James Bond vs. Batman
Now that the Caped Crusader is proving to be as interchangeable as 007, we felt it was high time to re-evaluate the respective merits of these two film franchise figureheads.
Had director Wolfgang Petersen not decamped to make Troy with Brad Pitt, we all could be watching Superman vs. Batman this weekend in theatres and on IMAX instead of Batman Begins. In fact, it is truly miraculous
#2
00-FAN008
Posted 17 June 2005 - 05:38 AM
Aw, why do people compare Batman and Bond? It's not like they're ever gonna fight each other!
But if I needed one of them to save my  , I'd count on Batman. He knows how to use martial arts and fear to his advantage. Plus, James Bond doesn't have a cool cape. 
#3
Qwerty
Qwerty
-
Location:New York / Pennsylvania
Posted 17 June 2005 - 05:57 AM
Aw, why do people compare Batman and Bond?
Two big terrific stars.
#4
Tarl_Cabot
Tarl_Cabot
-
Location:The Galaxy of Pleasure
Posted 17 June 2005 - 06:29 AM
QWERTY, I just read the Brosnan article you posted and I'm amazed to hear Brosnan weighed 164 lbs on Goldeneye and 211 lbs on DAD! That cannot be accurate! He does look fuller but 46 pounds!  sheesh...he's be a cow on Casino Royale if he kept the trend up...
Bond vs Batman:
I'd rather be Bond and wear tuxedos, italian suits and drive many different cars, travel the world and get laid alot (all this while while on the job!) rather than wear a silly costume and stew in a cave most of the time feeling sorry for myself. I look forward to Batman Beyond but.... comon!  
#5
Skudor
Posted 17 June 2005 - 08:57 AM
Nice article. For myself, I'd ask the question: who would I rather be, Bond or the Bat. Although Bruce's dough is appealing, Bond never seems to lack the cash or the lifestyle. On all other counts, I would much rather be JB.
#6
Qwerty
Qwerty
-
Location:New York / Pennsylvania
Posted 17 June 2005 - 01:50 PM
QWERTY, I just read the Brosnan article you posted and I'm amazed to hear Brosnan weighed 164 lbs on Goldeneye and 211 lbs on DAD! That cannot be accurate! He does look fuller but 46 pounds! sheesh...he's be a cow on Casino Royale if he kept the trend up...
LOL! Compare him from GoldenEye to Tomorrow Never Dies - he really bulked up, but then I think he lost some of it for The World Is Not Enough. I remember seeing The World Is Not Enough for the first time and was a bit surprised how much thinner he looked.
#7
Loomis
Posted 17 June 2005 - 02:36 PM
Aw, why do people compare Batman and Bond?
Two big terrific stars.
I remember reading somewhere that Christopher Nolan is a huge Bond fan and has freely admitted to taking a lot of inspiration for BATMAN BEGINS from the Bond films. And funnily enough, if Sony and Eon are still planning to make CASINO ROYALE a film about the young 007 on his first major mission, I imagine they'll be looking very closely at BATMAN BEGINS to see what works and what doesn't and whether they can take a few leaves out of Nolan's reinvention-of-Batman book.
#8
Lazenby880
Posted 17 June 2005 - 02:43 PM
[quote name='Qwerty' date='17 June 2005 - 04:43']As it is, with four major actors - like Bond - now having slipped in and out of the Batman costume (Connery, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan; Keaton, Kilmer, Clooney, Bale), it felt like the right time to stack up Mr. Mansion next to Mr. Martini and see who comes out with a higher
Edited by Lazenby880, 17 June 2005 - 02:45 PM.
#9
spynovelfan
Posted 17 June 2005 - 02:53 PM
Think the key word is 'major'. 
