batman begins or dark knight?

[Zero_Cool]

Batman Begins would be my choice.

[Sonny Chiba]

Originally Posted by mlittle3

I'm a fan of the character. Period.

I have read a few of the graphic novels. One doesn't need to have read all the comics to get the essence of who Batman is. Do you think Nolan or Burton spent all their time reading the comics? Of course they didn't. Burton has even admitted he didn't really like them. I fail to see the contradiction in what I said. Burton's Batman is a weirdo murderer who kills the bad guys. He isn't really a hero at all. Nor is he Bruce Wayne. He is simply Michael Keaton acting out Burton's creative masturbation (Back when he has such a thing). And yes, Batman (While he clearly has issues) is a heroic character. I think Nolan's vision is more true to the essence of who Batman should be, you don't. Oh well. Nolan's Joker is altogether more effective than Burton's in my opinion. Some people like the campy, silly Joker, some prefer the darker, anarchistic one from the Nolan film.

And where is Burton today? Making crappy movies with terrible scripts. I would argue even his visual style has become well, boring. I really liked some of his earlier work (BeetleJuice, Edward Scissorhands, Nightmare before Christmas) -but he has lost whatever talent he once had. He clearly only makes movies for the money these days.

Where is Burton today? Holy crap. Yeah keep chugging that koolaid, Nolan fan. Burton's last movie grossed over a billion dollars. It was the biggest movie of 2010. Yeah, he's certainly a "hasbeen" raking in that kind of insane success. I'm sure being a Nolan fan, you think that film was complete trash though. I thought it was great, and so did the people that came back to see it multiple times. I'm sure the studios are concerned with the fact that some fanbois are mad that Burton was related to a film franchise that Chris Nolan worked on, which is one of the unholiest of crimes because no one can be compared to the messiah. I'm sure that's right up near the top of their and the film going public's concerns.

If you don't think Batman has ever killed anyone, you're not familiar with that thing you refer to as the "character" of Batman. However, portraying Burton's Batman as a maniac killer means you haven't seen this film I guess, because the film was absolutely not like that. Maybe you saw the 80's version of the Punisher instead and got them confused because you never read a comic book before.

LOL at "creative masturbation." I'm sorry, but the fact that Burton is more talented at creating atmosphere and using things like breath taking cinematography and fantastic sets to create a Gotham City that is actually gothic and goes back to the noir roots of the actual comic book isn't masturbation.

Nolan is a good director. He's good at filming complicated action sequences obviously, but on a visual art level Burton's movie sinks this film several times over. Considering the fact that comic books are a visual medium, creating a surreal atmosphere through art design is kind of important. This is something other films like Watchmen and Sin City got right.

Nolan's version of Gotham on the other hand is sterile and boring. I'll say Nolan's movie is good for action scenes, melodrama, and some psychological/subtextual elements, but it doesn't really feel as "Batman" as it should, which is hilariously your main complaint coming from the perspective of someone who admittedly doesn't care about comic books and is supposedly a Batman expert based on that fact.

But right, if Michael Keaton gargled gravel and talked like he was passing the biggest turd ever every time he spoke as Batman, that would be a better version of the character, correct? Talking like he's the biggest hardass in the world must be a central part of the character that is Batman because Chris Nolan directed Christian Bale that way, and he can do no wrong because he's the messiah.

[poke smot]

you can have one with out the other, but they work better together.

[BluChron]

people arguing about nolans batman and tim burtons.

let me tell u something, burton's batman more resembled the comics while nolans batman was more of a batman in a realistic world we live in.

2 different types of batman movies., i really enjoyed burtons batman and batman returns. but i liked nolans batman is better.

[riverbelow]

The re-casting of Rachel is far more annoying than either of the two individual actresses by themselves.

Granted, if I could choose Id say Katie Holmes to star in both - as continuity is needed. This isn't back to the future. And Maggie G is NO Elisabeth Shue as a replacement.

To answer some people's take on the casting. IMO..katie is more 'cute' and 'sympathetic' and comes across WAY more 'pure/moral' as the role, whereas Maggie comes across more b!tchy and annoying, and really only ends up having a better chemistry with two-face than Katie would have. Thats the ONLY argument why Maggie is passable in TDK.

------

back to the topic at hand..

I think BB is amazing. I think a directors cut should be made though. I feel like somewhere there is more depth and it was railroaded by a 'need' to keep audiences moving with the story. Pace is better in TDK.

I do agree that the villains in BB are weaker, but thats GOOD! It gives the joker more impact on the franchise when he enters it. He changes the ballgame! Who doesnt get that? is very much missing the point.

