The Riddler Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 Its just too bad there wasnt a riddler. Serioulsy though....blows away the other batman movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 Riddler (and Joker, and Penguin, and Two Face, and Cat Woman) have already been done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Riddler Posted June 15, 2005 Author Share Posted June 15, 2005 ahhh....but were they done correctly my friend? You see even this Riddler has a riddle that none of you have solved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 ahhh....but were they done correctly my friend? You see even this Riddler has a riddle that none of you have solved. No, but it's not like they're going to redo all those movies, or that people would go see them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 ahhh....but were they done correctly my friend? You see even this Riddler has a riddle that none of you have solved. 359768[/snapback] would that be your misspelling of the word 'definitely' or your incorrect movie title (the title is 'batman begins')? quite the riddler you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
udonkey Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 I got to go to a screening for this on Monday night - I completely agree that this is how the other Batman movies should've been done. This is the great start for a new Batman franchise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 There is some talk of Crispen Glover playing The Joker in the next film....personally, I think that would be cool as sh*t. By the way, if anyone wants to see Christian Bale act his arse off, check out 'The Machinist'.....good movie, great acting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 There is some talk of Crispen Glover playing The Joker in the next film....personally, I think that would be cool as sh*t. Crispin "Willard" Glover trying to outdo Jack? Fugeddaboutit! I mean has Hollywood gotten THAT dry that they need to remake movies from just 15 years ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 No, but it's not like they're going to redo all those movies, or that people would go see them. 359773[/snapback] You're joking right? You don't think they will redo the villians? They erased the slate with Batman Begins and are rebuilding the franchise from the ground up. They will make the movies and people will want to see them. Goyer (the screenwriter) has been contracted to write the next two batman films and the villians allegedly are the Joker in the second one and Two Face in the third. Both villians we have already seen in previous installments... I just hope Nolan signs on to do the next two flicks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarthur31 Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 The Scarecrow was the villain in this one--so how much screen time did he have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevbeau Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Re-do the Joker? I dunno...Jack nailed it the first time. Should have got an Oscar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Crispin "Willard" Glover trying to outdo Jack? Fugeddaboutit! I mean has Hollywood gotten THAT dry that they need to remake movies from just 15 years ago? 359887[/snapback] I dunno, man.....My understanding is that these new films are meant to stay more true to the original comics. I'll watch just about anything Glover is in.....I thought Willard was pretty damn entertaining, especially when you have a nice surround sound system to get the effects of all those rats Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Re-do the Joker? I dunno...Jack nailed it the first time. Should have got an Oscar. 359903[/snapback] I agree, I thought Nicholson was damn good in the '89 film. I really think you'll see quite a departure from that version of the Joker, though....no matter who plays him in the new film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Toboggan M.D Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 I just saw Batman. Boy it was a damn good film. Christian Bale nailed the role as Bruce Wayne and Batman. Michael Cane is a great Alfred. This rebuilding of the Batman franchise looks very promising Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puhonix Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 I dunno, man.....My understanding is that these new films are meant to stay more true to the original comics. I'll watch just about anything Glover is in.....I thought Willard was pretty damn entertaining, especially when you have a nice surround sound system to get the effects of all those rats 359906[/snapback] Oooh, creepy, I'm going to have to check that out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 I dunno, man.....My understanding is that these new films are meant to stay more true to the original comics. I'll watch just about anything Glover is in.....I thought Willard was pretty damn entertaining, especially when you have a nice surround sound system to get the effects of all those rats 359906[/snapback] Glover's character in Charlie's Angels was fantastic. The movie as a whole sucked, but that sword-wielding hitman thing was pretty cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Fong Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Mark me down as another one that has seen Batman and loved it. I highly recommend it to anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ennjay Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 The villians allegedly are the Joker in the second one and Two Face in the third. Both villians we have already seen in previous installments... 359895[/snapback] I hope you're right. Two-Face is an absolutely terrific villain, full of the ambiguity and duality (literally!) that charge Bruce Wayne/Batman himself. The character was utterly wasted in the Schumacher/Kilmer/Jones version. No psychology, no complexity. I understand the new franchise intends to ignore the old one. Smart move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoachChuckDickerson Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 would that be your misspelling of the word 'definitely' or your incorrect movie title (the title is 'batman begins')? quite the riddler you are. 359777[/snapback] Don't forget about 'serioulsy'. The correct spelling would be as follows: The Riddler is seriously a fill in the blank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeG Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 I liked the movie, but there were many many flaws. I guess it's a little "more true" to the comics than the 1989 film, but there are still many many flaws that bother me. I'm a HUGE Batman fan and have collected comics for years and years... I consider myself a Batman historian and let me tell you, for everything cool and "correct" they did, they did have something different or totally wrong. Being a Hollywood movie for the mainstream non-comicbook fan audience, I understand the changes and knew there would be many. I could deal with all of them except three. If you haven't seen the movie yet, stop reading now...... 1. Bruce was too much of a wuss when he was a kid and even until he "went away"... and even towards the end, after his house burnt down and he and Alfred were going to the cave... he was going to give up and Alfred had to convince him to keep going. Bruce wasn't a wuss and he wasn't a scared little kid shivering and being haunted by his fear of bats from the time he was little. 2. Ra's Al Guhl didn't "teach" Bruce to overcome his fear and all that other crap. I see why they did it, but I just think that it gives "The League of Shadows" (league of assasins in the comics by the way) too much credit for the making of the Batman. Being told to "become the night" and turn the fear against the criminals, etc... Batman didn't get those ideas from Ra's. Batman is an extremely intelligent kick ass character and I think they gave other people too much credit for his "creation" 3. Bruce thinks his parents died because "he made them leave the opera"... again because of his fear of bats. WHATEVER... I think this is an un-neccessary change. and I HATE when Hollywood changes things important to the original character for no good reason. Again, I understand what they were doing with the entire movie, but I think they changed this for no reason. If they were going to use it to have Bruce vow at his parents grave to avenge their deaths or "take back the night" or whatever, I could deal a little better... but they didn't even do that. anyway, there were many many cool things in the movie and I can't wait to see it again and I think the next one will be AMAZING. I think Bale kicked ass and can't wait to see him in the suit again!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts