Cool News
The Latest On BATMAN YEAR ONE from Aronofsky...
Hey folks, Harry here with the latest info on Aronofsky and the BY1... Seems that Darren is sitting down to begin writing on BATMAN YEAR ONE with Frank Miller now.... meaning they'll probably be done... the end of January... so the earliest they could shoot the film, given regular pre-production time on a Bats flick is... end of the summer, (design, casting, set preps) So let us all hope that they can get the strike settled.... Meanwhile I hear Boaz and crew are getting BATMAN BEYOND in lean and mean cool shape... though no DETAILS at all... dagnamit... Here ya go....
Hi Harry,
Don't know if you have this - This appeared in the Chicago Sun-Times dated: 11.14.2000 by Cindy Pearlman.
SAME BAT CHANNEL: Batman is going to be hitting the couch.
Who knew the superhero needed a shrink? "I wanted to introduce some Freudian psychology and answer the question: What does it take for a real man to put on tights and fight crime. I promisethat this time Batman will be a complex character with issues", says hot director Darren Aronofsky ("Requiem for the Dream"), who sits down this week to write "Batman: Year One"
contrary to press reports, this extremely hush-hush project will not star one of those "Dawson's Creek" boys. "It's not the teen Batman. But we do tell the origins story," Aronofsky divulges. "We learn how Batman saw his parents killed in front of him by a gunman and then trained himself to fight crime"
Aronofsky is working with Frank Miller, who wrote the '80's comics "The Dark Knight Returns." As far as casting rumours that Ben Affleck might be the guy in latex, aronofsky says, "It's really premature. Honestly, I haven't thought about it."
Sign me -
Ian The Intern
-
+ Expand All
-
Someone has to stop this.
-
What about the Kurt Russell crap? Obviously, you answered your own question. It was crap! Nothing has been finalized as of yet. Maybe the previous rumors were all "wishful thinking" on behalf of Russell's publicist or something. Or at least I hope so.
-
We've been assuming that the BB film makers will keep the movie timeline consistant with the BB cartoon. What if they portray Bruce Wayne as 60 years old instead of 80ish? If Bruce had a serious heart condition, he would still be basically cripled. This would also allow Kurt Russell to portray Brucie. The movie would open with a 40-something Bruce hanging up his cape and then cut to 20-years-later. Kurt's the right age to portray both youngish and oldish Bruce.
-
Do tell, I love that series, but haven't heard about anything since the last story Hell & Back. Thanks to whoever can answer this question for me. Stay cool folks. As for Year One all I can say that with Frank on board it at least hasa good chance of not sucking, provided the studio suits don't fuck with it too much. Here's hoping.
-
.....there is a god.
-
Aronofsky is working with Frank Miller, who wrote the '80's comics "The Dark Knight Returns." As far as casting rumours that Ben Affleck might be the guy in latex, aronofsky says, "It's really premature. Honestly, I haven't thought about it."
Sign me - Ian The Intern
Uh -
Uh...hello? I've never read a Batman graphic novel, and I'm not even paying attention to these Batman movie rumours, and I know the deal here: there's two movies, right? BY1 by Aranosky(this article) and Batman Beyond, which details the old Bruce Wayne training his replacement. The latter was to star Kurt Russell. Morons.
-
Nov 15, 2000 8:37:34 AM CST
human2, you assume we are morons yet you, by your own confession
by *veers*
Thats seem pretty foolish to me.
-
You, like us, haven't the foggiest idea what's going on with either movie.
-
Ben Affleck. Jared Leto. Kurt Russell (who we're not going to see as Batman in anything other than a cameo anyways). Whoever Aronofsky picks, I don't care. I trust him, and I'm going to see this movie. His previous flicks were fuckin' awesome, he's collaborating with Frank Fucking Miller, and no matter how shitty the movie is, it's still going to be lightyears ahead of Batman & Robin, so it's a step up. And Robocop 2 wasn't that bad (at least compared to Robocop 3).
-
I covered this WAAAY back when the story first broke...point of fact Miller worte Robo 2 AND 3 as ONE film! They cut it into two horrid ones and he vowed to never work for Hollywood again...but Aronofsky si a different story so I guess he would make an exception... As far as Year one Leto would rock as the younger Bat and they work well together...my pick would be Guy Pierce as the Bat and Russel Crowe as Gordon (that would legitimize and make Gordon "cool" at the same time ina big way!) instead of making the big star of the day the generic villian give them a meaty role like Gordon. Anyways its weird how Afflecks name is linked to everything I think A was just being kind instead of ragging on Affleck for a rumor Affleck didn't start. I doubt he will ever be the Bat. Last note on Russell if you aged him to like 65 70 and the film is a hit you could de age him to 50 or 55 do Dark Knight Returns (he is huge and could look old and scarred) and link Year One and Beyond with it. I PRAY they have the forethought to plan a little this time like the LOTR and Lucas's of thw world...but I doubt it.
