67 replies to this topic

[Tarl_Cabot]

CR, by an Ocean on all fronts:

BB has Katie Holmes who should be confinded to the WB newtwork phantom zone for all eternity.Eva Green on the other hand, is a great looking actress with big screen talent and charisma and her character actually had a purpose in the story.Hard to believe anyone trades Penelope Cruz in for such a tall bag of bland oatmeal.



Lead role: sorry but Bond is just a billion times cooler and more interesting than Butt boy-er uh, Batman.

Action: Batman begins has action? Yes,The dullest car chase in movie history.

[Harmsway]

BB has Katie Holmes who should be confinded to the WB newtwork phantom zone for all eternity. Eva Green on the other hand, is a great looking actress with big screen talent and charisma and her character actually had a purpose in the story. Hard to believe anyone trades Penelope Cruz in for such a tall bag of bland oatmeal.

Well, Katie Holmes' character was fine, and contributed plenty to the story (a rarity in Batman love interests). She's terrible, admittedly, but she's also not in the film that much.

Lead role: sorry but Bond is just a billion times cooler and more interesting than Butt boy-er uh, Batman.

Honestly, I prefer Batman. I love Bond all the same, and CASINO ROYALE rocks harder than BATMAN BEGINS ever does, but I think Batman is the far more compelling and nuanced character, with a lot more lore to draw upon.

Interestingly, in a recent comic, Batman thinks to himself, "I'm cooler than James Bond."

Action: Batman begins has action? Yes,The dullest car chase in movie history.

Really? The batmobile chase took my breath away when I saw it in theatres. Lots of fun.

[Tarl_Cabot]

I knew the Harmsway squad car would pull up eventually.

Katie Holmes just bugs me. She's actually very easy on the eyes but something about her just doesn't work for me.I hope TDK is an improvement over BB. Yes, I thought the chase was a snore but better than the CGI crap of B and R.Also, if you're gonna reboot Batman why not just give him a flippin Batman costume like he wears in the comic? Do they think Bat Man fans are gonna be offended by tights? Sheesh.Did they realize how the fanboys reacted to Bat Man dead end?

[Harmsway]

I knew the Harmsway squad car would pull up eventually.

Batman's my boy. Somebody's gotta stand up for him.

Katie Holmes just bugs me. She's actually very easy on the eyes but something about her just doesn't work for me.

Same here. I can't stand her. But her character was recast for the sequel with the talented Maggie Gyllenhaal, so all is right with the world.

I hope TDK is an improvement over BB.

You and me both.

Also, if you're gonna reboot Batman why not just give him a flippin Batman costume like he wears in the comic? Do they think Bat Man fans are gonna be offended by tights? Sheesh.

Actually, very few Batman fans want tights, myself included - they inevitably look somewhat silly, and the Batman costume should have been upgraded in the comics long ago (he and Superman are still wearing those damn silly underpants). Furthermore, it just doesn't work in Nolan's vision, where he's not trying to recreate the look of the comics, but attempt a sort of "real world" visual approach. Tights just don't cut it as protection, nor do they strike fear in the hearts of criminals.

You'll be happy to know, though, that the suit in BEGINS was merely a proto-suit, though. Bruce Wayne upgrades his suit to a more cloth-based suit in THE DARK KNIGHT. It'll probably look something like this:

Did they realize how the fanboys reacted to Bat Man dead end?

I enjoyed that as a fan project (though it's not great by any stretch), but I took that as solid proof as to why tights don't work on film.

[Mamadou]

A close call for me, but I ended up voting for BB, though CR is the superior film by a few lightyears.

Why?

Because I had never before given a flying about Batman, and suddenly here was this movie that dropkicked me into Gotham City. And I cared! I couldn't believe, after the movie was over, that I had been invested in Batman (I was jaded after watching the dreck that was Spiderman, as well-reviewed--read: overrated--as it was). And that is what I believe a remake should do: attract people to it who might otherwise not be interested. BB succeeded at that, with flying colors.

The main attraction to BB was the cast; I knew I'd never see an ensemble like that again, so I thought I'd better get my butt in a seat. And when I was watching the movie, the writing sparkled, as did Christopher Nolan's direction (I was especially happy to read later that he was inspired by "Blade Runner," one of my favorite movies). So I got a perfect deal. Interestingly, though I had enjoyed the film in the theatre, I knew I really liked it when, a few months later, I saw it on a five-inch screen on the plane back from London; everything about the movie held up even in that tiny space.*

As for CR, I already knew I liked Bond, so I was going to see the movie in any case. But had the film been a run-of-the-mill good try, and not the triumph it was, I probably would not have been as excited. I probably would have waited until after opening weekend (even after I got home for winter break). Instead, all omens were good. So I call CR less of a reboot, and more of a good kick in the pants.

I hope all that made sense.



*this is actually a problem. I've seen movies that seem great while I'm watching them in the theatre, and then, when I watch them at home later, they don't hold up at all. Sometimes they don't hold up minutes after I leave the theatre.

*fans self* Sexy... *swoons*

Edited by Mamadou, 30 May 2007 - 01:53 AM.

[LadySylvia]

I must admit that I never really like any of the earlier Batman films directed by both Burton and Schumacher. But I thought that Nolan's BATMAN BEGINS was excellent.

After the mediocrity of the Brosnan era, CASINO ROYALE was like a breath of fresh air for me.

I guess that BB was more of a reboot than CR. But I think that CR is the slightly better film. At one point, I was in danger of falling asleep while watching BB. It seemed a bit in danger of being bogged down a bit. I never had that problem with CR.

[HH007]

I, like many others on this board, thought both movies were awesome. Both were well written and very well acted (with one exception in Batman Begins). However, I think Casino Royale was the better movie. Aside from the fact that I was drawn in more by CR, I thought Batman Begins suffered from two liabilities. First, the fight scenes were edited to the point of being incoherent. Second, Katie Holmes... nuff said (she is that exception I mentioned earlier). The only complaint I have about CR is that they could have given Jeffrey Wright's Felix Leiter a little more to do, but that aside, the movie kicked serious booty.

Christopher Nolan did do an amazing job of resurrecting a dead franchise, while Martin Campbell, Daniel Craig and co. did an equally amazing job of propping up a franchise that was on a steady decline since Brosnan's second movie. Batman Begins was a great movie, but Casino Royale made me a Bond fan all over again.

[Dr.Mirakle32]

i am eagerly awaiting the sequels for both of these films, 2008 is going to be a great year

Amen to that. Not only do we get THE DARK KNIGHT, and BOND 22, were also getting Robert Downey Jr. as IRON MAN, and Edward Norton as THE INCREDIBLE HULK.
2008 will be the best movie year since... well, 2006.

[Harmsway]

i am eagerly awaiting the sequels for both of these films, 2008 is going to be a great year

Amen to that. Not only do we get THE DARK KNIGHT, and BOND 22, were also getting Robert Downey Jr. as IRON MAN, and Edward Norton as THE INCREDIBLE HULK.
2008 will be the best movie year since... well, 2006.

And we get INDIANA JONES IV. And WATCHMEN, the movie adaptation of the greatest graphic novel ever written (it's an artistic masterpiece, and if the adaptation is successful, it will change perception of the superhero genre forever).

[sharpshooter]

Batman is not as friendly as Spidey and Superman. My comment regarded the character himeself. Spidey and Superman dress in colourful costumes. Spidey is a joker, Superman is a symbol for hope and ambition. Batman on the other hand is a night time vigilante, dresses in black and uses more force.

Commercially, people love him. A man with determination, and as Ducard/ Ras put it "the will to act."

Edited by sharpshooter, 30 May 2007 - 03:46 AM.

[tdalton]

I think that it's hard to say which is better than the other because they excel at different aspects of film making. I'd say that, just in terms of performances, CR gets the edge over BB simply because I think that Daniel Craig is better at playing James Bond than Christian Bale is at playing Batman/Bruce Wayne (not so much a criticism of Bale as it is a statement of how amazing Craig's performance was). On the other hand, though, I feel as though that, as a film, BB is better than CR, and is really more of a true reboot than CR was.

[Dr.Mirakle32]

i am eagerly awaiting the sequels for both of these films, 2008 is going to be a great year

Amen to that. Not only do we get THE DARK KNIGHT, and BOND 22, were also getting Robert Downey Jr. as IRON MAN, and Edward Norton as THE INCREDIBLE HULK.
2008 will be the best movie year since... well, 2006.

And we get INDIANA JONES IV. And WATCHMEN, the movie adaptation of the greatest graphic novel ever written (it's an artistic masterpiece, and if the adaptation is successful, it will change perception of the superhero genre forever).

How could I possibly forget about INDY IV?!
And JOHN RAMBO looks good too.

[Dr.Mirakle32]

Batman is not as friendly as Spidey and Superman. My comment regarded the character himeself. Spidey and Superman dress in colourful costumes. Spidey is a joker, Superman is a symbol for hope and ambition. Batman on the other hand is a night time vigilante, dresses in black and uses more force.

Commercially, people love him. A man with determination, and as Ducard/ Ras put it "the will to act."

But this is only one aspect of a character that has been around for almost seventy years. You seem to forget that for the majority of those years, Batman was a brightly dressed public defender, who had short ears, wore blue, and fought colorful villains with an even more colorfully dressed 14-year-old boy sidekick. Batman was originally only a dark avenger in his earliest appearences. After the introduction of Robin in 1940, he became a cheerful father figure, his stories became increasingly lighter, and they remained so until the 1970's when Denny O' Neil and Neal Adams took over.

The biggest exapmle of this cheery Batman is of course the Adam West show, as well as later animated shows such as the Super Friends.
"The Dark Knight" didn't really make a huge public comeback until the eighties when people like Frank Miller and Tim Burton brought the character back to his darker horror/pulp roots.

So actually yes, for the majority of the character's history, Batman has been as friendly as Superman or Spiderman.

[Harmsway]

So actually yes, for the majority of the character's history, Batman has been as friendly as Superman or Spiderman.

It's not the majority of the character's history. In the comics, the darker years comprise 40 or so years of the character's 68 year history. Not that he wasn't necessarily kid-friendly, per se, but he was darker than your average superhero. We have his initial years and we have the Denny O'Neil era onwards.

Sure, the entire lack of kid-friendliness really only came in the 80s, with Miller and Moore and others. But the darkness of the comics had really started before them (the O'Neil and Adams era have plenty of things that aren't exactly "kid stuff"). Miller and Moore were just the ones that got it out into the public sphere by taking it to great extremes.

[Jack Spang]

Both of them are good films but I'd have to give it to Batman Begins.

[DavidSomerset]

Compared to "Batman and Robin", BB was like Citizen Kane.
Compared to CR, CR wins hands down. Reason - the fight scenes. Whereas the CR fight scenes were brutal and direct, the BB fight scenes were gimmicky and can I say, blurry. Maybe next time Nolan ( great director) will manage to show exactly how Batman kicks asssss.
Also if CR had the talent in front of the camera like Caine, Freeman, Neeson, Bale, Oldman and Hauer, then it would have won a Oscar. Yes, DC would still be Bond.
I hope Nolan gets to direct Bond 24.

[stamper]

CR is full of "classic" scenes that you remember as being great and share with you friends.

BB had none of those. It's still a good movie, but you don't watch any chase in it, saying "wow, that is so greatly directed it's like a ballet, I'm gonna rewind the DVD and watch that chase again".

[Scottlee]

They're both good films, with CR getting my vote probably because I'm a bigger fan of Bond movies in general.

Batman Begins was still lacking that certain something that made the original "Batman" so much fun.

[HawkEye007]

Compared to "Batman and Robin", BB was like Citizen Kane.
Compared to CR, CR wins hands down. Reason - the fight scenes. Whereas the CR fight scenes were brutal and direct, the BB fight scenes were gimmicky and can I say, blurry. Maybe next time Nolan ( great director) will manage to show exactly how Batman kicks asssss.
Also if CR had the talent in front of the camera like Caine, Freeman, Neeson, Bale, Oldman and Hauer, then it would have won a Oscar. Yes, DC would still be Bond.
I hope Nolan gets to direct Bond 24.

I totally agree about the fights. The CR fights were hard hitting down and dirty affairs. Definitely realistic. As far as the BB fights, I read somewhere that Nolan filmed the fights that way intentionally to show Batman's inexperience and that as the movies progress the fights will evolve as he becomes more skilled and used to the job.

[Harmsway]

BB had none of those.

I disagree. There's plenty of "classic" stuff in BEGINS... For example, Ra's and Bruce's conversation in the prison sell. Fantastic. Or Batman's first scene at the docks, taking out the thugs in a horror-esque attack. Or the "Demon Batman" when he interrogates Crane. And so forth and so on. It's a more subdued kind of film, but I think there's plenty iconic moments throughout.

It's still a good movie, but you don't watch any chase in it, saying "wow, that is so greatly directed it's like a ballet, I'm gonna rewind the DVD and watch that chase again".

Well, it depends how you feel about the batmobile chase, which I think is a blast. And the fight at the docks I've found myself rewatching again and again - it oozes suspense and perfectly captures the nature of Batman's use of fear as a weapon. But BATMAN BEGINS' strength isn't the action scenes, admittedly, but that's fine. I actually hope THE DARK KNIGHT has significantly less action than BEGINS did.

As far as the BB fights, I read somewhere that Nolan filmed the fights that way intentionally to show Batman's inexperience and that as the movies progress the fights will evolve as he becomes more skilled and used to the job.

I'm not sure about that. But here's the quote I read from Nolan re: the fight scenes:

[box]BOM: One of the trends in action movies is that you can't tell what's happening on screen

[Publius]

I think CR is the better film, but Begins was much more of an improvement on its predecessor, was far more desperately needed in the franchise, and frankly was more of a true reboot than CR, which had a greater share of what I like to call "preemptive" nostalgia.

[Jack Spang]

That's one thing I didn't like about Batman Begins. Nolan used to many close up shots in the fight scenes. It's hard to see what's going on.

I'd love to see Nolan direct a Bond film. I think he's a realistic choice and I believe he's also a bit of a fan.

[Harmsway]

That's one thing I didn't like about Batman Begins. Nolan used to many close up shots in the fight scenes. It's hard to see what's going on.

It's effective in a few scenes (the dock scene and the Arkham Asylum scene), but beyond that, it does neuter the fight scenes. I hope he pulls the camera back a bit in THE DARK KNIGHT.

[Vauxhall]

To me, both were successful in their own ways. CASINO ROYALE succesfully updated a movie franchise which I've always loved. Alternatively, BATMAN BEGINS gave me interest in one which I've never previously had any desire to watch. As a result, I'll be going to see both BOND 22 and THE DARK KNIGHT next year. To that extent, both succeeded.

[blueman]

Huge Batman fan here, and BB sucks. Batman is the World's Greatest Detective, not a whiny adolescent with enough suicidal ideation for every John Hughes character ever written. If they wanted to go there they should've just filmed Miller's THE DARK NIGHT RETURNS, instead BB comes across as a swoony coming-of-age story for a character that needed such a treatment like Bond needed Dalton/Brosnan. And since when does ANYBODY need to tell Bruce Wayne about ANYTHING science-related? Dude freakin' created science, fercryingoutloud. The whole setup, that Batman has to eventually have a showdown with his former sensi-master-teacher-whatever, is patently unBatman: Wayne created Batman to fight crime, he didn't find him in Mongolia or wherever and doesn't need such a duel to "graduate," as it were. The whole classic Batman as lone wolf paradigm is shot to hell with Wayne presented as he is in the first half of the film: an inarticule and powerless young man. Blah. IMHO. BB wasn't a reboot, it was a recreation, and while it may have inviting qualities for some it was a huge turn-off for me because of what they did to the character of Wayne/Batman. Should've been a different superhero in that film, because what they presented is about 180 degrees from what Batman is IMO.

CR on the other hand embraced the classic essence of Bond and manifested it brilliantly. They got the 00 status over with in the PTS by showing that, simply, Bond IS Bond, 00 or no 00. Then they told a nicely updated Fleming thriller. Thank you EON for not making Bond a whiny, powerless, inarticulate kid, but a man who can handle everything from killing in cold blood to complex personal losses like a freakin' hero should. Bob Kane, spinning in his grave since Schulmacher first filmed a Batman movie, went into hyperspeed-grave spinning with BB. Fleming on the other hand is grinning like a big dopey fool over CR. I'm hoping Nolan's next Batman film simply tells a decent Batman story, but I don't have the confidence in that that I do in Bond 22 continuing what EON started so admirably with CR. Nolan, IMHO, has a heckuva lot to make up for. Bale can be a great Batman, he just has to forget the first film completely.

