Sidebar
Batman
Saw this at a local store, and couldn't stop laughing. Although, his love relationship with Catwoman, a woman in leather with a whip, makes a lot more sense now.
Classic 1966 Batman & Robin: Adam West and Burt Ward, among my favorite iterations of the dynamic duo. ---- Burt Ward: "*There are several fine actors who have portrayed Batman in films. In my eyes, there was only one real Batman. That is and always will be Adam West. He was truly the Bright Knight*."
I'm currently rewatching Batman: The Animated Series and noticed in the episode Feats of Clay that the assistant (I couldn't remember his name) of Matt Hagen seems to be a little bit more affectionate than you'd usually see in a friend. I could be seeing things but I never noticed that as a kid. If true that would make the story even more sad. But I guess good for him for getting out of that abusive relationship. Matt sees him mourning in the end and just laughs madly. Now I wonder what else I've missed. I was wondering about Maven and Selina Kyle but they seem to be more distant. Not to mention Selina's open flirtations with Bruce and Batman.
I've watched a few episodes already and hope to watch the rest in the next few days, so without spoilers how are people enjoying the show?
I like when characters are clearly defined. You need a clear baseline of a starting point of who these characters are, and where they come from. Their personality can change over time, but not WHO they are. So things like age (unless you plan to age the entire universe equally), facial features, race, gender, eye color, hair color, body size, body shape. These are all things that need to be consistant no matter how many times you reboot the series. Peter Parker has been a high school/early college aged skinny white boy who just happens to be Spiderman. Batman is always an early 40s, maybe mid 30s rich businessman, who happens to be Batman. When they wanted to make a black kid as Spiderman, they created a new character. I'm not sure if it's just for the video games (I don't regularly read comics, and I haven't seen him in any movies), they created Miles Morales. A NEW CHARACTER, and the city doesn't know Spidermans identity. They've seen him change his costume before. So he can "be" Spiderman, but he's a different physical person. And that's fine. That's how you SHOULD go about making a change to who the super hero is, without doing a hard reset on the universe. But Catwoman? She's all over the place. Sometimes she's white, sometimes she's black, sometimes she's young, sometimes she's old, sometimes she's a villain, sometimes she's a hero, and then one time for no reason at all they had her play basketball.....the nails I get, because she's CATwoman, but why the whip? Sometimes she has the whip, sometimes not. Pick a lane!!! God damn! Are there multiple catwomen? Am I supposed to believe there's an entire commitee of women who's sole goal in life is to point out how stupid Batman is, that he's not noticing that every time he runs into Catwoman, she's clearly a different person? Sometimes she loves Batman, sometimes she's lesbian. Sometimes she's anti-social. Sometimes she teams up with other villians. Sometimes she teams up with Batman. NO! FIGURE IT OUT DC!!! She's Selina Kyle. That's your starting point. If I'm to believe in this character, you need to define who she is. If there are multiple catwomen, that needs to be explained. You don't see Harley Quinn changing drastic things about her to the point of being unrecognizable. I remember being in the theater watching The Dark Knight Rises, and thinking "Huh. A woman wearing all black, who's a cat burglar. Why don't they just replace this character with Catwoman???" It wasn't until later in the movie when I pieced together that she WAS supposed to be Catwoman. THIS was the biggest "WTF ARE YOU DOING???" moment I had about the catwoman character. Scarecrow was clearly defined. Joker was clearly defined. Two face was clearly defined. All these characters there was no mistake who it was. Even Robin at the end of the movie didn't get a clear "IS that Robin, or not???" But Catwoman only became apperent about halfway through the movie. She had no connection or imagery OF cats. It's actually WORSE than the 1993 Super Mario Bros movie, when you saw the Goombas. At least there they explained "Hey, these are the goombas." They never explained why some of them had long lizard faces, and some had round heads......but they used the word "Goomba" right in the introduction. With Catwoman, they NEVER said "Catwoman" the entire movie. And it doesn't help things that the 2004 Catwoman movie with Halle Berry was just......just so bad. I love Halle Berry, but come on. I think even she'd admit that was a low point in her career creatively. The 1992 Batman Returns is THE definitive Catwoman. THAT'S how you do it. There's also the campy 1960s tv show version of Catwoman. Considering the rest of the show, Catwoman was fine here. Nothing too remarkable, but then again nothing from that version was. Other than maybe Ceasar Romero not shaving before putting on Joker face paint. I mean really. Did he never see the character? Joker does NOT have facial hair! My only theory is that it's multiple women, and they're all Catwoman. Batman, and the audience are treated like they don't see the constant shifting in who that is. And yes, I'm also upset by Batman and Robin. All of it. Just.....the whole movie. Mr Freeze is not some hulking power lifter. Poison Ivy was played alright I guess. Robin is not some dude in his 40s. He's supposed to be like 13. And yes, I realize that kind of makes Bruce Wayne/Batman a little suspicious that he's a grown ass man hanging out with this random 8th grader. Even moreso when you realize he's hanging out with him to get help from this boy fighting the most psychotic maniacs in Gotham. "Ok, Robin. We've got to stop the Joker. He's going to blow up the bank. He's going to have armed henchmen all over the ground. He's going to have bombs inside the bank. Here's a big stick." Ok, I'm losing focus here, and the more I type the more I realize how weird the Batman universe is.
