Support NeoGAF

[whytemyke]

Burton sucks no matter which way you look at it and he got Batman

You realize this statement just destroyed any support you may have had in any movie argument. Not only were both Batman and Batman Returns in the Top 5 of superhero/comic movies ever made, but most of his other films were phenomenal, too. Let's see:

-Big Fish
-Sleepy Hollow
-James and the Giant Peach
-Ed Wood
-Batman Returns
-Nightmare Before Christmas
-Batman
-Beetlejuice
-Edward Scissorhands
-PeeWees Big Adventure...

...not to mention the upcoming movies Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Corpse Bride. LOL OMG HE SUX LOTZ LOLOL AMIRITE?!!1

What's next from your brilliant repertoire of opinions? Spielberg is overrated? Tom Hanks is a shitty actor? PLS SHARE UR INTULECKTS

 

[Escape Goat]

Sleepy Hollow is one of my favorite movies. I love every frame of that movie. Very beautiful.

 

[Dan]

You realize this statement just destroyed any support you may have had in any movie argument. Not only were both Batman and Batman Returns in the Top 5 of superhero/comic movies ever made, but most of his other films were phenomenal, too. Let's see:

-Big Fish
-Sleepy Hollow
-James and the Giant Peach
-Ed Wood
-Batman Returns
-Nightmare Before Christmas
-Batman
-Beetlejuice
-Edward Scissorhands
-PeeWees Big Adventure...

...not to mention the upcoming movies Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Corpse Bride. LOL OMG HE SUX LOTZ LOLOL AMIRITE?!!1

What's next from your brilliant repertoire of opinions? Spielberg is overrated? Tom Hanks is a shitty actor? PLS SHARE UR INTULECKTS

Just to pop in here... Burton didn't direct James and the Giant Peach or Nightmare Before Christmas, the latter of which he was on a different continent for all but about 10 days of production. He had even less creative input on the former where he only received producer's credit.

Also, Big Fish sucked. It was a completely unmemorable pastiche of tediously weird-for-weird's-sake sketches, all with the purpose of teaching the douchebag main character a terribly obvious lesson.

 

[Flynn]

Ed Wood, Beetlejuice and Pee Wee's Big Adventure are his three best.

I like Mars Attacks, but understand if people don't agree.

 

[DopeyFish]

behind enemy lines was the worst fucking movie ever made!

gah!

 

[karasu]

Tim Burton made Edward Scissorhands. Anyone who says he sucks is a dweeb.

Most "A list" directors have no balls to begin with. I wouldn't want them anywhere near this project.

P.S. Spielberg is overrated.

 

[Die Squirrel Die]

Tim Burton deserves respect for his past work, but I'm worried he may be losing it. Both Planet of the Apes and Big Fish were awful, some of the worst movies I have ever seen. It all hangs on CatCF. I really couldn't give a fuck about whether it's faithful to Roald Dahl or not, 'cause frankly I've never been that hot on him. I even outright hated him for a while but I realise that this had more to do with an English teacher I despised trying to foist him on me. Now I'm just indifferent. I'll be judging CatCF purely as a Tim Burton movie, hopefully it's a return to form, and not a continuation of a downward trend.

 

[sans_pants]

its not like singer really did anything before xmen besides usual suspects

 

[FoneBone]

OK -- Dan, could you explain your stance toward directors? It seems to me that you prefer overall competence to (admittedly, sometimes failed) artistic ambition... I'd take a Burton or a Jackson over a Michael Bay or Brett Ratner any day. (Actually, at least at this point, attributing anything more than technical competence to Bay would be too kind).

 

[Hitman]

its not like singer really did anything before xmen besides usual suspects

Your point being?

 

[sans_pants]

Your point being?

give him a chance?

 

[Die Squirrel Die]

give him a chance?

But Usual Suspects was great. Rattner's not even a hack enough to ellicit Uwe Boll levels or derision. He's a bland, soulless, corporate whore.

There was only half a good movie in Rush Hour. The half that was a small, kickass, Chinese man. You have to be a total focus group arse to think that Jackie Chan couldn't carry an action-comedy by himself.

 

[Spectral Glider]

Sleepy Hollow is one of my favorite movies. I love every frame of that movie. Very beautiful.

