Considering your posts have subjective thoughts in them, this isn't actually true. No one is buying this. You're a Keaton fanboy who is trying to defend his preferred Batman. Let's not pretend otherwise.
Tell that to Christian Bale. I'm pretty sure Christian Bale has working eyes, ears, and cognitive function. I was just going along with what Christian Bale said about his version of Batman, like it or not, it's his version of Batman and he said, "I also kind of view Batman—you know, somebody mentioned American Psycho. (Pause.) He's kind of an American psycho."
"Pot calls the kettle black"...I definitely said that Keaton was overrated, but I don't recall claiming that Keaton is often overrated by casual fans conforming to popular assumptions. Even I wouldn't engage in that level of gatekeeping silliness. But, to each his own.
You keep bringing up 1939/40s Batman as if that wasn't already brought up. We KNOW that's mainly what was looked at. The thing is that it's not an accurate representation of Batman in general. It's an early version of Batman that wasn't really a fully realized character until later on. Yes, the no-kill code started off as censorship. But later on, Bats was brought back to his darker roots and he STILL had the no-kill rule because it became such a vital part of who he is. It's not mutually exclusive. And no, he can't always avoid casualties in a war on crime. That's... Why I literally brought up just that lol. It's why I can excuse Batman's actions with Ra's in Begins or accidentally tackling Harvey off the edge of the building in TDK. It's NOT always avoidable, but that's the point. That's the struggle.What he says to Joker in TDK is legit a callback to what he says to him in TKJOh dear, just look at all those words. Does he really gotta talk so much ? And "he didn't murder, he just committed justifiable homicides" is kind of a ridiculous statement.
I keep bringing up 1939/40s Batman because it's rad and the Burtonverse Batman is a throwback to that original Batman, that is the original source material by the creators, we can't really get more authentic than that. It's the original version of Batman and was basically pretty realized in the 1939/40s period by Bill Finger. He had the origin flashback established in 1939, the utility belt was established in 1939, the Batarang was established in 1939, the Batmobile name for Batman's car was established in 1941, Batplane [with a machine gun] was established in 1940, the Batcave was established in 1943, the Batsignal was established in 1942, etc. most of the top supporting cast: Richard Grayson Robin was established in 1940, Alfred was established in 1943, Commissioner Gordon was established in 1939, Vicki Vale was established in 1948, most of the top rogues gallery: the Joker was established in 1940, Catwoman was established in 1940, the Penguin was established in 1941, Two-Face was established in 1942, the Riddler was established in 1948, the Jervis Tetch Mad Hatter was established in 1948. the Jonathan Crane Scarecrow was established in 1941, Professor Hugo Strange was established in 1940, the original Basil Karlo Clayface was established in 1940, the vampire called the Monk was established in 1939 and so was Dr. Death. Joe Chill was established in 1948. The Joker's origin was established in 1951, Catwoman's origin was established in 1950.
The no-kill rule and no-gun rule was always a form of censorship. When comic book writers Frank Robbins, Denny O'Neil, Steve Englehart, artists Neal Adams, Irv Novick, etc. tried a throwback to the darker mysterious "creature of the night" Batman in 1969/1970s and Batman was still under the no-kill rule and no-gun rule because it was still under the Comics Code Authority, as Batman was also Saturday-morning kid stuff on Sesame Street, Super Friends, Scooby-Doo and Adam West voiced New Adventures of Batman in the 1970s. Denny O'Neil said that even the throwback to the murderous Joker leaving smiling corpses in Batman #251 (1973) "The Joker's Five-Way Revenge" had to be restrained because of the Comics Code, "I wondered if the Comics Code would let us get away with that many murders in a story, but again, you could never predict the Comics Code, but we didn't hear a peep from them. I was never satisfied with the work I did for Joker. Given the Comics Code there was just no way to make it work. He had to be like Hannibal Lecter in order to be consistent and logical and be the Joker, and he couldn't be that back then." Denny O'Neil interview (pt. 2)
Michael Keaton's Batman did use guns and kill and there was an outrage from film critics like Roger Ebert warning parents not to take the kids to Batman (1989) and Batman Returns, and the television talk show media ranted about the violence in Batman Returns.
Danny Elfman explained, talking to Tim Burton, "I remember what you said to me when you were fighting the R-rating on Batman Returns, which was absurd because there was nothing really violent in the whole movie to put an R-rating on." https://www.interviewmagazine.com/film/tim-burton
Entertainment Weekly [July 13, 1992] reported that Tim Burton had to cut out moments from Batman Returns that were considered "too vivid," just to get the PG-13 rating, instead of an R-rating. "Among other moments, a sweeping master shot of a circus gang member setting Gothamites on fire had to go." https://ew.com/article/1992/07/31/unhappy-returns/
A Christian "family values" group called the Dove Foundation were outraged at the McDonald's Batman Returns Happy Meal tie-in and the Kenner Batman Returns toyline, and Warners co-chairmen Bob Daly decided that Tim Burton is just too dark for Batman and too scary for kids, so Bob Daly offered the Bat franchise to Joel Schumacher to make a lighter and brighter version that doesn't kill. Justifiable homicide is a real thing in law. It's a thing.
Whoa Michael Uslan, an executive producer on the Burton movies praised them? Well knock me down with a feather. Another person involved in making those movies praising them. Imagine that.
And double whoa, Bale's Batman said more than five lines in one scene? What the hell were they thinking?!? That never happens with Batman. Totally out of character; "Shut up, you're going to jail", "Wrong on both counts", "Why are you doing this? Lets just take him to the Police, then we can go home...together. Selina, don't you see we're the same. We're the same. Split, ripped down the center. Selina please". If Schreck had not knocked him on him on his ass with a bullet he'd probably have still been talking.
LOL. That's true. Also in Batman (1989): "The police have got it wrong. They're looking for one product. The Joker's tainted hundreds of chemicals at the source. Each product only contains one component. The poison only works if the components are mixed. Hair spray won't do it alone. But hair spray and perfume and lipstick will be toxic and untraceable. Take this to the press."
Most of the time Keaton's Batman was being mysterious with a quiet demeanour, and minimal dialogue. This Uslan quote explained that the 1974 "Night of the Stalker" comic book story where Batman doesn't say anything was another influence, "I gave him [Burton] my favorite Batman comic book of all time — Detective Comics No. 439 - the best Batman story ever written. In that story titled 'Night of the Stalker' Batman doesn’t say one word. It is the story that had the most emotional impact on me. If you see the 1989 Batman movie, you will see a little bit of the influence of that particular element" Batman producer Michael Uslan on bringing caped crusader to the big screen, and franchise's iconic cast- Entertainment News, Firstpost
Plenty of examples of Batman being a chatter box in the comics, too.
That's right. I see Adam West's Batman as representing the openly chatting Batman in comics, much more than any of the other live-action Batmen.
Take a very famous example, a comic according to your quotes is the first comic Tim Burton loved. Batman carries an entire page of dialogue yapping to the Joker
Totally. But Tim Burton sighted The Killing Joke pages that had little to no dialogue as inspiring him, as those pages looked to him like storyboards for a film, along with the Ace Chemicals part, too. The look of the Joker's Goons also appears to have been based on the Joker's henchmen that beat up Commissioner Gordon in The Killing Joke. I figure Burton likely also liked the Bonus Brothers carnival with the circus freaks and the smiling corpse of the carnival owner and all that. In his Batman (1989) DVD commentary Tim Burton said, "The thing I liked about The Killing Joke was it was very visual. It was almost like storyboards for a film. It had a filmic quality to it, and the writing was sort of minimal, and it was just more cinematic to me that way. There was some inspiration for me."'
Considering your posts have subjective thoughts in them, this isn't actually true. No one is buying this. You're a Keaton fanboy who is trying to defend his preferred Batman. Let's not pretend otherwise.
I like how the Bale fanboys are acting like their own subjective preference isn't also embarrassingly obvious. Like what you like, but don't act like Keaton's portrayal isn't also a valid adaptation of a particular era in the character's history. To deny it is to present yourself as the ultimate Bale fanboy.
I like how the Bale fanboys are acting like their own subjective preference isn't also embarrassingly obvious. Like what you like, but don't act like Keaton's portrayal isn't also a valid adaptation of a particular era in the character's history. To deny it is to present yourself as the ultimate Bale fanboy.
