View Full Version : "I use to think they were missing the point of Batman."
Binker
11-02-2005, 09:53 PM
Tim Burton said that in the BR SE DVD about how people felt about Batman in the first two films.
What the **** is that?!
Spidey-Bat
11-02-2005, 10:02 PM
What don't you get?
He makes sense. WB kept saying campier and people didn't like it because of it's dark mood. They wanted the campy 60's Batman, not he 70's-80's Batman that O'Neil and Miller helped remake.
Binker
11-03-2005, 03:34 AM
I should've refreshed that. He was mentioning the idea of Batman being less focused in the films because he has to be hidden. And the fans (Dark Batman lovers, mind you) who disagree, he thought didn't "understand" Batman.
El Payaso
11-03-2005, 06:58 AM
I should've refreshed that. He was mentioning the idea of Batman being less focused in the films because he has to be hidden.
Isn't that the same way Nolan did with Batman as he's facing his enemies - as he's in action that is?
Kevin Roegele
11-03-2005, 07:22 AM
I should've refreshed that. He was mentioning the idea of Batman being less focused in the films because he has to be hidden. And the fans (Dark Batman lovers, mind you) who disagree, he thought didn't "understand" Batman.
How ironic. Some fans love complaining that Burton/Schumacher/Nolan/other fans don't understand Batman either.
Spidey-Bat
11-03-2005, 03:56 PM
I should've refreshed that. He was mentioning the idea of Batman being less focused in the films because he has to be hidden. And the fans (Dark Batman lovers, mind you) who disagree, he thought didn't "understand" Batman.
I thought there was enough development of Batman. The scenes where there was development, Keaton wasn't in the costume. Any scene where its just Bruce and/or Alfred, it's really Batman.
And did you happen to notice he said "I use to think..."
amazingfantasy15
11-05-2005, 10:50 PM
Watching the Batman Returns special features you really see that Tim Burton didn't nessecarily want to make a Batman movie, but a Tim Burton movie featuring Batman. I still like the movie though.
Spidey-Bat
11-05-2005, 10:52 PM
Watching the Batman Returns special features you really see that Tim Burton didn't nessecarily want to make a Batman movie, but a Tim Burton movie featuring Batman. I still like the movie though.
Similar to how Nolan added his touch of reality in Batman Begins.
Doctor Goblipus
11-05-2005, 11:32 PM
Coming from someone who made the Joker the killer of Bruces parents and Batman a stone cold murderer, Burton was zero room to talk about anyone missing the point of Batman.
Spidey-Bat
11-05-2005, 11:39 PM
Coming from someone who made the Joker the killer of Bruces parents and Batman a stone cold murderer, Burton was zero room to talk about anyone missing the point of Batman.
You think Bruce didn't kill some ninjas at the monastary?
Joker killing Bruce's parents is something called an adaptation. Similar to how Ra's trained Bruce.
Doctor Goblipus
11-06-2005, 12:40 AM
But Ras training Bruce didnt ruin the story
Joker killing Batmans parents and then Batman killing him did
It took away any motivation that Bruce had at all to be Batman
DarkKnightJRK
11-06-2005, 01:03 AM
But Ras training Bruce didnt ruin the story
Joker killing Batmans parents and then Batman killing him did
It took away any motivation that Bruce had at all to be Batman
I believe that was the point. It basically asked, "Would Batman trade away his ideals to potentially seal the wound of his parent's deaths by killing the man who killed them?"
It's basically what happened with Chill if he actually finished the job.
El Payaso
11-06-2005, 02:32 AM
But Ras training Bruce didnt ruin the story
Joker killing Batmans parents and then Batman killing him did
It took away any motivation that Bruce had at all to be Batman
No. Batman decided to fight crime. Beyond just fight his parents' killer.
Or the same you can say Joe Chill being killed by someone else took away any motivation that Bruce had at all to be Batman.
Doctor Goblipus
11-06-2005, 02:49 AM
No. Batman decided to fight crime. Beyond just fight his parents' killer.
Or the same you can say Joe Chill being killed by someone else took away any motivation that Bruce had at all to be Batman.
