The Official Batman Forever Thread - Part 2

[Tacit Ronin]

Yes. It was a "decent" film but we are entitled to more no?

 

[Cain]

Seriously the same dead horse gets beaten so much that it's about to resurrect and yell "for the love of god just let me rest in peace". We get it; BATMAN has a sloppy 3rd act. FYI cause it's obvious you don't know this otherwise bringing it up wouldn't be happening every 20 posts in this thread the 3rd act was NOT written by Sam Hamm.

It was rushed through during shooting because there was a WRITER'S STRIKE HAPPENING IN HOLLYWOOD AT THE TIME OF PRODUCTION and Hamm not being a scab didn't fly out to London to do touch ups. Everybody involved with the production has admitted that it's a sloppy 3rd act. Burton has regrets about the movie because of it and has said as much in the past. Nicholson has said he had no clue why the Joker was even climbing up to the belfry clearly cause rewrites were happening on the fly.

So there. That's why. Now can we please get back to discussing Batman Forever in the Batman Forever thread now?

 

[GothamLegend]

I completely disagree. Gotham (in the Burton films) did look like an actual city.

LOL, really? That Cathedral? Return's Gotham? Both movies taking place on looped confined streets and sets felt like an actual city to you? Surreal sure, real city? Where do you live? The way the citizens, police departments react to events made it feel like an actual city? Umm, no.

In your opinion, maybe. But that doesn't stop anyone from bashing the suits, especially because of the nipples.

You don't need to keep re-iterating that it's my opinion boss ... I know it is and I'm presenting it as such. I don't disagree. I think what he did was ridiculous, but it still makes sense given the overall context.

I didn't realize that there were "over the top performances" in either of the Burton films.

Jack's Joker performance is excused because the character kind of alloy for the over the top nature.

Devito's Penguin is ridiculously hammy and over the top. Little subtelty and nuance, IN MY OPINION (just so you don't have a fit about it : P) ... I like Pfieffer's performance, though.

They had some flaws but nowhere as extreme and the Schumacher films.

Burton's Batman Returns is EVERY bit as extreme as Shumacher's films. Just different kind of extreme.

It's kind of insulting to compare the Burton films with the Schumacher movies. Either that or you're doing a bad job of exaggerating.

Not really. Burton's films are slightly more adult, and visually darker. But they both are pretty dumb and go to extremes in their visuals and performances. Both seem to be done tongue in cheek without a true respect for the material, in my opinion.

Well that's your opinion.

Obviously, dude. You don't need to keep re-stating it. The point of message boards is to have discussions and SHARE opinion on a subject.

I thought both Batman and Bruce Wayne were quite fascinating in the first two. I have no idea where this came from because I never mentioned anything about this in the post that you quoted.

I was elborating on MY thoughts on the movie. I found Keaton's potrayl pretty unique and intriguing, but the character as written was very dull in both Burton films.

I don't understand how both 'verses are being compared.

Why can't they both be compared? They both directed two Batman movies. I'm not comparing Burton's Batman to Forrest Gump.

 

[Mister Meddle]

Not really. Because scenes prior lead us to believe the establishment very much care "you need to find out what this mad man is posioning us with and FAST ... do you read me?!!!!" ... "Were WORKING on it, I need all the help I can get." ... then Joker somehow takes over a broadcast of the mayor and ANNOUNCES he is going to have a parade, and the city knows he is a dangerous threat, and was ACTIVELY trying to stop him ... yet they don't come out to stop the parade? But arrive after the whole event while he's in a cathedral and don't have choppers, or swat team of their own to get men in the building?

It's not about realism, it's about having NO internal logic at all. It's stupidity.

Maybe because, in this universe that was inspired by a 1940's NYC, there was no such thing as a SWAT team?

The first SWAT team was established by inspector Daryl Gates in the Los Angeles Police Department in 1968.

 

[Cain]

Hey, who's up to talk about how bad Two-Face was in BF?

That performance is the one thing that really throws me out of the movie every single time. Especially when he does the multiple coin tosses I'm all for taking liberties with cinematic interpretations but that **** was too ridiculous. I wanted a cooler bad Tommy Lee Jones like in Under Siege or even Blown Away to contrast Carrey's Riddler. Not a buffoon who wails around on the street whenever he can't stub Batman's toes.

 

[The Morningstar]

Who isn't batting an eye lid? Joker was just brillaint and had it timed perfectly. Cops arrive right near when he's leaving too ... suspension of disbelief in this movie, because the intelligence everywhere else allows me to believe it's possible.

No, it's breaking it's own rules of logic. It wants to be this super serious crime drama, then it has stupid moments like that. How can it be forgiveable? It's breaking it's own "worlds" rules just to move the plot forward.

Same can be said of that trial scene where there is about 100 defendants all in there at the same time. That's stupid. Or the bullet scanning scene. That's stupid. Or a guy with a heavily disfigured face standing about 10ft away from the Mayor at the funeral service. That's stupid.

But... it has characters go into detail explaining how the RICO law works like a serious crime procedural movie.

Burton's movie has zero pretentions on being serious or realistic, so if there is moments of ridiculousness, it's par for the course. The world Burton builds and it's rules are more consistent than the world Nolan builds.

There is no ellapsed time in the bank robbery scene as the bus crashes through. It was in there for a very short time frame.

Well the editing there is bad. The bus must have been there at least 10 minutes.

Not really. Because scenes prior lead us to believe the establishment very much care "you need to find out what this mad man is posioning us with and FAST ... do you read me?!!!!" ... "Were WORKING on it, I need all the help I can get." ... then Joker somehow takes over a broadcast of the mayor and ANNOUNCES he is going to have a parade, and the city knows he is a dangerous threat, and was ACTIVELY trying to stop him ... yet they don't come out to stop the parade? But arrive after the whole event while he's in a cathedral and don't have choppers, or swat team of their own to get men in the building?

It's not about realism, it's about having NO internal logic at all. It's stupidity.

Maybe so. But the GCPD and the Gotham establishment is clearly corrupt. Hell the Mayor seems to be concerned about Joker being stopped so the anniversary celebrations can go on, more than stopping the Joker because he's a murdering nut case.

Which brings me to another point, maybe Joker and his goons just hijacked the parade? How does he do that? Who knows? How does Heath Ledger's Joker rig a whole hospital to blow up and fill two ferries with bombs without anyone noticing?

No, it is QUITE relevant. It's mob front companies that own banks. They house some of their liquidity in the banks THEY control. Who is crazy enough to try and dismember Gotham's Underworld, who at this point is banded together because of the Batman's impact ... only the Joker. Even then, he isn't making much dents in it by robbing millions of dollars.

Once again banks hold large sums of money. So it makes sense in that context. And NO where is it said or stated that this is all of their finances.

So the mob can own banks? Errr... what? That's stupid in itself. And I assume that is a big majority of their money, considering it filled up an 18 wheeler and was a literal mountain of cash. That's gotta be billions of dollars.

 

[Cain]

TDK board & TDK vs. '89 thread -----> that way

C'mon fellas be considerate; it's not like you have no access to that board or thread.

 

[GothamAlleys]

Let me be clear, I don't really have a problem with the bus in the bank thing. What I have a problem with is double standards and people saying TDK doesn't have any stupid things going on in it to move the plot forward. It does.

Same. One thing that gets me absolutely nuts and uptight is double standard. Unfair, pathetic double standard. How can one crap on one movie and pathetically find excuses for his 'favorite' for doing the same thing? I didnt touch this subject cause hey, someone doesnt like a movie being a movie, cool with me. But when I see this pathetic excusing of doing the exact same (meaning BEING A MOVIE) I cant stand it and the user drops in my eyes like a ton of brick walls in water. And btw, in movies things can happen other way than they would in real life or wouldnt happen at all - thats the BEAUTY of movies, that theyre unrestricted by reality.

Suspension of disbelief? If someone wont be looking or calculating where a car would land or how cop would behave or how bullet would act or why this didnt happen, I strongly believe all movies can be enjoyed for the pure core story and entertainment alone. I see in latest years movies and stories are judged by accuracy with reality instead of entertainment and artistic values, heart and characters

And people mudslinging Anton Furt's design bagging on movie for not being able to build entire city, just a part of it? Jesus Christ

 

[Cain]

I strongly believe all movies can be enjoyed for the pure core story and entertainment alone.

Absolutely as this is their inherent nature in their first place; entertaining storytelling. Whether with visuals and music alone like the silent pictures or through visuals coupled with anectdotes. I swear man if I overthank most of my favorite movies I probably wouldn't have ANY favorite movies. People forget to just "sit back and enjoy".

Movies are visceral experiences before everything else. They're not supposed to be an exercise in logic and intellect this is why they're NOT reality in the first place. I want escapism; see worlds that DO NOT reflect my own. Otherwise I'd rather just step outside and just be instead.

Yes you could look at movie from different angles and analyze their thematics and symbolism. That's something I enjoy doing myself. But I'm a bit of a cinephile and not just another general audience member. Bottom line is that the most important thing is that they function on their most primal level before anything else. Because most people will just view them for their sheer entertainment before anything else. Otherwise you just have another pretentious waste of time.

 

[The Morningstar]

Same. One thing that gets me absolutely nuts and uptight is double standard. Unfair, pathetic double standard. How can one crap on one movie and pathetically find excuses for his 'favorite' for doing the same thing? I didnt touch this subject cause hey, someone doesnt like a movie being a movie, cool with me. But when I see this pathetic excusing of doing the exact same (meaning BEING A MOVIE) I cant stand it and the user drops in my eyes like a ton of brick walls in water. And btw, in movies things can happen other way than they would in real life or wouldnt happen at all - thats the BEAUTY of movies, that theyre unrestricted by reality.

Suspension of disbelief? If someone wont be looking or calculating where a car would land or how cop would behave or how bullet would act or why this didnt happen, I strongly believe all movies can be enjoyed for the pure core story and entertainment alone. I see in latest years movies and stories are judged by accuracy with reality instead of entertainment and artistic values, heart and characters

Well said.

And people mudslinging Anton Furt's design bagging on movie for not being able to build entire city, just a part of it? Jesus Christ

People trashing Anton Furst's production design on Batman 89 are ********s who have **** taste. There, I said it.

 

[GothamAlleys]

Who isn't batting an eye lid? Joker was just brillaint and had it timed perfectly. Cops arrive right near when he's leaving too ... suspension of disbelief in this movie, because the intelligence everywhere else allows me to believe it's possible.

What? He predicted exactly to the milisecond WHEN hes going to exit and when the gap between the bus' going to be? He predicted talking to the mafia guy and putting the gas grenade in his mouth and all those extra seconds it will took him ? He predicted that bus' behind him wouldnt call cops?Anyone who knows anything about school buses knows they don’t drive behind each other in city traffic with a huge gap between them large enough for another school bus to just jump into the line.

There is no ellapsed time in the bank robbery scene as the bus crashes through. It was in there for a very short time frame.

11 minutes passed since the first shot of the floats appeared and till cops arrived on the scene in full force ready with floodlights etc in B89.

In TDK cops werent alarmed by bus crash. It mustve been silent alarm since there was NOBODY in front of the bank waiting for cops or anyone who could report it.

Not really. Because scenes prior lead us to believe the establishment very much care "you need to find out what this mad man is posioning us with and FAST ... do you read me?!!!!" ... "Were WORKING on it, I need all the help I can get." ... then Joker somehow takes over a broadcast of the mayor and ANNOUNCES he is going to have a parade, and the city knows he is a dangerous threat, and was ACTIVELY trying to stop him ... yet they don't come out to stop the parade? But arrive after the whole event while he's in a cathedral and don't have choppers, or swat team of their own to get men in the building?

You missed the fact he never mentionend where the parades gonna be. Thats why no one was waiting. If they knew, people would be lining up for money fighting for a spot. I a normal parade here in NYC and Jersey, people wait hours before any parade starts. What would couple of cops on the street do against full bunch of terrorist with machine guns? less than 5 minutes after they start gasing people police in full force arrives

It's not about realism, it's about having NO internal logic at all. It's stupidity.

Im sorry you feel that way about Batman movies. Perhaps one day theyll make one without illogical moves/parts so instead of cool and interesting ideas adding/needed for the story youll have a realism youre looking for

 

[The Morningstar]

Yea because we all know Batman and his mythos is realistic.

Oh wait, it's not. And imo there should be no attempt to "ground" it or make it realistic.

 

[GothamAlleys]

Before Ill go any further, I want to clarify for millionth time I LOVE Nolans Batman as much as Burtons. Its just that I dont disect movies, I watch them, I go with the flow. Im no idiot to fault movies for being movies. And Im certainly not a double standard biased person

But... it has characters go into detail explaining how the RICO law works like a serious crime procedural movie.

Lol, The Rico thing, funny you mention that. Apparently, they got Batman to go all the way to China, risk his life, illegally kidnap a Chinese citizen who had not been convicted or even indicted on any US-based crime, and bring him back for questioning and they didn't have an actual plan. They had NO IDEA what to nail him on, they just knew that he was the money-man for the mob. So, when he finally admits to being the banker for numerous criminal organizations, Harvey has a eureka moment with Rachel and blurts "we can get them on RICO"!?, presuming of course they can prove just one of the organizations pooling their money with Lau had committed crimes.

A bit of education: RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) is a US federal law. That means HAD that been the case that Harvey chose to pursue that path, he would have to hand over the entire case to a FEDERAL court, taking it completely out of his hands to prosecute – his jurisdiction was at a city level for Chicago (I mean Gotham). He was not a federal prosecutor. If he was, he would be referred to in the movie as a United States Attorney. If some want to argue semantics that he was a federal attorney and merely referred to as a District Attorney, that argument will fail because such positions are appointed by the President of the United States. They are not elected to that position, as is the case with Harvey Dent (it's pretty clear in both the viral marketing and election context of the movie)

That was just one flaw with that segment; another flaw is the fact that Laos lawyer just stood there doing nothing while Harvey and Rachel were using unjust tactics to pressure him to talk, making implications they would place his life in danger based on how much he cooperates. Because, without those tactics, they didnt seem to even have a clue of what to get Lao to admit to which might implicate the criminals they were after

So basically these legal eagles didn’t think of the RICO statute, simply the most obvious and most-used statute used against the mob, until a EUREKA! moment occurred during an interrogation

And Btw, the movie NEVER showed cops arrived at Dent's party. Why didnt they suddenly come and guard the exits? And what happened anyway? Joker and his goons were left on the 50th floor up wiith hostiles and it just cuts to another day with no explanation. I was really wondering how theyre gonna get out of this? GothamLegend must REALLY hate that movie

 

[Godzilla2014]

Personally, I love both the Burton and the Nolan Batman films for their own unique styles. The Burton films are like an expressionist gothic fever dream that the audience is allowed to view, while the Nolan films put Batman in a much more relatable world than we often see and really allow us to connect with him on a personal level.

 

[The Morningstar]

Yep. It's stupid. But it's fine. Until someone, not mentioning any names, says TDK was flawlessly written and didn't have any stupid moments but Burton's movies was full of them.

 

[The Morningstar]

Personally, I love both the Burton and the Nolan Batman films for their own unique styles. The Burton films are like an expressionist gothic fever dream that the audience is allowed to view, while the Nolan films put Batman in a much more relatable world than we often see and really allow us to connect with him on a personal level.

I connected more with Keaton's Wayne than Bale's. I sense more actual pain and psychological damage in Keaton's version.

Bale's just angry shouty man. And in TDK there was absolutely no reference to his parents death thusly no indication that he was still in pain from that traumatic experience.

Begins had a great moment, after Scarecrow hit him with the Fear Gas and he was in the back of a car curled up like a child scared witless. With Alfred's face a picture of panic and worry. Brilliant. TDK had nothing even approaching the emotional power of that for me.

 

[Godzilla2014]

I connected more with Keaton's Wayne than Bale's. I sense more actual pain and psychological damage in Keaton's version.

Bale's just angry shouty man. And in TDK there was absolutely no reference to his parents death thusly no indication that he was still in pain from that traumatic experience.

Begins had a great moment, after Scarecrow hit him with the Fear Gas and he was in the back of a car curled up like a child scared witless. With Alfred's face a picture of panic and worry. Brilliant. TDK had nothing even approaching the emotional power of that for me.

What I meant was that, in the Burton films, Batman is portrayed as a mysterious figure, with little information given about his past, while in the Nolan films, Batman is much more of a traditional protagonist who we're really allowed to know.

 

[nogap87]

Before Ill go any further, I want to clarify for millionth time I LOVE Nolans Batman as much as Burtons. Its just that I dont disect movies, I watch them, I go with the flow. Im no idiot to fault movies for being movies. And Im certainly not a double standard biased person.

I feel the exact same way. Both Jokers had their "yea right" moments but I still enjoy both movies.

As for BF, I wish Dick Grayson had been younger so Bruce would have had more of an influence on his life going into adulthood. I don't know if the comics ever straight out called Dick Bruce's son but that's how I always saw it. That dynamic is missing when Dick is practically a full grown man when they first meet.

 

[The Morningstar]

What I meant was that, in the Burton films, Batman is portrayed as a mysterious figure, with little information given about his past, while in the Nolan films, Batman is much more of a traditional protagonist who we're really allowed to know.

Ahhh I get ya.

I feel the exact same way. Both Jokers had their "yea right" moments but I still enjoy both movies.

As for BF, I wish Dick Grayson had been younger so Bruce would have had more of an influence on his life going into adulthood. I don't know if the comics ever straight out called Dick Bruce's son but that's how I always saw it. That dynamic is missing when Dick is practically a full grown man when they first meet.

I think Bruce officially adopted Dick and Tim.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Ahhh I get ya.

Something I find fascinating from a critical and analytical standpoint about Burton/Keaton's Batman is his isolation not only from the other characters, but even from the audience. That's not a stylistic choice you often see in a superhero film.

Nolan/Bale's Batman is compelling in a more direct fashion, as we know him much more intimately. We know why he does what he does and how he thinks. We know what his goals are, and we know the events around him impact him as a person.

Both work equally well for me.

 

[nogap87]

I think Bruce officially adopted Dick and Tim.

One of my favorite moments in the Young Justice cartoon was Bruce offering to play basketball with Dick because he saw he was upset. It was a simple "father-son" scenario and I would love to see something like that on the big screen with a Grayson that doesn't look like he's in his 20s

 

[GothamAlleys]

I connect with both Waynes on different levels. Keaton is interesting, seem like a next door quirky and very likeable guy but then when hes alone hes bordeline scary. Bale in Begins takes me on a emotional journey and I really feel for him, I really cheer him and he channels his emotions well imo

 

[The Joker]

Something I find fascinating from a critical and analytical standpoint about Burton/Keaton's Batman is his isolation not only from the other characters, but even from the audience. That's not a stylistic choice you often see in a superhero film.

Nolan/Bale's Batman is compelling in a more direct fashion, as we know him much more intimately. We know why he does what he does and how he thinks. We know what his goals are, and we know the events around him impact him as a person.

Both work equally well for me.

Both are good but I prefer the Bale approach. I like connection with the main character more by delving into the character. Batman's got a lot of layers. I like seeing them. I like getting inside Batman's head to see what makes him tick.

For all it's faults, Batman Forever did some of that.

 

[Godzilla2014]

I connect with both Waynes on different levels. Keaton is interesting, seem like a next door quirky and very likeable guy but then when hes alone hes bordeline scary. Bale in Begins takes me on a emotional journey and I really feel for him, I really cheer him and he channels his emotions well imo

I agree.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Both are good but I prefer the Bale approach. I like connection with the main character more by delving into the character. Batman's got a lot of layers. I like seeing them. I like getting inside Batman's head to see what makes him tick.

For all it's faults, Batman Forever did some of that.

I do agree, I love seeing the various layers of Batman's psychology. That's what drives most of the best Batman stories in some fashion. It's a big part of the reason I generally prefer the darker incarnations of Batman over the lighter ones.

As for Batman Forever, I honestly think that had the whole film gone in that direction of exploring Batman's character, then the Joel Schumacher films wouldn't be remembered in infamy.