What a silly post. No Bale fan here is claiming objectivity, and what people are ultimately getting at is that Bale was truer to the spirit of the character than Keaton, who at best, was true to a version of the character that lasted a short time and doesn't fully reflect how the character is commonly depicted.
Keaton and Bale emphasized different aspects and I think both emphases/interpretations are valid (though arguably flawed). Keaton more the dark driven, *vengeful vigilante*, Bale much more the noble, socially-minded (vigilante) *hero*. Keaton's version was, at least in moments in BR, too brutal but I think Bale's version was more wrong in being so socially-minded noble that he was ready/eager to quit being Batman when he felt society didn't need Batman anymore.
Bruce has, as he even puts it in TDK , "one rule". To Bruce, there has to be at least one thing that separates him from his enemies, and that would be the value of human life. He constantly does whatever he can to avoid that option to kill. Is it always easy? No. Are casualties avoidable 100% of the time? No. But, again, this is still a vital rule of his. Nolan captured not only that, but the basis of the relationship between Batman and Joker. Joker is fascinated with Batman because of how he constantly stands near the edge of that choice every night but remains true to that rule, so he's constantly pushing him to see what could break him, to achieve the ultimate victory/death from him in one perfect battle. None of that is in 89, at all. They randomly decide to make Joker the killer of Bruce's parents so that Bruce has a reason to go all psycho killer and "defeat" the villain at the end of the movie to wrap it all up. Gone is the longevity.
And yet TDK kind of ends the longevity and, ironically, the importance of the principle in another way, with Bruce is willing to make Batman be considered a murderer (I think including of the innocent), change his reputation and therefore impact on society for the worse, just to try to preserve Harvey's reputation and image.
I think the bottom line is we had two different Batman franchises made with two different goals, in two different contexts, in two different time periods.
Basically, the Burton and co weren't so much focused on the comics as ,they were bringing the darker elements from the lore to the big screen, and separating from the campy 60s show to the GA of 1989-1992.
They may have read some comics for inspiration, but they really weren't focused on bringing a comicbook accurate Batman to the big screen.
Plus, though there had already been the O'Neal/Adams run a while ago, the (later-regarded as classics and pretty-definitive and of-course-should-influence-adaptations) stories "Year One" and "The Killing Joke" had pretty much *just* come out. It's fine to feel Burton's Gordon was disappointing, I agree, I think it's very unreasonable to think that Gordon, Bruce, Alfred and Joker in B89 should have been very much like or derived from their "Year One" and TKJ portrayals.
Plenty of examples of Batman being a chatter box in the comics, too. Take a very famous example, a comic according to your quotes is the first comic Tim Burton loved. Batman carries an entire page of dialogue yapping to the Joker
I also love the comic but that scene and offer, or the way it was done, did feel at least a little awkward, Batman offering to rehabilitate Joker, that they need to de-escalate, end their conflict, with the context of the Joker having so recently shot and stripped Barbara, that felt like Batman being way too noble and forgiving and/or pretty callously overlooking what had been done to Barbara. Also Batman just declaring (based on Gordon still wanting to follow the law) "Maybe ordinary people *don't* always crack" felt a pretty weak rebuttal to the comic otherwise focusing on arguing that they will.
@theMan-Bat That really doesn't surprise me that Burton sighted the visual aspect of TKJ as what he loved rather than the story and characterization. I've always felt he was more about visual and less about story.
As for that one off story in 1974, Night of the Stalker, where Batman doesn't say a word being an influence, ok but one story where his character was silent does not make a good representation of the character in contrast to the thousands of comics where he says plenty. That's my point. I mean would it be great to have a silent Batman movie where nobody says anything just because they did that in Batman #433?
If Waters or you or who ever prefers a Batman who doesn't have much to say then fine. That's a personal preference. But its far from being against the nature of the character to have plenty of dialogue. They've all done it. From West to Conroy.
What a silly post. No Bale fan here is claiming objectivity, and what people are ultimately getting at is that Bale was truer to the spirit of the character than Keaton, who at best, was true to a version of the character that lasted a short time and doesn't fully reflect how the character is commonly depicted.
