The Dark Knight the dark knight and what we want

[donk70]

So any director should just do what the fanbase wants and/or make no changes tot he source material? Slavish adherence to the source material does not automatically make for a better movie. The Ducard/Ras thing was a complete invention, but worked really well.

Re the lipstick: Joker has applied lipstick in the past, DKR springs to mind.

Also, there's no need to be so defensive. Everyone's here to share opinions.

Did I say that every director should do what the fanbase says?

It's about having respect for the mythos and repect for the people who created the mythos. When you change something it's like saying that the original is not good enough to have exsited.

And for the record, I was mildly disappointed by the Ducard/Ras thing.


True, but did he smear it all over his face sloppily? No

Personally, I think Miller messed up when he put that in the story.


And you and your like are part of the reason I'm being defensive. No one is allowed to have a different opinion than you.

 

[itsthebatman]

Did I say that every director should do what the fanbase says?

It's about having respect for the mythos and repect for the people who created the mythos. When you change something it's like saying that the original is not good enough to have exsited.

And for the record, I was mildly disappointed by the Ducard/Ras thing.


True, but did he smear it all over his face sloppily? No

Personally, I think Miller messed up when he put that in the story.


And you and your like are part of the reason I'm being defensive. No one is allowed to have a different opinion than you.

Me and my like? Find an example where I have ever insulted someone for having a different opinion to me.
This (bolded) statement is complete rubbish. In general terms, this means of any adaptation cannot veer from the source material. In Batman terms, there is no one definitive version of any character, and if everyone 'respected' the mythos the whole time, we wouldn't have had iconoclastic interpretations like DKR, TKJ and Arkhma Asylum, to name but three.

 

[ronzpeed]

I want people to stop whining!

The irony of this is hilarious.

 

[donk70]

Me and my like? Find an example where I have ever insulted someone for having a different opinion to me.
This (bolded) statement is complete rubbish. In general terms, this means of any adaptation cannot veer from the source material. In Batman terms, there is no one definitive version of any character, and if everyone 'respected' the mythos the whole time, we wouldn't have had iconoclastic interpretations like DKR, TKJ and Arkhma Asylum, to name but three.

Again, there you go with putting words in my mouth. Did I say insulted? No, I didn't. But what you do is get keyed up when I state a differing opinion than you. It's quite amusing, actually. And before you say anything, I'm not trolling.

And I believe the only one story out of the 3 that is considered canon is TKJ, although all 3 are great stories.

And how do they veer from the source material?

 

[itsthebatman]

Again, there you go with putting words in my mouth. Did I say insulted? No, I didn't. But what you do is get keyed up when I state a differing opinion than you. It's quite amusing, actually. And before you say anything, I'm not trolling.

And I believe the only one story out of the 3 that is considered canon is TKJ, although all 3 are great stories.

And how do they veer from the source material?

I'm not keyed up. All I'm doing is offering my opinion and arguing my side, same as you. Your original post was very defensive. Alright then: find me an example where I've ever said nobody is allowed have a different opinion from me.

My point is this: films and comics are two very definite media, and what may work, and work well, in a comic, may not transfer well to film. Characters, their looks, motivations and personality change and mutate all the time: the Batman of the 70's is different from the 80's who is different from the 90's incarnation. He, and his supporting cast, are ripe for a wide variety of interpretations, with no one interpretation being definitive. It is not possible, with the many versions of the character over the years, to satisfy everything that everyone wants to see - there;s just too much going on.
With regard to this franchise, I think Nolan and co have shown a great deal of respect for the character to date, with Goyer on board to keep them true to the mythos.
For the record, I don't like the first Joker picture, and am much happier with the second, blurry though it is.

 

[BubbaGump]

I want people to stop whining!

Tell him to stoooooop eeeeet.

 

[Rezzo]

When you change something it's like saying that the original is not good enough to have exsited.

Changing something does not mean the original wasn´t good enough it is merely adapting it to work within the movie, everything does not work so sometimes things have to be adapted in order to work

 

[donk70]

Changing something does not mean the original wasn´t good enough it is merely adapting it to work within the movie, everything does not work so sometimes things have to be adapted in order to work

Excuse me, but what has not worked in the 68 years that Batman has been around?

 

[Rezzo]

Excuse me, but what has not worked in the 68 years that Batman has been around?

Jesus H Christ do you honestly expect to have everything that´s in the comics to be in the movies

 

[Eros]

Excuse me, but what has not worked in the 68 years that Batman has been around?

can we include 50s and 60s batman stories in the discussion?

 

[BubbaGump]

Jesus H Christ do you honestly expect to have everything that´s in the comics to be in the movies

Umm...300?

 

[Rezzo]

Umm...300?

Sorry but 300 and Batman are not the same, they style in which 300 was shot was completely comic based and BB was not shot in that style

 

[The Redux 714]

Jesus H Christ do you honestly expect to have everything that´s in the comics to be in the movies

V for Vendetta (a bit)
300
Sin City
The Crow (to a certain extent)

Any other questions? I didn't think so...

 

[donk70]

I'm not keyed up. All I'm doing is offering my opinion and arguing my side, same as you. Your original post was very defensive. Alright then: find me an example where I've ever said nobody is allowed have a different opinion from me.

My point is this: films and comics are two very definite media, and what may work, and work well, in a comic, may not transfer well to film. Characters, their looks, motivations and personality change and mutate all the time: the Batman of the 70's is different from the 80's who is different from the 90's incarnation. He, and his supporting cast, are ripe for a wide variety of interpretations, with no one interpretation being definitive. It is not possible, with the many versions of the character over the years, to satisfy everything that everyone wants to see - there;s just too much going on.
With regard to this franchise, I think Nolan and co have shown a great deal of respect for the character to date, with Goyer on board to keep them true to the mythos.
For the record, I don't like the first Joker picture, and am much happier with the second, blurry though it is.

You havent said it, but yet when I post you scurry over and reply. Heck, you even wanted to take this debate to a thread that has nothing to do with the Joker or the film.

And how is there too much going on for Goyer and Nolan to keep the look of the Joker as he is in the comics? I mean, is there too much in the mythos to prevent them from doing this?

 

[Rezzo]

V for Vendetta (a bit)
300
Sin City
The Crow (to a certain extent)

Any other questions? I didn't think so...

HAHA oh you fanboys

Heres an idea if you want the movie to be your way then I suggest you all become movie directors and make your own film how you want it and we´ll see if you can accomplish a movie just like the comic is

 

[The Redux 714]

Jesus H Christ do you honestly expect to have everything that´s in the comics to be in the movies

Sorry but 300 and Batman are not the same, they style in which 300 was shot was completely comic based and BB was not shot in that style

Sin City

 

[donk70]

Jesus H Christ do you honestly expect to have everything that´s in the comics to be in the movies

Lol, easy easy there, Tonto. I'm just asking for an example of what hasn't worked in the past.

 

[Eros]

V for Vendetta (a bit)
300
Sin City
The Crow (to a certain extent)

Any other questions? I didn't think so...

stop compareing and contrasting, certain things are changed, accept it and move on. As logn as the movies ae good, and you like them, thats all thats needed.

 

[donk70]

can we include 50s and 60s batman stories in the discussion?

Ughhh, while I am not a big fan of Bat Mite, Batman Jr. and Batwoman, I gotta say that it did work for the time period they were in. Times were much more innocent back then


You have no idea how painful it was for me to admitt that......

 

[Rezzo]

Sin City

Sorry but 300 and Sin City were intended to be shot in that sytle which is ok because you can do everything like the comic cause it is intended to look like that but BB was not shot in that style so that makes things a littler harder to do visually cause it has to look believable

 

[itsthebatman]

V for Vendetta (a bit)
300
Sin City
The Crow (to a certain extent)

Any other questions? I didn't think so...

Don't know the Crow, so can't comment. But 300, Sin City and V for Vendetta are either one book, or a limited series of books, with a particular art style that can be directly reproduced on screen, as opposed to Batman, who looks vastly different depending on which artist is drawing him, and acts differently depending on the writer.
If you want to talk about adapting one particular story, like Year One, DKR or Long Halloween, then that's a different story altogether. I, for one, would love to see a 300/Sin City style DKR.

 

[BubbaGump]

HAHA oh you fanboys

Heres an idea if you want the movie to be your way then I suggest you all become movie directors and make your own film how you want it and we´ll see if you can accomplish a movie just like the comic is

No thank you. I like being a fanboy.

 

[itsthebatman]

You havent said it, but yet when I post you scurry over and reply. Heck, you even wanted to take this debate to a thread that has nothing to do with the Joker or the film.

And how is there too much going on for Goyer and Nolan to keep the look of the Joker as he is in the comics? I mean, is there too much in the mythos to prevent them from doing this?

Thank you. I'm just debating; computers here on my lap, your reply comes up, it would be churlish not to reply while my thoughts are fresh in my mind. I'm here to talk and chat, exchange points of view; would be boring if we all agreed on everything. It was just handier to debate in this thread; if you wanna go elsewhere, no problem.

Re your second point; this a specific argument. My answer is: I don't know. My theory is that this is the way they decided they could give Joker a freakishly large smile without giving him a Nicholson-esque perma-smile. After all, there's nobody who can actually smile as wide as the Joker can, the other option may have been CGI.
And this is the last I'll say in this thread on the topic.

And a couple of examples of not very wide smiles, just to destro my own argument.

 

[Victarion]

Talia as a love interest. Sadly, looks like Selina's got a better chance here.

 

[David Rice]

Unfortunely that won't happen, if we all agreed then what's point of discussion?

There is no problem with a discussion. I just don't think people should go on and on about this or that by saying the film will suck because.... (insert whatever you want)

Just a thought.... t: