I know there are a bunch of batman threads.
Well here is one more. With a bunch of random thoughts. Feel free to disagree, agree, comment...whatever. Share your thoughts.



I was watching some youtube clips from the different Batman movies. Came across this deleted scene:

(watch from 3:05 onwards...great scene with the Bat)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtouiimSMe0

Reminds me of the scene from Batman Begins where Bruce walks in the cave with his beta-version suit on and is suddenly surrounded by bats and stands up and faces his fear...great scene too.

Now I am not saying it is copied - it may have been inspired, I don't know. Both scenes work VERY well, and I am real sad they didn't include the Batman Forever scene in the movie - why the heck delete it. It would've been awesome.


I think one of the problems with Dark Knight - which I loved, by the way, but don't agree with all the hype - is lack of story. Sure, it did have a lot of story, but I am not impressed by special effects. I am impressed by special effects in conjunction with a great story. That's why I love Batman Begins and do not think Dark Knight is better. I think Dark Knight was done really, really well, but I can't help but feel some character development with Bruce Wayne is missing. The previous films...Burton, Kilmer, focused a whole lot on his character which I felt was very important for the story. In Batman Begins it was central as well. It took a back seat for Batman Begins though, IMO. There was so much action non-stop (not action action, just...events, action) that I felt there wasn't enough time for those great moments of character development. There were some good moments, the scene where Bruce is in tears is great, and the butler tells of the guy who stole the diamonds or what it was. Those are the kinds of scenes I love and could've used more of.


I'll also add, I think it's a shame Heath gets so much mention as the Joker -- no, let me rephrase, I think it's a shame Liam Neeson didn't get more mention and his character (and group of vigilantes) didn't get more mention. Liam shoulda gotten more mention for his performance, I feel, but equally important the importance of his character for determining the new Batman Movies should get more mention. In Nolan's universe R'aas Al-Ghul was absolutely instrumental to shaping Bruce to Batman. Batman was created and shaped by a villain(?), and that stays with him in Dark Knight as well - either you play by the rules and might lose, or you become a villain and "win". The League of Shadows didn't observe the rules Bruce did, but Bruce plays by them...and so is on the verge of losing too.

While I think Bale is a great Batman I thought Kilmer was really good too (so was Keaton, and his human side worked well, but he just didn't look like a hero). I'd love to see Schumacher do/redo a Batman movie (I am not saying it should happen, I just wanna see it!) with a more serious tone and atmosphere a la Nolan. A movie like Batman Forever has a LOT of great things going for it... just needs some goofy elements removed and a little change here and there. Obviously the target crowds for the Burton/schumacher Batman movies were different...bigger appeal, more child-friendly (even though there were lots of grotesque imagery). Credits and kudos to Nolan for his new style, but it feels unfair to me to consider the old directors as if they weren't able to do a more serious Nolan-esque style. Watch Schumachers more serious movies...8MM, Falling Down..heck even the deleted scene from Batman Forever. He most definitely can be serious. Well, I'd love to just SEE Schumacher do a serious Batman.

Those were just some general thoughts. I wanna say though I think Dark Knight as REALLY awesome. Great movie. There are just a few things keeping it from being a masterpiece in my book. And personally Batman Begins was a greater theater experience than DK.

This really didn't need its own thread, sorry, but these discussions have been going on for quite some time in the other billion threads. It would fit perfectly into the TDK: Overrated? thread.

Batman Begins was a movie about Batman, The Dark Knight is the first movie to not mention Batman in the title and sure enough is a movie about Gotham City. My problem with Schumacher's "serious" is it is actually played TOO serious, as in unnaturally so (at least imo). It works in some films, not in others, and Sch. isn't the worst director out there, he's just incredibly uneven and tends to fall into high camp.

I think your point about Batman not being in the title is just silly... remind me, who is nicknamed the 'Dark Night'?

Oh it is silly, but so are a lot of things. Just like somebody pointing out a common and obvious misspelling as a means to ridicule another's point by stating nobody is nicknamed 'Dark Night', that's a description of a moonless evening, or just a really bad one.

The multiple suggested meanings of the titles aside, they did shift the focus (from the hero to the villains/city), great for some, irritating for others.

and yet to keep it going you posted twice

"Good morning! It’s Sunday, 4:52 in the A.M, and that means it's time for Perspectives!"

I think it's funny that you said the previous films focused more on Batman's character, when the common complaint is that the Burton/Schumacher films DIDN'T do that at all. While Begins was better in this regard then Dark Knight, Dark Knight alone still touches on what it means to be Batman and is far more meaningful.

I also think its odd that you say there was bigger appeal with the older ones, when the current movie is breaking all sorts of box office records.

Either way, I don't see why you didnt post this in the reviews thread.

Ok, that pretty much invalidates anything else you have to say.

Joel Shumacher shouldn't even be allowed to watch another Batman movie, let alone make one.

K

Here's a perspective about The Dark Knight written by a guy who calls his column CPO (Consenting Public Opinion):

http://popcornjunkies.com/2008/08/01...sion-topics-2/