Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle/Catwoman XXXIII

[Travesty]

Both Burton's and Nolan's movies haven't gotten the character correctly, at all. Both get some parts right, while they also falter in different areas. No director has gotten it right, and not one is "more accurate" than the other. Nolan has ventured just as far as them, but he does it in different avenues then the others. It all comes down to what you prefer, and there is nothing wrong with liking both.

[Nave 'Torment']

Originally Posted by shauner111

I agree with Fudgie on the ridiculousness of Batman Returns. But i think the way you look at the movies as "urban myth" versions of these characters....is actually pretty f'n cool.

Thanks! But yeah I'll agree with you on how ridiculous some of Burton's stuff was (no offense, I still love them to death!)

Originally Posted by Fudgie

Yeah not buying that. Only Burton's crazy Bat is like that.

Heh. Well take it for what you will, i just don't see what Bruce offered at the end of Returns as too rushed. By that point they were connecting on a much more deeper, depressing and insane level. It fit the mark at the masque when both showed up without costumes and were "still wearing masks."

Originally Posted by Pfeiffer-Pfan

I worry for some of you guys when the more fantastical reboot hits...

rain fire and brimstone on Hollywood's pencil-pushers for rebooting a reboot!

(actually i admit, i myself am a bit worried about my own state of mind when that happens)

[Nave 'Torment']

Originally Posted by shauner111

I'm actually excited for a fantastical reboot. Just keep it dark and serious and i'll be happy.

I really am not to be honest. I understand that you need to update your characters, that people's taste and ideas change over the years and these characters, if they are to survive, have to be retold in more contemporary ideals but making a reboot this close to an already critically and financially successful trilogy (TRILOGY!) will just be wrong. Forget giving audience-lag, people will still eat up a Batman movie when it hits, the character can survive that, but a reboot seems creatively redundant to me.

It's a lot like in the comics, I understand that they needed a fresh start during the original Crisis back in the 80s because, for all considerations, the definition of heroism had changed from what it was in the 50s, and a reboot addressed those. Same thing with Burton's Batman and Nolan's Batman, the idea of what is heroic and what is "cool" changed dramatically over the last what 14 years? They made a reboot after 14 years and people embraced it all out. It was a Batman for an entirely new generation because the generation did change. The concept of heroism did change. That's how you make a reboot.

I'm not counting Schumacher's films, Superman Returns or even Ang Lee's Hulk because a lot of people simply understood it to be a terrible adaptation of the character, a sort of misstep. You don't have that with TDK, this one was critically revered.

Since we're on the topic of Batman Returns..i watched it last night (and Batman Forever last week) and i can say one thing for sure. Even though one is dark/gothic & the other is lighter/psychedelic...Returns is just as campy and over the top as Forever. There are serious scenes with Bruce Wayne in both movies, even Kilmers Batman has a couple of darker scenes that i barely remembered (since its been so long). But they're both campy as hell and make Nolans Trilogy look like a complete comic-accurate depiction of the Batman in comparison. Don't get me wrong cuz i enjoy both movies but they're goddamn ridiculous.

I know right? I love the entire atmospheric mood and I admit I love those movies shamelessly, but the climax was about penguins marching with rockets stuck to their friggin backs. That's Austin Powers level of goofball. And DeVito was very over-the-top. I think that's actually one of the reasons why it was such a good balance between the campy Batman of the 60s and the more serious origin of the character from the comics. But stories with the same goofy sensibilities (giant rubber ducky) wasn't exactly misplaced from the comics or the animated series. If anything, those fantastical BTAS stories are things that'd fit right at home with Burton's films. And I never understood people criticizing Nolan's films for being indifferent or ashamed of the source material, they included so much and kept the characters so close it was just rewarding.

My point is, Batman Returns always had a mixed reaction but people look at it with nostalgic eyes. They put it on a pedestal over Shumachers first go at the character. They put it over Nolans movies sometimes. A lot of the same people who complain about Nolan venturing too far from the source material probably dont realize that Returns is actually the most inaccurate version of Batman and its characters/history to EVER step foot in a Batman film. Even the horrible Batman & Robin stuck to the 60s tv show. I couldnt even think of what era the 1992 movie represented when i was watching it last night.

