The Dark Knight Nolan needs more imagination.

[Morgoth]

That's the one thing that still bugs me. I worry about the Joker, 'cause he didn't even want the Scarecrow to wear his mask, I guess that's why he kept taking it off every five seconds!

These poeple need to know that if they are making a comic book movie it is just that. Don't act like it's something to be ashamed of.

Comics are cool, and so are the costumes and fantasy about them. It's all part of it and it's cool!!!

You don't need all these bloody excuses why a character wear a costume or mask, they just do, and they do 'cause that's part of who they are, that's all the explanation needed.

Scarecrow is his persona, that's why he dresses that way. Just like the Joker needs to lok like well, the JOKER!

I'm so sck of realism, these are Super heroes, I don't care if Batman doesn't have super powers or not, some of his enemies do and that's beside the point, Batman's still fantasy.

Even with movies like X-men they pulled that crap and ruined them.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

Give me a break, Melkor. Seriously.

How many times do we have to go through this?

Nolan made Begins with a bent towards realism. Yes. That doesn't mean he doesn't want realism in his Batman films. It means that he wanted to ground his Batman universe in reality.

At the end of Batman Begins, the Narrows was flooded with fear gas and the inmates of Arkham were in it when it happened.

That makes it pretty obvious that all bets are off now, okay? Nolan doesn't mind having all the colorful crazies in his movies. He just wanted to give them a reason for being there.

Now... can we call this discussion done with?

 

[Carnotaur3]

You also don't need to handicap the director to follow everything a comic book does. Let his vision for the films be.

 

[MechaOrga]

I personally loved his version of the scarecrow......

And you also need to remember that these chracters are all just starting out.

Think of scarecrow in Batman begins as "scarecrow begins"

In the script, johnathon crane is a still a working member of society. He runs a whole asylum for pete's sake and he has to appear in court.

He uses the mask only when he has to. At the end of the movie when all goes to shyt and he goes bat-shyt crazy, only then are we treated to scarecrow in his glory(although all to brief but still....)

I think that the scarecrow you know and love will be more of himself in the sequel IF they bring him back mind you....

Also you need to remember that these are actors, good actors that need to ACT under these costumes and if you cover there faces all the time, things get lost (hence no lenses on Bale---you need him to pierce people with his eyes)

There is a great scene in arkham when cillian is darting his eyes and body around(the scene, "its the Bat-man") where is he had if mask on, it wouldn't have worked....

Ok im done

 

[explode7]

Hey I'm cool with it being done right now.

 

[Crooklyn]

I think this thread had potential...had the title and post inside it, been worded more eloquently and encouraged a well thought-out discussion. But maybe next time.

 

[NinjaTurtleFan]

That's the one thing that still bugs me. I worry about the Joker, 'cause he didn't even want the Scarecrow to wear his mask, I guess that's why he kept taking it off every five seconds!

These poeple need to know that if they are making a comic book movie it is just that. Don't act like it's something to be ashamed of.

Comics are cool, and so are the costumes and fantasy about them. It's all part of it and it's cool!!!

You don't need all these bloody excuses why a character wear a costume or mask, they just do, and they do 'cause that's part of who they are, that's all the explanation needed.

Scarecrow is his persona, that's why he dresses that way. Just like the Joker needs to lok like well, the JOKER!

I'm so sck of realism, these are Super heroes, I don't care if Batman doesn't have super powers or not, some of his enemies do and that's beside the point, Batman's still fantasy.

Even with movies like X-men they pulled that crap and ruined them.

I see what you're saying because I can't see why Nolan won't use The Penguin. I kind of doubt we'll see Victor Fries/Mr. Freeze in a Nolan Batman film too. And I admit I was a little disappointed not to see The Scarecrow running around in tattered rags with his mask and a brimmed hat, but he did wear a torn straightjacket and when he came riding in on that horse I was like, "Yeah, that's The Scarecrow I want!"

