Christopher Nolan is a hugely overrated director, but: Tom Hardy, man. TOM HARDY.

The thing about Bateman's movies in general is that the exposition and first two acts are way more interesting than the third act climax: Batman Begins and Inception.

I still can't believe how highly regarded Dark Knight was and wonder how much of it was due to Ledger's death. It was a silly comic book movie trying so hard to be serious commentary (trust our billionaire overlords with anti-terrorist surveillance!).

Hey fabio, you're an idiot.

The whole little cellphone thing was a tiny subplot in the movie, and by spazzing about it you sound like you never even saw the movie and are basing your opinion off another idiots movie blog.

It is well regarded because it was GOOD. It is rated higher than the first film because it had more charecters in it to take away from bale's moody crap.

And yes, Ledger did a great job playing a well written role.

haha, I'm the one spazzing.

okay, sport

Holy shit I just read all your other spittle-flinging comments.


Tell me about your comic book issues, son.

fabio reading through solro's comments and bothering to post about it, definitely not overreacting, news at 11

In their defense, FABIO, you've always had an amazing talent for bringing that sort of reaction out of people.

I mean that as a sincere compliment.

Not to shit in your corn flakes but I get the feeling that Nolan will make another badass Batman movie

Some people just can't have nice things.

Seriously, nobody really doesn't like these movies. The first two are among the greatest action films ever produced. Most people who hate on them are just trying to sound cool, then they go back to pretending they love and understand 2001 A Space Odyssey.

Both Batman movies are great, and I love and understand 2001.

Did I just blow your mind?!

I don't think you NEED to be able to identify with a lead character for him to be good. In fact, in some stories that can be detrimental to the narrative. It can be just as fascinating to get into the head of someone who is UNLIKE us, and allow us to understand that person better, giving us the enjoyment of discovery instead of the familiarity of recognition.

I have very little in common with Bale's Bruce Wayne, but I've still enjoyed watching him develop throughout what I think are two excellent films. He really need to lose the forced raspy voice, though.

Maybe identifying with the hero isn't quite it; what superhero movies need to do is get the audience on the hero's side and make the audience accept that he or she really would choose to put on a leotard and punch muggers as a hobby. Superhero movies that make no such effort fail every time; "Daredevil" is the classic example, it just sort of assumed that audiences would say, "a blind guy with a radar sense? I'm sold, put him in tights and make him fight crime". The fact that his roles as attorney and superhero actually put him on opposite sides of justice didn't help either: if you try to mete out justice on people the courts have declared "not guilty", that doesn't make you an agent of justice, that makes you Nancy Grace.

Cartoon Network series?

Kid...I would like to have a word with you.

"Batman...why didn't you get me to quit smoking, this cancer shit sucks...Batman....your costume needs nipples"

Bane is an awesome villain: a crime boss who was smart enough to conquer the entire Gotham criminal underworld, AND figure out Batman's secret identity, AND beat his ass harder than anyone ever beat it before. Plus he invented a super-steroid that makes him strong enough to punch your car in half. If this were a Street Fighter bonus stage, he'd get SO MANY POINTS.

Also he wears a Luchador mask. I don't know what else you people could want out of a villain, or out of life.

Worked in 1992. I'm acutally interested in how it will be handled in the bleak reality of this telling.

Bane was a fucking *awesome* villain, but he had only one good story in him--Knightfall. After that, there wasn't much of a point. I'd expect Nolan to realize this, and to use that aspect of Bane.

As for Catwoman--remember Scarecrow in Batman Begins? Crane was integrated into Ra's al Ghul's storyline pretty flawlessly, and all it took was a subtle hand and a few nods to the original concept (he terrifies his patients with a scarecrow mask).

There are a lot of ways they can come at this and not make it feel incredibly campy; I'm willing to wait and see if they can pull it off.

allow me to expand upon my own idea for a moment. While it seems probable to me that this movie will not turn out well, none of this is really Nolan's fault. It can be inferred from a lot of the early speculations and information released about the film that there was considerable pressure from both the studios and the fanbase to see a third Nolan Batman. This incarnation of the franchise has proven infinitely profitable, so we can be sure that they put it to Nolan in such a way that there was no way he could sanely refuse. The unfortunate reality of the circumstances however is that without Ledger, the range of possibilities is automatically reduced to a much shallower pool. While my personal favorite joker(and overall favorite representation of Batman) is Mark Hamill from the original animated series, I find it unquestionable that Ledger's performance was anything but superior for the Nolan version of Gotham. Had he not been an asshole and killed himself, Nolan could have easily lifted 75% of "The Killing Joke" and rolled with it to a fully successful third film, and if not that, any of the other quality Joker storylines from over the years. So, what we are left with after all of this is the inevitable fate of any non-comic book Batman media: sinking further and further into trivial absurdity. The moment people found themselves unable to instantly call to mind a villain for the third movie, the descent into foolishness began. The fact is, the subject matter for a serious, captivating film just isnt there, at least not in the two and a half hour time frame. That Nolan could make this movie without some amount of pandering to popular interest (read: Michael Bayifying) is all but unthinkable.

Hippo-
scarecrow worked in begins because there was barely any of him in the movie

Boy, that's a whole lot of baseless conjecture and speculation for an action film.

Thie thing is that Lex Luthor actually makes far more sense as a villain within Nolan's ludicrously self-restricting, one-hand-behind-his-back "vision". The problem is that Batman himself is the fatal flaw in Nolan's universe... you can't possibly take a man like this seriously when you are consciously aware of the fact that Ryan Reynolds is flying around and fighting space aliens thanks to a magic ring within the same continuity.

These films are nice, but entirely joyless.

Cognitive: The Green Lantern movie isn't part of the same continuity. Nolan has actually been pretty adamant about there being no other superheroes in his universe (not even Robin.)

Also, I could see them turning Bane into a Lex Luthor type without too much of a stretch.

That's not for him to decide! THESE ARE NOT HIS DECISIONS TO MAKE!

Bane is a superb villain, putting side his questionable appearance (even in the comics, the luchador thing is badly inserted). He's intelligent but he's also the rare villain who is a physical match for Batman without having some weird, supernatural/over-the-top aspect to him like Clayface or Killer Croc. Even without the venom drug (which I seriously doubt they're even going to bother with in this film) Batman still fears him.
Basically what this means is we'll probably see a Batman film where the villain is less about secretive head games and more about doing brutal shit and trying to beat the shit out of Batman with his bare hands. I predict the plot will have something to do with Bane controlling the League of Shadow (or even possibly working against them). The casting of the younger Ra's Al Ghul might actually mean the character will come back and not just be a flashback cameo (and there have been set reports from extras saying that the sets and scenes being filmed looked basically like someone being reborn in a Lazarus Pit) In any case, I hold high hopes for it...I think Nolan has earned some credit at this point.

Bane is just a fucking "Doomsday" for Batman.

There was no thought put into his character other than "Who could defeat Batman in a mano-a-mano battle?" "Shit, I don't know, a wrestler?"

Yeah he defeated Batman in a fight. But come on guys, Batman got better.

Full Disclosure: I really got into Batman during his Knightfall story line. But,

1) I was a pimple-faced teen that didn't know a good story if it stuck its finger up my butt.

2) I also enjoyed the "Death of Superman" storyline when it came out.

I found the answer to my question: Batman is a masterfully written treatise on the human condition for the Cena Marks of the world.

They also get their understanding of the Middle East from Transformers movies.

You could just about make a "This Troper" out of this thread.

Wait until the comic book well is so completely dry that film producers turn to anime. Then we'll talk.

You have heard the rumors they are making Akira into a live action movie set in New York and starring Leonardo Decaprio, right?

Your day will come too...

They're not rumors anymore. Warner Bros. is moving ahead with the Akira film despite the massive outcry about how stupid it is and the fact that everyone who had initially been hired to work on it for the last few years has decided to quit realizing how stupid an idea it is.
In their weird desperation to make an Akira film, they're basically changing the storyline completely from the manga and just deciding to make it about a guy trying to rescue his friend from government medical experimentation on his psychic abilities and probably removing 80% of anything else even remotely relevant from the manga.
DiCaprio probably isn't starring in it, but he's producing it.

Bitching about remakes is worthless: if they change things then people complain that it's not true to the original, if they don't change things then people complain that it's pointless.

American Akira http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jafd97yJFOI

I guess Caminante's fragile psyche has forgotten about the Dragonball movie. Aside from the fact that it had better dialog than the anime, there wasn't much anyone could say that was good about it.

Either that, or he thought it was the best thing ever. Neither would surprise me.

I am pretty sure he was joking

To be fair to anime fans, casting that guy from the Twinklelight movies to play a character from Akira* is a dick move.

* - or anything, really.

Batman getting his spine crushed by a roided-up luchador will be analyzed endlessly on the internet as a trenchant social commentary on illegal immigration in America.

I remember how TDK was some sort of metaphor for "those damn kids" and how they don't respect society or something.

I will agree with you in that the best comic book movies are the ones that don't over analyze and just roll with it. (see: Iron Man, Thor, Superman, Flash Gordon)

Although, the Nolan movies are not really comic book movies, but rather just a different medium using comic book characters.

I wish these things were just for children

I'm just saying Batman is likely something you should grow out of before you're 30.

After 30 the only thing you're supposed to like is work, golf, and drinking yourself senseless because you gave up all your passions in order to conform.