-
Ideas: Have a scene where Alfred is reading to him and the story ends with the bad guy winning, then Bruce tells him to re-read the story with the good guy prevailing. I remember that and love it. Have his parents deaths be an especially traumatic moment all in slow-mo. and have it be replayed a few times, have the Joker and Two-Face and the Penguin not be dead. Put the old Robin and Batgirl into the background. Maybe a new Robin? Vince Vaughn as Batman? Have Scarecrow be the bad guy-the villian that turns your greatest fears against you...
have it start off by having Batman apprehend Killer Croc (CGI). Have Bats be a little like a Phantom of The Opera guy. -
Requeim of a Dream was nothing but film school cliches wrapped around a sensationalistic subject matter and thrown together for shock value. If I want to see a film of the same subject matter done with skill and inventivness, I'll put in my DVD of Trainspotting. Requiem sucked. I have no idea why anyone would trust this guy with Mighty Mouse: Year One, let alone Batman. Aronofsky is a flash in the pan at best.
-
Robin would be much younger (Jason Todd) and Vince Vaughn wouldn't be as 'psycho', I could see Vince being a great Batman that way. Am I the only one?
-
God, I love Batman. Have Robin say 'Holy Shit!' I've thought that would be so great in terms of cutting off the old campy series and going for the adult, film-noir esque, shock yo' grandpa, animated series-style, n' drama. Scarecrow would be great, though, could they/ would they use that in a Year One movie?
-
Personally all this speculation about who's directing Batman Year One and who'll be Batman means absolutely bugger all. As long as the film remains (almost) true to the plotlines in the graphic novel, I think that's the best we can all hope for. Why not wait and see what happens? And as for Aronofsky being a poor choice of director, isn't it true that a director can only be as good as his last film, what if BY1 takes the box office by Storm?
-
Is it me or did the last post have completely nothing to do with the subject that everybody else seems to be talking about? (That IS Batman Year One or am I just missing the point?)
-
I did forget to mention that the IS IT writings did make me laugh though, no offence to it's writer.
-
Nov 15, 2000 11:27:46 AM CST
ENOUGH ENOUGH ENOUGH OF BEN GODDAMNED AFFLECK, Hollywood, ther
by bgw claw
God damn!!! I am getting sick to fucking death of Ben Affleck being mentioned with EVERY SINGLE FUCKING young male role in the last 6 months. ENOUGH!!!! I don't want to go on cuz I'll start cursing even more, but does anyone else agree with me here? GIVE THIS GUY A 5-YEAR VACATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Nov 15, 2000 11:57:49 AM CST
"I promise that this time Batman will be a complex character wit
by cowblaster
It's about DAMN TIME!!! No more "Your parents died; get over it! -Schumacher." This sounds like it's finally going to be a good (live-action) Batman film. If this one focuses on the origin, then the next one should be a murder mystery/action thriller movie. I guess WB really DOES know how to make a Batman film afterall.
-
Kurt Russell, in my opinion, would make a good AVERAGE Batman. But, he's too old to play the twenty-something Batman in Year One, and too young to play the eighty-something Bruce Wayne in Batman Beyond. By the way, if Bruce was 60 in Batman Beyond, he'd still be fighting crime, and he wouldn't have given up at 40! In Dark Knight Returns, Bruce retired so early in his career shortly after Jason Todd's death (hey, it's a pretty old Elseworlds tale written before Tim Drake came along). In Batman Beyond, Bruce kept going until he was in his 60's, retiring after a heart condition forced him to rely on a gun in a fight. He didn't just hang up his cape and cowl because he was old. In fact, Bruce would never give up being Batman if it weren't for his health.
-
"Come in, boys. Sit down. Bottled water? No? Coffee? Tea? Espresso? Cappuccino? Latte? Americano? Iced blended mocha? Diet Coke? Ginger ale? Yoo Hoo? Mountain Dew? Red Bull? Snapple? Gatorade? Thera-Flu? No? You're good? The boys are good! My assistants have been reading the script, guys, and so far they understand it, so were all thrilled. We wanted to talk casting a little. How about that Kurt Russell? What a talent. Did you see THE COMPUTER WHO WORE TENNIS SHOES? Not the lame Kirk Cameron remake, which was pretty darn good itself. No? How about some of Kurt's other films like...the ones he was in? Good, so you know his work. How about him for Batman?....Uh huh. Uh huh. Too old. That's age-ism. We don't go for isms here at Warner Brothers, Darryl....Year One? I don't see why that makes Russell a problem...A young, inexperienced Batman? I like it. You're looking for a sexy Batman! How about Mel Gibson... Mel Gibson in 1980, Fred? I'm not sure I understand. How could we actually get Mel Gibson in 1980...Oh, ha,ha,ha. Good one Fritz! By the way, I love your graphic novel IT WAS A DARK & STORMY NIGHT. Those graphic novels are a helluva lot better than comic books. But I get the picture. You're wanting a Batman at the start of his career so we don't have to pay Mel his $20 million. Cool. How about that Bruce Campbell guy? He works cheap and he's very popular with the kids at Larry Knowles Damn Cool News website? ...A young Batman, just starting to be Batman? Okay. I'll think about it. Let's forget casting Batman right now. How about Robin? I'm thinking Sean Connery for some reason...
