Batman Begins

Post by **rgoer** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 6:13 pm

OK so they did a great deal of time-jump cuts in the expansive origin ramp-up of "Batman Begins"--the entire film showed events that spanned a good twenty years at least, right? So here is my secret wish:

The next film, they let it take place some years in the future. They can do a similar take on the origin of the Joker, cutting between "now" and "flashback" as they tell the Joker's story, but the meat of the film is Batman battling the Joker, as he has been for the last ten years (or whatever).

Then, we get a third film, set even further out than the Joker film, and they just straight-up film "The Dark Knight Returns" story arc all the way up to Batman's death, and just let the whole thing end then and there, on the meloncholy "high note" of Miller's awesome storytelling.

Post by **Canidae** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 6:26 pm

I don't mind the old Batman movies vs. the new one. They both have their merits. But I'll bet the chicks don't dig the new car.

I'll also bet Pauly enjoys dressing up as Robin at Halloween

Post by **Dave** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 7:04 pm

riddla wrote:
Dave wrote:At the end of Batman Begins, you get the impression time had passed between Wayne Towers and Batman's meeting with Lt. Gordon, so Batman had plenty of time to get in a row with Jack Napier. There's no reason the a second film can't go back and filll in that missing timeline. One of the main themes of the major Batman villians is that Batman creates them through his actions. He created the Scarecrow, so I suspect they will make him create the Joker too.
There wont be a Jack Napier in this new series, that name came from the Burton wank-iverse.

Either they go with the Red Hood origin or you'll never know his real name this time around if they stay faithful to the vein of comics that Begins originates from

I'll have to watch the film again, but didnt Gordon set it up that they dont know who he is but the guy was a murderer who escaped from Arkham?

I'd don't know but one constant remains: Batman creates his foes through his actions.

That's always been the real crux of the Batman story. He rids the streets of crime, but he leaves loose ends behind that only he can clean up.

Post by **sliver** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 7:42 pm

R00k wrote: And I'm starting to think of Gary Oldman in the same vein as Johnny Depp -- is there any role he can't play?

Gary Oldman was the cinematic chameleon long before Johnny Depp. Look at Hannibal, The Fifth Element, Air Force One, Lost in Space, JFK, ......

dave wrote: I'd don't know but one constant remains: Batman creates his foes through his actions.

did he create the scarecrow in this movie? my recollection is blurry all of a sudden

Post by **Dave** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 7:51 pm

I belive so... Better not post why or this really will be a spoiler thread

Post by **rgoer** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 7:58 pm

we need a spoiler tag to obfuscate text here...

anyway, the scarecrow existed (obviously) before Batman showed up in the "Begins" version of Gotham--but Batman did some things that apparently brought the Scarecrow much further out into the open. I think it is safe to say that (in "Begins") Batman directly caused the shift in Scarecrow's behavior from isolated, specific maliciousness to general Super-Villainy... (that is to say: self-motivated Super-Villainy, as opposed to acting merely as some other villain's pawn)

Post by **Dave** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 7:59 pm

black font will do:

Actually because of batman, the scarecrow OD'd on his own toxin

Post by **rgoer** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:03 pm

oh haha good call, and yeah, that's what I was talking about (of course)

Post by **Don Carlos** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:21 pm

Dave wrote:black font will do:

Actually because of batman, the scarecrow OD'd on his own toxin

I thought his throat would have fucked itself because of the tser that was shot in it?

Post by **reefsurfer** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:25 pm

I dont know... i thought the movie was good, but it wasent all that.
Maybe a sequel will be better... also, in this new Batman era i dont think fiction/comic characters like The Joker or Penguin is suited.. they feel missplaced... this new era is to dark.

It's like adding Daffy duck as a villian in The Crow movie...

Post by **Pauly** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:27 pm

reefsurfer wrote:I dont know... i thought the movie was good, but it wasent all that.
Maybe a sequel will be better... also, in this new Batman era i dont think fiction/comic characters like The Joker or Penguin is suited.. they feel missplaced... this new era is to dark.

It's like adding Daffy duck as a villian in The Crow movie...

but a guy dressed in a batsuit is an everyday occurence?

