Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
All you're really saying is you preferred the way it was photographed/CGI-enhanced in the latter.
The Tumbler leaping to another building rooftop in Batman Begins, and busting through the parking structure's upper level concrete barrier in The Dark Knight is the same thing. Same Tumber, different framing sequence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
And how do you not like Gordon manning the Tumbler in Begins? "Can you drive stick?"
A plot development and dialogue that could have fit right in to the 1960s TV show. Gordon in TDK was a real character. In BB, he was a cartoon, at least in Act 3.
^^^Sure, buddy. Counter? You ain't got no counter. A coin counter, mebbe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S.
A plot development and dialogue that could have fit right in to the 1960s TV show. Gordon in TDK was a real character. In BB, he was a cartoon, at least in Act 3.
Nonsense. That was another step forward in the Batman-Gordon relationship. It showed Batman trusted him with the biggest piece of his arsenal. Batman can't be in two places at the same time.
^^^Sure, buddy. Counter? You ain't got no counter.
It's not that I'm lazy, Bob. I just don't care.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
Nonsense. That was another step forward in the Batman-Gordon relationship. It showed Batman trusted him with the biggest piece of his arsenal. Batman can't be in two places at the same time.
It was not a step. It was a rocket-propelled leap. Not only was Gordon driving the Batmobile silly, but it was too much too soon in terms of a cop's relationship with a possibly-deranged vigilante. Maybe I'm just getting old, but in a Batman movie I'd like at least teeny more plausibility than evapo-ray cannons and police officers driving illegal assault vehicles down the subway tracks.
Marvel has a much bigger, more interesting base of characters to work with. The Avengers are pretty well known, and they were able to make individual films to go along with the group films, so their brand increased faster. If you include the Xmen, they have had decent films and a lot of different, well known characters as well Then Marvel struck gold with Guardians of the Galaxy, and even on the TV level, the Netflix series have been a hit. Throw in a revamped Spider-Man and introducing new popular characters like Deadpool, Doctor Strange Guardians of the Galaxy, and Black Panther, and they just have more volume and momentum.
I find the Marvel films themselves to be hit or miss. I didn't love the first Captain America or even winter soilder, only really liked Iron Man 3, thought the first Avengers was decent, loved the first Thor, loved Guardians of the Galaxy 1 and 2, loved Deadpool, loved Xmen First Class, thought Spider-Man Homecoming was cool, loved all the Netflix defenders series (especially Daredevil)......the rest, I thought were decent but somewhat forgettable.
DC films have a lot less quantity. I loved the Nolan Dark Knight Trilogy, and that kind of took the cake until MCU really started to blowup. I liked Man of Steel and thought Wonder Woman was great, but D.C. doesn't do as good of a job of weaving their characters together as Marvel. Also, DC has failed to showcase/ garner interest in lesser known characters like Marvel has. They just haven't made Suicide Squad, Aqua Man, Cyborg, etc really interesting. Whereas Marvel has taken non mainstream characters like Guardians of the Galaxy, Doctor Strange, Deadpool, Black Panther, Luke Cage, Jessica Jones, Winter Soldier, etc and made them popular.
Part of the problem is lots of D.C. characters are fresh to the mainstream. If you are older than now 17, you have likely seen some sort of Batman origin in theaters. Superman has been in now seven movies. The only other characters to appear in other movies are Supergirl and Green Lantern. The Suicide Squad itself were not seen in movies before they were in any DCEU movie were Wonder Woman, The Flash, Aquaman, Cyborg and Shazam. D.C. is pretty unknown like 90% of the MCU movies have been. Hulk was the only one we had seen at that point on film.
I actually fell asleep on WW. And Harley Quinn is overrated.....go into a battle with aliens with no meta-human powers and just a pistol and a giant sledge hammer and survive....yeah, right...
I think the general public already knows that Marvel movies have been out for awhile and have established an understandable universe so they look at it as DC is playing "catch up" and rushing things now, so they already go into the movie thinking "I bet this is gonna suck". And also, most of the general public are confused with Batman being recast so soon after the Nolan movies, they think all the movies are some how connected...or on the other hand, Batman being recast so many times within the past 25 years, they are growing weary and think the quality must be on the down slide since obviously "they can't keep the same actor in the role".
I think it boils down to Batman getting much less leeway than other characters do, but whuddevah.
Icons are held to higher standards, as they should be.
Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Spider-Man are known and loved the world over. They are the modern versions of Hercules, Theseus, Perseus, Odysseus. A lot of -euses.
Until their movies came out, who outside of nerd-dom had even heard of Black Widow or Scarlet Witch or Nightcrawler or Deadpool?
I suspect the upcoming INFINITY WAR will be the beginnings of the reboot of the Marvel cinematic universe. Chris Evans has already said he's getting tired of the role. Robert Downey Jr is now in his 50s. Hemsworth can't keeping taking all those steroids and remain healthy. Marvel still can't get the Hulk right. The time for this storyline and its characters to take a nap will soon be upon us.
It would be nice if Marvel could get the FF and the X-Men back in time to do a true universal reboot onscreen, but I don't see that happening for a good, long while.
The thing is that it is fear of losing Ironman which would cause the reboot. I would counter it was not Ironman but rather RDJ married to the role which caused what was unthinkable 20 years ago that you needed an Ironman to sell a Spider-Man movie.
Sure you can have another actor as the face behind the armor but there is no guarantee he connects like Hugh Jackman did with Wolverine. If you do get a big name there is a very real chance that he fails to connect in the role like George Clooney or Val Kilmer in their stints as Batman. Or the little three instead of the big three James Bonds in to paraphrase Nick Fury what was not a much larger universe. Just saying that they have an opportunity to age out a Tony Stark just as Howard Stark was in a supporting role and have a next generation smart guy from a full roster of such dudes from Richards to Osborn come in with his own technology and tell new stories instead of finding a new 40 something year old actor and having him be captured by rebels and needing to built a bio-mechanical suit to survive his injuries and escape.
It is the same with Thor there is no shortage of almost invulnerable characters who are not linked to another planet so he has a reason to spend more time with puny humans. And no shortage of super-soldiers. Sebastian Stan for one is supposed to be signed for 9 movies. You would think it was the plan all along to follow one of the comic book story lines with him.
The thing is that it is fear of losing Ironman which would cause the reboot. I would counter it was not Ironman but rather RDJ married to the role which caused what was unthinkable 20 years ago that you needed an Ironman to sell a Spider-Man movie.
All true in hindsight. But you have to remember that none of that was true back in 2006/07 when the casting of Downey was announced. Downey had had a lot of legal trouble, substance abuse problems, and bad press, so even though everyone knew he was a good actor, everyone thought he'd spend the rest of his career doing bit parts in small movies like WONDER BOYS.
Tom Cruise had been rumored for the role of Stark. I remember the general reaction to the Iron Man movie ten years ago. It went something like this:
"Iron Man? Who is Iron Man? Isn't that an old Ozzy song?"
"So Jon Favreau is directing Iron Man??? That dude from Swingers? Ha! This movie is going to bomb!"
"So Tom Cruise is going to play Iron Man. Huh. Maybe I'll catch a matinee showing."
"Wait. Robert Downey Jr. is playing Iron Man? HA! This movie is going to bomb! Favreau is an idiot! Why do studios hire such morons to direct their movies?"
And then the first teaser trailer came out, and people went:
And then the second full trailer came out, and people went:
And then the movie came out, was a huge hit, Favreau hailed as a genius, Downey hailed as the greatest movie star in the world.
Lesson: Hire talent, give them the money they need, then get the hell out of their way.
I think Marvel could live on without Iron Man, Thor and Steve Rogers. I just see it as a brand. They gotSpider-Man, Guardians, Doctor Strange, Ant-Man, etc. Then add in other side characters that hadn't been seen yet. It will live on without a reboot.
Well unless Fox ever gives up Fantastic Four or X-Men. Both of which are unlikely.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
