Cool News
SUPERBOWL: BATMAN BEGINS Spot!
Hey folks, Harry here - to me, this is the first time that I've seen footage from BATMAN BEGINS that got me genuinely excited beyond the pure fanboy interest in the character. This is a thrilling spot that gives us a taste of what we have in store. Here ya go, enjoy...
Here ya Go!
Here's Full Screen
-
+ Expand All
-
The Scarecrow to me doesn't look scary, or menacing, or anything. He just looks like some businessman running around in a burlap sack because maybe his buddies at the office glued it to his forehead. The look looks shitty, but everything else looks great and seeing Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman was great, and seeing Bruce give that line, "Does it come in black?" Was pure fanboy goodness! Can't wait!
-
Simply awesome, i actually like the sack of potatos look of the scarecrow, and they give us more batmobile this time, can't wait till june!!
-
Cute looking gay comic book movie. But not the Batman the world has been waiting for.
-
We only get one shot, and a decent one, though of his face. Seems rather faithful to the comic book... don't know how else they would pull it off while being faithful. It'll all have to come down to the part as written an performed. Can't judge from the trailer. Even though it was a damn cool one (and we get a good look at the batmobile!)
-
and I'm with Harry on having not really gotten excited by the previous spots, this one does it for me though. And I don't think Scarecrow looks particularly scary, but I never thought he looked scary in the comics either, I think he looks like what he looked like in the comics though, as a guy dressed up like a scarecrow, but I'm glad they managed to do it without having to make him too costume-y. And I love the way the batmobile sounds.
-
Feb 06, 2005 9:37:22 PM CST
M'enh.... I have total faith in Nolan AND this movie - but that
by fish tank
-
Yeah, there's gonna be criticisms of the Scarecrow's look but I think he will be crap until we see him through the eyes of someone who's fucked up on that gas or whatever he gives his victims.
-
Am I the only one who registers this clip as a disappointment? Scarecrow looks like a douchebag, Batman's mask remains awkward, and I don't like the "Does it come in black?" line. I hate to be one of those cliche fanboys who says everything "sucks" but I'm just being cautious. Batman is my favorite comic book hero and I thought Tim Burton already did a superb job bringing the character to the big screen.
-
I have to agree, looks a lot better...I know i'm in the minority on this, but the batmobile is fuckin' cool! WOTW spot was cool, I like that they don't show anything, more mystery!
-
Not to impressed with scarecrow or even the bulky new Bat mobile. I think the mask in NightBreed was a shitload scarier.
-
i wet my pants when it aired tonight...i hate football...only watched to see the spot....great stuff!
-
what kind of hand do you expect him to have?
-
ohh come on, don't tell me that wasn't cool as hell XD this movie looks completely awesome, and I can't wait to see it!
-
Uhh, I don't mean to question your fanhood, but, how can a Batman fan say that Burton's movie was 'superb' and still consider himself a fan? Admittidly, there were many aspects he got right, but just as many he got wrong...the end result was far from superb, mediocre? yes! I don't know a fan of Batman that would come even close to calling it superb! "Does it come in black?" does seem like it's pandering to the mainstream, and I'm a bit worried about Goyer's script, especially after Blade Trinity...but a lot will depend on the performances, characterizations and Nolan's direction, for which I have complete faith!
-
Feb 06, 2005 9:54:05 PM CST
oh, the cartoons always depicted him as made of hay straw or som
by orionsangels
-
http://simplyscripts.com/ - has some great scripts ;)
-
...and now it is on my computer. thank you, harry, for feeding my addiction.
-
We've yet to see Bats fight anyone. Other than that, awesome. Balse looks so much like the Tim Sale Batman it's insane.
-
And I dig Burton's '89 film quite a bit, everything after that is lost on me, even Returns, but I thought Burton, Keaton, and Nicholson turned in a great take on the comic.
-
This is the first thing I've seen thats really got me pumped about the movie.
-
I agree Keaton nailed the performance and I loved the look Burton gave the film, very thick atmosphere, i'll miss that in the new one...but Jack's Joker was a problem, namely that it was Jack doing Jack as the Joker, I saw little to no relation between him and the comic version. The story was really weak and most of the supporting charcters came off dry. I love Elfman's score though, one of the best superhero scores ever, second only to Williams' Superman.
-
IS that what the car is doing in the final sequence?
-
i'm very positive about this movie...the script will rock, the action will be great, and the acting just swell! but, the only thing that bugs me is the batcostume. to me it looks like some little kid's hack job of playing batman in his basement. but, at least the big rubber nipples aren't there...still, the outfit worries me. other than that, go bats go!!
-
Feb 06, 2005 10:51:01 PM CST
This film looks entirely too understated, just look at the Scare
by industrykiller
He's just a normal dude wearing a burlap sack on his head. Last I checked batman was still a comic book character. If Schumacher was waaaaay over the top Nolan looks like he's bringing it too low key. The problem with making it ultra realistic is that when some superhuman event needs to happen (inevitable when you are dealing with comic books no matter how realistic you try to make them) it seems totally out of place and fake to the point where even having a guy in a suit is something to snicker at. I guess we'll just have to see how this works out.
-
everything I've seen so far seems to be following it pretty closely. Whether that's a good or bad sign remains to be seen. Needless to say the script I read didn't exactly thrill me, I found the scarecrow to be particularly blah. Yeah, he hits a couple of people with his gas, inducing wacky little hallucinations like fire coming out of his eyes and such, but he just didn't come off as being particularly intimidating. Oh, and for those who think the line "Does it come in black" was a little out of character, well, there are several other things you may groan over before it's all said and done.
As it stands the script reads like a fairly mediocre action flick, the vehicle chase sequence could yield some thrills, if Nolan can jazz it up. But the villains did nothing for me, but hey, if can Norrington and Del toro can perform alchemy on Goyers script, there's no reason Nolan can't do the same. -
Wasn't impressed, the teaser was better.
-
Pats win which is a good thing, but the footage of Batman Begins continues to get worse and worse with each new trailer/commercial. Give me Burtons Batman anyday. Heck, MotP will be better than Batman 2005.
-
Judging stuff based on a thirty-second montage. You little boys are too damn cynical for your own good. If it sucks, it sucks, mm-kay? But you DON'T know shit until you actually see the whole thing. You can get buzz, you can get early scripts, you can decide that something doesn't fit YOUR vision... but, for cryin' out loud, give the damn movie a chance. It looks as if it's being made by people who care about the character, about the look, about the mythology, the whole package. And, no, it may not be perfect. Until YOU get financed by Warner Bros. to make YOUR perfect vision of Batman, at least let the damn thing be released before you descend on it like a pack of rabid lemmings. Jeez.
-
I had the script and that link did point to the script (though it is an earlier script that Nolan has since fixed up ...)
-
Feb 06, 2005 10:58:38 PM CST
Bless you Harry, but that wasn't the spot described to us by con
by 007-11
That can't be the Scarecrow. It looks nothing like the one described from the trailer those people got to see at that convention. Same goes for the commercial. It was supposed to end with Katie Holmes getting gased at the end. That was a new one they must have made for the Super Bowl. I don't believe we've actually seen the real Scarecrow. I'm damn excited about the whole thing though.
-
The script was VERY low key, in fact I'd wager that Bruce Wayne and James Bond were virtually interchangeable.
-
Feb 06, 2005 11:14:16 PM CST
Where's the wow factor? There doesn't seem to be one ... but I
by jdanielp
Without much of a "wow factor", ... is it enough to bring out most of the same audiences who saw Tim Burton's "BATMAN" of 1989? I'm not sure, but I'll be there. But then, I'm a huge Batman fan.
-
All you haters can suck it. I thought the TB Batman was great, loved it, didnt get too bunged up about how it stacks up to the comic book because,of course, a film isnt a comic book and what is effective in one (grey tights) is bafflingly stupid in another, just look at what I consider to be the most "comic book-y" of the recent spate of superhero films, batman and robin (steaming pile of harry shit) and batman forever (another steaming pile of harry shit. I can see how JS tried to meld the two mediums and he FAILED MISERABLY. Seperating the two mediums and enjoying each for their merits, Ive found, is the way to go. I thought the "does it come in black" line was fucking UBER COOL and I get the idea that CB is gonna deliver at least Bruce Wayne with a certain sardonic and dark wit. Im geeked to the gills.
And Scarecrow looks great, I like the fact that it wasn't some prosthetic rubber and latex mask that they were "hoping" we would buy as burlap. I like the idea of translating a totally fantastical (im almost positive thats a word...if not, once again, haters can suck it) comic book character into a feasible (if not totally believable) representation for the screen. Anyhow, ep3 is gonna rule the summer, haters are bitches and Elvis is alive in my underpants.
As Kip Dynamite would say:
Peath Out. -
I see after reviewing my talkback, which obviously I should do BEFORE i hit post, that I dissed on haters 3 times in my post. I guess that makes me a hater myself. A "Hater Hater"...how novel.
Peath Out -
actually, more like Jason with the bag over his head in Part 2. The rest looks great though.
-
1. Batman killed
2. Joker was the star of the film
3. Batman was shorter than vicky vale.
4. Batman used no detective skills (at least batman forever had that)
5. Batman used virtually no fighting skills and was running away from the enemies for most of the movie.
6. Batman killed.
7. Joker killed Batman's parents
8. Batman killed.
As long as these things are fixed in the new movie, I'll be happy. Until then, I'll enjoy Batman the animated series on DVD.
SIDE NOTE: Scarcrow is not made of straw in the cartoom. It's a suit. There are many episodes where he takes his suit off. -
Like he's been standing in a field with birds crapping on him.
-
If you'll recall, he figured out which cosmetics products the Joker poisoned, and in which combinations they were lethal. And who cares if Batman kills?
-
I'm just not down for another Batman film. I don't know... I just don't feel the need for it.
-
Feb 06, 2005 11:59:52 PM CST
The Star Wars Holiday Special Had More WOW Than This Trailer
by kingdingaling
If you were ever wondering where Morgan Freeman would show up next, look no further.
-
anything is better then donald trump, ben forehead or tom arnold. gimme more gas.
-
The teaser and TV spot just do nothing for me. I am more excited to see Firefly and I hated the TV show.
-
this will be good...give it a chance...we're all just doubting-toms cause of the last batman failures...i think goyer is smart enough on what to do...look at the first two blade films...they're awesome!! just don't let goyer direct the third batman movie and we'll all be okee-dokee!
-
Feb 07, 2005 12:13:25 AM CST
sledgehammer, if anything, that should be proof of the contrary
by ribbons
The first two Blade films were good in spite of Goyer, not because of him.
-
Though I have SLIGHT doubts about this movie being great, I still enjoyed the superbowl trailer for what it was worth. I'll be seeing this movie when its released, only then will I really know how the movie turns out. So... whens Batman gonna get his Holiday Special??? Get Robin in there and have Joker host a "Very Joker Christmas"!!! Penguin could show up and slide on his stomach across ice and snow with a huge grin on his face!!!
-
Feb 07, 2005 12:22:57 AM CST
I don't know, a lot of the nerds who identify themselves with Ba
by ribbons
Then again, Batman has to be the coolest case study in arrested development ever. Who'd want to offend the obese blue state basement dweller's market, right?
-
Feb 07, 2005 12:30:05 AM CST
I don't see how "BATMAN BEGINS" could be anything less than GOOD
by jdanielp
...and with all the history of the Batman comics, how could they possibly screw it up with so much talent in place? My only problem has been with the costume interpretation ... but the costume could be much worse (I love the open cape). And with this being a "year one" style of movie ... and with such focus on bringing life-like realism to the character, the costume is forgivable. (I hope to see Batman from the perspective of someone who's inhaled the Scarecrow's fear gas, ... to see Batman with exaggerated ears and cape ... as such a vision could be soooooo cool on screen!) -- I'm already looking forward to the sequel, "wow factor" or not.
