It's May 28, 2024, 04:50:14 AM
i thought Returns could've been better. i'm more a fan of the evil scientist/genius Lex Luthor rather than the Gene Hackman style with the Henchmen etc. I also thought Brandon Routh was trying to be too much like Christopher Reeve, but that's just me. i think Batman Begins has been the best comic based movie ever, with x-men 3 coming in 2nd, but overall I prefer the Marvel movies (xmen, spiderman, fantastic four etc) to the DC movies
That's all nostalgia man. You guys were kids when you first saw Batman and Batman Returns and that's how you invisioned Batman to be. I was a fan of the Frank Miller Batman and the Alan Moore Batman before I had ever seen the films so in my case I thought the films were terrible on first watch (even at a young age). They aren't Batman movies. They are Tim Burton movies and Batman just happens to be in them. Joker isn't Joker. It's Jack Nicholson with face paint, and Jack is amazing but he's not Joker. Not in that movie. Returns was just stupid goofy. I'll never quite understand how grown adults can rewatch the Burton Batman films and truthfully think they are better. Begins made it possible to think it could be even a bit real. It explained everything properly and took it so seriously and it's a movie about a man in a bat suit fighting crime. The first two just took that goofy concept and kept it goofy. I'm surprised Adam West didn't have a cameo.
Quote from: Shallow on July 04, 2006, 07:21:12 PMThat's all nostalgia man. You guys were kids when you first saw Batman and Batman Returns and that's how you invisioned Batman to be. I was a fan of the Frank Miller Batman and the Alan Moore Batman before I had ever seen the films so in my case I thought the films were terrible on first watch (even at a young age). They aren't Batman movies. They are Tim Burton movies and Batman just happens to be in them. Joker isn't Joker. It's Jack Nicholson with face paint, and Jack is amazing but he's not Joker. Not in that movie. Returns was just stupid goofy. I'll never quite understand how grown adults can rewatch the Burton Batman films and truthfully think they are better. Begins made it possible to think it could be even a bit real. It explained everything properly and took it so seriously and it's a movie about a man in a bat suit fighting crime. The first two just took that goofy concept and kept it goofy. I'm surprised Adam West didn't have a cameo.Okay, Dr. Phil...I like the Batman movies because I'm a fan of film, I don't care if it lives up to the comics or has any continuity errors, Tim Burton did an amazing job directing those films and I believe the cast couldn't have been better...I also love the dark atmosphere and vibe the films give you. "Superman", to me, is a lot cheesier and more childish...Not saying it can't be an enjoyable pop-corn flick, I'm just saying I like the "Batman" film franchise much more than anything "Superman" related...PeACe
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Exactly.Quote from: Now_I_Know on July 05, 2006, 10:31:10 AMQuote from: Shallow on July 04, 2006, 07:21:12 PMThat's all nostalgia man. You guys were kids when you first saw Batman and Batman Returns and that's how you invisioned Batman to be. I was a fan of the Frank Miller Batman and the Alan Moore Batman before I had ever seen the films so in my case I thought the films were terrible on first watch (even at a young age). They aren't Batman movies. They are Tim Burton movies and Batman just happens to be in them. Joker isn't Joker. It's Jack Nicholson with face paint, and Jack is amazing but he's not Joker. Not in that movie. Returns was just stupid goofy. I'll never quite understand how grown adults can rewatch the Burton Batman films and truthfully think they are better. Begins made it possible to think it could be even a bit real. It explained everything properly and took it so seriously and it's a movie about a man in a bat suit fighting crime. The first two just took that goofy concept and kept it goofy. I'm surprised Adam West didn't have a cameo.Okay, Dr. Phil...I like the Batman movies because I'm a fan of film, I don't care if it lives up to the comics or has any continuity errors, Tim Burton did an amazing job directing those films and I believe the cast couldn't have been better...I also love the dark atmosphere and vibe the films give you. "Superman", to me, is a lot cheesier and more childish...Not saying it can't be an enjoyable pop-corn flick, I'm just saying I like the "Batman" film franchise much more than anything "Superman" related...PeACeContinuity to the comic books aside, I truthfully fel the Burton movies were just campy, goofy, movies and if they were treated as such I wouldn't have a problem but people talk about them as serious dark movies that changed Batman forever. It was Beetlejuice in the form of Batman. The whole thing just looked so bad, particularly Batman Retuns. Begins gave us a reason or every stupid looking thing about Batman and it played it straight. You can prefer whatever you want but my distaste for the Burton films would still be there even with out my knowledge of the comics or Begins. I just think it's goofy.
