View Single Post
Old May 7 2013, 07:42 PM   #5887
Ovation
Vice Admiral
 
Location: La Belle Province or The Green Mountain State (depends on the day of the week)
Re: Superman (casting, rumors, pix till release)

kirk55555 wrote: View Post
Ovation wrote: View Post



Unrecognizable? Hardly. I've been reading Batman comics since the early 70s (and I've read numerous stories going back to the first appearance of Batman). In fact, I suspect I've read more Batman than you've had hot meals. And I had no trouble at all recognizing the character in Nolan's films.
As for the movies being like the comic Batman, I've never heard of a Batman book where Batman fights crime for about 2 years (fighting exactly 2 villains, one being an idiotic couselour and one being a psyco cosplaying as Joker), retires for 8 years and becomes a hermit, then returns just to defeat a vilainess who doesn't reveal she even exists until its just the right time to sabotage any thoughts that the supposed main villain was the least bit threatening. Then, he retires from what was supposed to be a life long crusade to screw a Catwoman so bad she made Hallie Berry's version no longer the worst catwoman ever. Don't forget having alfred constantly complain about Bruce being batman throughout the book. If that exists, i'd honestly like to read it just because it sounds like the worst Batman comic ever.
I didn't say it was based on an actual comic. I said the character was perfectly recognizable. Movie adaptations of literary sources (novels, comics, short stories, non-fiction books) are never exactly the same as the source material (nor should they ever be--they are different media with different constraints). Batman in Nolan's films is orphaned as a child, inherits a lot of money, spends a great deal of time wandering the globe (acquiring various skills along the way) before deciding what to do with his life. Alfred most certainly expresses reservations about Bruce Wayne's Batman persona in numerous storylines. All of these characteristics are there in the movies and they are sufficient to make the character clearly recognizable. You are free to dislike the particular form of the adaptation, but it is absurd to claim that the movie Batman is not recognizable in relation to the comics character.


kirk55555 wrote: View Post
Again, I have to ask why people think the director has so much influence, when almost every single other person in charge of the movie is Nolan or one of his cronies. Snyder means less than nothing at this point, Nolan has been in charge of writing and producing it. It wouldn't matter if Steven Spielberg were directing it, its a Nolan movie. One man is not going to beat out Nolan and his legion of minions. Snyder isn't going to be a factor, at all. I truley wish he was, because he worked on Watchmen and it turned out to be watchable (and I hate the Watchmen comic, its easily one of the worst comics I ever read, I couldn't even finish it, and I tried twice). If nolan was just the producer, or just the writer, and none of his minions were working on the film, I'd say Snyder would have a achance at making the movie watchable. But, even if he had a different style/different ideas than Nolan, he's more outmatched and outnumbered than the Spartans in 300.

RoJoHen wrote: View Post
Clark Kent wasn't born a reporter. He didn't pop out of his escape pod and just start working for the newspaper as an infant. He's allowed to do other things with his life.
High school-college-reporter has been Superman's path in every incarnation I've read, or something close to that. Wandering around as a random guy doing manual labor is just stupid. Its just adding extra angst into the movie (there is no way he's just having a day job or something, an event probably happened and he went away to dissappear and brood for awhile).
Ok. "Minions"? Really? That just severely undermines any form of legitimate criticism you might have to offer. As for Clark Kent's journey of self-discovery, there are, again, numerous examples from the comics of this kind of thing (the details differ, but the general idea is consistent). Your conception of "proper" Superman and Batman stories seems stuck in the 1950s-60s versions of each character. That is your right, but I'm afraid it is…unrealistic to expect such a vision of either character to be sufficiently appealing to today's audiences and readers. The kind of complexity of character you appear to disdain has been around in the comic versions of the characters since the 1970s in its earliest forms and rather uninterruptedly since then to today. It's as if you resent the filmmakers taking inspiration from storylines and general themes from anytime after the Nixon administration. I recommend the Adam West and George Reeves versions, if that is truly the case.
Ovation is offline   Reply With Quote