Amen to that......one of my all time favorite movies too. The casting, the sets, the music and the tone all come together in awesome fashion in that flick.....and hey, Casper Van whatever gets sliced in half, that alone should make it great.

 

[Dan]

OK -- Dan, could you explain your stance toward directors? It seems to me that you prefer overall competence to (admittedly, sometimes failed) artistic ambition... I'd take a Burton or a Jackson over a Michael Bay or Brett Ratner any day. (Actually, at least at this point, attributing anything more than technical competence to Bay would be too kind).

I don't think I've ever really said I want Michael Bay, Brett Ratner or similar directors directing, but there are worse guys out there for the specific jobs they've been chosen. For instance, right here with X-Men 3, I'd take Ratner over the other guy being mentioned as in the running. Is that my ideal situation? Hell no. My ideal would be Bryan Singer since he started this vein of the X-Men and I really liked where he was going with X2. Just the vast growth he made between X-Men and its sequel made me itching to see what he could do a third time. It's worth pointing out there are very, very few directors who have impressed me in recent years in the area of big Hollywood blockbusters.

As for Burton, I think he's got some cool story concepts in his head and he's a pretty cool art director, but I don't think directing itself is his specialty. I believe that's mostly his avenue to being able to tackle those other areas. He should be more of a producer, guiding the production but letting better people tackle the specifics. I don't think it's coincidence that a very large number of people consider Nightmare Before Christmas to be the best thing he's been involved with.

As for Peter Jackson, eh, I've been over my complaints with his LOTR stuff so many times. I'd go as far to say that I question the idea that his directing is more about "artistic ambition" than simple technical competence. I've admittedly not seen any of his other films, but from what I've seen, he's got a lot to learn about blockbusters. The poorly handled multiple storylines, the problems related to his script, the way he handles comedy within drama, the dependence on overly ambitious special effects, etc. I was quite unimpressed.

I'm not really sure what you want from me. There are only a couple live-action blockbusters I've enjoyed over the last few years (namely X2 and uh, hopefully Batman Begins). I think most of it's crap. If you want a list of what I am enjoying, the films from '04 that I found most inspired and exciting were Sideways, Primer, Closer, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and The Incredibles.

Yeah, uh... those are some quick thoughts but I'm not really sure what to say.

 

[Willco]

First, let me say this. I can appreciate Tim Burton's Batman films for what they are, but they are definitley not Batman. Batman doesn't go around killing thugs with machine guns on his Batwing. Batman doesn't tie bombs to clowns and watch them explode. Batman doesn't cruise around in his Batmobile all the time because his suit is so restricting that he can't move or bend his neck. Batman's fighting skills don't just consist of three things, those being a medium kick, a punch and that back hand thing he does to thugs. Batman doesn't just sit by a super computer and television all day waiting for the villains to do bad shit so he can fight crime... he actually uses some skill and detective work.

Burton's Batman is not Batman. It's his version of Batman. It's entertaining, but - again! - it's not Batman.

Second, Brett Ratner is not very good.

Warm Machine, you described someone who was not very good. Being not very good does not mean you're bad, it means just what it says -- he's not very good. You described someone who is adequate, which is exactly what Ratner is... at best. He's a very generic director and as someone previously stated, a corporate whore who is more than happy to cash the big check and pilot a safe flick. If he could, he'd love to do Rush Hour flicks until Jackie Chan can no longer slide between ladders and/or Chris Tucker dies of a drug overdose.

FOX's insistence on rushing X-Men 3 against Superman Returns is a dumb and costly mistake, one that cost them the writing and directing duties of Joss Whedon. Whedon is now busy with Wonder Woman and if Serenity does well, that franchise might blossom as well. So now they're stuck looking for C-list directors to helm a film with a script written in a matter of days, with a production team in chaos and lacking the kind of direction Singer had when he was in charge. I really don't see anything positive coming from this situation if FOX insists on meeting their Summer 2006 deadline.

 

[Escape Goat]

I think Joss Whedon proved he can write an X-Men story with his recent run on Astonishing. Everything on that book is great.

 

[Willco]

I think Joss Whedon proved he can write an X-Men story with his recent run on Astonishing. Everything on that book is great.

