You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
- tejastech08
- Rep: 194
Re: The BATMAN Thread
Jimmy Zig Zag Bobiadis wrote:nooo, its not a prequel to Burton's Batman. They are completely different if you look at the storylines. But yea I did like the first Batman alot, but Batman Begins a little more, and all the sequels to the first batman gotten progressively lamer.
Maybe it's not a "true" prequel in terms of the storyline, but the movie totally uses Burton's vision for Batman. I think I heard when he first began making it the studio's were confused because it was too dark & Batman was black. Completely different from people's perception of Batman (cheesy 60's show). Burton "re-tooled" Batman. This new series is just using his vision. No re-tooling involved, just starting over again.
I agree with you the sequels were pretty bad. With Batman & Robin, well, I never bothered to watch that one. Looked worse than a pile of dogshit though.
Actually, the only influence on Batman Begins is the black Batsuit. Otherwise, they are completely different. Burton's form of "dark" is a gothic, fantastical style. Nolan's is REALISM. Those are two completely different things. Gothic darkness kicks ass, but I think realistic darkness works better with Batman which is partly why Batman Begins is a better movie than Batman. And no, it's not a prequel at all. Go watch the movies and you will notice huge continuity issues. Here's a few of them:
1. Jack Napier (The Joker) kills his parents in Batman, whereas Joe Chill kills his parents in Batman Begins.
2. The Joker is created during Batman, whereas we are led to believe he ALREADY exists at the end of Batman Begins.
3. Joker is permawhite in Batman, whereas he wears clown makeup in The Dark Knight.
4. Joker's grin is more traditional in Batman, whereas he has scars on his face in The Dark Knight.
These issues completely separate the two visions of Nolan and Burton. In Burton's, you have a man who was dropped into a vat of chemicals and survived. You won't find that in Nolan's series. His version of The Joker is designed to fit in with a more realistic world. In Batman Returns, you had a Penguin freak. If Nolan put the Penguin in his movies, you would see a short, fat guy who dresses well and sells illegal weapons. So, as I said before, just because both are dark does NOT make them the same. One is quite unrealistic, and the other isn't. This means that Nolan is limited in what he can present whereas Burton can come up with all kinds of crazy ideas and throw them into the film. However, I think Nolan executed his realistic style better than Burton executed his fantastical gothic style.
As for Burton "re-tooling" the character, you give him a hell of a lot more credit than he actually deserves. Burton has admitted that he hardly ever read any comics while researching the character. Ever read any Batman comics from the 70's or 80's? Frank Miller did far more to re-tool the character than Tim Burton. Burton was actually told by the studio to do a dark version of Batman because it's what the fanboys were clamoring for. What Burton did was take it too far according to the studio with Batman Returns because his Penguin scared the shit out of little kids, and so they brought in the campy vision of Schumacher in order to sell more toys to kids.
Nolan has done more research in his portrayal of Batman than Burton ever did, and for that I am highly grateful. At least he takes the character seriously. There are so many scenes in Batman Begins that were portrayed in the comics or Animated Series, it's not even funny. It's truly the first Batman film to really get it right as far as the portrayal. Joker killing Bruce's parents? It's quite frankly the most ridiculous thing Burton could have done, but he did it.
- A Private Eye
- Rep: 77
Re: The BATMAN Thread
I was reading an article about the new Batman film in this months empire magazine. It does a comparison between all the different versions of Joker there have been. I didn't realise but it says Nicholson was on the fence about playing Joker and only agreed if he could take a percentage of the films gross, I forget the percentage he asked for, but because the film was so successful and made so much it means Jack Nicholson's Joker is technically the highest paid role there's been in movie history.
This new film looks awesome I can't wait for it's release.
Have they agreed to do anymore Batman films after this or they taking them one film at a time?
Re: The BATMAN Thread
Well, it's a cool trailer... but it's a 3 minute trailer. I wouldn't start making claims of greatness yet. And I certainly wouldn't compare Heath Ledgers portrayal to Jack Nicholson just yet. Settle down, back of the line. And I mentioned the sequels weren't really that good, but if your going to knock the Penguin, can I say that the tool who played Scarecrow in Batman Begins was awful & ruined the film by basically making those scenes boring. Pretty awesome how kids were more scared of a fat guy in a Penguin suit than that 'mo.
- tejastech08
- Rep: 194
Re: The BATMAN Thread
Well, it's a cool trailer... but it's a 3 minute trailer. I wouldn't start making claims of greatness yet. And I certainly wouldn't compare Heath Ledgers portrayal to Jack Nicholson just yet. Settle down, back of the line. And I mentioned the sequels weren't really that good, but if your going to knock the Penguin, can I say that the tool who played Scarecrow in Batman Begins was awful & ruined the film by basically making those scenes boring. Pretty awesome how kids were more scared of a fat guy in a Penguin suit than that 'mo.
Where did I knock the Penguin in Batman Returns at all? I enjoyed the portrayal. I'm just saying that it was too scary for kids and that's why WB chose to go with a cheesy, campy version with Batman Forever. The entire reason it was too scary is because he was grotesque. He had black blood coming out of his mouth for crying out loud. That's rated R type stuff, which I enjoyed as a 6 year old but apparently a lot of other kids were scared by it. Consequently, there were two turds released by Schumacher in the mid-90's.
As for Joker, Ledger has already blown Nicholson out of the water as far as I can tell. Only one disappeared into the role and it wasn't Nicholson. He didn't change his voice and the makeup didn't hide his facial features at all. It's just Nicholson in makeup. I prefer his performance in The Shining. It's a million times better than his acting in Batman. Ledger's voice and look is completely different from what he actually looks and sounds like in real life or any other roles for that matter. I can't stand it when people claim that Nicholson was perfect as Joker. I've watched that movie literally hundreds of times (I grew up with it) so I am a huge fan of the movie. But Nicholson didn't "get" the Joker character at all. He did it all for a payout just like any other big name actor. In that 2 minute trailer, Ledger more properly represented the Joker as I wish Nicholson had portrayed him in the original. But he mailed it in for the paycheck. I think Heath-Joker is going to scare the hell out of people kinda like Penguin scared the crap out of people in Batman Returns. I was a 3 year old when I saw Batman and Jack's Joker didn't scare me one bit precisely because he was just some old guy spouting off one-liners. If he didn't scare me and I was 3, I doubt he scared any adults unless they had a fear of clowns. The Heath-Joker is the type of dude you wouldn't want to come across in an alley. I never got the sense that Jack's Joker was very dangerous. He just seemed funny to me, thanks to the good one-liners.
As for Scarecrow, Cillian Murphy kicked ass. And if you you think he "ruined" the movie then all I'll say is you are in the vast minority on that one. The only thing wrong with Batman Begins, to me, was the dialogue and the microwave emitter plot. Everything else about it was awesome. If you wanna bash it, go ahead and do so. But the rest of us will continue enjoying Nolan's series while you wallow in the past with Burton's movies, which were damn good movies but are far from perfect. There's nothing wrong with being open-minded, but hey whatever. I know plenty of people who think Nicholson's Joker is perfect and can never be topped. If you take that position, then you probably shouldn't be on a new Guns N' Roses forum. That's probably not even a good analogy though b/c old GN'R literally was perfect whereas Nicholson's Joker was far from perfect.
Re: The BATMAN Thread
Jack Nicholson's Joker is technically the highest paid role there's been in movie history.
I don't know the rankings of highest paid roles, but I'm going to assume that no one has beat Tom Cruise's check for Mission Impossible. He received about 15 to 20% of the film's gross, and that movie made hundreds of millions of dollars.
As far as Nicholson being some awesome Joker, did you guys just pass a crack pipe around the board? When Nicholson does a role, he's playing himself. If I were to ever sell a screenplay or novel, the last person I would ever want playing one of my characters is Jack Nicholson.
Nicholson only has a handful of roles on his massive resume that are actually worth anything, and his performance in Batman isn't one of them.
That first Batman series was G rated romper room shit, and its amazing that people defend it.
- tejastech08
- Rep: 194
Re: The BATMAN Thread
A Private Eye wrote:Jack Nicholson's Joker is technically the highest paid role there's been in movie history.
I don't know the rankings of highest paid roles, but I'm going to assume that no one has beat Tom Cruise's check for Mission Impossible. He received about 15 to 20% of the film's gross, and that movie made hundreds of millions of dollars.
As far as Nicholson being some awesome Joker, did you guys just pass a crack pipe around the board? When Nicholson does a role, he's playing himself. If I were to ever sell a screenplay or novel, the last person I would ever want playing one of my characters is Jack Nicholson.
Nicholson only has a handful of roles on his massive resume that are actually worth anything, and his performance in Batman isn't one of them.
That first Batman series was G rated romper room shit, and its amazing that people defend it.
That's a little strong, but I agree with your general idea. I do think Nicholson is a great actor, but he did not disappear into the Joker role. It is apparent to me from photos and footage that Heath Ledger has already blown him away in this regard. Jack had a GREAT script of one-liners to work with, but otherwise his performance is by no means the definitive one. Any time you hear Ledger talking about it, you can tell he's just paying lip-service like everyone else. It's EXPECTED that you respect a legend like Nicholson, even if you completely disagree with how he portrayed the character, which is obvious considering Ledger's Joker is almost a polar opposite from Nicholson's.
As for Batman and Batman Returns being "G rated romper room shit," I've gotta completely disagree there. Batman certainly was not too scary for kids, but Batman Returns had much lower box office because of its darkness. In 1992, people simply didn't want a really dark portrayal of Batman, Penguin, and Catwoman. My biggest issue with Batman and Batman Returns is that they focus on the villains way more than the hero. Batman has no origin story and he's basically a background character. Nolan hit this issue 100% out of the park with Batman Begins. It's one of the best origin stories in the superhero genre. In fact, the origin part of the film is way better than the action-packed ending to the movie which I felt was mostly cliched and lame.
I think in 2008, audiences are going to be more accepting of a dark Batman film and the Joker will be completely bat-shit crazy. He'll be one scary bastard, which is how he shoulda been in the first Batman movie. Oh well though. Looks like WB is doing it right this time around.
As for highest paid actors, it's close between Nicholson, Cruise, and Keanu Reeves. Nicholson made $60 million in 1989 from Batman. Cruise received more than that for M:I, but inflation adjusted the $60 million is similar. And then there's the Matrix sequels. Reeves made a ridiculous amount of money kind of in a similar fashion to Nicholson and Cruise by having a percentage of the box office.
Re: The BATMAN Thread
Well, I am basing my opinions on the first Batman film and seeing previews of the following sequels. That first one is one of the worst movies I have ever watched, and just about fell asleep in the theater while watching it. I have avoided Batman films since then, and I remember when that Batman film with Arnold came out, I laughed every time I saw the trailer for it because it was just pathetic on so many levels.
Those films were not meant to tell a cohesive story. It was meant to milk as much cash as possible from kids and any adult Batman fans. Had fans not went to theaters for those films, you would have seen this franchise get a proper reboot in the late 90's.
I still haven't watched Batman Begins, but I will before this comes out because I am intrigued. I did play the video game, and it was great. As far as I know, it basically had the same plot/storyline as the film.
I agree about a dark Batman series. Thats what it always needed. I never understood this philosophy that comic book heroes are supposed to be all warm and cozy and safe for 5 year olds.
- tejastech08
- Rep: 194
Re: The BATMAN Thread
Well, I am basing my opinions on the first Batman film and seeing previews of the following sequels. That first one is one of the worst movies I have ever watched, and just about fell asleep in the theater while watching it. I have avoided Batman films since then, and I remember when that Batman film with Arnold came out, I laughed every time I saw the trailer for it because it was just pathetic on so many levels.
Those films were not meant to tell a cohesive story. It was meant to milk as much cash as possible from kids and any adult Batman fans. Had fans not went to theaters for those films, you would have seen this franchise get a proper reboot in the late 90's.
I still haven't watched Batman Begins, but I will before this comes out because I am intrigued. I did play the video game, and it was great. As far as I know, it basically had the same plot/storyline as the film.
I agree about a dark Batman series. Thats what it always needed. I never understood this philosophy that comic book heroes are supposed to be all warm and cozy and safe for 5 year olds.
It's all because of Superman really. He's always been the wholesome superhero and he was the very first superhero comic so it has had a huge influence on everything since, including Batman. And lately, we've got Spider-Man, which is probably the most popular superhero out there. And yep, it's the same deal as Superman: wholesome American. Then you've got things like Captain America that were literally created as propaganda during WWII against the Nazis. Superman and Batman comics both became about fighting the Nazis as well.
Re: The BATMAN Thread
As for Joker, Ledger has already blown Nicholson out of the water as far as I can tell. .
I'm glad you can tell that after a 3 minute trailer. Now sit thru 2 hours of it & we'll see.
I can't stand it when people claim that Nicholson was perfect as Joker. I've watched that movie literally hundreds of times (I grew up with it) so I am a huge fan of the movie. But Nicholson didn't "get" the Joker character at all.
To date, he's the best Batman villian so far....
In that 2 minute trailer, .Ledger more properly
end it right there..
As for Scarecrow, Cillian Murphy kicked ass. And if you you think he "ruined" the movie then all I'll say is you are in the vast minority on that one. .
Really?? I can't imagine that's true. I'll check IMDB for that.
The only thing wrong with Batman Begins, to me, was the dialogue and the microwave emitter plot. Everything else about it was awesome. If you wanna bash it, go ahead and do so..
I didn't 'bash it'. It's good, it's okay. I liked the opening storyline, it made a good introduction/explaination. Did I think it blew the original away??! No way. Absolutely not. It's okay, about as good as Batman. Maybe better, but I don't think it's head & shoulders better.
But the rest of us will continue enjoying Nolan's series while you wallow in the past with Burton's movies, which were damn good movies but are far from perfect. There's nothing wrong with being open-minded, but hey whatever. I know plenty of people who think Nicholson's Joker is perfect and can never be topped. If you take that position, then you probably shouldn't be on a new Guns N' Roses forum. That's probably not even a good analogy though b/c old GN'R literally was perfect whereas Nicholson's Joker was far from perfect.
What series are you talking about... it's 1 movie and a 3 minute trailer? Suddenly it's a series of them you've seen to make such comparisons. Alot of movies have kickass trailers. One of the best I've ever seen was when I was in college for some SciFi flick called Stargate. I swore that movie would be huge, the new Star Wars. Then reality hit. It didn't stretch well into 2 hours. Things like storylines, acting, flow come into play. Also, remember for a good portion of Batman Begins he wasn't even Batman yet... so they'll have to work that into the storyline & drift back & forth from being Batman to not. Storylines key, don't see that in trailers. All I'm saying is I'm not going to hail it as the next great summer movie yet, there's been some stinkers in recent years (DaVinci Code which had an awesome novel to base it off of).
Nice GnR analogy, I heard 3 minutes of Better. Does that mean Chinese Democracy will rock!!?
