Cinemassacre Reviews the Batman Films

[TMC1982]

http://www.cinemassacre.com/new/?p=605

 

[dude stannis]

Holy shizzle, I agree with that about 99%, the only difference is I'd go full scores for the two Burton and the two Nolan films, because even though I fully agree with all the gripes, I believe the strengths of those films fully make up for the problems.

 

[El Payaso]

Yeah, I agree with 98% of what this guy said.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I like that guy's reviews. Even though I personally liked BB a bit more then B89, It's refreshing to see him give his honest opinion without having to bash either film. I thought he was very fair in his assessment of all the films.

 

[Bat Attack]

Glad he wasn't a horribly biased fanboy of either series. Good reviews!

 

[deathfromabove]

meh...a little too "regualr guy" for my tastes.

everything even remotely artistic in the tim burton movies was "weird"?

thats all you got?

but very entertaining...

 

[El Payaso]

meh...a little too "regualr guy" for my tastes.

everything even remotely artistic in the tim burton movies was "weird"?

thats all you got?

but very entertaining...

Not enough bashing for you sir?

 

[Keymaker]

I love how his rating systems are the worst/funniest things about the respective films/series...like surfing Jokers and those MacDonald thingies t:

 

[Darthkush]

Good reviews. I think he's hard on "Returns" and I really thought he should've done Mask of the phantasm(as it was an theatrical release) but otherwise, really entertaining views.

 

[Borat]

I agree with some things, and disagree with some things. He does seem more of a regular guy who doesn't know as much about Batman as he lets on. Still good though.

 

[El Payaso]

I agree with some things, and disagree with some things. He does seem more of a regular guy who doesn't know as much about Batman as he lets on. Still good though.

What does he have to know about Batman to know what movies does he like and why?

 

[Borat]

What does he have to know about Batman to know what movies does he like and why?

True. I guess I'm thinking how he doesn't care too much about Batman's origin in BB. But I know the origin is what alot of fans love the most about Batman.

 

[AgentChaos0066]

His reviews were absolutely terrible.

 

[dude stannis]

His reviews were absolutely terrible.

Your review of his review is abolutely terrible. Mind being a little more constructive?

 

[El Payaso]

His reviews were absolutely terrible.

How so?

 

[AgentChaos0066]

Your review of his review is abolutely terrible. Mind being a little more constructive?

He was incredibly simplistic. Actually overly simplistic, almost without solid intelligence. As someone else stated, way too average stupid joe to be reviewing movies.

His reviews were just a wreck. The language, the total lack of understanding of virtually almost all of the movies he reviewed. He literally didn't understand them, and his criticisms in numerous instances were incredibly off base.

For example, when he refers to the scene in Batman Returns where Penguin bites the political advisors nose, causing it to bleed. He said it was uncalled for and out of the blue. THAT WAS THE POINT OF THE SCENE. He talks of how the Penguin was a character that you sympathize for as he's basically a misfit trying to fit into social order and the world above him that despises him. That scene shows why no matter how much Penguin tries, he's destined to be something different, a misfit. He's monsterous. That's why when to get back at someone making witty verbal jabs, he doesn't respond in kind with wit and puns, he bites his nose off. He didn't get it, then critiques it for totally off the wall and undeveloped reasons. There is plenty of reasons to critique Batman Returns for it's many flaws, but that scene? Hardly one of them. There are NUMEROUS instances of this simpleton and plain idiotic thinking through out his reviews.

BEGINS and TDK were the most intelligent films of the Batman and mass consumed comic book adaptation movie genre, yet the reviewer keeps describing them as pretentious? Are you serious? You'd have to be a ****** to consider them pretentious. They get their praise because they finally elevated the genre to it's standards in the best source materials from the all-time great graphic novels, etc. It finally got the intelligence and respect it deserved from the artists, and your complaint is basically it's too intelligent and/or pretentious? Are you kidding me?

Then just a little thing that bugged me. He talked about being annoyed by turning on the tv and seeing positive reviews and hype for The Dark Knight. Huh? If you're a fan of the character, and the masses are pumped for a QUALITY piece of cinema that advertises one of your favorite characters and movie franchises you'd be annoyed by that? Wow.

This reviewers intelligence is just ridiculously low. His criticisms, mostly unfounded, or totally underdeveloped or basically well thought out. Or even thought out period. Espically the criticisms of TDK. Joker too invincible? Yet praises B89 where the Joker escapes absolutely ridiculous situations left and right. Face it. These reviews are TERRIBLE. And the reviewer, a complete dumb ass.