Joss Whedon can write X-Men. He likes writing the X-Men and the fans like him writing the X-Men. Don't think this went unnoticed by FOX. But FOX was determined to keep X-Men 3 on track for Summer 2006 with this crazy, rigid schedule and Whedon didn't want to go along with it.

Now he's on Wonder Woman and I think letting Whedon go for the sake of making some timeline is ridiculous. They lose nothing if it comes out a year later and perhaps it's for the best since they won't have to contend with Superman Returns. The only thing out in 2007 in the same genre is Spidey 3 and Marvel wouldn't pit their two iconic franchises against each other. It really seems like FOX is just in a rush to push it against Singer and show him off or something. I dunno. I'm hoping this isn't some personal grudge intertwined with business kind of decision, but it sure seems like it.

 

[FoneBone]

Joss Whedon would be a terrible choice, because he dislikes Singer's movies.

As for Dan... well, I finally (sort of) see where you're coming from. I agree with you at least sort of, about Burton. But I see people like Michael Bay representing the worst of commercial Hollywood -- and for someone as harsh on current movies as yourself, I mean... how can you even be somewhat positive about him (or, to a lesser degree, Ratner)?

 

[FoneBone]

The only thing out in 2007 in the same genre is Spidey 3 and Marvel wouldn't pit their two iconic franchises against each other.

Opening the same summer does not equal "pitted against each other." Actually, with the schedule as insane as it currently seems to be, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see X3 slip back a year.

 

[Willco]

Joss Whedon would be a terrible choice, because he dislikes Singer's movies.

His criticisms of Singer's films are not without merit and if I'd want one director radically altering the setting of the films, it'd be Whedon and not Ratner. Whedon knows his shit. I like Singer films for what they are and they stay true to the overall message of the comic books, but the films are a quite a departure from the comic book pages. And nowadays when we've seen that films can be faithful to the source material, I'd like to see someone get a shot to bringing the real X-Men to the big screen.

No matter what, Singer's vision of the X-Men is most likely going to be erased in favor of whatever the new director has in store. We're not going to get a smooth transition from X2 to X-Men 3. And again, I'd like the director who changes the franchise be a person who gets the X-Men, rather than some generic director looking for a paycheck because Rush Hour 13: The Rushening fell through.

Opening the same summer does not equal "pitted against each other." Actually, with the schedule as insane as it currently seems to be, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see X3 slip back a year.

X-Men 3 and Superman Returns seem to be on a collision course. Will they open on the same weekend? No. But make no mistake, don't think FOX is going to let Warner Bros. take up all the comic book geek revenue.

And I don't think it'll slip back a year. FOX is determined to start shooting in a month.

 

[FoneBone]

Let me put it like this -- I believe Whedon could be a good choice for starting the franchise from scratch -- but not, however, if one expected some semblance of continuity.

 

[Dan]

As for Dan... well, I finally (sort of) see where you're coming from. I agree with you at least sort of, about Burton. But I see people like Michael Bay representing the worst of commercial Hollywood -- and for someone as harsh on current movies as yourself, I mean... how can you even be somewhat positive about him (or, to a lesser degree, Ratner)?

Let me tackle Michael Bay. I've hated or disliked everything he's done except for The Rock. That said, I think he does some things well, such as huge overly patriotic/sentimental moments. That sucks in almost every case, but given my limited exposure to the Superman character, I always thought he might be able to do a decent film there, just balls-to-the-wall action for America's invulnerable boy scout. It would surely lack substance but yeah. I'd love to see something with more depth, but I've never read the comics so I have something a skewed perspective on the character where he's pretty one-dimensional and boring. So I suppose, I could see Michael Bay elevating a certain kind of material, but maybe that material isn't what anyone really wants in the first place. I also have to concede to being far less optimistic about The Island now that I've seen the latest commercials, which tout a big lame special effect shot of that giant sign falling from the skyscraper with the main characters hanging on. Seems he was allowed to go overboard on this one too. I was hoping this would be a restrained Bay like the early footage seemed to point at. *prepares to totally eat crow*

