The Dark Knight Rises Bane

[raybia]

 

[The Englishman]

 

[Doc Samson]

I love the Adam West TV show. It's very much a product of the 60s; the optimistic tone and its playful sexuality are quite evident. It's premise seems to be that the good guys are basically stiff, and the bad guys are pretty cool. It works pretty well, and it's important to remember that the show was not unfaithful to the comics as they were at the time.

B&R lacks the period context, the originality or the innocence. The worst thing about that movie is that it seems like an artless cash-in. It has nothing in particular to commend it apart from belonging to the franchise that it is designed to milk. Yuck. I actually quite like the neon-thugs, but yuck.

And this is precisely why, even now, I can't watch that movie with a good conscience. As you stated, The TV show wasn't out of context for the times, or the comics of that period. B&R has no redeeming qualities in my book, and it's just hard to enjoy it even on the "it's so bad it's good" level, like I can, say...Commando. (Maybe the greatest movie of all time t

SM3 to me was pure, enjoyable fun, exactly what I expect from a Spiderman film, and therefore, I've watched it infinitely more than either 1 or 2. Everything people hate about it, I liked, especially the dancing. It was corny, and stupid, and...funny, at least to me. Well not just me, but everytime I was in the theater, everybody else found it funny too, and I saw it quite a few times.

SM2, was way too heavy for my tastes in this particular character, and even though I loved any Spiderman comic I ever read with those same elements in it, it just didn't translate well for me on the big screen. I can recognize on a technical level, the superiority of the first two in terms of quality, but sometimes that doesn't equate to overall enjoyment, as I suspect BB fans who prefer that over TDK feel much the same way

 

[The Guard]

I've gotten the the point where I can absolutely enjoy BATMAN & ROBIN and the less serious aspects of BATMAN FOREVER. Because I finally realized they weren't trying to be serious and failing miserably at it, thus creating crap. They set out to be campy, silly, pun-laden adventures with a modicum of heart, and they succeeded marvelously. The excess is fantastic. The sheer absurdity of them is fantastic if you stop expecting them to be Burton's Batman. And there are still some serious moments and weighty themes being tossed about. Despite the neon and the flash, Batman manages to remain somewhat dark and mysterious, even in BATMAN & ROBIN despite the quips, it's just the Batman we saw in the 60's and 70's VS the Burton version. Like SUPERMAN RETURNS, it's not what I wanted, but I can enjoy most of it for what it is.

 

[The Joker]

I can stomach Batman Forever and Batman and Robin, mainly because:

1. We now have an infinitely better new franchise
2. Both Forever and B&R didn't follow up a brilliant Batman movie (sorry Returns just wasn't a good Batman movie. Good movie, but not a good Batman movie)

Whereas with a piece of crap like Spider-Man 3, it killed the brilliant momentum Spider-Man 2 had given the franchise.

 

[ALP]

Lots of people lump BF and B&R together but I personally think BF works as an "okay" Batman film. Sure there is camp, a gay Riddler, and a city full of neon but overall I thought the film had a heart and did decent in certain aspects such as Bruce dwelling on his parent's death and attempting to help out a kid suffering the same fate as himself(would have worked much better with Bruce adopting a kid instead of a grown man). I do think that BF was Schumacher giving a genuine attempt at making a real Batman movie, it had plenty of the comic book elements mixed with his own flamboyant style. It's B&R when he just went "**** it all, let's make a toy commercial."

But really, in the end B&R being awful led us to a reboot. Had B&R just been a mediocre film that was a hit like BF, then Schumacher would just just made Batman Triumphant and who knows what after that. Instead it was so bad they they had to re-do Batman altogether.

I can stomach Batman Forever and Batman and Robin, mainly because:

1. We now have an infinitely better new franchise
2. Both Forever and B&R didn't follow up a brilliant Batman movie (sorry Returns just wasn't a good Batman movie. Good movie, but not a good Batman movie)

Whereas with a piece of crap like Spider-Man 3, it killed the brilliant momentum Spider-Man 2 had given the franchise.

I thought it was a brilliant Batman movie, just more of an elseworld story than a conventional Batman story. Not everything has to be completely conventional and follow the dotted line.

 

[Matt.S99]

I know he did look kind of hugo strange like in that movie, but I honestly find him to be way too much of a good looking man for that role. Id rather have him as Black mask. Because im sure we would see him pre black face.

 

[The Joker]

I thought it was a brilliant Batman movie, just more of an elseworld story than a conventional Batman story. Not everything has to be completely conventional and follow the dotted line.

It really wasn't a good Batman movie, IMO. Putting aside the very weird versions of Penguin and Catwoman, Batman himself is pretty much a non entity in the movie. It was like Burton completely lost all interest in the character, even more than he did in Batman '89.

I remember reading an interview with Keaton saying how unsatisfied he was with the Returns script in that regard.

