Christ Centered Gamer

This is a thread meant for any kind of Batman stuff. But I'll kick it off with my original motivation for making this thread.

After Arkham Origins was announced I decided to watch all of the 90's Batman movies, that I never saw up until this point. So that is: Batman Returns, Forever and Robin. Which means I've now seen all of the modern Batman movies (still need to see the Adam West one!).

So this is how I'd rate the Batman films:
Batman (1989)
Batman Begins (close tie with the '89 one)
The Dark Knight
The Dark Knight, Rises
Batman Returns
Batman & Robin
Batman Forever

Batman Returns remains low on my list, because despite maintaining a serious tone like the first film, the movie was very depressing to watch. And I disagree with both Penguin's and Catwoman's portrayals (Catwoman's "origin" really rubbed me the wrong way). It also felt more like a Tim Burton film at times, than Batman, I mean the character Max Shreck looked like he was straight out of Edward Scissorhands or Sweeney Todd. Overall, Returns is still better than the next two films, but if Burton just didn't make it so dark, we would've had a great trilogy on our hands, in my opinion.

I put Batman & Robin higher than Forever for a few reasons. For one, Batman & Robin to me was a campy movie that made improvements on an already campy movie (the Batmobile's design was much better the 2nd time around and the fight scenes were better). Forever, was a follow up to the serious (and superior) Burton films and started the horrible trend that created B&B. Both horrible movies, just dissecting which one is the lesser of two evils.

One complaint with Forever is the acting. Now don't get me wrong, I feel that Jim Carey and Tommy Lee Jones are both great actors. Now on one hand, I was expecting the Riddler to be a rehash of the Joker (I gathered this from the trailers)...but actually, I sensed more Joker rehash from Two face! It was just awkward. Also, neither of the characters had very clear motives (besides being doing crime for the sake of crime). Whereas, in B&R, aside from Bane, both Ivy and Freeze have really well established, clear cut persona's and motivations. In fact, for both characters, crime was more or less just a vehicle for them to achieve what they wanted, where it was the polar opposite for the two villains in Forever. Ivy and Freeze were also very true to how they should be potrayed. In fact, Freeze having the goal of saving his wife was a story arc introduced to Batman lore in the very well written Animated series, and the writers of B&R actually chose that portrayal as opposed to the commonly used portrayal from the Adam West show where Mr Freeze (called Mr. Zero in that show) is just another thief with a snow gun. Poison Ivy thinking plants are superior and having lips of death is also another portrayal of the character seen in the Animated series....whereas I have to give Forever credit for giving us a very unique take on Two Face

Also, Val Kilmer is the stiffest Batman and Bruce Wayne of all of the movies. But, I will give him credit, he at least tried to do a separate Batman voice from his Bruce voice. George Clooney on other hand...it felt more like Batman was playing George Clooney. But I felt Clooney was more watchable none the less. Kilmer tried harder, but wasn't very fun to watch.

I feel every good portrayal of Batman teaches me a little about the character (whether that be intentional or not). As each movie shows a different take on the character. Adam West's Batman taught me that Batman has to be an optimist...and this is even more evident in the darker films...why would a guy keep fighting a sess pool of crime? He has to have some faith in humanity. Batman '89 introduced me to Batman. Begins taught me what Batman means as a symbol. The Dark Knight taught me the philosophical relationship of Batman and Joker. Arkham Asylum taught me about the self determined nature of Batman. The Animated series taught me many things about the Bat. Dark Knight Rises...sadly only taught me that Batman can be anyone....which is a pretty lame message in my opinion and not true to the character at all.

In Batman Forever, I learned nothing about Batman. In Batman & Robin, I didn't learn much...but Alfred actually had an interesting quote about Batman I never thought of, when Clooney's Bruce asks him if he is stubborn, Alfred replies with this:

"Yes, actually. Death and chance, stole your parents. But rather than become a victim, you have done everything in your power to control the fates. For what is Batman? If not an effort to master the chaos that sweeps our world. An attempt to control death, itself. "

That's at least something. Forever tried dabbling with the duality nature of Batman, but it fell flat and didn't tread any new ground that was already better illustrated in Batman '89.