BB had 3 different villains which combined to form an even threat. TDK had one key villain who gave the same threat level but all on his own gives it that extra power.

[Hicks62]

I prefer BB to TDK. Both fantastic films, but I enjoy Batman Begins's production design (prefer a Gothem to look less like straight up Chicago) and action sequences more.

I recently sold my DVD's of both these films, figuring they'll be a blu boxset out next year after rises, hopefully with some better extras on it. Anyone else remember when Batman Begins was first annouced, it was initially meant to have a Nolan commentary? Wonder if that could appear.

[Bunker]

Batman Begins is the better Batman movie. TDK is the better movie.

[Nielsb90]

I prefer Batman Begins.. Better atmosphere

[sandip]

I like Dark KNight.

[ucfmatt]

I never really liked The Dark Knight. Found it slow and I didn't really care about any of the characters or plot developments.

Batman Begins was awesome though, you should definitely but it.

[Rz_Samurai]

I just placed my order for Batman Begins Steelbook, along with my preorder for Blade Runner and The Last Samurai Steelbooks

Thanks to all of you guys for your responses, BB sounds Great and cant wait to watch it!

[SixSpeedSamurai]

Most people probably don't care, but Bale's voice is what Batman's voice is supposed to sound like. It just happens to irritate many

[Monkey]

I prefer Batman Begins, it has much better story telling until the end which is the usual stuff.

[kernel_thai]

Batman Begins.

Origin stories r never easy because they have a lot to cover and have to keep the core fans interested while educating the unfamiliar. BB handles this flawlessly and lays the foundation for a Batman existing in the real world.

It would have been interesting to have a poll.

[rocinante]

I like Begins alot more than TDK. It felt very original, and the visuals were great too. Lots of variety, the Narrows was very cool looking.

Overall I like TDK, but its very similar to the movie Heat, and Nolan even admitted to that movie being a huge inspiration to him, so TDK doesnt feel very original at all to me. Visually it's boring too. It's just batman running around a pretty dull looking Chicago. So lazy. It's not what I wanted as a follow up to Begins. Im convinced that movie was so successful because Ledger died and was playing an iconic role. And the end was just awful, I lose interest every time it gets to the boat scene.

Begins on the other hand builds to a great crescendo at the end, like this sort of movie should.

Yeah, I like Begins A LOT more. Buy it.

[X12Celtics3]

Originally Posted by Sonny Chiba

Where is Burton today? Holy crap. Yeah keep chugging that koolaid, Nolan fan. Burton's last movie grossed over a billion dollars. It was the biggest movie of 2010. Yeah, he's certainly a "hasbeen" raking in that kind of insane success. I'm sure being a Nolan fan, you think that film was complete trash though. I thought it was great, and so did the people that came back to see it multiple times. I'm sure the studios are concerned with the fact that some fanbois are mad that Burton was related to a film franchise that Chris Nolan worked on, which is one of the unholiest of crimes because no one can be compared to the messiah. I'm sure that's right up near the top of their and the film going public's concerns.

If you don't think Batman has ever killed anyone, you're not familiar with that thing you refer to as the "character" of Batman. However, portraying Burton's Batman as a maniac killer means you haven't seen this film I guess, because the film was absolutely not like that. Maybe you saw the 80's version of the Punisher instead and got them confused because you never read a comic book before.

LOL at "creative masturbation." I'm sorry, but the fact that Burton is more talented at creating atmosphere and using things like breath taking cinematography and fantastic sets to create a Gotham City that is actually gothic and goes back to the noir roots of the actual comic book isn't masturbation.

Nolan is a good director. He's good at filming complicated action sequences obviously, but on a visual art level Burton's movie sinks this film several times over. Considering the fact that comic books are a visual medium, creating a surreal atmosphere through art design is kind of important. This is something other films like Watchmen and Sin City got right.

Nolan's version of Gotham on the other hand is sterile and boring. I'll say Nolan's movie is good for action scenes, melodrama, and some psychological/subtextual elements, but it doesn't really feel as "Batman" as it should, which is hilariously your main complaint coming from the perspective of someone who admittedly doesn't care about comic books and is supposedly a Batman expert based on that fact.

But right, if Michael Keaton gargled gravel and talked like he was passing the biggest turd ever every time he spoke as Batman, that would be a better version of the character, correct? Talking like he's the biggest hardass in the world must be a central part of the character that is Batman because Chris Nolan directed Christian Bale that way, and he can do no wrong because he's the messiah.

