scott

July 16, 2008 8:04 pm @DaveCarr Thanks.

July 16, 2008 7:41 pm

@daccampo...you raise some valid points that I cannot completely argue with.  I bow to you in forming a strong argument.

However, I think the fact remains that what many believe to be the best films are not origin films but the films that happen after.  It doesn't even have to be a superhero movie.  Empire Strikes Back is beloved much more than Star Wars, Godfather 2 is comparable to being as loved as by Godfather 2, Aliens is better than Alien, and the list is endless.  There are exceptions, Matrix is a perfect one, but for the most part we want to see what happens next.  

Our innerchild gets giddy when we see our heroes become heroes, but it's what they do with their power and how they deal with their enemies and the world around them that makes people satisfied. 

I have taken and witnessed children appreciating Spiderman climbing on the wall, Iron Man testing his suit and getting sprayed with an extinguisher, Neo's training and realizing he is the one, but the moment that stays with most is that first battle with the Goblin, Agent Smith, or Tobias.  Also, children do not think hierarchal when recalling.  All parts are cool, but the one that speaks the most is when they can play Batman vs. Joker with their friends outside.

I liken it to this, how often do we love villians (in super hero movies and in all others--horror for example) that cannot be explained and just appears?  More often than not, this is the case.  Any psycho killer or scary monster that just appears and wreak havoc is almost better UNEXPLAINED.  When the monster is villian is explained, we often complain how silly, lame, or unbelievable it is.  How many people were disappointed by seeing how Vader was created.  So if we can accept that we like our villians with a hint of mystery, why can we not expect the same of the Batman and our heroes?

And if you assume your audience wants to see Batman developed, why not show the Joker and Scarecrow's backstory?  Why would Nolan choose not to?  We saw how the Goblin, Doc Oc, Magneto, Tobias, and others come to be quickly and efficiently which worked wonders.  Why not do the same with the Scarecrow, Ra, or Joker?  Probably, because he recognizes it's not vital to the story like the CONFLICT. 

July 16, 2008 6:00 pm Are you with me on Bane?!  Thoughts?

July 16, 2008 5:36 pm

Captain (a.k.a. Conor), I totally agree with your top five and have read all of them.  The Killing Joke is one of the best graphic novels ever.  I also remembered the disturbing image of the Joker beating the #$%^ out of Robin, but had forgotten he was Iran's representative.  That was a strange story arc.  And when one thinks about it, who better then to represent Iran than the Joker?!

However, the Bane story needs to be included on this list because this was one of the moments when Batman was destroyed (his spine was snapped over Bane's knee).  I remembered everyone in school, and what seemed like the nation, talking about the death of Batman.  Bane as a character is super cool.  Bane's pre-plan to win was even better.  He broke out all of the inmates from Arkham Asylum, so we were treated to all of our favorites running around Gotham, and then Batman had to round them up leaving him too tired for his battle with Bane.  It was brilliant! 

The fact that Bane was so poorly mishandled in "Batman and Robin" is a crime.  The fact that he wore a spandex costume under a fedora and trenchcoat as Poison Ivy's limo driver was an even bigger one, but it was so $%^& hilarious.  I rewind it time after time. 

The out-takes of creepy Conor at the end of the show made me laugh.

My Joker shirt was only of his head holding a Joker card.  I wore it like that kid who wore Favre's jersey from ten or so years straight.

July 16, 2008 4:50 pm

@Tad.  Batman is one of the rare heroes that I love and am have read tons of.  What seperates him are a) the best villians (the Joker is arguably the best villian created) b) the fact that he is an ordinary man with no super powers c) that his creation is barely explained.  He witnesses the death of his parents and he is then thrust into the role of the Batman.  Kane and several writers never really touched on his backstory.  Most first issues and movies feature the hero gaining their power and then using it.  Batman's first issue was solving a mystery and there was no real mention of how he came to be, which could explain why I like him so much.

How many issues or T.V. episodes did we watch where his utility belt get him out of a jam.  After awhile the willingness suspension of disbelief took over and I became engrossed by his adventures.

 We all know the hero is going to win.  How he got there is not important.  How he is going to win is where the joy comes from.  I don't mind watching Batman be trained, however, I don't need to see how he got everything else.  This is the one hero who needs mystery, he fights crime in the shadows and at night.  Keep somethings a mystery from us.

