The SuperHeroHype Forums  

Go Back   The SuperHeroHype Forums > Batman > Batman World

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-12-2011, 11:52 AM   #526
El Payaso
Banned User
 
El Payaso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Rubbing your rhubarb.
Posts: 15,263
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

Never thought any villiain in the same movie where the Joker's in could surpass my interest. Eckhardt's Dent/Two Face did.

El Payaso is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 11:56 AM   #527
GothamAlleys
Side-Kick
 
GothamAlleys's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,631
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

Same. His story was really well done. The moment when he finds the coin in the hospital and remembers tossing it to Rachel was great

__________________
GothamAlleys is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 12:12 PM   #528
The Morningstar
Banned User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The place in between...
Posts: 10,151
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GothamAlleys View Post
Hmm, but in TDK he actually doesnt. It doesnt bother me at all since I loved this portrayal of two Face, but there was no evidence of double/split personality
That's my point. He doesn't develop a split personality. He doesn't go schizo.

I do like the portrayal in TDK. But my favourite is still TAS. I liked the whole "Big Bad Harv" thing it had going.

The Morningstar is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 01:42 PM   #529
Godzilla2014
Deadpan Snarker
 
Godzilla2014's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,844
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

I have to say that one of the things that pisses me off about the Schumacher films is that they took great characterizations from Batman: The Animated Series, and pissed on them and ruined them by camping them up. Want a split-personality Two-Face? You got it, with hyperactivity added! Want the cold, emotionless Mr. Freeze who wants to cure his ailing wife? You got it, but he'll make an assload of awful puns.

__________________
Fan of Christopher Nolan's Batman!
Quote:
Originally Posted by KRIM View Post
This post was brought to you by Godzilla.

http://i.imgur.com/6FNiJ.jpg

The more you know.
Godzilla2014 is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 05:30 PM   #530
circa81
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 139
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

I enjoy Forever as much as Returns, for different reasons, ofcourse. Batman 89 rules all, to me. A few observations about forever to explain why I like it better then Nolan's.

First, like Burton, Schumacher doesn't take the whole idea so damn seriously. Nolan's version really went out of the way the come up with a logical explanation for everything, for a premise that isn't logical to begin with. When Nolan tries to explain these extraordinary aspects of the mythology in such a realistic and serous fashion, they seam weak and UNrealistic.

Second; Kilmer's Batman may not be as nuts as Keaton, but it's still played out that he's not exactly sane as well. Also, while not threatening like Keaton, he's a better Wayne and Batman to me. He just seams more...in control and comfortable in the role of Batman, whereas Bale always seamed like he was putting on an act as Batman, it felt unnatural to me.

3rd, Gotham actually looks a city that you can't confuse with another city. About the neon and brightness; In forever, it felt like the gaudiness of Vegas on steroids, Sin city to the max.


4th, Kidman's character was a much better fit to the story, whereas Rachel seamed to exist just to have a main female in the cast, kinda like Vale in Batman.

5th, I like Carry's take on the Riddler. Sure, he was playing himself often, but the character's obsession with Wayne and of becoming the smartest person ever, I liked that real narcissistic aspect, which is pretty much the defining personal characteristic of the character. As for Jone's Two face, well, it's about as close to the source material as it is in TDK. At least in Forever he actually was a multiple, not just angry like in TDK.

Just a brief overview of why I like Forever.

circa81 is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 05:59 PM   #531
Godzilla2014
Deadpan Snarker
 
Godzilla2014's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,844
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by circa81 View Post
I enjoy Forever as much as Returns, for different reasons, ofcourse. Batman 89 rules all, to me. A few observations about forever to explain why I like it better then Nolan's.
So you prefer Batman Forever to The Dark Knight?

Quote:
Originally Posted by circa81 View Post
First, like Burton, Schumacher doesn't take the whole idea so damn seriously. Nolan's version really went out of the way the come up with a logical explanation for everything, for a premise that isn't logical to begin with. When Nolan tries to explain these extraordinary aspects of the mythology in such a realistic and serous fashion, they seam weak and UNrealistic.
Personally, the Schumacher films (and maybe even the Burton films) simply cannot beat the Nolan films' depth. In my opinion, you can talk about Forever feeling more like a comic book style than The Dark Knight all you want, but a Batman film with substance will always come out on top.

