Your favourite Batman...

[Gotham Central]

Christopher wrote:

---

^But before you weren't talking about your own personal preferences, you were talking about whether "audiences" were "ready to accept" a lighter Batman. Those are two completely different conversations.

Except that audiences have generally not gravitated toward the lighter Batman in the same way that they have the darker toned films.

Hell the "lighter toned" Live action Batman films are roundly creditied with killing the film franchise until Nolan ressurected it with a darker more realistic approach.

You know, one of the more interesting things that I noticed about Brave and the Bold was that Batman himself, was not all that silly. He was actually played pretty straigt. It was the world around him that was frequently goofy and over the top. In fact there were times when he seemed downright annoyed at the foolishness around him (not unlike his depiction in the old JLI comics).

[Christopher]

Gotham Central wrote:

---

I swear...you're all over the place man. in the 60's Batman thread you got all insulted because I suggested that you like camp. And here you are saying that you prefer the Adam West series and that you want a campy Batman. You clearly DO like camp and siliness...just run with it.

You're engaging in the basic logical fallacy of mistaking the specific for the general. I do not "like camp." I like good work. I like good camp and don't like bad camp. I like good drama and don't like bad drama. See what I said above, just this morning: category doesn't determine quality, quality does.

[Gotham Central]

Warped9 wrote:

---

Depends what you want in a comic or animation. If Batman comics of the '70s-'90s had been continuing what we saw on '60s TV I wouldn't have bothered with them. And while I enjoy B-TAS there is stuff in there I'd have a hard time accepting in a live-action feature.

Dialing back the grittiness we got with the Nolanverse could work, but if you dial it back too far then it's a question of whether you start turning some people off. Are audiences now ready to accept a Batman feature done in the tone of the Marvel films? Probably. Any lighter or sillier than that? I don't know.

This brings Game Of Thrones to mind. Most sword-and-sorcery leaves me cold because I can't believe in the setting. But GoT shows a world that is much more credible even if it's a fiction. It's quite easy to suspend disbelief.

Superheroes by their very nature are also a fantasy. But Batman is one of the few exceptions because he isn't superpowered and so it becomes easier to put him into a more realistic setting. I emphasize realistic as opposed to real because we're still dealing with fiction and extraordinary elements.

I really enjoyed The Avengers but I do recall thinking along the same lines as a lot of other people after the big climactic battle: where was the reference to the extensive casualties among civilians that such an attack would have wrought? The Avengers was sanitized to make it accessible to a broad audience, but some of the omissions were hard to swallow.

If you're going to go goofy then how about something more like The Incredibles? Or Kick-Ass if you really want irreverent parody?

I'm with you. Batman as goofy clown is best left in the past. Audiences today are looking for that dark hero not someone to dance the bat-tusi.

[Captaindemotion]

Gotham Central wrote:

---

Except that audiences have generally not gravitated toward the lighter Batman in the same way that they have the darker toned films.

Hell the "lighter toned" Live action Batman films are roundly creditied with killing the film franchise until Nolan ressurected it with a darker more realistic approach.

Actually, Batman Forever made a lot more money than Batman Returns. It was the fact that Batman and Robin was utter garbage which killed the series.

[JarodRussell]

Here's a pretty good comparison of similar scenes of Nolan Batman films and Schumacher Batman films.



The serious approach makes you care. Comedic approach/overly stylized approach ruins it.

They could have done a pretty amazing Batman film with George Clooney, Chris O'Donnell, Uma Thurman and Arnold Schwarzenegger had it just been serious and not played for laughs. But everyone in this film is camp and overacting by design. It's like watching circus clowns.

[Gojira]

Gotham Central wrote:

---

I'm with you. Batman as goofy clown is best left in the past. Audiences today are looking for that dark hero not someone to dance the bat-tusi.

While I don't mind a dark and serious Batman there does have to be some lighter moments because I personally can't take too much darkness.

[Warped9]

Seriously I've seen darker stuff in more mainstream films. Certainly we've seen more graphic and gratuitous violence than Nolan's trilogy.

Seeing those side-by-side Schumacher/Nolan clips is certainly an eye opener.

[Angel4576]

It says 'live action', but fuck that, I abstain.

Best Batman - Batman TAS/Mask of the Phantasm

Kevin Conroy is Batman......

[JarodRussell]

I especially like the comparison between the part where Bale-Wayne hangs on the ledge holding Ra's al Ghul, and he screams and it's extremely painful and exhausting, and where Robin catches Batgirl, and he's just casual, spouting a one-liner with no effort. That's the big difference, the difference between "realism" and camp what makes you either care or facepalm.

It's not really about dark or light, serious or comedic. It's more about what to do that an audience can relate with these characters and the film. If everything is camp, then there's nothing at stake. If the characters are unnatural, you don't care. And I think making a scene comical where, for example, a life is at stake is where people stop caring.

[Warped9]

Captaindemotion wrote:

---

http://collider.com/batman-the-dark-...railer/185226/

Trailer

Cool. I'm in.

And it ain't light either.

[Christopher]

Angel4576 wrote:

---

It says 'live action', but fuck that, I abstain.

Best Batman - Batman TAS/Mask of the Phantasm

Kevin Conroy is Batman......

It's not an abstention if you actually do cast a vote. It's a write-in.

[Angel4576]

Christopher wrote:

---

It's not an abstention if you actually do cast a vote. It's a write-in.

this is true.

In which case, I, like many others, nominate as per my original reply!

[Captaindemotion]

Warped9 wrote:

---

Cool. I'm in.

And it ain't light either.

Um - I think I posted this in another thread?!

[Warped9]

Captaindemotion wrote:

---

Um - I think I posted this in another thread?!

Yeah, but I figured to make a point. More new Batman and it ain't light. Of course one could try to wrap their head around how a story like The Dark Knight Returns could be done as goofy.

[Captaindemotion]

^ They could have made it a year after the graphic novel came out as a live-action movie, reuniting the cast of the 1960s show?!