Nolan wasnt any more "faithful" then Tim Burton

[RustyCage]

Replace GF with Jason Todd and you have the set up for The Dark Knight Returns. Heck, Rachel and Jason even died in a similar fashion (blown up by The Joker).

And they were both tied up with a false sense of hope for escape just prior, only to be cut short.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

The Batman of Earth-Two, whilst still in publication retired to become the Commissioner of police. In Kingdom Come Bruce retired from the Batman role. Frank Miller's Batman retires after Jason's death. Not to mention Batman Beyond (though that began as an animated series).

The habit of taking from other worlds for movies can be confusing for ones not reading them
But I like the idea

 

[747]

Being faithful is overrated as long as it's good. I dig both Burton and Nolan's take.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Being faithful is anything but overrated. It's severely underrated when people hope to see something faithful and they dog on something like Watchmen until years later when the majority seems to actually enjoy it now.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Faithfulness is necessary

 

[RustyCage]

Being faithful is anything but overrated. It's severely underrated when people hope to see something faithful and they dog on something like Watchmen until years later when the majority seems to actually enjoy it now.

My problem was never that Watchmen was unfaithful (it's extremely faithful), it was just that several things I consider to be important were edited down to death or cut out completely.

It needed to be two movies (I still feel that way about TDK Rises too), but I understand why it wasn't. WB was taking a pretty big gamble already, and it's kinda tough to find a satisfying 'halfway point' for Watchmen.

 

[Anno_Domini]

I didn't find that anything meaningful was really missed when I watched the Ultimate Cut, though.

I'm starting to realize that asking for a two-parter of TDKR is something that shouldn't be asked, imo. If anything, TDKR really just needed extra time, not another film added to it. That is asking too much I think.

 

[Lead Cenobite]

It annoys me when fans are lenient with Nolan's departures from the comics but not Burton's. I mean, if you simply find the Nolan movies to be better made, that's fine, but saying they're faithful is a stretch. There was so much "reimagining" going on in the name of realism that some characters were barely recognizable if not for their names. How is Ra's Al Ghul, who is not portrayed as an extreme environmentalist or immortal any more accurate than Devito's Penguin? There's just something about people's sudden open-mindedness after the years of merciless bashing against the Burton movies that really pisses me off.

 

[dude stannis]

Can't we just be glad we have several really diverse and equally interesting takes on a character we love?

Truthfully both Nolan and Burton departed from the comics. So what? Cinema is it's own art form and needs to be separated from comics.

 

[GothamAlleys]

I never thought copy and paste technique equals good, change equals bad. Thank god all movies adjusted the stories and characters to their needs. All movies changed major things and merged characters and events. - http://gothamalleys.blogspot.com/2011/03/list-of-changes-in-movies.html

 

[Lead Cenobite]

I don't mind change, it's just the hypocrisy of some fans annoys me. I don't know what it is about the Burton movies that earns it all the seething hatred it gets from the purists, because the Nolan movies are guilty of a lot of the same things.

 

[OutRiddled]

I don't care about little details so long as they remain true to the spirit of Batman. Yes, Batman has changed with the times like everything else but the roots of the character haven't changed.

The closest they ever got to show the real essence of the character is Batman '89. That is the closest you're ever going to get. Because it goes back to the original comics. And the original comic is like the first seed planted that grew a giant tree with lots of branches. But the very seed, the very kernel of what made Batman is still there in every incarnation, every outgrowth.

And Batman '89 goes right back to that. But people are going to ***** on and on about the Joker killing Batman's parents. Yet it has no relevance, really, it's just a minor detail.

Nolan's movies attempt to include a lot of the minor details, but they lose out on that original concept of Batman in the first place. By convoluting it with too much intellectual *********ion.

 

[Brain Damage]

The closest they ever got to show the real essence of the character is Batman '89. That is the closest you're ever going to get. Because it goes back to the original comics. And the original comic is like the first seed planted that grew a giant tree with lots of branches. But the very seed, the very kernel of what made Batman is still there in every incarnation, every outgrowth.

 

[theman]

the posts here have made me almost give up hope on humanity. so...MUCH...denial here. good luck with life nerds

but there are a few sparks of hope here as well im happy to see.

 

[theman]

Being faithful is overrated as long as it's good. I dig both Burton and Nolan's take.

now this I agree with. if the movie is awesome then, well, screw the comics. this is what I say about batman forever. I love the film, really its just one of my favorite movies to just put on and enjoy. it may be popular right now to hate on Schumacher but honestly I never had that compass because I don't consider myself one of "those" fans. I am a film fan first, always have, always will be. for me, Nolan got it the most right with batman begins. it may have been heavy with the realism but it still felt like a batman movie. perhaps it was just Nolan playing it safe with a blockbuster. after that, it was just Nolan doing what he does best, a lot of NYPD esque cop stories with so many twists and turns and self importance and overly complex storylines and so on. his movies lack the visual inventiveness of the other batfilms and is well kinda boring to watch. the big problem i have with chris nolans batman movies is that there is a distinct feeling of "ripoff" about his movies. think about this. where else have we seen a smaller vehicle pop out from the batmobile? where else have we seen batman gliding around the city among a large swarm of bats with terrified citizens screaming below? where else have we seen some guy say "what are you?" response after grabbing said guy "IM BATMAN"? where else have we seen the batmobile driving on rooftops? where else have we seen batman gunning down the joker as joker stands in the middle of the road egging batman on? where else have we seen joker have a fight with batman before falling to his doom? where else have we seen batman come to the aid of the damsel in distress from some villian and then has a long drive through gotham avoiding the cops while girl sits in the passengers seat terrified, and then brings her to his cave/lair/hideout where he proceeds to explain the details of the plot of the villian? where else have we seen the main villian try to gas the city? where else have we seen bruce wayne and selina kyle dancing together at a masquerade ball? where else have we seen batman have a fight with the villain in a sewer, with catwoman right there? gee, seems awfully familiar...maybe cuz nolan is just ripping parts from the other movies and calling it his own? PATHETIC. I guess its just a case of "better the first tme around". at least for me. tim burtons batman and BTAS got it the best.



also the response to the "batman doesn't wear puzzle piece armor" is a total copout, as that comic picture posted is from 2011, when the TDK suit was done in 2008 BEFORE that comic. so that doesn't mean anything, its just the comics stealing the movie idea of a puzzle piece armor looking suit. but 99% of the time, batman doesn't wear that.

 

[theman]

It annoys me when fans are lenient with Nolan's departures from the comics but not Burton's. I mean, if you simply find the Nolan movies to be better made, that's fine, but saying they're faithful is a stretch. There was so much "reimagining" going on in the name of realism that some characters were barely recognizable if not for their names. How is Ra's Al Ghul, who is not portrayed as an extreme environmentalist or immortal any more accurate than Devito's Penguin? There's just something about people's sudden open-mindedness after the years of merciless bashing against the Burton movies that really pisses me off.

word of warning, be prepared now to have to defend the original *best* supermans cuz the hypocrisy will be overwhelming.

 

[BatmanGoesToRio]

Faithfulness is necessary

I agree. But both directors took their liberties. Some of the changes they made may have been needed storywise. Some of them were lame and took away from the characters. And some of them were just for the sake of "changing something".
I'd say Nolan and Burton are on the same level with that but on different routes. Burton i.e. transformed pretty grounded characters to fantastic ones (Catwoman and Penguin) and Nolan transformed pretty fantastic characters to grounded ones (Ra's and Joker).

 

[OutRiddled]

I'd say Nolan and Burton are on the same level with that but on different routes. Burton i.e. transformed pretty grounded characters to fantastic ones (Catwoman and Penguin) and Nolan transformed pretty fantastic characters to grounded ones (Ra's and Joker).

Since when has Catwoman or Penguin ever been "grounded" characters?

Yeah, I know, you're only going to take more recent comics into consideration.. .. but if anything, Burton actually made these characters a hell of a lot more grounded than they used to be.

 

[TruerToTheCore]

OutRiddled, are you that dumb or are you trolling?

 

[OutRiddled]

OutRiddled, are you that dumb or are you trolling?

Yes, because calling me "dumb" isn't trolling.. t: Oh, what a wonderful world..

 

[batfreakforever]

All Bat-directors have been somewhat faithful.

 

[TX85]

The Nolan trilogy are my favorite Bat films as a whole and Bale is great..But they still aren't true Bat films in terms of making the source material justice!

I've always thought that Val Kilmer was an underrated Bruce Wayne AND Batman,Keaton is my favorite Batman and had the best Bat suit on film IMO(Returns)But Kilmer is by far my favorite Bruce and #2 Batman!!

Clooney got srewed with the B&R script!

 

[Two-Face]

The Nolan trilogy are my favorite Bat films as a whole and Bale is great..But they still aren't true Bat films in terms of making the source material justice!

I've always thought that Val Kilmer was an underrated Bruce Wayne AND Batman,Keaton is my favorite Batman and had the best Bat suit on film IMO(Returns)But Kilmer is by far my favorite Bruce and #2 Batman!!

Clooney got srewed with the B&R script!

You see I Was one of people who liked Val Kilmer's Batman (even though both Schumachers films weren't that good) I wanted Kilmer back for Batman And Robin he was great as Bruce/Batman and hes up there with Bale and Keaton in my opinion and he had a good Batman voice where's Clooney sounded same nothing different about the Batpersona.

I agree Clooney could have had a better script but I liked his Bruce Wayne though a lot.

 

[TX85]

Which was a shame cause Clooney had the perfect look for Bruce AND Batman even more than Kilmer

 

[ThePhantasm]

The Nolan trilogy are my favorite Bat films as a whole and Bale is great..But they still aren't true Bat films in terms of making the source material justice!

Year One, Long Halloween, No Man's Land, The Dark Knight Returns... the trilogy in some cases lifted directly from these comics. I don't see how they fail to do the source material justice.