-
Boring. Hack. Stinker. Although, the "land" bit made me chuckle. A minor chuckle. The Longest Yard trailer ways ten times better.
-
No arguments insofar as that goes
-
Think you're in the wrong talkback mate.
-
Feb 07, 2005 12:44:57 AM CST
I think some of you are getting the wrong idea about the "Scarcr
by nomad202
*SPOILER*
He's gonna look different and a lot creepier in "later stages" (I guess he uses the fear gas on batman and the scarecrow's image changes dramatically). I can't wait personally ;)
*END SPOILER*
Please, have patience, this summer is gonna rock!!
About "does it come in black?" line-
How can Bruce Wayne be a playboy w/out a sense of humor? It was Bruce Wayne who had the sense of humor, not BATMAN.
kddog69-
You forgot that Burton kept killing the major villains, BIG problem there.
-
i cant see how anyone can judge how good/bad the movie will be with this tv spot. It barely shows anything. it's just flashes of images here and there. Fanboys focus on the most obscure and miniscule things, as though that kinda shit determines how good the movie is on a larger scale. e.g. Scarecrow having human hands or how well his face is done. The movie will suck if the plot is terrible/mediocre, if the effects are lame, and if the characterization is wack. The tv spot shows virtually nothing of this sort. So you can't say anything. we'll see when the movie comes out.
-
He doens't have the style to pull something like this off. A great stylist can take mediocre moments from a script and make them great, but Nolan will pretty much keep the mediocre Goyer moments mediocre.
-
Feb 07, 2005 1:41:01 AM CST
by the way, the Constantine superbowl spot is much better.
by sirbiatchreturns
THAT is how to make a tv spot. its not the most amazing tv spot ever but its quite decent. it certainly made me say: 'yeah, i'll definitely be seeing this'. Batman Begins is like: 'ehh. i need more material to judge'.
-
Where on simplyscripts is the Begins script? I've found the Frightening script, which is kinda cool, but a little lame, but the link to the Begins script (a pdf file) goes to a "cannot be found" screen. The individual parts of the trailer didn't really do it for me (Alfred just sounds like Michael Caine, there's nothing too exciting that we haven't already seen) but on the whole it got me pretty damn excited for the movie, and I don't know why. The "come in black" line isn't perfect, but it isn't that bad, either. Remember Wayne takes all the existing technologies invented by Fox and adapts them for Batman - that's what he's doing here, so what's the problem? He literally wants the car to be painted black. You people are way too uptight. One joke does not a sense of humour make - wait till you've seen the movie before judging whether Bruce Wayne's been given a "lame" sense of humour.
-
xXX wasn't the best one, but it looked better than I thought it would. I don't think 30 was enough for Batman to come across correctly. Maybe it's just me. The Pacifier was awful. Spot of the night goes to The Longest Yard.
-
As much as I like Burtons "style"...he got the character all wrong. Now maybe we can concentrate on the character of Wayne instead of hamming it up with the villains.
-
ok i'll see this
-
When i first saw it on tv, i thought the scarecrow looked like shit, and was totally pissed off that they showed him. But after watching it again, he looks much scarier and cooler, and the fact that we can really see him blink makes him look much more eerie. I think the War of the Worlds teaser was probably the best only because it was surprising how fucking crazy that destruction was. As for "The Longest Yard," I was also fucking disappointed they gave away the "YOU CAN DOO IT" Rob Schneider cameo. Assholes.
-
YOU JUST PISSED ME OFF!! "who cares if Batman kills". The only thing that separates batman from those he fights is that he doesn't kill. It is the line that he will not cross. If you make him kill you destroy the entire point of the character. I guess you have never read a single batman comic or seen any other form of batman except for the 4 shitty movies that have been released. I respect that you claim that he did use detective skills to figure out the chemicals joker was using, but I personally don't consider that detective work. If you watch any episode of the animated series you should know what I mean. Anyway, Batman does not kill. Period. He believes in justice not vengence. Read Year one if you need help figuring this out.
-
Feb 07, 2005 3:58:08 AM CST
"Does it come in black?" VS "Chicks love the car" - the differen
by jackburton
The difference is that, quite simply, you can have Bruce Wayne saying a line like that about the car colour and get away with it with a knowing wink and low key delivery, but you can't have Batman saying a line like he did in Batman Forever without it seeming a) completely out of character, and b) stupid and lame as all fuck. Once he's in the suit he's all business, not there to yuk up with the jokes. My view anyway. As for the film, I have faith in Nolan, and this just further cements it for me, and along with Sin City this is my most anticipatd of the year.
-
look like a monster truck? I like the scarecrow's look... realism, sure. Flick still looks like crap though. Freemen's better off sticking with films like M$B.
-
The mask he wears would work fine in the real world. Plus, Batman's head can move around this time.
-
Its going to be good. But not great.
-
Spider-man doesn't kill. Batman kills - maybe occasionally, but he does. He has killed Joker eventually.
Maybe in Burton films he kills more often than in comics, but at least this separates these movies from other gay kid films, like Batman 3&4. -
I think it makes for a much more interesting character when he doesn't kill, but back in the early days of Kane Batman killed, Burton's 89 Batman is actually pretty close to how Kane portrayed him, Napier falling into a chemical vat is almost straight out of the very first issue of Batman, and I say "almost" cause in the movie Napier accidently falls in cause of his own gun shot and Batman tries to save him, in the comic Batman just straight up knocks the guy into it.
-
You mean that scene when Bruce Wayne is wearing samurai armor? Thats ACTUALLY samurai armor, not the batsuit, if thats what you were referring to. If not, ignore this post.
-
Is it possible... just possible... that this set of teasers has been the biggest misdirection ever? Know how they show insanely "cool" trailers of action/scifi movies and you complain after you leave the theater that you saw all the best parts in the trailers? HMMMMMM... maybe they're being SMART for once and doing what a teaser is supposed to do... TEASE. I don't want to see Batman fight anyone in these spots. I don't want to see any of the amazing visuals. I don't want to see the depth of a character. I want to see it in the movie and enjoy it then. No one fucking gets it anymore. Does it look interesting? Fuck yah! And please, comparing "Chicks dig the car" to "Does it come in black?" You must be kidding. "Chicks dig the car" is one of the worst lines EVER in a comic movie. And even if it was funny, it certainly wasn't Batman.
-
by twats on here bitching and pissing and moaning about a film THEY WILL GO AND SEE when it comes out. People who go "every single pic/trailer i see of this movie just makes me less and less interested" are hypocrytical cunts and should be dragged out into the street, have a tube stuck in their ass, barbed wire down the tube and then pull the tube out and fucking leave them there whinging about how Luca$ (the dollar sign is SO clever too) fucked up their childhood... despite the fact that they're all still stuck in it.
-
That looks awesome. Quit your bitching, fan boys.
-
Feb 07, 2005 8:50:49 AM CST
The trailer was fine and did you really think they were going to
by darksider
I think Nolan is going for as realistic as he can get to stay away from the previous films. The Scarecrow shot may have been from an early part of the film. There may be more later, so relax. I think he could really use the hat though. The line about the car was good as well.
-
Feb 07, 2005 9:22:25 AM CST
Bruce said "does it come in black?" good, Batman said "chicks di
by unmancito
If you read the comic you know that Bruce acts like a playboy, and jokes a lot (check Batman:Year one, Gordon goes to the manor for an example), but bats rarely does, and if he does it it's to the innercircle (JLA, Robin, Nithgwing, etc) not to some girl that shows up suddenly, the chessy line is definitely something Bruce will say and i will watch the movie for one!!!
-
Feb 07, 2005 9:35:36 AM CST
re: "Chicks dig the car"... wasn't it Robin who said that to Bat
by jasonpratt
Granted, B&R is a terrible movie, and would still be a terrible movie if it didn't feature a terrible version of Batman (Robin's a bit closer to right). But as I recall, the line occurs like this: opening credits, batsignal, B&R getting ready (cue loving closeup of batrumps, gag), Robin delivers first line of the movie--"I want my own car. Chicks dig the car." As sad as it is, it _does_ in fact fit the character in the movie, and even manages to have continuity relevance (Robin stealing the Batmobile in BF and finding out it impresses girls; Robin joyriding it again in B&R during that ridiculous car race through Gotham up and down buildings.) -- So yeah, I definitely prefer the nudge-wit of the new spot. It's closer to the "Get in the car..." "Which one?" reveal of the first movie; and even has a bit of parallel from the animated Batman theatrical film (where Bruce and his girlfriend are attending a 1930s-ish New York World's Fair shortly before he becomes Batman, and he sees the Batmobile in prototype. The obvious unspoken thought would be "Does it come in black?")
-
The horror of those previous two movies kind of overlaps each other; and God knows I don't have them handy for reference. But unmancito's reference now has me doubting if I'm remembering rightly; because I _do_ now sort of remember Batman giving this line to Nicole Kidman's character in that first rooftop meeting. urg. -- Of course, all of this is compounded by the fact that only in those two movies would _any_ woman dig _that_ car. (I think most women would be pretty wry, at best, about the one from the Burton films, but at least it was respectable.)
-
His voice sounds too "I'm forcing myself to talk all raspy." That could be your usual voice-over junk. His face doesnt seem right ... when he looks at the camera and says "Does it come in black?" aside from the cheese, his face just doesn't really look the part. That may be ridiculous to say from such a brief clip though. All in all, I'd say I'm less impressed than the teaser where he delivered the "... Me." line at the end.
Also, I love Batman and loved the 1st Tim Burton Batman movie, aside from the complaint that they always seem to kill the villain in these things.
-
Steve Zabin, on his morning sports talk show, basically asked, "So who's the pansy playing Batman?" I think you all can take that as the standard gut-reaction of the mainstream American fan. Doesn't mean the movie isn't gonna rock. Everyone's first reaction to Michael Keaton playing Batman was "Huh?! Mr. Mom?!" And Keaton pulled the role off beautifully. We'll see. At least the tone they're selling so far is right.
-
Why do all of the Batman movies (save the first one) insist on having two villains?
-
You know the only way the TalkBack Haters will be impressed is if the trailer launched a tube out of their televisions and sucked them off. They're the type of assholes who'd bang a supermodel and complain that she was as deep as a paper plate. I'm certainly not going to defend some directors' choice of dialogue or the goddamned publicity people's choice of trailer edits (Sorry, Haters, trailers aren't always edited and reviewed by the directors and prinicipal editors, so you can't always look at a trailer and say 'this is crap'.)********************Finally, I go to movies to escape, and nothing you hateful sonsabitches are going to make me dislike a movie I haven't seen yet. Batman's my favorite character, and NOTHING in this trailer makes me think they're not taking this character seriously...as seriously as a CHILDREN'S COMIC BOOK CHARACTER can be taken, mind you...Besides what's worse? "Does it come in black?" with a smirk, or "COWABUNGA!" from Robin as he and Batman FUCKING SNOWBOARD/SKYBOARD OUT OF A GODDAMNED ROCKET HEADED FOR THE MOON THAT EXPLODES AROUND THEM THOUSANDS OF MILES ABOVE GOTHAM CITY?!?! ARRRRHGLEAGLE-AAAHGLE!! DA BAD GUYS AH IN DEAH....Okay...back to...senses...Last Action Hero + Gallon o' Guinness Night = Bad Line Fever. Take it easy, Haters, it's not like this is Batman and Robin...************************
Hater #1: Well! If it isn't the so-called 'Batman'! What can be said about your Batmobile that hasn't been said about Afghanistan? It looks bombed out and depleted!**************Rest of the Hateful Sumbitches: Hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate...**********
-
Bale said in an interview with Dark Horizons that he purposely changed his voice when he was in the Batsuit because he felt as if that is what a real person would do. As Wayne, he talks normally. Jesus, this tv spot rocked, you hateful sumbitches dont seem to like ANYTHING! Im sure we'll hear you all moan when we finally see some KONG action! Morons.
