News Variety Reports Robert Pattinson is the new Batman

[Anwar]

This single statement proves you have never read a Batman comic. Ever.

Oh, I have. More than you.

A short, balding comedic actor

Tom Hanks started off doing comedies. And filming techniques make up for height issues. It's part of film.

cast because of Burton's hang-ups about a "square jawed hero" (his words)

Good idea, makes up for a conceptual flaw.

is not how Bruce Wayne or Batman was developed.

And RDJ wasn't as tall as what Tony Stark was envisioned as, what's your point?

Nope.

Yep, anyone who reads the comics would know it's just as often made into a Gothic Hellhole.

 

[suarezguy]

Looking like a garish model--even in the sets the actors inhabited--made for a terrible Gotham. There was no contrast to make the fantastical elements stand out, because the entire world was so artificial.

A lot was stylized but not everything was fantastical or artificial. Aside from being I guess a bit archetypal the newsroom, museum, Wayne manor party, looked grounded enough for contrasts.

https://movie-screencaps.com/batman-1989/8#foobox-1/5/batman-movie-screencaps.com-1266.jpg?strip=all
https://movie-screencaps.com/batman...atman-movie-screencaps.com-1798.jpg?strip=all
https://movie-screencaps.com/batman...atman-movie-screencaps.com-6879.jpg?strip=all

BR was, I think for the better, more outright fairy tale or, yes, freakshow but it wasn't without more grounded visuals as well, I think there is contrast.

https://movie-screencaps.com/batman...turns-disneyscreencaps.com-1548.jpg?strip=all
https://movie-screencaps.com/batman...turns-disneyscreencaps.com-2405.jpg?strip=all
https://movie-screencaps.com/batman...turns-disneyscreencaps.com-4930.jpg?strip=all
https://movie-screencaps.com/batman...turns-disneyscreencaps.com-6349.jpg?strip=all

This single statement proves you have never read a Batman comic. Ever.

A short, balding comedic actor cast because of Burton's hang-ups about a "square jawed hero" (his words) is not how Bruce Wayne or Batman was developed.

Again in the movies he didn't look short, also FWIW David Mazzuchelli's Bruce Wayne didn't look really dashing or playboy-ish or really youthful.
https://ifanboy.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Batman-404.jpg
http://atomicjunkshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/BatmanYO_HotPinkBathrobe-e1506855982249.jpg

The latter looking like it could be the basis for either Keaton or Bale.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Oh, I have. More than you.

That's a laugh. You so often mangle references, so much so that you could only be lifting Wikipedia articles for your so-called reading experience. Your statement in your previous post proved that.

Tom Hanks started off doing comedies. And filming techniques make up for height issues. It's part of film.

No. Its the reason no one was going to cast a 5 foot 4 actor as the MCU's Steve Rogers or Thor. The character has a defined appearance, and short and balding was not it for Bruce Wayne. Of course, the only reason you are shaking your pom-poms for Burton's film is your well known hatred of the Nolan Batman movies--yes, those gritty superhero films (and now Joker is on your hate list), which are the most acclaimed comic-book films of this century--far above your MCU movies.

Boo-hoo.

 

[crookeddy]

That's a laugh. You so often mangle references, so much so that you could only be lifting Wikipedia articles for your so-called reading experience. Your statement in your previous post proved that.



No. Its the reason no one was going to cast a 5 foot 4 actor as the MCU's Steve Rogers or Thor. The character has a defined appearance, and short and balding was not it for Bruce Wayne. Of course, the only reason you are shaking your pom-poms for Burton's film is your well known hatred of the Nolan Batman movies--yes, those gritty superhero films (and now Joker is on your hate list), which are the most acclaimed comic-book films of this century--far above your MCU movies.

Boo-hoo.

To be fair, Batman '89 was pretty acclaimed too.

 

[Anwar]

That's a laugh. You so often mangle references, so much so that you could only be lifting Wikipedia articles for your so-called reading experience. Your statement in your previous post proved that.

No, it just means I read so many sometimes things blur.

No. Its the reason no one was going to cast a 5 foot 4 actor as the MCU's Steve Rogers or Thor.

No one cared that Daniel Craig was shorter than all the other Bonds.

No one minded when Jackman, who was too tall, was cast as Wolverine. Nor did they care when James Marsden, who is too short, was cast as the traditionally tall Cyclops.

They also didn't complain Tom Hardy wasn't tall enough to play Bane.

And Bale is only around 2 inches taller than Keaton anyways.

The character has a defined appearance, and short and balding was not it for Bruce Wayne.

As shown earlier, some depictions of Wayne aren't "Young Generic Handsome guy". Keaton fit the bill as someone you wouldn't expect to be Batman and wasn't as dull as Bale was at the same time.

Of course, the only reason you are shaking your pom-poms for Burton's film is

They're more artistic and yet unashamed of themselves than Nolans' predictable works.

IE, Burton put effort into his Gotham while Nolan took the lazy way out and just made it Chicago.

which are the most acclaimed comic-book films of this century--far above your MCU movies.

Nope, their only claim to fame was being the only show in town and having a dead Academy darling. Put them out in a post Avengers environment, they'd fly under the radar. Folks aren't ashamed of comics anymore.

 

[fireproof78]

Can we stop with the shame talk? Different interpretations don't make people ashamed of comics.

 

[crookeddy]

Can we stop with the shame talk? Different interpretations don't make people ashamed of comics.

Stop trying to say that, people have been trying literally for years. He isn't listening.

 

[fireproof78]

Stop trying to say that, people have been trying literally for years. He isn't listening.

I won't stop but I appreciate the advice.

 

[Anwar]

Can we stop with the shame talk? Different interpretations don't make people ashamed of comics.

It does when the people making those movies openly say they dislike comics or aren't interested in them. Like Bryan Singer or Todd Phillips.

Stop trying to say that, people have been trying literally for years. He isn't listening.

Same as above.

 

[crookeddy]

It does when the people making those movies openly say they dislike comics or aren't interested in them. Like Bryan Singer or Todd Phillips.

Yeah they did say that, but then they still put a lot of comic book stuff into their movie that they really didn't have to. So at the end of the day, who cares what they say?

 

[fireproof78]

It does when the people making those movies openly say they dislike comics or aren't interested in them. Like Bryan Singer or Todd Phillips.

No, it really doesn't. Nick Meyer of TWOK fame is not a Star Trek fan. He hadn't seen much before and didn't watch any after. Is he ashamed of "Star Trek?" No. He just offered another point of view.

So, no, there is no shame in not liking comics and making comic book films. That has been a part of Hollywood and literary adaptation from the word go. So, no, there is zero shame associated with it, and it is unnecessary, poisons the conversation, and pretty much ensures hostility instead of exchange of ideas.

There is no shame here. We all like these characters and properties in our own way. One way is not better than the other.

 

[suarezguy]

It does when the people making those movies openly say they dislike comics or aren't interested in them. Like Bryan Singer or Todd Phillips.

I believe Singer said he initially wasn't interested in the X-Men comics, assumed that they would be bad, and then when he did read them he was impressed by and enjoyed them a lot.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

No, it just means I read so many sometimes things blur.

No sale. You have proven you are not familiar with the material to make such wrongheaded statements.

Oh, and Bruce Wayne was never meant to be short at all. Try as you will, there's no excuse for casting based on the director's hang ups about men who fit the visual idea of a superhero.

As shown earlier, some depictions of Wayne aren't "Young Generic Handsome guy". Keaton fit the bill as someone you wouldn't expect to be Batman and wasn't as dull as Bale was at the same time.

Incorrect, and I see you are still snaking those pom-poms for Keaton all based on your hate of the celebrated Nolan Batman films.

They're more artistic and yet unashamed of themselves than Nolans' predictable works.

Nolan captured the attention of the world with his vision of Batman--it was serious and not a character that walked out of a freakshow (Burton's Bat-mess), or like the Power Ranger-ing worst of the MCU. There, there, Anwar. Don't cry. Everyone knows you cannot stand the near-universal acclaim and respect the Nolan Batman and now Joker earned, far above 99% of the MCU. Apparently, your idea of a comic book movie is not at all like innumerable movie goers who love the Nolan/Joker interpretation.

There's no shame in being revolutionary in comic book movie adaptations.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

No, it really doesn't. Nick Meyer of TWOK fame is not a Star Trek fan. He hadn't seen much before and didn't watch any after. Is he ashamed of "Star Trek?" No. He just offered another point of view.

..and delivered the best Star Trek film of the entire franchise. Just as Nolan did the same for Batman.

So, no, there is no shame in not liking comics and making comic book films. That has been a part of Hollywood and literary adaptation from the word go. So, no, there is zero shame associated with it, and it is unnecessary, poisons the conversation, and pretty much ensures hostility instead of exchange of ideas.

This.

 

[Anwar]

No sale. You have proven you are not familiar with the material to make such wrongheaded statements.

Says you. You didn't even know about the Batman designs that support Keaton.

