Nolan's Batman

Yeah that's the problem with Superman, his powers are ridiculous and disguise is just the most pathetic thing ever. But if there's one person to add a touch (or just a hint even) of realism to it at best, it will be Nolan.

Also just read that the script for JLA that Millar was talking about is being worked on for a 2014 release. This could be a good way for them to introduce a new Batman rather than starting off with a new Batman franchise... Hopefully they can include a new Green Lantern in there too whilst they're at it!
 
I want Paul Verhoeven to do an ultra violent messed up Batman that really breaks bones and shatters femurs. He can be up against a really sadistic villain like a Gotham Clarence Boddiker with a bit more guile.
 
If you wanted to do Superman in something even approaching the Nolan Universe, you'd have to get rid of the whole mild mannered Clark Kent disguise persona and go back to the "leap tall buildings in a single bound" but not fly thing.
 
gaz1185 said:
Yeah that's the problem with Superman, his powers are ridiculous and disguise is just the most pathetic thing ever. But if there's one person to add a touch (or just a hint even) of realism to it at best, it will be Nolan.

Also just read that the script for JLA that Millar was talking about is being worked on for a 2014 release. This could be a good way for them to introduce a new Batman rather than starting off with a new Batman franchise... Hopefully they can include a new Green Lantern in there too whilst they're at it!
Click to expand...

Where did you find that?
 
duffer said:
Any possible reboot must surely go in a less realistic, more super human direction to tie in with the new Superman and the under development Flash movie and head towards a Justice League flick.
Click to expand...

Especially seeing how people took to the Avengers and the money that film made there will definitely be a Justice League film in the works. Not sure this current Batman would fit into that.

duffer said:
I'm not sure how anyone could do a "realistic" Superman. He's basically a god with one really serious allergy.
Click to expand...

They have to stop using Lex Luther and look at other enemies like Doomsday, Brainiac & Darkseid and they now have the money and technology to pull those characters off. The whole Lex Luther and Kryptonite thing has been done way too much and it is boring now. They are bringing in General Zod again this time which should make things more interesting.
 
Basically, Superman's main problems is that his power level and ability list is constantly fluctuating wildly between pretty strong and wtf strong, dependent on the story.

I watch one of the animated films and he was holding back the entire time cause he didn't want to hurt anyone, then he fake looes it, starts 'killing' people and punching buildings in half.

Everyone knows come the end of the movie Superman will be fine and all will be well, but the trick is to create enough drama in the story that for about and hour your not sure that he will be.

Stopping a robbery, is so fecking beneath his ability level it's almost not worth worrying about, unless he was trying to see how many he could stop in an hour, for a laugh. For Batman it's exciting because he's out numbered and out gunned, Superman could drop a mountain on them from space.

Lex tests him mentally, which is fine for a series as you have a lot of time to build up the plot and the character, but for a 2hour and change movie you need to bring the heavy hitters, someone just as powerful if not more so. Which is fine but what the hell are they bothering with the Earth for then?

Nolan was pretty good at taking the comics and boiling them down extracting the cool stories, the themes and altering them slightly in an enjoyable way.

In using Zod I think it'll be more about his moral choices, because Clark has the powers of a god and can rule mankind with an iron fist, but he doesn't want to.
 
For as much shit as he gets, if it wasn't for Arnie, that movie would have been fecking woeful and boring, at least we got laughs out of his hammy performance.
 
I never even saw Batman & Robin.

To be honest, after the first Batman directed by Tim Burton, I thought all the Batman films were pretty weak until Nolan came onto the scene. Batman Forever & Batman Returns pretty much ruined the franchise for me for a while. It wasnt until I saw Batman Begins that my faith in it was restored.

Maybe I am just not that into comic adaptations though. With all these Spiderman movies they keep putting out as well, not to mention the Incredible Hulk - how many of those feckers do we need? It seems like overkill to me.
 
I just got back from this, spoilers for The Dark Knight Rises and A Tale of Two Cities.

Sorry Bats, you're no Sydney Carton.

