News Variety Reports Robert Pattinson is the new Batman

[Anwar]

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.

Tell that to Clark Kent.

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.

Begins wasn't the supersmash hit folks say it was, the Nolan movies didn't reach that level until Dark Knight in 2008. And by 2008 both X3 and Spider-Man 3 had come and gone and left a bitter taste in everyones' mouths. So no, by the time the Nolan movies got their Rep they were 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.

I doubt it, most of Dark Knights' failings would be openly recognized if it came out now instead of glossed over like they were.

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

Like what?

Wow, disrespect towards the dead and completely ridiculous assumptions.

I'm tired of being conciliatory, I'm not sugarcoating things anymore. Ledger dying and the media circus that ensued are what helped make TDK Untouchable more than it's own merits. And no one talks about Logan anymore. It was flash in the pan.

Just because someone chose to interpret things differently doesn't mean they ashamed of the comics.

It's the attitude they give off.

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.

Guys like Todd Phillips made it clear he's not a fan and only used the name to get funding and attention because he knew he'd never get the movie made without that.

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.

Like I said, it was to get publicity and funding.

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???

Those modern comics are the ones that tried to change themselves to fit better with Dark Knight, not vice versa.

 

[crookeddy]

Those modern comics are the ones that tried to change themselves to fit better with Dark Knight, not vice versa.

Complete bullshit. Comics have headed in this direction since Dark Knight Returns sold so well.

 

[Ovation]

Tell that to Clark Kent.



Begins wasn't the supersmash hit folks say it was, the Nolan movies didn't reach that level until Dark Knight in 2008. And by 2008 both X3 and Spider-Man 3 had come and gone and left a bitter taste in everyones' mouths. So no, by the time the Nolan movies got their Rep they were the only game in town.



I doubt it, most of Dark Knights' failings would be openly recognized if it came out now instead of glossed over like they were.



Like what?



I'm tired of being conciliatory, I'm not sugarcoating things anymore. Ledger dying and the media circus that ensued are what helped make TDK Untouchable more than it's own merits. And no one talks about Logan anymore. It was flash in the pan.



It's the attitude they give off.



Guys like Todd Phillips made it clear he's not a fan and only used the name to get funding and attention because he knew he'd never get the movie made without that.



Like I said, it was to get publicity and funding.



Those modern comics are the ones that tried to change themselves to fit better with Dark Knight, not vice versa.

So. Much. Yawn.

 

[Anwar]

Complete bullshit. Comics have headed in this direction since Dark Knight Returns sold so well.

Dark Knight Returns was full of campiness, Miller even admitted he'd have had Batman fighting on giant pianos if he could've gotten away with it.

So. Much. Yawn.

So you have no argument.

 

[Ovation]

So you have no argument.

There is no substance against which to argue in any of your posts. Constantly repeating inanities (as you do incessantly) does not an argument make. It’s mind numbingly boring. Hence the Yawn.

 

[Anwar]

There is no substance against which to argue in any of your posts. Constantly repeating inanities (as you do incessantly) does not an argument make. It’s mind numbingly boring. Hence the Yawn.

Or rather, you have no argument.

 

[suarezguy]

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???

Those modern comics are the ones that tried to change themselves to fit better with Dark Knight, not vice versa.

The first two films were heavily influenced by Year One, The Long Halloween and, though I think less successfully, The Killing Joke and I'm not sure but those modern-ish comics are still probably very influential on the Batman comics of today.

 

[Ovation]

Or rather, you have no argument.

Yawn.

 

[fireproof78]

Guys like Todd Phillips made it clear he's not a fan and only used the name to get funding and attention because he knew he'd never get the movie made without that.

Thats.Not.Shame.

 

[Anwar]

Yawn.

So you have no argument.

The first two films were heavily influenced by Year One, The Long Halloween and, though I think less successfully, The Killing Joke and I'm not sure but those modern-ish comics are still probably very influential on the Batman comics of today.

Aside from the first movie ending with Gordon hearing about some guy called Joker, there's little in common with Year One. Same with Long Halloween, since there was nothing about the Holiday Killer. There was some Killing Joker with how Joker corrupted Dent but that's it.

Thats.Not.Shame.

Yeah it is, especially when he wrote off all the others as "Not real movies".

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

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???

This.

 

[Ovation]

So you have no argument.



Aside from the first movie ending with Gordon hearing about some guy called Joker, there's little in common with Year One. Same with Long Halloween, since there was nothing about the Holiday Killer. There was some Killing Joker with how Joker corrupted Dent but that's it.



Yeah it is, especially when he wrote off all the others as "Not real movies".

Yawn.

 

[fireproof78]

Yeah it is, especially when he wrote off all the others as "Not real movies".

Ok, well, at this point you and I will agree to disagree. This definition of shame is so broad and nebulous that if I decided to go to Taco Bell over McDonald's I would be told I am ashamed of hamburgers.

People can do different interpretations of a work, hence the term "adaptation." Calling other movies "not real movies" is pretty standard Hollywood rhetoric that means about as much as the "shame" definition so casually tossed about here.

Comics do not have to fit in to a tight little box. That's not the way adaptation works.

 

[Anwar]

This.

Is wrong.

Yawn.

So you have no argument.

Comics do not have to fit in to a tight little box. That's not the way adaptation works.

I agree, that's why these creatively bankrupt notions of how they all have to be "grounded" need to be tossed in the shredder.

 

[fireproof78]

I agree, that's why these creatively bankrupt notions of how they all have to be "grounded" need to be tossed in the shredder.

No, they don't. There is room for many different adapations and one is not greater than the other. Personal preference is totally fine, but declaring one "ashamed" is wrong on multiple levels.

Burton isn't greater than Nolan who isn't greater than Schuemacher, etc. It's not a competition and all can exist simultaneously.

