The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

by **Doc Jon** » Thu May 24, 2012 10:08 am

Jubilee wrote:
The shortcomings in the film, aren't objective shortcomings, they're your shortcomings because you don't like this portrayal of the character.

Me personally, I prefer the Batman film to anything I've ever read in the comics. Maybe Arkham Asylum and DKR come close. I couldn't give a shit about fighting scenes.

You're saying that him being a detective and a superb martial artist are purely due to my subjective analysis of the character?

Really?

I enjoyed both films for what they were. I still like them today and would rewatch either without a second thought. Doesn't mean I can't see some issues with the film. The fact that the fighting (in the first movie particularly) was the subject of much bitching means I wasn't alone either.

So you can attempt to trivialize it because you liked the movie, but they are huge parts of Batman's character.

by **Rockman** » Thu May 24, 2012 10:13 am

Playing down Batman's detective ability is like playing down Spider-man's witty comments during battles.

Both films did them, both films are great, both films might have been better if they were present.

It's not so important that it diminishes the character, but it is a trait that drew to me the character in the first place.

by **Starlord** » Thu May 24, 2012 10:19 am

I'm very much looking forward to the conclusion of the work. Of all the Batman movies we've had so far, these are obviously the superior ones. Are there weak spots. Yep. But I don't think you can compare this franchise with Avengers.

by **Doc Jon** » Thu May 24, 2012 11:06 am

Rockman wrote:Playing down Batman's detective ability is like playing down Spider-man's witty comments during battles.

Both films did them, both films are great, both films might have been better if they were present.

It's not so important that it diminishes the character, but it is a trait that drew to me the character in the first place.

Have you seen Spiderman 1 lately?

You may want to rethink that "great" assessment. It does not hold up at all. And 3 was terrible.

Humor is a huge part of Spiderman, and it definitely diminishes the character when it's left out. So a witless Spiderman and a non-detective non-martial artist Batman are ok...

Good to know.

by **Rockman** » Thu May 24, 2012 11:08 am

We get it you don't like Spider-man 1

I still think it is a fantastic film.

by **Starlord** » Thu May 24, 2012 11:11 am

Yeah I like Spidey 1 too. It holds up okay. 2 was still the better film though.

by **Doc Jon** » Thu May 24, 2012 11:16 am

Rockman wrote:We get it you don't like Spider-man 1

I still think it is a fantastic film.

Hey, that's fine.

But please don't try and convince me that not having Spidey crack wise isn't a big part of his character. That's like saying that it's not really essential that Reed Richards is smart. It is most definitely a part of the character and something is missing when it's not there.

I still liked a lot of what Raimi did, and can enjoy the films. The first has some cringe-worthy moments, but it has some really good ones too. Moreso with the second. I think the 3rd had some great scenes (or at least I thought it did) but it also had some real eye-bleeders.

by **AaronW** » Thu May 24, 2012 11:43 am

The trailer for the new Spidey flick shows more humor from Peter than the first three together. I'm looking forward to it.

by **Doc Jon** » Thu May 24, 2012 11:44 am

AaronW wrote:The trailer for the new Spidey flick shows more humor from Peter than the first three together. I'm looking forward to it.

Yes, I loved those parts.

by **AaronW** » Thu May 24, 2012 11:47 am

The Nolan batflicks are good, but the second one has some bad plotting and editing, its not among Nolan's best crafted works. The death of Ledger drove the hype of Dark Knight and without that I think it would have done a fair bit less money. Batman in the nolanverse is not nearly as smart as he should be, relying on Fox to make most of his gadgets, and not much of a detective. Plus the batvoice is terrible and the batsuit doesn't look that great. I think I enjoy most of the Marvel Avenger's related flicks as much or more, save for Thor.

by **Rockman** » Thu May 24, 2012 11:55 am

I think humor is an important part to spidey and I think the movies were less because of it, but it didn't ruin any of the films.

by **Doc Jon** » Thu May 24, 2012 11:55 am

AaronW wrote:The Nolan batflicks are good, but the second one has some bad plotting and editing, its not among Nolan's best crafted works. The death of Ledger drove the hype of Dark Knight and without that I think it would have done a fair bit less money. Batman in the nolanverse is not nearly as smart as he should be, relying on Fox to make most of his gadgets, and not much of a detective. Plus the batvoice is terrible and the batsuit doesn't look that great. I think I enjoy most of the Marvel Avenger's related flicks as much or more, save for Thor.

The first one suffers from the same problems imo, with even worse fighting.

And that conclusion with Ra's was very out of character.

by **AaronW** » Thu May 24, 2012 11:58 am

I think Bane looks terrible in the new trailer. Not too hopeful for the new flick.

by **Doc Jon** » Thu May 24, 2012 12:07 pm

AaronW wrote:I think Bane looks terrible in the new trailer. Not too hopeful for the new flick.

I'm a big fan of Tom Hardy and was psyched to hear that he was Bane. That being said, I have to agree that the previews have done little for me. I hope he pulls it off.