Batman Madness

[Drtooth]

Guardians of the Galaxy has pluses and minuses. Even through it's comic book based, it's not well known. The talking tree is more problematic than the talking raccoon. Again, I don't really see this as anything near Howard the Duck.

Seriously... I saw, like, several comments that brought that up the second they announced the film. Personally, I wanna see the general public react to Groot more than Rocket. GOTG is a pretty far out comic. And Marvel is trying it's darndest to get that brand out. A couple months after the movie's announcement, I saw a GOTG action figure set at Target. I wouldn't doubt they'd splash the brand all over FCBD.

I was going to post a Cracked article, but it makes one good point and then turns into a shallow "Nyeeeeh, I hated Dark Knight Rises" bashing article, like the movie went in and shoved a pineapple up his butt. I've heard all the "This isn't the second one, and something about it is a letdown, therefore it is terrible" crap from snotty dorks that wrote imaginary fan fics about what the film was in their heads, and were hugely disappointed Nolan didn't write their movie.

 

[jvcarroll]

Seriously... I saw, like, several comments that brought that up the second they announced the film. Personally, I wanna see the general public react to Groot more than Rocket. GOTG is a pretty far out comic. And Marvel is trying it's darndest to get that brand out. A couple months after the movie's announcement, I saw a GOTG action figure set at Target. I wouldn't doubt they'd splash the brand all over FCBD.

I was going to post a Cracked article, but it makes one good point and then turns into a shallow "Nyeeeeh, I hated Dark Knight Rises" bashing article, like the movie went in and shoved a pineapple up his butt. I've heard all the "This isn't the second one, and something about it is a letdown, therefore it is terrible" crap from snotty dorks that wrote imaginary fan fics about what the film was in their heads, and were hugely disappointed Nolan didn't write their movie.

Well, Dark Knight Rises was filled with lost opportunities. Nolan ran out of steam. It's the film he never wanted to make. They could have changed a few key things and made a much better movie. There are some great themes explored in several scenes, but it falls flat as a movie. Nolan actually did follow a story. He just changed it and made it less interesting.

I think they should have padded out the film with one or two more classic villains working with Bane to bring Gotham down. They didn't need to be explored too much. Just part of the mob. The film reduced Batman into something Bruce Wayne did for his summer break and that's kind of unforgivable.

 

[Drtooth]

First off... here's the article in question
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-ben-affleck-will-make-great-batman/

A flawed film that's the weakest in the series I get. But huge abortion that (in the words of the article) lowered the bar for Batman movies is ridiculous. The article makes a few good points at the beginning, then turns into a whiny, ungrateful fanboy who spends the rest of it trashing the film as if to say "Who cares who plays him? One not great movie out of three makes the entire trilogy terrible." Not critically pointing out the flaws in the film, whining. Heck, he even begrudingly accepts the MOS movie as "Myeeeehhhhh, it's okay I guess." And basically turns the article into, "this film is going to be stupid," whiplashes to "keep an open mind" and then goes back again to "this film is going to suck."

Dark Knight Rises could have been a better film, but it doesn't deserve half the crap it gets. I think people just wanted a reason to hate the film. Whether it was the theater shooting or the fact that they wanted the third one to fail to take the wind out of Nolan's sales, they just wanted to dump on the movie and focus on it's flaws. And not critical ones... idiotic nitpicks about how characters had funny voices and that blowing up a city is unrealistic and goofy compared to the hallucinogenic nerve gas of the first film... and my person favorite the whole "there is no way that Bruce Wayne could have climbed out of that thing alive." Because we want reality in our fiction because we can believe a billionaire with a military hardware stockpile puts on a Bat costume, but we won't forgive something that's not too out of place in an actual Batman comic story. Yet no one praises the stuff that Nolan got right. Connecting the final film to the first one in a trilogy so it felt like three connected movies, not one movie and then 2 more after the first one made money. Even the original Star Wars trilogy didn't do that. A New Hope could have been a stand alone film, where as you need to watch ESB and ROTJ.... and ROTJ basically retells the first story's plot.

I have no envy of the task Nolan had at hand with the third movie. The second film killed the franchise. Not in the usual terrible movie way. There was no logical way to make a film to follow that up that would capture that lightning in a bottle. What we got was a second movie climax, and then a falling action third film that ties the beginning together. More villains would have seemed desperate and trying too hard, anything less than blowing up the city (no thanks to serial escalation) would have seemed anti-climactic, and if the film features more of Batman beating people up, it would have been repetitive. The only other thing left was to not make a third movie and let everything just dangle. It was a no win.

Then you look at the other third installments of movies... they're not just weaker, they're downright insulting. DKR was the best third installment of a comic book franchise until Iron Man 3 came along. IM3 did it much better, sure... but Super-man 3, Batman Forever (which I kinda dug, but wasn't half as good as Batman Returns), TMNT 3 (which I gotta admit, I dig it more than the poor excuse for a toy commercial they called second film), and especially Spider-Man 3... all horrid. Still, even if it was, it's no excuse to poo on the entire franchise.

 

[jvcarroll]

First off... here's the article in question
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-ben-affleck-will-make-great-batman/

A flawed film that's the weakest in the series I get. But huge abortion that (in the words of the article) lowered the bar for Batman movies is ridiculous. The article makes a few good points at the beginning, then turns into a whiny, ungrateful fanboy who spends the rest of it trashing the film as if to say "Who cares who plays him? One not great movie out of three makes the entire trilogy terrible." Not critically pointing out the flaws in the film, whining. Heck, he even begrudingly accepts the MOS movie as "Myeeeehhhhh, it's okay I guess." And basically turns the article into, "this film is going to be stupid," whiplashes to "keep an open mind" and then goes back again to "this film is going to suck."

Dark Knight Rises could have been a better film, but it doesn't deserve half the crap it gets. I think people just wanted a reason to hate the film. Whether it was the theater shooting or the fact that they wanted the third one to fail to take the wind out of Nolan's sales, they just wanted to dump on the movie and focus on it's flaws. And not critical ones... idiotic nitpicks about how characters had funny voices and that blowing up a city is unrealistic and goofy compared to the hallucinogenic nerve gas of the first film... and my person favorite the whole "there is no way that Bruce Wayne could have climbed out of that thing alive." Because we want reality in our fiction because we can believe a billionaire with a military hardware stockpile puts on a Bat costume, but we won't forgive something that's not too out of place in an actual Batman comic story. Yet no one praises the stuff that Nolan got right. Connecting the final film to the first one in a trilogy so it felt like three connected movies, not one movie and then 2 more after the first one made money. Even the original Star Wars trilogy didn't do that. A New Hope could have been a stand alone film, where as you need to watch ESB and ROTJ.... and ROTJ basically retells the first story's plot.

I have no envy of the task Nolan had at hand with the third movie. The second film killed the franchise. Not in the usual terrible movie way. There was no logical way to make a film to follow that up that would capture that lightning in a bottle. What we got was a second movie climax, and then a falling action third film that ties the beginning together. More villains would have seemed desperate and trying too hard, anything less than blowing up the city (no thanks to serial escalation) would have seemed anti-climactic, and if the film features more of Batman beating people up, it would have been repetitive. The only other thing left was to not make a third movie and let everything just dangle. It was a no win.

Then you look at the other third installments of movies... they're not just weaker, they're downright insulting. DKR was the best third installment of a comic book franchise until Iron Man 3 came along. IM3 did it much better, sure... but Super-man 3, Batman Forever (which I kinda dug, but wasn't half as good as Batman Returns), TMNT 3 (which I gotta admit, I dig it more than the poor excuse for a toy commercial they called second film), and especially Spider-Man 3... all horrid. Still, even if it was, it's no excuse to poo on the entire franchise.

These puff pieces extolling the virtues of Affleck are ridiculous. These writers seem to be studio shills. But I'm kind of over the controversy. It's up to them to create a good film.

The one thing that article does point out is that this is not a Batman film. It's a Superman film with Batman in it. I'm irritated how Affleck and Batman have totally hijacked the Man of Steel follow-up.

I initially gave Batman Begins 4.5 stars, Dark Knight a full 5 stars and Dark Knight Returns a very generous 3.5 stars. Subsequent viewings have me rethinking that extra .5, but it's still doesn't deserve quite the amount of flack it gets. The reaction to negative critiques of that film caused Rotten Tomatoes to close down its direct responses to reviews altogether. The funny thing is that audiences seemed to agree later on. Nevertheless, it still tore up the box office.

 

[Drtooth]

There's another, somewhat more interesting Superman movie we should keep our eyes on...

a documentary about the thankfully aborted Superman Lives movie

Tim Allen was to have been Brainiac.

