TIME TO ARGUE IN A SUPER QUOTING FRENZY!
-Kanrabat- wrote:First, I hated that Batman got all "Spiderman 2" here. I just hate it when the superhero just give up and quit. ****, I want the hero to be heroic, not being human and depressed.
do not know Batman as well as you think. Maybe the Adam West variation, but not The Dark
Knight. Being dark and brooding is half the character.
Aw, come on, dont bring out the Adam West Batman. Even if he's awesome, he's in a world of his own. No, I have nothing against "Dark" and "Brooding". I saw the Tim Burton movies, the whole original Animated Series and even The Batman Animated series. (I'm not a comic reader) Oh yeah, I also saw the excellent Anime Batman Year One (based on that infamous comic). NEVER IN ALL THESE HOURS AND HOURS OF FOOTAGE, BATMAN NEVER JUST GAVE UP AND QUIT. Batman NEVER quit. Then, we get a Bruce Wane, all emo with a random crippling injury who just gave up. Sigh... Then, it got better when he moved his ass to get some work done, only to get own by Bane and be crippled again. Sigh... I know Bane crippling Batman is a vital part of the mythos. That's why the "Cane walking Wane" should have been left out. Batman, miserable and in the Pit after his defeat by the hands of Bane was very clever and awesome. Just why Batman was a retired loser before? That's one time too many miserable chapter in the movie. At the beginning of the movie, Batman should have been still active and kicking butts. THEN Bane own him and one and only ONE depressing chapter happen. It would have been more interesting because it would not have been an out-of-shape Batman that Bane would have defeated, but an all powerful Batman.
-Kanrabat- wrote:Next gripe. Catwoman IS NOT Catwoman. She's just a random catburglar but she's nothing like the iconic character.
Hot badass chick in a skin-tight suit, special skill with sarcasm, and a reluctant tendency to sometimes do the right thing. What exactly did they miss?
What did they miss? The "cat" part in "Catwoman". She should have been more, you know, "feline" and more sexy. Like that unnatainable femme fatale. Not over the top like in Batman Returns but more like in the Animated Serie. She was not TOO bad, but she felt more like an extra than a main character.
-Kanrabat- wrote:Final gripe: This movie IS NOT a Batman movie. Take out batman and put ANY action hero that do the exact same things and the movie would have remained inchanged. This "Batman" is a very awesome action movie. It just dont feel AT ALL like a Batman movie.
You can do that with just about any piece of Batman fiction. It's having Batman there that makes it good.
"Come and see, Batman in YOU GOT MAIL. Batman try to seduce a woman in the early times of the internet while promoting AOL and Starbuck's Coffe". Will THIS make a Batman movie?
... Actually, I'd pay money to see that.
Seriously, what I meant is where's Batman, lurking in the shadow, ready to strike? Where is Batman, solving great mysteries with his detective skills? There's also almost no interections between Batman and the main villain. Granted, the two sole encounters HURT and where explosive, but still... It's just that almost 3/4 of the movie is spent elsewhere while Bruce Waine is hurt and is hidden in a hole.
Man, I cant let go of that "miserable" Batman.
-Kanrabat- wrote:Bonus gripe. Bane dont have his chemical that transform him into a big-ass mutant. Still that would not have worked in this world and Bane is awesome enough as he is.
It's called Venom and no, it would not have made sense. They replaced it with an anesthetic that dramatically increases his tolerance to pain, thus allowing himself to push himself even harder, at least, and Batman disables him just like he would disable Bane in the comics.
That why that gripe is only minor. It's like Bane was under the influence of the Venom 24/7 sans being bloat-up like the Hulk. I really, REALLY liked that bane. Smart, calm, merciless, and unstoppable.
-Kanrabat- wrote:One surprise. Everybody figure out that Batman is Bruce Wane. At last, some logic.
I felt it was the opposite of logic, Blake figuring it out came right out of left field and they never fully explain it. Bane had the intel from the League of Shadows, Catwoman learned from Bane most likely, and Gordon was basically told by Batman up-front, so that at least made sense. But Blake knowing because he could tell Bruce was faking a smile is just silly.
The joke going around is that it's incredible that no one in Gotham put 2&2 together and figure out that the mysterious masked vigilante that have an infinite bujet with his hyper pricey gatjets is that billionaire that may have a grudge against criminals. At least, someone could have figured out that Bruce Wayne was at least Batman's sponsor.
100% agreed about the way Blake figured Bruce's secret. That made me raise my eyebrow so high, the theatre staff had to scrape it off the ceiling.
Shadowman wrote: -Kanrabat- wrote:
BTW, the first two Batman of this series were TRUE Batman movies. It was ABOUT Batman being Batman doing Batman things.
Sigh... Do you know about Garfield Minus Garfield?
This is what this movie felt for me. Batman Rise is Batman Minus Batman...
While I understand your gripe about Batman being absent from a large portion of the movie, the rest of it was vintage Batman, much moreso than The Dark Knight which could very well have been Joker The Movie. Outside of the portion where Bruce was stuck in the Pit, they focused way more on Batman in this, and the idea of needing Batman, and Batman as a symbol rather than a vigilante is discussed here much more than it is in the last movies.
I don't have much to say against that, appart "WHERE IS BATMAN IN MY BATMAN MOVIE?!" :crying: