Main > Everything Else
The dark knight trailer (new batman movie)
hulkster:
--- Quote from: Sir Auros on January 22, 2008, 07:33:08 pm ---Casto, have you ever read a Batman comic? I mean, since the 1970's?
Batman Begins was closer to the modern Batman than anything by Burton.
--- End quote ---
yeah im with Sir Auros on this one.....seems like you watched the old "bam!" and "biff!" batman one too many times and thought "oh gee, the joker is supposed to be a laughing retard all the time and never really accomplish anything". read this http://stars.ign.com/articles/841/841564p1.html from ign on the many faces of the joker. as you can see, the joker originally started out as an insane murderer that was more about killing and destruction than throwing cards at people.
tim burtons' portrayal of the joker was indeed great and i loved the first two films to death....and they still are great. burton's adaptation of the joker took the original maniacal version of the joker and combined it with the lunatic laughing boy of the old batman tv show and jack nicholason's acting is what you got. it was great.
that being said, heath ledgers joker is much closer to the original intent of what the joker was supposed to be. a messed up dude, that was more like a serial killer than a guy that wants to take over gotham city by filling up clown balloons with gas. and i always thought the actual joker making "chemical accident" was done a little campy. im supposed to believe (yes i know its a comic book movie, but bear with me) that a guy falls into acid and comes out with perfect clown makeup (a.k.a. tim burtons joker). heath ledger's look is much more believeable with the scarring and makeup done sloppily, clothes strewn together to kinda resemble a clown outfit. IMO, an insane serial killer isnt going to take the time to walk down to the local taylor to get measured for a purple suit. the makeup will be shoddy and he will look nasty and dirty.
obviously im a fan of batman begins as well, as the scarecrow was also made much more believable. im so glad they didnt make him look like a wizard of oz scarecrow adaptation....although im guessing howard wouldve liked that better. :dunno sheesh!
danny_galaga:
--- Quote from: ChadTower on January 23, 2008, 09:23:55 am ---
--- Quote from: danny_galaga on January 23, 2008, 12:14:32 am ---im with shmokes on this one. what burton did with batman just hadnt been done before. batman begins is great too, but definitely owes its existence to the first..
--- End quote ---
It had been done... just not that well and with that budget. There were a few Marvel adaptations in the 80s that just didn't work out because of small budgets and the talent that comes with it. The early 80s show about The Hulk was a similar dark treatment of a comic book character and was way before Burton's first Batman movie.
--- End quote ---
you mean that show with matrick duffy ('s leg) ?
"mr magee, dont make me angry!"
yep, pretty dark and gothic memories for me there...
ChadTower:
--- Quote from: danny_galaga on January 25, 2008, 09:04:36 am ---you mean that show with matrick duffy ('s leg) ?
"mr magee, dont make me angry!"
yep, pretty dark and gothic memories for me there...
--- End quote ---
That was Bill Bixby, not Patrick Duffy. It was a dark show for sure. Every week something crappy happened to that guy. The whole concept was that becoming the Hulk was a burden - something he had to hide and was desperate to cure before someone was killed. It was a lot more Jekyll and Hyde than it was 70s boomcrashpow superhero.
shmokes:
I always get a kick out of people vicariously giving Batman Returns great loads of respect solely on the grounds that it was made by the visionary who made the original. Batman was a masterpiece that basically created a genre. It was fantastic. It was great. The sequel is barely good. Penguin's henchmen are only the slightest, teeniest, tiniest bit better than the roller-blading, glowstick-wearing retards that Schumacher gave us later on. The only thing stupider than Penguin being able to remotely control the Batmobile's mechanical functions by sticking a little device to the car was when Batman punched a hole through the undercarriage of his car in order to pull it off. Dumb. And do we need three villains in a movie? No. We do not.
shardian:
--- Quote from: shmokes on January 25, 2008, 02:32:42 pm ---I always get a kick out of people vicariously giving Batman Returns great loads of respect solely on the grounds that it was made by the visionary who made the original. Batman was a masterpiece that basically created a genre. It was fantastic. It was great. The sequel is barely good. Penguin's henchmen are only the slightest, teeniest, tiniest bit better than the roller-blading, glowstick-wearing retards that Schumacher gave us later on. The only thing stupider than Penguin being able to remotely control the Batmobile's mechanical functions by sticking a little device to the car was when Batman punched a hole through the undercarriage of his car in order to pull it off. Dumb. And do we need three villains in a movie? No. We do not.
--- End quote ---
Although I loved Batman Returns, I have to whole-heartedly agree with your assessment.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version