As for Ratner, well, I think he's competent, and if Fox is deadset on starting X-Men 3 in two months, I'd rather have a competent director handle the material than someone with greater aspirations try to get their shit together in a big hurry. That's why I was fond of Matthew Vaughn for the job even though I have yet to see Layer Cake. He wasn't there to just imitate Singer and instead had a vision that he seemed to be getting done quite well. Now, I've only seen the Rush Hour flicks, and they're fun enough. I don't really see him elevating or hurting any script he's given. The whole situation with X3 isn't looking so hot right now anyway. Maybe I just don't want to admit that the only comic book movie series I've liked is about to go down the crapper, I dunno. Now, if Ratner's presence also comes his oversight of a rehaul of the script, well, my confidence in that being successful is nil. I'm not happy about it, but I could forsee worse possibilities. I'd prefer a delay and complete overhaul by someone with vision. [/end babble]

Or maybe Hollywood's just beaten me down with such an abundance of horrible blockbusters that I've started grasping at straws. Maybe because I don't have a strong opinion on Ratner that seems good to me, given the horrible decisions Hollywood's trained me to expect from them. At the end of the day, if the movie starts filming in two months without Vaughn at the wheel, I highly, highly doubt it'll be anything I consider a worthy followup to X2.

 

[karasu]

First, let me say this. I can appreciate Tim Burton's Batman films for what they are, but they are definitley not Batman. Batman doesn't go around killing thugs with machine guns on his Batwing. Batman doesn't tie bombs to clowns and watch them explode. Batman doesn't cruise around in his Batmobile all the time because his suit is so restricting that he can't move or bend his neck. Batman's fighting skills don't just consist of three things, those being a medium kick, a punch and that back hand thing he does to thugs. Batman doesn't just sit by a super computer and television all day waiting for the villains to do bad shit so he can fight crime... he actually uses some skill and detective work.

Burton's Batman is not Batman. It's his version of Batman. It's entertaining, but - again! - it's not Batman.

I see plenty of things about Burtons Batman that are very Batman, and have even been mimicked on the animated series. Sure he didn't show a lot of detective work, but big deal. The comics don't always focus on that either.

 

[Willco]

I see plenty of things about Burtons Batman that are very Batman...

The style? Yes. The character? Not at all.

... and have even been mimicked on the animated series.

The animated series owe more to the comic books that Burton's films. The only thing they borrow from Burton's films are Elfman's music and some of the whole living 40s style bit.

Style does not equal character. Gotham City does not make Batman.

Sure he didn't show a lot of detective work, but big deal. The comics don't always focus on that either.

Big deal? BIG DEAL? The biggest part of Batman is how smart he is and how much detective work he puts in. The best Batman stories involve dectective work. Hell, they still publish DETECTIVE FUCKING COMICS. Sure, not every single story features his detective work, but it's a huge fucking part of the character.

And I'm not asking for Sherlock Holmes here, because not even Batman Begins delivers on fully on the detective front. But Burton's Batman doesn't do shit until crime is already in progress or evil plans are laid out before him. He's kind of useless except as a killing machine who wears rubber.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

And I'm not asking for Sherlock Holmes here, because not even Batman Begins delivers on fully on the detective front. But Burton's Batman doesn't do shit until crime is already in progress or evil plans are laid out before him. He's kind of useless except as a killing machine who wears rubber.

uhh, don't you remember motherfucker? THE LIPSTICK! He figured it out and told vicki vale. THE LIPSTICK!

 

[Willco]

uhh, don't you remember motherfucker? THE LIPSTICK! He figured it out and told vicki vale. THE LIPSTICK!

OMG THE LIPSTICK HE TRULY IS THIS GENERATION'S GREATEST DETECTIVE.

Thank God he had that super computer to figure everything out afterwards!

I hardly qualify a convenient plot device to move the story forward detective work. It's insulting.

 

[element]

isn't this guy getting freaky with one of the williams sisters?

 

[Ninja Scooter]

OMG THE LIPSTICK HE TRULY IS THIS GENERATION'S GREATEST DETECTIVE.

Thank God he had that super computer to figure everything out afterwards!
.

STraight out. He was like "Bat Computer, how is Joker poisoning the citizens of Gotham" and the computer was all "BEE DOO BEEP DOO DEEP DOO BOP". And he also figured out that Vicki Vale hid the film in her bra!

 

[Willco]

STraight out. He was like "Bat Computer, how is Joker poisoning the citizens of Gotham" and the computer was all "BEE DOO BEEP DOO DEEP DOO BOP". And he also figured out that Vicki Vale hid the film in her bra!

:lol

I really wish they'd just re-release the Burton original and call it JOKER. He's the best part of that damn movie.

 

[karasu]

Come on. Burtons Batman figured things out, he used his head. He found out how the Joker made his poison and came up with a cure for it. He handled combat intelligently, figured out the Penguins motivations, used his detective skills to expose the connection between the Penguin and Christopher Walken's character, used stealth, had the great change of voice when he suited up as the Bat. They were just really subtle with the detective thing, like how he recorded conversations and things like that showing that he was always prepared/preparing. Even the suit in the new movie, you can't tell me that it isn't inspired by the original 89 version. Batman didn't always wear black and speak with a raspy voice. I realize that Burton changed a lot of things about the character, but he was influenced by Frank Miller. NOONE has changed Batman to suit their own vision more than Frank Miller. His Batman used guns too.

 

[Willco]

Come on. Burtons Batman figured things out, he used his head. He found out how the Joker made his poison and came up with a cure for it.

At no point in time do you ever see Batman or Bruce Wayne actually work out a cure or anything. The plot conveniently moves forward because it needs Batman/Bruce Wayne to realize the poisions were in the cosmetics (in a Eureka! like moment that never required any detective work) and - bam! - he has a cure. He's goddamn amazing that Batman is!

He handled combat intelligently...

Medium kick, punch, back hand thing... rinse, lather, repeat. If anyone ever figures out that he can't move his head, he's fucking screwed.

figured out the Penguins motivations, used his detective skills to expose the connection between the Penguin and Christopher Walken's character...

Uh, didn't everyone figure this out? It was kind of obvious.

... used stealth...

What? When? He walks around in a noisy rubber suit!

... had the great change of voice when he suited up as the Bat.

This is not exclusive to Burton.

They were just really subtle with the detective thing, like how he recorded conversations and things like that showing that he was always prepared/preparing.

So subtle they were that I didn't even notice! Batman relies on his gadgets to do the work and not himself.

Even the suit in the new movie, you can't tell me that it isn't inspired by the original 89 version.

I never said it wasn't. We were comparing the animated series and the Burton films. If there's one thing Batman Begins does borrow from the Burton films it is the suit, although heavily modified.

Batman didn't always wear black and speak with a raspy voice.

The voice thing is not exclusive to Burton. And if I recall there were black and gray variation of the Bat suit before Burton.

I realize that Burton changed a lot of things about the character, but he was influenced by Frank Miller. NOONE has changed Batman to suit their own vision more than Frank Miller.

Frank Miller has reinvented the character to a degree, but he more or less returned Batman to his original roots. He borrowed heavily from his origins and - yes! - adapted to his style. But his Batman is still Batman, and even moreso, his Batman is from a different era. Burton's Batman still doesn't resemble Miller's and Burton doesn't get Batman at all. He even said he didn't pay attention to the comics, which as Kevin Smith famously said, pretty much explains the 1989 Batman.

His Batman used guns too.

Yes, Frank Miller's Batman constantly used firearms to dispatch enemies (p.s. this is sarcasm). If you think this is the case, you need re-read DKR and/or you completely missed the point.

... Listen, I'm not trying to destroy what Burton setup. His films are entertaining. They're his version of Batman, but they're not the Batman. The animated series is the closest adaptation yet.

 

[Matrix]

Medium kick, punch, back hand thing... rinse, lather, repeat. If anyone ever figures out that he can't move his head, he's fucking screwed.

:lol

 

[sans_pants]

... Listen, I'm not trying to destroy what Burton setup. His films are entertaining. They're his version of Batman, but they're not the Batman. The animated series is the closest adaptation yet.

one thing i detest about burtons batman was that he gave the joker an origin

 

[karasu]

At no point in time do you ever see Batman or Bruce Wayne actually work out a cure or anything. The plot conveniently moves forward because it needs Batman/Bruce Wayne to realize the poisions were in the cosmetics (in a Eureka! like moment that never required any detective work) and - bam! - he has a cure. He's goddamn amazing that Batman is!

I have no idea why on earth you have to see him mix the chemicals, but ok whatever.