I haven't seen Burton's Batman films, but I'd just like to point out that how much money the movie made has nothing to do with its quality. I love some Burton movies (Edward Scissorhands, Big Fish, Sweeney Todd, Nightmare Before Christmas), liked others (Beetlejuice, Corpse Bride), and overall love his style and creativity... but Alice in Wonderland was absolutely awful. Not mediocre or slightly below average like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, but just not enjoyable at all (probably the least enjoyable film I've ever seen in theaters).

I'd really like to see Burton's Batman films, but I think that it will be key that I don't associate them at all with Nolan's. I love Nolan's films, and I think the only way I will be able to enjoy Burton's is if I view them as entirely separate films instead of comparing them.

Edit: I forgot Ed Wood in my list of Burton films that I really like.

[TylerDurden]

The problem with Burtons films, while trying to recreate an accurate gloomy Gotham city, is its unrealistic set doesn't hold up well. Miniature models and studios are no match for on the set locations. Batman 89 feels claustrophobic compared to the scenes in Batman Begins.

[madmonk39]

I love Batman Begins.I can watch it again and again while TDK is a bit harder to watch repeatedly.The pacing is better in Begins and the ending is top notch.Just wondering how on Earth are they going to top The Dark Knight?

[tommyboy81]

i love them both equally. Begins is just more Batman based. How he became the Bat.

[mlittle3]

Originally Posted by Sonny Chiba

Where is Burton today? Holy crap. Yeah keep chugging that koolaid, Nolan fan. Burton's last movie grossed over a billion dollars. It was the biggest movie of 2010. Yeah, he's certainly a "hasbeen" raking in that kind of insane success. I'm sure being a Nolan fan, you think that film was complete trash though. I thought it was great, and so did the people that came back to see it multiple times. I'm sure the studios are concerned with the fact that some fanbois are mad that Burton was related to a film franchise that Chris Nolan worked on, which is one of the unholiest of crimes because no one can be compared to the messiah. I'm sure that's right up near the top of their and the film going public's concerns.

If you don't think Batman has ever killed anyone, you're not familiar with that thing you refer to as the "character" of Batman. However, portraying Burton's Batman as a maniac killer means you haven't seen this film I guess, because the film was absolutely not like that. Maybe you saw the 80's version of the Punisher instead and got them confused because you never read a comic book before.

LOL at "creative masturbation." I'm sorry, but the fact that Burton is more talented at creating atmosphere and using things like breath taking cinematography and fantastic sets to create a Gotham City that is actually gothic and goes back to the noir roots of the actual comic book isn't masturbation.

Nolan is a good director. He's good at filming complicated action sequences obviously, but on a visual art level Burton's movie sinks this film several times over. Considering the fact that comic books are a visual medium, creating a surreal atmosphere through art design is kind of important. This is something other films like Watchmen and Sin City got right.

Nolan's version of Gotham on the other hand is sterile and boring. I'll say Nolan's movie is good for action scenes, melodrama, and some psychological/subtextual elements, but it doesn't really feel as "Batman" as it should, which is hilariously your main complaint coming from the perspective of someone who admittedly doesn't care about comic books and is supposedly a Batman expert based on that fact.

But right, if Michael Keaton gargled gravel and talked like he was passing the biggest turd ever every time he spoke as Batman, that would be a better version of the character, correct? Talking like he's the biggest hardass in the world must be a central part of the character that is Batman because Chris Nolan directed Christian Bale that way, and he can do no wrong because he's the messiah.

I'm not a Nolan fanboy. He isn't even my favorite director -that would be Spielberg in his prime. Hell, it took me multiple viewings before I truly appreciated Inception. I just prefer Nolan's take on the character to Burton's, as do most fans. You're obviously a hardcore Burton fanboy who thinks he can do not wrong.

Here are my issues with Tim Burton...

I don't like how Burton's Batman kills criminals. Batman does not kill several enemies in the Burton films, including the Devil circus freak with the Batmobile.

I don't like how his Bruce Wayne is a wimpy douche with bad 80's hair.

I don't like how Burton's Joker is a fat, middle-aged man.

I don't like his campy, cheesy take on Gotham city. It looks fake and cheap.

I don't like how Burton raped the Planet of the Apes series.

I don't like how he turned Willy Wonka into Michael Jackson.

I don't like his boring, soul-less version of Alice and Wonderland.

I like a few of his earlier films -BeetleJuice, Nightmare Before Christmas, and Ed Wood. But he is an artist, not a director. Nowadays though, even his visual style kind of sucks. He doesn't make films anymore, he makes products to be sold at Hot Topic.

'I wouldn't know a good script if it bit me in the face"-Tim Burton quote