Directly invoking the most famous act of self-sacrifice in literature and then backing away from it entirely really rather soured me on the film, which was also, sadly, lacking in a fair amount of the depth and ambiguity of The Dark Knight. I was also a little surprised by how much of a direct sequel it was to Batman Begins, which I re-watched a couple of days ago. It was of a comparable quality as well, that is to say they were both great Batman films, but merely good films, unlike what came between them, which was an out and out great film.

Essentially, a good film, but disappointing compared to what might have been, and what I think could reasonably be expected from a filmmaker who was on such a hot streak. One overwhelming positive however, they absolutely nailed Catwoman, the best the character has ever been in any format.
 
Is this the batman thread? Anyway:

In my opinion, the quality of the latest batman films goes in chronological order. The latest was good but lacked the depth of the second which lacked the storyline of the first. A few more things:

1) It's a good, entertaining film but I won't be watching it again soon.
2) You can't turn a nuclear fusion reactor into a nuclear bomb.
3) The good female character becoming bad and the bad female character becoming good was extremely predictable.
4) The brief restaurant scene at the end was predictable.
5) Bane was underused/underdeveloped in some way. I'm not sure how but he never gripped me like a Batman villain normally does, apart from the cool voice. I thought Hardy did very well but was limited by the writers.
6) It was long and contained lots of pointless plotbits
 
bill.s.preston said:
I prefer begins as a story, especially the whole training thing, but I found TDK more entertaining. The only thing that irked me about begins was the "luck" element of Holmes and Wayne meeting a young Joffrey Baratheon and the Tramp being there for Wayne's departure and Batman's emergence. I just thought it was a bit too corny.
Click to expand...


The Dark Knight was a bigger blockbuster... It was epic in that sense, but it relied far too heavily on the Joker, so I'm not sure it would've been a particularly memorable film without Heath Ledger's performance... Whereas BB didn't rely on individual brilliance... And as Zen said it contained the subtleties that the sequel perhaps lacked.
 
Watched this earlier and all I can give it is a 6-7/10. Decent summer flick, but nothing more. Bane was pretty cool until it was revealed that he was a massive girl, despite his inappropriate voice. Physically, Bane looked the part but the voice wasn't working. 'Meh' film all round.
 
Spoony Kobayashi said:
The Dark Knight was a bigger blockbuster... It was epic in that sense, but it relied far too heavily on the Joker, so I'm not sure it would've been a particularly memorable film without Heath Ledger's performance... Whereas BB didn't rely on individual brilliance... And as Zen said it contained the subtleties that the sequel perhaps lacked.
Click to expand...

I think that is a fair comment. But TDK does have Heath Ledger's performance. feck me, what a performance.
 
I watched Begins again tonight. It's not even the last half that's weak, it's the last 3rd. Everything up to the Birthday party is pretty much brilliant. It could well be the best one tbh, though I don't really like the last 3rd at all if I'm honest. But then I also don't like the ferry & sonar bits in the last 3rd of TDK. The latter two have more scope & emotive resonance but they have far more holes and silly bits. The Batsuit's also cooler in BB and he doesn't use the constipated throat cancer voice that much.

I still have a problem with "I'm not going to kill this man, but I am going to blow up this house, killing everyone in it." though. And Katie Holmes.

I agree about TDK & Ledger. Also if you view them all as one long film, it's the one that could be most easily cut.
 
RK said:
Is this the batman thread? Anyway:

In my opinion, the quality of the latest batman films goes in chronological order. The latest was good but lacked the depth of the second which lacked the storyline of the first. A few more things:

1) It's a good, entertaining film but I won't be watching it again soon.
2) You can't turn a nuclear fusion reactor into a nuclear bomb.
3) The good female character becoming bad and the bad female character becoming good was extremely predictable.
4) The brief restaurant scene at the end was predictable.
5) Bane was underused/underdeveloped in some way. I'm not sure how but he never gripped me like a Batman villain normally does, apart from the cool voice. I thought Hardy did very well but was limited by the writers.
6) It was long and contained lots of pointless plotbits
Click to expand...