 

[Ovation]

Is wrong.



So you have no argument.



I agree, that's why these creatively bankrupt notions of how they all have to be "grounded" need to be tossed in the shredder.

Yawn.

 

[JD]

Tell that to Clark Kent.

Much like with Bruce Wayne, it's the way Clark acts that is the disguise more than his looks. Even in the comics, they still draw Clark as looking like Superman, but nobody in the comics notices because he acts so completely opposite of Superman that it never occurs to people that's who he is. The same goes for Batman and Bruce Wayne.

Begins wasn't the supersmash hit folks say it was, the Nolan movies didn't reach that level until Dark Knight in 2008. And by 2008 both X3 and Spider-Man 3 had come and gone and left a bitter taste in everyones' mouths. So no, by the time the Nolan movies got their Rep they were the only game in town.

The Last Stand came out in 2006, Spider-Man 3 in 2007, and Iron Man in May 2008 2 months before TDK. So no, TDK was very far from being the only game in town, it was right in the middle of downtown.

I doubt it, most of Dark Knights' failings would be openly recognized if it came out now instead of glossed over like they were.

I don't think I've seen anyone say that it's flawless, it's just that the good parts far outweigh the bad.

Like what?

I'll be honest, I don't know all of the comics well enough to go through them point by point, but I've seen plenty of articles going through them all. I'm pretty sure it would easy to find some if you really want to.

I'm tired of being conciliatory, I'm not sugarcoating things anymore. Ledger dying and the media circus that ensued are what helped make TDK Untouchable more than it's own merits. And no one talks about Logan anymore. It was flash in the pan.

Legder's death might have brought it some attention, but I'm pretty sure it would have gotten the same kind of attention if he'd survived.
Sure nobody talks about Logan, but there are plenty of great movies that people don't talk about as much any more.

It's the attitude they give off.

I haven't seen that at all. They might not be huge fans, but they can't be to ashamed of them if they are willing to use them for source material.

Guys like Todd Phillips made it clear he's not a fan and only used the name to get funding and attention because he knew he'd never get the movie made without that.

But that is not being ashamed of the comics, since he obviously recognizes the worth of the Joker name if he's willing to use it.

Those modern comics are the ones that tried to change themselves to fit better with Dark Knight, not vice versa.

Even the more grounded comics that came out before it like Year One and The Long Holloween? There were grounded comics out there long before TDK came out.

 

[Anwar]

Yawn.

So you have no argument.

Much like with Bruce Wayne, it's the way Clark acts that is the disguise more than his looks. Even in the comics, they still draw Clark as looking like Superman, but nobody in the comics notices because he acts so completely opposite of Superman that it never occurs to people that's who he is. The same goes for Batman and Bruce Wayne.

Some artists and writers have tried to incorporate that it's more than just how he acts but that he tries to help his build as Clark Kent too. A physical difference as well as a characterization one.

The Last Stand came out in 2006, Spider-Man 3 in 2007, and Iron Man in May 2008 2 months before TDK. So no, TDK was very far from being the only game in town, it was right in the middle of downtown.

Like I said, Last Stand and SM3 ending their series the way they did (Lackluster) meant that Nolan's approach had nothing to stand in its way.

I don't think I've seen anyone say that it's flawless

I certainly have.

Legder's death might have brought it some attention, but I'm pretty sure it would have gotten the same kind of attention if he'd survived.

I'm not so sure.

Sure nobody talks about Logan, but there are plenty of great movies that people don't talk about as much any more.

Yeah, but the point still stands that Logan wasn't the gamechanger the grounded folks hoped it would be.

I haven't seen that at all. They might not be huge fans, but they can't be to ashamed of them if they are willing to use them for source material.

Phillips openly stated he did it to trick studios to get funding for his pet project.

But that is not being ashamed of the comics, since he obviously recognizes the worth of the Joker name if he's willing to use it.

Using something to get money doesn't imply much respect.

Even the more grounded comics that came out before it like Year One and The Long Holloween? There were grounded comics out there long before TDK came out.

Yes and just as many "comicky" ones.

 

[crookeddy]

Please please please stop responding to this person!

 

[JD]

Some artists and writers have tried to incorporate that it's more than just how he acts but that he tries to help his build as Clark Kent too. A physical difference as well as a characterization one.

Some maybe, but it's not like he's a scrawny stick figure as Clark, and then buff as Superman, and he isn't changing his face. Pretty much every version I've seen, they are still pretty clearly the same person.

Like I said, Last Stand and SM3 ending their series the way they did (Lackluster) meant that Nolan's approach had nothing to stand in its way.

Just because people didn't like them doesn't mean they didn't come out close to it. You said it was "the only game in town", which generally means it had no competition. That was clearly not the case since there was still a pretty consistent stream of other comic book superhero movies coming out around it.

I'm not so sure.

His death didn't change the quality of the movie.

Yeah, but the point still stands that Logan wasn't the gamechanger the grounded folks hoped it would be.

So? All you said was that people don't talk about it anymore, and I was just pointing out that doesn't mean it wasn't a good or popular movie.

Phillips openly stated he did it to trick studios to get funding for his pet project.

Yes, I am aware of that.

Using something to get money doesn't imply much respect.

He obviously recognized that it was popular and was willing to have his name associated with it. And from what I've read, even though he just "used it to get money", he still worked in elements from the comics, so obviously he doesn't hate comics that much.

Yes and just as many "comicky" ones.

And there are still "comicky" ones coming out today, and there have been both "comicky" ones and grounded ones going all the way back to at least the '70s and '80s, so I really don't understand what you're point here is. It's not like there were only "comicky" books before TDK and have only been grounded ones since TDK came out. For decades now there have been combinations of the two.