The SuperHeroHype Forums  

Go Back   The SuperHeroHype Forums > Batman > Batman World

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-16-2008, 07:39 PM   #351
Cain
"West West Y'all"
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Live from New York
Posts: 4,937
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Originally Posted by the GRIN Reaper View Post
Ok, I get what you're saying. But at the same time ... All Batman movies are the same type of film.
No they're not. They may coincidentally share certain details at times but that's inevitable when they ape the same source material. But they each have completely different themes and purposes. Just off basic theme alone they're all different

BATMAN - Story of a man going from urban legend to vigilante hero of the day.

Batman Returns - Story of that man's demons finally consuming him and breaking him down.

Batman Forever - That man finally confronting his demons head on and taking control of his life.

Batman & Robin - An exploration of that man's new life as a father figure and his relationship with his surrogate family.

Batman Begins - New retelling of the legend exploring the hero as far back as his time before becoming the symbol we know him as.

The Dark Knight - The exploration of the escalation caused by the effect the symbol has had on his surroundings.

Quote:
I love Batman just as much as you, I like the Burton films, but to dodge comparisons and call people who do generational idiots ... just doesn't make sense to me.
Perhaps that was harsh but I wasn't trying to be a jerk just being honest. I hold no ill will towards any fellow Bat fan though this is just a board where we talk Batman it's not like we all know each other personally. But to be more frank it's the same reason I don't compare Grant's Batman to Miller's Batman or how I wouldn't compare Finger's Batman to Englehart's Batman. Yet I love them all and they all adhere to the core of the Batman mythos. I just take things for what they are again whether I enjoy them or not is a different story.

Quote:
Films that hover in the same category of things they're trying to do and the type of movie they are can most certainly be compared and not looked down on in comparing them.
I suppose what you mean by "same category" is genre, not sure if that's so but it if is, well Driving Miss Daisy and Ghostbusters both comedies. Now one features dramatic elements as well so it's a dramadey and one is more exploitational with comedy but both are still at the core examples of comedy. So not even film's in the same category if you mean genre. I can't compare Galaxy Quest to Happy Gilmore but they both made me laugh. I can't compare The Matrix to Commando but both featured fun action sequences.

__________________
Pull list: Saga, Thief of Thieves, The Manhattan Projects, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Harbinger, X-O Manowar, Bloodshot, Archer & Armstrong, Shadowman, Green Lantern, Red Lanterns, Justice League 3000, Superman, Action Comics, Detective Comics, Batman & ____, Batman, Red Hood & The Outlaws, The Flash, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Swamp Thing, All-Star Western, Earth 2, Worlds' Finest, Superman/Wonder Woman, Daredevil, Superior Spider-Man, All-New X-Men
Cain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2008, 08:10 PM   #352
MysterioMenace
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 270
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Originally Posted by the GRIN reaper View Post
Well I might have to considering he just delivered back to back the two greatest Batman motion pictures, and the best movie of its caliber and genere. I mean Nolan is just a vast superior talent to Burton. Nolan co-wrote and directed the best superhero movie of all-time, and the best back to back comic book movies seen on screen. He deserves it from all bat-fans. Just get on your knees Bat-fans, and …
You’re so repetitive. You have no logical argument. Nolan is better…because he made the best Batman films? That’s a matter of opinion and yours isn’t law. Stop acting it. I don’t think Batman Begins is any better then Batman ‘89. I know plenty of people that even dislike it, deeming it utterly boring. They’re just different takes.

Burton went the comic route and Nolan revolved around character and realism. If this has some bearing on possible Oscars then don’t you realize Burtons been nominated numerous times for numerous other films in the past? So again…matter of opinion. I give Nolan an immense amount of credit, but I don’t feel a need to insult Burton when I do it. I’m not blindly bias toward him. I’m neither a Nolan fan nor a Burton fanatic, I’m a Batman fan first and foremost. An informed Batman fan can acknowledge that they’re both accurate depictions.

For someone to argue that Burtons vision is somehow inaccurate to the source material…they must’ve had limited exposure to the comics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by the GRIN reaper View Post
Gargoyles hear and there ... but the architexture of the city was never before B89 potrayed as a Gothic for the sake of being Gothic. Never. And what makes over stylized Gothic architexture threatning? I live in Chicago, and there is elements to my city that make Burton's visual look to his city look like happy1778 town. Real cities have various elements that make it up. Not entirely poor and run down, there is wealthy areas, different styles of architexture built up over generations
I’m starting to see that no amount of gothic pictures of Gotham will ever get you to admit you were wrong. Deeeenial! But here are more anyway…because it’s fun making you look idiotic and unfairly bias.

Literally called Batman Gothic.

Batman 639 (2005). Batman has long been established by gothic imagery and modern times make no exception of it.

Batman 227 inspired by Bob Kanes Detective Comics 31





Batman 444.

Depicting a very stylized Gotham city.



Quote:
Originally Posted by the GRIN reaper View Post
And?
And they’re based off of a comic! Or didn’t you know? By your blatant lack of knowledge on Batman comic book history…I wouldn’t be half surprised if you didn’t.

Quote:
Originally Posted by the GRIN reaper View Post
Yes, Chris Nolan puts you in a contemporary enviornment that sucks the audience in and makes them feel they are actually immersed in a world that is similar to our own ... therefore there is more relatability to the heroes, and the villains and their acts feel more threatning and dangerous. No wonder Burton fans don't understand concepts like this ... like Burton compared to Nolan, there is an intelligence gap there. haha

It's more threatning and oppressing because the world is relatable in look and feel ... thus making the insane actions of the characters inside of it more believable. Threatning doesn't come from overly stylized Gothic architexture, naked men statues in claustrophobic Wal-Mart sized Gotham set pieces. The inhabitants of Nolan's Gotham are more threatning. The people make it threatning, not the look of buildings. Buildings that look like a flip side to say Candy Land? No ... threatning is slums based off real life oppressive low income housing. Oppressive and threatning is the elements that holds the people of Gotham down by their greed and corruption.
I’m an audience member. I was proudly there opening day for Batman Begins. I walked out especially pleased. Can you guess where I’m going? I wasn’t sucked into his Gotham whatsoever. It was background. It has no visual soul. I didn’t especially pay any attention to it whatsoever. So…doesn’t that debunk your entire rant as opinion? Don’t you know what an opinion is? Plus it’s not like Nolan left out the gritty and gothic stuff, it’s just not laid on nearly as thick. We still have the Narrows, Arkham, and a few other locations outside the city itself. Batman still appears shadowed and vampyric. He’s still frightening and brooding. It’s there still, I just happen to prefer Burtons setting more so. It directly inspired Batman the Animated Series too, arguably the most well-respected American cartoon ever produced and nearly unanimously praised higher then even the highest of live-action Bat-outings.

Plus I’m humored by your condescending “intelligence gap” comment when you’ve successfully misspelled “threatening” and “architecture” every single go-around. Oh the irony! Need I mention you’ve used it seven times in two paragraphs? Can’t think of another adjective? I have trouble believing you were alive before 1989. I’d like to think adults have better grammar and spelling skills and common sense enough to not make any intelligence insults whilst riddling their posts (again and again) with childish errors. It’s no wonder you can’t put up an argument. It’s no wonder you can’t admit when you’ve been defeated. No amount of factual evidence will have you concede. You’re utterly clueless.

Quote:
Originally Posted by the GRIN reaper View Post
Gotham is supposed to be a real breathing city, massive with depth. Who says Gotham translates to Gothic?
Denis O’Neil, Neil Adams, Grant Morison, Paul Dini, Bruce Timm, Tim Sale, Jeff Loeb, Bill Finger, Jim Lee, Frank Miller, and many other contributors I‘m forgetting. They’ve all been involved in projects that portrayed a gothic Batman and/or Gotham, not all of which can be placed after Tim Burtons original film. Even Christopher Nolan retained elements. Even the very name (Gotham) argues with you. So excuse me…but Gotham has been gothic. Repeatedly proclaiming it’s never been means one thing - You’re ignorant of the facts. I’m far from the only one in this thread who’s called you out on it.

But here’s the kicker. I’ll love to see how you squirm out of this one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IG9Mp-dnKJs

“I envisioned Gotham the way I see it now at Pinewood. They’ve got every brick and every building and cornerstone here. It’s just marvelous!” - Bob Kane

Quote:
Originally Posted by the GRIN reaper View Post
Gotham is supposed to be a real breathing city, massive with depth. Who says Gotham translates to Gothic? I've heard no one downplay how threatning Gotham feels in Nolan's movie universe for Batman. In fact, they gush how it is a very scary place, the scariest seen on screen for Batman.

They're supposed to be normal buildings. Look at Batman: Year One ... city feels real and is still threatning without going overboard with a circle jerk of Gothic fantasy. And the look of Nolan's Gotham is on point with Batman: Year One.
My god! More Batman: Year One? Can you site anything else? More misspelled descriptions? More lies? You’ve heard me downplay how threatening Gotham feels in Nolan’s universe. This Gotham in-and-of itself doesn’t scare me whatsoever. It’s the people that reside there that are the threat. That’s what frightens me and brings this city to life. I agree it’s frightening, but only in the context of the characters and story. To paraphrase, “It’s nothing without the people that made it.” We’re discussing the actual visual city itself. Burtons had character without the colorful citizens. I mostly see no architectural style from Nolan. Only the exceptions of Arkham and the Narrows stand out in his Gotham. You do realize that Gothic architecture is real architecture…

Quote:
Originally Posted by the GRIN reaper View Post
Tell that to the critics who have said from BEGINS to TDK, Gotham and the world created by Nolan has gave way to the MOST FRIGHTENING comic book world seen on screen. Why? People lose themselves in the film because the movie world Nolan creates bleeds into what we know and feel living in our own everyday world.