Your fifth issue irked me the most.

Bane was bad-ass, in a way I was pissed that bitch came at the end and took his thunder.
 
Spoony Kobayashi said:
The Dark Knight was a bigger blockbuster... It was epic in that sense, but it relied far too heavily on the Joker, so I'm not sure it would've been a particularly memorable film without Heath Ledger's performance... Whereas BB didn't rely on individual brilliance... And as Zen said it contained the subtleties that the sequel perhaps lacked.
Click to expand...

Nail on the head for me. I think TDK is a fantastic film, Heath's performance is mesmerizing and I could watch TDK just for that alone. But so many people's opinion of TDK is mainly down to Heath and without him the film would no where near rated as high as it is. Don't get me wrong, it's still a fantastic piece of work, but Heath is the only thing people tend to speak of about with TDK. So many people were heavily armed to criticize Hardy's performance as Bane in TDKR before it even came out just because it can't compare with Heath's Joker - we all knew that would happen, a performance like that very rarely comes around and twice in the same saga was not going to happen. Hardy should be praised for actually stepping up to the plate to play the villain in TDKR.

BB & TDKR need to be admired for their sheer entertainment value, the brilliant story they provide as part of a trilogy which is based on a comic book character and the fact that they both have such a stellar cast, whom all should have their performances celebrated - it still baffles me today the cast they managed to put to get for BB all those years back.
 
Mockney said:
The Batsuit's also cooler and he doesn't use the constipated throat cancer voice that much.
Click to expand...

His voice was much worse in BB wasn't it? :lol: I'm pretty sure Bale toned it down in TDK after some "remarks" made about it. The batsuit was pretty tits mind you in BB, if you could combine that with the cowl from TDK/TDKR it was perfect. The suit got a bit too military in TDK, but I suppose it was meant to be more realistic.

Kid Cunto said:
Your fifth issue irked me the most.

Bane was bad-ass, in a way I was pissed that bitch came at the end and took his thunder.

Also:

How predictable was Robin's introduction?
Click to expand...

Bane was suffering though at that point, Talia only took control because Bane was beaten, he could feel and couldn't cope with Batman. She had to step in at that point. To be fair, when he got back up and said "you do realise I still have to kill you" I was slightly gutted they didn't go for round 3!

Also, I know I keep saying this, but it's not Robin. It was just a nod to the character and to point out that John Blake was basically acting like Batman's sidekick in TDKR.
 
gaz1185 said:
His voice was much worse in BB wasn't it? :lol: I'm pretty sure Bale toned it down in TDK after some "remarks" made about it. The batsuit was pretty tits mind you in BB, if you could combine that with the cowl from TDK/TDKR it was perfect. The suit got a bit too military in TDK, but I suppose it was meant to be more realistic.
Click to expand...

He only uses it when he needs to use it in BB. When he's trying to intimidate criminals and such. When he's just talking to people he just speaks a little growlier. In TDK & TDKR there are several scenes where he's talking to people who know his identity, but still giving it the full cookie monster treatment. In TDKR there's even a scene where he's talking to himself in it. The tit.

Par example..

 
Mockney said:
He only uses it when he needs to use it in BB. When he's trying to intimidate criminals. When he's just talking to people he just speaks a little growlier. In TDK & TDKR there are several scenes where he's talking to people who know his identity, but still giving it the full "WHERE IS HE!!!" treatment. In TDKR there's even a scene where he's talking to himself in it. The tit.
Click to expand...

"So, that's what it feels like." That was gas. :lol:
 
Just watched the movie...
was disappointed that batman did not die in the end.

Other than that it was a decent movie.
 
Spoony Kobayashi said:
The Dark Knight was a bigger blockbuster... It was epic in that sense, but it relied far too heavily on the Joker, so I'm not sure it would've been a particularly memorable film without Heath Ledger's performance... Whereas BB didn't rely on individual brilliance... And as Zen said it contained the subtleties that the sequel perhaps lacked.
Click to expand...

