Batman Begins Those who disliked Begins - Why?

[El Payaso]

Doesn't almost every superhero movie focus on the actual character?

Every one of them. B89 set the difference in many aspects.

 

[MacLeod]

Every one of them. B89 set the difference in many aspects.

Do you think it set a difference in a good way? I love 89, I would prefer to see more Batman moments on screen but who wouldn't? I thought it was done brilliantly.

 

[El Payaso]

I saw more Batman on screen moments in B89 than in BB.

ATTENTION: My previous statement does not mean anything about the movies' quality.

(^ I had to)

 

[MacLeod]

I saw more Batman on screen moments in B89 than in BB.

ATTENTION: My previous statement does not mean anything about the movies' quality.

(^ I had to)

I never doubted your doubting of the quality. I liked both movies, I just prefer 89 more.

 

[Stupify_me]

I never doubted your doubting of the quality. I liked both movies, I just prefer 89 more.

I guess I am just one of the few who thought 89 was a joke of a movie. It was great when I was a kid but eventually you just have to grow up.

Just my opinion.

 

[El Payaso]

I guess I am just one of the few who thought 89 was a joke of a movie. It was great when I was a kid but eventually you just have to grow up.

Just my opinion.

HAHAHAHA. C'mon dude. I don't doubt or judge your tastes but they have nothing to do with age.

For that matter several of us late 20's and early 30's should be saying 'I liked comic books as any other kid but of course I grew up.'

 

[Stupify_me]

HAHAHAHA. C'mon dude. I don't doubt or judge your tastes but they have nothing to do with age.

For that matter several of us late 20's and early 30's should be saying 'I liked comic books as any other kid but of course I grew up.'

If you say so. I think the over all feel of Batman 89 was very childish and cartoony. Yes there is alot of violence and some death but the whole thing felt like a cartoon and almost felt like they made it for a kid but went o"h crap we won't some adults to...Hey would could thow in a some one getting fried by a joy buzzer."

The comics don't really feel that way for me very adult themed.

Another thing I didn't like about 89 was people complain so much about the Begins fight scenes but go back and watch 89 it was filled with the most simple fight scenes there was no skill to what Batman was doing. He was doing straight kick straigh punch Backhand. He was doing moves that kids who are 12 or 13 do after watching an action movie when they are all excited and running home.

The strong lack of emotion behind the movie was also very disapointing. The movie was all about the action and the style of the sets. Also lets get in to some of the really really cheesy spots like the Joker in that hat dancing with a boom box that was so very corney or the you wouldn't hit a man with glasses crap. Those things were not thing Joker would ever do it was the idea of Joker from people who didn't give a **** about the comics.

Their idea of Gordon and his relationship with Batman (or lack there of) was one of the biggest let downs these guys are close and there is a very important bond there but it was ignored all togather.

I could go on and on but im tired and half of this just came out as ramblings.

 

[El Payaso]

If you say so. I think the over all feel of Batman 89 was very childish and cartoony. Yes there is alot of violence and some death but the whole thing felt like a cartoon and almost felt like they made it for a kid but went o"h crap we won't some adults to...Hey would could thow in a some one getting fried by a joy buzzer."

The joy buzzer fits Joker perfectly. But for you a good thing is a bad thing.

A cartoon for kids wioth adult themes sounds great anyway.

The comics don't really feel that way for me very adult themed.

Never fear improvement.

Another thing I didn't like about 89 was people complain so much about the Begins fight scenes but go back and watch 89 it was filled with the most simple fight scenes there was no skill to what Batman was doing. He was doing straight kick straigh punch Backhand. He was doing moves that kids who are 12 or 13 do after watching an action movie when they are all excited and running home.

This says a lot: one thing you hated about B89 is the way other people complain about BB. FTW???

Are you so running out of things to complain about B89?

I wish i could fight like that when I was 12.

The strong lack of emotion behind the movie was also very disapointing. The movie was all about the action and the style of the sets. Also lets get in to some of the really really cheesy spots like the Joker in that hat dancing with a boom box that was so very corney or the you wouldn't hit a man with glasses crap. Those things were not thing Joker would ever do it was the idea of Joker from people who didn't give a **** about the comics.

Yeah, Joker never do clowny things or make jokes when he's beaten up. Lecture us.