No
Batman is not like Spider-Man, he doesnt help people because hes a good person. He fights crime because hes an emotionally stunted 8 year old who fights all these evil because he can never get the one bad guy he truly wants.
Somone else killing Chill never lets Bruce move on and drives him to be Batman, ala Batman Begins
Batman killing Joker gives him closure and no reason to be Batman, ala Batman
Theres a reson the original franchise is dead. Schumacher finished it, but Burton started it.
El Payaso
11-06-2005, 03:27 AM
Batman is not like Spider-Man, he doesnt help people because hes a good person. He fights crime because hes an emotionally stunted 8 year old who fights all these evil because he can never get the one bad guy he truly wants.
Somone else killing Chill never lets Bruce move on and drives him to be Batman, ala Batman Begins
Batman killing Joker gives him closure and no reason to be Batman, ala Batman
That's, yes, one possible interpretation. I doubt people with such mental trauma could be that logic to say automatically 'He's dead, I'm cured'. Most probably he would try and find another face for his obsession. And another and another, becauise his obssession would be bigger than the real cause of it.
Theres a reson the original franchise is dead. Schumacher finished it, but Burton started it.
What do you mean by that? Like saying 'yes, let's blame Richard Donner for Superman IV, he started the whole franchise'?
The only reason the franchise died is because Batman & Robin was awful.
Joker killing Bruce's parents is something called an adaptation. Similar to how Ra's trained Bruce.
Exact same thing. Adaptation.
\S/JcDc\S/
11-06-2005, 03:58 AM
Similar to how Nolan added his touch of reality in Batman Begins.
Nice point :up:
No
Batman killing Joker gives him closure and no reason to be Batman, ala Batman
Next time you watch Batman Forever pay close attention to the scenes between Bruce & Grayson. It addreses why he never stopped after Napier's death. In one of the scenes he says something to the effect of "what if you kill Harvey? your obsessions won't end there every night you'll go out there looking for another & another".
JLBats
11-06-2005, 10:55 AM
Similar to how Nolan added his touch of reality in Batman Begins.
Why do you make everything about Batman Begins?:confused:
Are you obsessed?
Spidey-Bat
11-06-2005, 10:56 AM
But Ras training Bruce didnt ruin the story
Joker killing Batmans parents and then Batman killing him did
It took away any motivation that Bruce had at all to be Batman
What are you saying? How does a pre-Joker killing the Waynes ruin the story? It added the tension between the two that stories like Death in the Family and Killing Joke made. Just as Begins made Ra's Bruce's only trainer in the 7 years he was gone.
Bruce's motivation was NEVER revenge. His motivations have and always will be that no one ever has to suffer what he did as a child. Chill was killed in Year Two, but Bruce never hung up the cowl because his parents killer was dead.
Spidey-Bat
11-06-2005, 10:57 AM
Why do you make everything about Batman Begins?:confused:
Are you obsessed?
No. I'm just sick of the double-standard with BB fans. They fail to see that Nolan changed Batman as much as Burton.
Swordmaster
11-06-2005, 11:17 AM
What are you saying? How does a pre-Joker killing the Waynes ruin the story? It added the tension between the two that stories like Death in the Family and Killing Joke made. Just as Begins made Ra's Bruce's only trainer in the 7 years he was gone.
Bruce's motivation was NEVER revenge. His motivations have and always will be that no one ever has to suffer what he did as a child. Chill was killed in Year Two, but Bruce never hung up the cowl because his parents killer was dead.
Ra's Bruce's only trainer? I don't think so. It was obvious he had more training than what he learned at the Monastary, but Ra's helped fine-tune it and hone his skills. Ra's was, however, his largest mentor, imo.
Spidey-Bat
11-06-2005, 11:28 AM
Ra's Bruce's only trainer? I don't think so. It was obvious he had more training than what he learned at the Monastary, but Ra's helped fine-tune it and hone his skills. Ra's was, however, his largest mentor, imo.
What I meant was that in the 7 years Bruce was abroad, he only went to 1 place for the training rather than span the globe training from various experts.
skruloos
11-06-2005, 11:34 AM
What I meant was that in the 7 years Bruce was abroad, he only went to 1 place for the training rather than span the globe training from various experts.
As opposed to not showing him training at all?