 

[ALP]

It really wasn't a good Batman movie, IMO. Putting aside the very weird versions of Penguin and Catwoman, Batman himself is pretty much a non entity in the movie. It was like Burton completely lost all interest in the character, even more than he did in Batman '89.

I remember reading an interview with Keaton saying how unsatisfied he was with the Returns script in that regard.

But I've read tons of comics and graphic novels where Batman wasn't the main focus. The main formula is still there, it's just twisted. Villain is introduced, tries to take over the city with help from gangsters, plot is foiled by Batman, etc.

Definitely give you the weird twisted versions of Catwoman and Penguin though. Hey, it's not like Burton portrayed Batman as a blood thirsty killer...oh wait

 

[The Joker]

But I've read tons of comics and graphic novels where Batman wasn't the main focus.

This isn't a comic book that comes out like twelve times a year. It's a 2 hour movie that came out three years later after the first movie.

Definitely give you the weird twisted versions of Catwoman and Penguin though. Hey, it's not like Burton portrayed Batman as a blood thirsty killer...oh wait

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind killer Batman because I know it's based on those early Kane/Finger stories. I loved the gusto performances of Penguin and Catwoman. They just felt very different to their comic counterparts in nearly every way.

 

[ALP]

I thought penguin was a good one off thing. Like fine and good for the film but I'd never want to see him in the comics(although there are a few influences here and there). But Pfeiffer's Catwoman is probably my favorite of any incarnation!

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

Forever has a lot of things going for it.

Kilmer is pretty good. The suit, minus the nipples, is possibly the best ever. Batman's fighting style is the smoothest and most satisfying its ever been. Nicole Kidman is impossibly hot. Jim Carrey goes over the top, but he has some good moments where the Riddler's creepy obsessive nature shines through. It brings the focus back on Bruce Wayne and his torment, which is always a good thing.

The way Schumacher bridged the gap between the bloodthirsty Batman of the Burton films with his more classic no-killing version was quite brilliant, actually. Bruce's speech to Robin about revenge was great. Some argue that he just went and broke his code again anyway with making Two-Face fall, but I always saw it as Bruce thinking "I've already sinned, gone down that dark path; I will save Robin from doing the same by doing away with Harvey myself." In that regard, it was kind of noble, in a twisted way.

I think despite not being a Burton film, it concludes what I feel is a solid Batman trilogy. The fourth film is afterbirth.

 

[The Joker]

I thought penguin was a good one off thing. Like fine and good for the film but I'd never want to see him in the comics(although there are a few influences here and there).

DeVito was so good that it was hard not to like him (I still don't get how he got nominated for a Razzie for Returns!). I know a lot of fans liked it better because they find comic book Penguin boring (something I strongly disagree with. Comic book Penguin doesn't get his due anymore).

 

[craigdbfan]

They set out to be campy, silly, pun-laden adventures with a modicum of heart, and they succeeded marvelously. The excess is fantastic. The sheer absurdity of them is fantastic if you stop expecting them to be Burton's Batman. And there are still some serious moments and weighty themes being tossed about. Despite the neon and the flash, Batman manages to remain somewhat dark and mysterious, even in BATMAN & ROBIN despite the quips, it's just the Batman we saw in the 60's and 70's VS the Burton version. Like SUPERMAN RETURNS, it's not what I wanted, but I can enjoy most of it for what it is.

I can now see it that way too but only for the reasons Joker stated and that is we have a much better series in route to completion.

For me personally it was a shame seeing what happened to what Burton started with the first two movies and what happened thereafter with B&R and Forever. They weren't bad movies but more or less an interpretation of Batman/Bruce Wayne that no one really wanted including its versions of the baddies and Gotham.

This was my mentality before Begins but now that we have this wonderful series in progress I really don't mind those two for what they are.

 

[Doc Samson]

DeVito was so good that it was hard not to like him (I still don't get how he got nominated for a Razzie for Returns!). I know a lot of fans liked it better because they find comic book Penguin boring (something I strongly disagree with. Comic book Penguin doesn't get his due anymore).

I like what he was going for, but his incessant grunting I just can't take. At all. By the time he takes control of the Batmobile I'm ready to turn the whole thing off

 

[Gianakin_]

They set out to be campy, silly, pun-laden adventures with a modicum of heart, and they succeeded marvelously.

I agree about B&R, but I'm not so sure they tried to do that with BF.

 

[Gianakin_]

It really wasn't a good Batman movie, IMO. Putting aside the very weird versions of Penguin and Catwoman, Batman himself is pretty much a non entity in the movie. It was like Burton completely lost all interest in the character, even more than he did in Batman '89.

I remember reading an interview with Keaton saying how unsatisfied he was with the Returns script in that regard.

I'm pretty sure that either Burton or Winter said that they didn't quite know what to do with Batman, being vastly more interested in expliring the villains. And it shows in the film.

 

[Gianakin_]

I thought penguin was a good one off thing. Like fine and good for the film but I'd never want to see him in the comics(although there are a few influences here and there). But Pfeiffer's Catwoman is probably my favorite of any incarnation!