Here's the thrust of my MAIN ARGUMENT.  People often cite X-Men II, Spiderman II, (old) Superman II, Hulk with Edward Norton (not sure if it's a two, but it's better than the first), and several other IIs as the best in most franchises.  My guess is Dark Knight will be better and Iron Man II probably will as well.  WHY?!  Because all of the ORIGIN CRAP IS FINISHED!  Our heroes now are ready to battle and the stories don't waste time on the why or how.  And most people want to see new characters or VILLIANS.  The villians are the most talked about and revered. 

Superheroes by their very nature are boring, their origins even more so.  It's the villians that command our attention.  Everybody says how they want to be James Bond, but I'd prefer to be or hang-out with James Bond's enemies.  Conor, keep Father Wayne.

@ Dr. Collosus Tom Wilkinson proves that strong actors in bit roles can really make a movie.  Anybody can play a tough mobster.  This role needed an actor who was Gotham's G-dfather and Wilkinson did great in it. 

July 16, 2008 10:52 am

I liked this, but not nearly as much as you. 

Here's a possible #5 for "things that don't quite work," we see how Bruce Wayne gets every $#%^ thing in order to become Batman.  I just didn't care.  Here's him getting the Bat Cave, here's him getting the Bat Suit, but in the end it just becomes irritating.  Other superhero films can sum up people discovering their powers and going into action much quicker.  Spiderman crawls a wall and then enters a wrestling match, almost minutes later he's confronting who killed his uncle.  Ironman's cave of sorts is already done and he quickly builds a suit.  If you read the comics or are well informed about your Batman history you knew how he became what he is and you just wanted to see him protect Gotham.

If you think I'm wrong on this, examine Nolan's handling of this movie.  THere's no Joker backstory and they just wanted to jump into the battle.  I'm a huge Joker fan, so perhaps I'm biased.

Here's a possible #6.  There was no fun in this entire movie and it took itself too seriously.  Batman always had a sense of adventure and fun.  Usually it depended on the villians, but the writing always reflected humor.  This film did not.

Burton's film was more Burton, but it combined the dark with a sense of fun and playfulness which Batman has always had since Kane created him.

 Here's a possible #7.  The training sequence of Batman became too annoying.  "Conquer your fear, your fear must be conquered, your fear holds you back so conquer...!"  I don't care!  Shut up, Mojo Monkey.  I know this is a necessary evil in most movies, but am amazed that sometimes it works brilliantly and other times it blows up to laughable moments.  For every "With great power come great responsibility," there are a ton of groan cliches we must endure. 

I agree with you about Alfred.  I disagree with you about the water supply.  I thought this was brilliant, and cancels out one of my earlier points.  The Batman villians often want to destroy Gotham, and often have plans like poisoning the water supply.  Usually, the 60s show for example, it takes a quick visit to a sign that reads "Gotham Water Supply" and dropping a vile that reads "Poison."  Here, the plan, while contradictory and a tad unbelievable, seemed much cooler and developed.  You have to accept the villian is going to do a crazy scheme, but here's where I want to see the how aspect no matter how silly.

Things that worked that you forgot...

Tom Wilkinson as a gangster.  He played it pitch perfect.

The fight sequences with Batman taking his enemies into the shadows and attacking.

 The use of bats.

Things that make me and my comedian friends giggle...

Bruce explains to Alfred that he should entertain his guests while he is away, and Alfred agrees.  How does Alfred entertain the guests?  We improvised Alfred's stand-up comedy bits.

June 5, 2008 7:47 pm I would read any comic with Swamp Thing growing weed.  This might be the best comic ever.

May 29, 2008 9:50 pm

This movie is truly ten years too late.  I want to resist the "Harrison Ford is too old reference."  Yet, within the opening sequence it proves to be true.  When young action stars dodge bullets, you there's a little benefit of the doubt.  When an old action star does, it's impossible not to.  This applies for all of the hurdles Indy survives without a scratch or a drop of water on him. 

Indy doesn't really fight people as much as he falls into them causing them to fall. 

Nostalgia?  Yep, for a young Indy. 

 This film is a complete mess.  There's an obligatory 1950's diner sequence that is more parody.  Infact, the film appears to be a gigantic Indy parody with enough nods and winks to the audience to suggest morse code that reads, "This is ridiculous!  Did you see the gophers and monkeys?  Why are you still here?"  

 The biggest problem was a lack of dramatic tension.  You never believed Indy was in danger, and you didn't even know what goal he was trying to achieve.  The stakes were higher in the others, preventing Nazis from world domination and saving children.  The script is too wishy washy.

 AVOID THIS!