Swordmaster
11-06-2005, 11:36 AM
What I meant was that in the 7 years Bruce was abroad, he only went to 1 place for the training rather than span the globe training from various experts.
Ah. My mistake, then.
What I meant was that in the 7 years Bruce was abroad, he only went to 1 place for the training rather than span the globe training from various experts.
It was heavily implied that he had different forms of training prior to meeting Ra's. Just like how in the comics he trained with various people. Just because it wasn't shown it doesn't mean that it did not happen.
JLBats
11-06-2005, 01:01 PM
No. I'm just sick of the double-standard with BB fans. They fail to see that Nolan changed Batman as much as Burton.
But it has nothing to do with the topic. That's how Burton-Nolan flamewars start. Please refrain from bringing Nolan into otherwise Burton exclusive arguments, even if you feel their is a Nolan propaganda subtext.
mister Lennon
11-06-2005, 01:43 PM
The first one on missing the point was burton himself, making those two awful movies.
And nolan changed batman, yes, but not as much as burton did. And at least, those changes didnt damage the batman mithos so much as the burton or schumacher ones.
El Payaso
11-06-2005, 02:36 PM
Next time you watch Batman Forever pay close attention to the scenes between Bruce & Grayson. It addreses why he never stopped after Napier's death. In one of the scenes he says something to the effect of "what if you kill Harvey? your obsessions won't end there every night you'll go out there looking for another & another".
:up: :up: :up:
The first one on missing the point was burton himself, making those two awful movies.
And nolan changed batman, yes, but not as much as burton did. And at least, those changes didnt damage the batman mithos so much as the burton or schumacher ones.
First of all no changes made by Burton or Nolan have done any harm to Batman. Fans wanting to direct their own Bat-movie is another story.
With both Burton and Nolan Batman has been more popular than ever. Schumacher is another story again.
DarkKnightJRK
11-06-2005, 02:43 PM
Batman is not like Spider-Man, he doesnt help people because hes a good person. He fights crime because hes an emotionally stunted 8 year old who fights all these evil because he can never get the one bad guy he truly wants.
...
Batman killing Joker gives him closure and no reason to be Batman, ala Batman
The point of the series was that Batman found no closure in killing Joker. No matter how hard he tries to get closure and be a normal human being, he can't.
That's how we got to Returns, where Batman was just killing the criminals at random. He's lost his purpose, and only finds a way to break out of the insanity through Selina, who is so much like him it's almost funny. Despite the fact that there's obvious love between the two, Selina was hellbent on killing the one who created her, Shreck. The similarities of the two are so in common, the movies both climax in the same way--a confrontation of the "monster" and the "creator," if you will, and the person who's trying to bring the "monster" to accept the world.
No offence to the people who liked Begins (hell, I loved it still), but '89 and Returns make Begins look like a children's story in comparison.
Batwing6655
11-06-2005, 06:34 PM
But Ras training Bruce didnt ruin the story
Joker killing Batmans parents and then Batman killing him did
It took away any motivation that Bruce had at all to be Batman
ummm no? how the f*** does that remove motivation? in BB, bruce wants to KILL chill, but then chill dies RIGHT THERE. does he still become batman even though he knows he could never really get the guy who REALLY murdered his parents? yes!
Batwing6655
11-06-2005, 06:39 PM
No offence to the people who liked Begins (hell, I loved it still), but '89 and Returns make Begins look like a children's story in comparison.
true statement right there. Returns not only was a cool batman film, but omg, it struck me emotionally. at the end, i felt like crying sometimes, other times, i feel stronger. its weird, i know, but BR, more then B89, is a very emotional film. i love what michelle pfieffer did with that role, i felt her pain, her anger, everything, and i STILL to this day wish her and keaton got together at the end. but you never know....
ab38416
10-21-2006, 06:35 PM
ab38416
cryptic name
10-21-2006, 08:14 PM
I should've refreshed that. He was mentioning the idea of Batman being less focused in the films because he has to be hidden. And the fans (Dark Batman lovers, mind you) who disagree, he thought didn't "understand" Batman.
he was cinematically interpreting batman's desire to be hidden and not in the spotlight. that's part of the story of the first one, batman being reluctantly forced into a more public role because of the flamboyant nature of the joker.
dude love
10-21-2006, 08:47 PM
The point of the series was that Batman found no closure in killing Joker. No matter how hard he tries to get closure and be a normal human being, he can't.
