When DC next hits the reset button and Batman Begins anew . . .

[Dr. Banner]

Well all know that in 2005, with the film Batman Begins, visionary story-teller Christopher Nolan has given us the perfect incarnation of Batman and that he's going to do it again with this summer's The Dark Knight. The first movie killed at the box office and made Batman more popular than he's ever been and the second looks to do the same. With such a popular, perfect version of Batman out there, why hasn't DC started to use it?

Why are they still publishing an inferior version of Batman month after month after month when they don't have to?

Imagine the Tumbler and the Bat-pod on the comic book page drawn by Jim Lee or Tony Daniel. Imagine how good the new Batsuit would look drawn by Dustin Nguyen. Imagine Grant Morrison or Paul Dini writing about the brilliant versions of Batman and the Joker that geniuses Christian Bale and the late Heath Ledger portrayed.

Imagine all that and I know you can't help but wonder why we're then stuck reading a lesser version of this mythos all the time; a version that's sillier, and less realistic and ridiculously unbelievable. Why would DC want to publish that? Why would anybody want to read it?

The only answer I can think of is continuity. To use this better version of Batman means that they'd have to toss out a lot of continuity doesn't it? Luckily, it's only a matter of time before DC hits the reset button on their universe and tries again and when they do, and Batman begins anew, it should be like he was in Batman Begins.

http://www.webwombat.com.au/entertainment/movies/images/batman-begins-3.JPG

http://photos14.flickr.com/18952184_1b741f16c9_o.jpg

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/graphics/filmslide/bat/bat22.jpg

[carabas]

Imagine all that and I know you can't help but wonder why we're then stuck reading a lesser version of this mythos all the time; a version that's sillier, and less realistic and ridiculously unbelievable. Why would DC want to publish that? Why would anybody want to read it?You are aware that he shares a universe with aliens, immortal neanderthals, amazons, sorcerers, alternate versions of himself etcetera...

Also, Batman Begins, not exactly a very realistic film at all.

[DonC]

Imagine all that and I know you can't help but wonder why we're then stuck reading a lesser version of this mythos all the time



You know incorrectly. The idea of using Nolan's version in the regular comics never crossed my mind.

[Dr. Banner]

. . . and now that it has, you're wondering why it hadn't occurred to you sooner to use the better Batman in the comics aren't you?

[DonC]

No, I'm wondering why you have such a love for Christopher Nolan. His portrait of the character isn't the be all, end all for the Bat-universe.

[Dr. Banner]

You are aware that he shares a universe with aliens, immortal neanderthals, amazons, sorcerers, alternate versions of himself etcetera...

Also, Batman Begins, not exactly a very realistic film at all.

Even with the shared universe there's no reason that a Nolanesque Batman can't remain grounded, plausible, and undeniably awesome. Besides, a superior version of the character interacting with all those other characters would make for better stories, no?

[Batman was taken]

How can one seemingly love the Batman presented in film, while at the same time apparently loathing the one that appears monthly in comics?

[Dr. Banner]

No, I'm wondering why you have such a love for Christopher Nolan. His portrait of the character isn't the be all, end all for the Bat-universe.

Not the end all, no, quite the opposite in fact. His portrait provides the groundwork and starting point, a beginning if you'll pardon the pun, for a Batman/Bruce Wayne that is more human and engaging than the one note cartoon cut-out who had it all figured out when he was 8. It treats the character as plausible and real in a way that no one has had the courage to yet. He's given us a Batman we can believe in.

[the goddamn batman]

Well all know that in 2005, with the film Batman Begins, visionary story-teller Christopher Nolan has given us the perfect incarnation of Batman

He did? I adore BB, but I'd hardly call it perfect.

The first movie killed at the box office

Actually, while it did well it certainly didn't "kill".

Imagine the Tumbler and the Bat-pod on the comic book page

The Tumbler's going to get blown up in The Dark Knight. Nolan was going to blow it up in BEgins, but liked it too much to do it. But ti's going to eat sh!t in TDK...

Imagine Grant Morrison or Paul Dini writing about the brilliant versions of Batman and the Joker that geniuses Christian Bale and the late Heath Ledger portrayed.

Can't comment on Joker. Haven't seen the film. But, I kinda like the comics Joker. I like that the film is different... becasue it's a film and not the comics. I think it would be a great disservice to the characters to change them to fit the movie.

a version that's sillier, and less realistic and ridiculously unbelievable.

Yeah, Begins is pretty unbelievable when you get down to it.

Why would DC want to publish that? Why would anybody want to read it?

I like reading it. Just because you don't doesn't mean other people don't.


Also? Your poll is so ridiculously worded to fit your personal taste that I'm not even going to vote.

[Dr. Banner]

How can one seemingly love the Batman presented in film, while at the same time apparently loathing the one that appears monthly in comics?

Loath? No. Bored of and disinterested in because he's too perfect and too fanatastical? Yes.

As I've said, Nolan took everything that worked from the comics and then added and improved upon it to give us what is, undeniably, the greatest version of the character.

[DonC]

Even with the shared universe there's no reason that a Nolanesque Batman can't remain grounded, plausible, and undeniably awesome. Besides, a superior version of the character interacting with all those other characters would make for better stories, no?


Who's definition of superior? For some people the superior Batman appeared in the animated series. For some people the superior Batman appeared in the Tim Burton movies. For some people the superior Batman was in the 60s TV series. For some people the superior Batman appears in the monthly comics.

That's the beauty of comics - they aren't defined by one vision.

[the goddamn batman]

Not the end all, no, quite the opposite in fact. His portrait provides the groundwork and starting point, a beginning if you'll pardon the pun, for a Batman/Bruce Wayne that is more human and engaging than the one note cartoon cut-out who had it all figured out when he was 8. It treats the character as plausible and real in a way that no one has had the courage to yet. He's given us a Batman we can believe in.