Medium kick, punch, back hand thing... rinse, lather, repeat. If anyone ever figures out that he can't move his head, he's fucking screwed.

Ok there was so much more to it than that. People made a big deal about him using his gauntlets to block swords in Batman Begins, but he did that in Batman 89! Even little strategies like playing possum go much further than "I can kick your ass because I'm Batman and I learned 37 martial arts in ten years". His movements were economical, he used lots of straight line attacks like palm strikes and front kicks as oppossed to huge circular techniques. It's true that he couldn't turn his head, but he was smart enough to work around it(smoke bombs, his fighting stance and techniques don't limit peripheral vision). As a kid I always thought that flaw made him really unique and gave him that whole inhuman element(because he looked so strange when he turned left, right, and up before throwing that smoke bomb), but yeah it's ridiculous. I like how they worked around it though. It was 1989, the suit wasn't perfect. Ok.

Uh, didn't everyone figure this out? It was kind of obvious.

No. But as an audience member, what isn't obvious...

What? When? He walks around in a noisy rubber suit!

The scene where the Joker was created.He was fighting on catwalks and weaving in and out of the steam.

This is not exclusive to Burton.

Well... Adam West sure as hell didn't do it.

So subtle they were that I didn't even notice! Batman relies on his gadgets to do the work and not himself.

I can say the same thing about his comic! He gets knocked into the ocean and just happens to have his bat propeller boots! Capes that transform intoi hang gliders. Burtons Batman barely had any gadgets! It's only natural that he uses his computer.

The voice thing is not exclusive to Burton. And if I recall there were black and gray variation of the Bat suit before Burton.

yah black cape, gray suit. But his suit was always gray to begin with.

Frank Miller has reinvented the character to a degree, but he more or less returned Batman to his original roots. He borrowed heavily from his origins and - yes! - adapted to his style. But his Batman is still Batman, and even moreso, his Batman is from a different era. Burton's Batman still doesn't resemble Miller's and Burton doesn't get Batman at all. He even said he didn't pay attention to the comics, which as Kevin Smith famously said, pretty much explains the 1989 Batman.
[/quote[

Oh fuck that Magnolia bashing Kevin Smith. Burton even originally had a scene with Batman on Horseback ala DKR.

Yes, Frank Miller's Batman constantly used firearms to dispatch enemies (p.s. this is sarcasm). If you think this is the case, you need re-read DKR and/or you completely missed the point.

I never said that was the case, I said he used guns, which he did. Oh rubber bullets, sure.

The animated series is the closest adaptation yet.

Can't argue with that, but that's an entirely different world. Most animated series are more faithful than live action movies.

 

[Dan]

I can say the same thing about his comic! He gets knocked into the ocean and just happens to have his bat propeller boots! Capes that transform intoi hang gliders. Burtons Batman barely had any gadgets! It's only natural that he uses his computer.

Burton's Batman had all kinds of gimmicky gadgets. Shit, he had a fucking car that had the ridiculous ability to jettison its sides for the sole possibility of a passing a retardedly narrow alleyway.

 

[karasu]

Burton's Batman had all kinds of gimmicky gadgets. Shit, he had a fucking car that had the ridiculous ability to jettison its sides for the sole possibility of a passing a retardedly narrow alleyway.

That's about it though. Schumacher was the guy with all of the gadgets. I think Burtons Batman was limited to a souped up car. There was that ridiculous programmable batarang in Returns. @_@

 

[sans_pants]

Burton's Batman had all kinds of gimmicky gadgets. Shit, he had a fucking car that had the ridiculous ability to jettison its sides for the sole possibility of a passing a retardedly narrow alleyway.

lol i had that toy

no one want to adress the fact that they shouldnt have given the joker an origin and that the thing ive never liked about the batman movies is that they kill all the bad guys

 

[Ninja Scooter]

lol i had that toy

no one want to adress the fact that they shouldnt have given the joker an origin and that the thing ive never liked about the batman movies is that they kill all the bad guys

why not? Killing Joke is pretty much just an origin story and it kicks ass. Joker's origin in Batman 89 isn't THAT far off either.

