

Comment by Gift of the Magi on September 13, 2012 at 8:54pm

Let me drop this in. Bale recently talked about how he felt about leaving Batman behind. While it was nice to see him acknowledge how important the role was and that he really wanted to continue playing it...I was very disturbed to read his take on Batman himself. He refered to him as a person one tiny step away from becoming as bad or worse than the villains he fights, a barely leashed sociopath and mentally damaged individual who created the persona of Batman to focus his rage and instability.

Sorry, but Batman is first and foremost a detective. He is a street-level crime fighter that defeats his opponent by stealth, planning and using his head. He's not even that much of a tech hero like Iron Man. The gadgets and computers are only tools he uses when his own skills hit their limit. As a fighter, he is good...but he survives most fights by either running away or sneak attacks. He's not considered to be a primeire martial artist like Lady Shiva, Black Canary or Judomaster. Later on, Dick Greyson is considered to be a better HTH fighter than Bruce.

The movies...just focus way too much on dialogue and his damage. The action scenes sans vehicles are not impressive, the plots are pretty WTF?!? Moments, and very little time is spent developing the hero in Batman and not the thug. We get rare moments of him using his head...but it's almost an afterthought. Even Keaton and West's Batman did a better job at this.

Batman Begins was a hopeful film, a few flaws but room to grow. TDK I feel went in the wrong direction, emphasizing everything I didn't like about BB. TDKR was...rushed. Slightly better in some areas but worse in developing and keeping a set storyline...the film falls apart quickly and in the end the finish is...meh...unsatisfying.

Oh well, we already have a reboot planned. Maybe next time.

Comment by Quantum 21 on September 13, 2012 at 8:52pm

Don't get me wrong. I still liked the movie and would probably watch it again; however, if given a chance to do a director's cut, there would be alot of thngs that I would do differently in TDKR.

 

Comment by Nightshadow on September 13, 2012 at 12:52pm

I liked the film.

Comment by Tab on September 13, 2012 at 12:38pm

I was actually kinda looking forward to this... TDKR definitely had some loose ends that could have been cleaned up by extra content. Wasn't a BAD movie but definitely the weakest of the trilogy.

Comment by Happy Birthday Roboto on September 13, 2012 at 10:44am

@Jensen Ex
You must be new here, I'm the guy that's constantly pointing out the difference between facts and opinions to everyone else! That said people have every right in the world to like a film even if it is flawed, a lot of us have guilty pleasures, my problem is that people seem to act like the WTF moments... simply... are... not... there!

@Zgamer
I had fun watching it alright and I've had fun watching a lot of nonsense, but I just want people to say something to the effect of good, but silly! Here's my review of this disaster!

Comment by Zgamer on September 13, 2012 at 10:27am

@Happy Birthday Roboto I am on your side buddy. I am shocked to see it even make IMDB's Top 250 films list! I know there is opinion, but most people who defend the film simply say "I just had so much fun." That's not a substantial defense of the film. That's just an empty statement. I would love to discuss it with people if they could back up their opinion with facts and reasoning and I wouldn't even be upset if they did so to support the film. Just don't give me the "Shut up! It was awesome!" defense.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 7
• Next ›
• Page