May 31, 2000, 6:16 p.m. CST
I have a contact with Aaronofsky's storyboard guy, and i will see if any of this is real. It almost seems too good to be true, but we can always hope. I mean Batman is a beloved franchise, and a profitable one as well. (Even Batman and Robin made money, eventually) and we all wanna see a really good Batman again
May 31, 2000, 6:18 p.m. CST
by Mills Somerset
Just kiddin'. Aranofsky wouldn't be a bad choice, though I'd like to peek at "Proteus" to see if he can think big enuff for what I, at least, think "Batman" should be/look like. Though he's certainly got the dark part of dark knight down.
May 31, 2000, 6:22 p.m. CST
WHY does this guy keep getting cast? Pearl Harbor, now this??!? From the few films I've seen him in, he's completely unimpressive, and so wrong for the role. Why anyone would want to see him in ANY movie, much less a big summer blockbuster-type, is beyond me.
May 31, 2000, 6:32 p.m. CST
I think a more indy-look for the next Batman is definately the way to go. I loved Pi, and I think we all know Joel Shuemocker (sp?) really jacked up the last movies. We need the hollywood bull-crap to take a hike , and get some art back into a great character and genre.
May 31, 2000, 6:34 p.m. CST
I think Hartnett was the best thing about The Faculty (yes, even though Harry was brilliant as the "guy with an injured hand"). He was also dead on in the Virgin Suicides. If anyone has a problem picturing him as a young Bruce Wayne, you should really look at what he did with those two characters. I mean how much did he have to work with in The Faculty? Not really a whole lot, and by rights he was playing a pretty lame character. But he brought a charisma to it that actually made it bearable and almost enjoyable to watch. And in the Virgin Suicides, again he takes a somewhat charactery and bland role we've seen a million times and adds life to it. Well, anyway, if you don't like him, it sure is going to suck for you if you like Batman.
May 31, 2000, 6:41 p.m. CST
by Mills Somerset
When I think presence (lately): Wes Bentley had presence in "AB," Russell Crowe had it in just about everything he's done. Hartnett just sort of...broods. And looks wiry. Don't get me wrong: he was OK as Zeke in "Faculty" and when they busted out "Magic Man" while he walked in slo-mo in "Virgin Suicides," I cracked a big smile. But he seems to lack the goods needed to make Batman what I often argue he should be: NOT the guy who takes the backseat to the umpty-nine villains they'll no doubt try to pack in this time, but the actual star, front and center, of the film...which, not coincidentally, is called "Batman" or a variation thereof. Until they call the film "The Joker's Return (featuring that Bat-Dude)" or "Parade of the SuperVillains!, gimme a Batman with some formidable presence, stature, intensity, and complexity even if the dialogue isn't there to support it in every scene. I've said it before, I'll say it again: Batman being only as good or as important as the jaw of the guy who plays him is a fallousy that the world (and, yeah, obliging filmmakers, as well) has generated and should be rectified, pronto.
May 31, 2000, 6:53 p.m. CST
by 20th Century Fox
This is good news...I LOVED PI and think D.A. wouild be a cool choice to direct now all we need to do is find a good scrpit....
May 31, 2000, 7:13 p.m. CST
What the hell? I think Affleck would be great. Leo wouldn't fit the bill. Who else??
May 31, 2000, 7:46 p.m. CST
Ben Affleck or Josh Harnett? Batman lovers, puke your guts out! Darren is obviously an outstanding choice to direct a Year One feature, but either one of those guys don't belong in the Batsuit. A guy like David Boreanaz is a much better choice, in my opinion....although he is probably too old (he's 28, same age as Affleck). Overall, the franchise seems to be headed in the right direction finally....oh....and George Clooney...will you please stop blaming yourself for B&R in every interview you give....IT'S NOT YOUR FAULT BUDDY!!!! May Joel Schumacher never be allowed a comic book property (or a camera) ever again.
May 31, 2000, 8:03 p.m. CST
YEAH!!! That's all I wanted to know!!! They worked great together in Pi! I can't wait to hear the Requim for a Dream score! NOW I can't wait to here what kind of a treatment Clint can give Batman! -- Give it all your loving Give it all your hate You got to give it everything and get out of my face!
May 31, 2000, 8:14 p.m. CST
I'd rather see a clint eastwood or kurt russell version of Miller's grizzled Dark Knight and THEN a young punk just starting out in a year one tale. Anyone who hated tim burton's take on batman will not like aronofsky any better.
May 31, 2000, 8:19 p.m. CST
He's brooding and big, and he's definatly got the intensity . . . but he's from a WB show, strike one. And it's pretty much the same role he plays on Angel minus the fangs, strike two. But Josh Hartnett is like Robin, not Bruce Wayne! And what the hell are they casting young people for the movies, anyway? That's the Bruce Wayne TV show, dammit!!! And Vin Diesel as Victor Fries? Um, Micheal Ansara is THE Mister Freeze. Period. Now, a young Mr. Fries . . . who needs that, he's only interesting AFTER he becomes Mr. Freeze! Granted, Schumaker screwed up Mr. Freeze, Poison Ivy, Batgirl, Robin, Bane, and screwed up, then wasted Two-Face(Riddler was okay, but I don't care about him), so any revisiting they want to do there is fine. But I'm not leaping for joy until they make the Dark Knight and Batman Beyond movies with Clint Eastwood and Jason Behr, and put the Bruce Wayne show on Fox with a kick ass cast(Terry O'Quinn for Comissioner Gordon and Catherine Towne for Selina Kyle!). They can just Freeze the middle of his career movies until they can figure out what they're doing and make a GOOD Batman movie(no more killing villains, and somebody cast Jenna Elfman as Harley Quinn already!). Too bad we'll never see Joseph Gordon-Levitt or Elijah Wood as the Tim Drake Robin, either one would have been great.
May 31, 2000, 8:26 p.m. CST
Hartnett the best thing in the Faculty my bloated butt!
May 31, 2000, 8:39 p.m. CST
I dont understand the earlier comment that anyone who didnt like Burtons take on Batman wouldnt like Aronofsky any better. I don't know yet what I think of Darren as a potential director, I'm still not sold, but Burton made the only 2 Batman films! The other two Schumacher ones are the ones I've filed in my "sequels that don't exist" file, along with Speed 2, Ghostbusters 2, Blues Bros 2000, Crow 2, and Scream 3. PLUS, who the HELL would want to see Clint Eastwood??!? As for Kurt Russell, he can be fun in some films, but he'd be wrong for Batman. My vote: LET BATMAN DIE!
May 31, 2000, 8:40 p.m. CST
But SpoilerMan's comment about Tim Burton has me worried. Guess we'll just have to wait and see, won't we?
May 31, 2000, 8:40 p.m. CST
Why did my second post jump to the top of the list? Anyone reading those in order will wonder what the hell I'm referring to!