Quote from: Shallow on July 05, 2006, 12:09:38 PM^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Exactly.Quote from: Now_I_Know on July 05, 2006, 10:31:10 AMQuote from: Shallow on July 04, 2006, 07:21:12 PMThat's all nostalgia man. You guys were kids when you first saw Batman and Batman Returns and that's how you invisioned Batman to be. I was a fan of the Frank Miller Batman and the Alan Moore Batman before I had ever seen the films so in my case I thought the films were terrible on first watch (even at a young age). They aren't Batman movies. They are Tim Burton movies and Batman just happens to be in them. Joker isn't Joker. It's Jack Nicholson with face paint, and Jack is amazing but he's not Joker. Not in that movie. Returns was just stupid goofy. I'll never quite understand how grown adults can rewatch the Burton Batman films and truthfully think they are better. Begins made it possible to think it could be even a bit real. It explained everything properly and took it so seriously and it's a movie about a man in a bat suit fighting crime. The first two just took that goofy concept and kept it goofy. I'm surprised Adam West didn't have a cameo.Okay, Dr. Phil...I like the Batman movies because I'm a fan of film, I don't care if it lives up to the comics or has any continuity errors, Tim Burton did an amazing job directing those films and I believe the cast couldn't have been better...I also love the dark atmosphere and vibe the films give you. "Superman", to me, is a lot cheesier and more childish...Not saying it can't be an enjoyable pop-corn flick, I'm just saying I like the "Batman" film franchise much more than anything "Superman" related...PeACeContinuity to the comic books aside, I truthfully fel the Burton movies were just campy, goofy, movies and if they were treated as such I wouldn't have a problem but people talk about them as serious dark movies that changed Batman forever. It was Beetlejuice in the form of Batman. The whole thing just looked so bad, particularly Batman Retuns. Begins gave us a reason or every stupid looking thing about Batman and it played it straight. You can prefer whatever you want but my distaste for the Burton films would still be there even with out my knowledge of the comics or Begins. I just think it's goofy.You can never get the same sinister vibe from "Batman Begins" as you can get from a Tim Burton directed film...You wouldn't understand this, because you seem to be bigger on comics than you are on film. Tim Burton has an amazing unique style and I love both of the first two "Batman" movies. It's not supposed to be serious, but they make it what it is... a fantasy. "Batman Begins" was good, but it didn't give you that same cinematic feeling, it's closer to just reading the comics, and at times, it took itself too seriously, almost like they wanted you to feel like you were watching "The Pianast" or something...The modern-day "Superman" looks 10 times more camp than Tim Burton's classic "Batman's". It's all a matter of opinion, I guess. I just prefer Batman... Batman is self-made...PeACe
Quote from: Now_I_Know on July 05, 2006, 02:10:51 PMQuote from: Shallow on July 05, 2006, 12:09:38 PM^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Exactly.Quote from: Now_I_Know on July 05, 2006, 10:31:10 AMQuote from: Shallow on July 04, 2006, 07:21:12 PMThat's all nostalgia man. You guys were kids when you first saw Batman and Batman Returns and that's how you invisioned Batman to be. I was a fan of the Frank Miller Batman and the Alan Moore Batman before I had ever seen the films so in my case I thought the films were terrible on first watch (even at a young age). They aren't Batman movies. They are Tim Burton movies and Batman just happens to be in them. Joker isn't Joker. It's Jack Nicholson with face paint, and