Anita18
DANCE FOR ME, FUNNY MAN!
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2005
- Messages
- 25,882
- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 58
I don't recall Bugs Bunny having nekkid chicks in it.
I Am The Knight
Voilá!
- Joined
- May 10, 2005
- Messages
- 24,907
- Reaction score
- 3,613
- Points
- 103
Since Spirit looks exactly like Sin City, I say no.I think he likes the visual style, but I prefer someone with more versatility. Wouldn't mind a completely over-the-top Batman since that's what Miller is known for, but he'd have to come up with a different style. I don't want a Batman movie that looks like his Spirit that looks like his Sin City.
His original Batman stuff wasn't completely over the top. If he could go back to that, he'd be golden. I haven't read his more recent All Star series so I can't comment on wheter he's just making fun of the "grim & gritty" movement or not, though.
Major: Thanks for the link. I hope he was joking...But he probably wasn't, was he?
The Major
Superhero
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2008
- Messages
- 6,749
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 31
I don't recall Bugs Bunny having nekkid chicks in it.
Watch the Spirit vs Octopus fight.
Frank would be a great director for a live action Looney Tunes movie.
Melkay
Civilian
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2008
- Messages
- 997
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 11
Actually, I think The Killing Joke can kick Year One and some parts of DKR anytime it wants. And Year One actually focuses more on Gordon than Batman.
But overall, you're right there. Miller helped Batman and the hole world of comics a great deal.
That doesn't change the fact he has become a repetitive hack. And much of his success relies on the fact that he and Miller were pioneers in the eighties. Nowadays, Miller is just not the right choice.
But I'll let others elaborate better what I'm trying to say. Here...
http://k-punk.abstractdynamics.org/archives/005757.html
... this is the best "Batman Begins" review I've ever read. And it's also a heavy criticism piece against Miller's style.
Just because Miller ONCE (a key word) wrote Batman stories that shaped every subsequent portrayal since doesn't mean he's right to direct (or even write) an actual Batman film.
Let Miller prove himself as a director (which he hasn't yet) first before we talk about him possibly being a future helmer. More importantly, and this is my personal opinion, but looking at his recent Batman work and comparing it to the Nolan bros take, Miller seems hellbent in reshaping his version of Batman into a character who's anything but a hero and in reducing female characters to porn fantasies.
It's cliched, bordering on self-parody and is not the kind of thing personally I ever want to see on the big screen regarding Batman. There have been many interpretations of the character, I accept, but they should all come down to the same thing:this man's a selfless hero, despite his flaws and contradictions.
Miller understood that when he gave us both YEAR ONE and TDKR (to a lesser extent). Reading TDKSA and ASBAR he seems to have disregarded that noble aspect of the character, in probable fear that it makes Batman too much of a boy scout (the kind of archetype Miller doesn't want as a hero).
Nolan made a film as dark as one of Miller's Batbooks but didn't allow the atmosphere to dictate the character's overall personality. Nowadays that's all Frank does in that if Gotham is presented as corrupt and dark 'then OF COURSE my lead character has to match that to justify the work'.
Let Miller prove himself as a director (which he hasn't yet) first before we talk about him possibly being a future helmer. More importantly, and this is my personal opinion, but looking at his recent Batman work and comparing it to the Nolan bros take, Miller seems hellbent in reshaping his version of Batman into a character who's anything but a hero and in reducing female characters to porn fantasies.
It's cliched, bordering on self-parody and is not the kind of thing personally I ever want to see on the big screen regarding Batman. There have been many interpretations of the character, I accept, but they should all come down to the same thing:this man's a selfless hero, despite his flaws and contradictions.
Miller understood that when he gave us both YEAR ONE and TDKR (to a lesser extent). Reading TDKSA and ASBAR he seems to have disregarded that noble aspect of the character, in probable fear that it makes Batman too much of a boy scout (the kind of archetype Miller doesn't want as a hero).
Nolan made a film as dark as one of Miller's Batbooks but didn't allow the atmosphere to dictate the character's overall personality. Nowadays that's all Frank does in that if Gotham is presented as corrupt and dark 'then OF COURSE my lead character has to match that to justify the work'.
Rasputin911
Civilian
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2008
- Messages
- 529
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 11
I think Killing Joke is overrated. It has good moments, but the overall arc doesen't have much to it. TDKR and Year One both have great overall sotires, and manage to reach every corner of Gotham (or the world in TDKR) while still focusing on Batman himself.