Burton had Gothic fantasia? Wow, threatning. Oh I forgot, Penguins with rockets, Clowns shaking their ass to Prince and defacing art in museums ... FRIGHTENING!!!
This is about the critics? They have no bearing on my opinion. They shouldn’t have any influence over anyone’s opinion. That’s pathetic and juvenile to go with essentially a popular vote for the sake of popularity. Think for yourself! I wouldn’t care if this film was critically bashed or praised…I’m going to decide for myself.

I’m not going to defend Batman Returns. Even I feel that Burton ran too far with that film, but summing Jack Nicholson’s Joker with Prince music and dancing is an unfair assessment. The film has a huge body count and the Joker is merely acting like the clownish killer of that era. A humorous (albiet darkly) but homicidal psychopath…what a novel idea. Read the comics! Wow…ACCURACY!

Quote:
Originally Posted by the GRIN reaper View Post
Countless stories prior to the 80's has Batman set in a city that wasn't a Gothic toilet. Never was the city ever made up of that much Gothic architexture in the source material ... NEVER. It was always to whatever extent they took it visually, a recognizable city.

A bandwagon Dark Knight follower? LOL ... uhh, ok. I can live with that, whatever it means. I was around as a Batman fan before B89 ... don't be salty Nolan has put out the 2 BEST Bat-films of all-time. Without a single piece of overly fashioned Gothic set piece.
That’s very true. You can chalk that mostly up to the Comics Code censoring out any adult, psychological, and violent themes first seen in the original Bob Kane stories. But countless stories have Batman set in a city that was gothic too. Batman is a very old character with a humongous and evolving past. So there you go again, making inaccurate proclamations that only make you look like an ignorant poser. For Example; Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on Serious Earth definitely was as gothic and stylized as Burtons films. View this fan trailer and prepare to be enlightened:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-7W3be8XtQ

Scene for scene Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on Serious Earth. Literally the page lifted to screen. This is inarguably more gothic and stylized then Burtons original film. Whilst that was released during the height of Bat-hysteria in ‘89, your obnoxious claims of never are debunked by just a single book. I’ll be happy to site more examples if you decide to continue this dance.

So the point is this; No one cares if you dislike Burtons original film. You’re more then entitled to. But if you’re going to troll-bash it by using inaccurate arguments and misinformed insults…Batman fans will call you out on it. I’m sure I’ve not been the first, I’m far from the only one, and I doubt I’ll be the last. Your claims of Gotham never being gothic are incorrect. Your claims of Joker never acting like Nicholson’s version are incorrect. Your knocks on Burtons Batmobile are unfair considering the vehicles comic history. These have all been proven (comic panels and covers) by numerous people in this very thread, no matter how much you still deny it. You can’t argue with everyones photos. Stop trying. Burton (Batman ‘89) was mostly accurate to the source material, only having a few alterations. Begins and Dark Knight include just as many alterations. If you want to get technical, Batman: Mask of the Phantasm and the Animated Series are the most accurate translation of the character and Batman mythos. They’ve topped any live-action versions tenfold. Now give me your address, I’ll be happy to send you some Batman comics (outside of Year One) for the mere purpose of educating you. Otherwise stop speaking on subjects you obviously know little about. You’ll look less ignorant.

So don’t be salty because you personally don’t like or prefer Burtons comic accurate version. Don’t make up lies about that version. It has existed, whether you like it or not is irrelevant. It's all Batman and '89's version is far from being despised. Maybe Dark Knight does have the majority currently, but things change. Jack's Joker got praise originally like Heath's Joker is getting today. I wouldn't be surprised if tomorrows Joker has poser kids come in and bash Heaths Joker. Life has a way of repeating itself. That also doesn’t mean that said majority looks down upon the original Burton film because of Dark Knight. Plenty of people still prefer it, I even know some that prefer it. Don't act bitter...live with it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DACMAN View Post
Would you stop that? Seriously. "Bat-wings on something that belongs to Batman? Pshaw!" Also, there are actually bat-wings on the Tumbler. Look closer.
I know! Le Gasp! A batmobile that resembles a comic book batmobile! What was Burton thinking?

__________________
Batman (1989) - 4/5 / Batman Returns - 2/5 / Batman: MotP - 4/5 - Batman Forever - 1/5 / Batman and Robin - Doesn't Exist / Batman Begins - 4/5 / Dark Knight - 4/5

Last edited by MysterioMenace; 07-16-2008 at 09:12 PM.
MysterioMenace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2008, 10:35 PM   #353
theMan-Bat
Nocturnal
 
theMan-Bat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Gotham
Posts: 3,308
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Originally Posted by co2 View Post
Is this topic of discussion actually serious?
Sure.

__________________
Half-man, half-bat.

THE DEATH OF "SUPERMAN LIVES": WHAT HAPPENED?
Releasing on August 1st on DVD and Blu-ray combo package.


