fwiw, what im looking for is basically how you criticized the portrayal of Gotham, which strikes me as good criticism, even if im not sure i agree.
― ryan, Sunday, 3 August 2008 01:28 (fifteen years ago) link
i understand. part of it i guess is that i think the movie doesn't really warrant much weighty analysis. i just don't think there's a whole lot there.
― tipsy mothra, Sunday, 3 August 2008 02:21 (fifteen years ago) link
(i have been in the reverse position on other movies -- like there will be blood, which i think is sort of genius even though it has its share of incoherence and which i've defended partly on the same visceral grounds that some people are lauding the dark knight. i understand the view of morbz and others that there isn't really much going on in TWBB -- i just disagree.)
― tipsy mothra, Sunday, 3 August 2008 02:23 (fifteen years ago) link
(or marie antoinette, for that matter)
― tipsy mothra, Sunday, 3 August 2008 02:24 (fifteen years ago) link
The idea that a negative assessment of a film, in order to be valid, must specifically engage with and forcibly negate whatever positive assessments exist is hilarious. Thank you for that.
Anyway, "escalation of chaos" as a theme/strategy doesn't excuse narrative incoherence. If it did, Rob Zombie's Halloween remake would be a good film. And it isn't.
― contenderizer, Sunday, 3 August 2008 09:07 (fifteen years ago) link
wow thank you for not being able to read
― max, Sunday, 3 August 2008 11:41 (fifteen years ago) link
it's easy to take oneself out of an interpretative relationship with a work of art and simply proclaim it "brainless"....and it's perfectly valid to do so too!
Isn't it a mark of good thinking to engage with things on their own terms, unless those terms're unacceptable? I fucking loved this movie, for what it was and how it showed itself.
― Niles Caulder, Sunday, 3 August 2008 12:02 (fifteen years ago) link
today the part of deeznuts will be played by tispy mothra
― HI DERE, Sunday, 3 August 2008 12:15 (fifteen years ago) link
can safely say that probably no other comic book movie has inspired this much intense debate...which is very cool.
― Bo Jackson Overdrive, Sunday, 3 August 2008 14:41 (fifteen years ago) link
Is this the longest single movie thread on ILX?
― Just got offed, Sunday, 3 August 2008 14:49 (fifteen years ago) link
I just got invited to see it at Imax. I will now be going a fourth time. I have never seen a movie four times in a theatre before. my Regal club card is happy though.
― Bo Jackson Overdrive, Sunday, 3 August 2008 15:09 (fifteen years ago) link
it's easy to take oneself out of an interpretative relationship with a work of art and simply proclaim it "brainless"
what if your interpretative relationship with a movie leads you to the suspicion that it doesn't have much going on in its stylish little head? like, i see all the gestures at relevancy in dark knight -- terror, torture, surveillance, the trade-offs between security and liberty, the conflict between means and ends -- but they mostly end up seeming like ... gestures at relevancy. they acknowledge some set of moral tensions, but they don't illuminate them any more than your average pundit round-table on cnn.
but so ok, i don't expect social relevancy of comic-book movies or even think they're a particular plus. on the visceral entertain-me side, like i said, i think a lot of the action sequences are not particularly well handled -- they go on too long, at a sustained pitch of frenzy that becomes monotonous, and the editing is kind of murky. (major exception is the ferry-boat scene, which i think is good and has more actual tension than most of the movie.) so i don't think that's rejecting an interpretative relationship. it's just feeling sort of unfulfilled by it.
― tipsy mothra, Sunday, 3 August 2008 15:27 (fifteen years ago) link
Which, as I said earlier, comes down to the fact that you don't really like this movie and a lot of other people do seem to like it, quite a lot. And neither understands the other enough to fully empathise / change minds. And would should either?
― Scik Mouthy, Sunday, 3 August 2008 17:01 (fifteen years ago) link
no, of course. criticism pro or con isn't really about changing minds anyway, right? just a chance to talk about something.
― tipsy mothra, Sunday, 3 August 2008 17:07 (fifteen years ago) link
(i've had my mind changed by criticism before, probably -- in that it maybe gave me a new way of looking at or thinking about something. but more often i can enjoy good criticism of something, like ned's thoughts about this movie, even if i don't share the critic's opinion of the work itself.)
― tipsy mothra, Sunday, 3 August 2008 17:10 (fifteen years ago) link
based on the review excerpts you posted before you even saw the film i think your mind was halfway made up before you went into this thing, morbs.
― omar little, Sunday, 3 August 2008 17:23 (fifteen years ago) link
i don't get all that anyway, esp since people can read into shit like this exactly what they want to read. don't even get me started on the dude i overheard talking about how hellboy 2 was probably "john mccain's favorite film".
― omar little, Sunday, 3 August 2008 17:29 (fifteen years ago) link
like john mccain even saw the first hellboy
yeah. we'd probably have to get obnoxiously theoretical to really talk about this well, but i think, in short, good criticism simply brings your attention to something you didn't notice on your own. makes it possible to "see" something you couldn't see before. how this affects your subjective feelings about the movie is something different and maybe only related in an indirect way. (like if someone reads a movie as marxist it could either turn you off or turn you on.)
― ryan, Sunday, 3 August 2008 17:42 (fifteen years ago) link
I know when I saw Black Hawn Down, and then learned the truth about the real life counterparts portrayed in the movie, it ruined my initial assessment of the movie
― Bo Jackson Overdrive, Sunday, 3 August 2008 20:48 (fifteen years ago) link
so the new rumor is that Maggie Gyllenhall will be catwoman in the next film. makes total sense (9 lives lolz) particularly since her and Eckhardt are both under contract for two films.
― Shakey Mo Collier, Sunday, 3 August 2008 21:11 (fifteen years ago) link
http://www.hollywood-newsroom.com/rumors/angelina-jolie-is-not-catwoman-in-batman-3-its-maggie-gyllenhaal/
― Shakey Mo Collier, Sunday, 3 August 2008 21:12 (fifteen years ago) link
Who said that Rachel didn't die? Oh snap.
― Mordy, Sunday, 3 August 2008 21:18 (fifteen years ago) link
i would find that easier to believe if rachel at any point demonstrated an affinity for cats, right before her 'death' in TDK she came into physical contact w/ a cat and the explosion resulted in her absorbing cat powers/thinking
― batwing, Sunday, 3 August 2008 21:24 (fifteen years ago) link
http://www.ilxor.com/ILX/Pages/confirmbookmark.jsp?action=bookmark&boardid=40&threadid=50130&messageid=1804
Ahem.
― Oilyrags, Sunday, 3 August 2008 21:24 (fifteen years ago) link
*or* right before her 'death'
― batwing, Sunday, 3 August 2008 21:25 (fifteen years ago) link
What started this whole "Catwoman has cat powers" thing? I've heard others confused by this before, but the only instance of this I can remember of this happening was that Birds of Prey TV series. I don't think she had any powers in the previous films or TV series. Even in Batman Returns, it's not like she actually has nine lives.
― Nhex, Sunday, 3 August 2008 22:10 (fifteen years ago) link
the Catwoman is supposed to be Selina Kyle, isn't she?
― Bo Jackson Overdrive, Sunday, 3 August 2008 22:26 (fifteen years ago) link
Mostly. Like nearly all comics continuity, there are exceptions.
― Oilyrags, Sunday, 3 August 2008 22:29 (fifteen years ago) link
welp, i just bought the Watchmen graphic novel, so I'll have my hands full for a while....
― Bo Jackson Overdrive, Sunday, 3 August 2008 22:30 (fifteen years ago) link
besides, you got the rumor wrong. It's Jake that is going to be Catwoman.
― Bo Jackson Overdrive, Sunday, 3 August 2008 22:33 (fifteen years ago) link
flipside was in this
― conrad, Sunday, 3 August 2008 22:33 (fifteen years ago) link
Even in Batman Returns, it's not like she actually has nine lives.
I think maybe you should rewatch Batman Returns because she rather emphatically has nine lives in it.
― HI DERE, Monday, 4 August 2008 00:15 (fifteen years ago) link
saw it for the second time today, still really good, and seemed better constructed and less murky this time... which i guess means it's pretty clunky and murky if it takes two viewings to clear up.
it struck me that there are a lot of subtle jokes in it, the script could have been played for laffs much more -- i was the only one that chuckled out loud at this:
(talking about the sonar cell phone thing in hong kong) fox: it sends out a high frequency pulse, imaging the surroundings, like-- wayne: a submarine? fox: right. like a submarine.
― goole, Monday, 4 August 2008 05:54 (fifteen years ago) link
Watched the 1989 Burton Batman last night, for the first time in... I'd say at least ten years, maybe more like 15. And you know what? It looked quite good - Grissom's office for instance was beautiful - although much of Gotham was obviously either painted backdrops or models, they were beautifully done. But it still looked like an expensive theatre set rather than a movie.
Other brief thoughts...
The Batwing was... ridiculous.
Keaton has NO physical presence, and the idea that neither Knox nor Vale knows what the richest socialite / philanthropist in the city looked like was silly. His distractedness was good. Useless as a playboy figure, though.
Nicholson as the Joker... The fact that the sets looked like they were for a theatre production (presumably of Bugsy Malone) was fitting, because his performance was hammy as fuck, and straight out of a pantomime. Nowhere near Ledger. Not even fit to lace his boots. "Bob, don't forget, you're my... main... guhay" with all the weezing and the Cesar Romero suit. Rubbish. Not scary, not deranged. And what's with all the "I'm an artist until somebody dies" nonsense. Both Romero and Nicholson were old men when they played The Joker. That speaks volumes for the character's physicality. How high were his suit trousers? How thick his midriff?
And anyone complaining about narrative incoherence in TDK, well... good grief. None of Burton's first Batman makes any sense. Nothing is explained. There seems to be no narrative order. I don't really know how it fills two hours. And the fight sequences... don't exist, somehow.
Also, we see Batman right at the start, and then not again until nearly an hour in. And that rubber suit. Oh my. I'd love to know what Bale would have thought of wearing that.
The Batmobile is super cool, though.
But other than that... aside from talking about visual effects and performances and nonsensical narrative, there's NOTHING to talk about in Burton's Batman. No moral issues. No plot twists (or even holes; the narrative is that absent that picking holes in it is pointless; it's JUST a hole). No character development. Nothing. Nada. Zip.
Quite good fun though. But in a barely evolved from Adam West kind of way. The set and costume design was better and there were no Biff Pow Blam cards, but other than that... it felt so campy. Admittedly I've never seen any of the Schumacher Batman films, and this might be fabulously dark and involving compared to them, but it's nothing compared to Nolan's interpretation.
― Scik Mouthy, Monday, 4 August 2008 06:08 (fifteen years ago) link
^^^ This is why the second Burton Batman movie is so much better.
― HI DERE, Monday, 4 August 2008 09:11 (fifteen years ago) link
Recent comment about the first Batman film from a friend off-board: "Every line feels like a non-sequitur."
― Ned Raggett, Monday, 4 August 2008 15:01 (fifteen years ago) link
I love Keaton's Bruce Wayne though.
"My life is really... complex."
― Roz, Monday, 4 August 2008 15:10 (fifteen years ago) link
i always liked keaton as batman/wayne despite the movies not being all that great
― latebloomer, Monday, 4 August 2008 15:39 (fifteen years ago) link
Christian Bale is to Michael Keaton as Brandon Routh is to Christopher Reeve.
― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Monday, 4 August 2008 15:41 (fifteen years ago) link
But but George Clooney
― Ned Raggett, Monday, 4 August 2008 15:42 (fifteen years ago) link
It's possible that he boasted superior nipples.
― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Monday, 4 August 2008 15:44 (fifteen years ago) link
That analogy doesn't work because Brandon Routh is quite obviously aping Christopher Reeve and Christian Bale is quite obviously not aping Michael Keaton.
― HI DERE, Monday, 4 August 2008 15:45 (fifteen years ago) link
That's one way of looking at it. I see them as feckless younger men trying to sound adult.
― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Monday, 4 August 2008 15:46 (fifteen years ago) link
I saw Keaton as a nearly middle-aged man of not imposing physique trying to play a kick-ass martial arts bat superhero, and failing.
― Scik Mouthy, Monday, 4 August 2008 15:52 (fifteen years ago) link
Bale's appeal as Batman / Wayne is that he's quite juvenile, I thought.
"She was going to wait for me, Alfred."
Keaton's Batman/Wayne is pretty juvenile as well! "You weigh a little more than a hundred and eight." and the bit where he's trying to confess to Vicki Vale and mouths to himself "I'm Batman. I. am. Batman." haha.
I'm kinda lukewarm on Bale's Bruce Wayne but he's waaay better than Brandon Routh. (and by better, I mean hotter. but also better.)
― Roz, Monday, 4 August 2008 15:55 (fifteen years ago) link
re gyllenhaal as catwoman, oh please oh please be true true true
― Doctor Casino, Monday, 4 August 2008 15:57 (fifteen years ago) link