I repeat. Tim Allen was to have been Braniac. It's official. NO ONE can complain about Affleck as Batman anymore. No one has the right to put down MOS because, if we got THIS movie, we would have all experienced first hand what happened to the Nazis in Raiders of the Lost Ark.

I initially gave Batman Begins 4.5 stars, Dark Knight a full 5 stars and Dark Knight Returns a very generous 3.5 stars. Subsequent viewings have me rethinking that extra .5, but it's still doesn't deserve quite the amount of flack it gets. The reaction to negative critiques of that film caused Rotten Tomatoes to close down its direct responses to reviews altogether. The funny thing is that audiences seemed to agree later on. Nevertheless, it still tore up the box office.

I'm probably the only one that liked the third film over the first. The fact that the film gets that much flack proves that Batman fans have a short attention span. The worst thing Nolan could have done with the film was to make a generic Batman punches the villains, "be back for part 4" film, and hand the film over to a director that either tried too hard to emulate Nolan, or WORSE... make a completely cartoonish movie that comes off as a Mad Magazine parody of the 1960's show. The Dark Knight Saga thankfully didn't have a Batman and Robin. He ended the film series mutually. Choked? yes... DKR could have been a better film, B&R was an unsalvageable piece of humiliation that's not even so bad it's good. And the worst thing is, they totally could have made an even worse fifth film.

 

[jvcarroll]

There's another, somewhat more interesting Superman movie we should keep our eyes on...

a documentary about the thankfully aborted Superman Lives movie

Tim Allen was to have been Brainiac.

I repeat. Tim Allen was to have been Braniac. It's official. NO ONE can complain about Affleck as Batman anymore. No one has the right to put down MOS because, if we got THIS movie, we would have all experienced first hand what happened to the Nazis in Raiders of the Lost Ark.



I'm probably the only one that liked the third film over the first. The fact that the film gets that much flack proves that Batman fans have a short attention span. The worst thing Nolan could have done with the film was to make a generic Batman punches the villains, "be back for part 4" film, and hand the film over to a director that either tried too hard to emulate Nolan, or WORSE... make a completely cartoonish movie that comes off as a Mad Magazine parody of the 1960's show. The Dark Knight Saga thankfully didn't have a Batman and Robin. He ended the film series mutually. Choked? yes... DKR could have been a better film, B&R was an unsalvageable piece of humiliation that's not even so bad it's good. And the worst thing is, they totally could have made an even worse fifth film.

DKR took all the promise of Batman Begins and the Dark Knight and reduced the character of Batman to something that Bruce Wayne did over his summer vacation. I like some of the scenes, themes and performances of DKR, but count me among those deeply disappointed with the film. After some thought, I'd probably give it 3.25 out of 5 stars.

 

[Drtooth]

The film pretty much had the concept of Bruce desperately not wanting to be Batman anymore until there was no other option. I'm probably the only one who enjoyed that over a formulaic "Here I am to punch up the badguys" movie. Not to mention the intense physical pain he suffered at the beginning of the movie. I still don't see why that's so bad. And killing the Bat off at the end was an act of brilliance and boldness, especially since I could just see DC execs pulling their hair out that they actually did that to the character in a movie.

Something tells me if they made the movie people like to say they wanted, it would have turned into little more than a toy commercial.

 

[jvcarroll]

The film pretty much had the concept of Bruce desperately not wanting to be Batman anymore until there was no other option. I'm probably the only one who enjoyed that over a formulaic "Here I am to punch up the badguys" movie. Not to mention the intense physical pain he suffered at the beginning of the movie. I still don't see why that's so bad. And killing the Bat off at the end was an act of brilliance and boldness, especially since I could just see DC execs pulling their hair out that they actually did that to the character in a movie.

Something tells me if they made the movie people like to say they wanted, it would have turned into little more than a toy commercial.

I don't see why it had to be either this reductionist view of Batman or some formulaic fight fest. There's a lot of territory in between. Nolan never wanted to make this film, but he didn't want WB making it without him either. This was the compromise. Upon reading about Man of Steel, it's clear that the DKR team really wanted to be focused on Supes instead.

I didn't have a problem with Batman wanting to retire. I'll reiterate. I take issue with the fact that Batman was just something Bruce Wayne did one summer. They didn't have to do that. I would have preferred there to be some history referenced between TDK and DKR instead of Batman retiring immediately after TDK.