That's how we got to Returns, where Batman was just killing the criminals at random. He's lost his purpose, and only finds a way to break out of the insanity through Selina, who is so much like him it's almost funny. Despite the fact that there's obvious love between the two, Selina was hellbent on killing the one who created her, Shreck. The similarities of the two are so in common, the movies both climax in the same way--a confrontation of the "monster" and the "creator," if you will, and the person who's trying to bring the "monster" to accept the world.
No offence to the people who liked Begins (hell, I loved it still), but '89 and Returns make Begins look like a children's story in comparison.
What makes even better is the fact that he loses Selina. His redemption and closure died right in front of his face and he comes to the realisation in the end that he will be Batman forever (I'm not sure if the pun was intended).
ab38416
10-22-2006, 12:11 AM
[quote=DarkKnightJRK]The point of the series was that Batman found no closure in killing Joker. No matter how hard he tries to get closure and be a normal human being, he can't.
That's how we got to Returns, where Batman was just killing the criminals at random. He's lost his purpose, and only finds a way to break out of the insanity through Selina, who is so much like him it's almost funny. Despite the fact that there's obvious love between the two, Selina was hellbent on killing the one who created her, Shreck. The similarities of the two are so in common, the movies both climax in the same way--a confrontation of the "monster" and the "creator," if you will, and the person who's trying to bring the "monster" to accept the world.quote]
Exactly.
ab38416
10-22-2006, 12:31 AM
ab38416
TheGrayGhost
10-22-2006, 05:31 PM
No. Batman decided to fight crime. Beyond just fight his parents' killer.
Or the same you can say Joe Chill being killed by someone else took away any motivation that Bruce had at all to be Batman.
Not in the Burton movies. I believe you and I have had this discussion before. I'll see if I can dig up what I said.
El Payaso
10-22-2006, 05:41 PM
Batman was after the average thug (like at the beginning of B89) and after Joker (even before he realized he was his parents' murderer), not to mention Catwoman and Penguin & co.
He could have just spent his life tracking solely his parents' killer (what I'd call a personal vendetta) but he was objectivily fighting crime beyond that.
DocLathropBrown
10-23-2006, 12:45 AM
Like I've said in another thread, it's the idea that "He finds his killer, the motivation is gone" that shows someone doesn't "get" Batman. If that were the case, we wouldn't have Batman wasting his time catching other criminals. Crime is what took his parents, not any one man exclusively.
It's a popular, unfounded criticism of B89. He found his parents' killer.... why continue? Obviously, he does, so it wasn't about revenge, then, was it?
ab38416
10-23-2006, 01:34 PM
ab38416
Kevin Roegele
10-23-2006, 05:55 PM
Like I've said in another thread, it's the idea that "He finds his killer, the motivation is gone" that shows someone doesn't "get" Batman. If that were the case, we wouldn't have Batman wasting his time catching other criminals. Crime is what took his parents, not any one man exclusively.
It's a popular, unfounded criticism of B89. He found his parents' killer.... why continue? Obviously, he does, so it wasn't about revenge, then, was it?
Very true. And Burton answers that "He finds his killer, the motivation is gone" idea at the very start of the film; there will always be more crimes like the one that took Bruce's parents, and Batman is there to blast the scum off the streets and prevent it happening again.
DocLathropBrown
10-23-2006, 07:40 PM
Very true. And Burton answers that "He finds his killer, the motivation is gone" idea at the very start of the film; there will always be more crimes like the one that took Bruce's parents, and Batman is there to blast the scum off the streets and prevent it happening again.
Exactly. He even says in BF: "I would make sure that what happened to me never happened to anyone ever again." Or words to that effect. Batman isn't at all about revenge. In the Burtonon/Schumacher continuity, he got a chance to get revenge on the Joker, but that wasn't why he became Batman.
Fans who bash Burton's flicks choose to just forget that fact when they want to criticize the films....