-
In the first one, Batman was a 'real character with issues', mainly he was a few smoke capsules short of a utility belt. It got the Dark Knight part down. But it only barely paid homage to the Detective part. If DA is collaborating with Miller, then Year One should fix that. My suggestion for the sequels, something along the lines of The Long Halloween. I'm getting excited at the prospect here, enough that I'm forgetting how worried I've been that the Spider-Man movie will be crap.
-
Forget about this stuff for a while!!! Just get a copy of Return Of The Joker UNEDITED and feast your eyes on THE best animated (and probably overall) Batman flick yet. try www.scour.com. Then get the cut version when it comes out later this year and judge for yourself. Personally, I don't see how they can do the cut up sequence justice any other way.
-
I hated the fact that there would be a new Bat movie all of them are shit except for the first one.Miller is the only man for the job.Hopefully Just as he restored Batman and comics to there former greatness he will restore Batman to the greatest comic book character ever,which he pretty much is except for Daredevil.
I two wonder how Miller will fit it in though,what with Th Dark Knight Srikes Again and i also heard he was planning on adapting Bible stories to comics,im not lieing there its true. -
As I mentioned in a previous post, I'd have no problem with a Batman being played by a slick, black haired, muscled up al a SOLDIER Kurt Russell being a bad ass, as he was in TOMBSTONE or ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK. I would however like to offer some other choices, some unconventional, on who could play the older Batman in BATMAN BEYOND: Charlton Heston, James Coburn, Clint Eastwood and maybe even Gene Hackman (remember his bad ass FRENCH CONNECTION and UNFORGIVEN).
-
To the people considering Kurt Russell: He is a horrible choice to play Batman! While I am a fan of many of his movies, he is just too middle america to play Bruce Wayne. Bruce grew up as a rich kid, went to the best schools etc. Kurt does not come off as the product of an upperclass family who grew up in the comic book equivilent of Manhatten. He seems like the kind of guy who comes from Ohio or something. Just look at his characters from Escape from New York, Breakdown, or Overboard! Debonair tortured Millionaire out for revenge? I don't think so. And Affleck is too doesn't have the screen presence to pull off the role. You need someone who is wise beyond their years, more brooding. Nothing against either of the guys, but they just can't pull it off.
-
To rip Trainspotting is one thing. But to rip Trainspotting and then compare it to the Godfather?
-
Hey *veers*, you limpdick lamebrain shitface fuckbitch ass-ho! *I* paid the slightest bit of attention and knew what the fuck was going on with these movies, and the whole thing passed right over your head. Haha. Can't you tell that KNOWING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CASTING RUMORS OF THESE TWO MOVIES and reading the actual graphic novels are totally independent? No, obviously you can't. No wonder you failed algebra.
-
Mr. Aranofsky, your appropriate reply when asked if Ben Affleck is being considered for the Bat should not be something so vague as, "That's very premature." Let me make a few recommendations for a more solid stance on the issue of casting Mr. Affleck.****Q: THERE ARE EARLY RUMORS THAT BEN AFFLECK IS GOING TO BE THE BATMAN? A: 1) Are you #$^&ing crazy? I said already it's not a teen flick, 2) Over my dead body!, 3) And Matt Damon as the Joker, right? Man, you guys are funny...****I hope this helps!
-
Is every body insane?
What is up with all this casting bull shit ideas for Batman?
First of all, Bruce Wayne, is not fucking blond! He has dark hair, blue eyes. So don't give me Brad pit, fuck Brad pit, he is a blond pretty boy, he could not pull it off. It pissed me off when they got Val Kilmer, so get it through your thick skulls, no blondes!
Kurt Russell? He is an old fart and he is too fucking short!
Keanu Reeves? He does not have blue eyes!
George Clooney? No! He ain't got blue eyes and he is not in a good shape. Besides, he adds his shitty sense of humor to the role and true Batman Fans know the dark knight has no sense of humor like that.
Ben Affleck? He is a MAYBE.
He is young, dark hair, blue eyes,
tall, and is in a decent shape. But, he just doesn't strike me as Bruce Wayne! He doesn't have it! Bruce Wayne has the kind of eyes that strike you as "DON'T FUCK WITH ME!" Ben has kinda sad poppy look!
I suggest "Antonio Sabato Jr" He IS Bruce Wayne. He is perfect in terms of Face and body but His acting kinda sucks!
You can share your thoughts with me and e-mail me
wolverine_bat@hotmail.com
-
First off, there's these two inventions, been around for some time: hair dye and colored contact lenses. Secondly, SABATO, JR? Since when is Bruce Wayne Spanish/Latin? Yer funny, bub...
-
Crap. It was so full of film school cliches you could play drinking games every time they appeared. It had no original visual style whatsoever. Don't confuse shock value for art. Go ahead and let Aronofsky get his unqualified mits on Batman. You'll then see that the King isn't wearing any clothes. Let him go off and make his sci-fi film and let that be his test instead. If he gets Year One, you won't see another Batman film for a long long long time. As far as my obvious preference to Trainspotting ... well ... I think you're just slightly rabid about Aronofsky as Trainspotting isn't viewed as the crap film you'd like it to be perceived as. Aronofsky is flavor of the month and his name being attached to Batman has more to do with perception of his talent than reality. I can just picture an executive asking some pretentious intern who a hot director might be on the horizon and Aronofsky's name being raved about because the pretentious jerk only see's "art films" to the point that the idiot suit believes it. I can think of hundreds of more qualified and infinitely more talented directors for this project. The whole fiasco reminds me of a funny episode of Tom Hank's old sitcom "Bosum Buddies." His character had a gallery opening and none of his paintings were selling. But the other artist sharing the gallery was selling like hotcakes. When he asked a critic why the other person's art was getting raves, the critic went into a critique that was long winded and pompous about this painting that had a big red circle on a horizontal canvas of white and how important and blah blah blah... to the point that Tom Hanks had to yell out in frustation "IT"S A JAPANESE FLAG!" At which point the critic rolled his nose and left as it didn't change his opinon. Requiem is shock value and the equivelant of that Japanese flag. There's nothing there past what meets the eye. Were the actor's performances good? Sure, but past that it was a real disappointment. Now, I didn't dismiss Aronofsky out of hand, prior to seeing this movie. I was very into going to see Requeim. I left it scratching my head as to why anyone would give him Batman: Year One.
-
Of course, let's completely ignore the fact that The Godfather is hailed as one of the greatest movies of all time, if not THE greatest. So when you're comparing and contrasting the quality of Trainspotting to that of Requiem, the argument that Requiem is a superior film isn't helped by comparing Trainspotting to Godfather. Trying to prove Trainspotting is inferior to Requiem by saying it's like the Godfather to Requiem's Goodfellas isn't really going to further your claim, nor does it make your position that much clearer, which would be the point of using such an analogy. Ironically, you weaken your argument instead. They do test for irony on the S.A.T.'s, don't they? And if you want to delve into our personal knowledge regarding language usage, did the S.A.T.'s you wrote mention anything about homonyms ("I'm guessing you didn't do TOO well on the analogies section...") or spelling (The letter 'Q' is usually followed by the letter 'u' rather than an 'i', even in a name such as 'Quixote')? Of course, I'm being unnecessarily picky and personal, but maybe that's just the point of my argument.
-
Yes we all know he is busy writing and drawing the sequel to the Dark Knight Returns. But with Sin City, I think he's gonna take a small break from that, maybe a one-shot or something, but no big massive story until Dark Knight 2 is done and he is halfway done his Jesus comic. He is doing research on that now.
-
Why can't they just leave Batman alone? At least they stopped messing with Superman following that last disaster they called a movie. Don't they realize that once you go past number 3, you're basically asking for it? Batman is an extremely difficult character to cast b/c he possesses an almost impossible blend of intelligence, physicality, rage, and psychological depth. He's like Bond, Eastwood, and Stallone all in one. Ben Affleck would suck because he has none of these things (Bats is not an aggro frat boy). Pitt can't be Batman cause he's...Pitt (plus, he's more of the Aquaman type anyway). Russell would suck for more reasons than I care to go into (Soldier, Overboard, the Escape sequel, c'mon people). Plus, who the hell are the villians gonna be this time, Calendar Man and Louie the Lilac? Obviously I know who the logical choices would be, I'm kidding. But, one thing a lot of people don't talk about is that one of the many reasons why the movies kept getting worse was b/c they were running out of villians everybody is familiar with. Once they got past the main unit of vilIians from the West series, regular people had less invested in the bad guys. Unless you followed the comic (and later the cartoon), you'd have know idea who Two-Face, Poison Ivy, or Bane were. I blame that idiot Schumacher (Nipples on the batsuit?! F.U., you stupid Mary!) as well as the post-Joker (the most perfectly cast film character in the last 25 years) villians' lack of character development stemming from the whole, "2 bad guy per film" idea. This was something which compromised the integrity of the films in order to fulfill some sort of bullshit H'wood casting fad ("Oooooh, which cheesy uninformed celebrity could we cast now?") I just wish I had a time machine so I could convince Alec Baldwin to scrap that Shadow bullshit and plead his case to be the Bat from the get-go. And Batman Beyond was crap from episode one. Why go into a whole new storyline when you haven't even begun to delve deeply into the mythos of the first series? I hate that dick from Boy Meets World. Unfortunately, none of these pussies have the balls or the intelligence to make a real Bat-film, be it live-action or animated. If they can do violence and harsh material in mainstream comic books, why not in mainstream moving images? Watching Frank Miller sell-out is gonna hurt beyond belief (all corny and watered down, like that episode of the cartoon which did a piece of Dark Knight Returns). Until the powers that be collectively get a pair of nuts, let sleeping beaten dogs lie.
-
Nov 15, 2000 6:30:51 PM CST
If they follow the Year One comic closely, Gordon would HAVE to
by tall_boy
he has a great character arc in the comic, in fact, I'd go as far to say that he's as important as Bats is. thier stories both parallel each other, growing awareness of thier duty. Also, they should keep OUT the supervillains in Year One, this is about the gritty realism. I'm hoping Batman Beyond will have all the eye candy. . .