Jack is amazing but he's not Joker. Not in that movie. Returns was just stupid goofy. I'll never quite understand how grown adults can rewatch the Burton Batman films and truthfully think they are better. Begins made it possible to think it could be even a bit real. It explained everything properly and took it so seriously and it's a movie about a man in a bat suit fighting crime. The first two just took that goofy concept and kept it goofy. I'm surprised Adam West didn't have a cameo.Okay, Dr. Phil...I like the Batman movies because I'm a fan of film, I don't care if it lives up to the comics or has any continuity errors, Tim Burton did an amazing job directing those films and I believe the cast couldn't have been better...I also love the dark atmosphere and vibe the films give you. "Superman", to me, is a lot cheesier and more childish...Not saying it can't be an enjoyable pop-corn flick, I'm just saying I like the "Batman" film franchise much more than anything "Superman" related...PeACeContinuity to the comic books aside, I truthfully fel the Burton movies were just campy, goofy, movies and if they were treated as such I wouldn't have a problem but people talk about them as serious dark movies that changed Batman forever. It was Beetlejuice in the form of Batman. The whole thing just looked so bad, particularly Batman Retuns. Begins gave us a reason or every stupid looking thing about Batman and it played it straight. You can prefer whatever you want but my distaste for the Burton films would still be there even with out my knowledge of the comics or Begins. I just think it's goofy.You can never get the same sinister vibe from "Batman Begins" as you can get from a Tim Burton directed film...You wouldn't understand this, because you seem to be bigger on comics than you are on film. Tim Burton has an amazing unique style and I love both of the first two "Batman" movies. It's not supposed to be serious, but they make it what it is... a fantasy. "Batman Begins" was good, but it didn't give you that same cinematic feeling, it's closer to just reading the comics, and at times, it took itself too seriously, almost like they wanted you to feel like you were watching "The Pianast" or something...The modern-day "Superman" looks 10 times more camp than Tim Burton's classic "Batman's". It's all a matter of opinion, I guess. I just prefer Batman... Batman is self-made...PeACeI'm certainly as big on cinema as I am on comics and probably more so. Like I said, Batman is Beetlejuice and Tim Burton isn't getting confused for Stanley Kubrick any time soon. The film just seemed too silly and stupid and it is rewarded for being dark when it's not even close even for science fiction. Blade Runner was dark. Terminater 1 was dark. Batman was a cartoon brought to live action and it wasn't the first or best version of it. Burton doesn't have any oscars for good reason. His movies are just plain and simple goofy and try and pretend to be deeper when they aren't, kind of like Tarantino. I really liked Edward S Hands for what it was and it was done perfectly for the kind of movie it was supposed to be. Batman wasn't supposed to be that kind of movie and it ended up being a lot like that. I know about fantasy, like Lord of the Rings or Space Oddysey. Batman just isn't one of those films. It was a great money maker and a perfect children's Batman movie but that's about it. I don't see anything amazing about the cinematography, acting style, or pacing. It's a straight forward film with straight forward shots if you take the script out of and look at it from a visual point of view. I admire the sets, they aren't Batman, but they are still good in both movies. Blade Runner set the tone for the 80s sci-fi fantasy movies and Batman is just one of the rip offs, from a visual stand point.