Quote:
Originally Posted by circa81 View Post
Second; Kilmer's Batman may not be as nuts as Keaton, but it's still played out that he's not exactly sane as well. Also, while not threatening like Keaton, he's a better Wayne and Batman to me. He just seams more...in control and comfortable in the role of Batman, whereas Bale always seamed like he was putting on an act as Batman, it felt unnatural to me.
Val Kilmer's Bruce Wayne never evoked much of a passion for what he does, and nor does his Batman. I could buy Michael Keaton's Batman and Christian Bale's Batman scaring criminals because they made an effort to be scary. I never bought Val Kilmer's Batman scaring criminals because he never seemed to make that effort.

Quote:
Originally Posted by circa81 View Post
3rd, Gotham actually looks a city that you can't confuse with another city. About the neon and brightness; In forever, it felt like the gaudiness of Vegas on steroids, Sin city to the max.
My problem with the Schumacher films' Gotham is less the neon, but things like the blacklit alleyways, the giant naked man statues all over the place, et cetera.

Quote:
Originally Posted by circa81 View Post
4th, Kidman's character was a much better fit to the story, whereas Rachel seamed to exist just to have a main female in the cast, kinda like Vale in Batman.
I kind of agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by circa81 View Post
5th, I like Carry's take on the Riddler. Sure, he was playing himself often, but the character's obsession with Wayne and of becoming the smartest person ever, I liked that real narcissistic aspect, which is pretty much the defining personal characteristic of the character. As for Jone's Two face, well, it's about as close to the source material as it is in TDK. At least in Forever he actually was a multiple, not just angry like in TDK.
I think Carrey's Riddler has a lot of potential, but Carrey plays the role far too hyperactively to really capitalize on it, in my opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by circa81 View Post
Just a brief overview of why I like Forever.
I respect your opinion, though I disagree with it.

__________________
Fan of Christopher Nolan's Batman!
Quote:
Originally Posted by KRIM View Post
This post was brought to you by Godzilla.

http://i.imgur.com/6FNiJ.jpg

The more you know.
Godzilla2014 is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 06:19 PM   #532
circa81
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 139
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

So you prefer Batman Forever to The Dark Knight?

Despite so wanting to, I hate Nolan's take , and I feel TDK is the most overrated move ever. It's not even watchable to me.


Val Kilmer's Bruce Wayne never evoked much of a passion for what he does, and nor does his Batman. I could buy Michael Keaton's Batman and Christian Bale's Batman scaring criminals because they made an effort to be scary. I never bought Val Kilmer's Batman scaring criminals because he never seemed to make that effort.
Personally, the Schumacher films (and maybe even the Burton films) simply cannot beat the Nolan films' depth. In my opinion, you can talk about Forever feeling more like a comic book style than The Dark Knight all you want, but a Batman film with substance will always come out on top.

I have to disagree here. I get more substance out of Burton's films and forever then Nolan's. See my post history to understand why. Kilmer's Batman/Wayne, while not scary, feels authentic to me, much more then Bale. It's funny, I thought for years That Bale could play the perfect Batman, and then he did, and it sucked to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by circa81
3rd, Gotham actually looks a city that you can't confuse with another city. About the neon and brightness; In forever, it felt like the gaudiness of Vegas on steroids, Sin city to the max.

My problem with the Schumacher films' Gotham is less the neon, but things like the blacklit alleyways, the giant naked man statues all over the place, et cetera.

Doesn't bother me, why does it bother you, if I may ask?

Quote:
Originally Posted by circa81
4th, Kidman's character was a much better fit to the story, whereas Rachel seamed to exist just to have a main female in the cast, kinda like Vale in Batman.

I kind of agree.

Cool.

Quote:
Originally Posted by circa81
5th, I like Carry's take on the Riddler. Sure, he was playing himself often, but the character's obsession with Wayne and of becoming the smartest person ever, I liked that real narcissistic aspect, which is pretty much the defining personal characteristic of the character. As for Jone's Two face, well, it's about as close to the source material as it is in TDK. At least in Forever he actually was a multiple, not just angry like in TDK.

I think Carrey's Riddler has a lot of potential, but Carrey plays the role far too hyperactively to really capitalize on it, in my opinion.

I mostly agree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by circa81
Just a brief overview of why I like Forever.

I respect your opinion, though I disagree with it.

Same here

circa81 is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 06:20 PM   #533
circa81
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 139
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

Sorry for the lousy formatting, it's my weakness.

circa81 is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 06:33 PM   #534
Godzilla2014
Deadpan Snarker
 
Godzilla2014's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,844
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by circa81 View Post
Despite so wanting to, I hate Nolan's take , and I feel TDK is the most overrated move ever. It's not even watchable to me.
Ok.

Quote:
Originally Posted by circa81 View Post
I have to disagree here. I get more substance out of Burton's films and forever then Nolan's. See my post history to understand why. Kilmer's Batman/Wayne, while not scary, feels authentic to me, much more then Bale. It's funny, I thought for years That Bale could play the perfect Batman, and then he did, and it sucked to me.
Nolan's Batman films is far more cerebral than either the Burton films or Batman Forever.
Bale's Batman is more authentic to me. I can't buy Kilmer's Batman having the drive to spend so much of his time, money, and energy that it takes to be Batman.
I can buy Bale's Batman or Keaton's Batman doing these things, because they come off as the kind of driven person that would actually do them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by circa81 View Post
Doesn't bother me, why does it bother you, if I may ask?
It bothers me because these things don't make sense, and they detract from the authenticity. What city has alleys that are lit like night clubs? Why are the huge statues all over the city?

__________________
Fan of Christopher Nolan's Batman!
Quote:
Originally Posted by KRIM View Post
This post was brought to you by Godzilla.

http://i.imgur.com/6FNiJ.jpg

The more you know.
Godzilla2014 is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 07:22 PM   #535
Fudgie
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,112
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GothamAlleys View Post
I prefer the BTAS and TDK Two Face over the comic book version
Same here.

Fudgie is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 07:25 PM   #536
Godzilla2014
Deadpan Snarker
 
Godzilla2014's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 6,844
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GothamAlleys View Post
I prefer the BTAS and TDK Two Face over the comic book version
How would characterize their differences?

__________________
Fan of Christopher Nolan's Batman!
Quote:
Originally Posted by KRIM View Post
This post was brought to you by Godzilla.

http://i.imgur.com/6FNiJ.jpg

The more you know.
Godzilla2014 is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 07:31 PM   #537
CConn
Fountainhead of culture.
 
CConn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Peter North's Southern Headquarters
Posts: 57,586
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

I didn't like that his face was white.

CConn is offline  
Old 12-12-2011, 08:27 PM   #538
GothamAlleys
Side-Kick
 
GothamAlleys's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,631
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzilla2014 View Post
How would characterize their differences?
Well, while Two face has a potential to be terrific villain because I really dig the whole idea of the character, I think the comics didnt reach that potential, only BTAS and TDK did. What I mean is even tho TF always looked cool to me I never thought of him as being a dangerous and scary villain. He was just this yelling and fist wagging villain. In BTAS he actually became intimidating and TDK has just great characterization with all the pathos of the character brought up front. I feel his anger when I watch the movie, and if a viewer does that than the movie succeeds in a very tough area

__________________
GothamAlleys is offline  
Old 12-13-2011, 10:32 AM   #539
OutRiddled
Banned User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 507
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GothamAlleys View Post
Well, while Two face has a potential to be terrific villain because I really dig the whole idea of the character, I think the comics didnt reach that potential, only BTAS and TDK did. What I mean is even tho TF always looked cool to me I never thought of him as being a dangerous and scary villain. He was just this yelling and fist wagging villain. In BTAS he actually became intimidating and TDK has just great characterization with all the pathos of the character brought up front. I feel his anger when I watch the movie, and if a viewer does that than the movie succeeds in a very tough area
Mainly because I hate the character of Rachel and I did not buy their relationship one bit. So he's anger as Two-Face just seemed a little 'off' to me.

OutRiddled is offline  
Old 12-13-2011, 10:56 AM   #540
babbage
Siiiiide-Kick?
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 223
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by circa81 View Post
I enjoy Forever as much as Returns, for different reasons, ofcourse. Batman 89 rules all, to me. A few observations about forever to explain why I like it better then Nolan's.

First, like Burton, Schumacher doesn't take the whole idea so damn seriously. Nolan's version really went out of the way the come up with a logical explanation for everything, for a premise that isn't logical to begin with. When Nolan tries to explain these extraordinary aspects of the mythology in such a realistic and serous fashion, they seam weak and UNrealistic.

Second; Kilmer's Batman may not be as nuts as Keaton, but it's still played out that he's not exactly sane as well. Also, while not threatening like Keaton, he's a better Wayne and Batman to me. He just seams more...in control and comfortable in the role of Batman, whereas Bale always seamed like he was putting on an act as Batman, it felt unnatural to me.

3rd, Gotham actually looks a city that you can't confuse with another city. About the neon and brightness; In forever, it felt like the gaudiness of Vegas on steroids, Sin city to the max.


4th, Kidman's character was a much better fit to the story, whereas Rachel seamed to exist just to have a main female in the cast, kinda like Vale in Batman.

5th, I like Carry's take on the Riddler. Sure, he was playing himself often, but the character's obsession with Wayne and of becoming the smartest person ever, I liked that real narcissistic aspect, which is pretty much the defining personal characteristic of the character. As for Jone's Two face, well, it's about as close to the source material as it is in TDK. At least in Forever he actually was a multiple, not just angry like in TDK.

Just a brief overview of why I like Forever.

Wow. Nothing personal, but I think I just met my complete opposite! Usually I can find SOMETHING I agree with -or even understand- in someone's analysis of something, but I can't find any here. I'm kind of blown away! Interesting to read, nonetheless.


Last edited by babbage; 12-13-2011 at 03:02 PM. Reason: speeling
babbage is offline  
Old 12-13-2011, 01:52 PM   #541
Spider-Aziz
Like a Charm
 
Spider-Aziz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 31,813
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

It has some bad effects, used that stupid golden age origin for Two-Face (why would someone carry a vile of acid and walk with it, nonetheless to a court room)
Robin was too old to be Bruce's ward, maybe if they said he was 16 years old -one big if- it would have been excusable
Elliot Rosenthal theme is 'meh'
Nippled suits
Riddler & Two-Face connection

Beyond those, it's a fun decent movie

__________________
State Your Opinion on a Marvel Character, Part 1
If something is not a choice, but I do it, doesn't this mean I chose to do it instead of choosing to ignore it or to find an alternative? Aren't they all choices by the end of the process?
We're abusing our acronym privileges... ~ Sawyer
Spider-Aziz is offline  
Old 12-13-2011, 03:10 PM   #542
The Morningstar
Banned User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The place in between...
Posts: 10,151
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

It annoys me when people say Batman 89 doesn't have any depth or themes. Of course it does. It's basically a satire of the 80s/90s culture. Joker and his plots specifically.

As Jack Napier he is this ultimate yuppie gangster. He's vain as hell, into contemporary art, is materialistic etc.

When he becomes Joker he becomes this kinda, twisted yuppie. You think his plots of poisoning make up and beauty products is a coincidence? Course not. He's using peoples vanity against them, in a fatal way. Same way he uses peoples greed and desperation against them at the parade where he's handing out millions of dollars to lure them all to their deaths.

Perfect satire of the 80s/90s.

And the best thing is? There is no subtle as a sledgehammer to the knee caps dialogue explaining all that. There is no monologues going on about how he's using peoples vanity/materialism/greed/desperation against them. It's left to us, the audience to figure it out.

Burton's films do have depth. Just as much as Nolan's. Difference is, Burton's films don't spoon feed the audience. They show, instead of telling. Which Nolan's films are so badly guilty of.

The Morningstar is offline  
Old 12-13-2011, 03:17 PM   #543
Fudgie
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,112
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

People probably say it has no depth because they don't see all of that when they watch it. I know I sure don't. Joker just wanted to relive them of their failed useless lives as he called it.

Fudgie is offline  
Old 12-13-2011, 03:21 PM   #544
babbage
Siiiiide-Kick?
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 223
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

I was a kid throughout the whole 80s and a teen in the 90s and I honestly have no idea how Joker satirizes 80s/90s pop culture or yuppies or anything like that. He had an avant garde shtick, combined with a psychopathic lust for violence (which I liked... "I am the world's first fully-functional homicidal artist." Great line), but I don't see the satire. Do you have any citations from Burton?

babbage is offline  
Old 12-13-2011, 03:27 PM   #545
The Morningstar
Banned User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The place in between...
Posts: 10,151
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

No but for me it's pretty obvious.

He puts poison in make up and beauty products. It then has a scene of the news reporters without make up all spotty and rough looking, whereas before they were all good looking with no imperfections etc. It's blatant satire/piss taking.

Then you have the parade where he is handing out millions of dollars to all the poverty stricken citizens of Gotham.

Yea he says he wants to "relieve them of their useless lives". I'm glad he just said that. If it was Nolan's film he would of gone on a long monologue about how he was using peoples desperation from being poverty stricken against them. lol.

It's called showing and not telling. It's definitely there. If you can't see it you need to watch it again. Or maybe you just need to be spoon fed these things

The Morningstar is offline  
Old 12-13-2011, 03:32 PM   #546
babbage
Siiiiide-Kick?
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 223
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

Yeah, whatever. Sorry I asked.

babbage is offline  
Old 12-13-2011, 03:34 PM   #547
Fudgie
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,112
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

Guess you're seeing something I don't. I saw a guy using cosmetic products which nearly everyone uses in some form to get people. Even baby powder was mentioned as one of the tainted products.

Giving away free money, especially 20 mil, is guaranteed to attract you a big crowd whether people are poor or not. Who's gonna resist free millions whether they are well off or not?

That's how I see it. A nice comic booky monologue might have added some depth and clarity to it.

Fudgie is offline  
Old 12-13-2011, 03:38 PM   #548
The Morningstar
Banned User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The place in between...
Posts: 10,151
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

Na, a monologue would have ruined it. Show, don't tell.

I mean what, would a nice monologue saying "The replicants are more human than humans" in Blade Runner, for example, helped? No, it would have ruined it. Spoon feeding and telling instead of showing ruins movies.

The Morningstar is offline  
Old 12-13-2011, 04:24 PM   #549
circa81
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 139
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

I totally agree with you, Morningstar. Burton used subtly to great effect, an idea that seams to be lost on Nolan. You'd like this comparison. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSAhuL8FJuQ


Last edited by circa81; 12-13-2011 at 04:28 PM. Reason: edit
circa81 is offline  
Old 12-13-2011, 08:24 PM   #550
El Payaso
Banned User
 
El Payaso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Rubbing your rhubarb.
Posts: 15,263
Default Re: Was BF a "decent" Batman Film or Not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fudgie View Post
Guess you're seeing something I don't. I saw a guy using cosmetic products which nearly everyone uses in some form to get people. Even baby powder was mentioned as one of the tainted products.

Giving away free money, especially 20 mil, is guaranteed to attract you a big crowd whether people are poor or not. Who's gonna resist free millions whether they are well off or not?

That's how I see it. A nice comic booky monologue might have added some depth and clarity to it.
Just what those movies didn't need: a spoon-feeding long-winded monologue. You're either able to see it or at least able to enjoy it. The fact that's not verbally explained doesn't make it nonexistent.

El Payaso is offline  
Closed Thread

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 02:23 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.