-
my post was meant for the guy above you, Animation.
-
I love seeing the hate for the haters. They truly do suck mandrill ass. Backlash is a bitch, ain't it? Nothing wrong with legitimate and/or informed criticism, but the high-pitched whining over shades of color being wrong, or voices being raspy, or burlap actually looking like burlap, or nit-picking over a line in a trailer is nothing but the angry bitching of malodorous fanboy losers furiously masturbating to their McFarlane Toy collection. Nothing a severe beating about the face and neck with a gravel-filled rubber hose wouldn't cure, mind you.
-
Feb 07, 2005 11:17:17 AM CST
I knew lobbying for Bale instead of Kutcher wasn't a mistake
by quantum_ken
As insane as this sounds, I feel rewarded for my insignificant efforts to put Bale in the suit.
-
A. PSYCHO reference....me likeee.
-
You really think fans had anything to do with that decision? I dont think so.
-
A) Who wouldn't want to be named Bill Finger?
B) The original Kane Batman killed folks on the regular. He even carried a gun (in them days, the character's psychology was not as important as his pathology -
All of you haters, can say whatever you want, because in the end you'll be on line i june, salivating, just like me and the others that are already lovin this movie, what i have seen so far is cool and tons better than the last 2 batman, if nolan makes a movie as good as bats 1 and 2 i'll still be happy, but i think nolan will do an amazin' batman, so i'll hold my hate(if there's any) untill then!! right now i'm just happy that the batman franchise has a life after the batnipple fiasco!!
-
Feb 07, 2005 12:13:08 PM CST
The commercials for BATMAN BEGINS and WAR OF THE WORLDS were the
by kikstad
2005 will be a great year for movies.
-
scarecrow is cool enough as a villain, but ra's is who i'm wanting to see. as far as i'm concerned this is the villian i never thought would show up in the movies.
-
The only thing dividing Batman from the criminals is that he doens't kill? Please. Last I heard Batman wasn't robbing convenience stores and raping women. Get over it.
-
this movie would fall flat.
See: the Spiderman 2 elevator ride.
See: Wolverine in XMen2 with the kitty.
See: Gimli and the hobbits in LOTR.
Humor adds complexity to characters and relief to tense storylines.
And you know as well as I do you can cut trailers and teasers to look any old way you want to spark interest.Give me a break morons.
-
Many folks are complaining about how the Scarecrow looks too plain. Personally I think it makes sense to not have him look so over-the-top when he is in an earlier stage. When characters are under the influence of the fear toxin, he will look very freaky. That scene in the Superbowl trailer when the Scarecrow is holding up the lighter, he is about to do something rather twisted with that little flame.
Batman's suit is still black and rubbery, but it does seem to be a lot more mobile and flexible. I think this Batman will see a lot more action than previous Batmen.
I don't think there's anything wrong with the "Does it come in black" line. He says it during his millionare playboy half, and not the Batman half of his persona. Partly what made the "chicks love the car" line in Forever so awkward was that he says it as Batman and not Bruce.
The car looks weird, but it sounds awesome. And I know it will perform some really neat tricks in the film. -
Feb 07, 2005 1:22:22 PM CST
"It's hilarious when the "whiny fanboys" turn out to be correct.
by docpazuzu
Whatever helps you get through the day, chief.
-
I like what I see of Bale as Wayne and I'm just digging the whole vibe of the trailer. I think Nolan is going to nail this thing.
-
You're getting a little too fired up over a talkback about a freakin' 30 second commercial!!! And actually the worst dialog in any superhero movie was the WHOLE script of Batman and Robin. Batman Begins looks awesome. I haven't read the script so I might actually be surprised at certain parts of the film, but the cast is solid and the director is top-notch. So, chill the fuck out and wait for the full trailer before you assemble your mob of haters.
-
was in FOREVER when kilmer said it to kidman, then in B&R when robin reiterated it to batman as a joke...just to clear that up
-
I think the Batman Begins spot has finally peeked my interest.
-
This trailer won't really tell us much but the one over-riding feel I have from the first teaser through to now is that Bale will probably be the best Batman to date. He's probably as good an actor as Keaton and he isn't a dwarf.
-
I seem to have hit a nerve with you there, moviemack.
-
im more excited about this film than star wars, and i never thought that possible. dont get me wrong, i love star wars, more than several ex girlfriends, but batman begins just looks to be...the tits. wasnt sure about the scarecrow from sketches etc, but he looks ok for what he is: which is a not very well off guy in a suit with a sack over his head. this movie will own come june 17th, ill be there and no u all will 2.
-
"Moviemack step away from the caffine!!!!"
-
cwom on !!!Batman directed by chris nolan - i can do nothing but raaaa! to those saying there is not enough bells and whistles ... the best thing about bats as a superhero is that he is almost believable unlike SUPER and SPIDER etc. I just hope we have a story this time that is not just a load of fancy set scenes - and yes as someone said - bats needs to do more detective work .
-
How am I supposed to take you seriously?
-
Batman (1989) was a good film, but it wasn't Batman....jack wasn't comic accurate, many scenes were hokey and could Michael Keaton take on anyone in a fight?
Look at Bale in American Psycho when he is flexing for the camera....now THAT is believable! -
LOL you crack me up .
it'll be good !
it'll be shit !
do you resent people getting excited would ya rather see us miserable ? is that what you want ? a blubbering pile of talkbackers crying about how shite everything is - if you like that why don't you go to a self help group instead of a movie fan site ? or are you toofuckingcool.com? :0) -
But at least he's a funny asshole. I think the movie looks great.
-
I don't which is funnier -- you pretending that you're even interested in a conversation, or you thinking that you've said anything even remotely connected with Batman Begins to be worthy of thoughtful counterpoints.
-
well we'll remember you when it's shit/good
-
But not great either.
-
Hey, that line works fine in that setting. He
-
Feb 07, 2005 3:36:14 PM CST
"Obviously you don't pay any attention to what I'm typing anyway
by docpazuzu
Sure I do. So far in this TB, you haven't posted one sentence consisting of a well-founded opinion concerning the film. What you have done, however, is defend the right to hate the film on sheer principle. Nothing wrong with that, but don't pretend it's even faintly relevant or interesting. Voicing a fear that the film might suck based on having read a script or seen a trailer is perfectly reasonable, but to unequivocally assert that the film WILL suck based on the same sources is just obnoxious. For the record, I'll keep answering your posts as long as the rage it provokes in you continues to entertain me.
-
I pointed at the screen and yelled, "YES!"
-
...congratulate moviemack for not spouting off in this talkback about what a shitfest this movie is going to be (not how bad he thinks its going to be, mind you, but how bad it will be, because he KNOWS), but then I saw that he just got to the dance late. For him and all the other folks who prefer their Batman movies pre-disastered, here's a thought: Don't go to the movie. Can you do that? You seem to have made up your minds (many of you based on nothing more than rumors or a few out-of-context stills or a couple of brief flashes in trailers) that this movie is going to be vile. But can you make yourself stay away from the theater? I don't think so. At least not alone. That's why you want to sway as many people as possible into the negativity camp: to reinforce your irrational fear and prejudice and, hopefully, speed the movie out of theaters to minimize your window of temptation. The irony being, most of you will see it opening day. Although I doubt you will have the courage to admit it, much less admit you actually liked it (which I suspect more than a few of you will, even if it does, indeed, suck balls, which it might). Moviemack is only slightly different than the rest of you. He's read the script, which is something I just don't get. He claims to love Batman as a character and hopes for a movie interpretation worthy of his personal take on the character (never going to happen, by the way, unless you're a reallly wealthy guy with a lot of studio friends). Why spoil your own surprise and read enough about the movie to prolong the obviously bad and bitter feelings of disappointment that we all knew you weren't going to be able to avoid? If you'd waited and caught the movie at a cheap matinee or even downloaded it, you could have dealt with your feelings of emptiness and disappointment all at once, like ripping off a band aid. Instead you "spoil" the movie for yourself (in the "spoiler" sense of the word, since this movie would've been ruined for you no matter when you learned its secrets) and savor the agony over... what's it been now? How many months since you started your rant? Doesn't it get exhausting? Do you honestly think your continuing sermon is going to sway anyone, even those complaining along with you, into NOT seeing the movie? Or, worse, are you so deluded that you think you will convince the studio to change the movie or not release it? Studio execs don't love you and they don't care that this isn't the Batman you wanted. They are going to make gobs of money off of this and then, no matter how hard you protest, they're going to make another one. Probably two more. And I'll bet you end up seeing all three in the theater, regardless of what you type here. Because it's Batman and you just won't be able to help yourself. So stop your crying and bend over and take it already. Oh... and for the record, the trailer has me cautiously optimistic.
-
It is painfully obvious that most of you "satisfied" talkbackers have little to no true familiarity with Batman or the character's mythos. It seems your familiarity comes solely from the films and whatever has trickled into your subconscious. This film is based on the comic book, therefore it should reflect the comic book. Here's something most of you have missed: there is no Bruce Wayne. When young Bruce witnessed his parents' death, he suffered a severe psychological break. Bruce Wayne ceased to exist. Now, Bruce Wayne is the mask that Batman wears when necessary. SPOILER At the point in the film where Lucius Fox is showing Wayne the proto-Batmobile, Fox knows Wayne is Batman, so he wouldn't be so glib, because it would be unnecessary. The Batsuit is gear, and it is not what makes him Batman. Has Batman killed in the comic book? Yes, but not often. Does he have a history of killing his enemies? No. Has he killed the Joker before? In Dark Knight Returns, sure, but Dark Knight is a possible future, not THE future. It happened in the sense that you read it and you saw it occur on the page, but it's not the only way it can go down. I am an every week comic book fan, and I've seen the Joker die in various ways. He died (and came back) in the Batman Beyond movie. But pick up an issue of Batman right now and pretty much all of his villains live. SPOILER. Has Batman ever been so in love that he is willing to give up the responsibility of being Batman for a woman? No, but he will in Batman Begins. I'll repeat: Batman isn't Bruce Wayne dressed up as Batman. Why does the Batsuit always have to be made out of black rubber? Why can't we get a 2005 interpretation of the 60's television show costume? I'm not saying simple silk-screened fabric, but c'mon. Let's all just step out of our literal minds for a second. Batman has existed as a character for years and years, and has subsequently evolved, sure, but some things about who Batman is and what he represents have remained unchanged. I don't think we'll see a Batman film that satisfies comic book fans until a comic book artist and writer does one. Also, it's not about whether or not any of us haters or proclaimers will be there on opening day or whether or not any of us will pay to see the film. Despite the fact that I have read the same script moviemack as, and that I think the Batsuit looks laughable, and all the teasers, commercials and posters are rote and uninspiring, I will go see the film in theaters, if only to give the film a chance, to have an even more informed opinion and to "put my money where my mouth is." Box office is no indication of how "good" a film is. Titanic made millions and millions. And all you haters, down on moviemack, myself and others for being unhappy with how Batman Begins is being represented through various sources of evidence without seeing the finished product, I have a question for you. Evolution or Creationism?
-
Feb 07, 2005 4:01:27 PM CST
I take it morgan freemans character knows that bruce wayne is ba
by slappy jones
..cos if not he is going to figure it our pretty quickly if, lets just say, he is watching the news one night and reporters have footage of this mysterious batman driving away from an action scene in a black version of the wayne industries prototype ATV that he showed to bruce wayne who then asked if it came in black....i think he might put two and two together rather quickly....