Yeah exactly. I'd have loved for those unsuccessful Batman films to be some sort of neo-silver age nod to the 60s show, but Batman & Robin was even a terrible camp. Clooney didn't come close to West's comedic timing. But they should've stuck with it and made Batman Triumphant for the fans, a sort of Batman Brave and the Bold version. Something tells me that's a direction they might take with the next one.

If people complain about TDK Trilogy as much as they do, maybe you're gonna love the reboot. Im sure it'll be more accurate. But on the other hand, we dont know if they'll go back to the campy ****. If they're thinking of doing "monsters" like Clayface, Solomon Grundy, Killer Croc and Man-Bat i can assure you it'll be dark but probably a bit on the goofy side. You complainers will be complaining even more, i guarantee it.

Peeps can love Pfeiffer in Returns (i do too) but her Catwoman was a jokey character. I prefer her different but awesome take on Selina before she dresses up. Because her Catwoman was a little too cornball (a word she liked to use in the movie). I mean SHE LOOKED like Catwoman but i just dont see how people can like that over Hathaways and say it's because it was more "Catwoman". Pfeiffers performance was more in ur face and the suit was fine but the jokey nature of it and inaccuracies in the writing make me go to Anne's Catwoman all the way.

I think WB really should give Batman some rest. They've churned out several billion dollars out of him, pump up some other hero from the DC library instead of rehashing the same character.

As for Catwoman yeah though here's how I always looked at Michelle's portrayal: it's just so much modernist isn't it? You get the idea that she's a sort of female J. Alfred Prufrock from T.S. Eliot, or a Franz Kafka character. She's the alienated woman in a modernist world where, I suppose, Burton's saying that the only sane thing to do is to go crazy. Sexually repressed, she becomes a libidinal deviant where the only emotionally fulfilling thing to do is either bask in revenge or dance with death. It makes her sexy as hell but understandably a different interpretation of the character from the comics. She's make for a very good psychological case-study But yeah I think that overt-sexuality (which the character represented from the start) put a lot of people off. We could talk about the Freudian implications of that whip but maybe that's for another thread?

I love Anne's character for being closer to the Catwoman who overcame her emotional anxieties and was doing something proactive rather than reactive. But maybe that's just me. It's not like they didn't make her a sexual creature at all.

[Nave 'Torment']

Originally Posted by Travesty

Both Burton's and Nolan's movies haven't gotten the character correctly, at all. Both get some parts right, while they also falter in different areas. No director has gotten it right, and not one is "more accurate" than the other. Nolan has ventured just as far as them, but he does it in different avenues then the others. It all comes down to what you prefer, and there is nothing wrong with liking both.

Exactly. And I've never really minded a different interpretation. Sure there are certain things about the character, fundamental things that make her her that you can't get rid of, but I don't think they ever ventured so far that she stopped fundamentally being Selina Kyle or Catwoman -- even the 60s version. The only one to do that crime, to make an interpretation that was so different that she ceased being the same character she was, is that Halle Berry movie. You can make changes, but you don't changes so much that they essentially become someone else. And to keep it consistent, they gave us a Catwoman who wasn't even Selina Kyle. THAT's when it becomes shameless use of the character's popularity to sell a movie that isn't about them. The only other example like that I can think of are the Asylum rip-off movies or that mysterious "Bat-Woman" foreign film from the 60s.

[Travesty]

^heh, I was making more of a general statement of all the characters in the movies. But as far as Catwoman goes, I think Nolan's is definitely more accurate.

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by shauner111

I'm actually excited for a fantastical reboot. Just keep it dark and serious and i'll be happy.