Quote from: Shallow on July 05, 2006, 02:40:29 PMQuote from: Now_I_Know on July 05, 2006, 02:10:51 PMQuote from: Shallow on July 05, 2006, 12:09:38 PM^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Exactly.Quote from: Now_I_Know on July 05, 2006, 10:31:10 AMQuote from: Shallow on July 04, 2006, 07:21:12 PMThat's all nostalgia man. You guys were kids when you first saw Batman and Batman Returns and that's how you invisioned Batman to be. I was a fan of the Frank Miller Batman and the Alan Moore Batman before I had ever seen the films so in my case I thought the films were terrible on first watch (even at a young age). They aren't Batman movies. They are Tim Burton movies and Batman just happens to be in them. Joker isn't Joker. It's Jack Nicholson with face paint, and Jack is amazing but he's not Joker. Not in that movie. Returns was just stupid goofy. I'll never quite understand how grown adults can rewatch the Burton Batman films and truthfully think they are better. Begins made it possible to think it could be even a bit real. It explained everything properly and took it so seriously and it's a movie about a man in a bat suit fighting crime. The first two just took that goofy concept and kept it goofy. I'm surprised Adam West didn't have a cameo.Okay, Dr. Phil...I like the Batman movies because I'm a fan of film, I don't care if it lives up to the comics or has any continuity errors, Tim Burton did an amazing job directing those films and I believe the cast couldn't have been better...I also love the dark atmosphere and vibe the films give you. "Superman", to me, is a lot cheesier and more childish...Not saying it can't be an enjoyable pop-corn flick, I'm just saying I like the "Batman" film franchise much more than anything "Superman" related...PeACeContinuity to the comic books aside, I truthfully fel the Burton movies were just campy, goofy, movies and if they were treated as such I wouldn't have a problem but people talk about them as serious dark movies that changed Batman forever. It was Beetlejuice in the form of Batman. The whole thing just looked so bad, particularly Batman Retuns. Begins gave us a reason or every stupid looking thing about Batman and it played it straight. You can prefer whatever you want but my distaste for the Burton films would still be there even with out my knowledge of the comics or Begins. I just think it's goofy.You can never get the same sinister vibe from "Batman Begins" as you can get from a Tim Burton directed film...You wouldn't understand this, because you seem to be bigger on comics than you are on film. Tim Burton has an amazing unique style and I love both of the first two "Batman" movies. It's not supposed to be serious, but they make it what it is... a fantasy. "Batman Begins" was good, but it didn't give you that same cinematic feeling, it's closer to just reading the comics, and at times, it took itself too seriously, almost like they wanted you to feel like you were watching "The Pianast" or something...The modern-day "Superman" looks 10 times more camp than Tim Burton's classic "Batman's". It's all a matter of opinion, I guess. I just prefer Batman... Batman is self-made...PeACeI'm certainly as big on cinema as I am on comics and probably more so. Like I said, Batman is Beetlejuice and Tim Burton isn't getting confused for Stanley Kubrick any time soon. The film just seemed too silly and stupid and it is rewarded for being dark when it's not even close even for science fiction. Blade Runner was dark. Terminater 1 was dark. Batman was a cartoon brought to live action and it wasn't the first or best version of it. Burton doesn't have any oscars for good reason. His movies are just plain and simple goofy and try and pretend to be deeper when they aren't, kind of like Tarantino. I really liked Edward S Hands for what it was and it was done perfectly for the kind of movie it was supposed to be. Batman wasn't supposed to be that kind of movie and it ended up being a lot like that. I know about fantasy, like Lord of the Rings or Space Oddysey. Batman just isn't one of those films. It was a great money maker and a perfect children's Batman movie but that's about it. I don't see anything amazing about the cinematography, acting style, or pacing. It's a straight forward film with straight forward shots if you take the script out of and look at it from a visual point of view. I admire the sets, they aren't Batman, but they are still good in both movies. Blade Runner set the tone for the 80s sci-fi fantasy movies and Batman is just one of the rip offs, from a visual stand point.We simply have 2 different opinions...One thing though, is that a comic film is SUPPOSED to be like a cartoon made into live action. That's the vibe Tim Burton actually went for, after all, what are comics? But it's cartoonishly dark, a sinister live-action comic with dark imagery and a perfect score, I dunno how you don't see it? Tim Burton is a great director, Kubrick owns him, but I dunno where that came from. I also don't see how they were children movies, they were some pretty hard PG-13 flicks for those days and were actually a lot more violent than the next few installments. I guess to each his own though...PeACe