-
Feb 07, 2005 4:04:34 PM CST
It IS hard to fathom how we are supposed to take the word of som
by fluffyunbound
If you aren't Valentine Michael Smith, that means you would have to be either a) a freak or b) a Mormon who likes Batman - and frankly, both of those possibilities lower your credibility to zero.
-
the people complaining about cheesy lines of dialogue...have you guys actually ever read a comic book?
-
I have no love for the previous Batman films. The first two I enjoyed when they first came out despite their failure to capture what I felt was the traditional essence of the comic book Batman which, yes, I've read pretty much all my life. I just saw them as an alternative view of Batman. Over the years, however, their flaws have grated on me more and more -- to the point where I've come to consider them virtually unwatchable. I put it to you that most people cautiously optimistic about this latest incarnation are in fact NOT big fans of the Burton flicks and DO read the comics. Watching a few trailers is one thing, but like Childe Roland, I can't for the life of me understand the mentality of people who read scripts of highly anticipated films beforehand and spend the coming months ranting themselves into bleeding ulcers for something which: 1) might go through several incarnations before finally being shot, and 2) might actually seem a lot better once it's been visualized. Pessimism is fine. Fear is fine. Caution is fine. Utter hatred at this early stage is, on the other hand, ludicrous.
-
Feb 07, 2005 4:16:40 PM CST
I've been a huge fan of Batman since about 1970 ... and there is
by jdanielp
I would've LOVED to have seen a David Fincher directed "BATMAN: YEAR ONE" ... in the visual style of Fincher's "SEVEN", which resembles the art from the "YEAR ONE" graphic series ... with the muted color tones. -- As to "BATMAN BEGINS", despite my disappointment in the "look" of this costume (mostly the ears), it could be (and has been) much worse. I do appreciate the mobility of this Bat-suit and I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE that "open cape" shot, ... and how it reminds me of how artist Marshall Rogers exaggerated Batman's cape in those Steve Englehart/Len Wein written comics of the '70s. (The 2-parter with "Clayface III", ... an underrated villain with intellegence, psychosis, and strength, ... are among my favorite comics of all time.) It appears that the cape may be one of the few things exaggerated in this movie, with the apparent life-like translation. Give us a good (and respectful) story of how Bruce Wayne becomes Batman, ... with fight scenes that rival Bruce Lee's "ENTER THE DRAGON" and "RETURN OF THE DRAGON", ... and you can expect a HUGE hit this summer. -- I'm looking forward to it.
-
IN The Dark Knight Returns -- Batman did not kill the Joker -- he was about to, and had no doubt permanently crippled him, but held himself back at the end. Then, with his last ounce of strength, the Joker twisted his own spine, furthering the damage Batman had already done and making it look like the Caped Crusader had indeed killed him (letting loose his final -- and best -- joke in that possible future tale).
-
Once Bruce's parents are killed, there is no more Bruce Wayne. He becomes Batman at that point, and adopts the "Bruce Wayne" persona for the public: dashing, charming, witty, and confidant. That is what makes Batman and interesting hero, and I hope that's what they nail in this new flick. Bale has experience playing this kind of character. Patrick Bateman was his slick front put on to hide his murderous urges. American Psycho is so fucking good; and if he brings even have that energy to Bruce Wayne/Batman...we're in for a fucking treat.
-
See? Now that wasn't too hard, was it?
-
Characters like Talia (whom would work because you have Ken Watanabe as Rahs Al-Ghul in this film playing a significant role in Batman's story arc), or Ruper Thorne (the overweight mob boss that was the equivalent of the Kingpin on the old "BATMAN: THE ANIMATED SERIES" cartoon) or the likes of Clayface or Manbat or the Mad Hatter?
It's about time these characters are introduced or used. You don't need to go back and remake The Joker, or Catwoman, or The Penguin, or The Riddler, or Two-Face, or hell even Poison Ivy, but you do need to remake two characters: Mr. Freeze (Ben Kingsley) and Bane. Bane was such a underused character and Shumacher made him into a brainless dumbass. Bane isn't some mentally challenged idiot, he is a muscle-bound freakshow of an assassin. He is the man who broke the Bat! I mean come on!
I think though that Manbat and Clayface would be awesome! And Killer Croc would be cool to see also if done right. Babydoll wouldn't work to well unless you teamed her up with The Ventriloquist.
Just my two cents.
-
According to the leaked script that I've also read, and supported by every leaked, official and peripheral photograph, action figure, actor's/director's/producer's comment, video game screenshot, one sheet, short blurb or article, rumor, official website statement, teaser and commerical. Sucks, but it's true. That's what this film is going to be about, based on everything they've shown us, official or not. I'll be the first dude to admit I was wrong if this film comes out and is great. But it doesn't look good.
-
The scarecrow looks kewl!
-
I feel the same about the Dune movies too, (can't wait for the new DVD!) I'm still not excited by this, but Bale has me sold as The Bat. I might just be tempted to see one other film in the theatre this year after Ep.III. As to the Burton films, kind of hit and miss. I wish there was an "Phantom Edit" on Batman Returns, and have just the Catwoman story. I loved that part of the story...
-
...I know you're not the most objective medium, but that plot synopsis *does* sound pretty craptacular. Hurm.
-
Let's get back to the millionare viglante...the detective...the ordinary man who has the resources, money... and of course mad thirst for payback and justice that makes Batman so great. No super human feats...just a man who's sharpened his mental and physical abilities to their peak. And a few cool gadgets thrown in as well. Batman was always more akin to James Bond rather than Superman. And face it...only a couple of scenes from Burtons Batman hold up now. The rest is a mess.
-
Oi. Now THAT'S a stretch. More like "He got away with it."
-
The Scarecrow not looking scary enough. Okay... if I saw some >>>motherfucker walk in my house wearing a GOD DAMN BURLAP SACK WITH SEWN UP EYES AND MOUTH ON HIS FUCKING HEAD... fucking-a, I couldn't piss my pants and jump out the window fast enough!<<<
Y'know...that would be my EXACT reaction as well!!! -
Its just what I was looking for to get me excited about the film. The part where Alfred steps outta the plane and says "Master Wayne- its been a long time" just gave me goose bumps. The "Does it come in black" doesnt bother me- it is humorous- but its black humour(no pun intended)- and totally within character- also its an appropriate question as we all know what Wayne plans to do with the vehichle. I just hope all the main actors involved nail the characters we all love so much. Everything I've seen so far hints at that. Can't wait to see Oldman playing Gordon firing up that Batsignal. The only thing that bugs me slightly is Bale's American accent- to me it always comes across as forced and unconvincing- I've thought this since American Psycho- I dunno- hopefully it'll grow on me eventually as I think hes right for the role otherwise and a talented actor to boot!!!
-
Even more evidence that Batman rarely kills. Except in the movies. I also no one defends Batman having eyeholes and wearing black eye make up. SPOILER There's a scene in Batman Begins where Alfred has to remind Batman to wipe off his eye makeup before he goes into a ballroom. Riiiiiiiigghhht. Because Batman is so, you know, forgetful.
-
Feb 07, 2005 6:11:19 PM CST
"also its an appropriate question as we all know what Wayne plan
by kintar0
Did you miss the part in the commerical and the teaser where he's spray painting the Batsuit? What happens if it doesn't come in black? "Does it come in black?" is a stupid thing to say and Wayne obviously means it as a joke, because SPOILER Lucius Fox knows who Batman is. It's also obvious that Bruce Wayne is a dude who dresses up as Batman in Batman Begins, which makes it ordinary and rote. C'mon, abesapien, use your brain.
-
...Mr. Miracle, if only you believe... or at least suspend your disbelief. I have been a Batfan since I first learned to read, drawn in by the pretty pictures in my older brother's comic collection nigh three decades ago and, being cursed with an inability to forget things, have committed virtually every element of the Bat mythos in all its incarnations to memory. Look at the comic alone for example. How many different writers and artists have attempted to put their distinct stamp on the character over the years by tweaking something about his appearance (Remember the panties/no panties debate of the 90s? Or the pouches vs. cylinders ont he utility belt issue? And just how is his chest emblem supposed to look anyway?) or, heaven forbid, his backstory (Year One essentially reinvented the character from the way he had been depicted in his actual first appearances and Ducard, one of the many experts he sought out during his self-funded study abroad program, didn't come into the picture until the whole Many Deaths of the Batman storyline, which is relatively recent). Point is, especially in the DCU (pre and post Crisis) continuity is a malleable concept at best. There is no definitive "take" on the Batman. Just different artists' and writers' (and animators' and actors' and directors') takes on what has become a cultural icon. This is why Moviemack will never be happy with a Batman movie. It will never be "his" Batman, depicted the way he has come to view the character. I'm sorry, 'mack, but their is no objective standard of truth to hold this fictional being to, he's open to interpretation and always has been. Just because the vision on the screen doesn't match the vision in your mind doesn't make it wrong. In fact, since they possess the legal rights to the character right now, it could be argued that their vision is more true and right than yours will ever be (although personally I like to think that Batman belongs to those who love him and no bad movie or campy TV show can ever truly take him away). Try not to let your personal biases prejudice you against a film you haven't seen and you may just be surprised.
-
You just want that shiny medal dont ya, u keep goin on and on and on about that script u got ur hands on.
For this i have sent u a medal.
And slate the film when it comes out dip shit not b4.
And you hate the batmobile, have u ever fucking read the dark knight returns he drove a fuckin tank in that, but hey thats a comic book not a film so it must be ok.
-
Feb 07, 2005 6:34:02 PM CST
I was going to agree with DocPazuzu about not hating a film befo
by the killer-goat
but after reading moviemack's script synopsis... that's a tough call. How many decades and remakes before they get the origin and mythos right? The animated Batman: Mask of the Phantasm had a similar plot element regarding a love-interest for Bruce during the Bat origins, that was actually done pretty well, I thought, if only to reinforce Batman's indeterminate and non-existent love life. But it was done much better than this script sounds. *********** Regarding the 'no killing' policy; I was aware that Bats didn't carry guns, but wasn't some saint against the death penalty or killing, if left with little alternative. I think his constant failing and source of frustration was the repeated cycle of trusting in the justice system to keep the perps in check after he busted them over and over. Kinda contradictive given his nature of working outside the law, FOR the law. When you consider that most of Batman's opponents use guns, the 'killing' part seems kinda blurry when self-defense is a priority. If I recall, his stance on guns was that they all have a singular purpose-- to kill. Swords, batarangs, staffs, ropes, fists, etc... all close-combat melee weapons 'can' kill someone but also have defensive potential in the hands of an expert. A gun, however, has only one singular purpose in the wrong hands, and requires little respect for the whole 'life/death' equation that one gleans from martial arts. Kinda supports his 'cowardly and superstitious lot' credo. If they touch on Bruce's martial arts training, do they also touch on the idea of guns not being 'honorable' weapons? And on the practial side, I recall that guns weren't Batman's MO for "silent weapons", either.
-
Feb 07, 2005 6:37:42 PM CST
"Does it come in black?" I hear that question every time I drop
by mel garga
-
I argue that there is a "definitive" Batman, but this "definitive" form is not defined by appearance or anything that writers and artists over the years have added or subtracted. Or anything that has actually "happened" in continuity. Or any interpretation or misinterpretation. Thank Grant Morrisson for hypertime. Because of the existence of this "definitive form" of Batman, there are certain undeniable things that "are" Batman, and things that "are not" Batman. Batman Begins demonstrates many things that "are not" Batman, and this extends beyond anyone's "personal" Batman. When Abrahm's abortion of a Superman screenplay was leaked, there was an outcry over the "un-Superman" things contained therein. Lex Luthor is not a Kryptonian. I never said that continiuty was important. It is a simple, simple thing to look at something and see it for what it is. SPOILER If Joe Chill gets caught and incarcerated moments after he kills the Wayne, that's not Batman. Part of Batman's whole psychosis was that his parent's killer was never caught. We don't KNOW that is was Chill, despite Year Two. If Bruce Wayne takes a gun to Chill's parole hearing, that's not Batman. Sure, Batman has used guns before, but not by choice. If Ra's al Ghul pretends to be a henchman and uses a look-a-like, that's not Batman. Why? Ra's al Ghul is not a coward. Using a look-a-like is very un-Ra's al Ghul, in fact. Where are the motherfucking Lazarus Pits? I, and moviemack, and the haters, are thinking critically about this film. I am more than willing to let Nolan and Goyer prove me wrong.
-
From everything I have seen of the movie so far, it just seems much too bright for my liking. Since Batman is supposed to be a "creature of the night," I think there are too many scenes (in the trailer anyway) that take place during the day. The Scraecrow, on the other hand, looks pretty good and genuinely creepy (in a David Cronenberg/Nightbreed sort of way). I still have my reservations about the script and storyline, but I must say that the movie is certainly well cast. If nothing else, the acting will be terrific.
-
Feb 07, 2005 6:57:30 PM CST
Hopefully Scarecrow looks a lot different in the finished produc
by craiggers
Perhaps that shot in the trailer was just Jonathan Crane in transition to the Scarecrow. You know, he's in his office at the university, locks the doors, and puts the burlap sack on. Later, when Batman drops in, Scarecrow will be in full costume. The way he has been described thus far by people who have seen the movie, I refuse to believe THIS (a man in in a suit and burlap sack mask)is what those people have described as a freaky looking Scarecrow. There's got to be more to it. If not, well, we can take comfort in that Scarecrow doesn't really have much of a role in the overall plot.
-
Why all the animosity? Everyone here on the talkback has a right to their opinion, everyone has a right to skepticism, optimism, etc...that's the point of the talkback, to generate healthy discussion and debate amongst us movielovers. Yeah, I'll admit listening to consistently negative talkbackers bash every minute detail can get monotonous, but what really irks me is when guys insult and threaten people for posting views different from theirs. So what someone hates the Batmobile look, does that make him a moron or an asshole? This makes me wonder how many talkbackers here are adults or really adolescents getting their rocks off with stupid-ass wisecracks? I thought being a JERKWAD LOSER got you banned? Oh well...
-
Y'know, maybe I don't get it. And maybe you don't. I'm not trying to be insulting or anything here, at least not to you specifically for responding to me. My point was that EVERY damn flick that gets previewed gets a healthy share of "this is going to be the worst sucky piece of shit ever in this history of the fuckin' universe" blah-blah based on a few moments of footage, an early production drawing, or the fact that the 2nd Assistant Key Grip's boyhood sweetheart once rented a car that had driven through the neighborhood where Joel Schumacher once went to get some pad thai, and THEN they rag on anyone who might have found it interesting, or thought it was kinda good or even (gasp) all good. I myself want the Scarecrow to have his hat. Without it, I think he looks too much like Button-Eyes from Nightbreed. But we'll see. All I'm saying is, saying that some footage, or a drawing, or the cast or crew or whatever is good or bad is perfectly valid and a lot of fun. But pronouncing that the whole thing is doomed AND that everyone who disagrees with you is full of shit seems... well... very Republican. :)
-
Feb 07, 2005 7:50:07 PM CST
Moviemack, if I wanted to know the whole movie I would do like y
by screenplaywriter
Jesus, spare us the damn spoilers will ya? I mean whether what you say is true, or just mere rumors please for the love of God on high put a damn *Spoiler Warning* before you say something, or how about just not say anything at all?
I mean have some common courteousy man. -
Moviemack, you long for a movie that will mirror the attitude and style of the comics; it's never going to happen. Sure this movie may be a bastardization of the comic in your eyes but remember that the general movie going population AREN'T die hard batman fans. When people go to see this they don't want to know what he's thinking or how he's feeling, they are there to be entertained and to see shit blow up. When they come out of the theatre they don't want to go for coffee and sit restrospecting Batmans persona, they want to talk about how cool the suit looked or how good the fights were. Warners know this, if they made a movie that appealed to the die hards they'd make what? $3000'ish? I've read a good deal of the comics and, (i'm not looking to goad you into an argument here btw), if they adapted the comic book, EXACTLY, they'd have to be spiking the soda with Prozac; they'd be the most depressing things committed to celluloid. Oh and Batman TAS worked well because it was a regular spot on tv and a cartoon. It's as damn near a comic as you can get. If you wanted to capture the essence of the comic on the Big Screen you'd need the movies to be about 6 hours long and a sequel appearing every month. Just forget about it.
-
Quit your friggin' crying! And look at the bright side, that credit card commercial w/ all the Marvel characters looks 100% better than the Fantastic Four trailer. And for everyone that posted that they don't like football, we already knew that you tools!
-
whoever said tim burton's batman was superb i think was mistaken. It was good but not the definitive version. I think this version looks great despite the LIAM NEESON's character, i think i'm gonna have to wait and actually see the whole film before final judgement on Neeson's character not being asian. I think everything else about this movie looks great. I can't wait.
-
Feb 07, 2005 8:56:00 PM CST
Naysayers can now leave. Only those with no taste didn't like th
by triumph poops!
That was a fucking great trailer, indicating that this movie will be everything I was hoping to finally get out a BATMAN film. Can't wait till this thing opens! This thing is going to be GREAT!
-
Feb 07, 2005 9:34:52 PM CST
Here's the bottom line: just from the TRAILER this already looks
by commando cody
Face it: we get a young, trim, athletic, handsome guy as Bruce Wayne (who we know can act)... a better group of supporting actors playing more diverse roles to texture the story... a story that really FEELS like it starts the franchise from Day One and is a breath of fresh air... and after all the costuming experimentation since the original Burton film, most likely a functional batsuit that the person wearing it can actually move about in and be believable. I'm betting this right now just from the trailer: this movie on it's own will be better than all the previous Bat films together. And be more true to the character AND have everyone's blood pumping again.
-
Point proven. You hate this film with a vengeance and it's not even out yet. That's all fine and good, but not everyone has the same opinion as you and everyone likes their interpretations of Batman different. I think it looks just fine, AND it has Green Day on the soundtrack (you're gonna call me a teenage bitch for saying this, but they are a great band and the fact that it is combined with Batman is tits, but do I really care about your opinion? Does anyone here? Thus the point of this post). I thought it looked sweet and I cannot wait. But I am a little bit dissapointed about one aspect of the film...WHERE'S THE PRINCE SOUNDTRACK?!!
-
Uh, I hate Prince. His presence ruined much of Batman89.
-
Feb 07, 2005 11:08:51 PM CST
"the general movie going population AREN'T die hard batman fans.
by the killer-goat
Um. Okay, sure. But I don't see how that justifies watering down or altering the depth and psychology of the main character, or even changing his origins. Is there a single director out there who actually DARES to do something novel and, oh I don't know, actually USE the printed comicbook as the actual storyboard for the film? What, we can't have an interesting, complex superhero because people are incapable of watching involving characters? I think Sam Raimi would argue that one, so would the Spiderman returns. I mean, it's one thing to suggest that the Batman origin of the comic itself is a stupid, shallow, contrived plot, but to imply "this is as good as it gets" because Hollywood has surmised that the general audience is too close-minded, too brainless or too stupid to accept the actual origin story... well then we deserve nothing but Vin Diesel from now on.
-
I'm not one for spoilers, but since your attacking the man's cred I might as well say it: yes it's a ruse, and a pretty good one. Unfortunately the script doesn't live up to it. Think about it, in every trailer we've seen, all you see is Bale training with 'Deckard', of course Liam Nieson is the main bad guy, he's the only guy in front of your face.
-
Feb 07, 2005 11:20:52 PM CST
Holy Friday the 13th part 2 pushers running through disco mod ni
by neosamurai85
Yeah, that Scarecrow looks bad. The suit seemed ok. I know there was a lot of griping about it, but I can
-
it's called a "red herring." Don't be so fucking naive. But what do I expect? Can't use those critical thinking skills if you don't have them, can you?
-
"Deckard" was Harrison Ford's character in Blade Runner.
-
Jesus christ! What will make fans happy? You have a proven, mood-creating director, a great actor in lead and a supporting cast as strong as any film in any genre you'll see all year and that is still just fodder for babbling fan boys. I don't get it, haven't we all gotten over the costume thing by now? We all saw how ass the X-men suits looked when Harry posted them on the site and then when the film opened, all we could talk about was how kick-ass Wolverine cam across. Look, context matters. Plus, the script obviously ties his samuri armor into his inspiration/creation of the batsuit. That is a very believable tactic to win over the audience and is perfectly within character. The movie is called "Batman Begins," therefore Bruce needs to use what he has to get going...it all works perfectly. Plus, have faith in what actors like Oldman, Caine, and Neesan choose to accept. That should tell us a lot. And yes, by now, I fully suspect that the studios know how to play games with us fans. Thus, don't be surprised if more than a few concepts we think we're going to see don't show up in the final cut. Me? I'm in line first effing chance I get. I love Batman, the actors are all top of the line, and fuck yeah, I can't wait to see it in black.
-
Feb 07, 2005 11:54:33 PM CST
"Plus, the script obviously ties his samuri armor into his inspi
by kintar0
Nope. How can you say the script "obviously" does anything, you silly twat? SPOILER He spends time as one of "Ra's al Ghul's" ninja henchmen. He wears that while training with "Ducard." But thanks for playing.
-
Is English your second language or are you just drunk?
-
Granted there might be a few true blue naysayers on here, but for the most part I
-
Well I am working on my spanish paper for class tomarrow... that might be it. I know I haven't downed THAT much OJ. But odd that I'm in the spotlight. I think there are some far fatter fish in this here barrel to shoot. Peace.
-
I need to quit using... these... in every message... that I send... Star Trek... not even... that big... a fan of... Peace.
-
I think I
-
I'm guessing he's drunk ;-)
-
Get bent. That's an understatement. If I cursed you out as badly as I wanted to I probably wouldn't have a handle to write with anymore. Only a moron or a blissfully ignorant homophobe (I'm sure you don't "hate gays," but there are different connotations that come with the word) would rather have David Goyer captain Superman than Bryan Singer. I'm more afraid of 'The Flash' than I am of 'Superman Returns,' but since you obviously are not, I suppose we have nothing more to discuss. In the future, keep your "Supergayman Returns lol Singer's a scumbag" gas to yourself, please, because it smells pretty foul from where I'm standing.
-
Go fuck yourself, ThaSithMaster. All you got is that you think the actor who plays Superman is gay? What a complete and total cunt.
-
Feb 08, 2005 1:43:08 AM CST
Thanks for the infor Moviemack, but professor or chemistry geek,
by craiggers
As a fan who was really pissed at the changes made to Constantine, I've learned to just accept it and hope that essence of the character is intact. From what I've seen in the trailers, there is some hope. Same thing goes for Batman; people are so concerned that Nolan is making an ultrarealistic Batman, which means dulling down the looks of the bad guys such as Scarecrow into something lame like a burlap sack head and regular clothes for a costume. I HIGHLY DOUBT that this is the finished costume; but even if it is, as long as the performance is strong and the character of the Scarecrow is captured (which let's face it, isn't a stretch; I'm the master of fear, boogideeboo, done, Scarecrow), then we'll all be happy. Batman as least is wearing a costume and they seem to have his character right. Give this movie a chance; remember this: ANYTHING IS BETTER THAN SHUMACHER!
-
Feb 08, 2005 1:56:49 AM CST
Sorry to be the naysayer here... but it looks kinda crap
by theginger twit
Dare devil crap. Catwoman crap. I have a bad feeling about this.
-
I can't seem to get a good shot of him. Anyways, if you idiots are judging the movie from a 30 second ad and bitching about LITTLE details then you need to go fuck yourselves. Sorry I could'nt put that more eloquently, but I love batman and have always wanted them to take it back to burton territory. This movie will be a HUGE improvement over the schumacher films. Oh, and I happen to LIKE that last line "does it come in black?". So THERE!!!! DIE HATERS!!!!!!
-
Because you sure do sound like an ignorant redneck. Listen to Insane Clown Posse much? Could you be any more of a caricuture? How exactly is Singer spitting on Christopher Reeve's Grave? I'll bet you watch a lot of wrestling. You're a sad, pathetic joke. You revel in being a bigot. The gloves are coming off, huh? So, what would you do to Singer if you met him? It sounds like you'd kill him. And how exactly will Singer's "homo agenda" manifest itself in the picture? "Now speak my name again if you want.." You're just a total and complete moron. But I'll bet all the other guys at the Burger King you work at think you're just the coolest.
-
to Burger King for implying they'd ever employ someone like ThaSithMaster.
-
Goyer made the police catch joe chill to let people know that it wasn't the joker that killed the waynes. that's why he chose to do that in the movie. Also, year two isn't the only case where Joe chill killed the waynes. Before the Dark knights first revamp, Batman found Joe Chill but his own henchmen killed him before he could get to him. Also in Gotham adventures #17(based on the animated series) Joe Chill also killed the waynes but Batman never knew. Joe Chill fell to his death after he found out who Batman was, but batman never knew that he killed his parents. It depends on the continuity. Only in the most recent continuity of the mid 90s has Batman never known who killed his parents. Once again, goyer only wrote Joe Chill into the script to clean up after Burton. There are many things I don't like about what I see about this film and there are many things that I like. I personally have no problem with the car, the suit, the scarcrow(even riding a horse), ninjas(Ras does have them in the comics and in the animated series). I do have a problem with the love intrest, no joker, the opera. On the whole I'm still going to see this opening day and see this movie with my own eyes. Will this movie be better than the other four movies? YES. Will it be better than the animated series? Probably not. Will it be a good movie? Probably. Will it be a good Batman movie? I'll tell you after June 17. Either way, the sequel will probably pull an X2 or Spider-man 2.
My 2 1/2 cents -
Feb 08, 2005 5:20:32 AM CST
I also must agree that there are many different versions of batm
by kdog69
depending on what era you read the comics. I'm also not including the else worlds. Also, unless I'm mistaken(it's been awhile since I've read it), Darkknight returns takes place in the 80s in an alternate reality, because regan is president. I could be wrong though. And moviemack... in any part of the film does Batman kill anyone, have a credit card, have bat-nipples, appear to be shorter than a woman, neglect to swing from building to building, or appear at an auction in his bat-suit? Because that's frankly all I'm woried about in this film and I really don't give a shit about anything else you are your little friend Mr Miracle(I still think you two are the same person) have to say about this film. And I personally consider myself a huge Batfan, and not a stupid one just because I don't follow your narrow minded point view. By saying that people should all hate this movie is just as bad as saying that all people should love this movie. Just state your opinion and move on. People don't have to follow it. Grow up.
-
You really are some kinda cunt...
-
I also am sick of non-batfans saying "Who cares if batman doesn't kill". You are obviously not familiar with the Batman character. In no incarnation has Batman killed anyone (even elseworlds except for the Dracula trilogy). At one point in the comics the penguin (a batman villain for all you unbatfans) says when batman is threatening him "you've never killed anyone in your life". Having Batman kill is like having the Punisher not kill. I think this may be a point where me and moviemack may see eye-to-eye.
-
Feb 08, 2005 5:39:01 AM CST
Also, there is a difinitive Batman movie that was on the big scr
by kdog69
Batman: Mask of the Phantasm. Just buy it now. And yes, I do know that I have posted 4 times in a row. I also recommend Batman the animated series Vol. 1 & 2. And for all you Superman fans, that animated series is also out. Unfotunatly I promise you that the movie will not be as good as this... maybe the superman one will be, but not the batman one... but oh well, I could be wrong.
-
Thanks for sharing, stumpjumper. If I'm not mistaken, I think I hear your mom calling you home for lunch. By the smell of it, it's your favorite: corn pone with squirrel gravy and steamed ramps.
-
keep talking dirty i like that . but seriousely i hope singer sees that post and makes a supergayman just for you .
-
Some guy got deleted a week ago for some vague but un-PC comment about jews... but ThaSithMaster gets to stroke his pink light saber all he wants. I say be gone to you oh rancid ass that speaks! (or in this case types which is a talent worth some props) Fingerbang your mother
-
Feb 08, 2005 9:08:17 AM CST
I agree with Commando Cody -- this looks better than any previou
by kikstad
So all you Naysayers of Doom quit your whining until you see the movie. Personally, from what I've seen so far, my expectations are high.
-
You don't "waste you time reading scripts on the internet," but you DO waste your time arguing on the ol' AICN talkbacks. "I just thought it all seemed rather pointless to announce he's playing one character, only to have him (I guess) playing someone else in the end." EXACTLY. How hard was that? And kdog69, you're wrong. Even look at DK2, where Batman installs blades on the edges of his cape so he can slice open the abdomens of thugs. Didn't he kill the gang leader in Dark Knight Returns? I know both DKR and DK2 are technically Elseworlds, but never say never. Ra's al Ghul pretending to be one of his own henchmen DOES NOT make any sense for one reason: he's an egomaniac. And it's never happened. Talia and the Lazarus Pits have been removed because Goyer is too lazy and dumb to deal with them. And once again, to all those who post crap like "quit whining, wait til you see the movie," fine. But you have to quit saying how Batman Begins is going to "own" until you see the movie. You can't have it both ways, fuckwits.
-
I don't know about DK2. I only read it once. I don't paticulary like elseworlds. And I never said the movie will own. I just said it will be better the the other 4 movies. I am neutral about the whole thing. And the lazarus pit was removed to keep the movie in reality. I do agree that Talia should be in the film though. I also think Ra's should be removed from the film altogether.
-
If there are more movies the villains will be the Joker and Two-face. And what is with AINC talkbacks these days. Everytime a something comes out that has decent hype you guys have to bitch about it and everytime something that has bad hype comes out you guys are all defending it. I still see guys on this site that Love the Punisher for fuck sake. People rat on this movie, but didn't say shit when Catwoman came out. god. Me, I'll wait for the movie to fuckin open before I open my big mouth about this movie. And Mr Miracle, please stop debating batman knowledge with me. He has never killed anyone in the actual comics in the current continuity. There! You happy?! I really don't care about elseworlds except DKR and I didn't really like the second one since it was inconsistent. Actually... that took even more liberties than Goyer is... Ok... think about this... How bout we all just take Goyer's movie as an elseworlds. That way you can't bitch about shit. The only thing you should bitch about is "The Batman" on kids WB!
-
Feb 08, 2005 4:14:36 PM CST
I remember ... way back ... when I first saw the preview/trailer
by jdanielp
What an incredible surprise Cameron's film was! I saw it FIVE TIMES at the theatre ... and took three friends to see it on three separate occasions ... and they all were just as surprised as I was, in how well "ALIENS" was made. It continues to rank as one of my top all-time favorite films. -- Now, if only "BATMAN BEGINS" makes the same surprising impact.
-
Feb 08, 2005 4:21:28 PM CST
WB'S "The Batman" doesn't need a separate forum or column to be
by screenplaywriter
It has poor characters, played for more humor than dark undertones, poor plots, and poor storylines and dialogue. I mean they messed up The Joker, The Penguin, Catwoman, and The Ventriloquist. Bane wasn't too bad, but when he transformed he looked more like Clayface, or some whacked up man-beast.
Plus, I believe Rahs Al-Ghul will play a BIG part in this movie whether the Internet rumors, or spoilers say he doesn't. I mean he teams up with The Scarecrow doesn't he? I mean what more do you want. You have a rich maniac and a fear-inducing maniac. What more could Batman possibly go up against? If it does turn out however that Liam Neeson is Rahs and Ken Watanabe was his personal bodyguard than the audience will be totally thrown off and will simply won't care.
Trust me, if they did a head trip like that to me and the audience I would want some damn good explanations why. -
I consider ALL comic book movies to be "elseworlds". That is the ONLY way I can watch them.
-
Feb 08, 2005 4:42:20 PM CST
Here's a suggestion from a would-be movie director: Morph the t
by jdanielp
I hear some really cool music in my head, properly blended for Batman. -- Just a suggestion from someone who should be directing/making studio films.
-
...like "quit whining, wait til you see the movie," fine. But you have to quit saying how Batman Begins is going to "own" until you see the movie. You can't have it both ways, fuckwits." Miracle, not everyone advising you to wait and see before you condemn the film is promising it will own anything. Wait and see has been my message to you and 'mack all along, and I am fully aware that the movie could suck big black donkey balls. But it might not. I'm advising you to leave the hardcore continuity baggage at the door and treat this like any comic book super hero movie of the last 20 years. It's going to be an interpretation of a well known and much beloved character (beloved, I'd wager, by none moreso than me). Donner's Superman took liberties and still wound up being the most universally accepted and recognizable origin story for the character (Byrne borrowed heavily from it in his "Man of Steel" revamp of the comics, which set the stage for much of DC's very well-received self-reinvention during the 90s). Spider Man changed some elements that fans like myself considered integral to the development of the character as we knew him (MJ wasn't his first girlfriend, Gwen Stacy was... and the Goblin killed her!) but that movie was still very well done and quite enjoyable (despite the Green Power Ranger Goblin) and set the stage for an even better sequel. X-Men only vaguely resembled the characters we knew and loved, but that was so well accepted that it changed the look of the comics for years. Point being, you could really be souring yourself on an opportunity to rediscover the character through a different set of eyes and a fresh imagination. I'm going to leave the volumes and volumes of Bat lore I've accumulated over the years in a drawer at home when I see this movie, specifically so I can judge it on its own merits... just as I've done with every other comic book movie I've ever seen. I was pleasantly surprised by more than a few of them and disappointed by even more than that, but I would have missed out on some very cool and fun film experiences if I'd stuck my fingers in my ears and chanted "That's not right! That's not right!" instead of taking them in. It's too late for Moviemack. He's going to hate this no matter what (he has to, or he'll look like a jackass for all the venom he's been spewing these past months). But you seem like a smart and relatively open minded guy. Give it a shot and see what happens. If it sucks, I promise to come back here and laugh at it with you.
-
...I don't understand why people complain about the "Green Power Ranger Goblin." While the costume was ludicrous enough as it is, there was really no other way (or maybe I should say no BETTER way) to realize the character on screen. Supposing that Norman going completely batshit crazy and designing some Renaissance Faire-worthy wardrobe (complete with latex mask!) made any sense at all, do you have any idea how hard it would have been to computer generate? The "Power Ranger" Goblin was designed with those challenges in mind and he still looked shitty. I know it's heresy to just...let it go, but it really was for the best.
-
...I'll explain my problem. It wasn't that the film decided not to try and duplicate the very silly looking comic book Goblin costume. It's that they cast one of the creepiest looking actors in all of hollywood to play the part and then covered up his face with a completely expressionless mask. Some minor prosthetics and makeup passed off as some super space-aged thin-yet-protective laytex mask would have been a decent solution and would have lent that much more weight to DaFoe's performance, especially during the one-on-one dialogue scenes with Toby's expressionless laytex mask (which I think they might've tried to make a little more emotive by playing with the size and shape of the eyes from scene to scene, the way the comic book artists sometimes did). Again... none of this was enough to ruin the film for me, just ways I might have tweaked it if I'd been consulted (got that, Hollywood? consult me on these things from now on). For what it's worth, I don't 100% approve of what I've seen of Batman's costume, but I haven't seen it in any prolonged action yet and I'm not bothered enough by its look to think it could ruin an otherwise good movie (if that's what this turns out to be).
-
So I guess I misinterpreted your comment. Okay, I can dig it. Yeah, Dafoe's certainly a creepy actor. I suppose in some ways it's a waste of his face, but I still don't know how they would have worked a latex mask into the story (then again, where the hell did the metallic one come from? I think it was supposed to be one of the masks hanging up in his house, but that's pretty sketchy too). They managed to get his mask off in the climax and he was effective enough as Norman Osborn though, and now that my memory's being jogged, that one oft-maligned "rooftop scene" with Spider-Man and the Green Goblin was, I think, being played a little tongue-in-cheek by Raimi. As a director, he had to be aware of how goofy it looked.
-
In the very early issues of Detective Comics, Batman did in fact kill on occasion. Do some research, especially the first few years of the series. Granted I don't think that the modern interpretation of Batman would kill unless faced with no other option. He has in the past had to do so, though. I am not talking about Elseworlds or any alternate possible future, and I am not talking about DARK KNIGHT, I am talking about the original stories, by Bob Kane the creator of BATMAN. He's the leading authority. Regardless, the "I won't ever kill anyone ever for any reason" thing is more Kal El's schtick. Batman has softened a bit, but he will still throw you off a roof if the situation calls for it.
-
Seriously, the bitter nerd thing is played out. I grew up on Batman, I read the works of dozens of writers, and saw him through the eyes of dozens of artists. There is no definitave version of Batman, true, as long as the core of the character is intact. This is what really matters, and this is why all of this banter and name calling is so juvenile. Moviemack or Mr. Miracle, (I too am convinced you are the same person) Anyway, I am talking to you. So you read a script treatment. Big fucking deal. 9 times out of ten through revisions and editing the damned thing will barely resemble what you claim to have read, (as if studios don't leak misleading information for the sole purpose of throwing crybabies like you off track). The fact is, you wouldn't be pleased unless you were in the directors chair and handpicked the entire cast and production crew. Nobody is ever going to be completely satisfied on every level because each of us has made the character our own. We each have our own beliefs about what makes Batman who he is. All of the venom and hateful speech is foolish, because Batman belongs to everybody. If you can't get past your own preconceptions about the character long enough to objectively view someone else's take, you are cheating yourself. If you insist on spreading your venom at every chance you are just an asshole. You don't have to like it. I wanted Wolverine to be a short, stocky coil of muscle and razor sharp metal, they gave me Hugh Jackman with no mask. You know what? I didn't let it ruin the movie for me. It's hollywood man, nothing enters their grasp and comes out completely unscathed.
-
That was a futuristic take on a Blade-Runneresque Gotham of the future lol
moveimack what pills u taking, i mean as i read dark knight returns all the bladerunner images just keep flooding my eyes, aaaa no im tlaking shit just like u.
Funnily enuff reading that book gothem looked just like well fucking gothem not L.A 2019 u dick.
And yer uve read the script big fucking deal, ive read the land of the dead script and its fuckin terrible but its how its put to screen, if i see a good trailer 4 it hell ill get excited no matter how lame the script was.
Im sorry i love batman i love the early frank miller work, and this looks like a grt batman film. i no u have the upper godly hand of reading the script but cant u shut ur fucking mouth and wait untill the film comes out, and accept that people who arent geeky dicks who download scripts 24/7 might be looking at these trailers and enjoying what they see.
And the batmobile looks bad ass but hey uve read the script so it must b bad.
-
Feb 08, 2005 9:27:25 PM CST
I think it is safe to say we can wave "buh-bye" to Schumacher an
by red raider
This take on Batman looks so kick ass! Can't wait...
-
"Just a suggestion from someone who should be directing/making studio films." Yeah J, ya see, um a studio film like Batman Begins cost $135,000,000. And since you don't even make films that cost a few hundred dollars, you can see how far away you are from making a studio film. Everybody has an imagination. Remember, filmMAKERS get studio films. Not filmFANTASIZERS. Oh and Mel Garga, your post is the funniest thing I have read on a talkback in a while.
-
CLIT EASTWOODIE is a F*cking hypcrate. He had the chicken ballz to speak at a congressional hearing to try and get OUT OF making Hotels that he owns accessible to people with disabilities. He tries to F*ck the disabled again in his latest celluloid sh*t sandwich by literally pulling the plug. I guess he won't have to retrofit his hot els for one quad boxer...
He sux.
Number ONE it isn't about boxing, it is about Clit Eastwoodie euthanising his own horsetoothed quadriplegic boxer daughter.
Critics Enter Ring Against Eastwood
Feb 3, 4:03 PM EST
The Associated Press
LOS ANGELES - Not everyone is in Clint Eastwood's corner as his acclaimed boxing drama "Million Dollar Baby" heads into the Academy Awards.
(Spoiler alert: The rest of this story could ruin the movie for you.) Some conservative critics and groups representing the disabled say "Million Dollar Baby" is a sucker punch against the notion that people with paralyzing infirmities can lead lives worth living.
The film's harshest detractors say it's little more than propaganda supporting legalization of assisted suicide.
Director and star Eastwood says the characters' choices are rooted in the story and that the movie is not about euthanasia.
"Million Dollar Baby," which is in a neck-and-neck race with the Howard Hughes epic "The Aviator" for best picture, stars Eastwood as old-school boxing trainer Frankie Dunn, who becomes mentor to peppy fighter Maggie Fitzgerald (Hilary Swank).
A father-daughter relationship blossoms between the two as Frankie coaches Maggie through a meteoric rise to champion status in the film's feel-good "Rocky"-like first two acts.
The closing chapter presents a cruel twist, however.
(The next paragraph gives it away.)
An opponent blindsides Maggie, leaving her paralyzed from the neck down. Maggie decides she would rather die, and she asks Frankie to help end her life. After some moral agonizing, Frankie does.
Marcie Roth, executive director of the National Spinal Cord Injury Association, said her group has been working to improve conditions for the disabled since 1948, "yet lo these many years later, many people still think having a spinal-cord injury is a fate worse than death.
"Unfortunately, a message like the one in `Million Dollar Baby' just perpetuates exactly what we work so hard to dispel."
The film earned directing prizes for Eastwood at the Golden Globes and last weekend's Directors Guild of America Awards, positioning him as the front-runner for the same honor at the Oscars Feb. 27. Swank received the Golden Globe for best dramatic actress, and she, Eastwood and co-star Morgan Freeman earned Oscar acting nominations.
Fans of the film disagree that it favors assisted suicide. Chicago Sun-Times critic Roger Ebert ranked "Million Dollar Baby" as his No. 1 film of 2004 even though he disagrees with Frankie's actions.
Maggie's desire to die and Frankie's decision to help were choices consistent with the nature of the characters, Ebert said.
"It's a movie for grown-up, mature audiences in which people do things we don't necessarily agree with," Ebert told The Associated Press. "What kind of movies would there be if we expected everyone in them to do what we think they should do?"
"Million Dollar Baby" also has come under fire from such conservative commentators as Rush Limbaugh, Michael Medved and Debbie Schlussel, who predicted on her Web site that Eastwood's film will triumph at the Oscars "because it's Hollywood's best political propaganda of the year. ... because it supports killing the handicapped, literally putting their lights out."
Eastwood declined an interview request but told The New York Times that the film stuck closely to its source material, a story by F.X. Toole.
"How the character handles it is certainly different than how I might handle it if I were in that position in real life," Eastwood said. "Every story is a `what if.'"
Eastwood's critics say the movie is his latest salvo against the disabled community. In 2000, Eastwood testified before a U.S. House subcommittee asking that the Americans with Disabilities Act be amended to allow businesses such as his hotel in Carmel, Calif., more time to comply.
His testimony came after a disabled woman sued him because his historic inn lacked wheelchair access. A jury sided with Eastwood on all but two minor violations.
While "Million Dollar Baby" has drawn the harshest reaction, many of the same critics are bothered by the Spanish film "The Sea Inside," starring Javier Bardem as Ramon Sampedro, who fought a 30-year campaign for his right to die after a paralyzing accident. The film is among Oscar nominees for best foreign-language picture.
Both movies draw on stereotypes that disabled people cannot lead worthwhile lives, said Stephen Drake, a researcher for Chicago-based Not Dead Yet, a group that has held protests at theaters showing "Million Dollar Baby."
"I really can't imagine this kind of awards attention for somebody who put out a film that relies on the worst stereotypes the audience holds about homosexuality," Drake said.
The high profile of Oscar contenders often brings out the critics.
"A Beautiful Mind," the 2001 best-picture winner, drew complaints for omitting unflattering aspects about the life of mathematician John Forbes Nash. Similar gripes were aimed at 2000's "The Hurricane," which earned a best-actor nomination for Denzel Washington, who played boxer Rubin "Hurricane" Carter, imprisoned nearly 20 years for three murders before the convictions were overturned.
Tobacco companies criticized the whistle-blower drama "The Insider," a 1999 best-picture nominee, saying the film took liberties to place their industry in a harsher light. "60 Minutes" correspondent Mike Wallace also said "The Insider" painted an unfair picture of how he and the news show handled a confrontation with the tobacco industry.
"The Academy Awards are a huge platform for all kinds of people with all kinds of agendas, some worthy and some not so worthy," said Peter Rainer, contributing editor for New York magazine and past president of the National Society of Film Critics, which picked "Million Dollar Baby" as best film of 2004.
"It's an irresistible force for people to try to piggyback on to, to try to walk in that spotlight and get something out of it for themselves," added Rainer, who said he liked "Million Dollar Baby" but that it was not one of his top film choices of last year.
Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.Critics Enter Ring Against Eastwood
Feb 3, 4:03 PM EST
The Associated Press
LOS ANGELES - Not everyone is in Clint Eastwood's corner as his acclaimed boxing drama "Million Dollar Baby" heads into the Academy Awards.
(Spoiler alert: The rest of this story could ruin the movie for you.) Some conservative critics and groups representing the disabled say "Million Dollar Baby" is a sucker punch against the notion that people with paralyzing infirmities can lead lives worth living.
The film's harshest detractors say it's little more than propaganda supporting legalization of assisted suicide.
Director and star Eastwood says the characters' choices are rooted in the story and that the movie is not about euthanasia.
"Million Dollar Baby," which is in a neck-and-neck race with the Howard Hughes epic "The Aviator" for best picture, stars Eastwood as old-school boxing trainer Frankie Dunn, who becomes mentor to peppy fighter Maggie Fitzgerald (Hilary Swank).
A father-daughter relationship blossoms between the two as Frankie coaches Maggie through a meteoric rise to champion status in the film's feel-good "Rocky"-like first two acts.
The closing chapter presents a cruel twist, however.
(The next paragraph gives it away.)
An opponent blindsides Maggie, leaving her paralyzed from the neck down. Maggie decides she would rather die, and she asks Frankie to help end her life. After some moral agonizing, Frankie does.
Marcie Roth, executive director of the National Spinal Cord Injury Association, said her group has been working to improve conditions for the disabled since 1948, "yet lo these many years later, many people still think having a spinal-cord injury is a fate worse than death.
"Unfortunately, a message like the one in `Million Dollar Baby' just perpetuates exactly what we work so hard to dispel."
The film earned directing prizes for Eastwood at the Golden Globes and last weekend's Directors Guild of America Awards, positioning him as the front-runner for the same honor at the Oscars Feb. 27. Swank received the Golden Globe for best dramatic actress, and she, Eastwood and co-star Morgan Freeman earned Oscar acting nominations.
Fans of the film disagree that it favors assisted suicide. Chicago Sun-Times critic Roger Ebert ranked "Million Dollar Baby" as his No. 1 film of 2004 even though he disagrees with Frankie's actions.
Maggie's desire to die and Frankie's decision to help were choices consistent with the nature of the characters, Ebert said.
"It's a movie for grown-up, mature audiences in which people do things we don't necessarily agree with," Ebert told The Associated Press. "What kind of movies would there be if we expected everyone in them to do what we think they should do?"
"Million Dollar Baby" also has come under fire from such conservative commentators as Rush Limbaugh, Michael Medved and Debbie Schlussel, who predicted on her Web site that Eastwood's film will triumph at the Oscars "because it's Hollywood's best political propaganda of the year. ... because it supports killing the handicapped, literally putting their lights out."
Eastwood declined an interview request but told The New York Times that the film stuck closely to its source material, a story by F.X. Toole.
"How the character handles it is certainly different than how I might handle it if I were in that position in real life," Eastwood said. "Every story is a `what if.'"
Eastwood's critics say the movie is his latest salvo against the disabled community. In 2000, Eastwood testified before a U.S. House subcommittee asking that the Americans with Disabilities Act be amended to allow businesses such as his hotel in Carmel, Calif., more time to comply.
His testimony came after a disabled woman sued him because his historic inn lacked wheelchair access. A jury sided with Eastwood on all but two minor violations.
While "Million Dollar Baby" has drawn the harshest reaction, many of the same critics are bothered by the Spanish film "The Sea Inside," starring Javier Bardem as Ramon Sampedro, who fought a 30-year campaign for his right to die after a paralyzing accident. The film is among Oscar nominees for best foreign-language picture.
Both movies draw on stereotypes that disabled people cannot lead worthwhile lives, said Stephen Drake, a researcher for Chicago-based Not Dead Yet, a group that has held protests at theaters showing "Million Dollar Baby."
"I really can't imagine this kind of awards attention for somebody who put out a film that relies on the worst stereotypes the audience holds about homosexuality," Drake said.
The high profile of Oscar contenders often brings out the critics.
"A Beautiful Mind," the 2001 best-picture winner, drew complaints for omitting unflattering aspects about the life of mathematician John Forbes Nash. Similar gripes were aimed at 2000's "The Hurricane," which earned a best-actor nomination for Denzel Washington, who played boxer Rubin "Hurricane" Carter, imprisoned nearly 20 years for three murders before the convictions were overturned.
Tobacco companies criticized the whistle-blower drama "The Insider," a 1999 best-picture nominee, saying the film took liberties to place their industry in a harsher light. "60 Minutes" correspondent Mike Wallace also said "The Insider" painted an unfair picture of how he and the news show handled a confrontation with the tobacco industry.
"The Academy Awards are a huge platform for all kinds of people with all kinds of agendas, some worthy and some not so worthy," said Peter Rainer, contributing editor for New York magazine and past president of the National Society of Film Critics, which picked "Million Dollar Baby" as best film of 2004.
"It's an irresistible force for people to try to piggyback on to, to try to walk in that spotlight and get something out of it for themselves," added Rainer, who said he liked "Million Dollar Baby" but that it was not one of his top film choices of last year.
Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. -
I said that he didn't kill in the CURRENT continuity. I didn't say shit about the golden age. Read fully before you argue.
-
You seem to actually have a brain in your head unlike most of the people here.
-
Wrong talkback... freak
-
Feb 09, 2005 12:18:04 AM CST
Despite me disagreeing with moviemack and thinking his views on
by kdog69
everything that he talks about is on the script. It's a fact. I'll still see the movie anyway because none of those things bother me as much as the things in the other films, but I just wanted to clear up that he is telling the truth.
-
Feb 09, 2005 12:44:44 AM CST
I really couldn't give a rats ass less if you read a script or n
by scytheofluna
I just think it's sad that you expect people to listen to you just because you have read a script off the internet. Wow, you downloaded a script, I am so impressed...Grow up. Comic book fans aren't supposed to be bitter assholes. Lighten up or you will give yourself ulcers. (Whether you drink soda or not)
At the very least quit insulting people who disagree with you and quit being so fucking condescending. The movie might suck balls, you may be right, but why the hell would you get satisfaction from that? I don't really know how I feel about it yet. I am approaching it cautiously, and I have enjoyed Nolan's work before. Just because your particular vision of Batman isn't being satisfied doesn't make me or anyone else any less of a Batman fan. This film isn't going to be Year One? Big fucking suprise...If you want Year One read the damned comic. Rather than reading a script a year early and ruining the film for myself based on next to nothing, I plan to wait until the film is released and decide how I feel after I have seen it. You know, like they used to do, back when people actually watched films instead of downloading script treatments and spending 11 months broadcasting their disgust to the world. So do us all a favour. Shut the fuck up. You ruined it for yourself by talking yourself into hating a film you haven't seen, let the rest of us see for ourselves. -
I actually agree with you on most of what you said. I don't know whether this flick will be good or not, I just can't figure out Mr. Killjoy-er Miracle-er Moviemack...whatever the angry guys name is.
-
But being an adult I have a certain amount of self control and haven't read it yet.
Even if you have read the script and hate the stories direction, what are you going to do about it? Are you really that upset that your going to kill it for everyone else just so you can get off? Do you have children? Have you told them about Santa and the Easter Bunny? Tsk, Tsk, Schadenfreude is what it is. -
I said I viewed them as Elseworld tales, I never said that alone, meant they were good. At this point in the game my faith in Goyer is zilch, I'm convinced this individual has been saved ONLY because film is a collaborative medium and many hands have patched up his "work" ad nauseam. I liken him to a very poor driver. I may be coerced to sit in the passenger side, but I'll be damned If I'll let myself fall asleep.
-
Jesus , is moviemack STILL going ? LOL.
-
Man, I can see that he has boned up on the bat-lore. And I believe in his right to spew rancor about a film no one has seen yet. However, I like the cast, I liked the trailer, and moreover, the things I know about the script now make me want to see the movie. Miller's Year One and Dark Knight Returns series, Tim Sale and Jeph Loeb's Long Halloween and a lot of the Neal Adams comics from the seventies were the basis of my fandom for this character. Ra's Al Ghul is an intregal part of the Batman mythos. He's his ultimate nemesis, and like Moviemack said, most of his enemies are too insane to be a credible threat, or simply rely on mundane strongarm tactics to try and eliminate Bats. Ra's is just the kind of egomaniacal terrorist to try and induct such a focused and driven mind into his organization, or possibly so bereft of equals himself, hopes to hone a lifelong enemy in this one man. (If they're using the Lazarus Pits, the current age Ra's is pretty old already)....I can't say for certain that this movie will rock anyone but myself. My only misgiving was about the Batmobile...and I still don't know if I like it, yet. As for the holes in the script, what the hell, it's David Goyer. He's a wham-bang action movie dude, not a director or creator of cinema. Moviemack, I hope that one day you get the Batman movie you want; and I hope in the middle, they add the cute CGI Bat-Mite and fuck up the entire second half.....just kidding.
-
Feb 10, 2005 2:37:23 PM CST
Moviemack and the subject of Begins Bats vs. Comic Bats
by georgefnlucas
I disagree with you. And really, since taste is a totally subjective thing, my disagreement shouldn't bother you much. You asked for clear counterpoints...well, I'll try to do more than make derogatory comments about your ass' chappedness, but I can't promise anything. :) 1. I like the new look of the movie. Sepia-tones and all. Nobody complains that the first half of the Matrix is green-biased. It's a director's prerogative to present the material how he likes, using color to enhance the mood. Nobody has yet to say a Fincher flick looks like a grainy piece of grimy snuff film as a bad thing. I happen to agree with the director's vision. You don't...Oh well. Hopefully, this script(like other Goyer scripts that pass the audience Groan-O-Meter) gets worked with in the process. But, as to the one guy in Wayne Enterprises who's honest part of the script, that's from the comics, albiet a pastiche of two characters. One (I can't remember the name, sorry.) was killed during the recent 'Hush' storyline, and designed most of the Bat-gear. The other, was in the Loeb/Sale stuff as the guy keeping watch over Wayne Enterprises when the Falcone family tries to overrun them. (The Falcone's are also in the movie as I recall.) 2. I like this film because it has the 'Batman' feel I've been waiting for. It's not Burton's Batman...but then, that was a very unique vision of the mythology. The Joker as Bruce's parents' killer, and in turn Batman as the Joker's creator? A little contrived would be an understatement, I think. 'The Killing Joke' had the best explanation for the Joker's past, and made complete sense. 3.As for the comparison Film Bats to Comics Bats: The comics....I liked the forties Batman stuff I read. Although his character was paper-thin back then, and he did pick up a gun and he did throw guys off of yachts, rooftops, and run them over in his black Ford. But this was the day and age before the Comics Code. Crime comics were the height of popularity in that medium, so the heroes of those stories would be scoffed if they didn't put paid to the villains in those series. When the series came to be known as Detective Comics, and they introduced a character to entice younger readers (Robin), they toned down the finality of the violence. I think the evolution of the character came to a pinnacle during the Post-Crisis Reboot of the DCU, when Miller took over on Year One, and explained all of the backstory between June 26, 10:47 PM and the first time Bruce tries his hand at crimefighting, which has him nearly killed by a pimp and his thugs. You mention the cave imagery, which is directly from Dark Knight Returns...same type of framing in the shots and everything. This does not give him the idea of 'Bat as element of fear' (that comes when a big ass bat smashes into his window later on) but 'Holy shit, there's this big fucking cave under my house!'...These things you complain about in the script happened in the comics in one form or another. And when you try to condense fifty years or so of characterization into a film which might run an hour forty or so, you're going to have to use some broad strokes. This is not a plea for mercy on Goyer as a scriptwriter...I still have an empty place in my wallet where the turd Blade Trinity stole my cash. I went to see it, because I think the movies are 'fun'..now, I think Goyer should stick to scriptwriting first drafts or just producing. So you and I agree that Goyer is a case of a fluke hit = an average writer given more chances than he deserved. But as for script problems, those usually get worked out in the end. 4. The casting of this film has, in my opinion, brought to the fore the best man for the Bruce Wayne job in Christian Bale. The guy who said this would be a 'gay little superhero movie' should take a look at Equilibrium. There's Batman with a gun. There's the empty and terrifying look of a man with a mission and nothing to lose. Look at the movie 'American Psycho'. A little flick that works because of Bale's 'sane' persona. That is, in essence, Bruce Wayne. After everything else, Batman is what the movie is about, and I think this guy has the chops to do it. So, to condemn the guy before the movie hits the screen...I don't know, sounds too pessimistic. We'll see what the filmgoers say after it comes out, I just don't want to claim to be the arbiter of what is 'right' and 'wrong' with all film.
Oh...and your ass is chapped and stuff. -
Ha Ha Ha... You made fun of my login name. Hillarious. What, are you like fourteen? Is that really the best you can come up with? "Belittle me" all you want douchebag, you are the one who's blood pressure is about to boil. I find it incredibly amusing that you think anyone gives a shit. You don't know me, so to judge me based on the fact that I don't judge a film until I see the finished product is fucking stupid. So yeah, shut the fuck up. You haven't seen the movie, so you don't know shit. Grow up, and get over yourself.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 209 total posts 207 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 97 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 144 total posts 77 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 68 total posts 68 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 67 total posts 67 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 64 total posts 60 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 480 total posts 55 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 53 total posts 50 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 118 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 182 total posts 27 posts