Jump to content

"The Dark Knight"


Steve9347

Recommended Posts

It is so funny to see what the different "communities" think. Here we see praise of the Nicholson perfromance and Prince soundtrack, and yet on the comic sites I frequent, those are two of the main complaints. Watching the film recently, I noticed that the Batman run starting with '89 got off to a wrong start. The movie is called "Batman", but it takes almost 20 minutes to even see Bruce Wayne's face. But in that time we have come to know Jack Napier really well. Right from the beginning the villains were most important. That was what Nolan mainly did, that people seem to overlook. He made the film about the man in the cowl.

 

But then again, I can't stand Burton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bale film was great simply because we got a history of how Bruce Wayne actually turned into Batman. They also sold the fear of bats that Wayne had much better than how they tried to do so in Batman Forever.

 

Plain and simple, they started Batman from the start, had him truly becoming Batman, and thats what makes me so in love with that film.

 

Plus, how good is Liam Neeson in pretty much anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Jun 5, 2007 -> 07:40 AM)
It is so funny to see what the different "communities" think. Here we see praise of the Nicholson perfromance and Prince soundtrack, and yet on the comic sites I frequent, those are two of the main complaints. Watching the film recently, I noticed that the Batman run starting with '89 got off to a wrong start. The movie is called "Batman", but it takes almost 20 minutes to even see Bruce Wayne's face. But in that time we have come to know Jack Napier really well. Right from the beginning the villains were most important. That was what Nolan mainly did, that people seem to overlook. He made the film about the man in the cowl.

 

But then again, I can't stand Burton.

Just in general with all the comic book movies it seems you'll get completely different reactions from people who actually read the comics and people who didn't. X3 is a good example of that as I know a lot of people say it really didn't follow the comics all that much but I loved that movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jun 5, 2007 -> 11:22 AM)
Just in general with all the comic book movies it seems you'll get completely different reactions from people who actually read the comics and people who didn't. X3 is a good example of that as I know a lot of people say it really didn't follow the comics all that much but I loved that movie.

 

 

I absolutely loathe X-Men 3. Im sorry, it was nothing but smash-bang-boom. They just dropped the entire storyline and made up some crap and sold it to everyone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Jun 5, 2007 -> 11:36 AM)
I absolutely loathe X-Men 3. Im sorry, it was nothing but smash-bang-boom. They just dropped the entire storyline and made up some crap and sold it to everyone

Well SOOOOOORRRRRY. :P Ha, I know a lot of people hated it, but I really enjoyed it, SO THERE. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Jun 5, 2007 -> 11:38 AM)
And Im the comic book junkie :)

 

I'm actually a little suprised there wasn't more uproar about X3 (or certain aspects of X1 and X2) than there was. Since seeing it originally, I have come to learn who the original X-Men were, and it kind of surprises me that Beast, Angel and Iceman have been reduced to such minor roles. I know that X fans consider the original run to be much lesser than the Claremont era, but still, talk about re-writing origins!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Jun 5, 2007 -> 12:18 PM)
I'm actually a little suprised there wasn't more uproar about X3 (or certain aspects of X1 and X2) than there was. Since seeing it originally, I have come to learn who the original X-Men were, and it kind of surprises me that Beast, Angel and Iceman have been reduced to such minor roles. I know that X fans consider the original run to be much lesser than the Claremont era, but still, talk about re-writing origins!

I'm just mad that they didn't find a way to get Gambit in the movies. I'm not a comic book guy at all but honestly...who doesn't love Gambit?

 

EDIT: Maybe one of you comic book guys will know, but wasn't there a reason given on why Gambit wasn't in any of the movies?

Edited by Rowand44
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was a very minor comic guy my whole life, then I finally got fed up with the "geeks" complaining about the movies and the liberties that were taken, that I decided to do my home work. In about 2+ months I have bought these:

 

0602071939-1.jpg

 

Each one is 550-650 pages of classic comic glory (in B&W though). The DVD case on the top left is the Spider-Man DVD-Rom collecting all Amazing Spider-Man (debut in Amazing Fantasy and all annuals included) books up to June of 2006.

 

So my Comic Geek Training is still going on and I can't answer too many questions past 1970 or about DC...and non-Marvel. I'm learning though.

 

Yeah...I'm a little pathetic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...