I also love the comic but that scene and offer, or the way it was done, did feel at least a little awkward, Batman offering to rehabilitate Joker, that they need to de-escalate, end their conflict, with the context of the Joker having so recently shot and stripped Barbara, that felt like Batman being way too noble and forgiving and/or pretty callously overlooking what had been done to Barbara. Also Batman just declaring (based on Gordon still wanting to follow the law) "Maybe ordinary people *don't* always crack" felt a pretty weak rebuttal to the comic otherwise focusing on arguing that they will.
Ok, but that's an entirely different criticism than what we're talking about. You're critiquing what Batman was saying. We're discussing the fact Batman can and does talk plenty in the comics. That was just an example I pulled up since Burton supposedly loves the comic, but apparently and not surprisingly its primarily for visual reasons.
Is it outdated though? In recent years the 60's TV show had its own on going comic book series. We've had two animated movie adaptions of that era, both voiced by West and other actors from the 60's TV show. The Arkham games included the West and Ward Batman and Robin costumes and Batmobile, and even a 60's TV show themed race track map for the Batmobile missions. Fans have been campaigning for years to get the show released on DVD/blu-ray and when it finally happened there was big positive response. Burt Ward had a cameo recently in Crisis on Infinite Earths. Had West not sadly passed away I am positive he'd have been in there, too;
You're right the campy characterization of Batman is outdated in the sense its not the one utilized any more as a mainstream characterization, but its a very popular and important part of the character's history. The campy era of the comics lasted for years, and West played that version like he was lifted right from the comic book page. I think that deserves recognition.
There’s honestly no denying that the three best are Bale, Keaton, and West. It’s up for debate in which those three are ranked, but they undeniably occupy the top 3 spots
The thing about West is he's still the only guy who's managed to make "campy Batman" work. JL Batman was a joke and Clooneyman was a disaster, West walked a really tight rope and his dead-pan delivery really made the jokes land a lot harder than they would have otherwise.
What a silly post. No Bale fan here is claiming objectivity, and what people are ultimately getting at is that Bale was truer to the spirit of the character than Keaton, who at best, was true to a version of the character that lasted a short time and doesn't fully reflect how the character is commonly depicted.
Oh don't worry, you're not going to bait me into having a tiresome argument that self-evidently comes down to a matter of preference. Suffice it to say that the argument you've just espoused in this post is pretty much the opposite of what you've actually been practising throughout the discussion. And the lame likes and passive aggressive 'exactly' from your fellow Bale enthusiasts doesn't disguise the fact. Also I think your posts are pretty silly too.
Suffice it to say that the argument you've just espoused in this post is pretty much the opposite of what you've actually been practising throughout the discussion.
Trust me, that's a pretty accurate representation of at least the people on Facebook who share those views lol
yeah, I do have to admit that I did not like that moment in Begins. The guy's meant to be a polymath ffs lol. I guess you can write it up to him still trying to play dumb. Fox knew a good chunk of his secrets but not the full extent by then exactly if I recall. When it comes to the reclusiveness in Rises, I consider that another influence from Dark Knight Returns ; Bruce quitting being Batman because The Joker killed someone close.to him and he blames himself for it and other failures. We see him in a deep state of depression in that film.
Except in Dark Knight Rises he's retired because he basically won and all organized crime was basically overthrown due to the Dent act. "Peace time" and all that. For eight years, Gotham was safe, and the big fish were out of the. He wasn't focused on the small-time crooks.
IMHO, at the end of the day, no one's really wrong with their favorite portrayals. Some people are in love with the Snyder version and Ben Affleck, and that's OK I suppose. That version to me came off like an edgelord's view of Frank Miller's Dark Knight Returns Batman. That's clearly the version Snyder liked the most and wanted to make. But it doesn't work in a Cinematic Universe where you're meant to bring the characters together and start the Justice League.
If they wanted to do that, they should've focused more on a Timm/Dini style since that's a contemporary take and it really combines all the favored elements of Batman and ditches a lot of the lesser aspects that give people a hard time.
@theMan-Bat That really doesn't surprise me that Burton sighted the visual aspect of TKJ as what he loved rather than the story and characterization. I've always felt he was more about visual and less about story.