I even found Miller's Joker more convincing and scary than Moore's.
But i agree Miller hasn't done anything worthwhile in a long time. As for the BB review, it kinda validates what i said about the anti-miller backlash
Melkay
Civilian
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2008
- Messages
- 997
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 11
What about the overall message?
That's simply false. Year One is greatly reduced and very much focused on Gordon, his life and work. We don't even see the full result of Batman's appearance in the city (something we do see in DKR and now in film with TDK). All we see from Batman's perspective are a few actions and we see a very poor and rushed transition from Selina to Catwoman.
I didn't. He may be scarier, I give you that, but he suffers greatly from that compulsive attitude Miller has of making his heroes hard-boiled and strong and his (intelligent) villains effeminate. He Joker is predictable and not very well drawn, actually. But he does have great lines.
TKJ's Joker is a much more sound character. His motivations are not thin, his ideas are as psychotic as Miller's and Brian Bolland's artwork is superior by any standards. When Miller's DKR was fundamental for establishing a more accepted psychology for the Batman, TKJ established a psycholigal/origins pattern that has been revisited over and over again not only for the Joker, but for every villain in Gotham.
To put it in other words.... Miller's Joker may be scarier. But not more convincing. It's a Miller adaptation of his common caricature of the gay and weak villain. And one that we've seen multiple times by now.
You said that Miller didn't deserve the backlash. I'm not sure how the review validates that.
Last edited:
Darknightnomis
The Dark Knight Strikes!
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2006
- Messages
- 2,381
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 31
HELL GODDAMN YEAH!!!
Rasputin911
Civilian
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2008
- Messages
- 529
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 11
HELL GODDAMN YEAH!!!
hahahahahaaaaa! what's that from?
metalhead_dave
Why am I back on here?
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2007
- Messages
- 428
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 11
So would it be safe to say that we Don't Believe in Frank Miller?
ironman29758
Sidekick
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
- Messages
- 2,787
- Reaction score
- 50
- Points
- 58
last time he did a batman movie:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman:_Year_One#Film_adaptation
[edit] Film adaptation
A film adaptation of the series was to be directed by Darren Aronofsky and written by both Aronofsky and Miller. The project never received the greenlight by Warner Brothers because they found it to be too violent. Ultimately the project resulted in Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins. The first draft of the script has been leaked online, though only written by Miller.[4]
The film was one of many projects developed at the studio over the years spent trying to get a fifth Batman installment. Others listed included Batman Triumphant, Batman: DarKnight, Boaz Yakin's Batman Beyond, and Wolfgang Peterson's Batman vs Superman.[4]
[edit] Development
After the critical and financial failure of Batman & Robin, director Joel Schumacher felt he owed "the hardcore Batman fans the Batman movie they would love me to give them." It was in the summer of 1998, whereas Schumacher claimed he had pitched to Warner Brothers a film adaptation of Frank Miller's acclaimed graphic novel Batman: Year One. Despite his interest, the studio decided to go to renowned independent filmmaker Darren Aronofsky, after they were impressed with his work on π. When asked how he might approach the Batman film series Aronofsky originally wanted to do an adaptation of The Dark Knight Returns, another one of Miller's acclaimed works. He expressed interest in casting Clint Eastwood as the aging Batman and filming it in Tokyo, doubling for Gotham City. The studio was interested in the idea, though Aronofsky later changed his mind for an adaptation of Year One.[4]
Aronofsky would later go to work on Requiem for a Dream, while Warner Brothers was still hesitant for a film adaptation of Year One. This included the Batman Beyond and Batman: DarKnight projects that eventually fell apart. After completing Requiem for a Dream, Aronofsky came back to the studio for the adaptation, and officially signing on in September 2000. He brought Frank Miller with him to write the script, whom the two previously collaborated on for an adaptation of Ronin.[4] Year One was to be inspired by 1970s crime dramas such as Taxi Driver, The French Connection, Serpico, and Death Wish.[4] Aronofsky also wanted to bring "an independent guerrilla flavor [to it]."[5]
Ultimately, Aronofsky claims that the film wasn't greenlighted because Warner Brothers found it to be too violent, citing that an R-rated Batman film wouldn't appeal to children. As such the director came up with an idea that they could make two separate films. One was to be Aronofsky/Miller's Year One that wouldn't require a massive budget, and the second to be one that could garner to a family friendly audience. The studio ultimately turned down the concept.[4]
Warner Brothers then enlisted the aid of the Wachowski brothers[4], who went as far as writing a brief proposal.[6] They couldn't work any longer due to their commitment on The Matrix sequels and Warner Brothers asked Aronofsky if he would be willing to write/direct the film based on their proposal. He turned down the offer and the studio then enlisted more pitches.[4]
In December 2002, Joss Whedon pitched an origin story that he liked very much, but claims that Warner Brothers execs were "staring at him as if he were in a fishbowl."[7] Ultimately in January 2003, Christopher Nolan was hired to take over[8] and the result was Batman Begins.
