I was gonna ask the same question as Jordan re: the death scene, but was gonna be really rude about it, as is my wont. From what I recall (and don't mind me if I remember things a bit slanted):
Burton - slow-mo echoed horsecrap, almost pantomimed, leering sinister crooks, and OF COURSE that crook becomes the Joker (oh the pathos!)
Nolan - in real-time, actual interaction between the criminal and the victim, actual TENSION (cf. when the wallet drops), crook as lost befuddled desperate soul driven to such depths (apparent even w/out all the depression discussion), actual Bruce-parent interaction prior to that so viewers give a crap when the parents get popped, the insertion of Bruce's guilt into the scenario (cf. wanting to leave the opera house), and the lack of romanticized foofah when the gun goes off (tho, in hindsight, Mr. Wayne getting off that one line is a bit hokey, but, @ the same time, it dovetails nicely w/ what preceded it).
― David R. (popshots75`), Friday, 17 June 2005 13:38 (eighteen years ago) link
― Jordan (Jordan), Friday, 17 June 2005 13:40 (eighteen years ago) link
Yeah, yeah, but maybe I didn't put fine enough a point on it. Batman is not just any filmic property, he's a fucking brand, and a pretty big one. For the last 20 years, Batman has been the biggest (and nearly ONLY at times) moneymaker from DC Comics. On the one hand, yeah, Batman is a modern myth, an operatic iteration of the post-Depression urbanization, but on the other hand, Batman is Ronald McDonald.
― Huk-L, Friday, 17 June 2005 13:55 (eighteen years ago) link
― Huk-L, Friday, 17 June 2005 13:56 (eighteen years ago) link
― David R. (popshots75`), Friday, 17 June 2005 13:56 (eighteen years ago) link
― Huk-L, Friday, 17 June 2005 14:00 (eighteen years ago) link
I admit I actually liked the creepy sense of slow motion/unsettled music in the Burton depiction, at least as the scene begins. With this version, I suspect part of me may well have just been *impatient* -- like a, "Look, we know, okay?" Which for those that don't know is admittedly unfair. But also I thought the conclusion of the scene -- kid slumped to his knees, folks sprawling out on either side -- was a little too self-consciously staged in a movie where most such scenes are done with plot-derived intent (the multiple ninja scene in the monastery, for instance, or Falcone spreadeagled on the searchlight).
Also, frankly, I was a bit dulled by the young Bruce's reaction to it all. I suppose it's really hard to convey near instant shock and make it seem like something as compelling as "I've got a splinter in my foot. Ouch. I think I'll vaguely sniffle." The fact that it's immediately followed by Oldman's first appearance trying to figure out *how* to convey sympathy/assistance to young Bruce -- you can sense him trying to find the right words/attitude/etc., like you suspect just about anyone else would in that situation -- kicks the acting up a notch and has more of an impact in my mind.
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:04 (eighteen years ago) link
xpost
― Jordan (Jordan), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:05 (eighteen years ago) link
― Huk-L, Friday, 17 June 2005 14:06 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:10 (eighteen years ago) link
― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:15 (eighteen years ago) link
I guess I can see where Burton's self-aware staging of the event is less cloying than Nolan's "less artistic" attempt at verisimilitude, but at the same time, Ned, you're on crack, and you like Star Wars, so SHAVE THOSE SIDEBURNS HIPPY!
― David R. (popshots75`), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:24 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:27 (eighteen years ago) link
― David R. (popshots75`), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:28 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:28 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:29 (eighteen years ago) link
Off-topic: did anyone get the long Charlie & the Chocolate Factory trailer? W/ the usual Burtonesque weirdness and the strange "hey, it's a KID'S MOVIE!" vibe? What the hell?!?
― David R. (popshots75`), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:30 (eighteen years ago) link
The trailer I got was pretty much the same as the one I had seen with a couple of different camera shots.
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:31 (eighteen years ago) link
― Huk-L, Friday, 17 June 2005 14:32 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:34 (eighteen years ago) link
― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:39 (eighteen years ago) link
― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:41 (eighteen years ago) link
― Huk-L, Friday, 17 June 2005 14:41 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:42 (eighteen years ago) link
Linus Roache was so good as a child molestor in Priest that he's given off that creepy vibe in every movie I've seen him in since.
― Puddin' (Arthur), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:43 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:43 (eighteen years ago) link
― Huk-L, Friday, 17 June 2005 14:43 (eighteen years ago) link
― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:44 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:44 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:45 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:46 (eighteen years ago) link
― Huk-L, Friday, 17 June 2005 14:47 (eighteen years ago) link
― Huk-L, Friday, 17 June 2005 14:48 (eighteen years ago) link
SCENE: THING looks across a dinner table at INVISIBLE WOMAN
CUT TO: THING looking much different
THING: "I had a wonderful time contemplating things."
CUT TO: INVISIBLE WOMAN looking somehow older.
I.W.: "I think there are bad things."
HUMAN TORCH is seen in high chair smearing food over his face.
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:51 (eighteen years ago) link
Sky High may not look "good", but it had Dave Foley, Kevin MacDonald and Bruce Campbell so I'll give it a shot.
― Jordan (Jordan), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:51 (eighteen years ago) link
― Huk-L, Friday, 17 June 2005 14:52 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:52 (eighteen years ago) link
― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:53 (eighteen years ago) link
― Huk-L, Friday, 17 June 2005 14:54 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 14:56 (eighteen years ago) link
http://vondoom.free.fr/Images/Interviews/Paul%20Ryan/byrne2.jpg
― Leon C. (Ex Leon), Friday, 17 June 2005 15:00 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 15:01 (eighteen years ago) link
― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 17 June 2005 15:01 (eighteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 17 June 2005 15:02 (eighteen years ago) link
― L'Histoire d'Eric H. (Eric H.), Saturday, 18 June 2005 06:05 (eighteen years ago) link
― giboyeux (skowly), Saturday, 18 June 2005 06:51 (eighteen years ago) link
I feel kind of embarassed about it but I liked Constantine WAY better than this movie. Batman Begins should have been better with the amazing cast but Constantine was just so much more fresh and different. Batman Begins was a little too good and by-the-books and ultimately just predictable and dull. The criticisms of the mind-numbing action close-ups are OTM. Katie Holmes was pretty bad.
I think it's insane that anyone would genuinely argue that this was a better movie than the first Burton Batman. Perhaps too much time has passed and people are forgetting the impact of seeing that first Batman for the first time.
― walter kranz (walterkranz), Saturday, 18 June 2005 16:45 (eighteen years ago) link