Kevin Roegele
10-23-2006, 08:50 PM
Exactly. He even says in BF: "I would make sure that what happened to me never happened to anyone ever again."
Although Bruce does say in the same speech, "I would have my revenge." So you can see why people get confused.
Anita18
10-24-2006, 01:56 AM
Very true. And Burton answers that "He finds his killer, the motivation is gone" idea at the very start of the film; there will always be more crimes like the one that took Bruce's parents, and Batman is there to blast the scum off the streets and prevent it happening again.
The way I see it, there are several ways of interpreting Bruce's motivations for being Batman. One is the cowl being an outlet for his rage and pain. In both Burton and Nolan's interpretations, after the Wayne murderer is killed, it evidently doesn't get rid of the pain of his childhood trauma, so he continues fighting criminals to lessen that feeling. Another is altruism - that Bruce goes on this quest because he can, and he feels he's the only one who can stand up to the injustice. Again, I can see how one could interpret how both Burton and Nolan's visions accomodate that. The last reason is one that I think Burton emphasized more than Nolan, and that is that Bruce's obsession makes him an outcast from society and he cannot live without the alter ego. I can also see how Nolan could add this into the 2nd and 3rd installments of his Batman franchise, but we didn't see much of that in BB.
Bathead
10-24-2006, 01:28 PM
Does no-one esle find Burton's statement extremely arrogant? After reading one Batman comic, he thinks he gets Batman and others don't? Explain to me how that works.
El Payaso
10-24-2006, 02:01 PM
Explain to me how that works.
On the screen.
El Payaso
10-24-2006, 02:01 PM
*double steak*
DocLathropBrown
10-24-2006, 03:20 PM
Does no-one esle find Burton's statement extremely arrogant? After reading one Batman comic, he thinks he gets Batman and others don't? Explain to me how that works.
He read more than one comic. He did do a respectable amount of research to find out how to best bring Batman to the screen. A 20/20 segment from 1989 has him saying he read several comics to "try and get a feel for the history of the character" before he realized that Batman's specifics changed every 20 years or so.
No, it's not arrogant. Burton's quite the opposite if you know the man at all. The key words in his sentance is "I used to think they were missing the point of Batman." He admits that he sees things differently, that he felt he was just respecting Batman's privacy, since the character tries hard to stay out of the limelight.
For what it's worth, I think Burton gets Batman more than most people here, including Chris Nolan, how 'gets it' in all the wrong ways. Burton just tossed the playboy aspect of Bruce Wayne out of the window, which is not a change I'm against, mind you.
ab38416
11-02-2006, 12:05 AM
ab38416
Bumping this thread cause I was watching the film with commentary last night with a friend and when Burton said that all she said was WTF. I'm curious as to how newer posters to the miscellaneous Batman forum feel about this quote.
Penismightier
08-31-2007, 06:58 PM
He read more than one comic. He did do a respectable amount of research to find out how to best bring Batman to the screen. A 20/20 segment from 1989 has him saying he read several comics to "try and get a feel for the history of the character" before he realized that Batman's specifics changed every 20 years or so.
No, it's not arrogant. Burton's quite the opposite if you know the man at all. The key words in his sentance is "I used to think they were missing the point of Batman." He admits that he sees things differently, that he felt he was just respecting Batman's privacy, since the character tries hard to stay out of the limelight.
For what it's worth, I think Burton gets Batman more than most people here, including Chris Nolan, how 'gets it' in all the wrong ways. Burton just tossed the playboy aspect of Bruce Wayne out of the window, which is not a change I'm against, mind you.
You know, I was just thinking about this. Nolan got a lot of things right in Begins, mostly on the surface. All the elements were there, dark atmosphere, etc. I think Burton has understood the duality of the character more than any other character. He and his direction of Keaton showed us how uncomfortable, and maybe even downright disturbing, it is to be Bruce Wayne. Bale smirked like the playboy, changed his voice in the suit, but didn't have the psychological side of the man that Keaton and Burton brought. I look at Begins and I see why Bruce Wayne is Batman, but Keaton really made me think about what that sort of thing does to a man's psyche.