Their idea of Gordon and his relationship with Batman (or lack there of) was one of the biggest let downs these guys are close and there is a very important bond there but it was ignored all togather.

And this is where you got a point.

I could go on and on but im tired and half of this just came out as ramblings.

Yes, and besides we were talking about growing up.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

lol to be fair, Superman The Movie did it 30 years ago

I dunno. I wouldn't say it was AS MUCH as Batman Begins did.

I mean, Lex Luthor got a pretty good amount of screentime once he was introduced. Letting us see him unravel his plan and stuff.

Batman Begins really had us with Bruce practically ALL the time. We got to see other characters (without Batman at all, either watching or in the scene) a bit at the end. For the most part though, we got all Batman.

Doesn't almost every superhero movie focus on the actual character? I know 89 may not have because the Joker was used more but the other Batman movies had Batman as a main character. Spiderman and The Punisher were the main characters too and they were focused on well in my opinion.

I wouldn't say so. Spider-Man had given some good screentime to Osborne, to watch him become the Goblin.

The Punisher had screentime given to Howard Saint, especially in the latter half to watch his life crumble.

Every one of them. B89 set the difference in many aspects.

Well, for me yeah......it kinda made the Joker the star almost. In a few ways, it did feel like THE KILLING JOKE, in how the Joker kinda stole the spotlight. I thought so, atleast. Not to say Keaton didn't do good, I just found myself gravitating more towards Nicholson throughout the film.

I saw more Batman on screen moments in B89 than in BB.

I dunno....I have a little bit of doubt on that one.....but, I think your right. Batman wasn't an origin film, so we did get Batman from the very beginning, which was pretty cool.

 

[Stupify_me]

The joy buzzer fits Joker perfectly. But for you a good thing is a bad thing.

A cartoon for kids wioth adult themes sounds great anyway.



Never fear improvement.



This says a lot: one thing you hated about B89 is the way other people complain about BB. FTW???

Are you so running out of things to complain about B89?

I wish i could fight like that when I was 12.



Yeah, Joker never do clowny things or make jokes when he's beaten up. Lecture us.



And this is where you got a point.



Yes, and besides we were talking about growing up.

Joker does tell jokes but his jokes are dark or at least funny the glasses bit was stupid. I have never once seen Joker act as idiotic as he did in the scene with the boom box.


So you are telling me when you were twelve you couldn't lift your legs and arms up in the air ? That is all he did in that movie when it came to fighting.


One of the things I hated about B89 wasn't that people complain about BB that was just poor structure and I am sorry for that. I was just saying that it is dumb to complain about the BB fighting when in 89 it was very basic he had no skill what so ever.

There was no improvment in making 89 more cartoony than the comic.


Please try to keep it civil I have been nice to you. So people think that if some one disagrees with you that you should treat them like crap it is possible to be civil you don't have to talk down to people for not just saying I agee with every thing you say.

 

[Crooklyn]

I dunno. I wouldn't say it was AS MUCH as Batman Begins did.

I mean, Lex Luthor got a pretty good amount of screentime once he was introduced. Letting us see him unravel his plan and stuff.

Batman Begins really had us with Bruce practically ALL the time. We got to see other characters (without Batman at all, either watching or in the scene) a bit at the end. For the most part though, we got all Batman.

BB pretty much followed Donner's superhero blueprint, so I don't know where you see this "original" idea from.

The entire first half was almost entirely dedicated to just Clark, and wasn't until into the middle of the film where the title character actually appeared and the villain's plot was put into place. Not to mention the only time the hero and villain match up as good vs. evil, is at the very end. Sound familiar?

 

[El Payaso]

Well, for me yeah......it kinda made the Joker the star almost. In a few ways, it did feel like THE KILLING JOKE, in how the Joker kinda stole the spotlight.

Yes. And I don't recall anyone saying the Joker had too much frames in the KJ comic book. A good story is a good story.

Not to say Keaton didn't do good, I just found myself gravitating more towards Nicholson throughout the film.

No one can help but gravitate towards Nicholson. But Keaton was so good they insisted in keeping him for the second and the third one.

I dunno....I have a little bit of doubt on that one.....but, I think your right. Batman wasn't an origin film, so we did get Batman from the very beginning, which was pretty cool.

Batman was an origin film, it's just that they didn't tell everything in the traditional way. But yes, the flashbacks made possible that we could see Batman from the beginning.