May 31, 2000, 8:52 p.m. CST
I was looking at Comics2Film's Digital Concept Gallery (some pretty cool stuff, along with a lot of shite), and someone did a pic of Vin Diesel as Bane. Since we haven't seen Bane yet at all (B&R Bane doesn't even count, so shut it), I think Diesel would be better in that category - not that he would make a bad Freis either. However you spell that. Oh, and I just can't picture Hartnett as Batman. I'll always bring that caffeine-in-a-straw stabbing Zeke character to mind when I see him. I don't know about Wes Bentley either, but I don't have a suggestion, so....ehh.
May 31, 2000, 8:54 p.m. CST
...Is Matthew Lillard. He has the tall, slender build. The crazy voice. And... the chin. His work has ranged from idiotic (wing commander) to respectable (SLC punk). He has so many attributes that suit this role that it's almost too obvious... at least to me.
May 31, 2000, 8:57 p.m. CST
My casting picks of Eastwood/Russell were for a film version of Miller's gritty DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, where batman is over the hill but still pissed off. As I said, I'd rather see that as a 5th film and THEN they can start over with a young Dark Knight, ala YEAR ONE. I personally like Tim Burton (just happily bought SLEEPY HOLLOW this week on dvd) but many fans here at AICN just hate his take on batman. My warning was if you didn't like his arty/freaky look at the caped crusader, Aronofsky's cut from the same cloth.
May 31, 2000, 9:04 p.m. CST
Did I miss a couple films by him or something? Pi was creative, dark and intelligent, but it was made for 60 something thousand dollars. There were some people who had doubts that Singer could tackle a $75 million behemoth like X-Men after low budget $15 million flicks like Apt Pupil and The Usual Suspects. And what about Aronofsky's technical abilities? The cinematography and lighting of Pi were extremely primitive, perhaps due to budget constraints. Another thing about Batman is that he's an incredibly complex character. Pi was not exactly what I'd call heavy on the character development side of filmmaking. Of course, its unfair to judge a director's qualifications on just one film, but on the other hand its equally presumptuous to claim that Aronofsky's hiring is a "masterstroke" after just one film too.
May 31, 2000, 9:11 p.m. CST
Listen, I have been trying FOREVER to get this posted here but of course, it's almost impossible....I am not cool enough...f it all... Batman 5 WILL start a young bruce wayne...and the main villian will be the evil pancake pan... And aunt Jamima and her band of trusty bars of butter will help Bruce Wane, a ceo of a 'new hip dot com' and they will kick their ass...after trendy hip pop culture dialog, canned laughter, and a few lattes... Then, Darren Aronofsky will bend over and take it up the you know what by the big corporate money machine, known as Warner Bros, and will subject him to more bat nipples, bat abs, batt butt, and another villian called the "REALLY REALLY BAD GUY" who does REALLY REALLY BAD STUFF He is meaner than dr freeze, and has 10 more puns. Weee! And, this will be produced by Pepsi and Taco bell. But, this is insider stuff, so be careful with this 'inside information' that I get as a 'spy' from my 'insider sources'...I am a 'big player' but I 'wish to remain anonymous'...'my job is on the line' oh, hold on..."Welcome to Mcdonalds, can I take your order?"....Oh, ok, I'm back, ok, listen, anyway, Batman, the young one that is, will have a younger Alfred too...but this one is a short chinese woman 'cause we all need to be friendly to 'all of our american' neighbors...don't want to offend anybody. OH, for HEAVENS SAKE....BATMAN WAS KILLED! Thanks JOEL SHMUCK MAKER! Who cares if the director of PI does this? Stop falling for the buzz. HOW DO YOU KNOW HE IS RIGHT FOR IT?!?!?!? What if PI got BAD reviews ONLY...he's the same guy...would you be JUST as happy...oh, god, just wait for spidey. OH, and this is 100% fact until proven otherwise...oy... OH, and for Star Wars Spoilers...Jar Jar will turn Anakin to the dark side...how? Simple, he NEVER SHUTS THE HELL UP and he cuts his balls off... This is 'insider stuff' from my other 'spys'...WHY CANT I SPACE THIS GOD DAMN MESSAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (MODERATOR- I LOVE YOU VERY MUCH) :D
May 31, 2000, 9:18 p.m. CST
I don't even think Burton himself is too thrilled with the way Batman turned out. Edward Scissorhands was pretty great though.
May 31, 2000, 9:19 p.m. CST
by The Observer
May 31, 2000, 9:24 p.m. CST
by CHUD PARNK
No way. When talking about the Affleck/DiCaprio approach to casting, this is still it. It's just an "indie" actor approach to it. Vin Diesil as Freeze, just because he will shave his head and has big muscles? He really can't act or even speak very well. Hartnett and Reedis? What have they done that even suggests being right for this material. Hartnett is too young looking, and just too....soft for Bruse Wayne. Bad news. CHUD PARNK hopes this is crap.
May 31, 2000, 9:31 p.m. CST
by Beige Babapapa
Poppies frontman to score comic book film ....whoooahhhh .... good choice. Like the idea of "Pi" man to get dark and adolescent ..... year one a-go-go .....
May 31, 2000, 9:32 p.m. CST
by The Observer
If these rumors of Warner Brothers hiring Darren Aronofsky are true, then maybe the Batman series will be saved after all. I've seen Mr. Aronofsky's "Pi." A bit odd, but I enjoyed it. If they do hire him, I hope he tries to keep his dark, gritty visual flair. I'm concerned that if he is overwhelmed with a big budget, he may lose his unique sense of style in exchange for overblown visual effects.
May 31, 2000, 9:42 p.m. CST
No way am I gonna see this move if Aronofsky directs! The man has no talent whatsoever. "Pi" was a terrible movie! D. A. would only make the Batman franchise sink deeper into the hole that Schumacher created! Anyone that disagrees with me can go scratch!
May 31, 2000, 9:47 p.m. CST
by The Observer
Take it up the tailpipe, Miracleman! Aronofsky is PERFECT for the Batman franchise. The man has more talent in his farts than you do in your entire body, you ignoramus!!
May 31, 2000, 9:53 p.m. CST
'More talent in his farts than my entire body?' How very droll of you, King C. I'm so terrified that you called me an ignoramus. I still think that Aronofsky is a worthless sack of goat dung. "Battlefield Earth" was far better than the steaming pile of liver that was "Pi." Eat me, King Caesar, you ignorant pile of festering cow testicles.
May 31, 2000, 9:56 p.m. CST
May 31, 2000, 9:57 p.m. CST
Zeno my brutha, I'll admit to liking BATMAN RETURNS even more than Burton's first (gasp!). I'm a sucker for german expressionism in design, though (seen the chilli peppers vid for OTHERSIDE? Cool!) and so I was over the moon for Burton's 2nd bat flick. I had been a bat fan for 22 years already when RETURNS came out and I really felt I was seeing the Dark Knight that I'd always read, be it Bob Kane, Neal Adams or Marshall Rogers. What was it that you took issue with in Burton's flicks? Shumacher's flicks were too campy---much like a nightmare return to the awful days of Adam West, I felt. Oh well, to paraphrase THE DUDE in THE BIG LEBOWSKI: Well, that's just my opinion, man! Peace.
May 31, 2000, 10:06 p.m. CST
by The Observer
King Caesar and Miracleman, you guys need stop getting so worked up over who is directing the next Batman film. After all it is just a movie. Just take a few deep breaths and forget about it. Also, I don't know what's going on between SSZero and Moriarty, but I'm all ears. If Moriarty is indeed deleting messages from people who are lambasting him, then that goes against the entire reason for having the Talkback section in the first place: Free speech. God Bless America.
May 31, 2000, 10:11 p.m. CST
Bite Me, Observer. Anyone else want a piece of me? All of you guys are a bunch of PEONS. Perhaps I didn't make myself clear: I HATE Aronofsky. I HATE "Pi." I think that Battlefield Earth, Godzilla, and Independence Day are all better than "Pi" combined. COMBINED. Like I said before, anyone who disagrees with me can go scratch.
May 31, 2000, 10:15 p.m. CST
Why is my previous post above that idiot The Observer's post? Weird.
May 31, 2000, 10:48 p.m. CST
Oh and Observer: Look here, your fucking name is ironic, cause you don't seem to catch shit. Moriarty and FG and the rest ban like their cocks depended on it when the fuck they feel, Talk Back BEDAMNED! Harry himself advocated FG banning 'in the tak back below' way back on the asinine overamped 'anti-censorship' post for Tvclerks. HAS NOONE SEEN TETSUO:IRONMAN????????????? Aronofsky storyboarded PI scene for B&W scene....body cam and alll...WTF????? All those tight close ups and blurry crowd scenes, with the city tone,and hi-tech primitivism? That shit came straight from master filmmaker Shinya Tsukamoto's Iron Man.....Im surprised Niiiice hasn't picked up on this.
May 31, 2000, 10:51 p.m. CST
by The Observer
Sorry about that. I guess I need to brush up on my knowledge of how the judicial system works. Sorry.
May 31, 2000, 10:56 p.m. CST
by The Observer
I guess I do need to brush up on my observing skills. However, I have "observed" that you need to brush up on your spelling and grammar skills. Obviously, you wrote your message in extreme haste and anguish. It's okay, it's only Talkback. Now everyone, let's get back to Batman and Darren Aronofsky...
May 31, 2000, 11:12 p.m. CST
now, if only you had the intellect to add to the Batman discussion. Although it is good to see your living up to your name with that shit about spelling. Nothing though, is worse, (except maybe what i wrote in the OP post) than an officious prick whose only contribution is to chastise other's for their spelling. It seems I should parse my words for you, as your machinelike mind can't seem to extract the deep structure.
May 31, 2000, 11:21 p.m. CST
by Syd Mead
NO ! NO !! NO !!! FUCK YEAR ONE...big fuckin' mistake...seriously. Who the hell needs a bunch of "Young Guns 3" actors screwing up BatMan??? Vin Diesel??? Puh-leeze... that's the sadist piece shit news I've heard in a month. Just do the Dark Knight Returns...I'd rather see a crusty Clint Eastwood as a beat up, broken down and armed for bear Dark Knight than another limp dicked Bat-Teen. --Syd
May 31, 2000, 11:25 p.m. CST
by The Observer
Observer and Malchizedik, you lads should not be arguing! This is a forum on Batman and Darren Aronofsky! Now, I say the whole lot of you gentlemen who are arguing with each other should let bygones be bygones, and put this squabbling behind us! Anyway, I have my fingers crossed for Sir Aronofsky. Sink me, but the boy is a talented individual! I would love to go to the local motion picture house in the following years and see the place festooned with posters reading "Batman 5: A Darren Aronofsky Film." Alas, I can only pray... --They seek him here, they seek him there, those Frenchies seek him everywhere! Is he in Heaven, or is he in Hell, that demmed, elusive Pimpernel?
May 31, 2000, 11:44 p.m. CST
EURRRRA! Ok, that's better. I agree that German expressionism, combined with a certain degree of verisimiltude (the two are not mutually exclusive) is the best style to present Batman. I have no problem with Burton visually per se, (but I find it amazing he's able to pull so much off without stroyboards). Aronovsky may be able to deliver something visually compelling as well, judging from what I've seen from Pi. (Mmmmmmmm. . .Pie. . . . . . . . ) Whoops! Where was I? Oh yes, HOWEVER, I thought the plot of Batman 1 meandered all over Gotham City (I was bored), and that the richness of story of the Batman mythos (e.g., the dichotomy between playboy Wayne vs. dark Batman, the *irresolvable* problem of the slain parents, etc.) were either poorly executed or ignored. Kim Bassinger takes personal credit for her dialog, and it shows. Bad movie. Batman Returns was better. I actually cared about Batman's relationship with Catwoman. Yet again, the story was narratively sloppy and a mishmash (Penguins stealing children? Left field and tacked on.) In a mysterious move, Burton cut the traditional Penguin character in half, giving most of his personality to Christopher Walken. Instead the penguin was just a short Joker in different make-up (i.e., wisecracking homocidal maniac). Just not as good as it could be. Big Finish: Hopefully somehow someone will give us a film that is as truly great as I feel a Batman movie can be. Whether Aronovsky is that someone remains to be seen.
May 31, 2000, 11:57 p.m. CST
You wannabe limey cunt, lol, I Was taking about the future Batman director, and i made my point rather clear that DARREN ARONOFSKY STOLE ALL HIS STYLE FROM TETSUO:IRON MAN!!!!!!!!!Ok fine, ill bet you're ok with that, but i feel jipped, ok? You probably enjoy seeing John Woo use pidgeons and a double dick gun diving act in every movie, fine, but I think he's tired. He needs a rest. Aronofsky is young, only on his third film...We HAVENT even SEEN his 2ND!!! So far he only seems capable of ripping off shot for shot, another film. If Requim for a Dream is the next Drugstore Cowboy or ACO, I'll eat my words, but until then.......up your easy butt Jooboo!
June 1, 2000, 12:01 a.m. CST
If I was still drinking, I'd hoist a beer to ya. You're one of the good guys here at AICN, you know what you're talking about and express yourself well. Not to mention that you can be funny as hell! have a good night---time for this old comic fan to hit the sack. peace.
June 1, 2000, 12:07 a.m. CST
I'd like to see Aronofsky's version of Batman, even if it is a year one story, unfortunately. I like the aspect of a Year One story for the simple fact that it would wipe clean the horrendous films Schumacher made. Otherwise, I don't like the idea, and it's a cop-out to erase the mistakes they made with killing off major villains.
June 1, 2000, 12:08 a.m. CST
Buy yourself a video camera and a spandex catsuit and make your own film, buddy-boy. I promise it'll be more fun for you and your friends than reading these talkbacks.
June 1, 2000, 12:58 a.m. CST
by The Observer
It has come to my attention that you have deleted SSZero's messages 11 times. 11 TIMES. Why must you do this? What are you trying to prove? He's obviously not being deleted because his posts are off subject and because they contain strong language. I see that happening all the time with other people's mesages, and their words are not ripped from the Talkback section like so much cheap tape. Is this something... personal? If it is, what will deleting a tried and true Talkbacker's messages do to solve things? Exactly what is it you're trying to prove?
