BATMAN BEGINS discussion (No Spoilers) - Page 2

Well, I don't know why that guy's so angry, and while I'd disagree with him about a number of his arguments, he is right about not taking it too seriously. I'm one of the biggest Bat-fans you'd ever meet, but I love the 60's show and understand all interpretations are valid. Like I said Batman is based on a comic book- even the most "serious" interpretations have an edge of fun and humor, including "The Dark Knight Returns" and our beloved Animated Series.

I think this is sort of a fanboy thing- part of the reason theres so many bitter fans of ANY franchise is that they take their objects of geek affection way too seriously. They don't want to admit things like Superheroes or Space Operas or Magic Rings have an inherent silliness to them. I'm not accusing anyone here of that though- I think most Chewers get it, the general goodwill to things like "Sky Captain" being evidence of that. They enjoy life and realize even things they love can still be goofy. However there are obsessive nerds all over the World (especially the Internet) and I assume that's who this guy is addressing.

But back on topic- I don't think we have much to worry about. As this fellow says there have been dozens of incarnations of the character- but we're at a stage in the history of it now that a Great Interpretation can be assembled from the best bits of what came before. I think that's pretty cool.

Some levity is fine, and Begins has it's share of humor. But, overall, the mood is pretty serious (like Year One or DKR), and the pulpy tagline just doesn't match stylistically IMO. Going by the script and the interviews, Begins is not going for the Sky Captain retro thing in any way, shape, or form.

Oh, well I wasn't still arguing the validity of that. Sorry if it seemed that way. That was just sort of an offhand comment of the way I'd make/promote my ideal Batman movie, which, as we've established as part of the appeal of the character, wouldn't necessarily be popular with other fans. Fair enough. No, I totally agree the direction they're going is a great one. I'm just saying it probably won't be DEAD serious and we probably shouldn't take it that way.

My last post though was a general reaction to the rant that BlackTerror posted. The guy was commenting on how silly Batman is and I was agreeing with that but disagreeing that it's a bad thing. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

I'd like to say that Dan Harmon has a few valid arguments, but he reads like a complete moron; not really in terms of his negativity towards the character, just in general.

I will admit that although I'm a big fan of the character, I no longer read the books on a regular basis.
I've actually dropped most of my traditional superhero titles (meaning I still read the somewhat non-traditional Supreme Power & Hard Time) and I've decided to concentrate on better material. Creators are basically doing the same boring, and unchallenging shit they've always done w/ superheroes, and it's left me spent.

DC is doing yet another "big cross-over event" in the bat-books called "War Games", which I'm sure will prove just as pointless as "Last Laugh", "Fugitive", "No Man's Land", and so on.
If their sales are fine, that doesn't change the fact that Marvel is also suffering a huge creative decline. They still have the odd good book, like DC, but the departure of Grant Morrison, and the odorous presence of Rob Liefeld is fucking depressing (though I've never been an active fan of the Co.).

Getting back to Batman, I've always said that there is no defining version of the character, just some that were more interesting and/or entertaining than others. The Adam West show was great, the antimated series was great, I love Batman '89, and it's sequel, and I think this upcoming film will be another interesting mark in the character's history.

In other, less long-winded words, I agree w/ Daryl Zero.

SFX Magazine Interview.

Batman Begins has no connection to the Burton/Schumacher movies. It is strictly a reboot, retelling the Dark Knight's origin from the ground up. While Tim Burton had future Joker Jack Napier slaying Bruce Wayne's parents, Goyer's script remains faithful to comic book lore, pinning the Wayne's murder on smalltime hoodlum Joe Chill (played by Richard Brake.

Whispers are that the Scarecrow's mask is authentically bowel-troublingly scary, and far removed from the straw-stuffed sack we've seen in the comics. One report claims it has more in common with the S&M underground scene than the barnyard.....

In August 2004, the production pitched up in Chicago, where the moviemakers captured a pulse-pounding sequence of the Batmobile being pursued by police cars. One eyewitness described the sound of the Batmobile as like, 'Two V8 Mustangs roaring with their engines side by side.' As a police chopper shines a spotlight on the chase, the Batmobile hurtles through a parking garage then flies on to the sidewalk, smashing through a bus stop, a bike rack and a couple of newspaper vending machines........ Gotham City citizen? Take out insurance.

Don't expect Phantom Menace-styled merchandising overkill. 'If we narrow the focus, put less product in, it will sustain the brand longer,' says Dan Romancelli, WB Consumer Products president. So don't look for Scarecrow plushies infesting the shelves come Chrimbo 2005.


