• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

News Variety Reports Robert Pattinson is the new Batman

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't understand all this 'Batman needs to be this' or 'he can't be like that'.
He's fictional character, that's been re-invented in the comics countless times. He can be anything the current version of the character is. Some people will like it, others won't. I don't see a problem.
 
I don't understand all this 'Batman needs to be this' or 'he can't be like that'.
He's fictional character, that's been re-invented in the comics countless times. He can be anything the current version of the character is. Some people will like it, others won't. I don't see a problem.
True. Yet we all have our personal preferences as to how we like to see the character portrayed. For me, when it becomes more and more grim, dark and brutal, then watching it is a joyless experience. I like to actually have fun when I watch movies.

Kor
 
True. Yet we all have our personal preferences as to how we like to see the character portrayed. For me, when it becomes more and more grim, dark and brutal, then watching it is a joyless experience. I like to actually have fun when I watch movies.

Kor

And that's exactly how it works. Personal preference. I'm talking about people stating said personal preference as gospel, as fact.
"I do not enjoy this take on a certain character.... there for it is bad and rubbish. Fact."
I enjoyed the Nolan trilogy a lot. I have a friend who hates them. He cannot and will not accept that I enjoy them and will take every chance he has to almost evangelize how right he is. Fun fact, he hates religion but is not aware he's basically preaching his own personal gospel when it comes to his fandom for Batman. It really has put a strain on our friendship.

I see it in this topic as well. People will say "Yes, everyone should enjoy what they like.......But...... If you'll listen to me I will make you understand why I'm right and you're wrong."
I know some people will claim this is normal debate between people of different opinions. Personally, I just think why would you want to try and convince others they are wrong for liking something simply because you dislike it?

Egh....I'm probably just ranting again. Sorry.
 
Batman is a product of violent trauma--murder. Few who witnessed murder up close (especially as a child) will see the world through grim lenses, as its the effect of a brutal culture/energy which encourages / conditions one to be grim, not only as an acknowledgement of reality, but as a natural coping mechanism (for that category of people who try to cope). That's who Batman/Wayne is (certainly in the best Batman stories ever published and adapted productions), not some guy who is always sitting on what would be a psychological fence of grim and hopefully optimistic behavior. There are other superheroes who are less traumatized (and/or not the product of murder, so they can find their way into lighter behavior, but that's not Batman--certainly not the character at his best.

As a character and an emotion, Batman is grim--yes--but the best stories are not. They are dark, gritty and suspenseful. For me, grim is brutal and bleak. The O'Neil styled stories of the 70s and 80s, and more recently the Snyder run on the character, are the style I'm referring to. I also really liked Morrison's run before the New 52. Miller's version, which was never meant to be a definitive version, has carried too long a shadow over the character. In terms of movies, for me it is the difference between Batman Begins/The Dark Knight Rises and The Dark Knight. I enjoyed the Dark Knight but it is just too bleak a story for me to engage in repeated viewings.
 
As a character and an emotion, Batman is grim--yes--but the best stories are not. They are dark, gritty and suspenseful. For me, grim is brutal and bleak.

By that definition, Batman shouldn't be grim either. He's not "brutal and bleak." "Bleak" means hopeless, and Batman is a symbol of hope. And "brutal" means heartless and cruel, and Batman is fundamentally driven by compassion and selflessness. The idea is supposed to be that he's terrifying to criminals, but reassuring and inspiring to the rest of us.

The O'Neil styled stories of the 70s and 80s, and more recently the Snyder run on the character, are the style I'm referring to. I also really liked Morrison's run before the New 52. Miller's version, which was never meant to be a definitive version, has carried too long a shadow over the character.

Yes, I agree with this. O'Neil's Batman -- and the Batman: The Animated Series version that's most strongly inspired by that era -- isn't the obsessive borderline sociopath Miller popularized. He's grouchy and aloof, more serious than he was in the Golden and Silver Age comics (aside from the swerves into Bob Haney "Batman digs this day" characterization in contemporaneous titles), but still a pretty well-rounded human being seen as a hero by the people around him.

You know, as I wrote that, I was struck by an irony. O'Neil, Schwartz, et al. made Batman more serious in the '70s to get away from the goofy reputation of the Adam West show -- but in doing so, they made Batman's character more like Adam West's version. In the comics, from about 1942 through the late '60s, Batman and Robin were a nonstop comedy duo, trading wisecracks and bad puns with every punch. But the TV series embraced the same kind of deadpan humor that Airplane! would later on, portraying a ridiculous world whose protagonists took it all absolutely seriously to the point of farce. So the show's Batman and Robin were a lot more serious, solemn, and intense than their comics counterparts, even though their world was just about as silly as that of the Silver Age comics (more so in some ways, less so in others). And then the comics made Batman more serious, solemn, and intense in an attempt to be less like the TV show.
 
Sleek, fast black car with lots of toys, the voice of a British gentleman (Alfred) talking to Bruce inside, and now with a distinctive glowing rectangular red light at the front? Ha ha, I see what you did there Reeves...

Er, William Daniels (KITT) performs with a New England/Boston accent, not a British accent. (Although he's actually from Brooklyn.)
 
Some cool new pics of Pattison's Batmobile, displayed at the WB Hotel in Abu Dhabi.

Sleek, fast black car with lots of toys, the voice of a British gentleman (Alfred) talking to Bruce inside, and now with a distinctive glowing rectangular red light at the front? Ha ha, I see what you did there Reeves...
After all the crazy over the top Batmobiles in the other movies, it's kinda weird seeing one that's so grounded and down to Earth.
 
On the one hand, I hate "grounded" Batman, so I don't like that Batmobile. That said, I have to admit that it still looks better then either the Bat Tumbler or Snyder's Murder-mobile.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kor
Looks like KITT and the VIPER car had a baby.
Reminds me of the Seventies when for a brief time the Batmobile was a blue sports car.
bvEVj1k.jpg

Sort of a Batmask thing happening on the hood.
 
Jim Aparo drew some great Batmobiles in Brave and the Bold that were just normal sports cars with "add ons". Back then the Batmobile was drawn like a James Bond car.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top