Nolan basically doesn't want to repeat some of the mistakes Schumacher made and Burton too, which is understandable, but I do agree comic books are their own fantasyworld, they are their own mythology, and they shouldn't be treated as nothing else besides that. However, not every director can do a shot-for-shot adaptation of a comic ala Zack Snyder and Robert Rodriguez did with Frank Miller's work. Sometimes a director just sits down and takes the best key things from different comics and decides to splice it all in.

I'm like you I want to see Nolan get a little unrealistic with The Joker and other villains, but I too want him to keep it in a realm that it will all fit in.

Besides, as Bruce put it, "A guy who dresses up as a bat clearly has issues." If that ain't realistic seeing a guy in tights hunting down bad guys as a bat I don't know what it is.

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

It's his style.

Just like Burton's style is German Expressionism and Schumacher's style is glitz and glam.

And, since those styles have already been done, and that series is apparently over, it's someone else's turn to put their stamp on the character, it just happens to be a relatively down to earth stamp, at least as down to earth as you can get when you're still dealing with characters like Batman and Scarecrow.

The last series was very colorful and "comic-booky." And that was great. But like I said, that series is over. And this is the new style.

And if anything, Batman as a franchise is avoiding repeating itself. We've seen a great Joker already in Nicholson; but I'm very interested to see a different approach. If I wasn't, I would just watch the old movies over and over again. Which I do, but now I have Nolan's to watch over and over again too.

 

[Boom]

"Take this guy. Armed robbery, double homicide. Got a taste for the theatrical, like you. Leaves a calling card."

It'll be fine.

 

[thedarks0ldier]

I have to hand it to my old buddy Morgoth though, at least he didn't start by saying "I don't care that you guy's disagree aand don't bother responding because I am not going to read them."

 

[Catman]

You also don't need to handicap the director to follow everything a comic book does. Let his vision for the films be.

Talk about double-standard. When its Tim Burton directing he should be 100% faithful, but if its Nolan he can just do his thing.

Nice.

 

[Agentsands77]

Talk about double-standard. When its Tim Burton directing he should be 100% faithful, but if its Nolan he can just do his thing.

Nice.

I don't think Carnotaur suggested any such thing in his post.

 

[Attikus]

Burton was good. Schumacher was...not so good. But Nolan hit the nail on the head. Batman is flesh and blood. He bleeds. His world is our world and Nolan understood that. Batman doesn't live in a world populated by giant naked statues of men.

Nolan knows what he's doing. The Joker will be scarier than Hannibal, Darth Vader and Freddy Kruger combined.

 

[Miranda Fox]

Friendly suggestion for Morgoth - go back to Bluetights and whine with your buddy Twisted Bat and leave the real discussion to the adults k thx.

Talk about double-standard. When its Tim Burton directing he should be 100% faithful, but if its Nolan he can just do his thing.

Nice.

I'm pretty sure that's not what he meant. Seriously, there's no need to be so defensive.

 

[Cyrusbales]

I think his imagination lacking extends further than his costume thoughts, BB is rather cliche'd and has some very stereoypical action film moments and parts of direction.

 

[Darknightnomis]

I can't repond to this thread as so many has responded appropiatley to such an un-imaginative question.

However I will say this....

Burton was REALLY, REALLY good on the First Batman movie (wipe the stench of the campy 60s movie and TV show)

Burton was too creepy and weird on 'Batman Returns' (Was Batman in that movie? People tend to forget this was 'Batman and Robin' before Batman and Robin')

Schumacher was good in 'Batman Forever' (because it was the first Batman movie about...Bruce Wayne! what a novel concept) And Val Kilmer was a good Batman/Bruce Wayne.

Schumacher SOLD OUT for Batman and Robin and that's why it's is what it is! A piece of $#!*

Nolan however, was GREAT! That was the BAtman movie I've been waiting for and didn't even know it. Thnak you Mr. Nolan. YOu have my eternal gratitude!

To say it lack imagination is....well it's someting, but it' s definately not right.

 

[zanos]

Burton was good. Schumacher was...not so good. But Nolan hit the nail on the head. Batman is flesh and blood. He bleeds. His world is our world and Nolan understood that. Batman doesn't live in a world populated by giant naked statues of men.

Nolan knows what he's doing. The Joker will be scarier than Hannibal, Darth Vader and Freddy Kruger combined.

Uh..no. Batman's world is utter fantasy. It has absolutely nothing to do with our reality in any way. When you start grounding fantasy characters in realism you're doing a grave injustice to that character because you're basically neutering them.

 

[Miranda Fox]

Yes. How dare anyone have a positive opinion about BB.

 

[Fenrir]

That pic can get you banned, bud.

 

[Miranda Fox]

That pic can get you banned, bud.

Yeah, I was wondering about that...still, it's not as bad as Lemon Party. *snerk*

 

[blind_fury]

Nolan's movie lack iconic imagery and atmosphere. Imagination does not equal nipples on the Batman costume. It equals memorable action scene choreography(The Bourne Identity), ambitious cinematography(Children of Men), classic screenplay and dialogue(Robocop, Fight Club), epic storytelling(Mask of the Phantasm) and inspired adaptation of the source material(V for Vendetta, MOTP).

Imagination doesn't mean nipples on Batman. Don't be so simple.

 

[Eros]

My problems with Nolans Batman world so far, Bruce becomes Batman at 30. The fight scenes are oddly shot,Begins was a fun flick, but Batman89 was all around fun and entertainment, while remaining a very dark movie. Non the less Nolan does need to improve with TDK.

 

[thegameq]

Uh..no. Batman's world is utter fantasy. It has absolutely nothing to do with our reality in any way. When you start grounding fantasy characters in realism you're doing a grave injustice to that character because you're basically neutering them.

You know I have to agree with this; when you try to make these characters and the world they live in "real" it really takes alot away from what makes the comics so enjoyable in the first place--it still amazes me that so many really still don't get it........imagine if someone tried to make a realistic Spider-man movie? I shudder to think how it would have turned out.

Also, as entertaining and well made as Nolan's film was, my impression from many batfans (as well as my own hopes) is that they were hoping this latest iteration of Batman would finally be the one to bring the comicbook to life--especially after the way Spider-man was bought to life--especially after all the nay-sayers, who literally swore blood oaths that a man in tights swinging around would never work. Moreso, especially after Spider-man's success despite Raimi's straight out of the comicbook approach.

Frankly, I don't think we will ever see a true comicbook representation of Batman ala Spider-man. The world of Batman is very noir-ish and his stories are also very noir-ish and intelligent; more The Shadow and Sherlocke Holmes than James Bond and Indiana Jones. Sadly that type of movie, while it will find it's audience and gather accolades if done right, willl have limited appeal. In other words, we will always see "summer movie rubber suit Batman". Batman is to big a cash cow for WB to let it be made into a movie that might have limited appeal, even if the film was a work of art. Kinda sad and disappointing, Batman is a cultural icon. Unfortunately, the films never seem to match the image of said cultural icon.

 

[Miranda Fox]

But Nolan's Batman isn't really realistic and that's what a lot of detractors don't seem to really get. They keep bringing up realism without ever really comprehending what that means and why it's wrong when frankly, it's completely and utterly moot.

As he once said himself - it's a universe that's credible.

In the same way you can argue Raimi's Spider-man is credible. Sure, nobody is going to be really bitten by a DNA-altered spider and become a super-hero but it was presented in a way in which we could buy into it.

And that is what Nolan is doing.

In the end, if it's not a take you like, then fine but sometimes I just wish people would stop using realism when it's just not a viable argument.

No disrespect meant to you of course, game.

 

[sasquatchs]

Its about verisimilitude, not realism. And Batman is the only major superhero where that's possible (maybe debatable). Plus there's nothing to stop you telling a noirish Sherlock Holmes story in that way, doesn't have to be mundane to feel real.

I'm sure there'll be plenty of time for iconic Batman this time anyway