Overally, Batman & Robin was just more watchable. Forever felt very flat, like there was something missing to it. But I should point out, that many people's reaction to B&R might've been without knowing how campy it would be (hard to believe after what happened with Forever). I came into B&R knowing its reputation and having already seen a video of Mr. Freeze's ice puns, so I do concede to possible bias as to why I prefer B&R over Forever.

So even though I consider Forever to be the worst Batman movie, I'm glad B&R is considered the worst by many and that it financially flopped...otherwise we wouldn't have Nolan's film without the wake up call that was Batman & Robin.



What's your take on the films? Feel free to sound off about them, or anything else about Batman.

I think I would still probably rate Batman Forever a little bit higher than Batman and Robin. Batman and Robin was unfortunately the first Batman movie that I ever saw (multiple times too), and so by the time I saw the one preceding it, I was ready for anything to escape the crappiness of Batnipple shenanigans and Uma Thurman's poisonous mug. Also, Alicia Silverstone as Batgirl....really? That being said, I've only seen Batman Forever once, so maybe I'm truly forgetting how awful it was.

My list of favorite Batman movies is pretty boring - I didn't see the Tim Burton '89 one until I turned 16 and I have to say that I didn't really care for it all that much. I tend to disclaim most things made by Burton anyway, but it's also possible that it needs another rewatch. My favorites of the new series go in sequential order from their release: Begins first, then the Dark Knight, and finally the Dark Knight Rises. I have yet to see Batman Returns, but I'll admit that it looks intriguing.

Is there anyone around here who prefers Arkham Asylum over Arkham City? The latter needs a lot more playtime from me, but I really haven't been able to get into it as much. With Asylum, the story felt much more focused and noir-ish, which I appreciate more.

TripExistence wrote:My list of favorite Batman movies is pretty boring - I didn't see the Tim Burton '89 one until I turned 16 and I have to say that I didn't really care for it all that much. I tend to disclaim most things made by Burton anyway, but it's also possible that it needs another rewatch.

Yeah, I'm no Burton fan either ( I actually didn't know he made '89 Batman till much later). Which is partly why I had problems watching Returns I think (and it got just plain gross at times...it took things to levels '89 Batman never went).

What I love about '89 Batman is that it really crafts a unique world of Gotham city. Yet it also feels real. The architecture is larger than life, but people and cars look like stuff you see everyday. I think it captures the fun and feel of Batman. And I don't think we'd have the animated series or Arkham games without it, as they were able to build on 89's feel but give things more depth.

TripExistence wrote:My favorites of the new series go in sequential order from their release: Begins first, then the Dark Knight, and finally the Dark Knight Rises. I have yet to see Batman Returns, but I'll admit that it looks intriguing.

Yeah, I loved Begins when I saw it. Its pretty much the best origin story you could give Batman. And he had no smoker voice either that for whatever reason he adopted in the next two films.

I also felt that the Dark Knight tried to focus more on philosophical drama and didn't really feel like a Batman film. It was a good film, but it felt more like a Nolan film about some rich guy who dresses up as a ninja. What I loved about Begins is that it was all about Bruce Wayne, unlike the previous films where the villains take up most of the stage time. Begins showed you how Bruce changes, The Dark Knight didn't do any character development really for Batman. He just went through the motions.

And Dark Knight Rises was a big disappointment. It focused a bit more on Batman than Dark Knight. But Alfred was a drag and Bruce Wayne was useless until the very end...which I guess is the point, the people did all of the work because Batman inspired them, but all it did was show that Batman himself wasn't very unique and could be replaced by someone like Blake. It wasn't a bad film, but I'd call it the "worst of the good Batman movies".