June 1, 2000, 1:42 a.m. CST
June 1, 2000, 1:43 a.m. CST
yeah, like a 3d Total Recall net. and if you catch a tone of your words...I think Snoriarty should listen and put some this on the linel,,,,eh? Very bad cheeve off like my man regginal was banned so many tymes for just entertaining, and i dont have whyte guilt....I dont.
June 1, 2000, 1:48 a.m. CST
I don't normally post things like this to specific people here, but I've had enough of this. Look, if you don't like this site or anyone who runs it, fine. No one's asking you to. But, why waste so much time posting Talkbacks on a site you hate so much? Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but if you hate this place so much, then stop comming here! Stop reading these articles you hate so much, and do something productive in your life, instead of constantly protesting and slandering people you've never met, nor will ever meet, on their own website. Nobody's forcing you to even come here, so why do you bother? Why do you want so much attention from people you hate so much? Have you ever asked yourself that? Just go to another website that's to your satisfaction. . . one where you don't have to waist so much time arguing and bitching to the webmasters about how they run their own site. AICN isn't the only place on the Web to get movie news. I'm sure you can find a better one to go to.
June 1, 2000, 3:02 a.m. CST
by Palmer Eldritch
...because this site is his sole reason for living, he loves and adores it. I saw a documentary on the Rolling Stones, and it had this film maker talking about this footage he shot of Jagger on stage being attacked (as in beaten up) on stage by male fans! The director reckoned that what was happening was these fans were in love with Jagger, and wanted to get on stage and be with him, embrace him, kiss him, but as soon as these guys got on stage, they felt self concious and afraid, their minds contradicting their emotional instincts. So out of fear their first reaction was to hit Jagger, to strike out that the person who had excited and confused them so much. -- Sound familiar? Yes, SSZero is here all the time. He can't bear not to read everything Harry posts, everything Moriaty writes. He wants to pour his joy and happiness into the talkbacks, to express his love for and gratitude to these men who shine the light of happiness into his dull and insignificant life. But everytime he clicks that talkback icon, the fear starts, the words don't come, the emotions that charge him also cripple him, He feels self concious and exposed, he worries that his writing will look lame and sycophantic, that people will laugh at him, so he swings to the opposite extreme, pouring out hatred and anger against the site, in an attempt to allay the emotional turmoil and disguise his true, mixed up feelings. Repression does terrible things to a person -- *ding* "I'm afraid that's all the time we have for this session Mr Zero. Same time next week?"
June 1, 2000, 3:31 a.m. CST
"It's obvious this fucking dickhead has to feed his ego by taking out those who oppose him." "You get on your faggot soapbox wimpering about all the wrong done to you," "We are PISSED off and TIRED OF HEARING YOUR BITCHING," "You get pissed off, and its like a spoiled fucking brat that must get his way. First off all, what a vain faggot." "Well what about everyone tired of hearing you BITCH about this" "don't FUCKING post your EGO driven horseSHIT for everyone to read." ***Words quotted from SSZero that, oddly enough, apply to him as well. Sounds hypocritical to me. I don't know why you can't figure out why you were banned so many times.
June 1, 2000, 3:38 a.m. CST
His score was the much better than that horribly bomastic abomination in those horribly bad thrid and fourth films. Why did it get killed off? Elliot Gldenthal ( I may have got his name wrong) showed bugger all respect for it. Secondly - Batman Returns is simply the best of the series so far - though that's not saying too much - flaws like Keaton's size and Walken's character motivation remain. As For using PWEI's Clint Mansell. No. Please no. I'm English - I even have one of their albums. Believe me, trust me; forget Pi - Don't let him score the film.
June 1, 2000, 4:44 a.m. CST
Well, I'm definitely in favor of a "Year One" approach, so that much is good. As for Aronofsky, I'm neutral at this point. I thought "Pi" was an excellent flick, but I can't possibly guess how well the director of such a quirky, bleak, independent flick will handle a larger-than-life superhero movie. For instance, I think Burton's Bat-flicks had way too much of Burton's quirkiness, and not enough traditional action and focus on Batman himself. Moving on - Vin Diesel as Mr. Freeze is a fine idea, but Mr. Freeze has no place in a "Year One" setting. I'd much rather just see an inexperienced Batman fighting against crime and corruption (ala Frank Miller's vision), with no supervillains at all. And honestly, you just shouldn't use the same villain for two movies in a row, no matter how different the portrayal. I'd be alright with the Joker returning - it's been long enough - but they need to forget the continuity established by all previous Bat-flicks and restore the Joker from the ground up. I'm not real big on bringing in the music man from "Pi" either. Batman needs a traditional orchestral score, not electronica. So...mixed feelings. In any case, thumbs up to Moriarty for taking a close look at the current state of the Bat franchise. If this next film doesn't revive the franchise with the fresh start approach, then Bat-movies need to lie low for a couple years before they try again.
June 1, 2000, 5:33 a.m. CST
First off, consider how much happens during the course of the story. Wayne is reborn as Batman, takes on Two-Face, takes on the Mutant gang, takes on the police, takes on the Joker, AND takes on the Man of Steel. Oh, and he picks up a new Robin too. And there's a nuclear strike. Too much for one movie. You can pare it down, but will it still be the story you loved, or just Kurt Russell in a series of action sequences distilled from a great story? Remember too that "Dark Knight" actually has quite an experimental feel: internal monologues, strong satirical elements, and heavy use of TV newscasts, to name a few. Can a movie capture all that successfully? From a realistic standpoint, I also don't see DC allowing Superman to be portrayed on the big screen as a government stooge, and if you lose Superman you lose the whole ending. And personally, I just don't see any film matching the might of Miller and Varley's gorgeous artwork. You *could* make an interesting movie about an aging Batman, but "Dark Knight" in particular seems untranslatable to me. Best bet is to enjoy the homage paid in that one episode of the animated series, and just re-read a damn great comic.