 

[MacLeod]

Originally Posted by Stupify_me
Another thing I didn't like about 89 was people complain so much about the Begins fight scenes but go back and watch 89 it was filled with the most simple fight scenes there was no skill to what Batman was doing. He was doing straight kick straigh punch Backhand. He was doing moves that kids who are 12 or 13 do after watching an action movie when they are all excited and running home.

89 did have simple fight scenes but at least I could see them. I don't need to see Jet Lee do the scenes and I don't need to see it be ultra realistic either, but I do need to see it. I would rather have Batman only do front kicks and straight punches that I could see rather than have an entire martial art designed for Begins and still wondering what was going on. I'm big on fight scenes, anything is better than nothing for me.

 

[Cyrusbales]

Of course the joker stole the spotlight in B89, that's what he does! He seeks attention, he wants people to be forced to pay attention to his horrific acts. Batman doesn't want publicity, he wants to blend into the shadows etc, he doesn't need to be anything special in the public eye, he wants to be a ghost! The joker needs the attention, so having a lot of the attention of B89 on the Joker seemed like the right thing to do for me!

 

[Kevin Roegele]

If you say so. I think the over all feel of Batman 89 was very childish and cartoony. Yes there is alot of violence and some death but the whole thing felt like a cartoon and almost felt like they made it for a kid but went o"h crap we won't some adults to...Hey would could thow in a some one getting fried by a joy buzzer."

I get the feeling you'd love Batman '89 if you could be reassured it's not childish to watch.

The comics don't really feel that way for me very adult themed.

How many Batman comics have you read? It's only some of the ones of the last twenty years or so which have been adult themed. Batman has always been for a broad audience.

Another thing I didn't like about 89 was people complain so much about the Begins fight scenes but go back and watch 89 it was filled with the most simple fight scenes there was no skill to what Batman was doing. He was doing straight kick straigh punch Backhand. He was doing moves that kids who are 12 or 13 do after watching an action movie when they are all excited and running home.

That's the sort of complaint a 14 year old would make.

 

[Stupify_me]

I get the feeling you'd love Batman '89 if you could be reassured it's not childish to watch.



How many Batman comics have you read? It's only some of the ones of the last twenty years or so which have been adult themed. Batman has always been for a broad audience.



That's the sort of complaint a 14 year old would make.

This is just stupid.

A complaint a 14 year old would make? Give me a break.

 

[Crooklyn]

B89 fight scenes involved a very restrictive and heavy rubber suit. Which lead to sub-par fight scenes.

Fast forward nearly 15 years later, and we get...a slightly less restrictive and lighter rubber suit. Which lead to sub-par scenes.

I think the whole "15 year" thing is a big factor in criticizing modern movies. Our technology is much better now, and we should have had a bigger improvement when it comes to the main character's mobility.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

Someone on these boards once stated, (about the fact Batman in the movies has a hard time turning his head...), that maybe it is in Batman's personality and character to turn and face his enemy, rather than fight them while his back is turned.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

BB pretty much followed Donner's superhero blueprint, so I don't know where you see this "original" idea from.

I didn't say that.

I said the forus on the character, it was so centered on Bruce/Batman the entire film.

It's no secret it followed the blueprint of STM.

The entire first half was almost entirely dedicated to just Clark, and wasn't until into the middle of the film where the title character actually appeared and the villain's plot was put into place. Not to mention the only time the hero and villain match up as good vs. evil, is at the very end. Sound familiar?

Your not reading what I type.

I said the focus on Batman was heavy. Hevier than any film, I've seen. I'm just saying that. That's all.

In STM, there was a good chunk of Lex. Batman didn't really have to share so much screentime with Ra's or even Crane.

Yes. And I don't recall anyone saying the Joker had too much frames in the KJ comic book. A good story is a good story.

Didn't say it wasn't.

No one can help but gravitate towards Nicholson. But Keaton was so good they insisted in keeping him for the second and the third one.

No ****.

Batman was an origin film, it's just that they didn't tell everything in the traditional way. But yes, the flashbacks made possible that we could see Batman from the beginning.

yes.

Of course the joker stole the spotlight in B89, that's what he does! He seeks attention, he wants people to be forced to pay attention to his horrific acts. Batman doesn't want publicity, he wants to blend into the shadows etc, he doesn't need to be anything special in the public eye, he wants to be a ghost! The joker needs the attention, so having a lot of the attention of B89 on the Joker seemed like the right thing to do for me!