You haven't read Year One have you?

[Dr. Banner]

You haven't read Year One have you?

Sure have, and if we were still reading about that character, or someone like that character, I might not feel this way. Though not as much as Nolan's Batman, that guy was at least still a little human and relatable.

[Libaax]

Chris Nolan is great with Memento and Prestige but he doesnt know anything about Batman.


Who is this guy talking about realistic and stuff about a guy in bat-suit ?


I dont want comics versions of Nolan making Ra's Al Ghul IRISH and Carmine Falcone fricking brittish !


Talking about bieng biased fanboy Nolan.

Batman is the biggest superhero in the world, voted the best of the last century. He doesnt need Nolan to make him better. GM's Batman i dont like but there have been great Batman stories and will be again.

[Dr. Banner]

Who's definition of superior? For some people the superior Batman appeared in the animated series. For some people the superior Batman appeared in the Tim Burton movies. For some people the superior Batman was in the 60s TV series. For some people the superior Batman appears in the monthly comics.

That's the beauty of comics - they aren't defined by one vision.

If we're going to think that these stories should be about characters than wouldn't the Batman with more depth and humanity and dimension, like Nolan's, be the superior choice to put into a story?

What's so wrong with Nolan's Batman that he shouldn't be brought into the comics? What's so superior about the current cut out character that he shouldn't be over written by a newer, better version?

[DonC]

If we're going to think that these stories should be about characters than wouldn't the Batman with more depth and humanity and dimension, like Nolan's, be the superior choice to put into a story?

What's so wrong with Nolan's Batman that he shouldn't be brought into the comics? What's so superior about the current cut out character that he shouldn't be over written by a newer, better version?


It's your definition of better. As shocking as it may seem, other people may not see Nolan's Batman as better than Denny O'Neil's or Bruce Timm's or Grant Morrison's or Adam West's.

[the goddamn batman]

Who is this guy talking about realistic and stuff about a guy in bat-suit ?

I, personally, prefer "plausable" over "realistic". Nolan's Batman isn't realistic at all. It's plausable. But realistic? No. It's still complete fantasy.

I think it's more grounded in realism than the comics... but that isn't too hard.

I dont want comics versions of Nolan making Ra's Al Ghul IRISH and Carmine Falcone fricking brittish !

What? Ra's wasn't ever given a nationality... and the actors nationality has nothing to do with the character.

I don't know what you're talking about with Falcone. He didn't sound british... the name Falcone isn't british... and again, the actors nationality has nothing to do with the character.

Funny, though, that you failed to mention Bale's nationality. You know he's a big fat brit, right? He's got a thick english accent in real life.

Cillian Murphy's Irish, too. Linus Roache is English.

What's your beef with actors?

[Dr. Banner]

It's your definition of better. As shocking as it may seem, other people may not see Nolan's Batman as better than Denny O'Neil's or Bruce Timm's or Grant Morrison's or Adam West's.

I wonder what, pray tell, is so wrong with Nolan's Batman that he is an inferior product?

This is more than mere opinion, in addition to having everything regular Batman has, Nolan's Batman has a better, more nuanced backstory and a greater depth in characterization that would make his stories more interesting and enjoyable.

[the goddamn batman]

I wonder what, pray tell, is so wrong with Nolan's Batman that he is an inferior product?

This is more than mere opinion, in addition to having everything regular Batman has, Nolan's Batman has a better, more nuanced backstory and a greater depth in characterization that would make his stories more interesting and enjoyable.

Actually, it's not more than an opinion. It's your opinion. It's neither inferior or superior. It's only an opinion.

I find Nolan's Bat-verse to be quite enjoyable but I wouldn't say it's superior to the comics or the-Timm-verse. It's just another option.

What I'm curious about, though, is why you think everyone else should share your opinion? Or why they're not as entitled to their opinion as you are to yours.

And what makes you think if DC adopted Nolan's version that it would stick? Year One didn't stick, and it's easily one of the greates Batman stories, IMO. ANd Nolan took heavily from Year One... and appears to be taking things from The Long Halloween. So how is it that his version, which borrows ehavily from the comics is superior to the comics?

The only thing I see Nolan's version having over the comics is a singualr vision. Introduce that singular vision to the field of comics, and you can kiss it goodbye with in 25 issues. That's just sort of how corporate characters are. Different teams will be brought in and they'll do whatever they want/whatever editorial allows. But whatever happens, Nolan won't be there to 'protect' his once singular vision, so it won't last.

Example: Gotham Knight. It's done by a bunch of different teams. It's intended to bridge Nolan's films... and yet, I don't see a singular vision within the collection, let alone Nolan's singular vision.

[DonC]

I wonder what, pray tell, is so wrong with Nolan's Batman that he is an inferior product?

You're inferring comments that aren't there.

This is more than mere opinion, in addition to having everything regular Batman has, Nolan's Batman has a better, more nuanced backstory and a greater depth in characterization that would make his stories more interesting and enjoyable.

No, it's not. Storytelling is always about opinion. You are of the opinion that Nolan is like a god. Other people think Adam West's Batman is the best. You are entitled to your opinion and they are entitled to theirs.

If DC wanted to include Nolan's mythos into their stories then they would. And really, DC's backstory and Nolan's backstory are basically the same. Young Bruce Wayne travels the world training with various masters learning how to fight and be a detective. He even trained with the League of Assassins/Shadowns in the comics.

[Totoro Man]

short answer: no, definitely not.

long answer:

I wouldn't want to have the comics based on "Batman Begins".

the reason the movie worked so well is because Nolan and Goyer were trying to tell a story. they actually had something to say--an interesting take on the characters.