June 1, 2000, 8:13 a.m. CST
by Ambush Bug
Batman has had a constant presence in my life for as long as I can remember. I watched re-runs of the old Adam West show when I was a kid. I read every comic I could get my hands on and still do. The Burton films were pretty good and I can even sit through that first Schumacher shitfest. Let's not even go into the last installment. Needless to say, the news of an Aronovsky helmed Bat-flick is exciting news. Pi was a truly unique and imaginative little film. It would be interesting to see his approach to the Dark Knight. News that Aronovsky is going for a younger Year One Batman is okay, but I hate the idea of trying to tie all of the past villains into Bruce Wayne's origin. Granted, they could go the route of ignoring the previous films. They could use the Joker and Mr. Freeze as villains and probably get away with it. But Nicholson's Joker is firmly set as the definitive Joker and it was only a few yers ago that Schwartzeneggar cursed us with his take on Freeze. Why do we need to see these villains in Year One? Why not center on the hero and tell his story? If they are going to do some sort of prequel to the first film, why not use the Joker character, but give him the Red Hood identity he had in the comics? There could be a cameo by Keaton, who could be looking back through his journals to one of his first cases and have him peice togethor through the retelling of that story, that the Joker was in fact the Red Hood all along. There are plenty of other BAt villains that I we haven't seen yet. Scarecrow would be a great early villain for a Year One film. They could tie in the Scarecrow's fear themes with Bruce's insecurities as he first dons the cape and cowl. I am still hoping that one day Burton will return and give us a Bat-film with the Mad Hatter. Burton's take on Alice and Wonderland would be magnificent. Everyone thinks that they need to revisit the Joker character in order to take the Batman franchise to the top again. The reason why the first Batman film worked is because it had a good director and not too many characters to drown out Batman. As soon as someone realizes that Batman should be the star of the film, not the villain of the week, the films will be good again.
June 1, 2000, 8:55 a.m. CST
Glad someone like Aronofsky is doing it. What more could you ask for. And fuck Ben Affleck.
June 1, 2000, 9:59 a.m. CST
Yes, that's right, he's not on our side after all, just another oppressor. Look at the last flick, "Batbut and Leatherboy" - Poison Ivy was an environmentalist who just wanted Wayne Enterprises to stop polluting the Earth, but Batman says "people come first" Yeah, his people, and George Bush. Poor Mr. Freeze was just trying to find a way to save his dying wife, but all those kinky bat kids want to do is ride around on their expensive motocycles - frickin' bourgeouis preppy *$%#s! As for Arnofsky, well, maybe a film maker is in there somewere, but man PI gave me a headache, all that brain-pokey. I just luuuuved the Italian Hasidic Jews with their fake beards hanging off their ears though, and the secret stock broker "strike force" - HA! The soundtrack did kick ass, though - a much better film is the four-minute video for main title track with clips from PI and shots of worker ants. It doesn't matter, Hollywood doesn't make movies any more...just hype - and that's what you buy.
June 1, 2000, 10:44 a.m. CST
by Parsons 210
Jeff Robinov has been running around town interviewing for every job in Hollywood. Lorenzo barely speaks to him. Amy Pascal passed on hiring him at Columbia Pictures. C'mon Moriarty, do you REALLY think that the guy who wanted Chris McQuarrie (I've seen WAY OF THE GUN - wait till you do - WORSE than BATTLEFIELD EARTH, it is the SHOWGIRLS of writer turned director films)to direct ALEXANDER THE GREAT instead of Oliver Stone is gonna come up with somebody as good as Aronofsky? Puh-leese! This is the guy whose idea of brilliance is to remake the classic GET CARTER with Sly Stallone and Tarsem! The guy was driven out of ICM and by the time Batman- Queer One comes out he'll be driven out of the WB. The clock is ticking, Moriarty, so give credit where it is due - a brilliant agent named Robert Newman who hooked Darren up with Lorenzo for the job.
June 1, 2000, 11:12 a.m. CST
by Mills Somerset
He still believes Skip Woods is a good writer. If you need any evidence to the contrary, I dare you to pick up a copy of "In Defense of Sleeping Beauty". And this is the man they've left in charge of "Logan's Run"...which at one point Aranofsky was being considered for. D'oh!!!
June 1, 2000, 11:30 a.m. CST
If anyone has read "The Long Halloween" they will know exactly how Batman should be. I have been a rabid Batman fan forever and that was some of the best writing for the Batman mythos. I would suggest anyone to go out and try to pick up a copy of that series. If there is any approach to how the look and feel of this "Year one" stuff should look then this is it. Granted... Frank Miller's Year One was excellent, for the Batman but I don't think the studio's will (1) let the movie be that dark and dirty. I mean, that is why Burton lost the gig in the first place. To dark and scary for the little kids so enter Schumacher and that's why the next films were so light and campy. And (2) The general public is not really interested in the first half of that FM series. They don't care how he became Batman. They just want to see Batman. If you ask me then the studio execs need to take a look at the Long Halloween for it's look and feel. Gotham was run by the mob. Show the corruption of the city. Introduce a COOL Commisioner Gordon, not that fat dude who acts like he doesn't a bit of control on anything. Flesh out that relationship. That is enough for a whole movie in itself. Bring in a young Harvey Dent who is fighting the other side of the battle, in the courts. Have more rooftop scenes... Batman looking over the city... Meeting Commisioner Gordon in the shadows. I am not saying that they should use the story of The Long Halloween because there are too many villans. (and we all know what happens with that) Just read Jeph Loebs writing and Tim Sales drawings and then you will know exactly how all of this should look. Oh ... and by the way... Josh Harnett... That will be yet another nail in the coffin that WB is building for my favorite superhero.
June 1, 2000, 12:06 p.m. CST
Diesel as Mr. Freeze? No. Freeze is not a muscle-bound man. He wears a giant containment suit for pete's sake. I'd pick Ed Harris -- he's got those icey blue eyes and can play the tortured soul as well. Freeze is motivated by love.
June 1, 2000, 12:09 p.m. CST
Imagine if they (the villains) do cameos like Angela did in Spawn. Yu see them you know who they are, but they do nothing, they'tre just freakingly cool!
June 1, 2000, 12:18 p.m. CST
I agree wholeheartedly with Coromorant -- The Dark Knight Returns will not work on the big screen. At least with Year One, we've got the opportunity to start over again. The director may be capable of handling this material -- or he may flub it. If it does not work this go round, I say let it die. Hartnett is plain wrong for Wayne. Wayne at this age is a jet setting playboy -- a beautiful, tortured Gatsby-like character, not a boy. Nothing mean towards Hartnett, but he lacks in that kind of charisma and I doubt he'll ever grow up to have a rugged quality about him that allows Wayne to be both playboy and the Batman. Personally, I like the idea of someone like Christian Bale. He's got the body, and the acting talent necessary to give that character the edge of self-loathing that is entirely MISSING from all previous Batman films. Norman Reedus I can't speak on because I know nothing about him. I also thing it's a great big mistake to cast EVERYONE in this movie young. Gordon should be older, Freeze should be older, etc.
June 1, 2000, 12:48 p.m. CST
Wes Bentley would be great for Wayne, if he could make his body convincing enough. I hope they really go easy on the rubber costuming this time. Otherwise, I'd go with Christian Bale, or Billy Crudup. Viggo Mortensen for Gordon -- he looks the part and he's a good actor. Young Joker, HELLO! Joaquin Phoenix. That is the man for the part, folks. For Harvey Dent, I say use someone real likeable -- Luke Wilson. Someone who we'll all feel sorry for him when loses it and becomes Two-Face. I wonder if they're going to puss-out and make Kyle all romantic and feminine? -- Because in Year One, she's a hard, HARD young woman. I want someone edgy, like Chloe Sevigny.