SHADOWBAT69
08-31-2007, 07:10 PM
I look at Begins and I see why Bruce Wayne is Batman, but Keaton really made me think about what that sort of thing does to a man's psyche.
which is why there is no reason to not be able to like both actors performances. This is one of the best things Ive read in awhile.
Penismightier
08-31-2007, 09:48 PM
which is why there is no reason to not be able to like both actors performances. This is one of the best things Ive read in awhile.
Yeah, but it would be the ultimate if an actor could combine those two.
Catman
09-01-2007, 12:26 AM
I'm curious as to how newer posters to the miscellaneous Batman forum feel about this quote.
Despite what people think, Batman, got a lot of screen time. What Burton was talking about is people's claim that the villains were the center of attention. His response was that Batman should be hidden (in other words mysterious). Also, Burton is a visual artist. The images say it all when it comes to Batman in these movies. When you watch this scene...
KlYUd1wvE24
...you SHOULD know what Burton is trying to say. Heck, even Paul Dini (writer/producer of B:TAS) got it! And he praised it on the SE DVD.
Kevin Roegele
09-01-2007, 12:46 PM
It was heavily implied that he had different forms of training prior to meeting Ra's. Just like how in the comics he trained with various people. Just because it wasn't shown it doesn't mean that it did not happen.
Exactly. Bruce was beating up seven thugs at a time in prison. He was a top fighter before Ras found him. That's how Ras knew he had potential.
Penismightier
09-01-2007, 01:49 PM
Despite what people think, Batman, got a lot of screen time. What Burton was talking about is people's claim that the villains were the center of attention. His response was that Batman should be hidden (in other words mysterious). Also, Burton is a visual artist. The images say it all when it comes to Batman in these movies. When you watch this scene...
KlYUd1wvE24
...you SHOULD know what Burton is trying to say. Heck, even Paul Dini (writer/producer of B:TAS) got it! And he praised it on the SE DVD.
Oh Burton, explaining things with visuals in a visual medium, even without the aid of dialog, and especially without long monologues or extended training scenes. That's a perfect example of how not everything has to be explained in excruciating detail.
Comic Book Boy
09-01-2007, 01:51 PM
Similar to how Nolan added his touch of reality in Batman Begins.
Not really.
That was part of the comics.
Despite what people think, Batman, got a lot of screen time. What Burton was talking about is people's claim that the villains were the center of attention. His response was that Batman should be hidden (in other words mysterious). Also, Burton is a visual artist. The images say it all when it comes to Batman in these movies. When you watch this scene...
KlYUd1wvE24
...you SHOULD know what Burton is trying to say. Heck, even Paul Dini (writer/producer of B:TAS) got it! And he praised it on the SE DVD.
Oh I have and for many years that's why I admire his Batman movies so much. Just curious as to other stances on it, I explained this to my friend myself at least that isolation & indecision are a major part of Batman/Bruce Wayne in these films.
Exactly. Bruce was beating up seven thugs at a time in prison. He was a top fighter before Ras found him. That's how Ras knew he had potential.
Not only that but he was intuitive enough to track down all sorts of criminals prior to meeting Ras. Afterwards we see him greatly displaying some detective skills throughout the film which wasn't part of the League of Shadows training. What do people assume? that he learned all that in Wayne Manor? lol
Kevin Roegele
09-01-2007, 03:11 PM
I think if Nolan had the chance, he would have made the entire of Begins about Bruce's journey, and only becoming Batman at the end. Which would have been awesome. From a certain point of view.
Penismightier
09-01-2007, 03:17 PM
I think if Nolan had the chance, he would have made the entire of Begins about Bruce's journey, and only becoming Batman at the end. Which would have been awesome. From a certain point of view.
An entire, big-budget Batman film without so much as a Batsuit? And most likely no recognizable super-villains? It would work in a comic when a regular Batman comic would be coming within a few weeks, but not in a movie where there are years between films.
mjbull23
09-01-2007, 03:37 PM
In B89 about 3/4 of the way thru the film, when Vicki confront Bruce in the cave after discovering his identity, she asks him "Why do you keep doing this?" He replies "Because I'm the only one that can". This speaks to some sense of duty that Bruce feels he has to shoulder. It's not just about losing his parents, it's about his disdain for crime in general, as others in this thread have pointed out.