Surprisingly even Alan Moore considers the story of The Killing Joke among his worst works, but notes that the visual aspect by Brian Bolland is beautiful, "I’ve never really liked my story in The Killing Joke. I think it put far too much melodramatic weight upon a character that was never designed to carry it. It was too nasty, it was too physically violent. There were some good things about it, but in terms of my writing, it’s not one of me favorite pieces – although I of course remember Brian Bolland’s art as being absolutely beautiful..." Alan Moore Has A Lot To Say About 'The Killing Joke'
In his book Burton on Burton Tim Burton described his movies as, "They're all weird character pieces. I have just been drawn to who they are, even on a kind of symbolic level. I don't think anybody would consider these pictures to be in-depth character studies, but they're alternative character pieces. I always fight that literal impulse to lay everything directly in front of you."
]As for that one off story in 1974, Night of the Stalker, where Batman doesn't say a word being an influence, ok but one story where his character was silent does not make a good representation of the character in contrast to the thousands of comics where he says plenty. That's my point. I mean would it be great to have a silent Batman movie where nobody says anything just because they did that in Batman #433? If Waters or you or who ever prefers a Batman who doesn't have much to say then fine. That's a personal preference. But its far from being against the nature of the character to have plenty of dialogue. They've all done it. From West to Conroy.
Also in that first 1939 Batman story "The Case of the Chemical Syndicate" Batman had no dialogue at all until the last two pages of the story. Plus Michael Keaton did indeed break his self imposed limited Batman dialogue at times and becomes talkative as you pointed out in the scene in Batman Returns trying to reason with Catwoman, and I pointed out in the scene in Batman (1989) explaining to Miss Vale that he cracked Joker's poison scheme.
Adam West's Batman is a representation of the most openly chatty version, which had been most commonly prevalent in the Silver Age era comics, Michael Keaton's Batman is a representation of the most mysterious one that's less talkative, which is a throwback to the 1939 Batman, and throwback stories like "Night of the Stalker" from the 1970s mysterious Batman revival comics, mixed with bits of Killing Joke inspiration, Sam Hamm and Keaton sighted bits of Dark Knight Returns as inspiration, too, etc.
I'd call Bale's version a representation of the Post-Crisis comics Batman, since it's based on a combination of bits from Batman: Year One, The Long Halloween, "The Man Who Falls" story and the "Knightfall" arc.
While Ben Affleck's edgelord version seemed to be a misinterpretation of Miller's Dark Knight Returns by Zack Snyder. Even Miller's edgy Batman didn't Bat-brand people like cattle etc.
Kilmer and Clooney's jokey Batty seemed to be Schumacher trying and failing to recapture the colorful campy fun of the Silver Age Batman comics with added rubber nipples and a gaudy day-glow eyesore of a Gotham City, a neon Riddler, etc. Yuch!
Lewis Wilson and Bob Lowery are dirt-cheap poverty row serials Batmen that couldn't even afford a Batmobile.
Surprisingly even Alan Moore considers the story of The Killing Joke among his worst works, but notes that the visual aspect by Brian Bolland is beautiful, "I’ve never really liked my story in The Killing Joke. I think it put far too much melodramatic weight upon a character that was never designed to carry it. It was too nasty, it was too physically violent. There were some good things about it, but in terms of my writing, it’s not one of me favorite pieces – although I of course remember Brian Bolland’s art as being absolutely beautiful..."
I thought the story was nasty in a way that was disturbing but also appropriate, fitting, and it's too bad that Moore now thinks the characters are and should remain a certain way, simplified innocent and mostly cheery (well TKJ-like story and style probably shouldn't be done every month but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be done occasionally). I don't see how grimness, let alone focus on psychological problems, is a ghetto for comics.
@theMan-Bat Yeah I'm aware of Moore's opinion on TKJ. It wouldn't be the first eyebrow raising opinion that guy has had. He also wouldn't be the first artist to poop on one of his own works either. For example, Burton himself isn't a big fan of Batman '89; 'Looking back on the picture, Tim Burton stated, “I like parts of it, but the whole movie is mainly boring to me. It’s OK, but it was more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie.”' - Freakishly Clever: A Tim Burton Profile (Part 1)
You've pointed out two isolated stories out of what was at the time a 50 year comic book history, and only one is a notable story simply because it was his first ever tale, which did not even have an Alfred, Gordon, Gotham City, Batcave, Batmobile etc. I don't see this as any kind of justification to make the character barely speak. Like I said if its a personal preference, that's fine, we all have our preferences. But I don't see it as justified via the source material since Batman has predominantly been a character who can and does talk plenty. One thing we wholly agree on is the misrepresentation of Miller's Batman via Batfleck. That was just awful.