June 1, 2000, 1:20 p.m. CST
We are so accustomed to studio executives being clueless meatballs, that when they do something any logical twelve year old would do - like dump an aging, franchise destroying, wreck of a director for some talented new blood - we call them visionary. If you're slightly personable and legally slow, move to L.A., my friend. You can make it to the top!
June 1, 2000, 1:56 p.m. CST
Sounds like they're on the right track with the new Batman. I think hiring Aronofsky was a really good idea. Better than Schumacher. Is he still producing it? As far as the villains, I would love to see Mr. Freeze done correctly. Maybe this movie will just ignore the events of all the previous films and create its own timeline. I don't know about the Joker though. I thought Nicholson's Joker was awful (I know that's heresy). His laugh wasn't anywhere near as insane as Mark Hamill's and he wasn't fey enough. But, then again, I've always been a huge Joker fan, so I see him in a certain way. What I would like to see in this new movie are some Batvillains who haven't been used before, like the Scarecrow or Ra's al Ghul (though him in YEAR ONE would be a bit useless). Personally, I'd love to see Mr. Zsasz, even though that would definitely lead to an R rating. By the way, Moriarty, will the film focus as much on Commissioner Gordon as the book did? Have they even discussed who's going to play Gordon? I think that's one of the most pivotal roles in the film, him and DA Dent. Screw the bad guys, make the movie about Gordon, Dent, and that wacky Bat.
June 1, 2000, 2:27 p.m. CST
Even though I think Darren Aronofsky is making a career-destroying mistake by taking this gig, I fully understand why WB will hire him. Who the hell else is there? The handful of truly talented directors out there wouldn't touch this WILD WILD WEST-in the making with a ten-foot pole. The David O. Russells, Alexander Paynes, Wes Andersons of the world are too busy creating their own films, and the bloated A-list guys are too busy starting up internet companies so they can get rich on IPOs so they don't have to be embarrassed by their bloated, $150 million bombs. It's either Aronofsky or some equally unqualified commercial director like Marcus Nispel or Tarsem, and why would they trust those guys any more than Darren? Besides, what possible standard could they be trying to meet? MI2 receives horrible reviews and the second biggest opening weekend ever. The film business is the only business in the world where the fact that your product SUCKS is no impediment to making money. All the previous BATMAN movies sucked and made boatloads of money, so why even bother making an effort to ensure that the fifth one is a masterpiece or even good.
June 1, 2000, 2:40 p.m. CST
Sorry to continue the rant, but something some of you seem to understand but don't want to admit is this: execs at the studios and production companies DON'T CARE if their movies suck. There is no downside to their careers if the critics laugh at their efforts. The only thing that matters is if the movie makes money. And I'm not saying that they try hard to make good movies but fail because of their own lack of creativity -- I'm saying that they don't care period. They care about the concept (because it's the logline that sells) and they care about casting (because it's cast that gets financed), but that's it. I mean, why else do they hire the same hack writers over and over again? Remember: your average studio exec is not a movie buff, has no sense of Hollywood history (I knew an exec once who never saw friggin CASABLANCA and seemed proud of it), does not like to read, and is usually an ex-agent or lawyer or is 25-years-old with little life experience. Hollywood (as with all forms of media today) has exterminated the concept of taste and quality, and done such a terrific job of lowering the standards of the audience that they can unload a piece of shit like MI2 and be proud about it.
June 1, 2000, 3:26 p.m. CST
by The Avenger
I've been waiting since I was twelve to see Batman done right. With the Animated Series being the only exception, every incarnation of my all time favorite character has missed the mark by leaps and bounds. Now, the whole D.A. story has been swimming around for a while, and God do I want to believe it. As for this recent tidbit regarding casting, who knows? It's probably shite. But at this point, it's all speculation. As for D.A., anyone who know anything about this guy, knows what a HUGE fan of Batman he is. On top of that, his love for the work of Frank Miller rivals that of my own. After Pi, Darren was attached to a picture based on Miller's ground-breaking Ronin. Nothing ever came out of that; an unfortunate turn I assure you (Go out and read it now. Witness Matrix-like concepts a good fifteen years before the movies production!). Also, anyone who is familiar with Pi knows that Darren based Pi's look on Miller's Sin City. Let's face it, D.A. spent 60k on Pi; shooting Reversal 16mm filmstock (no negative). B&W Reversal Film Stock gives easily gives those hard blacks and whites. The effect can be rather unerving, as evident in Pi. Reversal used to be used quite a bit in lower-level film courses(that's what learned on; only a few years ago- say 1996 before the DV revolution). Now, Reversal is cheap for say a short. But a feature? Jesus... It's NUTS! What I'm saying is that D.A. is an artist who both has a unique vision but a love (a real love; not just, 'Hey I'm directing a Batman Movie! Lemme read some comics and pick my favorite version!' To quote Randall Graves... 'Man the last Batman was really Gay!') for the source material. The guy loves Batman; he won't fuck it up. One more thing: Anthony Daniels as Alfred! Let's face it, he's the right age (figuring that Alfred is about 45-50 during the events of Year one), he's British (Very British, actually), and when you boil it all down; Alfred and Threepio are the same guy... Well kinda.
June 1, 2000, 3:59 p.m. CST
I saw it again on TV today ( I live in South Africa with satellite) so some movies are played over and over again - which is cool... EXCEPT WHEN A MOVIE IS BATMAN AND ROBIN!!! It was a kid's movie. Pathetic. I'll need real convincing to be ready for another Batman movie.
June 1, 2000, 6:06 p.m. CST
Any suggestions anybody? Skllbns, you seem pretty sharp, how do we get Hollywood to make better movies?
June 1, 2000, 6:41 p.m. CST
by Mills Somerset
I think we should chuck the majority of studio execs into the drink with cement shoes, too. Or at least grill them and make sure they LIKE films, ranging from cinema school-enforced/AFI list stuff to those oddball films you find yourself defending logically and people still respect you for.... The bottom line is, 75 percent of all studio execs I've ever met and haven't liked, it's b/c they wear their Harvard and Brown degrees like badges of courage. Hey, the film biz ain't the biz-biz, y'know? Saavy business sense is incredibly important, but when it comes time to doing story notes and working with writers and coming up with the heart and soul of movies, it goes beyond, "So, which of these 2 posters do you like better -- Star X's head or Star X's head with the shadow of the naked girl behind him?". The best studio and production entity people I've ever met were whip-smart, film-loving cineastes who understood the biz well, but struck that right balance between the MBA-ers and the filmgeeks. And that's who I think should be making movies, that's who I'd trust. Acknowledging that, "Wow, super-new-hot director X is kickass and would be great for Project Y" is one thing, but doing it out of a love of film and the projects you work on while being conscious of all other elements (which boss' ass you have to kiss, how many bad films or semi-cruddy films u need to greenlight to get passion projects rolling, and so on) is something that all too few manage to even attempt to achieve, never mind manage to achieve. Would I like every fangirl and -boy to get their shot at writing directing or studio exec-ing? Sure. Would that be right? No. But the ones with the intelligence and wits about them would know how to do what the worst of 'em do (kiss ass and look out for me-me-me and the next big deal) without screwing over a bunch of people in the process. I truly believe that. And that's my story and I'm stickin' to it.
June 1, 2000, 11:08 p.m. CST
I really don't understand why The Long Halloween is so acclaimed; I thought it was too dull and derivative. Sale's art was, however, excellent. But I was not drawn into the story; there were just soooo many Italian mobster cliches and too many Godfather references. The ending was a cop-out, too. You want a great Batman story? Just read Alan Moore's The Killing Joke. I also agree that Dark Knight returns would be difficult to mount on screen; the story certainly would be probelmatic, as would casting someone in the role of the aged Bruce Wayne (Eastwood just looks too old and skinny). I've always thought TDKK would make a terrific edition of the New Batman Adventures, though, done in the animated style. Dini and Timm could go wild on this one: make it a 2-hr direct-to-video Elseworlds type of episode, get Tim Daly back as Superman and you'd have yourself a classic piece of animated film-making. As for the new Batman movie, they've just got to keep it simple. Stop throwing out two villains at a time, stop writing the scripts around big, stupid action/FX sequences. You'd think that Batman would be the centre of attention in his own films; he is, after all, a deeply complex character. I wish Schumacher and Tommy Lee Jones hadn't ruined Two-Face so badly in Batman Forever; he would have made a great single villain in the next film.
June 2, 2000, 2:03 a.m. CST
I knew someone had to like those movies. Wow. Let me page back and read that again. . .Ok, I'm back. Like I said, Wow. Are you sure you're not a relative of Joel Schumacher Colonels House? Never mind. Far be it for me to flame anybody. I will say this, you probably represent exactly who the aforementioned evil movie execs are aiming at with these movies. Your version will be made before mine ever will. Maybe I should do what the guy way up there said, and get a catsuit and a video camera. Until then I guess I can read Knightfall one more time, and dream. . .just dream. . .
June 2, 2000, 2:31 a.m. CST
Joel Schumacher is entirely credited to putting the Bat-franchise in the toilet with Batman Forever, and then flushing it with Batman & Robin! Sure, I liked the little jokes in Forever. . . they were unexpected and a bit funny. But, using his supreme ignorance, Joel said "Hey, they liked my little jokes, I'll use the same ones again this next time around, only make them even funnier by having them repeated over, and over again. And, I think I'll add in some cartoon sound effects for fun. After all, Batman is a COMIC-book. Why not make him comic?" Yeah, a man who witnessed his parents being murdered in front of him in cold blood when he was Eight, only to grow up training and planning to dress-up like a giant bat to scare the living shit out of every criminal in Gotham before he pummels them should be a LAUGH RIOT, Joel! BRILLIANT!!! And, don't forget to make Victor Fries a comedic guy, too. After exclaiming that he's dead to emotion, I sure did like seeing him make his henchmen dance for him (and what the hell was with that cigar? HELLO! MR. FREEZE? The guy who can't live in an environment above frezzing tempereatures?). On a side note, Clooney did his job as Bruce Wayne, he just hopped-on the band wagon a bit too late. And, for once, can we get an actor who can do most of the stunts as well as play Bruce Wayne, or is that too much to ask for? I mean, I'd like to see ol' Bruce really knock a few heads without the mask, to remind the audience who he really is.
June 2, 2000, 3:40 a.m. CST
by Mills Somerset
What I've said 1,001 times to anyone who'll listen. Has nobody ever noticed that name that appears as co-screenwriter on "Forever" and sole scribe on "& Robin"? Yes, I'm talking about Akiva Goldsman, who I really wish would be forced to accept some of the blame for these flicks, though I liked "Forever" a great deal and thought "& Robin" was just crummy, not "burn down the city, start a riot" bad as everyone else thinks it is. I mean, in my opinion, Schumacher was a great director of solidly effective, though admittedly not earth-shattering, films like "Flatliners," "Falling Down," and "Lost Boys"....the former film being one of my alltime faves, actually. And what has Goldsman given us? You know the addy of IMDB. You can very well look 'em up. Just thought I'd throw this into the mix..........and how scary, we haven't even approached a script stage on "Bat 5" yet.... wow.
June 2, 2000, 9:56 p.m. CST
Alright Colonel, who let you in here?!? You're not a fanboy, you're a. . .a. . .a movie fan! What you call "cotton-candy/bubble-gum/ check your brain at the door piece of fluff" we call sacrilege. Why? Well for one thing, many of us are nutty. But it actually goes deeper than that. Let me try to explain: The "superhero," or the fictional character embued with super powers, is a narrative convention that has been with us throughout history (e.g., Hercules, Paul Bunyan, Jesus, et. al.). (I could get into a sociologiical explanation as to why these stories are so powerful (or regressive, as viewed by some), but I'll let some Joseph Campbell nut do it for you some other time). In the twentieth century, this convention has come forward in different forms, most striking among them is the comic book. Out of this simple artform have come characters with rich histories and resonant narratives that have evoked a deep affection and loyalty among fans. It's not just the costumes and the daring-do, (sure, that's a big part of it), but it's also the relationships and the deeper themes as well that make these characters enduring. Naturally, fans would want to see these elements portrayed in this century's penultimate form of pop cultural (artistic) expression: The Movie: The closest thing to it actually being real. Unfortunately, this seems to be a tall order. Either the filmmakers stray too far from the source material creating a film for the true fans that is sorely lacking, or they merely make a superficial interpretation that inevitably leads to camp humor. The greatest tragedy is that many of us firmly believe that a truly great superhero movie can be made, one not only for the fanboys, or the weekend ticketbuyers, but one for anybody with imagination for years and years to come. A "fantastic" Citizen Kane, if you will. Do we take this stuff too seriously? Sure. Will we see this movie someday? Probably not. In my opinion, Superman: The Movie came the closest. Are Ace and Gary really gay? Just because someone listens to the Gipsy Kings doesn't mean their gay. Anyway, Schulmacher may have made a lightly entertaining movie for casual movie fans, but he made a truly horrendous movie for Batman fans.
June 2, 2000, 10:22 p.m. CST
Hopefully, this film will focus on Batman, not multiple villains. Personally, there has never been a "true" Batman film. Burton got the visuals right, but placed too much emphasis on them. At the risk of being verbally crucified, Jack Nicholson was too old and fat to be a convincing Joker. Most of Batman's classic villians are tragic figures. The first film ignored this by making Joker a gangster. Batman was too well established in the first film, and wasnt allowed to develop. Burton gave Nicholson way too much screen time to chew scenery, which set the tone of villian portrayals in the sequels. The biggest problem was that Burton made Batman a killer. Batman wouldnt machinegun or blow up badguys, that violates who he is. Hopefully D.A. will jumpstart this franchise by truly exploring one of the most complex characters in American pop culture Peace...
June 3, 2000, 12:51 a.m. CST
This most riveting news yet form the bats corner.....American Beauty's neighbor next door as this most sinister Bat yet...after all the night and its darkness is what drew me to the series in the first place and isn't he, Batman, its retched prince?