Post by **rgoer** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:28 pm

The Joker can be one dark motherfucker, don't worry

Post by **Dave** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:33 pm

Don Carlos wrote:
Dave wrote:black font will do:

Actually because of batman, the scarecrow OD'd on his own toxin
I thought his throat would have fucked itself because of the tser that was shot in it?

I dont know, but it doesnt matter since it had nothing to do with scarecrow's transformation from a homicidal sane guy into a homicidal crazy guy

Post by **R00k** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:58 pm

rgoer wrote:we need a spoiler tag to obfuscate text here...

anyway, the scarecrow existed (obviously) before Batman showed up in the "Begins" version of Gotham--but Batman did some things that apparently brought the Scarecrow much further out into the open. I think it is safe to say that (in "Begins") Batman directly caused the shift in Scarecrow's behavior from isolated, specific maliciousness to general Super-Villainy... (that is to say: self-motivated Super-Villainy, as opposed to acting merely as some other villain's pawn)

Dave wrote:black font will do:

Actually because of batman, the scarecrow OD'd on his own toxin

The way I saw it...

The Scarecrow was created because Batman refused to join the League of Shadows, but let Ra's Al Gul live. Al Gul then created the Scarecrow as a pawn for his plot.

Post by **rgoer** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 9:07 pm

Sounds good to me, Rook

I think all Dave was saying is that Batman's actions sent Scarecrow over the edge, making Batman into the Scarecrow's personal enemy (rather than just somebody that was getting in the way of the plans of the Scarecrow's superiors).

Post by **R00k** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 9:21 pm

Ah, well that makes total sense as well. So, indirectly created by Batman, and then turned into an arch-enemy to boot. His mercy was his weakness three times over.

Post by **Dave** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 9:30 pm

damn, i was writing a reply and it disappeared.... anyway.

The relationship between different Batman villains isnt that intricate--even when they're teaming up against him. Batman as a story isnt very deep either, but the great thing about it is that it can be if you let it.

The relationship between Batman and his villains is meant to show that although Batman may save the Gotham every week, his involvement causes serious side effects. Batman may not take lives, but the villains he creates often do on a grand scale. Even though his vigilantism is noble but seems harmless, it really isn't... It's also why Gordon and Batman always hang out alone on rooftops.

A great example is the Venom book. It seems like a random, unconnected novella, but it launches the Bane story arc that nearly ends Batman's career. I wish I could remember how the Venom story panned out... I don't have a copy of it at the moment.

Post by **mad** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:19 pm

just watched it, great movie

Post by **MKJ** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 8:23 am

reefsurfer wrote:I dont know... i thought the movie was good, but it wasent all that.
Maybe a sequel will be better... also, in this new Batman era i dont think fiction/comic characters like The Joker or Penguin is suited.. they feel missplaced... this new era is to dark.

It's like adding Daffy duck as a villian in The Crow movie...

you mean to tell me burton's gotham city wasnt dark & gritty enough?

Post by **MKJ** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 8:28 am

btw, new batman movie has been announced. same cast (cept for the villain ofcourse) and no katie holmes.
reason: WB is not pleased with katies unannounced engagement with cruise which pulled all publicity towards that instead of the movie

Post by **Dave** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 1:24 pm

good for them.. I thought she sucked relative to everyone else in the film, but maybe they'll prevent her from making a really dumb decision (marrying tom cruise)

Post by **rgoer** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 1:34 pm

but they already have Xenu's blessing--if she backs out now, the thetans will get her with their mind-rays

Post by **plained** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 1:35 pm

the dc justice leage or super freinds movie would be action pact

Post by **R00k** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:16 pm

Dave wrote:good for them.. I thought she sucked relative to everyone else in the film, but maybe they'll prevent her from making a really dumb decision (marrying tom cruise)

lol, I agree on all points.

And she would be pretty, but her mouth is so lopsided when she smiles it makes me cringe.

Post by **R00k** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:16 pm

rgoer wrote:but they already have Xenu's blessing--if she backs out now, the thetans will get her with their mind-rays

:lol: :lol: :lol: