The Dark Knight Rises The TDKR General Discussion Thread - - - - Part 153

[Malicked]

The soundtracks that Elfman and Zimmer created weren't too shabby either.

 

[antsman41]

I remember going to Blockbuster and renting films by some guy named Christopher Nolan the night he was set to direct, and then the whole Bale Dammit stuff was amazing... that teaser.... the photos... the SB spot (almost murdered a friend who tried to turn the tv off in spite of me)... oh so fun.

The first 45 minutes is still the best Batman live action anything we've got on film.

 

[The Batman]

While Batman Begins may be a better film than Batman 89', and while it may be the equivalent of Donner Superman in terms of approach and story structure, Batman Begins is, IMO, in no way the equivalent of Donner Superman in terms of influence and impact. That title still belongs to Batman 89.

B89 redefined how you market blockbusters, and proved that dark superheroes can make bank at the BO. It's the reason we got BTAS. It's a major reason why Batman is DC's top character today. And also, there is no Nolan trilogy without that first Burton film.

 

[BatLobster]

In terms of influence and impact I'd have to agree. The importance of 89 cannot be underestimated. Interestingly, it's also because of the very way it was made (a non-origin story) that we were able to have the franchise rebooted in the way that Begins did 16 years after the fact. If the first Batman film had been made via the "Donner template"...first of all it would probably be an entirely alternate franchise history going forward, and secondly Nolan would have likely never felt the itch to tell that untold story and we would've never gotten his trilogy. You can't discount the domino effect involved here.

That said, I think the Donner analogy mostly gets made due to the philosophy that went into the filmmaking.

 

[ThePhantasm]

I wish there were fewer origin stories these days. B89 had the right idea.

Of course, I love BB as well.

 

[Penguin]

I love both films, but Batman Begins is a lot better to me.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Oh ho ho ho ho... let's not go there.

 

[The Joker]

No lets go there. It's a Batman origin discussion. I think B'89 had the wrong idea on that score. All great heroes need an origin story. Michael Keaton sure feels that way, because he wanted the third Batman movie to be an origin movie for him. Specifically he said he wanted it to be like Batman Begins;

You look at where [Nolan] went, which is exactly what I wanted to do when I was having meetings about the third one. I said you want to see how this guy started. We’ve got a chance here to fix whatever we kind of maybe went off. This could be brilliant… [But Schumacher] didn’t want to do it, so I didn’t want to do it.

http://www.slashfilm.com/trivia-mic...ilm-to-be-a-batman-begins-style-origin-story/

I think the bold comment was Michael's subtle way of saying Batman needs some proper development as we have been lacking it in the last two movies.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Is there a rule somewhere that I have to agree with Michael Keaton?

As I said, I love Begins. I don't think its better than B89 but that's a long discussion.

And Batman never had an origin story in the comics before Begins. Aside from "my parents are dead" and "father, I'll become a bat"

 

[Penguin]

Oh ho ho ho ho... let's not go there.

I’m not saying that as if it’s fact, just my personal preference, man. t:

Then again, I’m sure somebody will see what I said and take it out of context.

 

[The Joker]

Yeah of course you have to agree with him. That's why I posted it. Because you have to bow down to his word.

Keaton could see the need to do a Batman origin even back then. I also imagine as an actor it wasn't very satisfying having little character material to work on for two movies, and being upstaged all the time by the villains script wise.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Keaton had a lot of character material to work with, and a defined character arc over the course of both films. The "upstaged by the villains" complaint is tired and inaccurate. Doesn't apply to Keaton, or Bale for that matter.

 

[The Joker]

Keaton had minimal material to work with, and no defined character arc. Not in either movie, and certainly not over the course of both movies. The upstaged by the villains complaint may be old, but it's very accurate. Which is why it's such a common complaint. Not just with fans, but critically, too. It's like the Bale Batman voice. Some of us may be ok with it, but there's no denying it's a valid and common complaint.

Is it any wonder Keaton was yearning for a Batman origin to be done. It would be the first time his character had an actual story centered on him. It's why Batman Begins was such a breath of fresh air. It was the first time we had a Batman movie that actually had some proper focus on Batman. Commissioner Gordon had a personality, actual friendship with Batman, and a significant role to play in the story etc

Breaking barriers no Batman movie had done before.

 

[ThePhantasm]

That's not true, but I don't have time to debate the point right now. Let's table this discussion for later. Maybe in the B89 thread.

 

[Penguin]

I agree, while this is an interesting argument, it would be better to bring up in the B89 thread.

 

[The Batman]

And Batman never had an origin story in the comics before Begins. Aside from "my parents are dead" and "father, I'll become a bat"

This is not true. "The Man Who Falls" and "The Untold Legend of Batman" are just two examples of comics that flesh out Bruce's early years.

"The Man Who Falls" in particular was a big influence on Batman Begins

 

[The Joker]

@ Phantasm; Yes it is true.