DKR is not a terrible film. It's just disappointing and the weakest of the trilogy. In a way, I think that was by design. Nolan created an ending that would cause WB to want to reboot the character and franchise. Nolan's vision would remain untouched by others. Even though this third act was rote, it was also brilliant in closing the book on this version of Batman.

 

[Drtooth]

At the risk of changing the subject, something just hit me today. And I'm surprised no one else realized this.

There is one thing that really annoys me about Warner Bros announcing they are going to cast Ben Affleck as Batman in the upcoming Superman movie.

It's not Ben being Batman, nor is it the fact he was cast before Lex Luthor. It's also not the fact that the movie's a Batman/Superman film or a Superman film with Batman in it...

It's that they announced it in the first place. They totally ruined any chance of the element of surprise of Batman popping up at some point in the film. And the irony isn't lost on the fact that Batman is all about the element of surprise.

Think of it this way. WB just announces this will be a Superman vs Lex Luthor film. You're watching it, and all of the sudden Batman (or Bruce Wayne) shows up unexpectedly. That's a huge surprise that would have you at the edge of your seat. But Warner Bros glubbed up, and the potential for an amazing plot twist is lost. Now, instead of "HOLY CROP! It's Batman!" the audience will go either "When the heck is Batman coming up" (they expect him now) or "Ben better not screw this up."

Part of what made TDK amazing is that they hid any references to Two-Face being in the film. They hyped up the Joker, and some promotional material with Harvey Dent popped up (giving it at least the ambiguous feel of will he/won't he). There wasn't even any Two-Face merchandise except for a Pez dispenser. But he was in classic form, and the Riddler was also part of the collection. And then look at Iron Man 3. They splashed The Mandarin all over the merchandise and promotional material, they mentioned he was going to be played by Ben Kinglsey, and in the end he really wasn't.
Then you look at the second Amazing Spider-Man film, and the first thing they announced the second it was announced... just after the first film was still in theaters... it wasn't who was going to be in the movie, which villain was going to be involved and who he was played by... we got the announcement that they're going to kill of Gwen Stacy. Thus robbing the audience of the shock of it happening, replacing it with "daggnabbit, just kill her already!"

 

[jvcarroll]

At the risk of changing the subject, something just hit me today. And I'm surprised no one else realized this.

There is one thing that really annoys me about Warner Bros announcing they are going to cast Ben Affleck as Batman in the upcoming Superman movie.

It's not Ben being Batman, nor is it the fact he was cast before Lex Luthor. It's also not the fact that the movie's a Batman/Superman film or a Superman film with Batman in it...

It's that they announced it in the first place. They totally ruined any chance of the element of surprise of Batman popping up at some point in the film. And the irony isn't lost on the fact that Batman is all about the element of surprise.

Think of it this way. WB just announces this will be a Superman vs Lex Luthor film. You're watching it, and all of the sudden Batman (or Bruce Wayne) shows up unexpectedly. That's a huge surprise that would have you at the edge of your seat. But Warner Bros glubbed up, and the potential for an amazing plot twist is lost. Now, instead of "HOLY CROP! It's Batman!" the audience will go either "When the heck is Batman coming up" (they expect him now) or "Ben better not screw this up."

Part of what made TDK amazing is that they hid any references to Two-Face being in the film. They hyped up the Joker, and some promotional material with Harvey Dent popped up (giving it at least the ambiguous feel of will he/won't he). There wasn't even any Two-Face merchandise except for a Pez dispenser. But he was in classic form, and the Riddler was also part of the collection. And then look at Iron Man 3. They splashed The Mandarin all over the merchandise and promotional material, they mentioned he was going to be played by Ben Kinglsey, and in the end he really wasn't.
Then you look at the second Amazing Spider-Man film, and the first thing they announced the second it was announced... just after the first film was still in theaters... it wasn't who was going to be in the movie, which villain was going to be involved and who he was played by... we got the announcement that they're going to kill of Gwen Stacy. Thus robbing the audience of the shock of it happening, replacing it with "daggnabbit, just kill her already!"

That's a secret they'd never be able to keep. It's more commercially beneficial to hype the Batman element. However, it would not be beneficial to promote Tim Allen as Braniac...or just about anything these days. Is he still around?