I don't even know if he's a Batman fan. And obviously not someone who is a movie fan, who understands cinema.

How so?

Better?

 

[dude stannis]

BEGINS and TDK were the most intelligent films of the Batman and mass consumed comic book adaptation movie genre, yet the reviewer keeps describing them as pretentious? Are you serious? You'd have to be a ****** to consider them pretentious. They get their praise because they finally elevated the genre to it's standards in the best source materials from the all-time great graphic novels, etc. It finally got the intelligence and respect it deserved from the artists, and your complaint is basically it's too intelligent and/or pretentious? Are you kidding me?

You're just presenting your opinion as fact, at least the reviewer was being genuine. I think they're pretentious. You calling me a ******?

Begins and TDK beat the audience over the head with their themes, other films CBM films like Superman: The Movie and X-Men are far more subtle.

Espically the criticisms of TDK. Joker too invincible? Yet praises B89 where the Joker escapes absolutely ridiculous situations left and right.

Oh hell no.

Confrontations with Batman:

AXIS: He caught a ricochet bullet in the face and nearly drowned in chemicals.
Flugelheim: Batman only ducked in to rescue Vickie.
Climactic show down: Dies.

Nothing in B89 is anywhere near as convoluted as the things the Joker did in TDK, he planned on the car chase going exactly the way it did (Which includes Batman surviving the Tumbler taking a direct hit from an RPG), somehow escaped the police station thanks to an explosion than knocked everybody but him, somehow managed to plant bombs in half of Gotham City completely undetected, managed to escape a parade with hundreds of armed police officers trying to tackle him, etc etc.

Yes I'd say was doing him more than a few favours.

 

[AgentChaos0066]

dude love,

You've been a MASSIVE Burton Batman movie homer, and concurrent Nolan hater for some time.

You didn't even bother to tackle my other points about his reviews. Even my problems with his criticisms of Burton's Batman Returns.

I love how you so graciously gloss over or forget details in comparison to the Joker in B89who is comically given more room to escape in escapable situations, then proceed to fabricate and over accentuate aspects to TDK's Joker supposedly being more infallible.

And now you're not even worth being addressed. Can't discuss with you. You lack objectivity.

 

[AgentChaos0066]

Confrontations with Batman:

AXIS: He caught a ricochet bullet in the face and nearly drowned in chemicals.

Not like drowning in water there, buddy.

He should've died instantly from inhaling liquid chemicals ...

BWAHAHAHA

I'm not going to even bother with the rest.

Joker dodging missles and large cannon fire from a jet.

There is plenty of fantasy material in TDK, but it's sold to you in a more realistic and believable nature.

And I'm not even sitting here saying I don't like the Burton films the way you'd so easily put down the OBVIOUSLY superior films Nolan just put out. But hey, whatever floats your boat.

Burton put out one great Batman film, and a solid effort in his returns.

Nolan's film? Better from top to bottom.

 

[dude stannis]

dude love,

You've been a MASSIVE Burton Batman movie homer, and concurrent Nolan hater for some time.

Is that why I'm always rating his Batman films 10/10 in all the Rank/Rate thread?

You didn't even bother to tackle my other points about his reviews. Even my problems with his criticisms of Burton's Batman Returns.

I agreed with you, so why bother?

I love how you so graciously gloss over or forget details in comparison to the Joker in B89who is comically given more room to escape in escapable situations, then proceed to fabricate and over accentuate aspects to TDK's Joker supposedly being more infallible.

What did I gloss over and forget?

And now you're not even worth being addressed. Can't discuss with you. You lack objectivity.

Explains why you double posted.. wait no it doesn't.

Not like drowning in water there, buddy.

He should've died instantly from inhaling liquid chemicals ...

BWAHAHAHA

Good thing it's a comic book movie with no pretension of being anything else.

I'm not going to even bother with the rest.

Of course you're not.

Joker dodging missles and large cannon fire from a jet.

He was missing intentionally.

There is plenty of fantasy material in TDK, but it's sold to you in a more realistic and believable nature.

It's the fact that it was trying to sell it to me in a realistic nature that made me not buy it.

And I'm not even sitting here saying I don't like the Burton films the way you'd so easily put down the OBVIOUSLY superior films Nolan just put out. But hey, whatever floats your boat.

