I never liked the campy slapstick treatment of Batman in the original movies and TV series. Considering the dark nature of his creation, his actions, and the criminals he fights, it's ridiculous to make it kid-friendly and fun. The original movies readily steered the stories in that direction, and for that I'm glad they're forgettable.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
Yeah it's totally absurd to make Batman kid-friendly or funny. You can pretty much just set fire to his 50 year history pre-DKR, as well as most of the modern treatments of Batman. Only emo, brooding Batman allowed!
EDIT:
Chris: It's part of that weird teenager mindset that comics seem to engender in their fans, where they want their stories about flying space aliens and magic wishing rings and guys dressed as Dracula to be serious and mature, because that stuff's not for kids, man. And look: There is no one -- no one -- who likes Year One and Nolan's The Dark Knight more than me, I assure you. But that's not all there is. or all its faults -- and make no mistake, there are many -- Batman & Robin has a consistent internal logic. It constructs a world in which it's okay for all this stuff to exist. Which is exactly what Nolan does in his films, albeit with a completely different idea of what "making it okay for this stuff to exist" actually means.
Last edited by Y; Mon, 08-06-2012 at 03:15 PM.
Yes because all comics should be geared towards the entire 10-81 year old audience to ensure no one is left out. I'm surprised you don't raise a fuss that there are almost zero non-white characters in the entire Batman universe.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
Your first troll post was on-point but I'm honestly lost at how you thought this was supposed to be effective.Originally Posted by Animeniax
Then you aren't interested in it as a movie in a whole you're just enjoying it for what it is. Its flawed and thats obvious, but if you ignore the flaws its a fun film. I loved it when I was younger sure, and I still don't hate it or anything, but it be lying to say the movie isn't lacking. There's plenty to pick apart and laugh at.
Bat nipples for one. I dont care how campy you're going for, bat nipples are inexcusable.
I couldn't agree more with you Y. I for one love Batman Forever and the Animated Series and will continue to. But even as a kid Batman and Robin was a let down compared to its predecessor.
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
EDIT:
An actual reply.
I'm not "ignoring" the flaws. They just don't sink the movie. Are people "ignoring" the flaws in The Dark Knight when they say it was a great film? After all, Gordon's plan to capture the Joker makes absolutely no sense and relies on him having precognition.Its flawed and thats obvious, but if you ignore the flaws its a fun film. I loved it when I was younger sure, and I still don't hate it or anything, but it be lying to say the movie isn't lacking. There's plenty to pick apart and laugh at.
Thurman's performance isn't a flaw in any way, for the record, she absolutely kills it.
We just disagree here again. The joke here is turning Batman's crimefighting suit into a fetish statement, a parody of the childish machismo of the comic book hero, and boy does it work. The fact that the first 6 shots of the movie are, in sequence, Clooney's ass crotch and nipples, then Chris O'Donnell's ass crotch and nipples, is hardly a coincidence. It's a fucking STELLAR joke. No lie.Bat nipples for one. I dont care how campy you're going for, bat nipples are inexcusable.
Sims/Uzumeri put forth the argument that B&R is actually the best pre-Begins Batman film. I can't buy into that completely, but it's a damn sight better than Forever. The villains in Forever are trying to one-up each other by aping elements of Nicholson's Joker and it just doesn't work. Kilmer fucking sucks. The movie is stuck between the faux-seriousness of the Burton films (Returns is actually crazier than Batman and Robin) and the camp of Batman and Robin, and I think it's easily the least entertaining Batman film.I couldn't agree more with you Y. I for one love Batman Forever and the Animated Series and will continue to. But even as a kid Batman and Robin was a let down compared to its predecessor.
The animated series is just a triumph in all respects. The better episodes of the show really fire on all cylinders and work way better than any of the original four films.
Last edited by Y; Mon, 08-06-2012 at 03:34 PM.
Like I said, I never liked any of the campy kid-friendly treatments of Batman, and yes that's throughout the 50 year history of the character. And pre-DKR, he's had plenty of dark episodes in his comics, which were some of the most memorable and well-loved arcs. All the pedestrian stuff has long been forgotten, in the comics and movies.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
You said it doesnt matter that Poison Ivy had 0 time to develop. And balance that against all the time she spends sitting on a fucking flower or seducing people and it feels less and less like a batman flick. I haven't seen it in years I need to watch it again but I remember it having almost nothing to do with Batman and more to do with Ivy/Freeze/Batgirl. Clooney needed more screen time and a better director who wouldn't just tell him to be himself.
