Burton or Nolan?

[theDarkJAww13]

No they didn't. Or at least, they didn't explore them in any kind of adult fashion.

They were pretentiously serious and trying to be "how it would really be," which is, to my mind, a juvenile way to approach Batman. The politics, the social dynamics, the themes were positively adolescent (and that's alright).

The Burton films were just as adolescent, but they weren't pretending to be grand, mature statements. And, to my tastes, they had massively more style, range of characterization, and the contrivances were more honestly contrived.

No one has EVER said Nolan's trilogy is supposed to be realistic in terms that it could ACTUALLY happen. It's ridiculous when people downplay these movies like it was Christopher Nolan's intention to make a pretentious, overly-realistic film as opposed to that just being how the overall PUBLIC regarded it. It was never meant to be realistic, it was simply supposed to be a Batman story taking place in a realistic SETTING. Two very, extremely different things. Nolan pulls off the latter terrifically, while the former would be impossible. People need to understand this before seeing these, or any, superhero movies.

What'd you say, they were "pretending to be grand, mature statements?" How so? Like you were quick to point out, there are plenty of moments in TDK that require your disbelief to be suspended - like the Joker's timing, plans, "adolescent" themes (don't think that makes sense), but do you honestly think Nolan was unaware of any of this? Very doubtful, it's just that he recognized he was making a BATMAN MOVIE lol. For that mere fact, it's clear Nolan wasn't intending to make this any grand statement, or an overly-pretentious drama film - just a good Batman movie, which he absolutely did.

Anyways, I just thought it was funny that your whole post was a reply to someone saying "Nolan's films had adult IDEAS." to which you disagreed. Even if you don't think the movie's realistic, or you perceive it as an attempt at being "overly serious" just because that's what critics said; disputing the fact that it had "adult ideas" is a pointless endeavor. A dude gets hanged in front of the Mayor's window for crying out loud - that's adult enough, we don't even have to touch on the themes or nature of the film. That scene is enough to solidify the "adult ideas" statement in my opinion haha.

My beef with Burton's Gotham is that it was too small and claustrophobic, and made the movie feel like a stage play.

I think something like Snyder's Watchmen does a better job creating a noir/goth aesthetic without becoming too cartoony. I know it's not a well-liked film, but it looked damn good at least.

Don't let yourself believe that Watchmen was "not well-liked" for a second. The feedback was over all positive - except from the comic book community (surprise surprise). Comic book fans don't allow themselves to enjoy anything if it's not cut-and-copy from the source material. I am so, so happy I saw the movie before I got back into comics so I didn't have the inevitable negativity toward the changes made swaying my viewing experience. I've since read the book and yes, it's a way better story overall, but the film was a fine superhero movie on its own merits. The performances alone were great and even if the events didn't match up exactly like the comics, the characters (personality-wise) more-or-less did.

[Aquacatlungfish]

Don't let yourself believe that Watchmen was "not well-liked" for a second. The feedback was over all positive - except from the comic book community (surprise surprise). Comic book fans don't allow themselves to enjoy anything if it's not cut-and-copy from the source material. I am so, so happy I saw the movie before I got back into comics so I didn't have the inevitable negativity toward the changes made swaying my viewing experience. I've since read the book and yes, it's a way better story overall, but the film was a fine superhero movie on its own merits. The performances alone were great and even if the events didn't match up exactly like the comics, the characters (personality-wise) more-or-less did.

I remember parents freaking out over Watchmen because they thought it was going to be like Fantastic Four and discovered it was full of brutal murder, guts ad attempted rape. It was pretty funny. I also remember casual comic book viewers being annoyed because the characters were "jerks" and missing the whole point of it.

[Vil_Dee]

It's difficult to say because in the areas I think one director was successful, the other director failed.

Burton had the better theme song, but Nolan had the better overall movie score (Pop music in a Batman movie, Burton? *shudder*).

Batman was better portrayed by Michael Keaton (He was intense, obsessive, got the right level of brooding, and he did the gravelly voice good) Bale was too Brucey, his brooding came off more like whining, and do I need to mention his Batman voice.
Oh. MY. God. Becky.

Joker was better portrayed by Heath (Nicholson was playing Nicholson -which is still pretty damn good, but still, it was Nicholson).

Burton had the better love interests for Bruce (Vicki Vale/Sexy Catwoman vs Dawes#1/Dawes#2/TryingtobeSexy Catwoman)

Burton's depictions were more fun, but Nolan's characterizations were better.

Burton's fight sequences were better (or at least I could actually see them)

Burton's Gotham was more Gothamy (I don't think Gotham should look like any ol American city).

Nolan's overall plots were better (Joker killed Bruce's parents, Burton? REally? Reeeeeaaaly? Selina was resurrected by cat souls? REally? REeaaaaally?)


On a side note, no one has yet to figure out how to make a Batman outfit that doesn't look ridiculous.

[maxpower00044]

I don't know how anyone who is knowledgeable of Batman, and his universe can pick Burton. He completely misses the mark consistently. There's not one character in his movies that are portrayed right. And, for the "look"; it's dated. Like Holmes said (holy crap, we agree), even the set feels more like a set, and less like the grand city that Gotham is, and should be.

[Ood Omega]

Oh. MY. God. Becky.

(Joker killed Bruce's parents, Burton? REally? Reeeeeaaaly? Selina was resurrected by cat souls? REally? REeaaaaally?)

LMFAO, Great post!

On a side note, no one has yet to figure out how to make a Batman outfit that doesn't look ridiculous.

Honestly don't think this looks ridiculous (keep in mind we are talking about a man dressed like a bat).

www.youtube.com/watch?v=yq-ykmGAa1k

I think they could update it though. Make it look like the new 52 suit or the Arkham City suit but keep the black & grey theme or even dark blue & gray. Again it depends on what artist is making it.

[Vil_Dee]

I don't know how anyone who is knowledgeable of Batman, and his universe can pick Burton. He completely misses the mark consistently. There's not one character in his movies that are portrayed right. And, for the "look"; it's dated. Like Holmes said (holy crap, we agree), even the set feels more like a set, and less like the grand city that Gotham is, and should be.

Batman was portrayed right up until, you know, that killing part at the end (Nolan's Batman did kill Two-face).
The Joker was more golden age Joker, definitely not unacceptable.


The movie was purposefully retro. It had a 1950's vibe with the dress, the cars, the old-school gangster stuff (kind of like Dark Victory).

I didn't think the "Gotham" in Nolan's movie was grand. It was a generic looking city and not at all gothic.

If I was ranking Batman movies though: I'd put "The Dark Knight" first and Burton's "Batman" second.

[cactusmaac]

I don't know how anyone who is knowledgeable of Batman, and his universe can pick Burton. He completely misses the mark consistently. There's not one character in his movies that are portrayed right. And, for the "look"; it's dated. Like Holmes said (holy crap, we agree), even the set feels more like a set, and less like the grand city that Gotham is, and should be.

Alfred?

If you've read the Golden Age Finger\Kane stories, Burton works just fine.

[maxpower00044]

Batman was portrayed right up until, you know, that killing part at the end (Nolan's Batman did kill Two-face).

Ya, the thing about that; he didn't kill Two-Face. Batman was saving a child and Two-Face happend to die as a result. That's not murder. Batman didn't kill Ra's. They had the same training. If Batman can get out, so can Ra's (we can argue these points until we're blue in the face, and you'll never be swayed, nor will I). I will admit, he killed the driver of the truck holding the Atom Bomb in Rises, but THERE"S A NUKE ON THE TRUCK. It's his known last act as Batman (in his mind), and even Batman knows priorities.

I didn't think the "Gotham" in Nolan's movie was grand. It was a generic looking city and not at all gothic.

It doesn't have to look Gothic. To me at least. Did Year One's Gotham seem Goth? Nolan's Gotham was an amalgamation of a bunch of recognizable cities, but it was still unique. Making it the ultimate big city.

[maxpower00044]

Alfred?

If you've read the Golden Age Finger\Kane stories, Burton works just fine.

Ahh, you got me. Alfred was just fine.

[tylenoljones]

Nolan's Gotham had a little more personality in Begins; but yeah, the fact that Gotham looked just like any other American city in the latter two Nolan films just took some of the fun out of it.

Vil-Dee's comparison of the films a few posts up is pretty much exactly how I feel, the sole exception being that I'd put Batman 89 over The Dark Knight. Re-watching The Dark Knight I find myself tuning out whenever the Joker isn't on-screen.

[Coyote2010]

Burtons Gotham and his Joker work amazingly well and the Death of the Waynes feels like a golden age comic.
I think Nolans films have so much heart though, Bales Bruce Wayne balances Playboy and adolescent so well. He really brings out the heart of the Batman story.