www.youtube.com
So I have a sizeable dvd collection. I'll often go to resale shops, and be like "Oh, a George Carlin DVD? $3? Yes please!" and then not watch it for years. So I've had Batman, Batman Returns, and Batman Forever in my collection FOREVER. I refuse to buy Batman & Robin on the grounds that it's Batman & Robin. Well anyways, last night I was bored, and needed to watch something new while I cleaned my room. I decided to watch Batman Forever. I remember loving it as a kid, and HATING Batman & Robin. So I figured "Well, let's see if this holds up to my childhood memories...." Spoiler alert, they did not....but it wasn't terrible either. So, this is the first Batman movie without Micheal Keaton, without Tim Burton, and maybe without Danny Elfman? The music certainly didn't feel like Elfman. So the immediate thing I dislike about this movie is, despite previously appearing in the series as Harvey Dent (previously played by a black actor, and now played by Tommy Lee Jones, which is confusing right from the start), you NEVER see why Harvey Dent went crazy. You see this really bizarre scene of acid being thrown on Harvey Dent, and him "covering up half his face" with a manilla envelope.......but the liquid clearly splashes his whole face. All of this is shown to the viewer through GNN (a CNN parody where GNN stands for Gothham News Network). The weird thing is, this is happening in a court of law. GNN is just broadcasting Harvey Dent, Attorney at Law doing his job in court. They had NO REASON to know something crazy would happen. And as it happens, Batman is just sitting among the spectators. He's not on trial. He's not beyond the line that only court participants go. He's behind that line, as a spectator. And again, nobody knew crazy things were going to happen to Harvey Dent, the attorney. Batman just came into the courtroom, took a seat, and was watching a random court case play out. WHY??? So Dent gets splashed with the acid, and for some reason blames Batman??? And now he's evil. Nothing to explain why he has any sense of duality. Nothing to explain his coin. Nothing to explain why only half his face was burned. I get that he got burned, but nothing is explained why he's EVIL now. On top of that, he plays the role like a combination of Ceasar Romeros Joker, and Jack Nicholsons Joker........except he's NOT the Joker. He's Harvey Dent/Two Face. He misses the point of the role entirely. The closest he comes is in the early parts of the movie, when he says to a bank security guard "Heads, you live...tails, you die". Flips it, comes up heads. Throws the guard into a vault, to which the guard says "I thought heads means I live?" and Two Face says "Ah, too true. You WILL live....to be bat-bait!" THAT'S NOT TWO FACE!!! Either way, he expects the guard to die. The whole point of the coin is to ease Harvey Dents empathy, while also satiating Two Face's bloodlust. In this movie, both outcomes leads to bloodlust in some form. There's even a scene later in the film where he keeps flipping the coin until he gets tails. WHATS THE FUCKING POINT THEN??? Joel Shoemacker and Tommy Lee Jones both missed the point entirely of the character. If I were writting this script, I'd have chosen another secondary villain. More on that later. The Riddler is played by Jim Carry. Now The Riddler is a very unique character which can be played a bunch of ways. You can play him dark, you can play him cartoony, you can play him mysterious, you can play him as an figure you never even see. Jim Carry takes it more in a cartoonish over the top mid-90s Jim Carry style performance. I've heard rumors that originally the role was meant for Robin Williams, and I certainly could see him playing the role almost the exact same way. I even saw a short video on youtube clipped from an interview recorded in the 90s where he talks about how sometimes Hollywood uses you and your talents as bait. At one time Jack Nicholson was supposed to play the Joker in Batman 89, and then backed out. So they said "We'll just give it to Robin Williams if you back out", and suddenly Jack Nicholson was back in. You could really hear the hurt in his voice when he said "Sometimes they use you. They promise you things they never meant to give you, all so someone else can make a little extra on their paycheck. But maybe one day I'll be cast. Maybe as The Riddler." Jim Carry played the role expertly however. For what this film was trying to be, he played the role exactly how he should. It would be interesting to see how he'd play it AFTER hollywood discovered he can do drama and not just "unsanctioned baffoonary", as Tommy Lee Jones put it. The citys atmosphere was WAAAAAAY off. The first two films depicted Gotham as being a dark brooding city, where crime and depression loomed in every corner. Batman Forever deals almost exclusively in neon bright colors. At one point an alley became a blacklight rave. It made NO SENSE!!! What's worse, is they could have played into the colors with the story they have, if they simply depicted the city with the same dark depressing tones, until the city gets ahold of Edward Nigmas brain drain machine. You could see the depressing greys and blacks of the city contrast slowly at first, and then more and more with the bright neon green. As each household plugs in, the city gets a little more neon bright. Signifying the population treating their depression with this new brain drain machine. All the while the viewer knows how it's cheery bright happy visuals represent something far darker. And that brings me back to two-face. Remember when I said he shouldn't even be in this movie? Well, he really didn't have any character development, or plan, or motivation besides "kill batman". So what if we swapped him out for a different villain. I'm thinking The Riddler works with Mr Freeze. As the city turns more and more green with brain drain machines in every house, it means more and more population is distracted and thus unable to pay attention to the real dangers around them. More and more the Riddlers machine becomes increasingly a metaphore for the distraction that TV had become by the 90s. Taken to the extreme, the city becomes a society of couch bound zombies, leaving the streets abandoned. I'm thinking Robin Williams could have played Mr Freeze. A character only interested in saving his wife, and when Batman destroys the only method to allow her to be healed, he instead diverts his attention to working with The Riddler. The Riddler clears the streets of opposition, and in return he gains mental information of the citizens watching. And Mr Freeze gets to set the abandoned city into a sub zero wasteland to allow his wife to comfortably walk the streets. His freezing could have turned the city neon blue. So the skies are neon green, the streets are neon blue, and Batman has to save the city. I think that works better on every level. Batman is played by Val Kilmer. He plays an alright Batman, but a great Bruce Wayne. Certainly a downgrade from previous films, but not the worst (for that, see George Clooney. The smug asshole). Nichole Kidman is here in a truely forgetable role. She's just another chick that wants to fuck Batman. They play her character as obsessed with duality, but she has no real interest in Bruce Wayne. Only Batman......and god damn does she throw herself at him. Truely awful writing. Her performance is fine for what they wanted her to do. It's just what they wanted her to do serves no purpose, and again misses the point of the role they've laid out for her. Chris something plays Robin. Which ultimately is weird for two reasons. First, he's way too old to be Robin. Robin is supposed to be like 14. Here he's like 23. Why is he getting forced to live with Bruce if he's an adult? At this point in the 90s, I'd have cast Joseph Gordon Levit. Oddly enough he'd be cast as "Robin" in the nolan films.......again, when he was far too old. Although I do like that they stayed true to the comics visual style of Robin in the circus portion of the film, and stayed true to the source material for his backstory. I kinda wish that was just his outfit in the movie, instead of that metalic look. BAT NIPPLES!!! BAT NIPPLES!!! Alfred crushed it as always. I forgot all about sugar and spice. I was like "sugar looks firmiliar. I wonder if she's done anything else.......holy shit that's drew barrymore. What the fuck is she doing playing such a bit part???" I bet you she just loved Batman, and wanted anything to do with this film, and the directors were like "Yeah, all we got is this bit part, but it's way below your talents, and..." "I'LL TAKE IT!!!" I bet that's how that went. The batmobile just offends me. The previous one was just perfect. Just don't change anything......oh, I see, it needed neon colors too. Probably so you could sell new toys. Which is another thing this movie suffers from. Everything is blatently made just for the sake of merchandising it. Batman 89 was a merchandise juggernaut, and all you needed was a black shirt, and a yellow bat symbol on the chest. Sold like a billion of those! Did we even see commishioner gordon? Maybe it's more of a modern film style, but I feel like these films were only thought of one at a time, rather than connecting 4 films as one continuous story. I feel like Joker should have made a small cameo at the end of this movie, to set up for his big return in the 4th movie. Replace Nichole Kidman's character in this movie with Dr Herleen Quinzel. Returning Jack Nicholson as the Joker. And the two of them would be the main villains of the 5th movie "Revenge on Batman" God damnit hollywood! Get your shit together!!!
graphicpolicy.com
I’m surprised how good this looks. It appears to be combining the BtAS aesthetic with some modern darkness. I’m cautiously optimistic. How about others?
