I don’t give a frick what the majority of people say. This Bat-flick is so much fun and stupid that it becomes full circle. Fight me if you think otherwise
I recommend you watch the scene where Bruce visits Dr. Chase. In that interaction he invites her to the circus but you can audible here a lisp when he says “tell me Doctor. Do you like the circus?” It’s prominent when he says Circus in particular
I didn't remember them doing the "Bruce falling into the cave" scene in those old movies! I thought Batman Begins was the first time it got adapted!
I have to rewatch Batman Forever. The "Bruce falling into the cave of bats" scene is one of my favorite Frank Miller additions to the Batman mythos
>This Bat-flick is so much fun
No, it isn't. Your memory of it is. Or whatever thet told you on Youtube. Actually sitting through it it another story. It's awful from top to bottom.
Nostalgia is a powerful weapon. Besides, probably most of them are shills. I saw some reviews here and there this past months, some of them saying it's a 9.5 or 10 out of 10 comicbook, and they never explain actually why. It's just goes like
>This whole series has been an absolute gift for anyone who’s a fan of the 1989 film. It’s also a great introduction to comics, so do your duty to the industry and give this series to someone who isn’t as into comics as you are.
Shilling at it's full power, fueled by Nostalgia. Good side is not everyone is prasing the hell out of it. Batman-News, for instance, it's maybe the only review place that saw through it and treated it like the shit it is. I wonder how Linkara would react to this series tho.
>I wonder how Linkara would react to this series tho.
Make it a double feature with Superman '78.
Actually, come to think of it, I wouldn't mind a "clipless" review of either from NC.
NC and Linkara DID review the Batman 1989 comicbook actually: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DavWFM3BN9c&pp=ugMICgJlcxABGAE%3D
I can see them reviewing the Batman '89 and hating the shit out of it to some extent (Linkara it's a 50/50, Doug on the other hand would hate it the most probably since he really loves Burton's approach about Batman).
>Nostalgia is a powerful weapon.
How ironic. This Two Face is dreadful! lmao
>Ends up being a better Two-Face than the Batman '89 comic
How in heaven do you frick it up THIS much? Even his death is more memorable
>>Ends up being a better Two-Face
I'm gonna stop raining on your parade and let you get back to, le sigh, we need to go back. But Jones, a gifted actor, was just hamming it up willy nilly. Nothing charming, interesting, or funny like Jack. Just le so wacky. He was a waste.
Don't get me wrong: TLJ was indeed a wasted Two-Face. He was really bad. It just happens that, when compared between the two, TLJ Two-Face somehow ends up being the better one (compared to '89 Two-Face). At least he was consistently bad. '89 Two-Face keeps changing it's character in every issue.
>Issue 01, he wants to put down Batman >Issue 02, he tosses that away and wants to help Burnside. >Issue 03, he suddenly is into multiversal lore and hates Gotham even tho he himself got his face fricked up trying to save Drake >Issue 04, he wants revenge somehow >Issue 05, he becomes the leader of the Joker Gang, kills cops left and right, tosses the coin away and uses it only when the script tells him to, and kills Gordon
Don't know about Issue 06 yet because I didn't read it, but so far, the preview points him like he know wants to blackmail everyone with some private info he got between issues. Say what you want about TLJ, but he just wanted to kill Batman and nothing else. A Stupid and unidimensional motivation, yeah, but consistent during the whole movie.
Fair enough, I only read the first issue or so. It's just with such a titanic actor, in another writer/director's hands, he could have been the definitive Harvey Dent/Two-Face.
2 years ago
Anonymous
100% agree in that. Kind of happens the same to me with Arnie as Mr. Freeze. Like, with a different director and script, he would've become a perfect Bane (Or even Mr. Freeze too, but, I dunno, always thinked he fitted better as Bane)
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Like, with a different director and script, he would've become a perfect Bane
Yeah, a big missed opportunity. In another universe Forever underperformed at the box office and they hired like, Tony Scott to helm a grittier direction toplined by Arnold's BANE.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Tony Scott
That could've been interesting. A more action packed Batman could've saved us from what happened back in the 90s while also keeping WB's desire to change Burton's style and make this movies more ""familiar""
While I don't hate the '89 comic as much as some do, it's just so forgettable that I honestly wouldn't mind seeing a follow-up to Schumacher's movies (Batman '97?). There's so many weird things from Forever and B&R that you would have to address that it would at least be interesting if not good. Bonus points if they adapt the unmade Batman Triumphant script.
Law of expectations. >Comic following up two beloved movies sucks >Comic following up two despised movies turns out good
Frick, now I really wish DC would do this.
Batman 97 would also incorporate elements from TDKR and the scrapped sequel films.
You'd likely get the following additions >Jason Todd based off Edward Furlong >Carrie Kelley based off Milla Jovovich >Ra's Al Ghul based off Tobin Bell >New Joker based off David Bowie >Superman based off Brad Pitt
I liked batman and Robin more
Clooney was awful and was a total charisma black hole because he didn't care but everyone else was great
Kilmer was a good Batman but neither villain in this really clicked with me
Would include Christopher Lloyd Riddler, Catwoman would be in her spin-off, maybe introduce a Burtonverse Zatara. Maybe a Two-Face design that's more Burton-esque. More elaborate set pieces, like Channel Awesome's video with the carnival finale but expanded upon.
God I’ve never felt this vindicated before. I fricking LOVE Forever. DC would’ve been much better off doing a comic continuation of the Schumacher-verse with how colorful and campy it already is.
Nice poster, beautiful looking movie.
As much as I liked Burtons movie I do like Schumachers being its own thing too. Both were very visual directors.
I don’t give a frick what the majority of people say. This Bat-flick is so much fun and stupid that it becomes full circle. Fight me if you think otherwise
Its pure Batman and balls to the wall comic book.
Perfectly captures "extremely handsome man goes out to fight crime in a ridiculous bat outfit".
I recommend you watch the scene where Bruce visits Dr. Chase. In that interaction he invites her to the circus but you can audible here a lisp when he says “tell me Doctor. Do you like the circus?” It’s prominent when he says Circus in particular
I feel like the color choices influenced the look of Gaspar Noe's films
not even stupid, one of the deepest dives into Bruce Wayne's persona in the character's live action history.
Yeah it's actually one of the few movies that treat Bruce like an actual character. Probably the only 2 that actually address his personality.
He's sullen, brooding, but confident and willing to smile, etc.
This shit is way deeper than anything the new movie tried to accomplish
>I fell...I fell forever.
I didn't remember them doing the "Bruce falling into the cave" scene in those old movies! I thought Batman Begins was the first time it got adapted!
I have to rewatch Batman Forever. The "Bruce falling into the cave of bats" scene is one of my favorite Frank Miller additions to the Batman mythos
>This Bat-flick is so much fun
No, it isn't. Your memory of it is. Or whatever thet told you on Youtube. Actually sitting through it it another story. It's awful from top to bottom.
>Ends up being a better Two-Face than the Batman '89 comic
How in heaven do you frick it up THIS much? Even his death is more memorable
It's weird to see reviewers praising it so hard when every issue has been diminishing returns and unlike Burton's vision.
Nostalgia is a powerful weapon. Besides, probably most of them are shills. I saw some reviews here and there this past months, some of them saying it's a 9.5 or 10 out of 10 comicbook, and they never explain actually why. It's just goes like
>This whole series has been an absolute gift for anyone who’s a fan of the 1989 film. It’s also a great introduction to comics, so do your duty to the industry and give this series to someone who isn’t as into comics as you are.
Shilling at it's full power, fueled by Nostalgia. Good side is not everyone is prasing the hell out of it. Batman-News, for instance, it's maybe the only review place that saw through it and treated it like the shit it is. I wonder how Linkara would react to this series tho.
>I wonder how Linkara would react to this series tho.
Make it a double feature with Superman '78.
Actually, come to think of it, I wouldn't mind a "clipless" review of either from NC.
NC and Linkara DID review the Batman 1989 comicbook actually: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DavWFM3BN9c&pp=ugMICgJlcxABGAE%3D
I can see them reviewing the Batman '89 and hating the shit out of it to some extent (Linkara it's a 50/50, Doug on the other hand would hate it the most probably since he really loves Burton's approach about Batman).
>Nostalgia is a powerful weapon.
How ironic. This Two Face is dreadful! lmao
>>Ends up being a better Two-Face
I'm gonna stop raining on your parade and let you get back to, le sigh, we need to go back. But Jones, a gifted actor, was just hamming it up willy nilly. Nothing charming, interesting, or funny like Jack. Just le so wacky. He was a waste.
Don't get me wrong: TLJ was indeed a wasted Two-Face. He was really bad. It just happens that, when compared between the two, TLJ Two-Face somehow ends up being the better one (compared to '89 Two-Face). At least he was consistently bad. '89 Two-Face keeps changing it's character in every issue.
>Issue 01, he wants to put down Batman
>Issue 02, he tosses that away and wants to help Burnside.
>Issue 03, he suddenly is into multiversal lore and hates Gotham even tho he himself got his face fricked up trying to save Drake
>Issue 04, he wants revenge somehow
>Issue 05, he becomes the leader of the Joker Gang, kills cops left and right, tosses the coin away and uses it only when the script tells him to, and kills Gordon
Don't know about Issue 06 yet because I didn't read it, but so far, the preview points him like he know wants to blackmail everyone with some private info he got between issues. Say what you want about TLJ, but he just wanted to kill Batman and nothing else. A Stupid and unidimensional motivation, yeah, but consistent during the whole movie.
Fair enough, I only read the first issue or so. It's just with such a titanic actor, in another writer/director's hands, he could have been the definitive Harvey Dent/Two-Face.
100% agree in that. Kind of happens the same to me with Arnie as Mr. Freeze. Like, with a different director and script, he would've become a perfect Bane (Or even Mr. Freeze too, but, I dunno, always thinked he fitted better as Bane)
>Like, with a different director and script, he would've become a perfect Bane
Yeah, a big missed opportunity. In another universe Forever underperformed at the box office and they hired like, Tony Scott to helm a grittier direction toplined by Arnold's BANE.
>Tony Scott
That could've been interesting. A more action packed Batman could've saved us from what happened back in the 90s while also keeping WB's desire to change Burton's style and make this movies more ""familiar""
HARVEY
I'M BATMAN
While I don't hate the '89 comic as much as some do, it's just so forgettable that I honestly wouldn't mind seeing a follow-up to Schumacher's movies (Batman '97?). There's so many weird things from Forever and B&R that you would have to address that it would at least be interesting if not good. Bonus points if they adapt the unmade Batman Triumphant script.
Imagine if they did Batman '97 and turned out even better than the Batman '89 one.
Law of expectations.
>Comic following up two beloved movies sucks
>Comic following up two despised movies turns out good
Frick, now I really wish DC would do this.
Batman 97 would also incorporate elements from TDKR and the scrapped sequel films.
You'd likely get the following additions
>Jason Todd based off Edward Furlong
>Carrie Kelley based off Milla Jovovich
>Ra's Al Ghul based off Tobin Bell
>New Joker based off David Bowie
>Superman based off Brad Pitt
I liked batman and Robin more
Clooney was awful and was a total charisma black hole because he didn't care but everyone else was great
Kilmer was a good Batman but neither villain in this really clicked with me
Reminder that comics were never very good, and modern comics are even worse thanks to woke infiltration.
I wonder anons, if it was up to you, how would've you done Batman '89?
Would include Christopher Lloyd Riddler, Catwoman would be in her spin-off, maybe introduce a Burtonverse Zatara. Maybe a Two-Face design that's more Burton-esque. More elaborate set pieces, like Channel Awesome's video with the carnival finale but expanded upon.
>Burtonverse Zatara
I swear they planned that one back in the 2016 comic pitch. I wonder how that would've entered into play.
God I’ve never felt this vindicated before. I fricking LOVE Forever. DC would’ve been much better off doing a comic continuation of the Schumacher-verse with how colorful and campy it already is.