June 3, 2000, 1:25 a.m. CST
Sure, that would be fine and dandy, El Mariachi, but I don't want to give up hope on the world's greatest superhero just yet. But, I DO believe it would take a miracle to get the movie franchise out of the toilet (for now, anyways). My advice is to sit on the whole thing for a decade or so, and then start over from scratch with a new storyline far seperated from this one. I dug the first Batman movie, but it really wasn't Batman at all. Sure, I loved how he was portrayed as an Urban legend and feared amongst criminals, and how we found out his origin through the discovering eyes of others, instead of just some flashback ("Vale, I think your friend Wayne is pretty messed-up" "Oh my God. His parents were murdered in that alley!"). But, what I didn't like was how Batman was just walking around killing people left and right at the end of the movie, and in Batman Returns. Batman doesn't kill! He swore never to lower himself to those detestible vermin who have no respect for human life. So, I think that the Bat-franchise should remove itself from these movies and start anew. . . with a Dark Knight as he was always ment to be. With movies that focus on Batman's grim persona, his choice to single-handedly to fight a war on crime (great book, by the way) and would die before he ever gave it up for anything. . . including his own happiness.
June 3, 2000, 2:39 p.m. CST
by JACK TORRANCE
As a young kid BATMAN was my favorite because he was a real guy without superpowers using only his gadgets and his wits. Sort of a children's JAMES BOND. Maybe he should have shagged the catwoman(Julie Newmar was a nugget). I did not care for SUPERMAN as he was very unreal. The movies changed my opinion around. The first two SUPERMAN films delivered the excitement but I have gone into all four BATMAN films hoping to get an entertaining ACTION movie but all have disapointed me in some way.They are TOO DAMN DARK!! The first two were visually interesting because of Tim Burton but Keaton did not thrill me and the actions scenes were not exciting enough. The first Schumacher Batman with Jim Carrey and Val Kilmer was close to a Good Batman movie because all the characters were good. Val Kilmer was the best BATMAN so far.But the actions scenes and robin were not good enough. So lets give Schumacher credit for that one as well as THE LOST BOYS(Produced by RICHARD DONNER hhmm didn't he direct the first SUPERMAN and All four LETAHL WEAPON films).We all know that Mr. Freeze one blew dog. Two weak villians are not neccessary how about one good one. Clooney would do a good job with the right ACTION director. The series needs an action director just like the ALIEN series does.Putting artistic,moody and dark directors in a movie that is supposed to be exciting is like putting an art director in the last 007 film "The World is Not Enough" the action scenes,the hero, and the villian did not deliver. WARNER BROS. WAKE UP and TURN ON THE ACTION!!!!!
June 3, 2000, 5:13 p.m. CST
All other criticisms aside, at least Schumacher's Bat-flicks had some action. Cheesy action, yes, but there was some decent kung-fu fightin' in there too. Burton's flicks had moments of action, but none of it was ever cool. Is programming a batarang to hit three guys in a row cool? No. Is hitting some thug in the nuts with a spatula extending from Batman's glove cool? No. Is it cool to have to sides of the Batmobile fall off just so Batman can drive down an alley? Hell no! The movies need to look to the animated show for inspiration. There have been shitloads of great fights and action scenes on the cartoon. Even weak episodes have been redeemed at times by some great action scenes. So, yes, for God's sake bring in an *action* director for your *action* movie. Try McTiernan, Cameron, Donner or the Wachowskis ("The Matrix" actually showcases about the right blend of action vs. story for a Batman movie) - avoid Michael Bay and Renny Harlin at all costs. I just want a Batman that's cool, and you need a good story for that, but it don't mean beans without some great fisticuffs and mind-blowing action.
June 3, 2000, 7:18 p.m. CST
Whoops, I'm thinking of "Action Jackson." Ok, back to the point: Action-Shmaction: No action sequence from Batman Forever pops out in my mind at all. The only one I remember from Batman and Robin in the one with the ice skating and the (oy vey!) rocket ship, and that's because it was so awful. A story that's in the service of the action is a weak way to make a movie. Case in point: Mission Impossible 2.
June 3, 2000, 10:07 p.m. CST
...I'm just saying that quality action needs to be a bigger part of the Batman franchise than it's been so far. There's been too much emphasis on Gotham city itself, scenery-chewing villains, and unimportant secondary characters. I want an emphasis on Batman, on his detective work, and most definitely on more action. Again, I see the "Matrix" story/action quotient as a good mark to shoot for. The very good (if not *quite* great) "Mask of the Phantasm" had a nice balance as well. Getting back to Schumacher's flicks for just a moment - you may not remember specific action sequences, Zeno, but I watched them recently, and what struck me was that while there was a high cheese factor, there were also more extended scenes of fisticuffs than Burton had done. That much, I liked. Burton's action scenes were just...too Burton. Schumacher at least had a clear antecedent in the action scenes of the campy 60's series (which I admit a fondness for...while still holding "Batman: Year One", "Dark Knight", and the animated series as the ideal). Aside from just scaring thugs, pouncing on them, and hitting 'em with batarangs, I think Batman needs to showcase some heavy duty martial arts and stunt work. Ever see a Batman fight scene choreographed by the comic book writer/artist team of Doug Moench and Paul Gulacy? Their fight scenes are very cinematic (I'm thinking specifically of a late 80's or early 90's story arc called "Prey"). Where most comics showcase just the high points of a fight, a Moench/Gulacy fight is more moment-to-moment, filled with blocks, feints, counter-moves, etc. I'd like to see that level of thought brought to the films. Oh, and rest assured that "Prey" had a solid plot too. So, yes, story first by all means, but a good Batman movie needs better action than the four films have showcased so far.
June 4, 2000, 10:25 p.m. CST
Whatever happened to making sequels one after the other that were consistently good and all had good stories? Guess that never happened. As for the Batman series I can only see one possible way to get it out of a slump-which is what it was/is in. First I can't believe Warner Bros. was stupid enough to let Joel Schumacher direct the post-recent/old sequels. He brought the Batman series to a halt which is my belief why it's taking so long for another sequel. If the studio had any intelligence they would get a notable director, maybe burton if he's still sane, to direct the prequel. This other director I've never heard of before and if they do create this 'prequel' it better have several things-the darkness in it that Tim Burton brought with the first two. But most importantly it better NOT be like Star Wars and have some lame prequel where it's hyped up but ends up sucking royally leaving the whole series to rot. As for those who think the series is profitable-look at the past two films and see how profitable they were to how they could have been had they not been ruined. Let's just hope everyone (like me) didn't see Batman and Robin and would like to see the prequel and have high expectations for it. A better idea would to do a Batman 5 instead of Batman 0 or -1, just delete the thoughts of Batman Forever and Band Robin and just go with Batman's finale or something where it brings the series back to it's regular, dark-looking gothic demeanor with Keaton throwing more hits than Reeves and Elfman composing the wonderful score if he's not in retirement yet. After all, no movie is complete without the score and the one Danny composed is wonderful.