Overall, my big issue with all of the Nolan films (and pretty much all of the Batman movies except for '89) is that they really dumb down Batman. In the Dark Knight, rather than do real detective work, as a friend of mine put it, he just let the machines do everything for him. In Begins, Lucius Fox just gives him the tools and he uses them, no real thinking is done on his part. In Dark Knight Rises, Jordan Levitt's character did alot more detective work while Batman sat on his butt in most of the film. This is what I love about the DC Animated Universe and Arkham games. Batman's true super power is his mind. He's comparable to Tony Stark, but rather than more of an engineering side of intelligence, its more in the problem solving and psychological side of things.

In Batman '89 there isn't much work done in terms of being a detective (something that could've been more emphasized in Returns but sadly was missed). When Joker has those chemicals that kill people, Batman figures out how Joker did it all. It was only a small part in the film, but he had to think, on his own, and it showed why Batman was different from most superheroes.

TripExistence wrote:Is there anyone around here who prefers Arkham Asylum over Arkham City? The latter needs a lot more playtime from me, but I really haven't been able to get into it as much. With Asylum, the story felt much more focused and noir-ish, which I appreciate more.

I'm in the same boat. There's something about Asylum that draws me in that City doesn't. Even though I play City alot because there's alot of fun stuff to do in the game, I've replayed the Asylum story line at least 7 times, now. They did improve some things in City, like the combat, and gave you more options in stealth. But the stealth maps themselves are not as fun to me in City.

And yeah, the story was better in Asylum. I think they should've just stuck to Strange as the final villain. In, Asylum they build up to the great finale you were expecting and didn't hold back. So I think Joker should've stayed as a side character in City, because his story did the character justice in the previous game.

But, if they were to do another Batman movie Reboot, I'd prefer to see something similar to the Arkham games. Their portrayal of Batman is the best adaptation I've seen, by keeping things dark but also letting there be fantastical characters in its world. The games succeed in their characterization of Batman where the Nolan movies failed.

A new Batman game has been announced. Game Informer had an issue on the game in may and has had several exclusive online articles on their website for free about the game.

And now there's been a new teaser trailer released (word on the street says...ok actually youtube comments say...that there will be a full blown trailer come May 20th).

The interweb dwellers spoke truth and today a new, full length trailer for Arkham Origins surfaced. It has a longer fight scene between Deathstroke and Batman than the teaser:

ccgr wrote:

So cool

Ben Affleck as Batman: Yay or Nay?

he was a forgettable Dare Devil...

I would rather have a crash test dummy.

People care too much.

I'm not really the biggest Affleck fan but I think he has done some good stuff and there must be a reason why they chose him. It's not like this gargantuan box office draw nowadays. We're just gonna have to wait and see what they do with the character.

TripExistence wrote:People care too much.

Welcome to the internet!

TripExistence wrote:We're just gonna have to wait and see what they do with the character.

What's the fun in THAT?!

But yeah... from what I've seen him in (admittedly, not much), I'm convinced that he can't really act. However, hopefully he'll try harder in this role and prove me wrong. And if he can at least show the inflections between Bruce Wayne and Batman, and not over do it...he'll at least be an improvement to both George Clooney and Christian Bale in some ways.

Now I was playing Batman (in the words of Sulley from Monster's Inc..."it could happen!"), I'd be paying Kevin Conroy for lessons and advice.

Well, I liked him in Good Will Hunting and Shakespeare in Love. I've seen him in a fair few other things where he didn't necessarily add to the movie, but he didn't detract from it either. I feel as if that might be the case here.

Has anybody here seen the director's cut of Daredevil? I haven't, but I've been wanting to due to the apparent jump in quality from the theatrical version.

There's a new Batman game on the horizon: Arkham Knight!

Trailer:


Some quick info we know about the game (that's not obvious in the trailer):
*You'll get to drive the Batmobile, which you can jump in and out of
*The map will be 5X bigger than Arkham City
*Arkham Knight in the title refers to a new villain in the game
*It is the end to Rocksteady's trilogy

GameInformer Coverage



First batch of screenshots:
http://www.sticktwiddlers.com/2014/03/0 ... y-returns/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This site has the new screens that just came out:
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/gamenews ... #/slide/10" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Let's cross our fingers. Arkham Origins was a little disappointing, especially knowing Asylum and City were so good.