GoogleMe94
09-01-2007, 05:42 PM
the OP is obviously a burton hater, or just plain ignorant. hes taking what burton said WAY out of context.didnt even bother to fully explain his thoughts, pfft. burton was talking about the ppl who think batman should be totally shown and be out there just as much as his villians, but batman is more likely to stay hidden in the shadows rather then showing off his fancy kung fu, etc. he said something similiar in the book "burton on burton", where he stated that Joker is the kind of character that will be out in the open yelling "look at me! look at me!" whereas batman will be off in the shadows somewhere in a dark alley, not wanting to be seen. thats what burton was trying to say about batman and his villians, and why batman isnt shown TOO much in his films. he strikes, and then disapears quickly, kinda like bale did in BB, minus the origin. i never liked origins anyway.
GoogleMe94
09-01-2007, 06:14 PM
Bumping this thread cause I was watching the film with commentary last night with a friend and when Burton said that all she said was WTF. I'm curious as to how newer posters to the miscellaneous Batman forum feel about this quote.
i think anybody who heard him say that and says "wtf" are total dorks. obviously he was talking to the noncomics fans who think batman should be in broad daylight and eat up screentime, lol. that would suck.
No. I'm just sick of the double-standard with BB fans. They fail to see that Nolan changed Batman as much as Burton.
*Shed's Tear*.
:up:
But it has nothing to do with the topic. That's how Burton-Nolan flamewars start. Please refrain from bringing Nolan into otherwise Burton exclusive arguments, even if you feel their is a Nolan propaganda subtext.
I think the **** already hit the fan.:csad:
Super_Ludacris
09-01-2007, 07:09 PM
Yeah but only one of them seem to please the hardcore bat-fans.....lol
it never ends with this. Watch....
damn. I just noticed that this thread is like a year old.
Yeah but only one of them seem to please the hardcore bat-fans.....lol
it never ends with this. Watch....
What the hell defines a hardcore bat-fan though? I mean I've read and own hundreds of Batman stories from 1939 - present. I own stories that people on these boards never even bother to talk about or acknowledge that they exist does that make me more hardcore than your average hype bat-fan?
I think both films are on even plane. BB I like because of the further exploration of the Bruce and Alfred dynamic which I've always been a fan of and I digged the changes (that's right changes) that Nolan/Goyer made to Bruce Wayne not so much the changes they made for Batman though. I only prefer BB slightly because it's the first chapter of a greater narrative where as Burton's films are more stand alone.
I dig BATMAN because of the spectacle behind the film there is a sense of wonder in that film that Nolan's film lacks. I also love the characterization of Batman in those films but then again I'm a huge fan of the pulpy original Bat-Man as depicted by Kane & Finger. As with Nolan/Goyer I digged the change from the status quo that Burton/Hamm did with Bruce Wayne. It humanized him more and made him a sharper contrast to the supernatural Batman. I mean really if anything I'd say "hardcore bat-fans" are the only ones that could truly appreciate and be pleased by what both films brought to the table. Sorry to say but none is no more definitive than the other.
GoogleMe94
09-06-2007, 07:02 PM
i'd go as far to say that anyone who doesnt like the tim burton batman films must not be a very big batman fan, cuz those films rocked and presented the character correctly, there are some things that burton did with the character that nolan missed.
Swordmaster
09-06-2007, 07:09 PM
i'd go as far to say that anyone who doesnt like the tim burton batman films must not be a very big batman fan, cuz those films rocked and presented the character correctly, there are some things that burton did with the character that nolan missed.
I say thee nay. The Burton films, while in my opinion great, do not appeal to everyone, and just because of that, doesn't mean they aren't Batman fans. You have no right to say who is and who isn't a true Batman fan, anymore than I do.
Penismightier
09-06-2007, 07:36 PM
I say thee nay. The Burton films, while in my opinion great, do not appeal to everyone, and just because of that, doesn't mean they aren't Batman fans. You have no right to say who is and who isn't a true Batman fan, anymore than I do.
Agreed. The most anyone can really say is that some people are more traditional Batman fans and those who are fans of Nolan's Batman. And then they can debate on the pros and cons of each interpretation.
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.