FRANK MILLER'S SIN CITY A DAME TO KILL FOR
In theaters August 22nd.
theMan-Bat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2008, 11:10 PM   #354
co2
Side-Kick
 
co2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,694
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DACrowe View Post
Some people need to realize Burton wasn't trying to make a straight forward narrative that was grounded in reality but a fantasy where hte images told the story and developed the character more than the screenplay.
I agree with that. And it brings me to a point. There were complaints that Burton's films feel constrained as they are all done on a set. That may be true, but it did work for the movie in that in Burton's films Gotham is almost a character itself and it needed to have that claustrophobic, "closing in on you" feeling. And that's exactly what you get when you watch them. It takes you more into the fantasy realm which is what Burton was trying to achieve. Burton understood that Gotham is a fake city, and the tweaked reality of that plays a role.
Very different from what Nolan is trying to do. Nolan is doing lots of location shooting to lend a greater feeling of open realism. It's a different approach but each has their merit and drawbacks.
I remember hearing an interview with Frank Miller where he claimed that there has been an effort to bring realism so superheroes that he thinks is rather stupid. Now, I agree to a certain point because I do see what he is talking about. I also get what Nolan is doing. Comic books are fantasy, and if you park it too close to reality, it can look really silly. And maybe Batman, because of the nature of his character and over the top villains, has potential to look sillier than most others. Nolan is trying to give it as much real world credibility to counterbalance that fact. It's a fine balancing act.
I do think every version of Batman we have seen, accurately reflects the Batman of the comics at the time. I'd go so far as to say that even the TV show was an accurate portrayal of Batman at the time and Ceasar Romero embodied the Joker perfectly. You don't believe it, you should read some Batman comics from the early 60's.
Before you go putting down this or that translations..everyone should bear in mind exactly what it was translating from at the time.

co2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 05:51 AM   #355
returntovoid
Side-Kick
 
returntovoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,855
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

edit


Last edited by returntovoid; 08-17-2010 at 09:08 AM.
returntovoid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 05:53 AM   #356
returntovoid
Side-Kick
 
returntovoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,855
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
No they're not. They may coincidentally share certain details at times but that's inevitable when they ape the same source material. But they each have completely different themes and purposes. Just off basic theme alone they're all different

BATMAN - Story of a man going from urban legend to vigilante hero of the day.

Batman Returns - Story of that man's demons finally consuming him and breaking him down.

Batman Forever - That man finally confronting his demons head on and taking control of his life.

Batman & Robin - An exploration of that man's new life as a father figure and his relationship with his surrogate family.

Batman Begins - New retelling of the legend exploring the hero as far back as his time before becoming the symbol we know him as.

The Dark Knight - The exploration of the escalation caused by the effect the symbol has had on his surroundings.



Perhaps that was harsh but I wasn't trying to be a jerk just being honest. I hold no ill will towards any fellow Bat fan though this is just a board where we talk Batman it's not like we all know each other personally. But to be more frank it's the same reason I don't compare Grant's Batman to Miller's Batman or how I wouldn't compare Finger's Batman to Englehart's Batman. Yet I love them all and they all adhere to the core of the Batman mythos. I just take things for what they are again whether I enjoy them or not is a different story.



I suppose what you mean by "same category" is genre, not sure if that's so but it if is, well Driving Miss Daisy and Ghostbusters both comedies. Now one features dramatic elements as well so it's a dramadey and one is more exploitational with comedy but both are still at the core examples of comedy. So not even film's in the same category if you mean genre. I can't compare Galaxy Quest to Happy Gilmore but they both made me laugh. I can't compare The Matrix to Commando but both featured fun action sequences.
I agree with that.

returntovoid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 06:11 AM   #357
TruerToTheCore
Banned User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Earth-1
Posts: 2,936
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
BATMAN - Story of a man going from urban legend to vigilante hero of the day.

Batman Returns - Story of that man's demons finally consuming him and breaking him down.

Batman Forever - That man finally confronting his demons head on and taking control of his life.

Batman & Robin - An exploration of that man's new life as a father figure and his relationship with his surrogate family.
To see it that way makes the Burton/Shoemaker series kinda cool. Too bad it's horribly executed in some ways.

TruerToTheCore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 08:46 AM   #358
DACMAN
The Spidey Fan
 
DACMAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 11,358
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MysterioMenace View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by DACMAN
Would you stop that? Seriously. "Bat-wings on something that belongs to Batman? Pshaw!" Also, there are actually bat-wings on the Tumbler. Look closer.

I know! Le Gasp! A batmobile that resembles a comic book batmobile! What was Burton thinking?
I didn't say that.

He did...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhobo View Post

Would you stop that? Seriously. "Bat-wings on something that belongs to Batman? Pshaw!" Also, there are actually bat-wings on the Tumbler. Look closer.
It's really not hard to use these online tools.

__________________

SPIDEY QUIPS SONY! JUST ASK BENDIS AND WATCH!

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:
DACMAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 08:59 AM   #359
DaRkVeNgeanCe
Mr. Vigilante-10 Years
 
DaRkVeNgeanCe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY
Posts: 12,693
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Holy crap you cats aare going nuts up in here.