I'd much rather have other authors bring something new and meaningful to the Batman comics being published than to blandly imitate what they see other people doing.

that's why "Begins" worked so well. Nolan decided that he wanted to make a "more realistic" version of Batman. granted, it's still an outrageous and implausible superhero movie when you get right down to it.

the best Batman stories have always been produced by people who brought their own vision to the character while still remaining true to the mythological core that's evolved into "Batman" over the years.

part of what makes Batman so wonderful is that he IS a corporately owned character (not just in the literal DC owns the rights sense). we should allow the flexibility and freedome to let other artists, writers, and visionary thinkers to put new and interesting spins on the now timeless character.

[stealthwise]

Quite simply, the Batman Begins version doesn't lend itself well to serialized storytelling.

[Dr. Banner]

You might be right. Bringing Nolan's Batman to the comics might ruin everything that makes Nolan's Batman awesome. Bringing Nolan's Batman to the comics might ruin him and make him as broken and problematic as comic book Batman currently is.

[Dr. Banner]

.

If DC wanted to include Nolan's mythos into their stories then they would. And really, DC's backstory and Nolan's backstory are basically the same. Young Bruce Wayne travels the world training with various masters learning how to fight and be a detective. He even trained with the League of Assassins/Shadowns in the comics.

There are some major differences - what Bruce is doing before he leaves Gotham and why he ultimately chooses to leave Gotham come to mind - that seperate DC's and Nolan's backstories and make Nolan's Batman a deeper, more complex and human character.

[metalhead_dave743]

There's no middle ground between the two things you can vote for so I'm not voting. I'd be up for using Nolan's origin (and maybe the events of TDK) as Batman's "official" origin for the comics, but I wouldn't want Batman's comics to follow strictly to Nolan's rules. There are too many good villains who couldn't be able to be used properly if the Batman comics stuck with Nolan's rules. And I'm a little too partial to Ras Al Ghul's comics portrayl.

However, I would LOVE to see a comic series that would pick up where BB and TDK leave off. Somewhat of an Ultimate Batman series completely standalone... that could follow suit in the Nolanverse(just as long as Joker survives TDK).

You might be right. Bringing Nolan's Batman to the comics might ruin everything that makes Nolan's Batman awesome. Bringing Nolan's Batman to the comics might ruin him and make him as broken and problematic as comic book Batman currently is.

They might do a pretty good job of that in TDK. For some reason, I think Batman might not have a happy ending in this movie.

[DonC]

You might be right. Bringing Nolan's Batman to the comics might ruin everything that makes Nolan's Batman awesome. Bringing Nolan's Batman to the comics might ruin him and make him as broken and problematic as comic book Batman currently is.


Just out of curiosity, what are the problems you think the Batman comics have?

[Alan2099]

The less the comics have in common with Nolan's version, the better, if you ask me.

[earl]

It hasn't really worked out the way comic fans figured it would, but DC has tried something like this with Frank Miller. You would have to figure since he was the guy behind two of the most iconic Batman stories with Year One and The Dark Knight that it would be definitive, but that didn't go as planned.

Batman has been around for nearly 70 years, it has been adapted in so many different ways, I don't think it is possible to really have one definitive version.

I don't see why DC would want to change the current monthly books to follow a film, even if it is successful. The only thing that Batman Begins really did and I understand why, was merge a few characters down to make the plot easier to follow for a two hour movie and play it all straight, which had not been done in the films to that point.

I think it would be possible, given the right people behind the project, to do a Batman 'MAX' series. Something not tied to the usual monthly Batman books that could be done over a period of time to give the Batman saga a beginning, middle and end, but I tend to doubt that it will ever happen. Half the book would end up just being something knicked from other Batman stories that have been done and probably better the first time.

[Spiffy]

Well all know that in 2005, with the film Batman Begins, visionary story-teller Christopher Nolan has given us the perfect incarnation of Batman
If we're going to think that these stories should be about characters than wouldn't the Batman with more depth and humanity and dimension, like Nolan's, be the superior choice to put into a story?

What's so wrong with Nolan's Batman that he shouldn't be brought into the comics? What's so superior about the current cut out character that he shouldn't be over written by a newer, better version?
You use terms like "perfect", which I'm sorry... is a bit... over the top as an argument.

Batman Begins was a good movie. And a good Batman. But perfect? Even "better than the comic"? I doubt it.

There's nothing compelling these changes to be brought into the comic book. They're good for the medium they are present in, but hardly necessary outside of it. And they shouldn't be done simply so people aren't "confused" between the two continuities.

Heck, its bad enough that so much of "Smallville" has been absorbed into Superman comics. Any day, I expect to flip open an Action Comics and find out that thanks to THAT show, Lana Lang is now Supes' Twu Wuv instead of Lois.

[HaroldAllnut]

You know incorrectly. The idea of using Nolan's version in the regular comics never crossed my mind.

I'm right there with you, DonC. Nolan's version is good as a movie and nothing but.

[Dr. Banner]

Just out of curiosity, what are the problems you think the Batman comics have?

He's comes across, more often than not, as too perfect and too one-dimensional. He seems able to do everything and anything and he can do it all by himself. As soon as his parents were murdered he transforms, instantaneously into a perfect one dimension crimefighter.

There's less humanity in that than a Bruce Wayne who can lose himself in his pain and needs the help of others, not just for costumes and equipment, but for emotional connections and support. The changes Nolan's brought make Batman a more human character to me, but also a more powerful one because he comes not just from a childhood psychological trauma but from a conscious decision made by a human being who has explored several paths to get there.

[Alan2099]

He also came across as a guy with no strong feelings who pretty much had to be led to do what was right and have his path explained for him. I'm sory, if you're looking for a strong leading character, Bale is not the Batman you want.

Keaton, Conroy, and West all had distinct but quite strong personalities, knew what they were doing, and had a resolve to do what they felt was the right thing.

[the goddamn batman]

It's interesting that you list the actors when the fault is clearly that of the writers and directors.

Also? Hater.

I kid, I kid.:biggrin:

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Everyone has their own "greatest version" of Batman - or any popular fictional character, for that matter. It's usually the one most people were first introduced to.

