Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (March 24th, 2016)

[batfan08]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

While I don't agree with Evilface about Keaton Batman (I think he's the best), he's right about Bob Kane.

People love to rip Kane, but without him, there still wouldn't be Batman. He's not the only "creator" to essentially to take credit for all the work, and he certainly won't be the last. Yeah, he did Bill Finger wrong and it was a ****** thing to do, but he did eventually give credit where credit was due and felt guilt. Even though it happened after his death, Finger has received the recognition he's deserved as being the creator along side Kane. It was a collaboration and everyone knows it. Plus, those two are looooong gone. I'm surprised someone else hasn't popped up to ride off their coat tails like Jerry Robinson had done.

Stan the man gots not shame.

I do think it's a shame that people can't crusade for one without resorting to undermining the contributions of the other. I definitely think Finger deserves the credit for all he did to give us the character we know today, but, at the same time, it's not like he created a character named Batman and Kane decided to rip him off. Kane played an equal part in te character's conception. At the end of the day, though, you're right. Pretty much the only context where Finger isn't recognized is in the official one, but it's, arguably, the most open secret in comic books.

 

[Khev]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

I wonder would people accept a Batman who kills again. (Keaton's Batman) And a Batman universe where Joker is dead.

Well in the Burtonverse any random thing can bring someone back to life (Selina Kyle.) It'd be a trip seeing an old Keaton fighting an old Joker in that universe again.

 

[VintijDroidGutzz]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Imagine an unimpressed, crotchety old Jack joker.

That would be a win beyond imagination.

 

[jye4ever]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice



Imagine if the next Keaton Batman movie he invents a reanimation vaccine that brings Jack Joker back to life and all the Joker could say were his lines from the 89 movie.

 

[VintijDroidGutzz]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

..or he becomes his character from "As Good As It Gets".

 

[jye4ever]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice



Or

"You can't handle the truth!"

 

[VintijDroidGutzz]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

"Boy - there's two things in Texas.."

..whoops - wrong film.

 

[jye4ever]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice



Is that serious enough for WB.

Speaking of which:

Published October 11, 2014 by Devin Faraci
Maybe Edward Norton Should Have Been Making DC Comics Movies All Along


He thinks comics are only good when they're dark and serious.

Edward Norton appeared with the cast of Birdman at New York Comic Con this weekend, and he spoke a bit about comic books. Having once been the Incredible Hulk, and co-starring in a movie about an actor whose superhero part past haunts him, you'd think Ed might have an interesting thought or two. Nope!


I grew up on all the graphic novels, the Frank Miller, I was obsessed with that stuff. So I think it's this rich pool of stuff that's become almost, y'know, a whole modern-day canon of mythic stories for a lot of us, and we kind of all sit around hoping that someone's gonna make a film — make films out of that type of material that captures how serious it felt for us at that time in our life when — because nobody read comics because they're cartoonish. They read them because they're dark and serious and long. That's what was great about the best ones.


According to Vulture, who had a reporter in the room, nobody applauded this statement. And with good reason: it sucks. This is the poisonous point of view that gave us not only some of the worst comic books of all time but also the current crop of bafflingly serious DC comics movies. It's an anti-fun manifesto, and it's wrong. No wonder Norton couldn't get along with the guys at Marvel Studios.


Note to self: don't go see any superhero movies Edward Norton writes.


SOURCE: VULTURE

 

[batfan08]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

See, that's where he's full of ****, too, though. Movies being "fun" for the sake of "fun" is how we got Batman & Robin. It's funny how the two camps are either "anti-fun" or "anti-serious," and it's even more hilarious considering they're both wrong. The fact of the matter is that the only thing they should be focusing on is quality; making good movies with good stories. I have no problem with fun when it's done right. This summer is arguably the best example I can possibly think of for why both the "anti-fun" and "anti-serious" camps are wrong, and the fun part is that they were both Marvel movies. Guardians and Cap could not have been more different. Sure, Cap had moments of levity, but it was predominantly a serious thriller. Just as Guardians had some heartfelt and earnest moments amidst it's humor and, well, fun.

 

[jye4ever]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

I prefer Cap 2 over GOTG.

Not all of Marvel humor works for me, but MOS is also a big bore to sit thru.

I'm actually enjoying the drama-humor mix of AOS Season 2.

 

[batfan08]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

I prefer Cap 2 over GOTG.

Not all of Marvel humor works for me, but MOS is also a big bore to sit thru.

I'm actually enjoying the drama-humor mix of AOS Season 2.

Same here. I'm kind of the opposite of you, though. I loved all of the Guardians stuff, but it was the humor in Avengers that didn't click as much for me. As far as MoS is concerned, I can see where you're coming from. I still like it a lot, but it has it's flaws and one of the big ones is that it tends to drag a bit. I think it's more a matter of the material than the length, though. As for AoS, I still need to see this week's episode. There are just so many shows, and, on top of that, I started The Sopranos about two weeks ago, and I've been marathoning it ever since.