It's strange because I don't like Nicholson's Joker at all, despite being more faithful to the cmoics than Burton's Penguin and CW. However, I think the Penguin was more interesting in BR than he ever was in the comics. CW... well, I can definitely welcome a new interpretation closer to the comics. Despite being brialliantly written and acted, I know they can do better with her.

 

[Gianakin_]

Forever has a lot of things going for it.

Kilmer is pretty good. The suit, minus the nipples, is possibly the best ever. Batman's fighting style is the smoothest and most satisfying its ever been. Nicole Kidman is impossibly hot. Jim Carrey goes over the top, but he has some good moments where the Riddler's creepy obsessive nature shines through. It brings the focus back on Bruce Wayne and his torment, which is always a good thing.

The way Schumacher bridged the gap between the bloodthirsty Batman of the Burton films with his more classic no-killing version was quite brilliant, actually. Bruce's speech to Robin about revenge was great. Some argue that he just went and broke his code again anyway with making Two-Face fall, but I always saw it as Bruce thinking "I've already sinned, gone down that dark path; I will save Robin from doing the same by doing away with Harvey myself." In that regard, it was kind of noble, in a twisted way.

I think despite not being a Burton film, it concludes what I feel is a solid Batman trilogy. The fourth film is afterbirth.

It tried really hard to stay close to the comics and felt a lot like BTAS at points. The overall story was by far the best of the previous franchise. Miles ahead the other 3. However, the execution was mostly iffy.

 

[Wolverine1988]

I was actually watching Batman and Robin last night, at this point its one of those movies that is so bad , that it is actually kind of fun to watch and point out all the stupid moments and the horrible performances.

I am sure Uma Thurman made sure that a copy of that movie isn't within 500 feet of her, she i feel has to be the most embarssed one.

 

[ALP]

It's strange because I don't like Nicholson's Joker at all, despite being more faithful to the cmoics than Burton's Penguin and CW. However, I think the Penguin was more interesting in BR than he ever was in the comics. CW... well, I can definitely welcome a new interpretation closer to the comics. Despite being brialliantly written and acted, I know they can do better with her.

Well hey, I guess we can agree to have the opposite opiniont:

I mean I really enjoyed Burton's Penguin, I just wouldn't want him anywhere near the comics. Burton made the changes to make Penguin his main villain whereas Penguin of the comics is mostly a supporting villain or one who pulls the strings. And for those roles comic Pengy suffices well. Similarly, I loved Nolan's interpretation of the Joker. It was perfect for TDK. But things like the scarred smile, war paint, and grunge feel I do not want in the comics(although the first and third element were present in the graphic novel "Joker" and it was a nice one-off).

As for Catwoman, I loved what Pfeiffer did b/c I thought it was really interesting. The usual cat burglar route is for the most part boring to me. I'll go ahead and say upfront that if Nolan's Catwoman is a diamond thief I will more than likely not like it as much as Pfieffer's twisted crazy cat lady. Unless she has a brilliant dynamic with Bruce. But simply stealing diamonds from the Gotham museum doesn't do it for me(like Two Face robbing the second national bank of Gotham). Although I did like Catwoman: When In Rome. And even then, it presented something fresh for the character.

 

[The Guard]

I agree about B&R, but I'm not so sure they tried to do that with BF.

Seems pretty obvious that they did, especially with regard to the villains. But even the heroes have their share of puns.

 

[Gianakin_]

Seems pretty obvious that they did, especially with regard to the villains. But even the heroes have their share of puns.

I know, but the mixed tone of BF really confuses me as to what their intentions were. According to Joel's commentary, he wanted to do a BY1 type of story (or in tone, I don't remember) and WB told him no. So, it seems to me that he wanted BF to be dark, but Goldsman and WB put in all the cheese.

 

[Gianakin_]

Well hey, I guess we can agree to have the opposite opiniont:

Wow, from the rest of your post, we do have the exact opposite opinions, don't we? On all 3 villains!t:

 

[The Guard]

I know, but the mixed tone of BF really confuses me as to what their intentions were. According to Joel's commentary, he wanted to do a BY1 type of story (or in tone, I don't remember) and WB told him no. So, it seems to me that he wanted BF to be dark, but Goldsman and WB put in all the cheese.

There are some different tones, but the overall tone of BATMAN FOREVER is basically just an action adventure with humor. It's really Bruce's character moments that are the darkest, in an interesting twist on the mythos. Batman's tend to be lighter and more swashbuckling, as do Robin's, save for his parents death. I don't think that's an accident. Schumacher, the Batchler's and Goldsman were aware of Robin's impact on Batman, and as in the comics, they had Batman lighten up a bit. As I recall though, according to Joel himself, he wanted to do a darker story, and WB told him they were going lighter. So he went lighter. And then, with BATMAN & ROBIN, they told him to go even lighter. So, since going lighter worked box office wise for BATMAN FOREVER, he went even lighter.