And yeah, Nolan's admitted to being a big Bond fan. Haven't seen BB yet, but the clip I saw with Bale and Freeman and the car looked pretty much like a Q briefing to me. I think there's a chance Nolan would direct a Bond film, simply because he would be one of the few big-name directors who would see it as a chance to become part of cinema's most iconic series and he wouldn't be nearly as keen to change it all around as, say, Tarantino or Spielberg. Although there would probably be a lot of shadows around. If Eon are prepared to take risks like reboots and 20somethings and so on, perhaps they'd be prepared to let one of the most innovative and successful directors in the world - and a British Bond fan to boot - create something really special for Bond 22.
Although, really, Quiller would be far better suited to Nolan.
#10
Lazenby880
Posted 17 June 2005 - 03:04 PM
Think the key word is 'major'.
And the airbrushing continues.
#11
tdalton
Posted 17 June 2005 - 03:46 PM
Think the key word is 'major'.
And the airbrushing continues.
Of course, had there only been three Batman actors to this point, we all know the article would have also neglected to mention Dalton's involvement with the Bond series. I agree, however, that it is completely unfair to leave Lazenby out of that article. He played James Bond in an EON produced Bond movie, so he should be just as much a part of the legacy of the franchise as Connery, Moore, Dalton, and Brosnan are.
#12
Righty007
Righty007
-
Location:Station CLE - Cleveland
Posted 17 June 2005 - 04:35 PM
Think the key word is 'major'.
And the airbrushing continues.
Of course, had there only been three Batman actors to this point, we all know the article would have also neglected to mention Dalton's involvement with the Bond series.
I agree, however, that it is completely unfair to leave Lazenby out of that article. He played James Bond in an EON produced Bond movie, so he should be just as much a part of the legacy of the franchise as Connery, Moore, Dalton, and Brosnan are.
The article said "four major actors." George Lazenby wasn't included because he isn't a "major" actor.
#13
Qwerty
Qwerty
-
Location:New York / Pennsylvania
Posted 17 June 2005 - 04:39 PM
[quote name='Lazenby880' date='17 June 2005 - 10:43'][quote name='Qwerty' date='17 June 2005 - 04:43']As it is, with four major actors - like Bond - now having slipped in and out of the Batman costume (Connery, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan; Keaton, Kilmer, Clooney, Bale), it felt like the right time to stack up Mr. Mansion next to Mr. Martini and see who comes out with a higher
#14
tdalton
Posted 17 June 2005 - 05:17 PM
The article said "four major actors." George Lazenby wasn't included because he isn't a "major" actor.
Sadly, I'm not sure that one can really consider Timothy Dalton a major actor in the Bond franchise, either. He only did one more film than Lazenby did. The only reason that Dalton is mentioned in the article is so that they can keep it with 4 actors for Bond and 4 for Batman. Had only 3 actors played Batman, then Connery, Moore, and Brosnan would have been the ones listed as "major" players in the Bond franchise. Had 5 actors played Batman, then Lazenby would have made it onto the list of "major" players in the Bond franchise. As you all know, I favor Dalton's Bond over all others, but if Lazenby isn't considered a major part of the franchise, then Dalton cannot be considered a major part either. 
#15
Stephenson
Posted 17 June 2005 - 06:43 PM
Well, if he was going back to the sixites for Bond, why didn't he just mention Adam West? There's your five and five. And don't say it's because West's Batman wasn't "serious"; he included Moore who's movies had Tarzan yells, slide whistles, lasers in space, clown outfits and ... worst of all... QUICHE!
#16
ComplimentsOfSharky
ComplimentsOfSharky
-
Location:Station PGH, Pittsburgh
Posted 17 June 2005 - 07:46 PM
[quote name='Lazenby880' date='17 June 2005 - 14:43'][quote name='Qwerty' date='17 June 2005 - 04:43']As it is, with four major actors - like Bond - now having slipped in and out of the Batman costume (Connery, Moore, Dalton, Brosnan; Keaton, Kilmer, Clooney, Bale), it felt like the right time to stack up Mr. Mansion next to Mr. Martini and see who comes out with a higher
#17
JuggaloJohn
JuggaloJohn
Recruit
-
-
Crew
-
-
1 posts
Posted 22 June 2005 - 07:59 AM
hello i saw this online and just had to sign up to add my 2 cents
i think the Artical is From the view of someone how thinks they know everything about movies but has no real clue about what brought both to the screen. Bond was done by good movie makes and until now Batman was done by guys who wanted their own Vison and didn't can about the Character. Batman Begins however is amazing and done well.
James Bond vs. Batman
Now what are you going by, because i mean there are very different interpretations of Both Characters. i see you are going by both movie sets, but the Characters are far more indepth then that. I mean if you got Adam West batman vs Sean Connery bond. Bond wins hands down, or if the Frank Miller Batman from "The Dark Knight Returns" vs. Roger Moore bond. Batman Destroys him. But the Batman Movies are not really good, this New one is the First Batman movies to Get the Batman Character right. Tim Burton, although i love his directing style , he scewed up so much of the storyline. And do get me started on the joel schumacher ones........may he burn in hell for them.........
If you don't know how the Character of batman is to acted see the new movies and watch the Animated series because that is BATMAN, and Dc comics has said that as far as they are conserned the Last 4 movies Never happened.
not to say im not a Bond fan, I have everymore, my mother is a huge bond fan and through that i am as well.
the Two Are alot alike in alot of ways. but i feel that Batman is Hands down Better. on alot of the Points given in the artical
starting with the points that matter.
Automobiles: yes bond as had lot of very sleek and cool looking cars over the series. But the Tim Burton Batmobile was As armed and tected out and anything Bond had, but it also has the "Get out of my way" factor to it with that one of a kind design. and the Tumbler in the new movie is a tank.
Villains: The bond villains are Great some of them Best style with out being cheese. But to be fair i would Have to leave out the Joker, because there is no villain better then him in anything, i would put him up as the best villain of all time. But batman really can go up agains every villain in the DC comic list. and so do to the fact that it's pretty much bond's normal crazy human villains, vs all the Supervillains in DC so i say you can't compare the two.
Gadgets: they Draw, Batman's list of Toys is just as vast as bond. but i would have to give the nod to batman for Making them all himself, he is pretty much Bond and Q in one.
Athletic Ability:........that thing said Bond for this..... yes Bond is very athletic. But Batman Swings from roof tops diver 30 stories to the street below to grab a guy and hang him upsidedown off the edge of a roof top to get information out of him. drives, flies, and mover just as well as bond. Plus all the Martial arts would give anyone an advantege in Athletisism. i would call it a Draw
Motivation: Batman Wants to do this, No one has to do anything. Batman is also driven by a purpose, feeling to do this. Bond is a Goverment agent doing his job, if you look at him he only does his Job, what he was trained to do. With some care but Not with the Passion that Batman Gives it. and Bond is just as "fake" in the way he actes in public and Bruce Being the Richest Playboy in gotham city, just batman knows where the line is and can jump back and forth at will, Bond has to keep up the Act all the time.
I would say if i had to be saved by one of them, Batman all the way.
if i would have to fight one, Bond
anyway I can't wait for the next bond, but he's not my Desktop image Batman is
So go see Batman Begins and you will see How Batman was Meant to be.
well that's my 2 cents
#18
Bond_Bishop
Bond_Bishop
-
Location:Secret position compromised: Karlstad, Sweden
Posted 22 June 2005 - 08:48 AM
Interesting article, Qwerty!
#19
MrDraco
Posted 22 June 2005 - 09:05 AM
LOL i dont know if Batman could win...i mean, it is bond...cuz..well
WHEN THE STAKES ARE HIGH>>BET ON BOND
Posted 24 June 2005 - 08:41 AM
"Batman does what he does because he has to; Bond does it now because he wants to." says the article. I totally disagree.
Bond does what he does because he has to. He is an officer of the British Secret Service. He quited the job for himself or his friends both in OHMSS and LTK. Also he is been brought up by the goverment to be a spy. He has no other choice. Whereas Batman does what he does in order to take the revenge of his family.
Whereas Batman is a billioniare Bond has nothing. All the cars even his house everything belongs to the goverment.
Bond is in a way a slave of the goverment, like in the Socıalıst countries. He HAS to do what he has been told to. If he doesnt he will loose everything as in LTK.
James Bond is nothing if he doesnt has the number 0f 007. He takes pleasure while doing his job, I agree, but he has no other choice. He is not living the life he wants, he lives the life that some other persons decided.
#21
JackLordIsFelix
JackLordIsFelix
Sub-Lieutenant
-
-
Crew
-
-
198 posts
Posted 28 June 2005 - 03:43 AM
Well, if he was going back to the sixites for Bond, why didn't he just mention Adam West? There's your five and five. And don't say it's because West's Batman wasn't "serious"; he included Moore who's movies had Tarzan yells, slide whistles, lasers in space, clown outfits and ... worst of all... QUICHE!
Isn't it time to get over the AVTAK quiche-bashing? For goodness' sake, it's a freakin' pie -- and that "real men don't eat quiche" thing is so 20 years ago; anyone who read Bruce Feirstein's book realizes it's a metaphor, and a fairly funny one at that...
#22
Donovan
Posted 28 June 2005 - 04:12 AM
I've always liked Batman well enough. But when you think about it, it's a really silly concept. Bond has so many more possibilities, and the world is his Gotham. The producers of the Batfilms aren't even all that confident of their hero to allow him to wear his real costume:  To me, that is what Batman looks like. So right off the bat, so-to-speak, this new film still didn't get it right. And for some %@#! reason, we're 5-for-5 of having the leading lady find out his identity. WTF?
#23
Harmsway
Posted 28 June 2005 - 04:35 AM
Well, I'm biased, but I'll always like Batman more than Bond. Perhaps it's the fact that Batman is actually open to subtext, that the characters can have depth, or maybe just the fact that Batman is a genuinely good person while Bond is not.
And Donovan - the Batman costume has changed a lot in the comics over the years. These days his cowl and gloves are more often black than anything else. And to be honest, the only superhero film to honestly 100% keep the costumes is Superman. Most comic-book costumes would look ridiculous on screen, but are cool when drawn. That's fine - it's purely a difference in medium. I myself, even as a long time Batman fan, disliked the blue-grey, as well as the yellow circle around the bat (I also hated the bat costumes in all the films except Begins).
#24
tdalton
Posted 28 June 2005 - 08:20 AM
disliked the blue-grey, as well as the yellow circle around the bat (I also hated the bat costumes in all the films except Begins).
I can't really see how the blue-grey costume would work well in a live action Batman film. The costume in Begins was great, IMO, and I agree that the ones in the other films weren't very good, especially in Batman and Robin.
#25
Stephenson
Posted 29 June 2005 - 02:03 PM
Well, if he was going back to the sixites for Bond, why didn't he just mention Adam West? There's your five and five. And don't say it's because West's Batman wasn't "serious"; he included Moore who's movies had Tarzan yells, slide whistles, lasers in space, clown outfits and ... worst of all... QUICHE!
Isn't it time to get over the AVTAK quiche-bashing? For goodness' sake, it's a freakin' pie -- and that "real men don't eat quiche" thing is so 20 years ago; anyone who read Bruce Feirstein's book realizes it's a metaphor, and a fairly funny one at that...
I was being sarcastic, hence the smiley face. Getting awfully worked up over quiche aren't you?
#26
TortillaFactory
Posted 29 June 2005 - 06:05 PM
or maybe just the fact that Batman is a genuinely good person while Bond is not.
I'd take issue with this one - while I'll admit I don't know a ton about Batman, I do know something about Bond. He's not a nice man, but I'll defend his goodness to the end. At some point in life we're taught that "nice" and "good" are the same thing, but it's not true. Bond doesn't always make the best decisions and he's made a lot of mistakes, but he also sticks his neck out for people over and over again (though he might not admit it). Selfish motives? Maybe, but if you break it down, don't we all have selfish motives buried somewhere deep down inside? I think it's Bond's goodness in spite of his (well-placed) cruelty that makes him such a compelling character.