Some other superhero movies have been the victim of studio interference - corporate decisions that have been more about a potential toy line than creativity. How have you kept this vision of Batman pure?

'Warner Bros took a hands-off approach. They chose Chris (Nolan), Chris chose me - and they left it alone. Chris was very focused on staying true to the source material. Batman has endured as a cultural figure for nearly 70 years. There's a reason for that.'

What elements of the Batman myth translate effortlessly to the screen? Which ones simply won't work for a modern, mainstream audience?

'Frankly, I think the bulk of Batman's myth is a fairly easy translation. I think - and have always felt - that Robin was very problematic. Beyond Batman himself, I think the villains can be tricky. Because we have taken a more naturalistic approach to the Batman universe, the bar for the ensuing reinterpretation of Batman's rogues' gallery will have been raised. It'll be harder to take some of the classic villains and set them in a more realistic world. Not impossible, just harder. But I think that's a challenge that will help the Batman franchise.'

Was there trepidation that Ra's al Ghul was too obscure a villain?

'There was no trepidation at all. Ra's is a perfect villain for Batman's maiden voyage as a hero. He's different from the other villains - more of a paternal figure, more grounded in reality. And since Bruce lost his father, Ra's personality dove-tailed nicely into the themes we were exploring.'

Bryan Singer's X-Men and Sam Raimi's Spider-Man movies have raised the bar on superhero films. What will Batman Begins deliver when it opens in Summer 2005?

'The thing about those movies is that they stay true to the source material. The depictions of the key personalities are spot-on. And I'd like to think that we've done the same thing here. Of all the major superhero franchises, though, I think ours may be the most naturalistic. But you have to remember - Spider-Man and the X-Men are outcasts. Even their non-costumed identities are essentially misfits. Bruce Wayne is different. Bruce is a respected figure. A public personality. That dynamic leads to a different kind of story.......'

Good interview. I agree that Robin is problematic but I don't think he's impossible to include in the series in some form. Part of the thing with Batman is that he created a surrogate family in Gordon, Alfred, Barbara and Dick to take the place of the family he lost. That's the way I see it anyway, and I always thought that was great. I went over this before in an earlier thread but I'll say it again- They should have Dick Grayson in the sequels. Not necessarily as Robin- that probably wouldn't fit- but as a young boy that Bruce adopts because he can relate to his situation.

Having an arc in this purported trilogy that deals with Bruce as reluctant father would add another layer, I think. As for villains, I think many of them like Penguin or Riddler can be effectively realized as criminal masterminds as apposed to colorful baddies. more oddball characters are going to be hard to do, but I'm glad to see they're up to the challenge at any rate.

Well, I like it. A scarecrow that's actually scary-looking? Sign me up!

Nothing earth shattering, but for those who care, the official Batman Begins website has a few new pics of characters from the film including a new shot of Watanabe as Ra's Al Ghul, Tom Wilkinson as Carmine Falcone, and Linus Roache as Dr. Thomas Wayne. Also, on the 26th or so, the site should have new pics of Cillian Murphy (as Scarecrow?), Rutger Hauer, and Katie Holmes.

Still, thanks for the heads up Chest. Not bad.

No prob, Daryl.

Pic of Watanabe as Rha's Al Ghul at the official site.

http://batmanbegins.warnerbros.com/page10.html

New pics are up at chud

Surprised about the look theyve given Murphy, I pictured him being more like he looked in 28 Days Later, like he hadnt eaten for days and was half crazed. In Batman, he looks like a Gap model!

I read somewhere that at full length he looks VERY thin.

where are these new pics?

Very, very archived.

It's best to just go to the Batman Begins website, all those pictures of the characters are there.

The reason I am looking forward to this movie so much is because of the resemblance to Burton's film. I think that is exactly what this series needs. They need to go back to what made the movies so great in the first place. Nolan is telling a different story so I don't think there will be any problems if the movie looks like a Burton movie, at least it doesn't look like a Schumacher movie.

I don't know, to me the Burton and Schumacher flicks were more similar than most fanboys would care to admit. They were all overblown productions, high on costuming and atmosphere but low on character and plot. The distinction is that one atmosphere was sort of a 13 year-old's notebook margins doodle version of dark and brooding, and the other's was a Hollywood Blvd boutique version of a gay pride parade.

What I'm looking forward to is a tonal shift, not just on the surface but in the filmmaker's overall intent.

I've tried, and tried, but I can't muster up excitement for this. The big message I'm getting in my brain is 'too real.' Maybe because Batman has always been hyper-stylised, and to see it presented in a real way like this, it's not translating to me properly.

Well, unlike quite a few people, I'm extremely hyped about this. But, I think that comes from the fact I'm a Batman freak. The first movie I ever saw in a theater was B89 (Burton's Batman) when I was three or so. I learned to read from Batman comics, so my opinion is a bit skewed, heh. Looks great though.

I love the parade analogy, but I disagree completely. Everything that made the Burton films good was gone by the time Schumacher got his hands on it. And I love the weirdness of it all, Scumacher just didn't have the delicate touch to handle that balance.

The Schumacher batfilms were more in touch with the early 60s Batman than the Burton films were in touch with any of the comics. But, for a lot of people, a dark Batman means a good Batman. In my opinion Batman Returns is the worst of the lot in terms of faithfulness, but in goth and darkness, it's number one. Show me a comic where Batman intentionally engulfs someone in flames, then I'll praise BR as the second coming of ::insert something witty::.

Did you ever read 1939-1940 era Batman stories? It's clear that a lot of ideas were drawn from that era for the Burton movies. The strafing sequence especially can be seen as coming from Batman #1. Lots of deaths in that era, directly or indirectly caused by Batman. Detective #29 ends with the villian engulfed in flames. Heck, the first appearance ends with Batman knocking the villain into a vat of chemicals. Detective #30 gives you henchmen neck snapping action which is even more clearcut than engulfing a guy in flames.

It's pretty clear that Burton's Batman was an amalgam of different eras. You'll see the Batman as killer aspect as well as the black costume drawn from the characters earliest days. The batmobile and batwing were obviously drawn from later stories. As was the media commentary. And the Joker is very much a later incarnation of the character. Burton picked and chose what he found interesting about the character, but pretty much all of it at least had some basis in the original stories.

Superherohype has a llink to the best pics I've seen yet of Bale in costume. They seem to be actual stills from the film, and it shows the cape, his chin, eyes, and all in a far more intimidating manner than they've seemed thus far.

High quality pics!

link

I don't care about being faithful to the comic, as long as I like what they are doing with the character. And I'm not one of those "Dark Batman=Good" people. But I happen to find that the more troubled version of the character presented in the Burton films is more interesting than the goofy do-gooder of the 60s.

Since there are so many incarnations of Batman one can't really fault a movie version for not being totally faithful. And there is no excuse for Forever and Robin being as bad as they are. What Burton did was create a world where Batman and his rouges galler would exist. What's happening with the new movie is that they are creating characters that woyuld exist in the "real" world.

I still don't understand this need to put him in a goddamn suit of armor. Mind you, not the pics with Neeson, the whole costume design.

I have been underwhelmed by everything I have seen, with two exceptions:

a. The foreign poster art ;
b. Christian Bale's voice and appearance in the cowl.

The U.S. poster art, the clips I've seen, the photos.....none have really struck a chord.

I typically avoid story spoilers like the plague, but I'm tempted to start looking them up so that I can get excited again. I want to be excited, dammit.

I'm fuckin 5 years old again seeing a batman movie for the first time.. I eat up every picture i can find from this movie, but I too avoid spoilers.. I don't need them, I'm already excited for this film, mainly because I love batman, I love Nolan, Memento, Insomnia, Bale, Freeman, Neeson....the list goes on. I'm not gonna speculate about what type of Batman they're gonna show us here.. I have faith in Nolan, and equily as important, Bale.

The first trailer was interesting, but the only thing that's really got me excited was the Batmobile.

The suit just looks Burton redux.

Why mess with a good thing? That suit still looks badass, and the only real problem was limited mobility that restricted Batman's fighting prowess to standing, walking slow, and punching guys in the face. He was about as mobile as Steven Seagal in those films, but from the interviews being done and the trailer descriptions, it looks like they've improved the suit a lot, especially in terms of mobility.

The other improvement is the cape, which finally fits like a freaking cape and looks very majestic. That last pic of Bale standing in front of the car gives me shivers. I mean, that's fucking Batman. Nolan's style, from his own words, is realism. How could a Batman really exist in real life, and what would that entail? From that perspective, I like the suit.

A real life Batman wouldn't do hand to hand fighting.

At any rate the Batsuit in the movie is made of magic Waynetech material, so the look should have been sleeker.

Some pics make the suit look sleek and others not as much, I really hope Batman dosn't move around like a stiff robot, didn't they say that Batman will actually be able to move his head around? With the thickness of that neck I wouldn't think so.........

still, I hope it's a success, just so we can get a Nolan sequel with The Joker down the line.

Crime solving caped ninjas don't need body armor. Not ninja in the Dudikoff sense, ninja in the "you can't see me, you're scared shitless, and I'm two steps ahead of everone" sense. I could see how a Batman like that might be difficult to compose on film, particularly with expectations of an action movie.

If Nolan strikes closer to the character's core than Burton, he's going to have a lot of leeway from me to play loose with any other aspects of the character.

So the neck is thick? To me it seems like there's a lot of space between Bale's neck and the fabric, which may be kinda ungly and disproportional, but nonetheless is exactly why he's going to be able to move his head in that suit.

I feel it's become irrelavant what the costume or production design looks like. We got a sense of the style and you either dig it or you don't. What it comes down to is whether or not Nolan can nail character in this film. Will we genuinely care about Bruce Wayne? How will his relationship with Gordon play out? Will these villains offer anything meaningful and/or deliver something slightly outside of convention?

As Devin has said (and I'm inclined to agree), the script ain't all that (it's good, not great) but I guess I'm still pretty optimistic that the transition from page to screen will be a good one provided that Nolan can establish an emphasis on character before style.

I'm fine with the way the costume looks. I'm Rubber Neck Technology has improved since the 800 pound Batman suit in the first Burton movie.

Here's BOF's set report that talks about the suit for those interested...

http://www.batman-on-film.com/setreport3.html

It still looks like a guy going to a costume party dressed as Batman to me. Can't put my finger on it, just off-putting.

I'm soo looking forward too this movie!!

Looking at that pic I can understand, i'd say it's too long......like it would be probelmatic to get in and out of the Batmobile with that cape........

I'm holding off on judging the costume until i see it in motion..from that interview it sounds like they really know what they're doing, so I'm confident things will be fine when the movie comes out..probably the best thing about the last two bat movies was the batsuit, especially in Batman Forever. Watching the first one again, the suit looked alittle too "squared" in its design, kinda like a clunky suit of armor. I like the well rounded, moveable look of this suit.

"I'm Batman"

The first time i heard of another batman movie i admit i was psyched, mainly because i had been so horribly dissappointed by the last one that i was like well how much worse could it get. i absolutely loved the first one. michael keaton and jack were both brilliant and i love tim burtons twisted take on everything. the look and feel of gotham was what i expected. i wanted the dark and twisted because thats the part of batman i enjoy. i mean you have to be pretty twisted to put on a bat suit and fight crime. i love how they got into the psycology of it all. the second one was really good, and as a side note i never understood why the need for a catwoman that didn't involve Michelle Pfeiffer, and the name change. didn't they realize that catwoman was already in a movie and maybe they could have gone off that somehow, but i heard elektra did kinda the same thing. i thought the third one was okay. it was still dark and i am a fan of val kilmer, but then the last one...i've not the words to say how dissappointed i was.

But now, after the images and the little tidbits, i am totally psyched for this movie and i can't wait to see him punch someone in the face and just kick general ass. I've like christian bale ever since i saw american psycho and i like how dark and twisted that was and i hope thats the way they go with this one.

The one that appeared in the LA Times is by far the best live-action Batman pic I've ever seen. It's a comic panel come to life:



I love the suit, but then again I'm one of the few who doesn't think the costume as it appears in the comics would work in live action. Not a fan of the tights at all. I've always wanted something akin to the suit seen in the Splinter Cell video game. A sleek, all-black wetsuit-type material with armoring. Surprise! That's what we got. Look at the Wayne Tech suit before he sprays it. I just think it's damned cool. Pleased as punch.

Thick neck's fine by me. Looks great from the side especially. You get that sort of "hulking" appearance reminiscent of Tim Sale's rendition. Plus, all these set reports state that he can move wonderfully in the suit, his head/neck included.

I've heard people badmouthing the neck since day one. Sure, it's a bit bulky, but that also goes towards the illusion of Bale being this monstrous creature. Besides, with the extra give in it, it allows for movement of Bale's head. Something that most people's beloved Batman, Keaton, couldn't even do. I'm sick of seeing complaining, "Why would they use a black rubber suit again?" First of all it's not rubber. Second of all, I'm sorry, but I'm in the group that doesn't want Batman to be going around in blue tights with a red cape. If you want Batman's cowl to be white, then I hope you can finance your own $130 million dollar movie. Also, PM me if in the future, someone does a live action Batman wearing tights, and makes it look good. Not even the self-proclaimed messiah Sandy Collora could do it.

Uhh... maybe they want Batman in his classic outfit... as in grey and blue?

the neck is bulky precisely because Nolan was trying to counter the whole stiff-neck syndrome in previous installments

And we all know how fit Adam West looked in it.

Because West's approach to the character is so Similar to Bale's.

I'm not saying they should go back to tights, but the all-black is kind of boring. Still, I'm sure it will look fine on screen.