Dr.Mirakle32
Super Freak
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2005
- Messages
- 2,862
- Reaction score
- 31
BB was a complete restart of a dying franchise, which hadn't had a film in eight years, where as CR is still part of the same continuing franchsie, just with a continuity update.
BB features an entirely new cast and crew, and does as much as it can to seperate itself from the previous films in the series, both in tone and story.
In a long running series like the 007 films, it is hard to do the same thing.
While CR is structured as a reboot, it really isn't so drastic. Other than it showing Bond becoming a double-oh and meeting Felix Leiter for the first time in 2006, it is clear that this is still part of the same series. There is still the classic Monty Norman Bond theme, a pre title sequence, the iconic gunbarrel scene (although in a slightly different context) a series of stylized credits (with the familar ALBERT R. BROCCOLI'S EON PRODUCTIONS presents... as IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND 007 in...) and Judi Dench as M (I know Bond originally meets her for the first time in GoldenEye, but she was obviously kept for audience familiarity.)
Like I said, Casino Royale is clearly part of the same franchise and series, just with a tweaked continuity update after the over the top sci-fi extravaganza that was DIE ANOTHER DAY. A low key thriller after a sci-fi epic has happened before in the series: OHMSS came after YOLT, LALD came after DAF, FYEO came after MR.
Batman Begins on the other hand is to Batman and Robin, what Tim Burton's Batman was to the 1966 Adam West film: No connection other than a use of familiar characters. BB is a complete restart. Sure there are nods to previous films ("I'm Batman!" the black suit and grappling gun were created for the '89 film, and even the alliterative title sounds like a prequel to the Burton/Shumacher series,) but the film itself does as much as it can to seperate itself from the previous entries in the franchise.
While BB is surely the truer "reboot," the better film is no doubt CR.
I thought CASINO ROYALE was a MUCH beter film and surpassed BEGINS on pretty much every level. BB was good, but Nolan took it a little bit too seriously, tried to make a serious drama rather than an action film, and made most of the action scenes too clausterphobic.
I also hated the annoying brown tint to the entire film. I really hope he swicthes the photography in the next film. It was well shot, but I always imagined Batman's world being grey and blue, not brown and tan. The music was good and definitely moving, but it lacked a dynamic theme such as the ones written by Danny Elfman or Shirley Walker.
Plus it seems that BB was ashamed of it's comic book roots. Where's the art-deco/gothic Gotham city? There it is simply a brightly lit big city that can be found in every state.
It may sound like I am ripping on BB, but I still like it quite a bit. the casting was nearly perfect and it was a very well made film, although it well never top the Tim Burton original in my book.
CR on the other hand is proud of it's cinematic and literary heritage, going back to the 1960's filmaking style of the early Terrence Young/Guy Hamilton films, and bringing to tone of the story back to Fleming, while delivering a relevant, and modern spy-thriller. The photography is beautiful and colorful like the early Bonds; the action scenes and stunts are some of the best seen in years; the musical score is without a doubt David Arnold's finest achievement; and the script actually has heart, brought out by Paul Haggis' fine dialogue. It is certainly not a faithful adaptation of Fleming's novel, but the spirit of the early novels is kept intact, even though the story isn't.
The truer "reboot": Batman Begins
The better film: Casino Royale
Maybe Martin Campbell should take over when Nolan's done, and Paul Haggis could write the script....
Anyway, these are my views, but which film do you fans prefer?
BB features an entirely new cast and crew, and does as much as it can to seperate itself from the previous films in the series, both in tone and story.
In a long running series like the 007 films, it is hard to do the same thing.
While CR is structured as a reboot, it really isn't so drastic. Other than it showing Bond becoming a double-oh and meeting Felix Leiter for the first time in 2006, it is clear that this is still part of the same series. There is still the classic Monty Norman Bond theme, a pre title sequence, the iconic gunbarrel scene (although in a slightly different context) a series of stylized credits (with the familar ALBERT R. BROCCOLI'S EON PRODUCTIONS presents... as IAN FLEMING'S JAMES BOND 007 in...) and Judi Dench as M (I know Bond originally meets her for the first time in GoldenEye, but she was obviously kept for audience familiarity.)
Like I said, Casino Royale is clearly part of the same franchise and series, just with a tweaked continuity update after the over the top sci-fi extravaganza that was DIE ANOTHER DAY. A low key thriller after a sci-fi epic has happened before in the series: OHMSS came after YOLT, LALD came after DAF, FYEO came after MR.
Batman Begins on the other hand is to Batman and Robin, what Tim Burton's Batman was to the 1966 Adam West film: No connection other than a use of familiar characters. BB is a complete restart. Sure there are nods to previous films ("I'm Batman!" the black suit and grappling gun were created for the '89 film, and even the alliterative title sounds like a prequel to the Burton/Shumacher series,) but the film itself does as much as it can to seperate itself from the previous entries in the franchise.
While BB is surely the truer "reboot," the better film is no doubt CR.
I thought CASINO ROYALE was a MUCH beter film and surpassed BEGINS on pretty much every level. BB was good, but Nolan took it a little bit too seriously, tried to make a serious drama rather than an action film, and made most of the action scenes too clausterphobic.
I also hated the annoying brown tint to the entire film. I really hope he swicthes the photography in the next film. It was well shot, but I always imagined Batman's world being grey and blue, not brown and tan. The music was good and definitely moving, but it lacked a dynamic theme such as the ones written by Danny Elfman or Shirley Walker.
Plus it seems that BB was ashamed of it's comic book roots. Where's the art-deco/gothic Gotham city? There it is simply a brightly lit big city that can be found in every state.
It may sound like I am ripping on BB, but I still like it quite a bit. the casting was nearly perfect and it was a very well made film, although it well never top the Tim Burton original in my book.
CR on the other hand is proud of it's cinematic and literary heritage, going back to the 1960's filmaking style of the early Terrence Young/Guy Hamilton films, and bringing to tone of the story back to Fleming, while delivering a relevant, and modern spy-thriller. The photography is beautiful and colorful like the early Bonds; the action scenes and stunts are some of the best seen in years; the musical score is without a doubt David Arnold's finest achievement; and the script actually has heart, brought out by Paul Haggis' fine dialogue. It is certainly not a faithful adaptation of Fleming's novel, but the spirit of the early novels is kept intact, even though the story isn't.
The truer "reboot": Batman Begins
The better film: Casino Royale
Maybe Martin Campbell should take over when Nolan's done, and Paul Haggis could write the script....
Anyway, these are my views, but which film do you fans prefer?