-
Ehh...indeed, Batman is a very complex character and finding an actor that fits this complexity will be truly challenging. But cat-woman appears on Batman-year one as a kind of pimp or something. Yeah, I know this is NOT going to be a movie adaptation from the comics, but I thik they should consider this. And oh yeah, remember, Batman DOES NOT take steroids, so making him huge in year one(considering he'd be about, um, 18-22?) would be just another atrategy to sell toys eh? I saw all the Batman movie and I must admit Joel Schumacker is a complete lameass, mainly for making Batman a "I'm Batman because I am insomniac" kind of dude, besides having a really non-realistic costume. Fuck, quit the rubber business, Batman got a kind of kevlar suit and some shit like that in comics, rubber is too hard to let him do gymnastic tricks and martial art kicks. Just because it's a comic character movie doesn't mean it have to be completely surreal and unrealistic. For now, that's it.
-
Well I'm glad to hear it's not going to be all fuckin' Dawson's Creek age kids, but still, I'm sick of Year One stories. Did we not basically get year one from BATMAN in 1989? And Spider-Man is going to be Year One-ish. Yeah I know you guys are going to bitch and say "It's gonna follow that Frank Miller story" or some shit, oh boy.
Besides IMHO I think Bruce Timm and Paul Dini would be better to write a real Batman movie anyway. Yeah I know Batman Beyond is going through with those guys working on it but they aren't doing new cartoon episodes right now, they can't crank out a two hour movie in the next six months?
and no more rubber suits dammit! i want to see leather. and not all padded like x-men. more like the emma peel look in the avengers (yeah the movie sucked but i liked the leather look) you could do the grey with the black bat like in the comics.. come on that would be cool. rubber is so cheez.
finally i just had to put in my two cents b/c i've loved batman since i was old enough to read, and if any of you wanna bitch f you, it's my opinion. -
wes bentley: batman. viggo mortensen: jim gordon. vince vaughn: harvey dent. rachael leigh cook: selina kyle. ian richardson: alfred. other characters: i dunno. aronofsky directs. you watch. five-tone out.
-
...from what I've seen of Rachel Leigh Cook, she's just too petite and delicate for our Ms. Kyle. I'm not going to suggest an alternative because a) I don't know any of the new, young actresses and 2) Even if I did, if I suggested somebody, everybody would just think it was some chick I wanted to pooch. Also, and there is no compromise on this, they gotta get John Cleese for Alfred and I DEMAND, YAY DEMAND I SAY, that I, Buzz B. Maverik, write all his dialogue.
"You want to dress up as a bat, sir? Perhaps you should check into Arkham for a little relaxation therapy. Do a craft instead." All I want for writing Alfred's dialogue is one million dollars, a custom made Purdy shotgun, and a Chevy Suburban packed with Cuban cigars. You hear that, you agents out there. Get to work, earning your ten percent of those cigars. Get me the deal quick and I'll let you fire my shotgun a few times (always good to get a second set of fingerprints on a gun, anyway). -
because i'm not all that au fait with the young actresses either. the more i thought about it, the more i considered ms leigh cook to be the best in her age group (in a perfect world, i'd go with jennifer connelly but she's a little old to play opposite bentley, and he's my first AND ONLY choice for batman. you need someone in their early 20s and i think connelly is around 30...it makes a difference). katie holmes? too subdued. jennifer love hewitt? too wet. tara reid? too fuckin' bubbly. christina ricci? too surly. thora birch? too busy pretending she's christina ricci. mena suvari? just kinda creeps me out. shannon elizabeth? shit, why not go with tawny kitean or linnea quigley if you're thinking like that? my only other options are natasha lyonne, alicia witt, milla jovovich and (my preferred alternate choice) michelle williams. or maybe chloe sevigny. am i thinking about this too much? wait, kate hudson just jumped into my mind! THAT'S a good call - kate hudson! and not just because i'd like to 'pooch' her. (thanks, buzz, that term has entered my vocab for good.) and while i can dig the idea of cleese as alfred, i still think you need one of those bone-dry british bluebloods as alfred. cleese has a little too much baggage to pull it off, but richardson ('dark city') could do the job nicely IMHO.
-
I love when people use the term "film-school cliches"... I find it funny how a person could watch a movie and say it is full of them. if there is any element that is cliche free it is film school, the time when you can truly express your creativity without being hampered by a producer's vision of your film. Requiem was great, original, and insightful. Don't knock it because it made you feel bad afterward. It was wonderful.... and terrible at the same time.
-
...as a rip. i actually go to film school. Pittsburgh Filmmakers. I actually just sent my first film off for processing so fuck you. i'd like to know if you've ever attended film school. because their are film school cliches, but i doubt anything you'd find in Requiem for a dream. give me some film school cliches you saw in Requiem. i'd like to know if you actually have any fucking clue what you're talking about. because for as many people who go to the school that suck and make terribly boring and/or pointless wanna be clever shit flicks, there are some of the more original and creative movies that you'd never see in hollywood. a lot of "experimental" type things (i hate that fucking term). look, i know you're really proud of that phrase, you think its clever as hell and use it in two posts in the same talkback, but its a complete cop-out, it doesn't mean anything to anyone. if you actually knew what film school was like you'd know that any cliches are pretty much the same types of cliches you see in the big movies, only crappier. its like the guy who said kubrick was a hack. so fuck you. oh, and have a nice day.
-
remember how gay everyone said hugh jackman looked when the first picks came around? "he sucks, they should have gotten russell crowe!" that type of thing. then when it hit the screens they raved about how well he brought the character to life. i'm sure there's some quality unknowns who fit the part. like me (hahahaha). anyway. if i had to pick someone who was well known for the role, it would definately be Christian Bale. Just look at American Psycho for his ability to portray slickness and rage, brooding and all of the things that define bruce wayne (well, except murder, etc.). plus he has the right build, lean and muscular. bruce wayne in year one does not need to be in the 18 to 22 range. keep in mind the extensive training he's done all over the world. and allow for some time to have him living a life with the need for vengeance building. the bruce wayne of year one is not a kid. i'm 18 on the verge of 19 and that is still such a young age. bruce wayne shouldn't be played at that age (even though they'd have a 24 year old with a receding hairline play 18 anyway). i think arronofsky will do a great job, especially with the aid of Miller. just from the way he talks about the project a sense of hope is built. but, we'll just have to wait and see.
-
First of all, I've never seen Aronofsky's movies so I can't really comment on his ability to direct the next Batman film. But I'd like to offer my own opinion on who should play Bruce Wayne/Batman. Ben Affleck seem to be the only candidate out there (thus far) who's on the short list to be the next Batman, and people in this forum also appeared to be against him been cast as Mr. Wayne. I, for one, thought that Affleck could probably pull it off. I have seen many movies, including Affleck's, and I think that he can definitely act, and act well. His performance in both Chasing Amy & Dogma were pretty kick ass. He had many minor roles in movies like 100 Cigarettes & Boiler Room, and he also shown that he can do well even in small parts. Although Affleck been in several movies this year, most of them are indie flicks (Reindeer Game, Boiler Room, Bounce), and people who appeared in Kevin Smith's movies don't suck (well, except Shannon Doriety). The buzz is good on Affleck in his upcoming movie Bounce, and I think he can prove his acting depth in this movie. People who thought that he can't be "bad" didn't see him playing a goon in movies like Mallrats & Dazed and Confused.
Anyway, I hope the new Batman will be better than those 3 Bats who wore the tights in the last 4 Batty movies. -
you're post actually made me laugh. way to go. god, i'm in my first semester and i've seen half of those already. its nice to know some people in this talk back actually have a fucking clue what they're talking about when it comes to film school. i was dissapointed. i expected to find a bunch of ambitious, passionate people trying to do something cool, and found that people are capable making really pointless garbage and don't really seem to give a shit about trying to make something worthwhile. but at the same time i'm not complaining because that's my competition. to be fair though, i've made friends with a few people that are at least striving to make something interesting. what film school do you/did you go to anyway?
-
Great debate. You're doomed to this Aronofsky Batman. Don't choke on it.
-
Whoever mentioned Billy Crudup for the role of Batman is dead on target. Crudup has the right look and is a heck of an actor. Go see him as a rock star in Cameron Crowe's "Almost Famous", out now. Eexcellent actor, excellent movie. See it before it leaves the theatres. Crudup for Bats!
-
Affleck is not cut-out to play Bats. He does not have the intensity or the presence for a good version of the character. Whoever mentioned Vince Vaughn had a half-way decent idea, but he would be much better as a villain, perhaps as Harvey Dent/Two-Face or even the Joker (although my choice for the Joker's creepy/funny/menacing persona is the versatile Kevin Spacey). I would suggest Billy Crudup for Batman, as I mentioned in my last post, or perhaps Russel Crowe. Both have the intensity neccessary for a good, serious Dark Knight-style take on Batman.
-
I'd look for someone tall, solid, with very angular features and with the squarest chin I could find. None of the major actors out there come to mind. For his supporting cast, I'm all for Viggo Mortensen w/ a moustache as Gordon. I just think he's perfect both from a physical and talent standpoint. Also like Vince Vaughn as Two-Face/Dent, but he's a big guy, so it would be nice if they got a Batman that could look at him at eye level without having to run around in platform shoes. I think that Wes Bentley looks more like Terry than Bruce. Bruce is a manly-man, not thin and wirey. Bruce is a throwback to Hollywood leading men, not all these man-boys that make the girlies scream these days. That's why Hugh Jackman and Russell Crowe are such turn-ons -- there haven't been men like them in Hollywood in a long time. This isn't meant in a derogatory way, but think about the top male box office stars: Cruise, Pitt, Carey, Damon, Affleck.
-
Ben Affleck is a cocky, substandard actor, who when not turning on his lethario grin and trying to be serious, always resorts to blank, carbon copy emotion. The guy sucks. If you are going to do Year One, they need to snag someone younger and more in tune with method acting, emotional, as oppossed to Afflecks cheap, ego driven, acting school skills. I say go with that Wes Bentley kid, he's got a dark look, and appears to be a "thinking" actor, who iumbues his emotions into the material. Plus, Bentley has a limited resume, adn not all the hideous Reindeer Games, Dogma, Armageddon baggage associated with Affleck.