@theMan-Bat Yeah I'm aware of Moore's opinion on TKJ. It wouldn't be the first eyebrow raising opinion that guy has had. He also wouldn't be the first artist to poop on one of his own works either. For example, Burton himself isn't a big fan of Batman '89; 'Looking back on the picture, Tim Burton stated, “I like parts of it, but the whole movie is mainly boring to me. It’s OK, but it was more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie.”' - Freakishly Clever: A Tim Burton Profile (Part 1)
Yup, I'm aware of Burton's feelings on Batman (1989), too, Mistah J. Producers Jon Peters and Peter Guber and second unit director Peter MacDonald interfered on Batman (1989). Tim Burton was deeply offended that Jon Peters, etc. would interfere with a creative decision. So Tim Burton complained in Details [June 1992] that, "Batman [(1989)] wasn't so much my movie - it was a conglomerate." Batman- The 1989 Film: Vintage Magazine Article: "Details" June 1992
And in Inside Hollywood [August 1992] Michael Keaton said, "And the script for Batman Returns is even better than the original. The first one was flawed. It didn't have a strong story in places. A couple of scenes, like that Macy's Day Parade From Hell, were boring. But then the next scene was brilliant. It was an uneven film... moments of brilliance interspersed with tedium. But Tim created a mood throughout that made it a great film." Batman- The 1989 Film: Vintage Magazine Article: "Inside Hollywood" August 1992
Tim Burton wanted to withdraw from Jon Peters and Peter Guber as Bat producers so they were not involved in Batman Returns, and Michael Uslan sued Jon Peters and Peter Guber in 1992. https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...-batman/618f302a-4ec5-4a9d-a413-e94d2b98ced5/
You've pointed out two isolated stories out of what was at the time a 50 year comic book history, and only one is a notable story simply because it was his first ever tale, which did not even have an Alfred, Gordon, Gotham City, Batcave, Batmobile etc.
Actually, Commissioner Gordon first appeared in that first Batman story, "The Case of the Chemical Syndicate," from Detective Comics #27 (1939) created by Bill Finger with only the art by credit hogging Bob Kane. And he wasn't Sergeant Gordon or Lieutenant Gordon or Major Crimes Unit Gordon. Gordon first appeared as Commissioner Gordon in Detective Comics #27 (1939). Alfred and the Batcave were created on the 1943 dirt-cheap poverty row Batman serial. The original Batman didn't need a Alfred or a Lucius Fox to do any of his thinking for him. Detective Comics #31 (1939) says "Through the dark of a New York night.." The name Gotham City didn't appear until Batman #4 (1941). Bill Finger explained in the Steranko History of Comics Vol. 1 (1970), "Gotham is another name for New York." And Tim Burton explained on the Batman (1989) DVD commentary, "We just took the approach that there was a parallel universe New York." In the Starlog Yearbook Vol.. 5 (1989) Anton Furst explained, "Gotham City is definitely based in many ways on the worst aspects of New York." In Batman Returns: The Official Book of the Movie (1992) by Michael Singer, Bo Welch explained that Gotham Plaza is "a deliberate caricature of Rockefeller Center in New York. You never see any set or any piece of the city in its entirety. You see a piece of the city here and another piece there. It allows your mind to fill in the rest and use your imagination." Gotham wasn't another name for Chicago. The 1939 Batman drove an automobile that was described as a specially built high-powered auto. In the Starlog Yearbook Vol.. 5 (1989) Anton Furst explained, "We went back to the salt flat speed machines of the '40s, when they were doing all the speed trials, and then took.elements of all the vehicles that had that brutality built in them, and put them together." Batman- The 1989 Film: Vintage Magazine Article: "Starlog Yearbook" Vol. 5, 1989
The name "Batmobile" didn't appear in Batman (1989), not until Batman Returns, just as the Batmobile name didn't historically appear in the comics until Detective Comics #48 (1941) "The Secret Cavern" written by Bill Finger. The Tumbler tank wasn't called a Batmobile in Batman Begins, or The Dark Knight, or The Dark Knight Rises. In Comics Scene #3 (1988) Batman (1989) scriptwriter Sam Hamm explained about Batman (1989), "I felt it was just like that original Batman story in 1939 ["The Case of the Chemical Syndicate"] which starts out with this mysterious Batman who goes off on his exploits. And the shock at the end is it [Batman] turns out to be Bruce Wayne. The twin agendas I thought were right to work with were: 1) Determine what is the kind of story structure that will make Batman sufficiently menacing. He's a frightening character. His whole gimmick, the only reason to wear the bat costume, is to frighten people. And 2) Do what that initial [1939] Batman story did and take Batman as a fait accompli. In other words, if you start with Batman and work backwards to [show he is] Bruce Wayne, then you have a structure that allows you to see this character's impact on the rest of the people in the story. You don't have to waste half-an-hour [on the origin and] getting him into the costume. People are paying to see the guy in the [bat] suit kick some bad guys. If you're paying to see Batman, then you want to see Batman." Batman- The 1989 Film: Vintage Magazine Article: "Comics Scene" Issue #3 July 1988
"Shut up, you're going to jail", "Wrong on both counts", "Why are you doing this? Lets just take him to the Police, then we can go home...together. Selina, don't you see we're the same. We're the same. Split, ripped down the center. Selina please". If Schreck had not knocked him on him on his ass with a bullet he'd probably have still been talking.
LOL. That's true. Also in Batman (1989): "The police have got it wrong. They're looking for one product. The Joker's tainted hundreds of chemicals at the source. Each product only contains one component. The poison only works if the components are mixed. Hair spray won't do it alone. But hair spray and perfume and lipstick will be toxic and untraceable. Take this to the press..." and he keeps on talking.
I thought the story was nasty in a way that was disturbing but also appropriate, fitting, and it's too bad that Moore now thinks the characters are and should remain a certain way, simplified innocent and mostly cheery (well TKJ-like story and style probably shouldn't be done every month but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be done occasionally). I don't see how grimness, let alone focus on psychological problems, is a ghetto for comics.
I didn't like what the story did to Barbara Gordon, and Batman sharing a laugh with the Joker after crippling Babs, and I could do without naked Commissioner Gordon, too, etc. I totally preferred Barbara Gordon Batgirl over angsty Oracle stuck in a wheelchair. That's why I think Birds of Prey was misguided, too, for Barbara Gordon to be stuck in a wheelchair in a world with a Lazarus Pit, a Wayne Technologies and a S.T.A.R. Labs, etc. yet in grim gritty Post-Crisis nobody could figure out a way to fix her legs. I bet Tim Burton's Batgirl would've been Winona Ryder.
Except in Dark Knight Rises he's retired because he basically won and all organized crime was basically overthrown due to the Dent act. "Peace time" and all that. For eight years, Gotham was safe, and the big fish were out of the. He wasn't focused on the small-time crooks.
That was one of the main points of Batman Begins though. Bruce realizes it's the corruption that creates people like Joe Chill and that's what he should focus on eradicating.
That was one of the main points of Batman Begins though. Bruce realizes it's the corruption that creates people like Joe Chill and that's what he should focus on eradicating.
Yes. Not to mention, I find the idea of Batman retiring and Bruce becoming a recluse for 8 years silly and unbelievable. But they wrote themselves into a corner because of the ending of Dark Knight.
Not to mention, in other comics, Joe Chill is more than just a small-time crook driven desperate by a fictional depression.
Yes. Not to mention, I find the idea of Batman retiring and Bruce becoming a recluse for 8 years silly and unbelievable. But they wrote themselves into a corner because of the ending of Dark Knight.
Not to mention, in other comics, Joe Chill is more than just a small-time crook driven desperate by a fictional depression.
I think Batman focusing on the actual problem that creates street crime makes more sense than to waste time prowling the streets for it while leaving the actual problem untouched. Bruce also didn't become a recluse for 8 years, He was only one for three.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
And "he didn't murder, he just committed justifiable homicides" is kind of a ridiculous statement.