My favorite Batman is the one created by Denny O'Neil and Neal Adams. My favorite movie version is still Michael Keaton.

Having said that, I am still enjoying Morrison's run. If you don't like the monthly DC Comic version, don't buy it.

P.S, Hey - my 100th post!

[Alan2099]

It's interesting that you list the actors when the fault is clearly that of the writers and directors.

You have a bit of a point. Writers and directors have a big part of what makes the character, but I feel that it's ultimately the actor that makes or breaks any give role and adds the real meat to it.

[the goddamn batman]

You have a bit of a point. Writers and directors have a big part of what makes the character, but I feel that it's ultimately the actor that makes or breaks any give role and adds the real meat to it.

Sure, a shitty actor. Bale's a terrific actor. I enjoyed him in Begins, so... but I've yet to see him in anything where I didn't enjoy his work.

Simple fact is, the writers define the character. The director is the one telling the actor how to physically portray the character. The actor is a hired hand, you know? Maybe they'd have given a better performance under a better director. One with a different sence of what's good... or what's fitting to the character or film.

It's like when Showgirls won all those Razzies for sucking and the director accepted all of the actors 'awards' because he knew that it was his fault. Not that there was any saving that movie, or that Jessie is a good actress anyway... but still, the movie was what he made it. That's not the actors faults, you know?

I dunno... not that the actors aren't reponsible in part as well. I just think most of the blame fall at the feet of the people making the calls, not the people who answered the phone.

[Dr. Banner]

He also came across as a guy with no strong feelings who pretty much had to be led to do what was right and have his path explained for him. I'm sory, if you're looking for a strong leading character, Bale is not the Batman you want.


Not quite. Bruce knew what he wanted, he just didn't know precisely what he wanted. When Rachel pointed out the suffering of the Gothamites he knew he wanted to do something more than just throw money at the problem. When Falcone pointed out that he knew nothing of the evil and that should avoid it he knew that he needed to confront it. When Ras told him that he should become an assassin he knew he wanted to become a guardian.

Where in all that, were there no strong feelings? How was he being led when every decision was his own? How could his path be explained to him when he found it himself?

[Spiffy]

He's comes across, more often than not, as too perfect and too one-dimensional. He seems able to do everything and anything and he can do it all by himself. As soon as his parents were murdered he transforms, instantaneously into a perfect one dimension crimefighter.
Only in the badly written issues. In the well written ones, Batman has a ton of flaws. He's arrogant. He's cold and detached. He's schizophrenic.

And the "as soon as his parents were murdered" seems to ignore the boatload of stories written over the years detailing the years and years of training he had to undergo.

And you know... rebooting his origin isn't going to prevent people from writing bad Batman stories.

[Alan2099]

How could his path be explained to him when he found it himself?
You pretty much already explained that one. He constantly had people telling him what to do and what not to do and when he did finally make up his mind, he had somebody else telling him where he could get all his stuff.

Then of course there's that horrible, "why do we fall" line.

You could say he found the path himself ... after half a dozen people point and told him there was a path ahead.

[metalhead_dave743]

The less the comics have in common with Burton's version, the better, if you ask me.

Fixed it for you :wink:

[Choppa]

I don't understand this complaint. The movie is based on the comics, so why would that version be more "perfect" what it's based on?

Personally I don't like many of the changes that the movie made so I wouldn't want to see them in the comics. While they may work in the context of a film, they don't necessarily work in a serialized comic book format.

[stelok]

I liked the movie idea that Bruce Wayne was personally trained by Ra's Al Ghul.

Maybe the comics could use that cool idea.

[Choppa]

I liked the movie idea that Bruce Wayne was personally trained by Ra's Al Ghul.

Maybe the comics could use that cool idea.

He wasn't. He had other training before that. Ra's taught him to overcome his fear and how to use "trickery" to his advantage to exploit his enemies.

[HeckBoy]

I liked BB, but I don't think it was that great. Honestly, I think part of the leg-humping has to do with how bad the Schumacher films were that preceded it. I mean, I'm going to watch Dark Knight first thing when it comes out, but I don't really think we need to blend the movie and comic continuities too much.

[Dr. Banner]

I don't understand this complaint. The movie is based on the comics, so why would that version be more "perfect" what it's based on?


Refinement. Nolan took the material and made it better. It's the same way that a steak, expertly prepared, is better than a burned slab of beef.

[Dr. Banner]

You pretty much already explained that one. He constantly had people telling him what to do and what not to do and when he did finally make up his mind, he had somebody else telling him where he could get all his stuff.

Then of course there's that horrible, "why do we fall" line.

You could say he found the path himself ... after half a dozen people point and told him there was a path ahead.

He most certainly found the path himself and found his way along it himself as well. Nobody told him to go to Asia and learn to fight or to seek out the League of Shadows to learn their techniques, he decided that all for himself. That he encountered people while traveling along this path and that what they said impacted on him doesn't equate to "telling him what to do" by any stretch of the imagination. All it does, is show that this Batman is a human being compellingly capable of learning and growth and not some Batgod who can do it alls by himself.

[Dr. Banner]

Only in the badly written issues. In the well written ones, Batman has a ton of flaws. He's arrogant. He's cold and detached. He's schizophrenic.

That's another plus about Nolan's Batman, that he's needed others has prevented him from becoming an obsessive, egotistical jackass.

And the "as soon as his parents were murdered" seems to ignore the boatload of stories written over the years detailing the years and years of training he had to undergo.

Two completely different types of journeys though. Nolan's Batman needed to find his way to being Batman and his journey was more than about acquiring skills but also finding himself. It's more interesting that way. Comic book Batman just woke up one morning and decided that his response to the murder of his parents would be to become some sort of crimefighter, boring, and then went around learning how to do that, also boring.