Burton's Batman is pretty much completely owned by the Joker. Hell, The Dark Knight was a Joker movie. I don't have any problem with the film having the villains as a centerpiece - they're the dynamic element of the film next to the hero's static existence anyway. I think Ivy and Freeze play off each other well, with her the sexpot and him the devoted husband. Now if you want a problem with Freeze, it's that he has no reason to be "evil" except the movie requires him to be. He just wants to cure his wife and is stealing shit to get money to do that, and you'd think he could just start a donation drive or something.
en.wikipedia.org/List_of_Batman_comics_Animeniax_has_read - Page Not Found - 0kbLike I said, I never liked any of the campy kid-friendly treatments of Batman, and yes that's throughout the 50 year history of the character. And pre-DKR, he's had plenty of dark episodes in his comics, which were some of the most memorable and well-loved arcs. All the pedestrian stuff has long been forgotten, in the comics and movies.
Last edited by Y; Mon, 08-06-2012 at 04:00 PM.
Year One, Death of Robin, Knightfall, The Dark Knight Returns, the Cult, etc... all amazing arcs exploring the darker side of Batman, none of them kid-friendly or campy. Ask any comic fan and these arcs will come to mind, not any of the run of the mill superhero tripe that you seem to enjoy.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
Yeah but stuff like The Killing Joke, while having a very dark plot, its also very over the top with weird baby midget people and psychotic amusement parks. You can't say you like comic books if you only enjoy the 'realistic, darker' stuff.
Anyway 2 movies that I am passionate enough about to post in here to recommend to anyone who hasn't seen them, and they're actually blasts from the past...
Rushmore
Wes Anderson's masterpiece. Jason Schwartzman's coming out party, and Bill Murray at his finest.
and
The Station Agent
Peter Dinklage, aka Tyrion from Game of Thrones, gives a stoic performance. Brilliantly subtle film.
Last edited by Kagemane_no_Jutsu; Mon, 08-06-2012 at 07:51 PM.
Yes but for a particular comic character like Batman, there's nothing wrong with liking only darker stuff that fits his story and character. Save the light-hearted feel-good silly stuff for characters geared towards that kind of storytelling. On the same token, serious stuff for a goofy character like Groo or Lobo was out-of-character and didn't make for good storylines.
I'll second the recommendation for Rushmore. Great movie. I liked The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou better as Anderson's best work, but Rushmore was his freshman effort and a great movie.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
Actually, pretty much no one nowadays talks about how great arcs like Knightfall, the death of Jason Todd, or The Cult are, but you'd know that if you hadn't just Googled those titles off of a list of famous Batman books. Modern Batman writers don't fall into the trap of horseshit like Knightfall, confusing dark and grim with adult storytelling. Frank Miller followed Dark Knight Returns up by parodying himself in Dark Knight Strikes Again. The death of Jason Todd was a marketing stunt, the issue bookended with a phone number to call to either have Jason die in the explosion or barely survive - clearly not just a shitty gimmick but the sign of mature storytelling.
Obviously modern Batman writers like Grant Morrison, Neil Gaiman, and Paul Cornell don't give a hoot about having fun with their Batman comics. If only I read them I'd understand that.
I finally watched Wrath of Khan a couple nights ago and I understood why my friend reacted with, "YOU HAVEN'T SEEN WRATH OF KHAN??" when I told him I hadn't seen it. It's a pretty good movie.
Seen Full Metal Jacket yesterday. Loved the way it starts but gets a little slow throughout. An okay movie but wouldn't watch it again. Could be my aversion to war/army movies.
Now... we can click as warriors... button to button, it is the basis of all internet.
Only a fool trusts his life to a virus.
Cool to see the arcs I grew up reading and remember best are also on lists of famous Batman books. The death of Robin demonstrates that Batman's readership are either older and looking for more gripping and adult themes in Batman, or they are a bunch of sick kids interested in death and graphic violence. The Joker beats Robin near to death before that, surely a feel-good romp of a read for all the kids.
Probably the second or third best of the Star Trek movies to me. Undiscovered Country is my favorite, followed by the whale one where they travel back in time.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
That isn't a "gripping, adult theme". It's a ploy to rubberstamp editorial's thinking on removing an unpopular character. Jason Todd was so inessential a character that his crowning moment is to get killed in a crass marketing stunt (and then promptly replaced with another Robin).
This is the strong, mature storytelling of a Choose Your Own Adventure book, with some "adult" violence thrown in. That doesn't make the storyline any better, just more bloody. It's a shame that was, and is still, confused for being "adult".
Life and death of humans are gripping, adult themes. I'm sure your wiki search will out-do my memory in terms of recounting the lead up and impact of the death of Robin story, including the circumstances behind deciding to kill off Robin, but the storyline when I read it was more adult and compelling than what you're reading on wiki, though it was more than 20 years ago.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
Zero effort troll, you just shittily copied my own accusation.
When beaten, cry troll.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