Actually I think TDK was miles ahead in terms of performances and characters and not just Heath Ledger. Of course he was the heart and soul of that movie but even the other characters were much better drawn out and better portrayed. Maggie Gyllenhaal had more personality and spunk as Rachel. Aaron Eckhart was very strong as the Gotham's White Knight who gets torn down. And of course Heath Ledger who put in a jaw dropping performance.

Whereas Begins has Batman and his background story, basically. Liam Neeson was pretty good but I never saw him as a strong foe to Batman. The whole gas leak thing just peters away.

Also, it's a bit unfair to take Ledgers performance out of TDK. It was part of the movie. It is one of the reasons I can watch that movie over and over and over again but not Begins.
 
feck me that was a long-ass movie. I was busting for a piss with ages to go. Bit fecking gloomy if you ask me. That cnut in the mask was a bit hard to understand at times...some of the dialogue from the normal people was hard to hear sometimes too.
 
Mockney said:
He only uses it when he needs to use it in BB. When he's trying to intimidate criminals and such. When he's just talking to people he just speaks a little growlier. In TDK & TDKR there are several scenes where he's talking to people who know his identity, but still giving it the full cookie monster treatment. In TDKR there's even a scene where he's talking to himself in it. The tit.

Par example..

Click to expand...


I suppose you could say that, The Batman has become a totally seperate identity to him, to the point that whenever he puts on the suit, he doesn't feel like Bruce Wayne anymore, but Batman... and so must talk like Batman at all times when kitted out.

Not that it makes it any less ridiculous... but I suppose it's an argument.
 
MJJ said:
Just watched the movie...
was disappointed that batman did not die in the end.

Other than that it was a decent movie.
Click to expand...

Thats how I felt. There were also some stupid moments (I thought) such as how Blake just knew he was Batman, that fire batman symbol (good to look at etc but silly), how the ice didn't break when they were all just standing there and an issue I had was why Talia didn't make her way to the back of the truck and get rid of the device instead of just hope to try and drive around for 5 minutes. I know it would have probably meant the city would blow up but it just never made sense.

Also can someone tell me, you know when Bane out him in the prison, he asked the other 2 to keep him alive. But why did that guy help him with his back? Why not just let him stay in bed in pain while he watches?

But a good film overall, I'm still always slightly annoyed Scarecrow doesn't get used more often
 
Batman can exist in a neo-realistic not New York because he is merely a man in a suit. Superman is an alien with godlike powers. I'm not sure you can do a realistic Superman nor can I see Nolan endeavouring to make it happen. From the looks of the teaser trailer, it looks very much like a superhero film. However, I think what we can expect though is consistency and a moral backdrop.
 
Mockney said:
He only uses it when he needs to use it in BB. When he's trying to intimidate criminals and such. When he's just talking to people he just speaks a little growlier. In TDK & TDKR there are several scenes where he's talking to people who know his identity, but still giving it the full cookie monster treatment. In TDKR there's even a scene where he's talking to himself in it. The tit.
Click to expand...

Just watched that clip, you're right he does sound more normal when he's talking to Rachel there. Maybe I got them mixed up. I remember when TDK was released reading that the suit was intended to have a built in voice changer - that was never clearly stated, but would make sense for the fact as Batman he still uses his 'voice' when speaking to Fox, etc.

Kid Cunto said:
"So, that's what it feels like." That was gas. :lol:
Click to expand...

I actually didn't mind that line, at least there was a opportunity for some humour in quite a dark film.

LARulz said:
Thats how I felt. There were also some stupid moments (I thought) such as how Blake just knew he was Batman, that fire batman symbol (good to look at etc but silly), how the ice didn't break when they were all just standing there and an issue I had was why Talia didn't make her way to the back of the truck and get rid of the device instead of just hope to try and drive around for 5 minutes. I know it would have probably meant the city would blow up but it just never made sense.

Also can someone tell me, you know when Bane out him in the prison, he asked the other 2 to keep him alive. But why did that guy help him with his back? Why not just let him stay in bed in pain while he watches?

But a good film overall, I'm still always slightly annoyed Scarecrow doesn't get used more often
Click to expand...

