Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Dark Knight Rises' started by Thread Manager, Jan 10, 2016.
Even though we don't have much to go on, how do you guys think Pattinson will compare to Bale?
I think he's going to be great. The few things they've released showed promise and he has a really good director to guide him.
However, so far Pattinson is no Bale, in terms of performance skills and range in general. He has definitely shown acting chops and progress but it's too soon to judge and compare him to one of the best. And for my taste personally, while possible, it would be extremely difficult to surpass this specific version of the character, since I think he was nailed in pretty much every way in the trilogy.
Well, based on the fact that this new movie (and trilogy) will be on his shoulders more than any past actor. Or the potential of his voice, as we heard in the trailer. His acting chops, that jawline of his, the way he’s moving in the suit, his eyes..
He could very well be the best Batman (above Keaton) and the best Bruce Wayne (above Bale). We just have let 1 or 2 movies go by. Because we may not get the full Wayne experience until the sequel (the public persona may only be created later).
It’s too early but I have a GOOD feeling about this.
I think it's too early to compare tbh, but from what I've seen, I think hes gonna be amazing and it's very very possible he could be on par with Bale. Whether he surpasses him remains to be seen, but he's gonna fantastic.
He’s already better in the suit.
And his voice is already better too, let's admit
He had me at "I'm vengeance"
I keep saying he's going to be the best Batman . He's just an amazing actor.
We knew he had the acting skills. I didn’t realise he was going to look so good in the suit, be so brutally convincing in action scenes, and have a solid Bat-voice.
Great potential so far but Bale is a very high bar to match/pass.
Pattinson is overall a good actor, I think we can quite say this without a doubt now.
Good Time, The Lighthouse and Tenet were all solid films and he did a good job here. (He has some other films aswell)
I think Bale and Keaton are great and Affleck is good, so he can surpass Affleck and match them at his best. Also, I never had a problem with Bale's voice because dubbed it's not as dark as the original one is.
Pattinson is just as great of an actor as Bale is IMO, so I'd say the potential is definitely there for him to become the best version of Batman yet. He already has the Bat-voice down and action wise just from the little we saw of him in that trailer he looks a lot more brutal and efficient in hand to hand combat than Bale ever did.
When it comes to there portrayal's of Bruce Wayne that's where I expect to see the biggest difference, because Pattinson's looks a lot more traumatized and angry and not your typical Bruce Wayne at all which is what I'm excited for, because we will most likely watch him grow into that definitive version of Bruce over the course of the three films that Matt Reeve's has planned. Bale is still my favorite Bruce Wayne though, so it won't be easy to surpass that IMO, but if anybody can do its definitely Pattinson.
Bale might have not been the best action-wise but he was the best character-wise.
I'd take Bale becoming Batman or escaping the pit over any Affleck/Keaton moment by far. He also starred in better films and had better lines.
BvS is the only good Affleck movie and he's polarizing there.
They've officially put out the Fire Rises documentary free to anyone.
The Fire Rises: The Creation and Impact of the Dark Knight Trilogy
Am I really gonna rewatch TDK for the 4th time this year on Batman day? Yes....yes, I am.
If I were to guess, I'd say that like most live action Batmen, he will be great at at one aspect of the character, but overall won't be the end all be all live action Batman.
I'll say this, though...one thing that I will miss about Bale/Nolan Batman is the avoidance of painting Batman as this guy who is "as crazy as the people he fights" or some similar edgelord take on the character.
I'd have to second this.
To me, Bale's Batman was essentially like a modernized version of 70s Denny O'Neil Batman, which is amazing. That said, I have confidence that Pattinson's take will have value and possibly be considered amongst the best. I think fans who still think there will ever be a #1 "undisputed", definitive version that everyone agrees on are dogs chasing cars. When Pattinson's time is up, the next generation of fans will be saying that about the next guy. It's just the way it goes. I'd rather appreciate each version for what they bring to the table.