#27
Lazenby880
Posted 29 June 2005 - 10:00 PM
Isn't it time to get over the AVTAK quiche-bashing? For goodness' sake, it's a freakin' pie -- and that "real men don't eat quiche" thing is so 20 years ago; anyone who read Bruce Feirstein's book realizes it's a metaphor, and a fairly funny one at that...
I don't think I'll ever get over it - or that Stacey didn't know what a quiche was.  Well, I'm biased, but I'll always like Batman more than Bond. Perhaps it's the fact that Batman is actually open to subtext, that the characters can have depth, or maybe just the fact that Batman is a genuinely good person while Bond is not.
I probably like both characters equally as they are quite different and inhabit very different worlds. As a character though, Batman is undeniably the more interesting, particularly in Frank Miller's seminal Year One and The Dark Knight Returns as well as Moore's The Killing Joke and Morrison and MacKean's Arkham Asylum. These are how Batman should be portrayed - as a complex character who has some deep flaws but is motivated by justice. The latter - Arkham Asylum - goes so far as to suggest that Batman is as disturbed as his many foes. We shan't mention the live action interpretations - although Burton's Batman was an enjoyable film despite its infidelity to the character - with the exception of Begins, even surpassing the animated Mask of Phantasm and Return of the Joker as the best Batfilm made. That is not to say that the literary Bond is not a fascinating character, however he was deliberately drawn as an 'everyman' with whom most readers could relate. Indeed, I like Bond for the very opposite reasoning that I like Batman. We don't know much about his backstory and that is the way I like it - at this moment I am denying the existence of SilverFin. And Donovan - the Batman costume has changed a lot in the comics over the years. These days his cowl and gloves are more often black than anything else. And to be honest, the only superhero film to honestly 100% keep the costumes is Superman. Most comic-book costumes would look ridiculous on screen, but are cool when drawn. That's fine - it's purely a difference in medium. I myself, even as a long time Batman fan, disliked the blue-grey, as well as the yellow circle around the bat (I also hated the bat costumes in all the films except Begins).
Agreed. An unarmoured Batman costume would not be especially believable in the modern day. Given that Batman has no superpowers he would be rather naive to go around - in the cinematic medium - in a cloth suit given his enemies have all sorts of weaponry. I too dislike the blue/grey costume even as a fan of the graphic novels, and much prefer the all black look of Begins. Didn't mind the yellow oval as it was quite an iconic image, I've even got a t-shirt with it emblazoned on the front. The Schumacher 'films', well I just pretend they never happened. And getting back to the Lazenby issue, I still think it is rather unsportsmanlike to ignore an actor who portrayed James Bond in an official movie - a quite important and good one at that. 
Edited by Lazenby880, 29 June 2005 - 10:13 PM.
#28
Harmsway
Posted 29 June 2005 - 10:27 PM
I probably like both characters equally as they are quite different and inhabit very different worlds. As a character though, Batman is undeniably the more interesting, particularly in Frank Miller's seminal Year One and The Dark Knight Returns as well as Moore's The Killing Joke and Morrison and MacKean's Arkham Asylum. These are how Batman should be portrayed - as a complex character who has some deep flaws but is motivated by justice. The latter - Arkham Asylum - goes so far as to suggest that Batman is as disturbed as his many foes. We shan't mention the live action interpretations - although Burton's Batman was an enjoyable film despite its infidelity to the character - with the exception of Begins, even surpassing the animated Mask of Phantasm and Return of the Joker as the best Batfilm made.
Glad to see you like Year One, DKR, and The Killing Joke. Are you a fan of The Long Halloween/Dark Victory by any chance (aside from Year One, these are my favorite tales featuring the Dark Knight). I love Arkham Asylum to bits (glorious artwork and wonderful moments throughout), but I've never really liked the idea that Batman is as disturbed as his foes are. Sure, he's a tad nuts, but I do like to keep him as a hero, doing what he does because it's good. Batman Begins took that position - and I'm ever thankful for it. I'd take issue with this one - while I'll admit I don't know a ton about Batman, I do know something about Bond. He's not a nice man, but I'll defend his goodness to the end.
At some point in life we're taught that "nice" and "good" are the same thing, but it's not true. Bond doesn't always make the best decisions and he's made a lot of mistakes, but he also sticks his neck out for people over and over again (though he might not admit it). Selfish motives? Maybe, but if you break it down, don't we all have selfish motives buried somewhere deep down inside? I think it's Bond's goodness in spite of his (well-placed) cruelty that makes him such a compelling character.
Bond is not a man of principle on any count. He's not driven by honor, justice - he's driven by his own selfish desires. Despite what many may believe, I do believe that it's true to do something good purely for its own sake, to the right thing precisely because it's the right thing, and Bond doesn't do that. Batman, of course, is not the image of perfect good either, but what's appealing about him is the struggle to stay good and not cross the line into evil.
#29
Lazenby880
Posted 29 June 2005 - 10:49 PM
Glad to see you like Year One, DKR, and The Killing Joke. Are you a fan of The Long Halloween/Dark Victory by any chance (aside from Year One, these are my favorite tales featuring the Dark Knight).
I love Arkham Asylum to bits (glorious artwork and wonderful moments throughout), but I've never really liked the idea that Batman is as disturbed as his foes are. Sure, he's a tad nuts, but I do like to keep him as a hero, doing what he does because it's good. Batman Begins took that position - and I'm ever thankful for it.
I do indeed like The Long Halloween, Dark Victory to a slightly lesser extent, however I would personally consider those novels I mentioned superior. Arkham Asylum is indeed a great novel. In particular, I was interested to see the extent to which the wonderful artwork of the former influenced the hallucination scenes in Begins. I take your point regarding how Batman is portrayed as he should still be the good guy and I don't think he should be shown as some psychological headcase. Just a little loopy is fine. And what about Hush? I enjoyed it - especially Lee's artwork - though the abundance of characters got a little wearing. It started to feel like a conveyer belt of Batman's allies and enemies.
#30
Harmsway
Posted 29 June 2005 - 11:07 PM
Glad to see you like Year One, DKR, and The Killing Joke. Are you a fan of The Long Halloween/Dark Victory by any chance (aside from Year One, these are my favorite tales featuring the Dark Knight).
I love Arkham Asylum to bits (glorious artwork and wonderful moments throughout), but I've never really liked the idea that Batman is as disturbed as his foes are. Sure, he's a tad nuts, but I do like to keep him as a hero, doing what he does because it's good. Batman Begins took that position - and I'm ever thankful for it.
I do indeed like The Long Halloween, Dark Victory to a slightly lesser extent, however I would personally consider those novels I mentioned superior.
Arkham Asylum is indeed a great novel. In particular, I was interested to see the extent to which the wonderful artwork of the former influenced the hallucination scenes in Begins. I take your point regarding how Batman is portrayed as he should still be the good guy and I don't think he should be shown as some psychological headcase. Just a little loopy is fine.
And what about Hush? I enjoyed it - especially Lee's artwork - though the abundance of characters got a little wearing. It started to feel like a conveyer belt of Batman's allies and enemies.
Hush is cool. I agree that it's a bit of a conveyer belt, but that, in its own way, is fun. It's a good story, but not a great one. I would agree that Year One and TKJ are better than Long Halloween or Dark Victory, but DKR is severely overrated. It's a relic of its time that hasn't aged well, and when you truly look at it, it isn't told that well either. It's good - just not that good. All the stuff with the USSR didn't work, and there were plenty of out there ideas (the stupid robot kid the Joker uses). The best moments of DKR are the ones with Two-Face and Joker, but once the Joker dies, the comic starts to flounder a bit.
Reply to quoted posts Clear
|