__________________
GODZILLA
T H E A M A Z I N G S P I D E R - M A N 2 - M A Y 2
1939-2014: 75 YEARS OF THE BATMAN
- BEN AFFLECK IS BATMAN-#TrustBatfleck -
SUMMER MOVIES - Captain America TWS 8/10
DaRkVeNgeanCe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 12:19 PM   #360
batzilla
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 51
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Guard View Post
I think those of you who insist on calling everything that Nolan didn't create a joke are just...children. Ridiculously immature, and such massive sheep.

I agree that Gotham did not look all THAT gothic. It just looked really dark.

I've never understood why people have an issue with Burton's giant naked statues. It's like people have never seen a statue before.

Christian Bale really physically doesn't look much more like the comic book Bruce Wayne than Keaton did. Bale just happens to be taller.

Calling the sets on BATMAN and BATMAN RETURNS tiny is just absurd. The sets were MASSIVE. It's just denial to say otherwise. What they "looked" like to you "they look like sets!" people is irrelevant. They don't look any smaller or more cramped than almost any other film, and they were HUGE sets.

I hate mindless absolutists. Not always, mind you. Just most of the time.

Sure, i'll agree the "SETS" were "HUGE" but...they were still "SETS"! BB and TDK were shot in a REAL HUGE CITY! This makes a TREMENDOUS difference!

Surely you would agree?!

A set is a set is a set. And even though Returns may have had large sets, to me they came across as VERY small. So, big deal if they were big. It just did not work. When Batman first pulls onto the set in the Batmobile it was laughable! I mean, you could just see plain as day that the area where all of the "goons" were flying around, landing in Christmas trees (GOD that was stupid) that the Batmobile was at STAGE right and then pulls onto the set LOL!

The "city" where all the (goofy) action was taking place was only about 5 times the are that the Batmobile itself was taking up LOL!

AWFUL movie.

And besides, there are a TON of folks that agree with me on Returns on BOTH fronts. A lot of people felt the movie felt tiny and that the story was weak.

In BB and in TDK you KNOW Batman is in a GIGANTIC city! This gives Gotham the scope it NEEDS to succeed in making you believe Batman actually is defending a city and not a small sound stage

batzilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 12:25 PM   #361
batzilla
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 51
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaRkVeNgeanCe View Post
batzilla is there anyone on here that your talking to? Cause I dont see anyone
Well, you are.

Also, I apologize for being a jackass. I just am one ya know so sometimes it hard to hold it in.

If you dig B89 and Returns that cool. I like B89 for what it is to me now, a great memory of that time/era. But I just cannot like Returns in any way. The Batsuit in Returns was better than B89. I thought it was great. I did like the art direction. Just wish it was on a MUCH grander scale. If they had used CGI to make Gotham LOOK bigger ( a LOT bigger!) then it would have made a big difference.

Hell, even my wife made a comment about how "small" the city seemed. She rarely notices stuff like this.

11 hours and 35 minutes until THE BEST BATMAN MOVIE EVER MADE!

RIP Jack Nicholson's Joker.

batzilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 12:32 PM   #362
The Guard
Side-Kick
 
The Guard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 25,310
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Sure, i'll agree the "SETS" were "HUGE" but...they were still "SETS"! BB and TDK were shot in a REAL HUGE CITY! This makes a TREMENDOUS difference!

Surely you would agree?!
What the hell does the different approach taken by BATMAN BEGINS in filming a locale 20 years later have to do with ANYTHING in regard to the original production of BATMAN? The streets in BATMAN looked like streets. The big open areas looked like big open areas. Gotham looked like Gotham. When The Batmobile tears through it, it looks like it's driving through the streets of Gotham. I don't know what you want beyond that. Apparently you wanted to see "THE BIGGEST, MOST MASSIVE, SPRAWLING AREA EVER SEEN BY MAN"! Which is just stupid.

Quote:
A set is a set is a set. And even though Returns may have had large sets, to me they came across as VERY small.
And some people have the imagination to see sets and see setTINGS. Yours strikes me as a personal problem. Perhaps you haven't seen the movie in years and years. Go watch it again.

Quote:
The "city" where all the (goofy) action was taking place was only about 5 times the are that the Batmobile itself was taking up LOL!
What absurd, absurd logic.

Quote:
And besides, there are a TON of folks that agree with me on Returns on BOTH fronts. A lot of people felt the movie felt tiny and that the story was weak.
That's because frankly, a lot of people are just biased morons when it comes to any Burton project. A street is a street, be it in Chicago or on a massive backlot set.

Quote:
In BB and in TDK you KNOW Batman is in a GIGANTIC city! This gives Gotham the scope it NEEDS to succeed in making you believe Batman actually is defending a city and not a small sound stage.
Gotham looked pretty sizeable in BATMAN and BATMAN RETURNS. I guess there weren't enough aerial shots for you or not enough CGI-enhanced aerial shots or something. Grow an imagination.

I'm fine with people saying "Gotham looks bigger in the new movies than it did in the older ones". But this "It just flat out looks fake and setlike" stuff is absurd.

__________________
Writer and Lyricist of GOTHAM'S KNIGHT: THE BATMAN MUSICAL

And if I'm right
The future's looking bright
A symbol in the skies at night

Last edited by The Guard; 07-17-2008 at 12:37 PM.
The Guard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 12:34 PM   #363
batzilla
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 51
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mandalore464 View Post
To this day (Haven't seen TDK yet), Batman Returns is still my second favourite Batmovie. I must say I'm surprised that so much people here think it was bad, although I understand the issues you bring up against it.

I don't know. Ever since 92, I've thought Returns was so much better than the first Burton. More baddies, cleverer plot (not just Batman out for revenge and the Joker destroying stuff), a bit darker, and a more "tale" feel to it that made the whole film eerie and kind of... dream-like I must say. I just loved that movie.

Even though now I'm sure BR is gonna move to the third spot in my Top, as Begins will move to the second one to let TDK take its place, and although I myself think the Nolan's films are superior adaptations of the Batman mythos than Burton's were, I must say I find most of the arguments ("B89 sucks", "B89 had tiny sets", "Jack Nicholson wasn't good") kind of ridiculous.

Of course you are entitled to your opinions, but the way you put those arguments into words make it sound like you're just mindlessly bashing the old stuff in favor of the new stuff, and I can definitely understand the frustration of the B89 fans who reply to you...

Seriously, stating your opinion on a message board does not mean you have to do it with the only intention of hurting the feelings of people who still love Burton's movies better. Seriously, have a little respect, dudes... And an open mind as well. Those movies are almost 20 years old. And even though I think they are too "Burtonized" to be considered faithful adaptations of the Batman character, they both still look awesome.
Well said Mandalore464. I apologize for going off on whats his name and you're right, I should show a little more respect and not get so personal BUT HE STARTED IT!! LOL!

Seriously, after calming down and thinking more about it, I think B89 is a fine film and has its place in my Batman heart for what it brought to the world of Batman. Returns is just too bad of a movie for me to accept though. But, having said that, I understand others feeling different about it.

But you have to admit that when the Penguin was sitting on that Batmobile "ride" and controlling the real Batmobile that this was VERY close to juming the shark. I had a very hard time with that lol!

Anyways, i'm leaving the office now and going home to watch Batman Begins (on BluRay on my 47" 1080p!!) along with the prologue to The Dark Knight to get myself ready for tonight entertainment! FINALLY ALMOST HERE!!

I may even pop in Batman 89. After all, I was just as fired up for that movie as I am TDK.

Peace!

batzilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 12:50 PM   #364
MysterioMenace
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 270
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Originally Posted by batzilla View Post
RIP Jack Nicholson's Joker.
He's far from dead and his massive amount of fans know it. The day people stop watching Batman '89 will be the day he dies. That day will never come. Besides...Heath's the one that died. Literally.

__________________
Batman (1989) - 4/5 / Batman Returns - 2/5 / Batman: MotP - 4/5 - Batman Forever - 1/5 / Batman and Robin - Doesn't Exist / Batman Begins - 4/5 / Dark Knight - 4/5
MysterioMenace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 12:58 PM   #366
batzilla
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 51
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Guard View Post
What the hell does the different approach taken by BATMAN BEGINS in filming a locale 20 years later have to do with ANYTHING in regard to the original production of BATMAN? The streets in BATMAN looked like streets. The big open areas looked like big open areas. Gotham looked like Gotham. When The Batmobile tears through it, it looks like it's driving through the streets of Gotham. I don't know what you want beyond that. Apparently you wanted to see "THE BIGGEST, MOST MASSIVE, SPRAWLING AREA EVER SEEN BY MAN"! Which is just stupid.



And some people have the imagination to see sets and see setTINGS. Yours strikes me as a personal problem. Perhaps you haven't seen the movie in years and years. Go watch it again.



What absurd, absurd logic.



That's because frankly, a lot of people are just biased morons when it comes to any Burton project. A street is a street, be it in Chicago or on a massive backlot set.



Gotham looked pretty sizeable in BATMAN and BATMAN RETURNS. I guess there weren't enough aerial shots for you or not enough CGI-enhanced aerial shots or something. Grow an imagination.
Well, I really didnt feel that Batman 89 was small. Just Returns. B89 actually, to me, felt a LOT bigger and I was fine with it. And, I really loved the art direction of Gotham in B89. Returns also looked cool just that it was just so tiny to me.

Kind of like the Wizard of Oz. You could so easily tell that it was shot on a sound stage as opposed to being shot outside. Both B89 and Returns felt that way as well except that B89 was handled better (IMO) than Returns.

I actually did some backgrounds for Jimmy Neutron (DNA) as freelance back in '99 and we talked a great deal about the "illusion" of making "sets" (albeit a lot different in a 3D cartoon as opposed to real life photography) with convincing depth to them and to me, Returns lacked that depth big time. You never really even got to look over the tops of buildings. Most of the shots were pointed down and even the ones that were shot perpendicular to the streets had zero depth to them. Like when Batman and Catwoman were fighting on the roof tops.VERY claustrophobic feel to the film.

And I disagree. A REAL street (in a real city) is NOT the same as a street on a sound stage. How could you think this? Two different things. If you shoot on a street on a stage it LOOKS like a street on a stage (unless you have good CGI to fill it out) but when you shoot a street, say in Chicago, then theres no NEED for any CGI. You get the idea.

I understand a back lot is better than a sound stage but still, if you were shooting a movie and it called for a street scene in a large city, which would you prefer to shoot? Sound stage street/back lot street? Or a REAL street in a REAL large city (if money were no object)??

This is why BB and TDK have scope while Returns lacks that scope. TREMENDOUSLY! And screw imagination! I use that for my next door neighbors wife or while reading a book.

But, again, I can understand someone being able to over look this and enjoy the movies anyways. I would have if the characters/dialog were good. The whole argument over this scope thing really takes a back seat to my opinions on the stories and characters. The Joker was not good. The Penguin was just annoying and Catwoman was silly. Too many "funny" lines like Arnold's Mr Freeze.

Thank GOD for Nolan & Co.



Just my worthless 2˘

batzilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 12:59 PM   #367
MysterioMenace
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 270
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Batman is cemented in Gotham City. Batman Begins involved world travel. That’s probably the only reason as to why the scope feels larger in Begins. It’s a subliminal thing. The two Gothams themselves look no bigger to me.

__________________
Batman (1989) - 4/5 / Batman Returns - 2/5 / Batman: MotP - 4/5 - Batman Forever - 1/5 / Batman and Robin - Doesn't Exist / Batman Begins - 4/5 / Dark Knight - 4/5
MysterioMenace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 01:01 PM   #368
The Guard
Side-Kick
 
The Guard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 25,310
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

And here's BATMAN RETURNS

I haven't seen too many mall plazas this large
http://www.batmanunmasked.com/displa...album=37&pos=9

http://www.batmanunmasked.com/displa...lbum=37&pos=88

http://www.batmanunmasked.com/displa...bum=37&pos=111

Complaints about this kind of set seem odd...it's a street, it looks like one
http://www.batmanunmasked.com/displa...bum=37&pos=112

http://www.batmanunmasked.com/displa...bum=37&pos=117

http://www.batmanunmasked.com/displa...bum=37&pos=131

http://www.batmanunmasked.com/displa...bum=37&pos=150

http://www.batmanunmasked.com/displa...bum=37&pos=154

Do Nolan's movies feel a bit more real world? Sure, but they feel more real to begin with.

http://www.batmanunmasked.com/displa...bum=37&pos=267

http://www.batmanunmasked.com/displa...bum=37&pos=281

http://www.batmanunmasked.com/displa...bum=37&pos=296

http://www.batmanunmasked.com/displa...bum=37&pos=273

http://www.batmanunmasked.com/displa...bum=37&pos=321

http://www.batmanunmasked.com/displa...bum=37&pos=343

I don't see anywhere that a plaza doesn't look like a plaza, that a city doesn't look like a city, that a street doesn't look like a street, etc.

__________________
Writer and Lyricist of GOTHAM'S KNIGHT: THE BATMAN MUSICAL

And if I'm right
The future's looking bright
A symbol in the skies at night
The Guard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 01:01 PM   #369
MysterioMenace
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 270
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

I’m still failing to grasp why these two films have to compete. They’re both amazing. Mostly young people today just look for flaws in Burtons just to heighten Nolans to a so-called superior level. They’re really no more accurate to the Batman vision. They’re just different takes. Too many people are Burton and/or Nolan fans. Not enough act like Batman fans.

__________________
Batman (1989) - 4/5 / Batman Returns - 2/5 / Batman: MotP - 4/5 - Batman Forever - 1/5 / Batman and Robin - Doesn't Exist / Batman Begins - 4/5 / Dark Knight - 4/5

Last edited by MysterioMenace; 07-17-2008 at 01:05 PM.
MysterioMenace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 01:27 PM   #370
El Payaso
Banned User
 
El Payaso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Rubbing your rhubarb.
Posts: 15,263
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MysterioMenace View Post
I’m still failing to grasp why these two films have to compete.
Fanboy-ish vibrating insecurity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MysterioMenace View Post
They’re both amazing. Mostly young people today just look for flaws in Burtons just to heighten Nolans to a so-called superior level. They’re really no more accurate to the Batman vision. They’re just different takes. Too many people are Burton and/or Nolan fans. Not enough act like Batman fans.
Haven't seen TDK yet but from what I've heard this is going to be finally another bat-masterpiece.


Last edited by El Payaso; 07-17-2008 at 01:31 PM.
El Payaso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 01:46 PM   #371
Mandalore464
New User
 
Mandalore464's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 990
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MysterioMenace
He's far from dead and his massive amount of fans know it. The day people stop watching Batman '89 will be the day he dies. That day will never come. Besides...Heath's the one that died. Literally.
Well, that was uncalled for.

This argument about sets is ridiculous. I was watching Batman Returns no later than last night, and it never occured to me that it looked "small".

Anoher thing, saying a film's better than another because it was shot on location as opposed to an artificial set is pure BS. I can give you a list of films shot on location which are crap. And a list of films shot on sets which are brilliant.

It all comes down to the director's vision. If he's Burton, he's gonna look for a Burton world. That's a place he's not gonna find in New-York or Chicago or wherever. he has to make it up, because he wants to give his movie this particular feel to it that's also his trademark. Very gothic architecture, very dark buildings and alleys.

Nolan is permanently on his quest to bring us a realistic-looking universe. That's why he went for shooting on location in Chicago.

All in all, I'd say I like shooting on set better, because you can really shape up whatever set you envisioned, while shooting on location, although it saves you the trouble of making it up, brings its own deal of problems (particularly logistics problems) and forces you to make concessions with the vision you may have had while reading the script (ex. "I imagined this building would have a large spike on its roof, but this will have to do").

Bringing up the CGI argument really annoys me. First of all, CGI in 92 was crap. The movie that revolutionalized CGI was jurassic Park, which came out the year after. Batman Returns wouldn't have looked better with CGI. Second, CGI is fake, and costs money. Some directors (like Nolan by the way) like to use CGI as little as possible, and I can't blame them.

CGI is easy, CGI is cheap, CGI can ruin a movie very easily. Don't misunderstand me, I love Star Wars. CGI fits the universe of the prequels. But when you're a director, being able to actually SEE your sets come to life, being able to touch them, feel them, incorporate them into the action instead of waiting for some technician to add them to the print later on, is something truly exceptional. And I'm not even talking about the advantages for actors.

Take Danny de Vito to his Penguin's lair on BR's set, he'll get into character at once. No need for concentration, rehearsal, whatever. Take him to a green room and explain to him that there's gonna be a lake here, a penguin there, and a cage there, and he'll have to fake it. It's harder.

To conclude, really, the argument about sets is ridiculous. Burton and Nolan did not envision the same Gotham, and they both went for what would suit their needs best. Oh and by the way, the Narrows in Batman Begins were a set.

And Batman Returns is great fun!

Mandalore464 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 01:53 PM   #372
The Guard
Side-Kick
 
The Guard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 25,310
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
I’m still failing to grasp why these two films have to compete. They’re both amazing. Mostly young people today just look for flaws in Burtons just to heighten Nolans to a so-called superior level.
Now, I like Nolan's Gotham for the most part, but it's amusing, because what Nolan did was shoot a city as a backdrop. Which HUNDREDS of movies have done. Burton and Furst created one. I think each approach fit the film's respective tones.

__________________
Writer and Lyricist of GOTHAM'S KNIGHT: THE BATMAN MUSICAL

And if I'm right
The future's looking bright
A symbol in the skies at night
The Guard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 01:55 PM   #373
The Guard
Side-Kick
 
The Guard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 25,310
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Some directors (like Nolan by the way) like to use CGI as little as possible, and I can't blame them.
Nolan used quite a bit of CGI in BATMAN BEGINS, it just wasn't real obvious. Most of his "aerial" and "Gotham sprawling out" shots involved CGI in some capacity.

__________________
Writer and Lyricist of GOTHAM'S KNIGHT: THE BATMAN MUSICAL

And if I'm right
The future's looking bright
A symbol in the skies at night
The Guard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 01:59 PM   #374
Mandalore464
New User
 
Mandalore464's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 990
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Guard
Nolan used quite a bit of CGI in BATMAN BEGINS, it just wasn't real obvious. Most of his "aerial" and "Gotham sprawling out" shots involved CGI in some capacity.
That's what I was referring to by "as little as possible". I didn't mean to say that Batman Begins was CGI-free.

And to be fair, the shots you're referring to (you probably know it yourself, I'm making this comment for others) are actually composite shots, which means they're made up of real images that were actually shot and brought together via the use of computers. In the end, everything shown is real, it's just like a jigsaw really, made up of pieces of actual buildings. Nothing was computer generated for these shots.

Edit: I'm actually not sure if anything in Batman Begins was computer generated, meaning entirely created via the use of a computer. I don't remember any example of that from the extras, but I haven't watched them in a while. But I do know that Batman's jump at the start of trailer 2 for TDK was CGIed, because the city wouldn't allow him to shoot that for real. Nolan really is someone who likes to use computers as little as possible.


Last edited by Mandalore464; 07-17-2008 at 02:04 PM.
Mandalore464 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2008, 02:02 PM   #375
TruerToTheCore
Banned User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Earth-1
Posts: 2,936
Default Re: Am I the only one who feels like B'89 is vastly overrated?

Anton Furst's GOtham City was and is great.

Why they changed it and gave us "the city in a shopping mall" for Batman Returns is beyond me. Another sign that Batman Returns was born to suck.


Last edited by TruerToTheCore; 07-17-2008 at 02:12 PM.
TruerToTheCore is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:17 AM.

monitoring_string = "dee460792f24517621e3ca080805de7e"
Contact Us - Mobile - SuperHeroHype - ComingSoon.net - Shock Till You Drop - Lost Password - Clear Cookies - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Top - AdChoices


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SuperHeroHype.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.