The guy who helped him with his training wasn't one of Bane's henchman, he was just a prisoner who was instructed to keep Bruce alive. I think he actually felt empathy towards Bruce from what he was seeing and took the decision to help him. Plus Bruce was their best chance of escape from the pit they've ever had, I think they acknowledged that and was partly another reason why they continued to assist him.
 
Bear Attack said:
Batman can exist in a neo-realistic not New York because he is merely a man in a suit. Superman is an alien with godlike powers. I'm not sure you can do a realistic Superman nor can I see Nolan endeavouring to make it happen. From the looks of the teaser trailer, it looks very much like a superhero film. However, I think what we can expect though is consistency and a moral backdrop.
Click to expand...

Nolan, Zack Snyder and even two of the actors have already come out and said that it's going to be quite a realistic... well as realistic as it can get. Here's a bit of what Snyder said:

I think the visual style of Superman, though I can’t say for certain as it’s early, but I kind of feel like — and I did say to the studio — that what’s cool for me and interesting, and odd, is that Superman is probably going to be the most realistic movie I’ve ever made. It’s kind of fun that the most realistic movie I probably will make is a movie called Superman. Which shows how crazy my other movies are. Because I guess for him to be credible... He gets more credible by the reality that you can bring to him, you know emotionally, and visually, I think.
Click to expand...
 
LARulz said:
Thats how I felt. There were also some stupid moments (I thought) such as how Blake just knew he was Batman, that fire batman symbol (good to look at etc but silly), how the ice didn't break when they were all just standing there and an issue I had was why Talia didn't make her way to the back of the truck and get rid of the device instead of just hope to try and drive around for 5 minutes. I know it would have probably meant the city would blow up but it just never made sense.

Also can someone tell me, you know when Bane out him in the prison, he asked the other 2 to keep him alive. But why did that guy help him with his back? Why not just let him stay in bed in pain while he watches?

But a good film overall, I'm still always slightly annoyed Scarecrow doesn't get used more often
Click to expand...
Not only blake but the whole orphans thought he was batman or that was the feel I got from it. The fire batman symbol was possibly the most pointless act ever but it looked cool. A time bomb is about to go off, whats the first thing you do? Try and make a cool batman symbol.

and I thought Bane was a really good villain. Loved when he killed that dagget guy just like that.
 
MJJ said:
Not only blake but the whole orphans thought he was batman or that was the feel I got from it. The fire batman symbol was possibly the most pointless act ever but it looked cool. A time bomb is about to go off, whats the first thing you do? Try and make a cool batman symbol.

and I thought Bane was a really good villain. Loved when he killed that dagget guy just like that.
Click to expand...

That's not what he said, he said that all the kids made up stories about Bruce, because he was a hero to them. Most of it probably wish fulfillment of their own lives or overblown ideas of what rich people must do, like he has a toilet made out of gold or he plays golf with diamonds, silly shit that none of them too seriously.

One of the stories was obviously that he's so rich, he could be batman and that one resonated with Blake. The point was when you sit and think about to be Batman you have got to have some serious feelings about wanting to go out and right the wrongs of the world, with your fists. To most people Bruce doesn't seem that bothered about current affairs and is a bit of burnout. Blake saw that mirror of himself in the rage behind the masked facade of affability from Bruce, the billionaire playboy philanthropist.

It's a bit of a stretch, but not a game breaker for me.

As for the burning bat symbol, rule of cool.

That said, theatricality and deception are powerful agents.

It was to strike fear into the bad guys and inspire the good guys, a beacon , the cavalry has arrived, a call to arms if you will. It even had Bane rocked a bit, which makes it worth something.

I think Fat Kev Smith has probably the best point with the soundless appearance of the Bat, for the tunnel scene and the soundless appearance of the Bat-pod in the last Bane scene, they both are loud vehicles that arrive unnoticed.

What's the official time were we don't have to use spoilers anymore ?

If you haven't seen it by now, shame on you.
 