[edit] Plot
Frank Miller wrote a draft, which is to this day, the only one leaked online. The story went thus:
After the death of his parents, young Bruce Wayne remains lost on the street and is eventually taken in by Big Al, owner of an auto repair shop with his son Little Al. Driven by a desire for vengeance towards a manifest destiny of which he is only dimly aware, young Bruce toils day and night in the shop, watching the comings and goings of hookers, pimps, and corrupt police officers across the street to a cathouse. We are then introduced to detective James Gordon as he struggles with the corruption he finds endemic among Gotham City police officers of all ranks.[9]
Bruce's first act as a vigilante is to confront a dirty cop named Campbell as he accosts "mistress Selina" in the cathouse, but Campbell ends up dead and Bruce narrowly escapes being blamed. Realizing that he needs to operate with more methodology, he initially dons a cape and hockey mask. However, Bruce soon evolves a more stylized "costume" with both form and function, acquires a variety of makeshift gadgets and weapons, and reconfigures a black Lincoln Continental into a makeshift "bat-mobile." In his new disguise as "The Bat-Man," Bruce Wayne wages war on criminals from street level to the highest echelons, working his way up to Police Commissioner Loeb and Mayor Noone, even as the executors of the Wayne estate search for their missing heir. In the end, Bruce accepts his dual destiny as heir to the Wayne fortune and the city's savior, and Gordon comes to accept that, while he may not agree with "The Bat-Man"'s methods, he can't argue with the results.[9]
No casting ever took place, though Val Kilmer (who had previously played Batman in Joel Schumacher's Batman Forever from 1995),[10] Ben Affleck,[11], Keanu Reeves,[4] and Christian Bale[12] all expressed interest for the role of Batman. Kilmer would only do it "if it were to be more humorous,"[10] while Bale cited the role as "a dream come true." His agent then told MovieHole.net that Bale had been approached for a number of Batman projects, including Year One. He stated that Bale preferred the Year One version because the script was more "unique."[12] Bale would of course end up being cast for the lead role in Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman:_Year_One#Film_adaptation
[edit] Film adaptation
A film adaptation of the series was to be directed by Darren Aronofsky and written by both Aronofsky and Miller. The project never received the greenlight by Warner Brothers because they found it to be too violent. Ultimately the project resulted in Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins. The first draft of the script has been leaked online, though only written by Miller.[4]
The film was one of many projects developed at the studio over the years spent trying to get a fifth Batman installment. Others listed included Batman Triumphant, Batman: DarKnight, Boaz Yakin's Batman Beyond, and Wolfgang Peterson's Batman vs Superman.[4]
[edit] Development
After the critical and financial failure of Batman & Robin, director Joel Schumacher felt he owed "the hardcore Batman fans the Batman movie they would love me to give them." It was in the summer of 1998, whereas Schumacher claimed he had pitched to Warner Brothers a film adaptation of Frank Miller's acclaimed graphic novel Batman: Year One. Despite his interest, the studio decided to go to renowned independent filmmaker Darren Aronofsky, after they were impressed with his work on π. When asked how he might approach the Batman film series Aronofsky originally wanted to do an adaptation of The Dark Knight Returns, another one of Miller's acclaimed works. He expressed interest in casting Clint Eastwood as the aging Batman and filming it in Tokyo, doubling for Gotham City. The studio was interested in the idea, though Aronofsky later changed his mind for an adaptation of Year One.[4]
Aronofsky would later go to work on Requiem for a Dream, while Warner Brothers was still hesitant for a film adaptation of Year One. This included the Batman Beyond and Batman: DarKnight projects that eventually fell apart. After completing Requiem for a Dream, Aronofsky came back to the studio for the adaptation, and officially signing on in September 2000. He brought Frank Miller with him to write the script, whom the two previously collaborated on for an adaptation of Ronin.[4] Year One was to be inspired by 1970s crime dramas such as Taxi Driver, The French Connection, Serpico, and Death Wish.[4] Aronofsky also wanted to bring "an independent guerrilla flavor [to it]."[5]
Ultimately, Aronofsky claims that the film wasn't greenlighted because Warner Brothers found it to be too violent, citing that an R-rated Batman film wouldn't appeal to children. As such the director came up with an idea that they could make two separate films. One was to be Aronofsky/Miller's Year One that wouldn't require a massive budget, and the second to be one that could garner to a family friendly audience. The studio ultimately turned down the concept.[4]
Warner Brothers then enlisted the aid of the Wachowski brothers[4], who went as far as writing a brief proposal.[6] They couldn't work any longer due to their commitment on The Matrix sequels and Warner Brothers asked Aronofsky if he would be willing to write/direct the film based on their proposal. He turned down the offer and the studio then enlisted more pitches.[4]
In December 2002, Joss Whedon pitched an origin story that he liked very much, but claims that Warner Brothers execs were "staring at him as if he were in a fishbowl."[7] Ultimately in January 2003, Christopher Nolan was hired to take over[8] and the result was Batman Begins.
