Hot toys Batman Begins Toyfair exclusive Damage Report!

[IXI Nick IXI]

its more stylized...

 

[devilof76]

I wouldn't argue Burton's city is more genuine. I'd just say it's a whole hell of a lot more fun.

Bores the hell out of me. It made an abstraction of Gotham; the detail has been gutted. It doesn't even seem like people live there.

 

[DiFabio]

The Burton and Nolan Gotham Cities suck batdick.


Where da neon lights, black light and giant man statues at?

 

[Rex Mason]

Bores the hell out of me. It made an abstraction of Gotham; the detail has been gutted. It doesn't even seem like people live there.

How you can find Furst's designs boring is beyond me. His concept drawings are something to behold. I love his idea of a city that never tears buildings down. It just constantly builds upon itself. It's brilliant.

His comic book designs for Gotham were equally impressive, and added great touches to the feel of the city, from Wayne Tower to GCPD headquarters.

As a kid, all I wanted to do was live in Gotham. I knew the risks, but I was still willing to take them...

 

[Rex Mason]

The Burton and Nolan Gotham Cities suck batdick.


Where da neon lights, black light and giant man statues at?

I wish the statues had nipples.

 

[devilof76]

How you can find Furst's designs boring is beyond me.

Did he do the sets for Madonna's Vogue video? Because that's what his Gotham looks like to me.

 

[Y4NK33 PL4N3T]

Did he do the sets for Madonna's Vogue video? Because that's what his Gotham looks like to me.

 

[Rex Mason]

Did he do the sets for Madonna's Vogue video? Because that's what his Gotham looks like to me.

If I were you, I'd take a look at some of the art of Batman books then, and really take a look at his drawings.

 

[devilof76]

I'm not criticizing the man as an artist. I'm criticizing how Gotham looked to me in Burton's film. When I read a comic book, the cities do not seem fake.

When I watch '89 batman, they do.

 

[small_studios]

I bet Keaton's Batman could beat up Bale's Batman.

 

[devilof76]

Nuh uh.

 

[soubido]

rOctober.

Notices SHOULD go out sometime this month. Fingers crossed.

nice, cant wait

 

[Rex Mason]

I'm not criticizing the man as an artist. I'm criticizing how Gotham looked to me in Burton's film. When I read a comic book, the cities do not seem fake.

When I watch '89 batman, they do.

Could be the execution of Furst's designs you have an issue with then, due to the limited technology of the time. Although to me, I still love the way the movie looks.

 

[Rex Mason]

nice, cant wait

Wait, what is this thread about again?

 

[DiFabio]

Did he do the sets for Madonna's Vogue video? Because that's what his Gotham looks like to me.

I watched the video and it's not even close.


Why are we talking about Batman '89 in the Batman Begins Damage report thread anyway?

I really just hope this isn't repeated for the 1989 Batman next year...

Screw the '89, it better not happen for the TDKR versions

Oh.

Always gotta have these petty horse____ arguments about which Batman is "da bestest". Oddly enough, I always felt Begins and '89 had the right atmosphere for their particular Gothams. They're arguably the best compared to the garish, neon crap from Schumacher and boring old Chicago. The gritty, claustrophobic Furst '89 Gotham is fantastic and how could anyone hate on the depressing, corrupted rainy Narrows from Batman Begins?

But there can only be one. I'm pretty sure the best Gotham will be in TDKR, because, well, it's ____ing Pittsburgh.

 

[thenammagazine]

I bet Keaton's Batman could beat up Bale's Batman.

If they use toys, Keaton's wins. Otherwise, Bale's wins.

 

[Khev]

Yeah, I like how a lot of the costumes, sets, etc. in '89 Batman look like they could be from a 40's noir film yet there are contemporary and hi-tech elements as well.

Sure, some of the 1940's styles are cool but it still screams "80's camp" much louder than "timeless noir" or "timeless hero story," etc. Its like they added a cape and a car to Michael Jackson's "Smooth Criminal" video and called it a superhero movie.

I mean its still pretty cool, especially since we can remember the initial phenomenon surrounding it, but I certainly wouldn't calling it a particular engaging film in this day and age. I'm not saying that's terrible, because I do find myself occassionally in the mood for a throwback movie that doesn't measure up to today's standards, but with superior Batman movies now available and superior "throwback" superhero movies from Marvel (Captain America, X:FC) 89 Batman's shortcomings are just a little more pronounced IMO.

 

[DiFabio]

The discussion reminds me of this video,



[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDKkeOdEyT8"]Battle of Batmans - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Khev]

One thing's for certain, Keaton was the definitive Batman of the 80's, Kilmer of the 90's, and Bale of the 2000's. Clooney was just terrible.

 

[TheFiend]

I don't think the tone of '89 Batman is dated at all. The look/scope, probably, but not the tone which I find a nice balance between dark, fantastical, and fun/goofy. You know, kinda like a comic book.

In that film Burton manages to capture some moments that are quintessential Bob Kane Batman, which is timeless like Superman.

By comparison, Batman Returns is all around dated. It's now really just another 90's Tim Burton movie much more than a Batman movie.

Completely disagree. Burton's Batman has a timelessness to it because he didn't stamp it with any firm timestamp. While some of the styles are arguably 80's, the only thing that really dates it is the Prince soundtrack. If you look at the wardrobes, the cars, the buildings, etc., it's timeless.

Donner's Superman, on the other hand, is strictly 70's, from wardrobes, to sets, etc.

This is a big reason I love 89 so much. Definitely timeless and I always thought so, even when I was a kid. But I love Nolans Batman too, am I the only one thats love's them both and think they are equally important when it comes to the mythos of Batman.