Oh, and Bruce Wayne was never meant to be short at all. Try as you will, there's no excuse for casting based on the director's hang ups about men who fit the visual idea of a superhero.

Neither was James Bond, that didn't stop them from hiring Daniel Craig.

Incorrect, and I see you are still snaking those pom-poms for Keaton all based on your hate of the celebrated Nolan Batman films.

Actually, it's because Keaton was better than Bale.

Nolan captured the attention of the world with his vision of Batman

Not really, he just came at the right time. His depiction of Batman wasn't any different from how he'd done characters in his prior films. One Note fanatics, like Leonard in Memento.

--it was serious and not a character that walked out of a freakshow (Burton's Bat-mess), or like the Power Ranger-ing worst of the MCU.

IE, predictable and dull with no real respect for the comics.

There, there, Anwar. Don't cry. Everyone knows you cannot stand the near-universal acclaim and respect the Nolan Batman and now Joker earned, far above 99% of the MCU.

Seeing how Nolan needed a dead actor for that, I'm glad the MCU didn't sink that low. And Joker will be forgotten as quickly as Logan was. Meanwhile the MCU has still equaled anything he put out.

Apparently, your idea of a comic book movie is

Something unashamed of itself and where it came from.

There's no shame in being revolutionary in comic book movie adaptations.

I agree, that's why Feige is a bigger figure than Nolan.

 

[suarezguy]

Nolan captured the attention of the world with his vision of Batman--it was serious and not a character that walked out of a freakshow (Burton's Bat-mess)

Freakshow is a very valid interpretation of Batman, Nolan's films and TAS definitely had elements of it and with some of the characters they are generally meant to be pretty grotesque and/or otherwise disturbing.

or like the Power Ranger-ing worst of the MCU.

They were indeed better and even more serious than a lot of the MCU but I don't think the Nolan Batman sequels were as serious or mature as they thought they were or are generally regarded to be, they also tried very hard to be very crowd-pleasing rather than challenging in how they dealt with their themes, issues, stories.

 

[fireproof78]

Something unashamed of itself and where it came from.

Would love to see this shame that keeps getting accused of without actual proof.

 

[JD]

Bruce Wayne shouldn't look like a guy who'd easily be Batman, that's the point.

With the way Batman is usually presented, there's really no way Bruce Wayne couldn't look like he'd be Batman unless he was a shapeshifter. The whole Bruce Wayne thing has always been more about behavior than appearance.

Nope, their only claim to fame was being the only show in town and having a dead Academy darling. Put them out in a post Avengers environment, they'd fly under the radar. Folks aren't ashamed of comics anymore.

The Nolan Batman trilogy started while the X-Men, and Spider-Man movies were coming out, so they were far from the only game in town.
Trust me, if they came out now they'd still be just as well recieved, they're just damn good movies.

IE, predictable and dull with no real respect for the comics.

There's more than enough stuff taken directly from the comics in the Nolan movies to show that they respected them.

Seeing how Nolan needed a dead actor for that, I'm glad the MCU didn't sink that low. And Joker will be forgotten as quickly as Logan was. Meanwhile the MCU has still equaled anything he put out.

Wow, disrespect towards the dead and completely ridiculous assumptions.

Something unashamed of itself and where it came from.

Just because someone chose to interpret things differently doesn't mean they ashamed of the comics. If the people making these movies were really as ashamed of comics as you keep saying, they wouldn't even want to be associated with the characters. The fact that they want to use the characters at all shows that they are fans at least some level. Even if it's an "in name only" adaptation, there still must at least some interest and respect for the comics if they are able to recognize the worth of the name, and want to be associated with it.

agree, that's why Feige is a bigger figure than Nolan.

Not sure I'd go that far, they're both a pretty big deal.

 

[fireproof78]

Just because someone chose to interpret things differently doesn't mean they ashamed of the comics. If the people making these movies were really as ashamed of comics as you keep saying, they wouldn't even want to be associated with the characters. The fact that they want to use the characters at all shows that they are fans at least some level. Even if it's an "in name only" adaptation, there still must at least some interest and respect for the comics if they are able to recognize the worth of the name, and want to be associated with it.

Exactly. True shame would be avoidance, not the casual tossing around of the term that is so commonplace nowadays. Words mean things and shame is not a good thing.

Trust me, if they came out now they'd still be just as well recieved, they're just damn good movies.

Indeed. Even my wife, who isn't a Batman fan by any stretch, really enjoyed these films.

 

[crookeddy]

Of all the Batman movies TDK trilogy was probably closest to how Batman is in the comics in the 21st century. Why are you ashamed of modern comics???