And you know... rebooting his origin isn't going to prevent people from writing bad Batman stories.

True and that's the problem that I've acknowledged. Bring Batman to the comics means losing the one thing that makes Batman so good, Nolan's creative vision.

[Choppa]

Refinement. Nolan took the material and made it better. It's the same way that a steak, expertly prepared, is better than a burned slab of beef.

Sure, but like I said you're comparing one story to years of stories. Everyone who writes the character is going to add their take to it. To say that the comic version should only distill those very specific elements which you deem "perfect" would mean no more character growth and would get boring pretty quickly. The cool thing about having so much to work from is that you can distill the stories to make up one clear picture. But there are some that like certain interpretations of key things and some who like others. Sticking to one interpretation means losing out on other takes.

[Supermancho]

Bring Batman to the comics means losing the one thing that makes Batman so good, Nolan's creative vision.

You're fighting in a war you'll never win. This is about opinions and personal tastes. I respect yours. But till now, no one seems to share it. You have a huge Nolan bias.
Your poll is very partialized. Not voting.

[Dr. Banner]

Even if I don't win that doesn't mean I shouldn't keep fighting for what is right, and for what I believe in.

[the goddamn batman]

Even if I don't win that doesn't mean I shouldn't keep fighting for what is right

Oh good lord man...

[DonC]

Even if I don't win that doesn't mean I shouldn't keep fighting for what is right, and for what I believe in.


And just like that you went from "Kid with a new toy enthusiasm" to "Restraining order creepy."

[metalhead_dave743]

Even if I don't win that doesn't mean I shouldn't keep fighting for what is right, and for what I believe in.

Dude, I'm one of the biggest fan's of Nolan's version of Batman and I'M thinking you are being a little radical here. Just a TAD.

[Dr. Banner]

So, because I'm not going to change my mind or stop talking about something I think is a great idea just because it's probably not going to happen I'm creepy now?

[DonC]

"Kid with a new toy enthusiasm" is "OH MY GOD, I LOVE THIS MOVIE! THIS IS THE GREATEST MOVIE EVER MADE! DON'T YOU LOVE THIS MOVIE? HOW CAN YOU NOT LOVE THIS MOVIE?!? IF YOU DON'T LOVE THIS MOVIE, YOU'RE A STUPID DOODIE-HEAD!"

"Restraining order creepy" is "I'm on a mission from God to spread the Gospel of Batman According to Saint Christopher of Nolan."

Just dial it back a little. It's a movie, not "Go Tell it on the Mountain."

[The Batman]

Nolan didn't even include one of the most essential and powerful moments in Batman lore -the vow to his parents on their grave. For that alone, this isn't the greatest version of Batman and most certainly not one I'd want to see in the comics.

[Dr. Banner]

To think that one of the least important and disposable moments in Batman lore is one of the most essential and powerful is really idiotic. Nolan got rid of it because it was stupid and useless.

[Batman was taken]

To think that one of the least important and disposable moments in Batman lore is one of the most essential and powerful is really idiotic. Nolan got rid of it because it was stupid and useless.

So wait - His whole motivation and vow to his parents is idiotic and disposable? The vow to his parents is why he does what he does.

I'm trying to take you seriously, but you're making it really hard....

[HeckBoy]

I think this thread jumped the shark a couple pages ago.

[the goddamn batman]

Nolan didn't even include one of the most essential and powerful moments in Batman lore -the vow to his parents on their grave. For that alone, this isn't the greatest version of Batman and most certainly not one I'd want to see in the comics.

Now that you've pointed that out... you're so right. I don't know how I never noticed that, but yeah. That's such an important moment. Interesting that Nolan didn't use that.

[stelok]

I dont want comics versions of Nolan making Ra's Al Ghul IRISH and Carmine Falcone fricking brittish !

.

If a Black man can play Kingpin, then an Irishman can also play an Arab.

Besides a white Anglo-Saxon named Alec Guiness has played Arab and Japanese characters before.

[Damiean Dark]

BB is in a film medium every gesture and emote is captured you cant equal that emotion in a comic book drawing no matter how good the art and on the flip of this some comic writing and dialouge is almost impossible to translate to screen. Batman comics is fine and imo far superior then BB which is a pretty average film i want batman to move like an olympic level athlete, i want a real batmobile, i want bruce wayne to swear on his parents grave and become serious and withdrawn as a child and to essentially become the bat in his mind then not in his late teens/early twenties, i want bruce to have an inkling of the bat intelligence which one of his three main atributes, Ras in the comics is a criminal mastermind with an air of aristocracy Ras in the movie is a sombre, boring guy who talks in pretentious boring chunks of dialouge.

[Damiean Dark]

I want Falcone to be manacing and not a bumbling fool, i wanted rachel cut from the movie as the romance between her and bruce is one of the worst acted i have ever seen, i want to be able to see batman fight, i want to see batman pull himself up a ladder like he can do it in his sleep not like he carrying a small child on his back.

[metalhead_dave743]

I want Falcone to be manacing and not a bumbling fool, i wanted rachel cut from the movie as the romance between her and bruce is one of the worst acted i have ever seen, i want to be able to see batman fight, i want to see batman pull himself up a ladder like he can do it in his sleep not like he carrying a small child on his back.

:rolleyes: Uh huh... I wanted to be starting Center Fielder for the Boston Red Sox... Life Sucks get a helmet

[Supermancho]

Besides a white Anglo-Saxon named Alec Guiness has played Arab and Japanese characters before.

And an intergalactic guru (AKA Jedi Master) as well:biggrin:
http://www.yelims.com/IPB/Invision-Board-France-234.gif

[Dr. Banner]

So wait - His whole motivation and vow to his parents is idiotic and disposable? The vow to his parents is why he does what he does.

I'm trying to take you seriously, but you're making it really hard....

The scene wouldn't have made any sense because fighting crime and being Batman isn't a decision he makes until later in life when he's old enough and experienced enough to appreciate the consequences of what he's set out for himself. What Nolan does is more nuanced and believable. than someone making a vow and then turning themselves into a superhero.

I mean, what was young Bruce Wayne going to do? Wow to turn himself into a superhero on his parents' graves and then go home and start doing push ups? Crack open a criminology text book? Has Nolan done any of that I can't imagine anyone in the theatre not laughing out loud at the ridiculousness of it.

[Supermancho]

The scene wouldn't have made any sense because fighting crime and being Batman isn't a decision he makes until later in life when he's old enough and experienced enough to appreciate the consequences of what he's set out for himself. What Nolan does is more nuanced and believable. than someone making a vow and then turning themselves into a superhero.

I mean, what was young Bruce Wayne going to do? Wow to turn himself into a superhero on his parents' graves and then go home and start doing push ups? Crack open a criminology text book? Has Nolan done any of that I can't imagine anyone in the theatre not laughing out loud at the ridiculousness of it.

A vow like "I will avenge your death by any means" doesn't take you straight to the gym. It's a process. It's a boy crying for his parents, thinking about what to do every second of the day, rolling in his bed every night throught several years. It's a process. And because Bruce didn't know exactly what to do from the start, he even apply for FBI agent. A good director can show that in a few scenes.
http://myholes.co.uk/images/uploads/thumbs/thumb_batmanbegins.jpg

[Batman was taken]

A vow like "I will avenge your death by any means" doesn't take you straight to the gym. It's a process. It's a boy crying for his parents, thinking about what to do every second of the day, rolling in his bed every night throught several years. It's a process. And because Bruce didn't know exactly what to do from the start, he even apply for FBI agent. A good director can show that in a few scenes.
http://myholes.co.uk/images/uploads/thumbs/thumb_batmanbegins.jpg

Couldn't have said it any better myself. He didn't KNOW he was going to be Batman per se, when he made that vow, just that he wanted to do something.

All they really needed to do was have a quick shot of him (as a child) infront of his parents grave. That's all that really would have been needed.

[carabas]

Batman Begins was a decent take on the character. It might even be a decent trilogy or however many they intend to make.

I however do not think for a second that Nolan's Batman can support the never-ending monthly grind indefinitely. No Batman can, which is why DC keeps on changing bits and pieces of all their long-term characters.

[Damiean Dark]

Couldn't have said it any better myself. He didn't KNOW he was going to be Batman per se, when he made that vow, just that he wanted to do something.

All they really needed to do was have a quick shot of him (as a child) infront of his parents grave. That's all that really would have been needed.

Exactly but at the same time in a way Bruce Does become Batman at that moment, at least in his own mind the fear tactics and intense training come later.

[Choppa]

Sheesh, wasn't it plainly obvious from his actions whas his intentions were? Do you really need a scene with him blatantly stating his vow? Can't you read between the lines? Should Crane come out and say "I'm Dr. Crane and I'm a villian. My motivations are such and such..."

[NOD]

"On my oath as a small child I swear that I shall avenge the death's of my parents in some manner...not necessarily specfically against their killer though, maybe more generaly...you know, against criminals as a whole...within certain parameters of course...I probably won't be doggedly pursuing tax-evaders or insider-traders...or not, who knows, I'm very young...it's really hard to say how this deathly serious vow will manifest itself over the next few decades...I mean I can't rule out legitimate law-enforcement, although I feel that might be fundamentally unsatisfying...vigilantism has a certain visceral appeal, but is it practical...and what of the moral implications...would I really be any better than the criminals I sought to take down...man I've been kneeling at the rapidly cooling corpses of my parents for a while now, I should really get to a phone or something...

[Dr. Banner]

Sheesh, wasn't it plainly obvious from his actions whas his intentions were? Do you really need a scene with him blatantly stating his vow? Can't you read between the lines? Should Crane come out and say "I'm Dr. Crane and I'm a villian. My motivations are such and such..."

"On my oath as a small child I swear that I shall avenge the death's of my parents in some manner...not necessarily specfically against their killer though, maybe more generaly...you know, against criminals as a whole...within certain parameters of course...I probably won't be doggedly pursuing tax-evaders or insider-traders...or not, who knows, I'm very young...it's really hard to say how this deathly serious vow will manifest itself over the next few decades...I mean I can't rule out legitimate law-enforcement, although I feel that might be fundamentally unsatisfying...vigilantism has a certain visceral appeal, but is it practical...and what of the moral implications...would I really be any better than the criminals I sought to take down...man I've been kneeling at the rapidly cooling corpses of my parents for a while now, I should really get to a phone or something...


It's great to see that at least some people can see how stupid and useless that moment would be.

Nolan just isn't the kind of director that's going to beat us over the head repeatedly with something and including that moment would be precisely that. if you can't dig on subtlety or nuance maybe his work just isn't for you.

[The Batman]

^^^

You're not Dr. Banner.

Who are you?

[Batman was taken]

Sheesh, wasn't it plainly obvious from his actions whas his intentions were? Do you really need a scene with him blatantly stating his vow? Can't you read between the lines? Should Crane come out and say "I'm Dr. Crane and I'm a villian. My motivations are such and such..."

Yeah... That's not what I said at all. Nice try though.

I said a quick shot of him in front of his parents grave. It's a big part of the mythos. IIRC, they had a little montage of him traveling the world at one point. Throw it in before that. Or one of his flashbacks. It's been a while since I saw it, so I don't know exactly where I'd put it, but yeah.

Sorry if I offended you by pointing out something that's not perfect with the movie. I really liked the movie, but it is missing a few things.

[Choppa]

Yeah... That's not what I said at all. Nice try though.

I said a quick shot of him in front of his parents grave. It's a big part of the mythos. IIRC, they had a little montage of him traveling the world at one point. Throw it in before that. Or one of his flashbacks. It's been a while since I saw it, so I don't know exactly where I'd put it, but yeah.

Sorry if I offended you by pointing out something that's not perfect with the movie. I really liked the movie, but it is missing a few things.

That's one of the aspects that defenitly works on paper and not on screen. The movie is better off for not having it.

[Supermancho]

Sheesh, wasn't it plainly obvious from his actions whas his intentions were? Do you really need a scene with him blatantly stating his vow? Can't you read between the lines? Should Crane come out and say "I'm Dr. Crane and I'm a villian. My motivations are such and such..."

I was pointing to this:
The scene wouldn't have made any sense because fighting crime and being Batman isn't a decision he makes until later in life when he's old enough and experienced enough to appreciate the consequences of what he's set out for himself.
Then, who's this Batman? not one I know.

And...
I mean, what was young Bruce Wayne going to do? Vow to turn himself into a superhero on his parents' graves and then go home and start doing push ups? Crack open a criminology text book? Has Nolan done any of that I can't imagine anyone in the theatre not laughing out loud at the ridiculousness of it.
It wasn't an epiphany what hapenned over his parents grave. Just the start of the process resulting in Batman's birth.

We were just saying that vow is a big part of what Batman is.

[the goddamn batman]

That's one of the aspects that defenitly works on paper and not on screen.

Someone standing over a grave doesn't work on screen? Since when?:confused:

[BatWing]

It's great to see that at least some people can see how stupid and useless that moment would be.

Nolan just isn't the kind of director that's going to beat us over the head repeatedly with something and including that moment would be precisely that. if you can't dig on subtlety or nuance maybe his work just isn't for you.

Like he beat us over the head repeatedly with the 'why do we fall?' line? Or the 'are you watching closely?' and the explaining of the prestige in The Prestige? (terribly underrated, by the way). I think he's a great director, but using actual subtlety isn't one of them, I think.
The line is iconic and exemplary for the character. It's like losing with great power comes great responsibilty in Spider-Man. It has to be there. In good hands (Nolan could've made it great) it would have been a memorable scene.

[Libaax]

I, personally, prefer "plausable" over "realistic". Nolan's Batman isn't realistic at all. It's plausable. But realistic? No. It's still complete fantasy.

I think it's more grounded in realism than the comics... but that isn't too hard.



What? Ra's wasn't ever given a nationality... and the actors nationality has nothing to do with the character.

I don't know what you're talking about with Falcone. He didn't sound british... the name Falcone isn't british... and again, the actors nationality has nothing to do with the character.

Funny, though, that you failed to mention Bale's nationality. You know he's a big fat brit, right? He's got a thick english accent in real life.

Cillian Murphy's Irish, too. Linus Roache is English.

What's your beef with actors?

I dont got anything against the nationality of an actor.


Carmine Falcone the coolest italian maffia boss in Bat story sounded uber british cause of the actor or the director somehow think his accent was allright for a guy named Falcone.....


Ra's Al Ghul the only arabic villain i can think of and the only famous one shouldnt become a WHITE DUDE in the film.

I was disgusted with how Ducard was both. Not about his nationality but the most grand and coolest villain of Batman became something lame with Ducard.

I always loved his interaction with Batman in the comics, him always calling him The Detective. Expected him to have a role and not being so belittled enough to be alias of Ducard.

[Alan2099]

Even before I knew what nationality Ra's was supposed to be, I always viewed him as a strange and mysterious foreigner. The movie didn't even seem like it was trying for anything close to that.

[Libaax]

Even before I knew what nationality Ra's was supposed to be, I always viewed him as a strange and mysterious foreigner. The movie didn't even seem like it was trying for anything close to that.

Exactly why use him if he is just a useless alias.


The guy created as international villain is what i like. If he was the villain of the movie like Ducard was and was a white dude i wouldnt care.

Just like Kingpin if the character is the same in everything but race i dont care it will work fine for me.

Now he was only a way to fool Bruce Wayne.

[carabas]

Ra's Al Ghul the only arabic villain i can think of and the only famous one shouldnt become a WHITE DUDE in the film.How many A-list actors of Arabian decent with decent name recognotion do you know?

[GLF]

I personally find the BB batman to be by far the best out there (I haven't read that many of the comics, but I have read a few). I certainly wouldn't mind if they decided to start a comics series based on it.
However, I don't expect others to feel the same, and because this is largely a matter of personal taste, you can't really say that they "should" replace all other versions with this one.

[Choppa]

Someone standing over a grave doesn't work on screen? Since when?:confused:

I envision it coming off really contrived. Like in Iron Man when Tony says "I want to be able to protect the people that I care about!" (or something). It's just not something that people actually say in real life.

[Supermancho]

How many A-list actors of Arabian decent with decent name recognotion do you know?

The first one I can think about is Omar Sharif.

[nepenthes]

Well all know that in 2005, with the film Batman Begins, visionary story-teller Christopher Nolan has given us the perfect incarnation of Batman and that he's going to do it again with this summer's The Dark Knight. The first movie killed at the box office and made Batman more popular than he's ever been and the second looks to do the same. With such a popular, perfect version of Batman out there, why hasn't DC started to use it?

Why are they still publishing an inferior version of Batman month after month after month when they don't have to?

Imagine the Tumbler and the Bat-pod on the comic book page drawn by Jim Lee or Tony Daniel. Imagine how good the new Batsuit would look drawn by Dustin Nguyen. Imagine Grant Morrison or Paul Dini writing about the brilliant versions of Batman and the Joker that geniuses Christian Bale and the late Heath Ledger portrayed.

Imagine all that and I know you can't help but wonder why we're then stuck reading a lesser version of this mythos all the time; a version that's sillier, and less realistic and ridiculously unbelievable. Why would DC want to publish that? Why would anybody want to read it?