Been there, done that just recently. There's only so many times you can read "Well we saw Bruce had a room full of foreign junk so that told us all we need to know about his origin" excuse. If that's what passes for an adequate Batman origin, then I'm the King of England. No offense to those who believe that. But if it was true then it's a wonder why Keaton was so unsatisfied and wanted to do an origin story at all.

B'89 has it's place in Batman history, and it had a lot of positive effects for which I'm grateful and respect it for. But as a movie itself, it's riddled with flaws and problems. Both as a movie and as a Batman adaption. The lack of focus and development of Batman himself is one of the major ones. It's not a coincidence that it's one of the most common criticisms leveled against the movie. With good reason.

 

[ThePhantasm]

If you don't want to have the discussion later, that's fine too. But don't presume that you can predict what I'll say ahead of time. I didn't plan on mentioning Bruce's "foreign junk" once.

If it'll be a real, friendly discussion, I'm all for it, but I'm in no rush to get into some Burton/Nolan film d*** measuring contest.

 

[The Joker]

I wasn't talking about you, I was talking about the recent experience of that discussion in the B'89 thread.

 

[ThePhantasm]

No worries then.

Look, I get what the "most common criticism" is. I've heard it many times. Doesn't bother me how common the criticism is. I'm already in the minority because of my opinion. Still think I have good reasons for it though.

 

[The Joker]

Likewise. I've heard all the arguments for it before. A couple of posters even turned hostile when this debate started, not against me, but against other posters who were voicing the same kind of criticisms. It's not really a friendly environment to have a critical discussion. I've always found here much more open to critical discussions without things turning heated. Ironic considering the rep the Nolan fan base has.

Just for clarification, the actual reason I posted that Keaton link is because it says a lot when the actor himself wanted an origin for his character by the third movie. If you've given your character adequate material that fleshes them out, then you wouldn't feel the need to go and do an origin story after two movies. Especially when the first one supposedly told us all we need to know. But in Keaton's words, he saw it as the chance to fix where they went off. I agree with him.

It's a shame they never did make such a movie. I'd love to have seen Keaton do a Year One/The Man Who Falls type story.

 

[Penguin]

I noticed a lot of the time when an argument starts that involves B89 and you start to criticism it, there is always someone that just brings up Nolan or gets the Dark Knight Trilogy involved too.

 

[BatLobster]

I guess this makes me something of a fatalist, but I'm grateful for Batman 89 being made exactly the way it was for the reasons I stated earlier. If it had been an origin movie...A. It wouldn't be the more mysterious take on the character that many still hold dear, and B. We would've likely never gotten TDKT.

Ultimately, I think a director like Chris Nolan was more suited to tell the journey of Bruce Wayne into Batman, just like a director like Tim Burton was more suited to portray him as a dark, mysterious creature of the night. Not that Burton couldn't have done it, but just try to picture a Burton movie (especially from early in his career) with ninjas and Bruce Wayne having a sword fight on a frozen pond out in the Himalayas. It just doesn't quite compute. There's a sense of straight-forward earnestness and adventure that comes with that type of movie and Burton is more about dark humor, the bizarre, and creating his own idiosyncratic world.

But who knows, if Burton had come back for a third movie, maybe Keaton would've gotten his way and they'd have done a prequel.

 

[Brother Jack]

It's a relatively small story wrinkle in Begins but I always thought it was a genius move to have Bruce almost revenge murder Joe Chill and then get thwarted by Falcone as the figurehead of the systemic corruption and crime in the city. It was almost as though Gotham itself denied Bruce his vengeance even as it had took his parents originally and it, among other things, positioned his mission as Batman as a much more city-wide crusade. He was going after criminality itself, something larger and more noble than any kind of revenge-driven missive. I've always disliked the version of the origin where the impetus was revenge. And I am including Batman 89 with that. Never liked the Joker being the murderer of the Waynes.

 

[The Shape]

All great heroes need an origin story. Michael Keaton sure feels that way, because he wanted the third Batman movie to be an origin movie for him. Specifically he said he wanted it to be like Batman Begins;


http://www.slashfilm.com/trivia-mic...ilm-to-be-a-batman-begins-style-origin-story/

I think the bold comment was Michael's subtle way of saying Batman needs some proper development as we have been lacking it in the last two movies.

I think when he says "We’ve got a chance here to fix whatever we kind of maybe went off", he's referring specifically to Batman Returns, which is a movie that I don't think he was thrilled with. Keaton on Returns:

“We got to be back home [filming in Burbank] so that made me happy. It was quite the cast with Michelle Pfeiffer and Danny DeVito and everyone. It wasn’t as satisfying to me when I saw it, but maybe that’s because the bar was set so high on the first one. I think I only watched it one time."

http://herocomplex.latimes.com/movi...s-of-batman-and-shining-love-for-beetlejuice/


I'd wager that his desire to do an origin story for the third was more a matter of "let's get back to basics and away from all of this weird ****" than it was a matter of "we've got to do an origin now because we ****ed up by not doing one first". I'm not sure where or why you're getting the impression that Keaton was "so unsatisfied" by B89 not having a full-on origin story.