It's been awhile since I saw it, but my sense is that the three villains of Batman Returns don't mesh very well. It felt like a random assemblage of characters rather than an ensemble. Like, it makes sense for Max Schreck, an avatar of corporate greed, to team up with a corrupt politician. But it's bizarre for that politician to be the Penguin. This movie's version of the Penguin is a Frankenstein's monster type villain: he doesn't fit into normal human society. He's an abandoned, circus freak loner who connects more with penguins than people. It doesn't really make sense for him to be a gland-handing politician, on either a literal or a thematic level.
This movie's version of the Penguin is a Frankenstein's monster type villain: he doesn't fit into normal human society. He's an abandoned, circus freak loner who connects more with penguins than people. It doesn't really make sense for him to be a gland-handing politician, on either a literal or a thematic level.
I can't say anything about the comics' version of the Penguin, but for the purpose of the film I find him coherent enough. He's a freak with abandonment issues that, for a brief while, is seduced by the idea that he can belong. Max Schreck sees him and thinks he can use and manipulate him, and for a brief while this works - and when it finally backfires, the Penguin lashes out: You don't want me? Well, I don't want you, in fact, I despise you!
The one that's an odd one out, next to the freaks that are Catwoman, Batman and the Penguin, is Max Schreck, who's an entirely human monster and the one most lacking a heart. There's something wonderfully audacious about having Christopher Walken be the non-freak in an ensemble of freaks.
Thirith on
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Tim Burton´s Batman was the best. People praise Nolan a lot because what came after Burton was DIRE, for a minute there Batman looked like a dead IP, untill it got all edgyfied for the new "why so serious" audiences.
FANTOMAS on
Yes, with a quick verbal "boom." You take a man's peko, you deny him his dab, all that is left is to rise up and tear down the walls of Jericho with a ".....not!" -TexiKen
... untill it got all edgyfied for the new "why so serious" audiences.
While my favourite Batman will probably always be Batman Returns, I don't see this. What's edgy about Nolan's Batman? Different, yes, but there's nothing wrong with that. If anything, Nolan's Batman ended up trying to bring in political issues of the day but failing to do so intelligently, but I wouldn't call that 'edgy'.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
I guess I’m in the camp that thinks Beetlejuice is fine on its own. No sequel, no attempt to explore the world or whatever. It’s a weird, kind of sweet, very funny oddity and that’s fine.
It's not begging for a sequel/remake by any means, it just left me wanting more. Maybe I should check out these cartoons.
They should have made a Candyman cartoon, too.
I just want more cartoons based on movies that definitely aren't for kids.
... untill it got all edgyfied for the new "why so serious" audiences.
While my favourite Batman will probably always be Batman Returns, I don't see this. What's edgy about Nolan's Batman? Different, yes, but there's nothing wrong with that. If anything, Nolan's Batman ended up trying to bring in political issues of the day but failing to do so intelligently, but I wouldn't call that 'edgy'.
You dont think that the whole Joker character was edgy? Or that Batman himself wasnt absolutely edgy? Did I dream all those training sequences and the voice tone and all that ?
If I didnt hold that trilogy in such low regard, I would rewatch them to see if I am misremebering stuff.
Yes, with a quick verbal "boom." You take a man's peko, you deny him his dab, all that is left is to rise up and tear down the walls of Jericho with a ".....not!" -TexiKen
You dont think that the whole Joker character was edgy? Or that Batman himself wasnt absolutely edgy? Did I dream all those training sequences and the voice tone and all that ?
If I didnt hold that trilogy in such low regard, I would rewatch them to see if I am misremebering stuff.
Perhaps we mean different things by 'edgy'. IMO the word signifies a self-conscious, look-at-me-I'm-in-your-face, adolescent-thinking-it's-mature, Zach-Snydery sensitivity.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
+4
Options
cj iwakuraThe Rhythm RegentBears The Name FreedomRegistered Userregular
Batman Begins is the one that most blends being a fun comic film with Nolan's sensibilities, I think. He started getting higher aspirations after that.
... untill it got all edgyfied for the new "why so serious" audiences.
While my favourite Batman will probably always be Batman Returns, I don't see this. What's edgy about Nolan's Batman? Different, yes, but there's nothing wrong with that. If anything, Nolan's Batman ended up trying to bring in political issues of the day but failing to do so intelligently, but I wouldn't call that 'edgy'.
You dont think that the whole Joker character was edgy? Or that Batman himself wasnt absolutely edgy? Did I dream all those training sequences and the voice tone and all that ?
If I didnt hold that trilogy in such low regard, I would rewatch them to see if I am misremebering stuff.
"Edgy" isn't the right word for it IMO, or at least focuses entirely on Bale's growl.
It was darker though, and attempted to be more grounded in reality than the comic book movies and shows that preceded it.
It's arguably the first time a comic book character was placed in the "real" world.
That's to say, a world that wasn't immediately shown to be zanier or more fantastical than the one we live in in order to justify the existence of a billionaire vigilante who dresses up like a bat to fight psychos in clown makeup...and IMO paved the way for the MCU and CW's DC universe (the first two seasons of Arrow might as well have been Nolan Batman: The Series) being able to create and expand on a world that doesn't have to dress itself up in order to justify helicarriers, alien invasions or the Speed Force.
You dont think that the whole Joker character was edgy? Or that Batman himself wasnt absolutely edgy? Did I dream all those training sequences and the voice tone and all that ?
If I didnt hold that trilogy in such low regard, I would rewatch them to see if I am misremebering stuff.
Perhaps we mean different things by 'edgy'. IMO the word signifies a self-conscious, look-at-me-I'm-in-your-face, adolescent-thinking-it's-mature, Zach-Snydery sensitivity.
We mean the same, I think the Nolan trilogy is JUST like Snyder, but dialed back a notch.
Yes, with a quick verbal "boom." You take a man's peko, you deny him his dab, all that is left is to rise up and tear down the walls of Jericho with a ".....not!" -TexiKen
0
Options
cj iwakuraThe Rhythm RegentBears The Name FreedomRegistered Userregular
You dont think that the whole Joker character was edgy? Or that Batman himself wasnt absolutely edgy? Did I dream all those training sequences and the voice tone and all that ?
If I didnt hold that trilogy in such low regard, I would rewatch them to see if I am misremebering stuff.
Perhaps we mean different things by 'edgy'. IMO the word signifies a self-conscious, look-at-me-I'm-in-your-face, adolescent-thinking-it's-mature, Zach-Snydery sensitivity.
We mean the same, I think the Nolan trilogy is JUST like Snyder, but dialed back a notch.
I think Nolan's way better at laying down groundwork, and also, keeping his villains around. I love how Scarecrow just casually shows up in the third film, and even Gordon's like 'oh god, you again?'. It's very Batman.
You dont think that the whole Joker character was edgy? Or that Batman himself wasnt absolutely edgy? Did I dream all those training sequences and the voice tone and all that ?
If I didnt hold that trilogy in such low regard, I would rewatch them to see if I am misremebering stuff.
Perhaps we mean different things by 'edgy'. IMO the word signifies a self-conscious, look-at-me-I'm-in-your-face, adolescent-thinking-it's-mature, Zach-Snydery sensitivity.
We mean the same, I think the Nolan trilogy is JUST like Snyder, but dialed back a notch.
In what way? Like, training sequences are edgy now ... what?
I'm really not understanding what you are objecting to here.
You dont think that the whole Joker character was edgy? Or that Batman himself wasnt absolutely edgy? Did I dream all those training sequences and the voice tone and all that ?
If I didnt hold that trilogy in such low regard, I would rewatch them to see if I am misremebering stuff.