Quote from: Now_I_Know on July 05, 2006, 02:55:45 PMQuote from: Shallow on July 05, 2006, 02:40:29 PMQuote from: Now_I_Know on July 05, 2006, 02:10:51 PMQuote from: Shallow on July 05, 2006, 12:09:38 PM^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Exactly.Quote from: Now_I_Know on July 05, 2006, 10:31:10 AMQuote from: Shallow on July 04, 2006, 07:21:12 PMThat's all nostalgia man. You guys were kids when you first saw Batman and Batman Returns and that's how you invisioned Batman to be. I was a fan of the Frank Miller Batman and the Alan Moore Batman before I had ever seen the films so in my case I thought the films were terrible on first watch (even at a young age). They aren't Batman movies. They are Tim Burton movies and Batman just happens to be in them. Joker isn't Joker. It's Jack Nicholson with face paint, and Jack is amazing but he's not Joker. Not in that movie. Returns was just stupid goofy. I'll never quite understand how grown adults can rewatch the Burton Batman films and truthfully think they are better. Begins made it possible to think it could be even a bit real. It explained everything properly and took it so seriously and it's a movie about a man in a bat suit fighting crime. The first two just took that goofy concept and kept it goofy. I'm surprised Adam West didn't have a cameo.Okay, Dr. Phil...I like the Batman movies because I'm a fan of film, I don't care if it lives up to the comics or has any continuity errors, Tim Burton did an amazing job directing those films and I believe the cast couldn't have been better...I also love the dark atmosphere and vibe the films give you. "Superman", to me, is a lot cheesier and more childish...Not saying it can't be an enjoyable pop-corn flick, I'm just saying I like the "Batman" film franchise much more than anything "Superman" related...PeACeContinuity to the comic books aside, I truthfully fel the Burton movies were just campy, goofy, movies and if they were treated as such I wouldn't have a problem but people talk about them as serious dark movies that changed Batman forever. It was Beetlejuice in the form of Batman. The whole thing just looked so bad, particularly Batman Retuns. Begins gave us a reason or every stupid looking thing about Batman and it played it straight. You can prefer whatever you want but my distaste for the Burton films would still be there even with out my knowledge of the comics or Begins. I just think it's goofy.You can never get the same sinister vibe from "Batman Begins" as you can get from a Tim Burton directed film...You wouldn't understand this, because you seem to be bigger on comics than you are on film. Tim Burton has an amazing unique style and I love both of the first two "Batman" movies. It's not supposed to be serious, but they make it what it is... a fantasy. "Batman Begins" was good, but it didn't give you that same cinematic feeling, it's closer to just reading the comics, and at times, it took itself too seriously, almost like they wanted you to feel like you were watching "The Pianast" or something...The modern-day "Superman" looks 10 times more camp than Tim Burton's classic "Batman's". It's all a matter of opinion, I guess. I just prefer Batman... Batman is self-made...PeACeI'm certainly as big on cinema as I am on comics and probably more so. Like I said, Batman is Beetlejuice and Tim Burton isn't getting confused for Stanley Kubrick any time soon. The film just seemed too silly and stupid and it is rewarded for being dark when it's not even close even for science fiction. Blade Runner was dark. Terminater 1 was dark. Batman was a cartoon brought to live action and it wasn't the first or best version of it. Burton doesn't have any oscars for good reason. His movies are just plain and simple goofy and try and pretend to be deeper when they aren't, kind of like Tarantino. I really liked Edward S Hands for what it was and it was done perfectly for the kind of movie it was supposed to be. Batman wasn't supposed to be that kind of movie and it ended up being a lot like that. I know about fantasy, like Lord of the Rings or Space Oddysey. Batman just isn't one of those films. It was a great money maker and a perfect children's Batman movie but that's about it. I don't see anything amazing about the cinematography, acting style, or pacing. It's a straight forward film with straight forward shots if you take the script out of and look at it from a visual point of view. I admire the sets, they aren't Batman, but they are still good in both movies. Blade Runner set the tone for the 80s sci-fi fantasy movies and Batman is just one of the rip offs, from a visual stand point.We simply have 2 different opinions...One thing though, is that a comic film is SUPPOSED to be like a cartoon made into live action. That's the vibe Tim Burton actually went for, after all, what are comics? But it's cartoonishly dark, a sinister live-action comic with dark imagery and a perfect score, I dunno how you don't see it? Tim Burton is a great director, Kubrick owns him, but I dunno where that came from. I also don't see how they were children movies, they were some pretty hard PG-13 flicks for those days and were actually a lot more violent than the next few installments. I guess to each his own though...PeACeI'll agree on the music. The first theme was way better than the new one. I brought up Kubrick to show what a weird looking sinister film is supposed to look like. Sin City was cartoonishly dark. Batman was a cartoon. It was childish and juvenile in so many ways and so much was wasted on "wouldn't this be cool" moments that made no sense. Why are comic book movies supposed to be cartoons. Just because they are drawn on paper doesn't mean they have to be like saturday morning shows with live actors. Let's say I never read the book, or there never was a Batman until Tim Burton created and directed the movie. I'd still think it was a goofy film for children. Not todlers or infants, but anyone between the ages of 7 and 14. The whole thing just fely like I was watching a circus on film. You may like that, I don't. No one's opinion is better than the other's here. I'll also never understand the 1920s fashion with 2000s technology but oh well. I can look past that, but I don't see anything sinister about the film. I didn't see suggestive evil. I saw goofy imagery and stupid plotlines. Begins wasn't perfect but for it was the best yet. Batman was just a another great Burton pushing the ennvelope kids movie, like Beetlejuice, Nightmare Before Christmas, and Edward Scissor Hands. It did not change Batman (like it gets praised for) and it was not award winning material (and it didn't win any).
I meant real awards like the Oscars, and awards for Burton, not for special effects. The effects were great.As for dark, I just don't see it. Watch Blade Runner. That's dark. Watch Rutger Hauer play Roy Batty. That's sinister. Batman uses a lot of dark shots and little light and Jack Nicholson is so transparent as the Joker. Roy Batty is a complex figure with a real human side for such a soul-less role.
Quote from: Shallow on July 05, 2006, 03:53:29 PMI meant real awards like the Oscars, and awards for Burton, not for special effects. The effects were great.As for dark, I just don't see it. Watch Blade Runner. That's dark. Watch Rutger Hauer play Roy Batty. That's sinister. Batman uses a lot of dark shots and little light and Jack Nicholson is so transparent as the Joker. Roy Batty is a complex figure with a real human side for such a soul-less role.It won an Oscar...and also, it won awards in areas like "favorite film" as well. But it won a great amount of music awards, which is one of the things that gives those films their dark vibe and it's main feel...It might appeal to you in a different way, but to me it is perfect how it is...PeACe
Quote from: Now_I_Know on July 05, 2006, 04:10:43 PMQuote from: Shallow on July 05, 2006, 03:53:29 PMI meant real awards like the Oscars, and awards for Burton, not for special effects. The effects were great.As for dark, I just don't see it. Watch Blade Runner. That's dark. Watch Rutger Hauer play Roy Batty. That's sinister. Batman uses a lot of dark shots and little light and Jack Nicholson is so transparent as the Joker. Roy Batty is a complex figure with a real human side for such a soul-less role.It won an Oscar...and also, it won awards in areas like "favorite film" as well. But it won a great amount of music awards, which is one of the things that gives those films their dark vibe and it's main feel...It might appeal to you in a different way, but to me it is perfect how it is...PeACeBut the focus of what we are talking about it Burton and his choices with the film. The music was great but Burton had little to do with that, and that didn't make or break the movie with me nor should it anyone, and the Oscar it won was not for the movie or direction. It was for the sets, which I already said were great.