[edit] Plot
Frank Miller wrote a draft, which is to this day, the only one leaked online. The story went thus:
After the death of his parents, young Bruce Wayne remains lost on the street and is eventually taken in by Big Al, owner of an auto repair shop with his son Little Al. Driven by a desire for vengeance towards a manifest destiny of which he is only dimly aware, young Bruce toils day and night in the shop, watching the comings and goings of hookers, pimps, and corrupt police officers across the street to a cathouse. We are then introduced to detective James Gordon as he struggles with the corruption he finds endemic among Gotham City police officers of all ranks.[9]
Bruce's first act as a vigilante is to confront a dirty cop named Campbell as he accosts "mistress Selina" in the cathouse, but Campbell ends up dead and Bruce narrowly escapes being blamed. Realizing that he needs to operate with more methodology, he initially dons a cape and hockey mask. However, Bruce soon evolves a more stylized "costume" with both form and function, acquires a variety of makeshift gadgets and weapons, and reconfigures a black Lincoln Continental into a makeshift "bat-mobile." In his new disguise as "The Bat-Man," Bruce Wayne wages war on criminals from street level to the highest echelons, working his way up to Police Commissioner Loeb and Mayor Noone, even as the executors of the Wayne estate search for their missing heir. In the end, Bruce accepts his dual destiny as heir to the Wayne fortune and the city's savior, and Gordon comes to accept that, while he may not agree with "The Bat-Man"'s methods, he can't argue with the results.[9]
No casting ever took place, though Val Kilmer (who had previously played Batman in Joel Schumacher's Batman Forever from 1995),[10] Ben Affleck,[11], Keanu Reeves,[4] and Christian Bale[12] all expressed interest for the role of Batman. Kilmer would only do it "if it were to be more humorous,"[10] while Bale cited the role as "a dream come true." His agent then told MovieHole.net that Bale had been approached for a number of Batman projects, including Year One. He stated that Bale preferred the Year One version because the script was more "unique."[12] Bale would of course end up being cast for the lead role in Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins.
gwynplaine
L'homme qui rit.
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2007
- Messages
- 11,294
- Reaction score
- 2,444
- Points
- 103
I saw 5 minutes of Speed Racer on a plane and stopped it, it was so horrible. Now I don't want to see anything by the Wachoski bros anymore.
gwynplaine
L'homme qui rit.
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2007
- Messages
- 11,294
- Reaction score
- 2,444
- Points
- 103
I don't either but I actually think that Stallone would make a pretty accurate TDKR Batman. Also he is a pretty good actor, Copland, Rocky and 1st blood come to mind, but it's just my opinion.
The Major
Superhero
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2008
- Messages
- 6,749
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 31
Agreed.
CaptainClown
Papa SPANK!!!
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 25,611
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
I would def pay to see that.I say yes only so we can have a scene like this:
gwynplaine
L'homme qui rit.
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2007
- Messages
- 11,294
- Reaction score
- 2,444
- Points
- 103
I can see why but I think he is talking to Robin and I never want to see Robin on the big screen again, except like you said before, to die
t:.MMoralN10Tion
Civilian
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2007
- Messages
- 233
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 11
You must not have heard of how bad his movies are. Ya see, he's an awesome writer (sometimes) but to take over Nolan's franchise? NO.
Similar threads
The Dark Knight Rises
The Trailers Ruined the Dark Knight Rises' Suspense
