The Dark Knight Batman vs. Iron Man via chud.com (Batman as a Character)

[Danielson]

So....he thinks that Iron Man is totally psychologically there? I thought he was going to have alcohal problems in the second film if there are ones? Also, he's an egomaniac to an extent from what I can tell, but I'm not and Iron Man expert.


Though it is interesting that Iron Man is basically Marvel's Batman. Billionaire without real powers, just resources.

 

[Nightmare]

Both movies will rule. /end thread.

 

[Nepenthes]

then may yahweh have pity on your soul. because the writer has no idea what the hell he's talking about.

yahweh would have to convince me I that even have a soul before I became concerned with whether I have his pity

I think he does know what he's talking about, more so than a signifigant number of the people here even. He just happens to have differing opinions is all, that and he seems uninformed about direction and content of TDK. But hell, most people who dont post here regularily would be uninformed

Although I enjoy the current franchise more than any other, I understand where he's coming from. I'd love to see a batman movie done something like Flash Gordon. A real intelligent approach to the funhouse phantasmagoria so prevalent in the comics but never touched upon by hands that really knew anything about the material.

this is what i agree with.





Reading some of the comments here about this guy he sure sounds like a bit of a *****e. But I have to admit I do share some of the sentiment relayed by Keyser Soze about Devins attitude toward superhero comics and fanboys. It's a huge topic that can't be adressed here, but put simply, you do have to wonder why the majority of "superhero" comics are actually quite juvenile and shallow and just basically crap. It's almost like the medium is confined by itself, it can't break out. And I definitly share his disdain of the average fanboy, the breed who participate online at least. "homo-repressed teen-fascist fantasist losers" - I wouldn't use those exact words myself but I think I get what he's describing, and I do think an urepresentiative proportion of comicbook readers fit into this category compared to consumers of other media forms or genres. Who knows Devin may be a massive self-loathing *****e but I don't care to find out for myself, I can only comment on the article and comments.

 

[Nivek]

I honestly dont see why people are interested in this guys opinion. It's bad enough he went from one of the most complained about posters to being the 2nd Banana on that site. It's bad enough that Nick doing that drove off at least half of CHUDs posters (like myself and others) and turned a once great site into a graveyard. But now we have people discussing his stupid tastes here.

But I have to point out, Keyser gave one of the best dissections about the guy I've ever heard.

 

[cjblair]

 

[Darknightnomis]

I didn't give this a moments thought when I found out it was one of those idiots from Chud.com.

What a waste of the internet.

 

[escobar2248]

You really like to use that lock image...t:

 

[cjblair]

You really like to use that lock image...t:

Lies, lies and slander!

 

[Jonathan Crane]

He didn't like Batman Begins - so...? Who cares?

 

[Keyser Soze]

He didn't like Batman Begins - so...? Who cares?

He's perfectly within his right to express his opinion. Just like we're perfectly within his right to express our disagreement about said opinion.

The sad thing is, as Nepenthes says, he DOES raise some good points. Often, I've read his articles, and seen the skeleton of a good argument. If only they could find someone less smarmy and agenda-driven to explore them...

 

[sasquatchs]

The kneejerk reactions in the thread only further his point frankly, although his constant random snipes in the past are enough to annoy anyone

Some of his issues with Batman have a kernel of truth but I don't think most of his complaints apply to Begins, although I wish they did.

I sort of agree with him about the dour is meaningful mistake Nolan's made, as if that was enough. Also that Batman is only interesting as a nut despite it being flogged to death in the comics, but Bruce is nowhere near a nut in Begins. On the one hand they gave us a very serious journey, yet the lack of depth in the writing doesn't justify that. It feels like an attempt at something different, but falls utterly back into convention. Begins is po-faced, but I think Devin's mistaken in calling it dark in anyway, there's no darkness to his psychology compared with Miller's stuff. Its very much a adventure kids film to my mind, sadly

Nolan's made Bruce's angsty issues relatable to the point of mundanity, as if they confused the commonplace with realism. And his transformation into Batman is justified more through circumstance than psychology, as if anyone in the same position would put on the cape. I think they made a big mistake in suggesting the idea of Batman is a rational one, that naive, straightforward heroics would be interesting. It's an almost Spidermanish take on Batman. I was hoping they'd go much more in the direction of a disturbed individual in a normal world, yet this Bruce is very much a normal guy in a normal world. In that sense I do think the genie should be put back in the bottle. For me they went way overboard trying to show Batman as logistically possible, and only payed lip service to the emotional realism or lack of it that'd take someone there.

Really I'd like either the light adventure thing that he wants, or the full-on darkness he's rallying against. Begins is more of a half-committed straddle between the 2

 

[FlawlessVictory]

IM has been getting rave reviews. Right now it's at 88% on RT (15 fresh, 2 rotten). It's going to be hard for TDK to top that. I thought for sure TDK would be the best reviewed superhero film of the three, looks like I'm going to be wrong on that.

 

[Keyser Soze]

IM has been getting rave reviews. Right now it's at 88% on RT (15 fresh, 2 rotten). It's going to be hard for TDK to top that. I thought for sure TDK would be the best reviewed superhero film of the three, looks like I'm going to be wrong on that.

I dunno. Empire (the reviewers I usually trust more than anyone) gave "Iron Man" ***. Which is good, but pales in comparison to the ***** for "Batman Begins".

 

[JackBauer24]

I'll never understand how anybody can look at Batman Begins and not realise that it is (by far) the best superhero movie ever made. I mean one only has to waltz over to the AICN talkbacks to see the *****ebag opinions of a load of immature morons (many of them sounding quite similar to this guy). The *****ing and nitpicking is really unbelievable. And it's always about silly inconsequential things. It's never 'the movie had no narrative drive', or 'there was no character development' or 'the story sucked' - as could be said for most comic book movies. It's always 'OMGZ the axxti0n wuz so sheky!' or 'its tooo seriooouus!'. And the most ludicrous of all 'the script was terrible' - erm... no it wasn't.

Then when something like Iron Man comes out, the reviewers go crazy for it. Harry just reviewed it calling it 'the first perfect superhero movie'. Well, sorry Harry but no it ain't - I've seen it - and whilst it is a fine film, it's also a very safe and predictable one. Whereas TDK looks like something truly revolutionary in the superhero genre. But just because it doesn't have a ton of flashy CGI in its trailer nobody pays attention. There were approximately zero CG shots in the first Dark Knight trailer (as opposed to Iron Man which was mostly comprised of them) and it still kicked ass - you know why? Because Nolan is a man with vision who understands what makes films great.

It's almost as if a film aims low and hits, as Iron Man did - it's treated to much less scrutiny than a film like BB, and to a greater extent TDK, that dares to aim high. BB had a much better script than any other superhero movie out there, incuding Iron Man, and yet it gets the most grief - I just don't get it. It reminds me of 2005 when people were saying 'yeah, Batman Begins was good and all, but Sin City - man that was the greatest movie evah!' It's not that people just prefer style over substance - as BB had plenty of style, but substance actually works as a negative in the equation. Maybe it is as people have said here - maybe most people like Devin would prefer their movies dumb, predictable and not trying to be serious. Which is a damn shame. I wish I could sum up my feelings more articulately but I just don't understand people sometimes...

 

[JackBauer24]

I dunno. Empire (the reviewers I usually trust more than anyone) gave "Iron Man" ***. Which is good, but pales in comparison to the ***** for "Batman Begins".

Actually Empire gave Batman Begins ****

 

[Keyser Soze]

I'll never understand how anybody can look at Batman Begins and not realise that it is (by far) the best superhero movie ever made. I mean one only has to waltz over to the AICN talkbacks to see the *****ebag opinions of a load of immature morons (many of them sounding quite similar to this guy). The *****ing and nitpicking is really unbelievable. And it's always about silly inconsequential things. It's never 'the movie had no narrative drive', or 'there was no character development' or 'the story sucked'. It's always 'OMGZ the axxti0n wuz so sheky!' or 'its tooo seriooouus!'. And the most ludicrous of all 'the script was terrible' - erm... no it wasn't.

Then when something like Iron Man comes out, the reviewers go crazy for it. Harry just reviewed it calling it 'the first perfect superhero movie'. Well, sorry Harry but no it ain't - I've seen it - and whilst it is a fine film, it's also a very safe and predictable one. Whereas TDK looks like something truly revolutionary in the superhero genre. But just because it doesn't have a ton of flashy CGI in its trailer nobody pays attention. There were approximately zero CG shots in the first Dark Knight trailer (as opposed to Iron Man which was mostly comprised of them) and it still kicked ass - you know why? Because Nolan is a man with vision who understands what makes films great.

It's almost as if a film aims low and hits, as Iron Man did - it's treated to much less scrutiny than a film like BB, and to a greater extent TDK, that dares to aim high. BB had a much better script than any other superhero movie out there, incuding Iron Man, and yet it gets the most grief - I just don't get it. Maybe it is as people have said here - maybe most people like Devin would prefer their movies dumb, predictable and not trying to be serious. Which is a damn shame. I wish I could sum up my feelings more articulately but I just don't understand people sometimes...

One thing that annoys me about a lot the negative comments I've read on "Batman Begins", is that to find flaws, the film is put under an extremely high level of scrutiny. Yet, the same people who dismiss "Begins" for these "flaws" will often cite preference for other superhero movies, which under the same criteria they submitted "Begins" too, would completely fall apart.

 

[Citadel30]

I'll never understand how anybody can look at Batman Begins and not realise that it is (by far) the best superhero movie ever made. I mean one only has to waltz over to the AICN talkbacks to see the *****ebag opinions of a load of immature morons (many of them sounding quite similar to this guy). The *****ing and nitpicking is really unbelievable. And it's always about silly inconsequential things. It's never 'the movie had no narrative drive', or 'there was no character development' or 'the story sucked' - as could be said for most comic book movies. It's always 'OMGZ the axxti0n wuz so sheky!' or 'its tooo seriooouus!'. And the most ludicrous of all 'the script was terrible' - erm... no it wasn't.

Then when something like Iron Man comes out, the reviewers go crazy for it. Harry just reviewed it calling it 'the first perfect superhero movie'. Well, sorry Harry but no it ain't - I've seen it - and whilst it is a fine film, it's also a very safe and predictable one. Whereas TDK looks like something truly revolutionary in the superhero genre. But just because it doesn't have a ton of flashy CGI in its trailer nobody pays attention. There were approximately zero CG shots in the first Dark Knight trailer (as opposed to Iron Man which was mostly comprised of them) and it still kicked ass - you know why? Because Nolan is a man with vision who understands what makes films great.

It's almost as if a film aims low and hits, as Iron Man did - it's treated to much less scrutiny than a film like BB, and to a greater extent TDK, that dares to aim high. BB had a much better script than any other superhero movie out there, incuding Iron Man, and yet it gets the most grief - I just don't get it. It reminds me of 2005 when people were saying 'yeah, Batman Begins was good and all, but Sin City - man that was the greatest movie evah!' It's not that people just prefer style over substance - as BB had plenty of style, but substance actually works as a negative in the equation. Maybe it is as people have said here - maybe most people like Devin would prefer their movies dumb, predictable and not trying to be serious. Which is a damn shame. I wish I could sum up my feelings more articulately but I just don't understand people sometimes...

well said!!!

 

[JackBauer24]

One thing that annoys me about a lot the negative comments I've read on "Batman Begins", is that to find flaws, the film is put under an extremely high level of scrutiny. Yet, the same people who dismiss "Begins" for these "flaws" will often cite preference for other superhero movies, which under the same criteria they submitted "Begins" too, would completely fall apart.

Yes! That's a much more succinct way of saying what I was trying to t: Thanks.

 

[Keyser Soze]

Actually Empire gave Batman Begins ****

Yes, for the cinema release, but they amended their initial rating and bumped it up to ***** for the DVD release.

 

[ActuallyRobin]

Yes, for the cinema release, but they amended their initial rating and bumped it up to ***** for the DVD release.

Really? Intriguing!

 

[S.A.A.D.]

Let the guy at CHUD have it guys,he doesn't know what he is missing out on when it comes to Nolan's Batman..

 

[sasquatchs]

One thing that annoys me about a lot the negative comments I've read on "Batman Begins", is that to find flaws, the film is put under an extremely high level of scrutiny. Yet, the same people who dismiss "Begins" for these "flaws" will often cite preference for other superhero movies, which under the same criteria they submitted "Begins" too, would completely fall apart.

JackBauer is predicting TDK will be "revolutionary", yet it's critics that are putting the films on a pedestal?

 

[JackBauer24]

JackBauer is predicting TDK will be "revolutionary", yet it's critics that are putting the films on a pedestal?

Revolutionary when it comes to Superhero movies yes. I'm not expecting it to redefine the very grammar of cinema or anything.

 

[metalhead_dave]

Nevermind

 

[Keyser Soze]

JackBauer is predicting TDK will be "revolutionary", yet it's critics that are putting the films on a pedestal?

I think one extreme is as bad as the other. It's the over-enthusiastic praise of some "Begins" fans that draws out the resentment in those less keen on it, and make them more determined to look for flaws and bring it down from "the pedestal", as you put it.

I have been careful in just what kind of predictions I've made. I'm not going to say "The Dark Knight" will beat "The Godfather", as I've read elsewhere. That superlative level of praise just invites backlash, just like someone saying "permawhite Joker always sucked" anyway invites a re-ignition of the make-up debate. For every positive there's a negative, and all that. But I won't be shy about saying I've never been so hyped about seeing a movie as I have for "The Dark Knight".