Perhaps we mean different things by 'edgy'. IMO the word signifies a self-conscious, look-at-me-I'm-in-your-face, adolescent-thinking-it's-mature, Zach-Snydery sensitivity.
We mean the same, I think the Nolan trilogy is JUST like Snyder, but dialed back a notch.
In what way? Like, training sequences are edgy now ... what?
I'm really not understanding what you are objecting to here.
Yes, you master of reading comprehension, thats EXACTLY what I meant, training sequences are all edgy now... sigh.
Yes, with a quick verbal "boom." You take a man's peko, you deny him his dab, all that is left is to rise up and tear down the walls of Jericho with a ".....not!" -TexiKen
You dont think that the whole Joker character was edgy? Or that Batman himself wasnt absolutely edgy? Did I dream all those training sequences and the voice tone and all that ?
If I didnt hold that trilogy in such low regard, I would rewatch them to see if I am misremebering stuff.
Perhaps we mean different things by 'edgy'. IMO the word signifies a self-conscious, look-at-me-I'm-in-your-face, adolescent-thinking-it's-mature, Zach-Snydery sensitivity.
We mean the same, I think the Nolan trilogy is JUST like Snyder, but dialed back a notch.
In what way? Like, training sequences are edgy now ... what?
I'm really not understanding what you are objecting to here.
Yes, you master of reading comprehension, thats EXACTLY what I meant, training sequences are all edgy now... sigh.
You dont think that the whole Joker character was edgy? Or that Batman himself wasnt absolutely edgy? Did I dream all those training sequences and the voice tone and all that ?
If I didnt hold that trilogy in such low regard, I would rewatch them to see if I am misremebering stuff.
Perhaps we mean different things by 'edgy'. IMO the word signifies a self-conscious, look-at-me-I'm-in-your-face, adolescent-thinking-it's-mature, Zach-Snydery sensitivity.
We mean the same, I think the Nolan trilogy is JUST like Snyder, but dialed back a notch.
In what way? Like, training sequences are edgy now ... what?
I'm really not understanding what you are objecting to here.
Yes, you master of reading comprehension, thats EXACTLY what I meant, training sequences are all edgy now... sigh.
Or that Batman himself wasnt absolutely edgy? Did I dream all those training sequences and the voice tone and all that ?
which is why I asked.
I was talking about Nolan´s training scenes in Batman, I dont think that painting fences and waxing cars in Karate Kid was edgy.
Yes, with a quick verbal "boom." You take a man's peko, you deny him his dab, all that is left is to rise up and tear down the walls of Jericho with a ".....not!" -TexiKen
... I think the Nolan trilogy is JUST like Snyder...
Now *that* to me sounds edgy.
Don't get me wrong - I think Nolan's Batman films can absolutely be criticised, and I also think that they have much less to say than at times seems to be intended (which IMO is worst in TDKR, with its nods towards Occupy Wall Street etc.). But in terms of, well, pretty much anything there's a difference between Nolan's films and Snyder's.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
0
Options
DeadfallI don't think you realize just how rich he is.In fact, I should put on a monocle.Registered Userregular
There is definitely a difference between Nolan and Snyder, its in the part of that quote that you left out.
Yes, with a quick verbal "boom." You take a man's peko, you deny him his dab, all that is left is to rise up and tear down the walls of Jericho with a ".....not!" -TexiKen
So my dad wanted to see Rambo: Last Blood, so I decided to indulge him.
That movie is... let's say... ill-considered considering today's political climate. Of note, also, was that the movie theatre was basically empty on a "cheapy Tuesday", which we were both surprised by. Doesn't bode well for the movie's box office performance.
I disagree that the difference between the two lies just in degree. I think they're very different in terms of aesthetics and aims, in what they're trying to do any in the extent to which they succeed or fail. Why not tell us in what sense you consider them just the same, difference in degree or not? (And don't complain about the part of the quote I left out - the stress of what you said was on "JUST the same", and at that point "a notch" does not make a huge difference.)
Thirith on
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
You dont think that the whole Joker character was edgy? Or that Batman himself wasnt absolutely edgy? Did I dream all those training sequences and the voice tone and all that ?
If I didnt hold that trilogy in such low regard, I would rewatch them to see if I am misremebering stuff.
Perhaps we mean different things by 'edgy'. IMO the word signifies a self-conscious, look-at-me-I'm-in-your-face, adolescent-thinking-it's-mature, Zach-Snydery sensitivity.
We mean the same, I think the Nolan trilogy is JUST like Snyder, but dialed back a notch.
In what way? Like, training sequences are edgy now ... what?
I'm really not understanding what you are objecting to here.
Yes, you master of reading comprehension, thats EXACTLY what I meant, training sequences are all edgy now... sigh.
The Conjuring is a major upgrade for James Wan after the crapfest that was Insidious. It's not great, but unlike Insidious it is at least competently shot, properly lit, and isn't aggressively stupid. The plot is bog-standard haunted house stuff, with some exorcism thrown in for good measure. It's no Exorcist, but it's solid. The other movies in this series look real dumb though, so I think I'm gonna stop here.
0
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
The Conjuring is a major upgrade for James Wan after the crapfest that was Insidious. It's not great, but unlike Insidious it is at least competently shot, properly lit, and isn't aggressively stupid. The plot is bog-standard haunted house stuff, with some exorcism thrown in for good measure. It's no Exorcist, but it's solid. The other movies in this series look real dumb though, so I think I'm gonna stop here.
The first sequel is actually a better movie, no joke. Give it a try!
Such a strange career path for him too, he use to be a serious actor doing movies like forbidden planet, until he got old did Airplane! and suddenly he's one of the funniest men in Hollywood.
The Conjuring is a major upgrade for James Wan after the crapfest that was Insidious. It's not great, but unlike Insidious it is at least competently shot, properly lit, and isn't aggressively stupid. The plot is bog-standard haunted house stuff, with some exorcism thrown in for good measure. It's no Exorcist, but it's solid. The other movies in this series look real dumb though, so I think I'm gonna stop here.
The first sequel is actually a better movie, no joke. Give it a try!
Isn't that the one with the creepy nun and dapper slenderman? I dunno man, spooky characters popping up and going "BLAAARGH" is like the opposite of scary to me.
0
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
Such a strange career path for him too, he use to be a serious actor doing movies like forbidden planet, until he got old did Airplane! and suddenly he's one of the funniest men in Hollywood.
It turns out straight laced heavy acting is really fucking funny in absurd situations.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
+19
Options
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
The Conjuring is a major upgrade for James Wan after the crapfest that was Insidious. It's not great, but unlike Insidious it is at least competently shot, properly lit, and isn't aggressively stupid. The plot is bog-standard haunted house stuff, with some exorcism thrown in for good measure. It's no Exorcist, but it's solid. The other movies in this series look real dumb though, so I think I'm gonna stop here.
The first sequel is actually a better movie, no joke. Give it a try!
The Conjuring and The Conjuring 2 are both good movies that unfortunately glamorize real life con artists. The spin-off movie about the scary doll is awful. Haven't seen Annabelle 2 or the Nun, so can't really say anything about those.
reVerse on
+1
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
The Conjuring is a major upgrade for James Wan after the crapfest that was Insidious. It's not great, but unlike Insidious it is at least competently shot, properly lit, and isn't aggressively stupid. The plot is bog-standard haunted house stuff, with some exorcism thrown in for good measure. It's no Exorcist, but it's solid. The other movies in this series look real dumb though, so I think I'm gonna stop here.
The first sequel is actually a better movie, no joke. Give it a try!
Isn't that the one with the creepy nun and dapper slenderman? I dunno man, spooky characters popping up and going "BLAAARGH" is like the opposite of scary to me.
It is that one, yes, but there’s good, creepy stuff in there. It has more of a real story to it (both with the family and the Warrens), it’s shot better... I’m not a fan of the first one but the second one is actually a decent movie, IMO.
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
Annabelle 2 is actually quite good.
The Nun is garbo.
0
Options
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
Hmm, the Nun seems to be on Netflix. Might as well give it a watch since it's October and all.
0
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
I haven’t seen The Nun (2018), but I have seen the unrelated film The Nun (2005), a Spanish horror movie that’s surprisingly well-directed for how silly the actual nun is.
Posts
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
The one that's an odd one out, next to the freaks that are Catwoman, Batman and the Penguin, is Max Schreck, who's an entirely human monster and the one most lacking a heart. There's something wonderfully audacious about having Christopher Walken be the non-freak in an ensemble of freaks.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
They should have made a Candyman cartoon, too.
I just want more cartoons based on movies that definitely aren't for kids.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
You dont think that the whole Joker character was edgy? Or that Batman himself wasnt absolutely edgy? Did I dream all those training sequences and the voice tone and all that ?
If I didnt hold that trilogy in such low regard, I would rewatch them to see if I am misremebering stuff.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
"Edgy" isn't the right word for it IMO, or at least focuses entirely on Bale's growl.
It was darker though, and attempted to be more grounded in reality than the comic book movies and shows that preceded it.
It's arguably the first time a comic book character was placed in the "real" world.
That's to say, a world that wasn't immediately shown to be zanier or more fantastical than the one we live in in order to justify the existence of a billionaire vigilante who dresses up like a bat to fight psychos in clown makeup...and IMO paved the way for the MCU and CW's DC universe (the first two seasons of Arrow might as well have been Nolan Batman: The Series) being able to create and expand on a world that doesn't have to dress itself up in order to justify helicarriers, alien invasions or the Speed Force.
We mean the same, I think the Nolan trilogy is JUST like Snyder, but dialed back a notch.
I think Nolan's way better at laying down groundwork, and also, keeping his villains around. I love how Scarecrow just casually shows up in the third film, and even Gordon's like 'oh god, you again?'. It's very Batman.
In what way? Like, training sequences are edgy now ... what?
I'm really not understanding what you are objecting to here.
Yes, you master of reading comprehension, thats EXACTLY what I meant, training sequences are all edgy now... sigh.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
You literally mentioned the training sequences: which is why I asked.
I was talking about Nolan´s training scenes in Batman, I dont think that painting fences and waxing cars in Karate Kid was edgy.
Don't get me wrong - I think Nolan's Batman films can absolutely be criticised, and I also think that they have much less to say than at times seems to be intended (which IMO is worst in TDKR, with its nods towards Occupy Wall Street etc.). But in terms of, well, pretty much anything there's a difference between Nolan's films and Snyder's.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
xbl - HowYouGetAnts
steam - WeAreAllGeth
That movie is... let's say... ill-considered considering today's political climate. Of note, also, was that the movie theatre was basically empty on a "cheapy Tuesday", which we were both surprised by. Doesn't bode well for the movie's box office performance.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Ok, so what's "edgy" about them?
The first sequel is actually a better movie, no joke. Give it a try!
Such a strange career path for him too, he use to be a serious actor doing movies like forbidden planet, until he got old did Airplane! and suddenly he's one of the funniest men in Hollywood.
Isn't that the one with the creepy nun and dapper slenderman? I dunno man, spooky characters popping up and going "BLAAARGH" is like the opposite of scary to me.
It turns out straight laced heavy acting is really fucking funny in absurd situations.
The Conjuring and The Conjuring 2 are both good movies that unfortunately glamorize real life con artists. The spin-off movie about the scary doll is awful. Haven't seen Annabelle 2 or the Nun, so can't really say anything about those.
It is that one, yes, but there’s good, creepy stuff in there. It has more of a real story to it (both with the family and the Warrens), it’s shot better... I’m not a fan of the first one but the second one is actually a decent movie, IMO.
The Nun is garbo.