I like both roughly equally, it's just that I can accept the fact that one Burton did a certain of things better and Nolan did a certain set of things better. But since everyone has their lips firmly planted on Nolan's ass, I'm more inclined to defend Burton.

Burton put out one great Batman film, and a solid effort in his returns.

Nolan's film? Better from top to bottom.

Opinions and ********s.

 

[AgentChaos0066]

He was missing intentionally.

Really? Was that the director's cut? LOL ... thats why he's seen targeting HIM directly. The missles and cannon fire just fly else where ... all that fire power and it couldn't land one time. Mmmhmm

Then he takes down a jet with a shot from a 6 shooter?

Riiiight.

Fantasy is one thing, plot holes and completely illogical happenings even with suspension of disbelief is another.

You'd be one of the few who didn't buy into the HYPER-realism of BEGINS and/or The Dark Knight. Because it was FANTASTICALLY done. They made everything, even as fantasy driven as it was, make sense and within the movie world ... made you suspend your disbelief with intelligence and well thought out reasoning.

Pretentious because it doesn't just wallow in medocrity of simply being a "comic book movie", because it's compromised of comic book characters? Please. Good thing they didn't go that simpleton route, or we wouldn't have recieved two of the best and most well thought out adaptation stories of a comic book character of all-time. Yes, TDK was aggressive and reached beyond it's pulp roots, and it should be given it's just due. Because it was successful at it. You call it pretentious, I call it deserving quality.

It's a funny world, we live in.

 

[dude stannis]

Really? Was that the director's cut? LOL ... thats why he's seen targeting HIM directly. The missles and cannon fire just fly else where ... all that fire power and it couldn't land one time. Mmmhmm

No that's why the whole surrounding area was highlighted too.

Then he takes down a jet with a shot from a 6 shooter?

Riiiight.

That bothers me too.

Fantasy is one thing, plot holes and completely illogical happenings even with suspension of disbelief is another.

You'd be one of the few who didn't buy into the HYPER-realism of BEGINS and/or The Dark Knight. Because it was FANTASTICALLY done. They made everything, even as fantasy driven as it was, make sense and within the movie world ... made you suspend your disbelief with intelligence and well thought out reasoning.

I'm glad you enjoyed it. I just happen to think some things didn't happen to be done as FANTASTICALLY as you did.

Pretentious because it doesn't just wallow in medocrity of simply being a "comic book movie", because it's compromised of comic book characters? Please. Good thing they didn't go that simpleton route, or we wouldn't have recieved two of the best and most well thought out adaptation stories of a comic book character of all-time. Yes, TDK was aggressive and reached beyond it's pulp roots, and it should be given it's just due. Because it was successful at it. You call it pretentious, I call it deserving quality.

Ok you obviously haven't being paying attention, I call them pretentious because the dialogue lacks subtlety, I don't have a problem with the moisture evapourators that for some reason don't evapourate humans or omniJoker, it's the dialogue. That's why I prefer Superman: The Movie and the dialogue of Spider-Man and X-Men because they don't overtly beat me over the head with their themes and ram them down my throat. Some people prefer subtlety and others prefer a louder more direct style.

Since when did simply being a "comic book movie" constitute mediocrity? A lot of people in the film industry reached and exceeded their potential. Some of the CBM films guys like Sam Raimi, Richard Donner, Guillermo Del Toro, Bryan Singer, Jon Favreau, Robert Downey Jr., Edward Norton, Christopher Reeve, Ron Perlman, et al have gone on to say that some of their best and/or most personal work has come from CBM films. Are you calling all these people mediocre?

It's a funny world, we live in.

Yeah, one where we all have differing opinions. I personally love it.

 

[El Payaso]

Better?

Effort was all we asked for. Without it your last post seemed to be all you accused this critic of being and lack of, but 1000 worse.

 

[Evil_Meanie]

Fantasy is one thing, plot holes and completely illogical happenings even with suspension of disbelief is another.

I'm sorry, but The Joker surviving what appears to be a sure death has been a staple of his comic book appearances since Bob Kane decided not to kill him off in his second appearance. The movie was simply paying tribute to the work that it was based off of. Sure, it doesn't necessarily make sense, but it's a staple of the character. He even does this in the Animated Series.

 

[El Payaso]

I'm sorry, but The Joker surviving what appears to be a sure death has been a staple of his comic book appearances since Bob Kane decided not to kill him off in his second appearance. The movie was simply paying tribute to the work that it was based off of. Sure, it doesn't necessarily make sense, but it's a staple of the character. He even does this in the Animated Series.