Since we're on the topic of Batman Returns..i watched it last night (and Batman Forever last week) and i can say one thing for sure. Even though one is dark/gothic & the other is lighter/psychedelic...Returns is just as campy and over the top as Forever. There are serious scenes with Bruce Wayne in both movies, even Kilmers Batman has a couple of darker scenes that i barely remembered (since its been so long). But they're both campy as hell and make Nolans Trilogy look like a complete comic-accurate depiction of the Batman in comparison. Don't get me wrong cuz i enjoy both movies but they're goddamn ridiculous.

My point is, Batman Returns always had a mixed reaction but people look at it with nostalgic eyes. They put it on a pedestal over Shumachers first go at the character. They put it over Nolans movies sometimes. A lot of the same people who complain about Nolan venturing too far from the source material probably dont realize that Returns is actually the most inaccurate version of Batman and its characters/history to EVER step foot in a Batman film. Even the horrible Batman & Robin stuck to the 60s tv show. I couldnt even think of what era the 1992 movie represented when i was watching it last night.

If people complain about TDK Trilogy as much as they do, maybe you're gonna love the reboot. Im sure it'll be more accurate. But on the other hand, we dont know if they'll go back to the campy ****. If they're thinking of doing "monsters" like Clayface, Solomon Grundy, Killer Croc and Man-Bat i can assure you it'll be dark but probably a bit on the goofy side. You complainers will be complaining even more, i guarantee it.

Peeps can love Pfeiffer in Returns (i do too) but her Catwoman was a jokey character. I prefer her different but awesome take on Selina before she dresses up. Because her Catwoman was a little too cornball (a word she liked to use in the movie). I mean SHE LOOKED like Catwoman but i just dont see how people can like that over Hathaways and say it's because it was more "Catwoman". Pfeiffers performance was more in ur face and the suit was fine but the jokey nature of it and inaccuracies in the writing make me go to Anne's Catwoman all the way.

Great post

[shauner111]

Originally Posted by The Joker

Great post

Did hell just freeze over!?

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by shauner111

Did hell just freeze over!?

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

See I'm not a monster, I'm just ahead of the curve

Shockingly there are things in TDKR I truly enjoy (we just spend the bulk of the time focusing on the negatives), and Hathaway's Selina is one of them. She's easily one of my top 5 characters in the trilogy. While I love Pfeiffer's Catwoman, it's not a version of Catwoman I really associate with Catwoman in general. Whereas with Hathaway's I do.

[MagnarTheGreat]

Anne's on SNL right now. I missed like the first 15 minutes.

[kvz5]

Katie Holmes... again!

Too short though. Meh.

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by kvz5

Katie Holmes... again!

Too short though. Meh.

I was thinking the same thing. Still a good showing for Anne.

[batdude]

Yeah, Anne must really not like Katie Holmes.Kind of wish they had done a Catwoman sketch.

[terry78]

She was a straight riot on SNL.

[Nave 'Torment']

she should've done a Maggie Gyllenhaal? or a Marion Cotillard? What no love for Bat-fans?

[Dark Raven]

Anyone have a link to Anne's sketch? Did she have short hair as Katie?

[Kane52630]

[Alex Logan]

Originally Posted by shauner111

Did hell just freeze over!?

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

Indeed.

[Gold Samurai]

Originally Posted by Fudgie

Yeah not buying that. Only Burton's crazy Bat is like that.

C'MON! Let's get nuts!

[kvz5]

[shauner111]

Originally Posted by Alex Logan

Indeed.

[JackWhite]

Happy Birthday Anne!

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

Happy 30th!!

[Dragon_316ca]

Bruce turned 30 in Batman Begins. Anne turned 30 today.....

#Fullcircle

[AnneFan]

I like that promo pic up there. But more importantly, Happy 30th Birthday to Anne!

She has this quote from the December issue of Vogue:

"I'm turning 30, and—I hope this isn't obnoxious to say—I feel prettier, and much more myself. I guess I just feel much more satisfied with less now."

I'm listening to 'Nobody Does it Better' at the moment to mark the event, appropriate lyrics.

Nobody does it better, makes me feel sad for the rest
Nobody does it half as good as you, baby, you're the best

[Two-Face]

Happy birthday Selina Kyle I mean Anne.