|
Post by strykerdarksilence on Jan 12, 2010 17:54:18 GMT -5
I prefer Burton's Batman to Nolan's.
|
|
|
Post by Free Hat on Jan 12, 2010 17:58:02 GMT -5
No offence, but that argument is far more pretentious than the movie ever came close to being. To be honest, I fail to see how his statement is pretentious in the slightest. He's outright dismissing the idea of super hero or comic book films ever being anything more than silly pop entertainment. How is that not pretentious?
|
|
|
Post by Kroot bringing Justice on Jan 12, 2010 18:03:08 GMT -5
My hatred for the word pretentious has increased by 200% suddenly.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 12, 2010 18:25:35 GMT -5
To be honest, I fail to see how his statement is pretentious in the slightest. He's outright dismissing the idea of super hero or comic book films ever being anything more than silly pop entertainment. How is that not pretentious? It's nothing more than a differing opinion on what he felt he would have enjoyed more. He thought it didn't work as they tried to do it, and might have enjoyed it better if it had been a popcorn flick rather than trying to be a more philosophical superhero movie. Pretentiousness would be arguing that any movie that doesn't have the same philosophical bent is an inferior movie and not worth watching. It's an arrogance that I don't see just because someone thought a particular comic book movie would work better as a comic book movie.
|
|
|
Post by toddpolt on Jan 12, 2010 18:29:58 GMT -5
I prefer Burton's Batman to Nolan's. I prefer scripts to art direction. Nolan>Burton That said, Batman Returns was pretty good. I mean really good, one misunderstood by wussy parents out there. First Batman though was blah. Weak script, Batman not the star of his own movie, etc. Oh and Bat Dance.
|
|
|
Post by tap on Jan 12, 2010 18:34:23 GMT -5
If anything, I think The Dark Knight made me appreciate the real gems of Batman film legacy even more--Batman Returns and The Mask of the Phantasm (and maybe even Batman '66 for comedic reasons).
|
|
theryno665
Grimlock
wants a title underneath the stars
Kinda Homeless
Posts: 13,571
|
Post by theryno665 on Jan 12, 2010 18:36:55 GMT -5
I like '89 Batman less and less as time goes on and this started well before I saw The Dark Knight. I don't know, a part of me still thinks its a solid comic-book movie, but it's pretty cheesy. And as much love as Jack Nicholson gets for his Joker, I don't see it. Aside from a few dark moments, his Joker isn't too far off from Cesar Romero's.
However, I like Batman Returns and Batman Forever, possibly for the same reasons I dislike '89 Batman. Weird, huh?
|
|
MCMGM
Vegeta
WC's Official Jeff Buckley Stalkeress.
Red Sonic My Ass
Posts: 9,184
|
Post by MCMGM on Jan 12, 2010 18:43:54 GMT -5
The only one I can't watch is Batman and Robin. I just...CAN'T.
|
|
|
Post by Perpetual Nirvana on Jan 12, 2010 18:52:07 GMT -5
If by "entertaining" you mean Jim Carrey looking like he's having an orgasm on-screen for 90 minutes, sure. Actually, yeah I found Jims antics quite entertaining in that film, it was a laugh riot. "He may have to settle for the Bronze". Ironic that you chose probably the only line of Jim Carrey's that was actually funny.
|
|
erisi236
Fry's dog Seymour
... enjoys the rich, smooth taste of Camels.
Not good! Not good! Not good!
Posts: 21,904
|
Post by erisi236 on Jan 12, 2010 18:53:04 GMT -5
Really I think that Returns is the worst of the bunch, it's just such a mess story wise.
|
|
|
Post by toddpolt on Jan 12, 2010 18:53:31 GMT -5
The only one I can't watch is Batman and Robin. I just...CAN'T. Yeah seriously. I mean how can anyone whine about the Nolan Batman movies after "Batman & Robin"?
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Jan 12, 2010 18:54:01 GMT -5
I can still watch all the old ones, even the 60's Batman with West. I got no hang ups on not being able to enjoy them cause of Dark Knight.
|
|
|
Post by toddpolt on Jan 12, 2010 18:55:38 GMT -5
I can still watch all the old ones, even the 60's Batman with West. I got no hang ups on not being able to enjoy them cause of Dark Knight. I like the 60s Batman too. Not my cup of tea regarding Mr. Caped Crusader, but for campy satire, its good. Which I can't say for Schumacher's movies which were "inspired" by the TV show. They were just dumb.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Jan 12, 2010 18:56:44 GMT -5
The only one I can't watch is Batman and Robin. I just...CAN'T. Yeah seriously. I mean how can anyone whine about the Nolan Batman movies after "Batman & Robin"? Because I can still enjoy both Forever and Robin, while Begins bored me half to death.
|
|
Jiren
Patti Mayonnaise
Hearts Bayformers
Posts: 35,163
|
Post by Jiren on Jan 12, 2010 18:58:54 GMT -5
I like them all, Even the Schumaker ones as "So bad they're good"
|
|
|
Post by FrankGotch on Jan 12, 2010 18:59:09 GMT -5
I prefer Burton's Batman to Nolan's. I prefer scripts to art direction. Nolan>Burton That said, Batman Returns was pretty good. I mean really good, one misunderstood by wussy parents out there. First Batman though was blah. Weak script, Batman not the star of his own movie, etc. Oh and Bat Dance. Honestly thought TDK had a crappy script. I really didn't like how the Joker had no motivation other then some kinda whacked out evil zen thing. He seemed very one denominational, it just seemed like they wrote the Joker to be cool for the sake of being cool. Ledger did a good job making him into a cool character, but at the end of the day Joker came off like a marketing tool to used boost the box office among teen age males, and occasionally show up say something clever and blow sh*t up. He was almost like the writers cool evil Marry Sue.
|
|
|
Post by strykerdarksilence on Jan 12, 2010 19:03:01 GMT -5
I prefer Burton's Batman to Nolan's. I prefer scripts to art direction. Nolan>Burton That said, Batman Returns was pretty good. I mean really good, one misunderstood by wussy parents out there. First Batman though was blah. Weak script, Batman not the star of his own movie, etc. Oh and Bat Dance. As do I, infact the majority of films I watch/own are heavy on dialogue because I find the acting and plots in such films far more enjoyable. I just prefer the...for want of a better word...'aura' of the Burton films.
|
|
|
Post by toddpolt on Jan 12, 2010 19:07:06 GMT -5
Because I can still enjoy both Forever and Robin, while Begins bored me half to death. ... You like....that? HOW?!?
|
|
|
Post by toddpolt on Jan 12, 2010 19:10:03 GMT -5
Honestly thought TDK had a crappy script. I really didn't like how the Joker had no motivation other then some kinda whacked out evil zen thing. Anarchy. I mean that whole speech by him with Dent at the hospital sums him up. And that terrible visual of him burning that giant mountain of money.[/quote] He seemed very one denominational, it just seemed like they wrote the Joker to be cool for the sake of being cool. Ledger did a good job making him into a cool character, but at the end of the day Joker came off like a marketing tool to used boost the box office among teen age males, and occasionally show up say something clever and blow sh*t up. He was almost like the writers cool evil Marry Sue. And what of the first Batman where Joker had a full-fledged origin story, yet the hero himself gets one measley flashback to explain everything? THE HERO IS NOT THE STAR OF HIS OWN MOVIE!!! Besides, Anytime someone has tried to give an origin to "explain" Joker, they always failed. I mean when not even the great Alan Moore can do it, well that says something.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Jan 12, 2010 19:15:07 GMT -5
Because I can still enjoy both Forever and Robin, while Begins bored me half to death. ... You like....that? HOW?!?I can still enjoy Batman & Robin in the sense that it's the same kind of movie as the 60's Batman. I don't take it seriously.
|
|