MJJ said:
Not only blake but the whole orphans thought he was batman or that was the feel I got from it. The fire batman symbol was possibly the most pointless act ever but it looked cool. A time bomb is about to go off, whats the first thing you do? Try and make a cool batman symbol.
Click to expand...

The symbol was a pretty cool part of the film - yet, a rather silly part at the same time. It was there for inspiration to the people of Gotham yes, but the time it would of taken to make and the time Batman had left it wouldn't of made sense for him to do it. Surely Batman just turning up to lead the fight would have been inspirational enough.

*I think it's best not to mention the fact Batman prepared the sign to be lit from the ice and knew Gordon would walk into the path of the flare :lol:
 
Lastwolf said:
That's not what he said, he said that all the kids made up stories about Bruce, because he was a hero to them. Most of it probably wish fulfillment of their own lives or overblown ideas of what rich people must do, like he has a toilet made out of gold or he plays golf with diamonds, silly shit that none of them too seriously.

One of the stories was obviously that he's so rich, he could be batman and that one resonated with Blake. The point was when you sit and think about to be Batman you have got to have some serious feelings about wanting to go out and right the wrongs of the world, with your fists. To most people Bruce doesn't seem that bothered about current affairs and is a bit of burnout. Blake saw that mirror of himself in the rage behind the masked facade of affability from Bruce, the billionaire playboy philanthropist.

It's a bit of a stretch, but not a game breaker for me.

As for the burning bat symbol, rule of cool.

That said, theatricality and deception are powerful agents.

It was to strike fear into the bad guys and inspire the good guys, a beacon , the cavalry has arrived, a call to arms if you will. It even had Bane rocked a bit, which makes it worth something.

I think Fat Kev Smith has probably the best point with the soundless appearance of the Bat, for the tunnel scene and the soundless appearance of the Bat-pod in the last Bane scene, they both are loud vehicles that arrive unnoticed.

What's the official time were we don't have to use spoilers anymore ?

If you haven't seen it by now, shame on you.
Click to expand...

nah, my point was more that the orphans were the one that believed in him the most as in they were shown to be waiting for him early on in the movie. Although that might be because they were the only children shown.

I watched the movie yesterday but avoided the thread before that. Think it will be the same for anyone sensible as if you click this thread before watchign it then you are a fool.
 
Just a thought about the Blake thing:

Doesn't he mention to Wayne that when he finds Gordon, after he's been shot by Bane, that he was repeating himself and talking a lot of nonsense to Blake (something like that). Maybe Gordon told Blake he was Batman at this point, it would make much more sense to start with, and Blake is a pretty clever cop but I don't think he just deduced who the Batman was by a visit to his orphanage! He now knew who he was, he knew Batman needed to be back out there and could of just adapted some of the story about the orphanage, not saying the events didn't transpire in the past, but he used it to inspire him to return.
 
MJJ said:
nah, my point was more that the orphans were the one that believed in him the most as in they were shown to be waiting for him early on in the movie. Although that might be because they were the only children shown.

I watched the movie yesterday but avoided the thread before that. Think it will be the same for anyone sensible as if you click this thread before watchign it then you are a fool.
Click to expand...

They believed in Batman, sure. Not necessarily that he was Bruce Wayne. I don't Blake had expressed his idea to anyone else, other than Bruce in a serious manner. I don't even think it was even more than a strong feeling before he went to Bruce directly and I think Bruce's total lack of reaction confirmed it 100% to him, as he was saying it.
 
gaz1185 said:
Just a thought about the Blake thing:

Doesn't he mention to Wayne that when he finds Gordon, after he's been shot by Bane, that he was repeating himself and talking a lot of nonsense to Blake (something like that). Maybe Gordon told Blake he was Batman at this point, it would make much more sense to start with, and Blake is a pretty clever cop but I don't think he just deduced who the Batman was! He now knew who he was, he knew Batman needed to be back out there and could of just adapted some of the story about the orphanage, not saying the events didn't transpire in the past, but he used it to inspire him to return.
Click to expand...

C'ept Gordon was surprised at when Batman basically told him he was Bruce Wayne is one of the least cryptic hidden messages of all time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.