The Tim Burton Batman films focused more on the grotesque villains and elaborate sets than the title character. The Joel S. movies focused more on blacklights, day-glo paint, rubber nipples and cheese.
The Dini/Timm animated series seemed to the only non-comic book "take" that I could really get into.
This looks promising. Keeping the focus on Bruce Wayne and his motivations.
Though the glimpses of Ra's Al Ghul and the Scarecrow _do_ whet the appetite for the villains!
They certainly have surrounded Christian Bale with enough talented supporting actors. And he can do "the voice". Here's hoping.
*The geek in me hopes that there will be a "Dr. Harlene Quinzell" working at Arkham Asylum.*
[ April 28, 2005, 08:39 PM: Message edited by: Puffy Treat ]
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
I've been looking forward to this since I first heard there was work on a script based on Miller's "Year One." The final version is fairly removed from the Year One books, but looks like they kept a lot of the themes.
But I have to admit the major reason I'm happy they're going back to Batman's beginning, and hopefully restarting the franchise story from scratch. The Joker's not dead.
As much as I loved Burton's Batman, I hate the fact that they killed off the best villain. And too many comicbook movies since have followed suit. I applaude Xmen for making it through 2 movies with Magneto alive. Arch-nemeses do not just get killed off in the first conflict. /rant
--Enigmatic
[ April 27, 2005, 08:00 PM: Message edited by: Enigmatic ]
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
The original Burton Batman film was pretty odd. Among other things, it had Batman casually killing the Joker's goons in the cathedral scene...without even lifting an eyelid over it.
Enigmatic: According to WB this film is _not_ to be considered a "prequel" to the Burton or the Joel S. films...so yes, if it's successful, any sequels will follow their own direction.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
None of the Batman movies made to day come close to doing him justice, including Burton's.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
Dagonee: I fully agree!
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
Check that: I though "Batman: Mask of the Phantasm" was pretty darn good. But that was an animated tie-in the the Dini-Timm series.
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
I see this has already been posted. Oops.
But, yes, I've been frothing at the mouth to see this thing come out. I agree that none of the previous Bat-films have come close to rendering America's Most Famous Tragic Hero in all of his glorious, tortured light. I worshiped B89 and Returns as a kid, but looking back on it, it seems to be more of a warm-up for Nightmare Before Christmas. I think, fundamentally, Burton movies go for style over plot. There is rarely any plot complication. However, sometimes I'm in the mood for that, and it's fine.
...but I don't care for that with Batman. Posted by HesterGray (Member # 7384) on :
This is the best trailer I've seen yet! I think I almost had a heart attack!
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
I warned you in the other thread: put a diaper on before you click the link, or at the very least, sit down.
[ April 28, 2005, 12:22 AM: Message edited by: Book ]
Posted by Lupus (Member # 6516) on :
wow, this looks amazing. I can't wait to see it
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
I wish I could link pictures here, but I just found out that the one overhead shot you get of Gotham is EXACTLY like a map of Gotham that appears in the comics. They even have bridges in all the right places.
Talk about details...
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
I even like the music Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
It's from Zimmer, the guy who did Gladiator.
Posted by Olivetta (Member # 6456) on :
Liam Neeeson, Cillian Murphy, Christian Bale, Morgan Freeman... I'm all a-twitter.
Plus, from thattrailer Katie Holmes looks less annoying than usual. More grown up, I guess.
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
Don't forget Gary Oldman, Rutger Hauer, and Tom Wilkinson.
EDIT: I was somewhat impressed with Katie, too. Her "But the man I knew, the man who vanished... never came back" line seemed like... actual acting. No cutsie stuff.
At the same time, though, the "You were gone a long time" delivery almost gave me diabetes.
Oh, well. It's better than Kirsten Dunst.
[ April 28, 2005, 12:24 PM: Message edited by: Book ]
Posted by Olivetta (Member # 6456) on :
Well, now that movie's just STUFFED, isn't it?
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
On Tim Burton's Batman: No, it's not perfect. Yes, Batman Begins looks much better. However, I think everyone who wants to see the darker, angstier Batman of the pre-comics-code days or more modern books need to give this movie a bit more credit. At the time, most people's image of Batman was formed more by Adam West's camp and Superfriends. iirc, even the comics in the late 80s were pretty watered-down. Burton helped get Batman back to his more conflicted roots. The movie was an important wedge to get us to the Dark Knight as opposed to Biff Pow Blam.
That being said, it did suck that they completely ignored the fact that Batman doesn't kill.
Just my $0.02. I'm sure there are better comics experts on the board than I.
--Enimagtic
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
Well, no. The original Batman did kill. Ya don't shoot the bad guys with a .45 if ya intend to only wound.
[ April 28, 2005, 04:58 PM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
I thought, "Eh, I'm not going to want to see this movie..."
Then I watched the trailer, and, well, I just might. Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
aspectre: Finger and Kane dropped that aspect of the strip _very_ quickly. Back in those days "continuity" in a super-hero comic was "whatever works this month". By the time Batman got his own book in 1940 (along with many of the key supporting characters and villains) Batman was not a killer. And "never was"...because whatever they felt didn't work was quietly dropped.
So for 49 years before the Burton film, Batman was not a killer. That's why it was so unsettling.
[ April 28, 2005, 08:45 PM: Message edited by: Puffy Treat ]
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
Enigmatic: The Batman comics of the late 80s (pre-Burton) "watered down"?
Hardly. In the post Frank Miller Batman era, there was a rush to outdo "The Dark Knight Returns" .
Robin beaten by a crowbar, killed off. (by readership vote!)
Batman as a barely-sane twistie who believed that one day he would enter Arkham Asylum as a patient.
Those comics were the epitome of late-80s "Grim and Gritty" excess.
[ April 28, 2005, 09:11 PM: Message edited by: Puffy Treat ]
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
To anyone who knows what I'm talking about, the rumor mongering about the mill is that this franchise will be strongly centered around the Long Halloween and Dark Victory plotlines, with Joker and Two-Face finally getting their realistic screen birth.
Here are those photos of Gotham I was talking about.
[ April 28, 2005, 10:17 PM: Message edited by: Book ]
Posted by ChaosTheory (Member # 7069) on :
I read the script a while ago...don't want to give anything away but if filmed right this movie will be very cool, the best Batman yet.
Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
Honestly, that wouldn't be a difficult feat.
-Trevor
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
I haven't picked up either Long Halloween or Dark Victory yet - I'm hoping they do a novelization as they did with Knightfall and NML.
By the way, Bane is the villian with the greates injustice done to him by the last series of movies. A KnightFall movie would be excellent.
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
Nothing like a short, angry fat man in platform shoes to make an instant movie classic.
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Oops. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)