The only answer I can think of is continuity. To use this better version of Batman means that they'd have to toss out a lot of continuity doesn't it? Luckily, it's only a matter of time before DC hits the reset button on their universe and tries again and when they do, and Batman begins anew, it should be like he was in Batman Begins.

Wow, you seem pretty ignorant and self-righteous. Do you really think the guys at DC, whose JOB it is to keep the titles selling, don't know their business better than you do? Just because YOU like the film incarnation better you're wondering why it isn't transfered into every single comic title?

Reality check, film and comics are entirely different mediums with different conventions and WIDELY different markets and restrictions. And there are already comics that adopt the tone of Nolans films.

also Batman titles right now are the best they've been for years. Simultaneously we have re-defining books that fans and critiques love and are each selling gangbusters. So when you say that DC is "still publishing an inferior version of Batman month after month after month when they don't have to " you clearly have to rethink your argument

.

[Cornelius Stirk]

Couldn't disagree more. Now I wouldn't mind a nolanverse elseworlds comic, I wouldn't buy it, but it'd be a good idea marketing wise, I don't see why you should toss everything out for a movie that people may forget in ten years.

They didn't do it for Batman '89 (which , in case you'd forgotten made substantially more than B.B's) and they shouldn't do it now. Are there ideas from the films that'd make sense in the comics? Sure, like how the batgrapple gun became standard in the 90's, but I honestly think throwing out the baby with the bathwater is a mistake.

[GLF]

I found this on wikipedia (about Batman Begins), and thought you guys might be interested in it.


"Comic book scribe and editor Dennis O'Neil stated that he 'felt the filmmakers really understood the character they were translating', citing this film as the best of the live-action Batman films."


If I have my info correct, O'Neil is one of the big batman writers, and it has his stamp of approval.

[Supermancho]

I found this on wikipedia (about Batman Begins), and thought you guys might be interested in it.


"Comic book scribe and editor Dennis O'Neil stated that he 'felt the filmmakers really understood the character they were translating', citing this film as the best of the live-action Batman films."


If I have my info correct, O'Neil is one of the big batman writers, and it has his stamp of approval.

The key word is translating. O'neal aproved the movie, but he's not saying that should be the standard.

[GRANT!]

No. The cool thing about Batman is you can do pretty much anything you want with him. Why limit it to one vision?

[the goddamn batman]

Carmine Falcone the coolest italian maffia boss in Bat story sounded uber british cause of the actor or the director somehow think his accent was allright for a guy named Falcone.....

He didn't sound English to me...

Ra's Al Ghul the only arabic villain i can think of and the only famous one shouldnt become a WHITE DUDE in the film.

Why? Why does it matter than much?

I envision it coming off really contrived. Like in Iron Man when Tony says "I want to be able to protect the people that I care about!" (or something). It's just not something that people actually say in real life.

I just wanted a scene of Bruce standing at the grave. We didn't even get that. I don't need him to say anything. But a shotr of him standing there would have been nice.

They didn't do it for Batman '89 (which , in case you'd forgotten made substantially more than B.B's)

They did make a comic adaptation of the movie though.

[Supermancho]

I just wanted a scene of Bruce standing at the grave. We didn't even get that. I don't need him to say anything. But a shotr of him standing there would have been nice.

You just read my mind.:biggrin:

[metalhead_dave743]

They didn't do it for Batman '89 (which , in case you'd forgotten made substantially more than B.B's)

No it didn't.

Batman made $411,348,924

Batman Begins made $371,853,783

The difference is 40 million. Now I know that's enough to retire on but between numbers like that, 40 million isn't that substantial and Warner Brothers can chew and spit out 40 million.

And at least Begins beat it outside the U.S. :biggrin:

[nepenthes]

Ra's Al Ghul the only arabic villain i can think of and the only famous one shouldnt become a WHITE DUDE in the film.

You haven't thought it through. Do you think these changes are just made for no reason?

How would the general public perceive a Batman relaunch featuring an Arab terrorist trying to destroy an economic center of the decadent Amerika? There would be no way to avoid the spectre of islamofacism, and Ra's Al Ghul has never been about that at all. People would roll their eyes at that type of realism in a comic book franchise, so best not to make it even a remote possibility they'll perceive it that way. To that end they even made his Ubu Japanese and based him in an Asian region instead of Middle Eastern.

[The Batman]

No it didn't.

Batman made $411,348,924



Is that in 1989 dollars or 2005 dollars?

Because I'm pretty sure that Batman's $251 million domestic take would be more than $400 million if we turn it into 2005 dollars.

[metalhead_dave743]

Is that in 1989 dollars or 2005 dollars?

Because I'm pretty sure that Batman's $251 million domestic take would be more than $400 million if we turn it into 2005 dollars.

Depends on how much movie tickets were back in 89.

[pariah-1972]

I kind of feel for this kid i know i would love to have a Burton version of the Batman mythos comic book preferably written by Burton himself:biggrin:

Of course it would be hard to do since all the villains 'cept maybe Cat-woman died in his movies.
I would love love to see the mutated freak Penguin than the boring ass one we gots now
Hell i would take the one from the last animated series he was a kick !

Either way just cause it would have Nolans version (or whatever he wants ?) doesn't mean its going to be any good in comic book version.
Just like i can't stand the Beetlejuice cartoon :tongue:

[Choppa]

I just wanted a scene of Bruce standing at the grave. We didn't even get that. I don't need him to say anything. But a shotr of him standing there would have been nice.
.

I gotcha. I'm still glad they didn't do that. The funeral scene was good enough for me. Begins seemed to be more about him protecting Gotham in order to carry in his parents' work than specifically avenging them.

[Trey]

Batman Begins? OVERRATED,OVERRATED,OVERRATED


Love Memento, by the way.

[The Batman]

Yeah, if we just adjust the domestic numbers for Batman (1989) we get $433 million dollars. Well above even Batman Begin's worldwide take.