Side note, in O'Neil's novelization of Batman Begins, it features some of Ra's journals which include mentions of Talia and his desire for her to date Bruce. So in a way, he even was able to color inside the lines and add bits of canon into the trilogy (if you want to accept it as canon).
Somewhat related, but this was a pretty decent read.
“… is Ra’s Al Ghul immortal?” Denny O’Neil, and Reflecting on a Bronze Age Batman Villain…
That's gonna be the big thing. I think people make too big a deal out of the voice (it's great in Begins!) but it does make for some awkward line readings and is part of why his Batman doesn't totally live up to his perfect Bruce Wayne.
Bale's always gonna be my guy though because I am beyond biased. Best actor to ever play a superhero.
It's hard to go by one line, but I was actually a bit surprised by how...standard Pattinson's Bat-voice was? I guess for some reason I thought he'd be doing something a bit weirder. It basically just sounds like a mixture of Keaton/Kilmer/Bale's more subdued deliveries. Not that I have any issue with that. A bat-voice is just a bat-voice at the end of the day, they're all basically variations on the same idea unless you're going for super clean and clear Conroy kinda thing.
That said it's still just one line, lol. I'm really curious if they're going to adopt the Keaton/Burton mentality of just giving him less to say when in the suit in general. Or if he'll end up being a more chatty-Batty.
I don’t think that one line is it for Pattinson’s voice. I’m expected different deliveries for different scenes. He JUST destroyed a dude. I want to hear what he has to offer when he’s spooking someone out, not answering their question.
I'm really curious what he's going to do, and also how they're going to write the character. I have no doubt it's going to be awesome, and he might have different "modes" of the voice just like Bale did.
One thing I have to say is while a lot of focus goes to Bale's voice and delivery, I think the Nolans' wrote him pretty much perfectly. Some of the dialogue they wrote for him sounds like it's ripped straight from the comics. My favorite case in point:
"His name's Schiff, Thomas - a paranoid schizophrenic, former patient at Arkham..the kind of mind the Joker attracts. What do you expect to learn from him?"
I mean that is peak Batman stuff! I totally respect the Keaton approach of 'less is more', but I definitely don't mind those wordier moments from Batman when the writer really gets the voice of the character.
It's remarkable how strange of a choice Ra's was as the villain for Begins. Scarecrow made sense. He was by that point probably the most famous Batman villain that hadn't appeared in a live action film, but Ra's was pretty obscure. Even now he probably wouldn't be in the same ballpark as Joker or Two-Face as far as the general public goes. But the logic behind that choice was ingenious, to position him as a dark father figure to Bruce. It reverberates into Knight, wherein he's not explicitly mentioned by name but his philosophy on criminology as adopted by Bruce is obliterated by Joker ("criminals aren't complicated"). And obviously his presence is intrinsic to Rises, how his legacy lives on through Bane and Talia mirroring Batman's legacy through Blake, and framing Bane as the dark fraternal brother to Bruce, as the article says the true "anti-Batman". It's fascinating how deep it goes. I know some people have taken umbrage with the decision to bring the League back, but it was a very thematically resonant way to conclude the whole story.
Completely agreed. It's pretty crazy to think that to this day, Batman Begins is the only film not to feature a villain that appeared in the 60s show and I don't suppose that's going to change anytime soon. But as the article points out, Ra's filled a perfect gap in the mythos which dovetailed perfectly with the cinematic gap in the character's history that Nolan was looking to exploit. And tying Ra's to Bruce's origin is the cherry on top.
Credit where it's due, Goyer brought some absolutely fantastic ideas to the table that were a perfect marriage for the tone and approach Nolan was already envisioning.
But yeah, it's part of why I think I'll always see the TDKT as the cinematic representative of "O'Neil Batman". Doesn't hurt that he also happened to write the novelizations for all 3 films and seemed quite fond of them.
Greg Cox did the TDKR novelization... and did a pretty bland job of it.
Ah, indeed. Thanks for correcting me.