-
As for physical resemblance, Ben Affleck is tall and got that square jaw which is perfect for Bruce Wayne. Yes he was in Armaggeddon, but so was Bruce Willis. Anyway, I think Ben would definitely bring something substantial to the role. Here are other actors I think can fill other roles well:
Catwoman - Amanda Peet (she's from The Whole Nine Yards)
Harvey Dent Two-Face - Christian Bale (from American Psycho)
The Riddler - Edward Norton (he's better than Jim Carrey)
The Penguin - Danny DeVito (he's still more Penguin than anyone else)
Batgirl - Sarah Michelle Gellar (her Buffy character reminds me of Barbara Gordon)
The Joker - Mark Hamill (he's got the perfect voice for Joker. If they could turn him into the Joker physically he's perfect) -
hands down.. The best choice. The old Tom Selleck.
-
try this: jim caviezel as bruce wayne/batman. that's right: jim caviezel! shit yeah! keep mortensen/jim gordon and vaughn/harvey dent, but get either jennifer connelly or amanda peet to play selina kyle. CRISPIN GLOVER as the joker. fuck this, i'm goin' to hollywood.
-
The only major villain in Year One is Catwoman. There is no other major villain in the story. Just the Roman and his gangster family and the corrupt police force. And screen time for Batman in costume is going to be only for a very brief time and he isn't even wearing it for the big climax. Unless, of course, Aronofsky and Miller changes that. I have no faith in Aronofsky at all and Miller is all about the paycheck that allows him to keep doing Sin City or whatever else he wants to do. So we'll see sped up film, fish-eyed lens', split screen Batman: Year One and some of you will be in complete denial about how great it all was. Great debate though. That I must be an idiot for having an opposing viewpoint or opinion is a ridiculous position to take. I really don't think Aronofsky is qualified for this. I really disliked Requeim and thought it was only an adequate film that was really selling itself on shock value alone. Argue against me if you will about how you don't think it employs film cliches, but I think it does. You don't think that young directors or film students can't fall into obvious approaches and methods in their work that are tired and used? I do. Defend it. Don't just call someone an idiot for taking that view point if you can't defend your view point. That's not debate. That's just a low brow personal attack. I thought his aptitude showed in Requeim. I thought the way it was presented wasn't that original in terms of method and techinique in such a way that the first thing that comes to mind is: BATMAN! Requeim was just a series of shock value moments by someone who didn't show me that he had an original eye. Does that make me wrong? No. That's my opinion. Now .... in a constructive way, debate my points and change my mind by explaining to me what you saw in Requeim that suggests Aronofsky is the right man for Batman: Year One. One insult and I can't take your opinion seriously.
-
i like the way risk thinx. there's a lot of holier than thou bastards on the internet. like i said to someone on a diff b.b. a week ago, if you can only lay the smack down online you've got a more useless existence than me. but that's not what this is aboot. (no i'm not canadian) i want the next batman to be kick ass. i need it to be kick ass. i've never seen darren's flicks. i will look into them now. i know about miller and the robocop movies. but i wouldn't mind hearing a bit about how risk thinx its just a pay check for him. (easier for me to believe with the dark knight returns 'sequel') and instead of just sitting with ones wank in hand and squealing about ben affleck being batman and kurt russell playing batman in bb (i try not to believe these until i see a REAL movie trailer) i think there has to be a known guy that would pull off batman. i'm not gonna go "Michael Keaton is the only choice" i liked him but time moves on. still i don't think they should force the issue in trying to get an unknown in the part. but they shouldn't just try to get a name. dougray scott or hugh jackman anyone? but if someone truly were to fit the part and is a known guy then go for it. get an actor that fits the character not an actor that fills the theatres.
-
THE WB better fucking make year one, the comic kicked serious ass, and I am not a geek fanboy but there is a lot of potential in this series if they follow the storyline and go with the long halloween, and possibly dark victory. I know david boreanez(sp?) plays basically the same role on angel, but he would be kick ass, if not him then wes bentley would be a good choice. All this talk is way premature anyway. Let this kurt russell shit die a slow nasty death.
-
i know this talkback is probably dead by now, but i don't care. i'm bored. i think all of the accusations against you weren't based specifically on your standpoint of requiem for a dream, it was the use of film school cliches as an insult. what i personally wanted to know was if you had any clue about what the fuck you were talking about. what i wanted to know was what your idea of a "film school cliche" was, and how requiem fit into it. basically, you made one uninformed off hand remark twice, and some people who actually attend/attended film school called your bluff. i believe i said it in my own post prior that film school cliches don't often differ from industry or indie film cliches, but film schools have more particular cliches within them, more along the lines of what the comedian listed. so don't talk shit on something you no nothing about. and if you do have any clue, i'd be interested to hear just how exactly requiem falls into film school cliches. its a funny thing around here, no one ever answers when i ask them to explain something. some guy called kubrick a hack and i asked him to tell me what his definition of a hack was, and how kubrick fit into it. but alas, no answer from either of you.