 

[karasu]

lol i had that toy

no one want to adress the fact that they shouldnt have given the joker an origin and that the thing ive never liked about the batman movies is that they kill all the bad guys

That origin is from the books.

 

[Sagitario]

Completely off-topic...

:lol :lol :lol @ teiresias's avatar...

 

[Willco]

I have no idea why on earth you have to see him mix the chemicals, but ok whatever.

Any attempt at detective work is nice.

People made a big deal about him using his gauntlets to block swords in Batman Begins...

Who made a big deal about this?

The rest of the argument that his attacks are economical and crap is just that -- crap. Batman is a much more fluid fighter than is represented in Burton's films. He's so boring that it's not funny. And anyone with any decent amount of experience in hand-to-hand combat could take him out so easily it's not funny. I know that's more of a nitpick, but for CHRIST'S SAKE HE COULDN'T EVEN MOVE HIS HEAD!

No. But as an audience member, what isn't obvious...

There really wasn't anything impressive about linking the already known creepy and evil Shreck to the Penguin. It was practically spelled out.

The scene where the Joker was created.He was fighting on catwalks and weaving in and out of the steam.

He was so stealthy the cops didn't even see hi- OH WAIT.

Well... Adam West sure as hell didn't do it.

That's because Adam West sucks.

I can say the same thing about his comic! He gets knocked into the ocean and just happens to have his bat propeller boots! Capes that transform intoi hang gliders. Burtons Batman barely had any gadgets! It's only natural that he uses his computer.

Burton's Batman had a shitload of gadgets. Batman does rely on 'em in the comics, but there are moreso an extension of his intelligence and no good Batman story uses them as a crux. Whereas in the Burton films he has a fucking Game Gear batarang he programs to attack to four people and shit. The aforementioned car that divides in three quarters. Fucking balloon cutters. That's just the dumb gadgets!

yah black cape, gray suit. But his suit was always gray to begin with.

Okay...

Oh fuck that Magnolia bashing Kevin Smith. Burton even originally had a scene with Batman on Horseback ala DKR.

I'm impressed, no wait I am not.

I never said that was the case, I said he used guns, which he did. Oh rubber bullets, sure.

Just making sure they weren't giant fucking machine guns that he used to spray bullets into a mob of people in hopes of killing a few thugs. I must've missed that issue of DKR if so.

 

[Odnetnin]

Ratner actually made the 3rd Hannibal film really fucking awesome. Way intense much much more true to the SOTL film than Scott's atrocity. I'm going to withhold judgement cause I think he could pull it off.

 

[OmniGamer]

isn't this guy getting freaky with one of the williams sisters?

Welcome to my post on page 1

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

P.S. Spielberg is overrated.

I interrupt this thread to say:

Jaws, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Raiders of the Lost Ark, ET, The Color Purple, Empire of the Sun, Jurassic Park, Schindler's List, Amistad, and Saving Private Ryan say differently.

That's not to mention his other works, which are far more enjoyable than most directors, but don't enter the list of great above such as The Duel, 1941, Temple of Doom, Indian Jones and the Last Crusade, Minority Report, Catch Me If You Can, and The Terminal.

That is all. I now return you to your Batman argument, already in progress...

 

[karasu]

Burton's Batman had a shitload of gadgets. Batman does rely on 'em in the comics, but there are moreso an extension of his intelligence and no good Batman story uses them as a crux. Whereas in the Burton films he has a fucking Game Gear batarang he programs to attack to four people and shit. The aforementioned car that divides in three quarters. Fucking balloon cutters. That's just the dumb gadgets!

dude, he used that Jet in one scene and the car did have a few tricks. But on the ground level Batman didn't use anything outside of grappling hooks, smoke bombs, and his batarang. His suit didn't turn into liquid metal and he didn't have rockets in his boots. The comics are FAR more ridiculous with his gadgets I bet Batman Begins will have more. He has a jumping car, a hang glider built into his cape, and god knows what else. These complaints are so lame. They can be applied to every version of Batman imaginable.

Jaws, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Raiders of the Lost Ark, ET, The Color Purple, Empire of the Sun, Jurassic Park, Schindler's List, Amistad, and Saving Private Ryan say differently.

That's not to mention his other works, which are far more enjoyable than most directors, but don't enter the list of great above such as The Duel, 1941, Temple of Doom, Indian Jones and the Last Crusade, Minority Report, Catch Me If You Can, and The Terminal.

All of that sentimental easily digestable garbage. Schindlers List is the sweetest story of the Holocaust EVER! I'd like to Spielberg take some chances, stop worrying so much about huge box office and using huge names and cute kiddies. His brand of filmmaking is so watered down and business oriented.He's good, but there are so many other directors who add so much more to filmmaking and the genres that they work in than he does.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

All of that sentimental easily digestable garbage. Schindlers List is the sweetest story of the Holocaust EVER! I'd like to Spielberg take some chances, stop worrying so much about huge box office and using huge names and cute kiddies. His brand of filmmaking is so watered down and business oriented.He's good, but there are so many other directors who add so much more to filmmaking and the genres that they work in than he does.

I do agree that he has gotten too over sentimental in some of his more recent stuff, like AI, and The Terminal. I didn't care for AI much at all, but still enjoyed The Terminal. It'll be interesting to see how he does with War of the Worlds, a film I'm not all that interested in to be honest. Still, he's better than 99% of the directors working today, and gives more consistently good films than pretty much anyone else.

I'm curious as to who you think is a better filmmaker and is as good, or better, on a consistent basis.

 

[Spectral Glider]

I'm not a reader of any of the Batman comics, but when I first saw Burton's Batman I remember just leaving the theater thinking it was only "OK." Jack makes the movie (I too didn't care for the whole "I made you, you made me" nonsense though).....but the rest of it didn't do much for me. Batman Returns I thought was just more or less a disaster. It does offer up a classic Walken line though, "Bruce WAYNE, what are you doing dressed as Batman?" That's about all I'll give it though. But the Bat flicks that followed were even worse. It'll be interesting to see where this new one goes.

As for Burton, my favorites of his are Pee Wee, Beetlejuice, Scissorhands, and Sleepy Hollow. I never did get the whole Nightmare before Xmas obsession. It's ok, but I don't see the miracle. I was severely, severely disappointed with what he did with Apes though. That was terrible considering the massive potential.

And Spielberg, there are many of his films that don't do much for me. But Jaws just may be my favorite movie of all time, and for that he gets a pass. Well, that and Raiders and Temple of Doom too. ET was good 20 years ago, doesn't hold up as well for me now though. I never did like Close Encounters, too drawn out. Jurassic Park is too up and down, too many sloppy inconsistencies. Lost World was worse. Private Ryan is very, very good though. And I highly enjoyed Catch Me If You Can, that's a very good movie. I can still hear William's awesome little theme for that flick, one of his underrated scores.

 

[Warm Machine]

As far as Burton is concerned...name a single good action scene he has ever staged.

This is a Burton action scene... guy gets in Batmans way, Batman punches him. End of scene.

Burton's style is quirky for quirky's sake. Doesn't matter what the subject matter is he always tries to infuse his safe weirdness into the movie. Disney darkness if you will.

He also has a terrible sense of reality and a piss poor attention to detail. There is a scene where the bad guys in Batman returns have opened up Batmans car and stripped the wiring out. Then we see a device stuck to the bottom of the car ignoring all the wiring we saw previously. To get to this device Batman then punches through the floor of his bullet proof car to get to it. Now that is a whole lot of nonsense.

Batman gets shot down in his Bat Plane by a long barreled revolver! Ohhh how funny!

Doesn't the skull in Sleepy Hollow have all of it's teeth in a regular fashion and then the headless horseman has his teeth filed to points?

Then there is the "plan" in Planet of the Apes where they hide behind the engine of the crashed ship only to knock some of the apes over and have to fight hand to hand anyway. Good plan.

Ed Wood is Burtons best film.

 

[Spectral Glider]

Doesn't the skull in Sleepy Hollow have all of it's teeth in a regular fashion and then the headless horseman has his teeth filed to points?

No, they're both pointed. The thing is, you don't get a decent of shot of the skull's teeth till at the end when it falls from the bag, before Depp picks it up and tosses it to him. It's there you can see they are pointed.

 

[Drozmight]

Batman gets shot down in his Bat Plane by a long barreled revolver! Ohhh how funny!

Dude, I thought that was one of the film's highlights. I still laugh.