[marktmurphy]

I like BATMAN RETURNS a lot, but I don't think it's a particularly good film. It's an absolute mess. It's a beautiful mess with lovely moments, but a mess nonetheless. No narrative focus, Batman becomes a supporting character, no real thematic development... it's just a series of random events happening one after the other (sometimes without any explanation - like the Penguin miraculously obtaining the batmobile plans, or the penguin army showing up out of nowhere). As I said, though, I like it. Mainly because of the performances, all of which are excellent.

That is true, but it has such wonderful style. It's amazing what you can carry through with some style, wit and visual flair.

[bond 16.05.72]

I like BATMAN RETURNS a lot, but I don't think it's a particularly good film. It's an absolute mess. It's a beautiful mess with lovely moments, but a mess nonetheless. No narrative focus, Batman becomes a supporting character, no real thematic development... it's just a series of random events happening one after the other (sometimes without any explanation - like the Penguin miraculously obtaining the batmobile plans, or the penguin army showing up out of nowhere). As I said, though, I like it. Mainly because of the performances, all of which are excellent.

That is true, but it has such wonderful style. It's amazing what you can carry through with some style, wit and visual flair.

I'd agree with that, watching Batman again recently like you said with Returns, it has no cohesion, it's just a few random scenes strung together.

Yes Burton has artistic flair and BR was easily better than Joker, I mean Batman.
Although Burton & Schmacher seemed to side line Batman for colourful villians. Nolan bought Wayne & Batman to the forefront of the story and made the film about the character not unlike CR which was about Bond as opposed to just having him in it.

[Jack Spang]

Oh, if we weren't supposed to really see what was happening at the docks and now I think about it we weren't, then the fight was shot well.

[Harmsway]

And since when does ANYBODY need to tell Bruce Wayne about ANYTHING science-related?

He's gotta learn it somewhere, doesn't he? Even with a driven college education it's not like Bruce Wayne is going to start off as the all-knowing king of knowledge. I've always viewed much of Batman's knowledge to come from after he took up the cowl, not before. The 40-year-old Batman is going to know much more than the 26-year-old Batman.

And it's not like he was ignorant of science. He knew that the fear gas was a "weaponized hallucinogen in aerosol form" - not exactly the language of a layman.

The whole setup, that Batman has to eventually have a showdown with his former sensi-master-teacher-whatever, is patently unBatman: Wayne created Batman to fight crime, he didn't find him in Mongolia or wherever and doesn't need such a duel to "graduate," as it were.

Well, I don't know what comics you like or not, but there's a great deal of precedent for Wayne traveling the world and searching things out. I've always loved that angle, myself... and I like the Nolan even took it a bit further. Many comics have Wayne deciding he wanted to fight crime from the moment his parents died - Nolan toys with that and creates a very interesting journey for Wayne as a character.

The whole classic Batman as lone wolf paradigm is shot to hell with Wayne presented as he is in the first half of the film: an inarticule and powerless young man.

I liked it. The lost soul who finds purpose. And he's hardly inarticulate and/or powerless - he's just not Batman yet. Which is fine. It's a lot more complex start for a character than just a "Hey, I'm going to fight crime."

Bob Kane, spinning in his grave since Schulmacher first filmed a Batman movie, went into hyperspeed-grave spinning with BB.

Bob Kane gave BATMAN AND ROBIN his blessing.

Oh, if we weren't supposed to really see what was happening at the docks and now I think about it we weren't, then the fight was shot well.

Yeah. We weren't. There or in the Arkham Asylum fight. It's supposed to be a flurry of disorienting activity with a scary edge.

[blueman]

Harmy, I guess I like my Batman as the good old self-driven, anti-social sociopath--even at age 28. Just never got the Wayne-as-lost-soul bit, 5 minutes into BB I was livid. Not my Batman. I would've been much more into Wayne teaching himself science and criminology and biology and martial arts and law etc. etc. all through his formative years, while Alfred watched helplessly. Driven, that's Wayne/Batman.

Of course, I also like the super-cheesy 60s Batman TV series, but that's because it was such a great send-up of a World's Greatest Detective Batman. Ah well, different strokes. And, I'll likely go to Nolan's next effort, just like I always go to Bond. Just can't help myself.

Edited by blueman, 01 June 2007 - 07:49 AM.