-
Vince Vaughn was mentioned for Superman. I disagree with this, even though I like Vaughn a lot. He is too creepy and/or comedic to play Supes. You need a big boy scout type. I would suggest Brendan Fraser. Kevin Spacey was mentioned for Lex Luthor. This is such a terrible suggestion! Spacey is great, but again, is kind of mercurial and creepy. He can not project the kind of menace Luthor should have. I would urge Warners to consider Spacey for the Joker, though. Spacey's talked for acting fits this role. For Lex Luthor, I would strongly suggest Michael Douglas, who could do the superpowered version of Gordon Gecko. Throw in his beautiful, hot wife as Luthor's femme fatale ally, Patrick Stewart as Braniac, a hot actress for Lois Lane (any ideas?), an action-packed script and great effects, and you have the makings of a hit movie. As far as Batman goes, I would suggest Billy Crudup as Batman. Crudup has the look, is unknown to the general population, and is a very good actor (see him in "Almost Famous", a great movie in theatres now). Spacey could play the Joker to a tee, Vince Vaughn as Harvey Dent/Two-Face, Ed Norton in a cameo as the Green Arrow (if you think he couldn't play this role, look at "American History X
"), and in some novelty casting, Adam West as Commisioner Gordon (just kidding). Steve Buscemi could play the Scarecrow, Devito and Carrey could return as the Penguin and the Riddler respectively. Chris O'Donnell could leave his partnership with Batman to become Nightwing. The next Robin could be Edward Furlong. Melissa Joan Hart as Harley Quinn, some other WB chicks as Catwoman and Batgirl, and you are set on casting for any future Batman movie(s). -
Burt Reynolds would have been a great OLD Miller Dark Knight. The once-sexy guy. Damn that would have smoked.
-
I came back to the one and only comic I ever loved - BATMAN - after a few years absence and it was The Dark Knight and Year One that hooked me back. This is a very complex human hero and it's damned sacriledge if his character isn't presented clear and true no matter what the medium. So keep it simple and by the "book". Make Year One and never! ever! put the actor before the character. The guy is out there, probably been in some small stuff, probably not well known, BUT HE IS THERE. Have some damn patience and find him.
-
If they are actually gonna do this Year One shit, they're gonna have to totally disregard the continuity set up by the first film. In Batman '89, the story showed how Batman was introduced to Gotham City. They didn't know who or what he was ("Is there a 6 foot bat in Gotham City?..."). I am all for erasing the memory of Joel Shitmaker's two films, but why destroy the history set up by the superior first movie? Is the Joker gonna be alive and well again? Are we going to meet all the previous villians again for the first time? Are the sequels going to follow this brand new continuity rather than the old one? I fucking hope not. I hope they find some way of making this film decent w/o ruining what was set up by the first two. C'mon people, a film series cannot realistically be reinvented when the last film in that series is only a few years old.
Since nothing ever works out the way I want it to, and this crap is gonna happen no matter how much I bitch, I guess my vote for a young Batman would have to be Jude Law. Intense, brooding, aristocratic...get him some hair dye, a dialect coach (to lose the accent), and a weight room, and he should be more than adequate. Fuck Kurt Russell and his cheesy wife. Tell me what YOU think. -
I almost forgot...Why exactly is Burton no longer doing these movies? It's not like WB can't afford him. Any answers?
-
First of all go discuss lame idea's about a superman movie elsewhere, please. Second of all, i would like to defend the movie PI. It was made on a $60,000. And it grossed over $3 Million. When you make a movie with $60,000 and it has a cast and crew of about 40 people, you can begin to understand why some of the acting was a bit poor. But for the most part it was quite good. Requiem for a Dream had excellent acting and stunning visuals with a real message. I don't know what Darren spent $4.5 Million on (it hasn't yet made it back) but it's a solid movie.
I do agree with the crowd that casting Batman is a daunting task. And i think a young clint eastwood would have been great. (He could play the Batman Beyond Bruce Wayne). To be honest, i think they should find a no name actor with the right look. To the folks griping about continuity... get a life. The (attempted) enforcement of continuity has been a huge burden on comics and the greatest Batman comics ever written are those that have been written independent of that concern (Elseworlds, Legends of the Dark Knight, Kingdome Come). And Batman survived 'Batman and Robin' possible the worse script ever written, therefore it can survive anything! Finally, i don't know why they got rid of Tim Burton!?! -
I believe it was Tim Burton's choice to no longer do the Batman movies.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 439 total posts 165 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 144 total posts 142 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 153 total posts 138 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 55 total posts 47 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 196 total posts 45 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 60 total posts 36 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 127 total posts 36 posts
- I am The Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day! No, I’m the Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day! -- 35 total posts 35 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 513 total posts 29 posts
- The Sensorties Revisit The Friday Docback (And Still Smell)!! DOCTOR WHO Story #7 Again, The Coming Of Season/Series 7, And More!! -- 117 total posts 26 posts