Nolan, his trilogy is soaked in comics and its first rate movie watching.

[nepenthes]

On the architecture thing, up until Batman 89 Gotham in the comics generally looked like an ordinary city. Anton Furst and Tim Burton created that grand art deco look and the comics began adopting it here and there. Then TAS truly made if part of Batmans modern DNA.

[tylenoljones]

People seem to forget that up until Batman 89 Gotham in the comics generally looked like an ordinary city. Anton Furst and Tim Burton created that grand art deco look and the comics began adopting it here and there. Then TAS truly made if part of Batmans modern DNA.

It wasn't so much the crazy architecture in Burton's films that appealed to me. The opening shot of the family leaving the theatre, that follows them to the alleys and then ends up at the rooftops of Gotham; there's no giant statues or set pieces. There's just a lot of attention to detail in the scenery that helps build atmosphere.

Compare the Narrows in Batman Begins to any other city-scape in The Dark Knight. The Narrow's just looks like a run-down area of any major city, but it looks rich in detail in comparison to the stark settings in Nolan's later movies.

Bales Bruce Wayne balances Playboy and adolescent so well. He really brings out the heart of the Batman story.

Bale's Bruce was the best part of that whole trilogy, particularly the scenes where Bale is playing the spoiled rich boy. The Dark Knight Rises could have used some more of that, I think.

In a perfect world, we'd somehow work out an arrangement where Bale could play Bruce, and Keaton could jump in when it's time to wear the Bat-Suit.

[theDarkJAww13]

I remember parents freaking out over Watchmen because they thought it was going to be like Fantastic Four and discovered it was full of brutal murder, guts ad attempted rape. It was pretty funny. I also remember casual comic book viewers being annoyed because the characters were "jerks" and missing the whole point of it.

The movie missed the whole point of the comics i'll agree, but it wove a different, more straight up superhero tale with the same characters - loosely following the main plot of the comics. All the characterizations were decently spot on in my opinion. But again, who am I? Am I right!? haha

[Vil_Dee]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=yq-ykmGAa1k

I think they could update it though. Make it look like the new 52 suit or the Arkham City suit but keep the black & grey theme or even dark blue & gray. Again it depends on what artist is making it.

They need to stop it with the molded plastic muscles and bulges already. Maybe they should start with a well-fitted flight suit as a base with some armor plating.

Ya, the thing about that; he didn't kill Two-Face. Batman was saving a child and Two-Face happend to die as a result. That's not murder. Batman didn't kill Ra's. They had the same training. If Batman can get out, so can Ra's (we can argue these points until we're blue in the face, and you'll never be swayed, nor will I). I will admit, he killed the driver of the truck holding the Atom Bomb in Rises, but THERE"S A NUKE ON THE TRUCK. It's his known last act as Batman (in his mind), and even Batman knows priorities.

Well, he did kill him, even if he was justified in doing so. In continuity, Batman has always found a way to save people without killing the bad guy. I know they wanted Two-face to die at the end, but they could have altered the scene a little so he died without Batman being directly responsible (ie. having Gordon do it, or having him off himself). I mean, it's kind of funny, when he makes a mad rush to save the Joker (who was just about to blow up two boat loads of people), but can't throw a well placed batarang to disarm Harvey.

It doesn't have to look Gothic. To me at least. Did Year One's Gotham seem Goth? Nolan's Gotham was an amalgamation of a bunch of recognizable cities, but it was still unique. Making it the ultimate big city.

Gotham for me, I prefer a more escapist vision. I don't want to be reminded of a real life city.

Nolan's Gotham had a little more personality in Begins; but yeah, the fact that Gotham looked just like any other American city in the latter two Nolan films just took some of the fun out of it.

Vil-Dee's comparison of the films a few posts up is pretty much exactly how I feel, the sole exception being that I'd put Batman 89 over The Dark Knight. Re-watching The Dark Knight I find myself tuning out whenever the Joker isn't on-screen.

I think Batman 89 is more fun to watch from beginning to end.

But the Joker scenes in TDK were just so. . .oh baby

People seem to forget that up until Batman 89 Gotham in the comics generally looked like an ordinary city. Anton Furst and Tim Burton created that grand art deco look and the comics began adopting it here and there. Then TAS truly made if part of Batmans modern DNA.

I didn't start reading comics till after the Batman 89 movie came out, so Gotham has always been gargoylely and archy to me.