The Roman could've been better.

[Morgoth]

I think the one thing that bothered me in BB, is that Falcone acted like a two bit thug, the way he spoke and everything. I always saw him with more class, from the way he spoke, and carried himself.

He should be smooth, sophisticated. They just didn't get his character right. I don't know why they did what they did to him.

He's alright in the film, but just not The Roman. :dry:

[Seen]

His accent took some getting used to. And I always imagined his last name pronounced as "Fal-con" and not "Falcone" with the long e. I guess the pronouncation as it was in the film sounds more Italian, but then at least give Wilkinson an Italian accent and not the accent of, like you said, a two-bit thug.

Plus, his character literally sort of vanished when he was drugged with Crane's toxin. We didn't see or hear about him. I hope there's an explanation in The Dark Knight of some kind as to what happened with the character.

[Morgoth]

Yeah his character was a bit of a waste.

[Paste Pot Pete]

I guess Nolan was attempting to portray him as what he saw as a more "typical" urban crime boss. Despite their money and power, they usually are still two-bit thugs at heart, and this was certainly who Nolan's Falcone was. I never cared that much for The Roman, so the change didn't concern me all that much.

I was more put off by the characterization of Loeb; he didn't show any real signs of being the absolutely corrupt a-hole from the comic, just a typical hardass. Maybe in TDK..

[CConn]

You're all Irishmen.

Drunken, wife-beating Irishmen.

[Seen]

You're all Irishmen.

Drunken, wife-beating Irishmen.

Your point? :oldrazz:

[Boy Wonder '04]

What peeved me the most was the way Falcone spoke, that Tom wilkinson guy was a freaking car wreck. Most likely the worst acting in the whole movie!..
I say replace him with David Strathairn at least someone who can do a sinister job as a mob boss who looks Roman!:

http://handson.provocateuse.com/images/photos/david_strathairn_01.jpghttp://in.yimg.com/i/in/promos/oscar/redcarpet/Red-DavidStrathairn.jpg

[El Payaso]

Falcone, Flass, Loeb and to certaion extent, Luicius Fox are characters that keeps the name but are extremely different to the original characters. To the extreme of being different characters actually with the same name.

That's what makes me smile everytime a fan claims BB is THE most accurate comic movie ever or such.

[Nepenthes]

With Loeb nothing actually contradicts the comic version (expect well, he's black) and he could still be the corrupted arssehole but we just didn't see it. The corruption in Gotham was well-established in BB, without having to waste time dragging another city official into it.

Flass, yeah well. The name was a just a homage here (and one thing that actually bothered me in BB was the use of unusual, ugly and indistinct names. Faden and Flass have no impact or familiarity and they make it hard to track the character for a first time viewer. You can't even catch the name properly in many cases, and you need to know when they're talking about a certain character or else Flass is just the slobby cop that shows up once in while, and Faden barely exists. Judge Hammer would have been better, and Detective Stanley. See the difference when it's a strong name?)


El Payaso what was different about Lucius Fox?

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Well, Lucius is a much smarter man in this one, as oppose to being a glimmer kinda dumber guy he is in the comics. Making him older too, where he's been around long enough to had been friends with Bruce's dad and Alfred might be something new.....but, really......I'm not sure. Lucius never seems to get much "screentime" in the comics, he just seems to have always been an excuse for why it is that Wayne Enterprise doesn't just crash and burn overnight while Batman saves Gotham.

I don't really see how people could confuse Faden and Flass, I think b/c of the time apart we get between each of them.....and how distinctly different Flass looks, it's just too hard to confuse the two, I think. Especially with Faden's red hair, which in and of itself is easy to notice.

Honestly......I think the whole "Roman" angle probably could have been done.....if the film was longer. But, he's not really THAT guy in the film anyways. They hint at it, but we never get much on it.

Who knows, though. We could get more on the Falcone family in a sequel. His kids, even Sofia, are in Batman Begins continuity.

[El Payaso]

With Loeb nothing actually contradicts the comic version (expect well, he's black) and he could still be the corrupted arssehole but we just didn't see it. The corruption in Gotham was well-established in BB, without having to waste time dragging another city official into it.

I'm not arguing Nolan didn't handle the corruption subject in a fine way.

But Loeb is fat, old and white and the B Begins' Loeb is none of that. Not to mention nothing in the movie depicts him as corrupt. Maybe an *******, but not corrupt.

Flass, yeah well. The name was a just a homage here (and one thing that actually bothered me in BB was the use of unusual, ugly and indistinct names. Faden and Flass have no impact or familiarity and they make it hard to track the character for a first time viewer. You can't even catch the name properly in many cases, and you need to know when they're talking about a certain character or else Flass is just the slobby cop that shows up once in while, and Faden barely exists. Judge Hammer would have been better, and Detective Stanley. See the difference when it's a strong name?)

What bothers me is not only Nolan used the same name as a cheap wink - because it is not the same character - but that the original Flass was way more interesting than the fat dirty corrupt cop stereotype.

El Payaso what was different about Lucius Fox?

He's not a scientist and doesn't know Batman's identity from the beginning.


------------------------------


Now, in Carmine Falcone's case. Yes, he's little like the comics version but still Tom Wilkinson made the hell of a character. Same with Freeman's Luicius.

[batmaluco]

Now, in Carmine Falcone's case. Yes, he's little like the comics version but still Tom Wilkinson made the hell of a character. Same with Freeman's Luicius.
I agree.
"begged... like a dog..."
This phrase, or even better, the way he delivered it, still give me chills.
For me, one of the best moments of that film.
Tom Wilkinson is really really a great actor.
And Morgan Freeman is probably the most charismatic man on planet Earth. Period.

[El Payaso]

Ah man, three cheers for the acting of those dudes in Begins. Top notch.

[batmaluco]

Ah man, three cheers for the acting of those dudes in Begins. Top notch.
Yes, I'm still amazed about how lucky we were in terms of acting skills of the cast in Batman's movies. With only some exceptions...:dry:

Michael Gough for instance was great as Alfred, and in my opinion (of course), the best thing in Joel Schumacher's Batman films, if there's something I can't complain about his films, is the great Alfred.

[ChrisBaleBatman]

I dunno......maybe it's because Lucius is played by Freeman...but I really prefer Fox in Begins than the comics or even BTAS.

It's been established wayyyy before Batman Begins that Bruce does swipe things out of Wayne Enterprises, and it makes better sense and more interesting too to know Fox is covering Bruce's back on that side as well.

I never really buy into the idea that Lucius knows Bruce as well as he does, and cannot either a) figure out Bruce is hiding something.....thereby adding up he's Batman or b) not in shock that Bruce CAN run the company on his own, b/c Bruce is a great bussinessman and smart guy with Lucius around....instead of being the drunk playboy in public.

And I cannot credit Shumacher with Gough.....he just knew if he'd have any chance at winnining over Burton fans, he'd NEED to keep Alfred. That dude was great. Horrible the way they badly wrote his parts in though. They wanted to give him more screentime....just went about it the wrong way.

[El Payaso]

I dunno......maybe it's because Lucius is played by Freeman...but I really prefer Fox in Begins than the comics or even BTAS.

It's been established wayyyy before Batman Begins that Bruce does swipe things out of Wayne Enterprises, and it makes better sense and more interesting too to know Fox is covering Bruce's back on that side as well.

Me too. I rather this Luicius than the comics one. Makes so much better sense. I have never had a problem accepting that many things from movies are just better than the original source.

[batmaluco]

I dunno......maybe it's because Lucius is played by Freeman...but I really prefer Fox in Begins than the comics or even BTAS.

It's been established wayyyy before Batman Begins that Bruce does swipe things out of Wayne Enterprises, and it makes better sense and more interesting too to know Fox is covering Bruce's back on that side as well.

I never really buy into the idea that Lucius knows Bruce as well as he does, and cannot either a) figure out Bruce is hiding something.....thereby adding up he's Batman or b) not in shock that Bruce CAN run the company on his own, b/c Bruce is a great bussinessman and smart guy with Lucius around....instead of being the drunk playboy in public.

And I cannot credit Shumacher with Gough.....he just knew if he'd have any chance at winnining over Burton fans, he'd NEED to keep Alfred. That dude was great. Horrible the way they badly wrote his parts in though. They wanted to give him more screentime....just went about it the wrong way.
^I agree. With both statements.
And in B&R they gave him even more screentime, but went overly melodramatic, in my opinion, looks like Schumacher had intentions in making me cry but like it happens with me very oftenly, over melodramatic stuff just let me :dry: ...

The death of The Penguin in Burton's BR and the scene with Alfred and little Bruce after his father's death in Nolan's BB are very touchy, though (imo, of course).

[Lead Cenobite]

It seems to me that Flass only changed in appearance and not in personality in Begins.

[Two-Face]

I thought Tom Wilkinson's performance was good and Nolan could have cast Al Pacino as Carmine "The Roman" Falcone since character was Italian- American. Like I said Wilkinson acting wasn't bad at all unlike the TomKat.

[Mee]

I liked The Roman, he was great for the small part he had.:up:


Fox was good too. But I do think Flass was a bit too much like Eckhart from Burton's movie.

[Tojo]

The noly problem i had with Falcone was that he didn't have more to do.

[Mr. Socko]

That's what makes me smile everytime a fan claims BB is THE most accurate comic movie ever or such.

Sin City is the ONLY movie that can take that claim. Like the movie or love it, it was accurate to the comics, from the script to the look.
------------------------------------------------------------


The Roman was different than in the comics and from how I'd have imagined him. I always thought of him being just like Vito Corleone(Brando/Godfather).

But Tom did an amazing job, and I always thought his last name was pronounced just "Falcon" too.

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Me too. I rather this Luicius than the comics one. Makes so much better sense. I have never had a problem accepting that many things from movies are just better than the original source.

Agreed.

Which, is kinda tough I think.....especially for comic fans, but it's a little known fact that the comics have ****ed up twice as bad as the movies. It just gets lost in history b/c every month they've got another chance to fix things.

I agree. With both statements.
And in B&R they gave him even more screentime, but went overly melodramatic, in my opinion, looks like Schumacher had intentions in making me cry but like it happens with me very oftenly, over melodramatic stuff just let me :dry: ...


What happened was that Alfred became the constant.....I mean, Batman kept getting recast but Alfred stayed the same. And, I think Shucmacher wanted to get more of Alfred into the story of each film b/c he deserved it....and b/c he was so popular. Thing is, they couldn't come up with a GOOD way to get more Alfred into the films.

So, that's why Alfred became the "costume maker" and then the "security maker".....and then tying him directly into Batgirl's origin was golden for them...making him her uncle practically made the rest easy.

And, honestly...despite all this...Alfred's subplot is the best thing happening in BATMAN AND ROBIN.

[batmaluco]

What happened was that Alfred became the constant.....I mean, Batman kept getting recast but Alfred stayed the same. And, I think Shucmacher wanted to get more of Alfred into the story of each film b/c he deserved it....and b/c he was so popular. Thing is, they couldn't come up with a GOOD way to get more Alfred into the films.

So, that's why Alfred became the "costume maker" and then the "security maker".....and then tying him directly into Batgirl's origin was golden for them...making him her uncle practically made the rest easy.

And, honestly...despite all this...Alfred's subplot is the best thing happening in BATMAN AND ROBIN.
I agree with the first part of your post.

But I didn't like that Alfred subplot very much. I understand why people like it but it's just not my cup of tea.

I tend to like more when stories are about tragedy than when it's about drama. Some people define a tragedy when something unexpected happens in a sudden. Bruce's parents death is a good example of a tragedy. In a matter of brief seconds something happens and it's done. One may cry later, but it's already done. And there's no turning back.

The drama is when something bad is announced to happen in the future and people start to cry or suffer for that event before it happens.
It gives a soap opera kind of feel that I don't apreciate as much as a tragedy.

And that's the reason why I didn't like very much that "my friend is dying" subplot.

But for me, even with that, Michael Gough was the best thing in Schumacher's Bat-films. :up:

[Superman Prime]

Falcone, Flass, Loeb and to certaion extent, Luicius Fox are characters that keeps the name but are extremely different to the original characters. To the extreme of being different characters actually with the same name.

That's what makes me smile everytime a fan claims BB is THE most accurate comic movie ever or such.


Took the words right outta my mouth. .... Stop stealing. :cmad:

[Cryogenic]

The scene is currently up on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6N7lUHH8Z4

It's well acted by Wilkinson, but the character is cliched.

Besides that, what I don't like about this scene are two things:

1) Bale's acting. Very monotone. He just pulls his typical angry / indignant faces. He was just plain moody throughout the entire film. It might be justified in a scene like this, but there's nothing substantially different elsewhere to contrast it against.

2) The scripting. Falcone tells Bruce he has balls and commends him for showing a fearless approach, but then tells him he doesn't understand who or what he's dealing with, and then asserts that "you'll always fear what you don't understand", completely contradicting himself! This is just one of many examples where Nolan pounds the concept of fear into a viewer's head -- at the expense of tact, discretion and logic.

Sorry for venting 'n all, but this thread is built on a scene that's supposedly gripping and powerful, yet contains the fallacies I maintain BB reeks of.

[chosen1]

I think the one thing that bothered me in BB, is that Falcone acted like a two bit thug, the way he spoke and everything. I always saw him with more class, from the way he spoke, and carried himself.

He should be smooth, sophisticated. They just didn't get his character right. I don't know why they did what they did to him.

He's alright in the film, but just not The Roman. :dry:


Yeah he should've been like stringer bell.

[Lobster Charlie]

2) The scripting. Falcone tells Bruce he has balls and commends him for showing a fearless approach, but then tells him he doesn't understand who or what he's dealing with, and then asserts that "you'll always fear what you don't understand", completely contradicting himself! This is just one of many examples where Nolan pounds the concept of fear into a viewer's head -- at the expense of tact, discretion and logic.

Sorry for venting 'n all, but this thread is built on a scene that's supposedly gripping and powerful, yet contains the fallacies I maintain BB reeks of.

Actually, Falcone tells him he's got "spirit," and he tells him that *after* he says "you always fear what you don't understand."

I don't see the contradiction. He's saying that Bruce was brave to show up, not knowing what he was getting himself into. And now that he knows what he's up against (after Falcone explains that he has the city basically in the palm of his hand, via the Judge, the off-duty policeman, the politician), he should be afraid, because the criminal world (for the "prince of gotham") is something he has no understanding of. If he did, he wouldn't have waltzed in there, saying what he wasn't afraid of.

This is the inspiration for Bruce learning that he needs to get into the criminal psyche in order a) conquer his fear of what he doesn't understand, and b) learn the value of fear and its power over people.

[strider]

I liked the Falcone they used for BB. Although I was expecting a lot more from The Roman...I just hope Maroni/Thorne/Sinois whoever they use, gets to "shine" in TDK. In a hardacore realistic Bat world, bosses would be Batman's main villains.