 

[VintijDroidGutzz]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

I think sometimes actors just say **** to get the audience on side - & sometimes they babble on the fly.

It obviously backfired for Norton, so he can suck eggs now.

 

[pturtle]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Same here. I'm kind of the opposite of you, though. I loved all of the Guardians stuff, but it was the humor in Avengers that didn't click as much for me. As far as MoS is concerned, I can see where you're coming from. I still like it a lot, but it has it's flaws and one of the big ones is that it tends to drag a bit. I think it's more a matter of the material than the length, though. As for AoS, I still need to see this week's episode. There are just so many shows, and, on top of that, I started The Sopranos about two weeks ago, and I've been marathoning it ever since.

The Sopranos is the greatest show of all time!!!!

 

[jye4ever]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

I think sometimes actors just say **** to get the audience on side - & sometimes they babble on the fly.

It obviously backfired for Norton, so he can suck eggs now.

 

[DiFabio]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

The Joker's head was split open, his brain matter was painting the Cathedral steps.

I don't think he could come back from that.

 

[karamazov80]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

I don't have a problem with Norton's opinion there. Frankly, I think that's an appropriate POV for Hulk, which is generally a tragic and depressing story. Turning him into a comedian in Avengers worked, but it's not in the spirit of classic comic Hulk. I think there is room for both kinds of movies, and all kinds of movies in-between, so I agree with Batfan--it's about whether they are made well for what they are. For me it also matters who the story is about--even a fantastic, dark and gritty story wouldn't be desirable for Superman, though MOS's story was far from fantastic. For Hulk, Batman, Daredevil, Punisher, tragic and dark works and for some of those guys a fun, light-hearted movie just wouldn't be a good idea IMO.

 

[Uncanny Web-Slinger]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Is that serious enough for WB.

Speaking of which:

Published October 11, 2014 by Devin Faraci
Maybe Edward Norton Should Have Been Making DC Comics Movies All Along


He thinks comics are only good when they're dark and serious.

Edward Norton appeared with the cast of Birdman at New York Comic Con this weekend, and he spoke a bit about comic books. Having once been the Incredible Hulk, and co-starring in a movie about an actor whose superhero part past haunts him, you'd think Ed might have an interesting thought or two. Nope!


I grew up on all the graphic novels, the Frank Miller, I was obsessed with that stuff. So I think it's this rich pool of stuff that's become almost, y'know, a whole modern-day canon of mythic stories for a lot of us, and we kind of all sit around hoping that someone's gonna make a film — make films out of that type of material that captures how serious it felt for us at that time in our life when — because nobody read comics because they're cartoonish. They read them because they're dark and serious and long. That's what was great about the best ones.


According to Vulture, who had a reporter in the room, nobody applauded this statement. And with good reason: it sucks. This is the poisonous point of view that gave us not only some of the worst comic books of all time but also the current crop of bafflingly serious DC comics movies. It's an anti-fun manifesto, and it's wrong. No wonder Norton couldn't get along with the guys at Marvel Studios.


Note to self: don't go see any superhero movies Edward Norton writes.


SOURCE: VULTURE

And some of the best too

 

[EVILFACE]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

I don't have a problem with Norton's opinion there. Frankly, I think that's an appropriate POV for Hulk, which is generally a tragic and depressing story. Turning him into a comedian in Avengers worked, but it's not in the spirit of classic comic Hulk. I think there is room for both kinds of movies, and all kinds of movies in-between, so I agree with Batfan--it's about whether they are made well for what they are. For me it also matters who the story is about--even a fantastic, dark and gritty story wouldn't be desirable for Superman, though MOS's story was far from fantastic. For Hulk, Batman, Daredevil, Punisher, tragic and dark works and for some of those guys a fun, light-hearted movie just wouldn't be a good idea IMO.

Bixby's Banner is tuff to beat.

 

[jye4ever]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

I don't have a problem with Norton's opinion there. Frankly, I think that's an appropriate POV for Hulk, which is generally a tragic and depressing story. Turning him into a comedian in Avengers worked, but it's not in the spirit of classic comic Hulk. I think there is room for both kinds of movies, and all kinds of movies in-between, so I agree with Batfan--it's about whether they are made well for what they are. For me it also matters who the story is about--even a fantastic, dark and gritty story wouldn't be desirable for Superman, though MOS's story was far from fantastic. For Hulk, Batman, Daredevil, Punisher, tragic and dark works and for some of those guys a fun, light-hearted movie just wouldn't be a good idea IMO.

Ang Lee Hulk proved to Marvel serious Hulk no more.

In Avengers he had his few dark moments, he even attempted a Pa Kent.

 

[pturtle]

Re: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Ang Lee Hulk proved to Marvel serious Hulk no more.

In Avengers he had his few dark moments, he even attempted a Pa Kent.