       
www.ign.com
cross-posted from: https://reddthat.com/post/19582774 > Batman: The Last Halloween To Conclude the Long Halloween Trilogy - IGN
collider.com
cross-posted from: https://feddit.uk/post/11755652 > > If The Dark Knight felt like a relentless crime thriller inspired by the cinema of Michael Mann, The Dark Knight Rises explored the spiritual and emotional journey of Christian Bale’s version of Bruce Wayne. By connecting to the storyline involving the League of Shadows first introduced in Batman Begins, Nolan and his brother Jonathan Nolan were able to bring their interpretation of the caped crusader to a satisfying conclusion. Although the film satisfied story beats that they had established at the beginning of the trilogy, The Dark Knight Rises drew inspiration from Charles Dickens’ classic novel A Tale of Two Cities. > > > > ... > > > > Dickens’ novel examined how it could be possible for one city to have two classes of citizens with completely different experiences. A Tale of Two Cities focuses on the experiences of both a wealthy family and an English barrister in the years leading up to the Reign of Terror, in which revolutionaries stormed Paris and executed members of the upper class. Jonathan Nolan cited the sociopolitical themes of A Tale of Two Cities as a primary influence on The Dark Knight Rises. He stated that when looking for “good literature for inspiration,” he found that A Tale of Two Cities was a "harrowing portrait of a relatable, recognizable civilization that completely folded to pieces with the terrors." Similar to the French revolutionaries who were infuriated by the wealth gap, the prisoners Bane frees in The Dark Knight Rises have a justified reason for their anger; it is revealed to them that Dent’s crimes were covered up, and that his entire legacy is itself a lie.
dcanimated.com
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/15445069 > "Batman: Caped Crusader" Premieres Aug. 1, 2024 On Prime Video, First Images Revealed
cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/12393006
insidethemagic.net
Sequel is a novel.
So I've been playing through all the Arkham games lately, and I had an interesting thought about the whole Arkhamverse as a storyline. I think the entire game series is based (loosely) on The Killing Joke story, with other major events, references, and storylines lifted from other Batman comics. I just think TKJ was used as a basis for the games' world. We see Joker's beginning with his flashback at the end of Arkham Origins, which is almost identical to his TKJ origin, as well as him crippling Barbara in that flashback during Arkham Knight (right down to the clothes he's wearing). The overall dark tone of the games lend to this theory, as well as Joker being shown just how sadistic he can be. What do you think?
cross-posted from: https://lemmus.org/post/3524216 > What are your favorite Batman moments?
For those of you who don't know, Bane's story has two endings in the Arkham series. One is considered canon, while the other is not. In the Arkham Knight prequel comic, Bane is killed by the Arkham Knight as proof to the other rogues that he has what it takes to kill Batman. This is considered non-canon. In the actual Arkham Knight game, a Riddle reveals that Bane kicked his Venom addiction, returned to Santa Prisca, and liberated it from the drug lords that controlled it. This is considered canon. Regardless of canonicity, which do you feel was the better ending for Bane's character? I personally prefer the canon version. It just feels like a more satisfying conclusion for his character arc. What are your thoughts?
It adds the pre alpha Arkham Asylum suit for anyone wondering
The first two issues of the new DC Comics series Justice League vs Godzilla vs Kong have been filled with great art, characterization, action and splash pages. The series is shaking up to be like a well-done summer blockbuster flick but for comics…and in winter. Kudos to the creators behind the effort so far. Very well executed! Some great Batman moments too.
A Batman science fiction comic? I’m intrigued! Anyone else pick this up?
Anyone else have this on their radar? By Rafael Grampa
secretldn.com
cross-posted from: https://feddit.uk/post/1589553 > > Calling all superhero fans and Batman stans: an extraordinary experience is winging its way to the city to celebrate Batman Day (September 16) in London. ‘Batman Unmasked’ will take guests on a journey through the franchise’s cinematic history in a don’t-miss immersive experience. > > > > > > ‘Batman Unmasked’ goes back in time to celebrate all iterations of the iconic franchise on the big screen. Guests will get to ‘ooh’ and ‘ahh’ at a mind-boggling selection of memorabilia that ranges from Michael Keaton’s Batman (1989) all the way through to Robert Pattinson’s spin on the character in The Batman (2022). These include costumes, props, and vehicles from the movies, all presented in a special Batcave setting. > > > > But that’s not all. Fans will also get to pore over more than 100 comics, and brand-new Batman Day special edition comics, in a special comic book area. > > > > If you’ve always been one to root for the villain, however, you’ll want to check out the ‘Joker Zone’. There, the spotlight is turned on the infamous criminal. Sights include costumes worn by Heath Ledger and Joaquin Phoenix in The Dark Knight (2008) and The Joker (2019). > > > > More than just the first Batman exhibition of its size in the UK, ‘Batman Unmasked’ also marks the first time some of the pieces will have ever been displayed in the UK.
Mafex Hush Nightwing and Batman (black)
I have only seen Return of the Joker but am considering watching the Batman Beyond TV show. It seems like a well-reviewed popular show in the fandom. What are people’s spoiler-free impressions of the show?
Enough said.
I have never seen this movie, seems like a good date to give it a try!
Hello Batman fans! I never got around to watching The Batman when it aired. It's on Netflix now and I'm wondering whether or not it is worth a watch. How does it compare to BTAS or other Batman media? is it at least an 8 out of 10 in terms of quality? I'm curious about other's non-spoiler thoughts.