Thread: The Dark Knight Rises continuation thread

Haha! Is it Wrong, lol, that being a Capote fan, I was more annoyed that they changed the ending in the film than the racism in it?

Haha! And Seinfeld referenced that ending.

Well, kinda, the ending irked, but yeah, some hard core racism against Asians.

Reminds me of Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story where his girlfriend, Linda, takes him to see some films, and they happened to have some Asian stereotypes, maybe even from said film, it's been a long time since I've seen it, but he walks out.

***

But anyways, Batman isn't quite my favorite comic character, but I love him because he's so complex he's been fit whatever people wanted at any given time. And that goes back and forth with comic and visual media.

Those serial basically wanted an American hero to go against WWII foes, which he did, just like Captain America, and yeah. not PC, but Americans were at war.

And we get the the Adam West series. This is what I think about it. This is a presentation of the post Fredric Wertham comic universe. The good ole doctor, he was bitching against EC, and also against DC that this stuff was violent and reinforcing juvenile delinquency and he finally got the comics industry to castrate themselves with the Comics Code. And he, his criticism against Batman was that he was gay and so was Robin (like there's anything wrong with that to begin with). So we get lame Batman comics that are "family safe."

But with that Adam West series, we get this flamboyant Dynamic Duo, who seem gay, and camp as hell (thanks for teaching me what is camp, Susan Sontag) whose gay is campy with the guest stars, but still the women who where on that show...Yvonne Craig..Carolyn Jones ...Julie Newmar...and the Dynamic Duo just played against them. Or yeah, the biggest Batman Villain, who was played the secretly gay Caesar Romero, and made Batman seem more straight.

This series, in my opinion was just an F-off to the comic code. Basically saying we're going to play with sexuality each and every way and you can screw us (pun intended). And despite in my opinion it's nowhere the definite version and I know Kane was just squirming at it, it was fun, silly, and thank you Comics Code, probably the only type of series they could get out at the time, but the creators found a way to be secretly subversive. I guess that was the '60's ways of doing it.

But the 70's came along, and Neal Adams came along and he wanted to say an F- you to the comics code and not by playing with it, but just being straight forward with it, and going back to what Bob Kane wanted for the character... that set the tone for Miller's tale, and Burton, and then Joel Schumacher who went back to camp, but didn't really do the subversiveness of all of it, well, unless you make nipples on costumes.

But Nolan wanted to do something different for this post 9-11 world and that's what he did, something real, but brought it together with no spoilers. Haha

Mmmm, I want someone like Darren Aronofsky take over the reins and do something weird and more stylized than Nolan.

And this is why I like Batman, he can be shaped and adapted different and there is ultimately no definite version, but a personal definite version. What's my definite version? The comics version? Neil Adams.

The media version? I still haven't gotten it.

Sorry for the essay. Just wanted to share. I love comics more than hockey, so that's why I can geek out over this so much.

It's interesting to think about the role of comics and politics over the years. Especially in the earlier eras. Superman and Captain America are great examples of the propaganda machine at work. I'm sure there could be a book about this topic.

Batman is my favorite comic book character and in fact, he may be the only one I really have a serious interest in. Not to say I don't like to see a movie about X-Men...I do...but that's about as far as I'll go with those characters. The definitive Batman for be is a combination of things. There is more than one answer. The Nolan films are my favorite when it comes to movies. But I also love the animated series, I love the Arkham Asylum/City games, and of course comics such as The Long Halloween. Like you said, it's open for many different interpretations and all of these work for me. I actually would love to see a David Fincher version of the character. More than Aronofsky. I know he had a treatment for a reboot before Nolan took over but that guy is just way too abstract and "out-there" for Batman. It's just not the right fit. With Fincher, we know he's a master at doing serial killer movies and Batman villains are perfect for that. Of course, to maximize potential, you'd probably need it to be an R-rated film which would never happen.

Having said all that, just how wrong is it that I find Batman Forever to be a really fun movie? Just that one. Not the abomination that came after it.

No, Batman Forever was a really fun movie, and it had Robin, but it made a lot of money and I think that just made Schumacher self indulged himself over the next one because how much money he was given. Batman & Robin is really fun, lol, if you are high.

Not so much if you're not.

Fincher? That might be interesting too!

Originally Posted by orpheus

No, Batman Forever was a really fun movie, and it had Robin, but it made a lot of money and I think that just made Schumacher self indulged himself over the next one because how much money he was given. Batman & Robin is really fun, lol, if you are high.

Not so much if you're not.

Fincher? That might be interesting too!

I bought the box set of the Burton/Schumacher films a while back. The audio commentary for B&R is pretty interesting. The only time I've ever heard a director practically apologize for a movie on the DVD/BD. Warner deserves a ton of blame too though.