I don't think it automatically means that Joker should takeover the story, though.

I'm not saying that B89 did with that concept.

But....don't think for a minute that the only way to tell a Joker story is if he's the center, b/c it's not so.

I hope to God he doesn't get more spotlight than Batman in TDK. I'd be pretty damn pissed if he does....

 

[Crooklyn]

I didn't say that.

I said the forus on the character, it was so centered on Bruce/Batman the entire film.

It's no secret it followed the blueprint of STM.

Your not reading what I type.

I said the focus on Batman was heavy. Hevier than any film, I've seen. I'm just saying that. That's all.

I was going off this comment of yours..

What do you mean? I think it changes the way a superhero film should shift it's focus. Focusing all on the actual main character, Batman, was a a very original thing...I think. And, if it's not.....it's certainly a rare thing to see.

So yeah, it came off to me that you're saying BB was the first comic book film to actually focus on its main character mostly, which I find highly disagreeable.

In STM, there was a good chunk of Lex. Batman didn't really have to share so much screentime with Ra's or even Crane.

Neither did Superman with Lex.

Lex got a few minutes of time for his story (admittedly more than Ra's and Crane), but it was still clear as day 90% of the film was focused on Clark/Superman.

 

[Tojo]

I liked Begins, but I don't think it was the greatest comic book movie ever, like some people do.

Overall I liked the darker tone. But last summer I enjoyed Fantastic Four more. It whizzed alone, while Batman Begins moped a little.

I agree with your first point, partially. I don't think it was as brilliant as everyone made it out to be, but it was most definatley the best COMIC BOOK movie i have seen(and i seen 'em all).

Your second point, however, is ******ed. It hardly moped at all. If you want moping, watch a Kubrick film. This film hardly had a character scene over 10 seconds. Ridiculous. I'm not asking for it to be overstated, but the more i watch the film the more shallow it appears. althought i think TDK will be a very different proposition. My MAIN problem with this is that Bruce wayne, despite having his parents killed, did not appear to struggle for ANYTHING. Also, i would have preffered to see him start his Bat-career by taking on some petty criminals, and to really SEE the rage(have him put a few in a wheelchair) and then for him to realise this is not the right way and to restrain himself, and refine his method along the way. Everything came to easy to him(the Lucius/Wayne enterprise just having everything he needed etc). Also the ending(Gordon with Tumbler) was BS.

Meh...it was ok. But i find it really hilaious when some fans call it 'Teh best movie ever!!!'. I hope it would bridge the gap between comic movies and movies, and it did but only a little. I expect more from TDK.

 

[Sandman138]

I agree with your first point, partially. I don't think it was as brilliant as everyone made it out to be, but it was most definatley the best COMIC BOOK movie i have seen(and i seen 'em all).

You would rate it above A History of Violence, American Splendor, Ghost World, and Road to Perdition?

 

[Tojo]

You would rate it above A History of Violence, American Splendor, Ghost World, and Road to Perdition?

Actually i haven't seen or read AS or Ghost World, but i would definatley rate it above AHOV, RTP. RTP isn't a bad film, but AHOV imo was terrible.

 

[Sandman138]

This is not the thread to debate History of Violence, but I will say that I think you are dead wrong. I honestly don't like RtP as a movie all that much, but I would say that both a far beyond Begins.

 

[Cyrusbales]

I don't think it automatically means that Joker should takeover the story, though.

I'm not saying that B89 did with that concept.

But....don't think for a minute that the only way to tell a Joker story is if he's the center, b/c it's not so.

I hope to God he doesn't get more spotlight than Batman in TDK. I'd be pretty damn pissed if he does....

Surely by appeasing to the jokers whim with the filmmaking technique and narrative style, that adds a greater level of sophistication to the movie? A level that BB lacks. I'm not saying it's the only way to tell the story, but having the joker being the centre makes a great deal of sense, he steals the spotlight from Batman, who doesn't want it, and the film(a type of media), acts as the media does within the film, by focusing on the Joker.

It's a very clever film making method, utilising the the actual fact that it's a film, within the context of the narrative. These subtle ideas are often lost upon many, who fail to realise them.