Several news items here: Guy Pearce (Memento) might play Batman, and the Batman: Year One concept is all-but-officially dead. Looks like Pearce's Memento director, Christopher Nolan is at the helm of Batman 5, which could still be subtitled The Frightening. (The Daily Telegraph)
Quote from: cbrad4dChristopher Nolan is at the helm of Batman 5, which could still be subtitled The Frightening. (The Daily Telegraph)
Sounds like a halloween event at Six Flags...
www.darkhorizons.com
"Ashton Kutcher. We all know he is the front runner in the Bat-mix. But he is only the WB's front runner. Nolan does not want Kutcher (at least he is definitely not his first choice), as far as Nolan's first choice; he has a lengthy list of unknowns/semi-established actors that will be screen tested in late Summer. Nolan has until the end of August/early September to find a replacement; and from the buzz around the office, it looks like he will do just that (I think someone mentioned about 20 different names in mind?). As far as Nolan wanting Guy Pearce, I wouldn't hold my breath. I think that was mostly rumor that he was going to pull a "Burton" and cast an actor he recently worked with and has a good relationship with. He's looking in the 25-30 range as far as actors go. (As opposed to 18-22). Remember what happened with Spiderman? The Wes Bentley/Di Caprio situation? I am 100% certain that's what is going to happen here. Again, Nolan has until the end of Summer to find his replacement. Chris Lloyd as Scarecrow. Yes, he has been spotted around the backlots. No, we don't know for sure what for. He was spotted with Nolan twice, and then alone the other 3 times. I read a report that he was seen shaking hands with Nolan and had a script in his hand, I can't confirm this, but I will try to look into it to see what I can get out of the situation. Take that last bit with a grain of salt. A damn big one at that. Al Gough as Alfred again? You're on the money. He is both Nolan's and WB's first choice, and will most likely get the role, even though the film is a restart of the franchise. (This is just a way to pay homage to the previous films and keep some familiarity with audiences, because almost nobody else from previous films will be cast)".
Its only a matter of time before the "dude, wheres the batmobile" jokes role in so Id just like to thank Tim Burton for all he has done
Ashton Kutcher as the Dark Knight? (fuuuuuck off). Who knows, maybe he could do a dramatic gig but who doesn't keep thinking of That 70's Show's Kelso when you hear the name Ashton Kutcher.
I suppose a Nolan directed Bat-flick would be cool. God knows I'd prefer a Darren Aranofsky one.
All the Batman projects seem silly. Don't get me wrong, Batman was always my favorite of super heroes, but I am a little disheartened when the point of interest in these directors is to make the series "darker". Hah, I didn't color tone mattered that much. Best Batman recreation? Not in any of the movies, but the animated series from the mid 90s got Batman the best even though the movie to come from it was dissapointing.
~rougerum
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetBest Batman recreation? Not in any of the movies, but the animated series from the mid 90s got Batman the best even though the movie to come from it was dissapointing. ~rougerum
Terrific series...
aw
Yeah, but Burton's movie was fucking great too.
Ashton as Batman? That's just.....silly. I'm actually speechless right now on that one.
I'm not sure about the Burton ones. The first can be seen in light of color tone as well, but it does try to go for it. Its just underwhelming though in my mind when compared to how realistic and emotional The Crow is and how they are essentially taking a very similiar super hero premise of sorts. Batman Returns, not nearly as good as the first, just gives hints of it and introduces the cliche that with each new Batman film, you get two common known enemies to fight and just a push up of the special effects bar.
~rougerum
Batman: Ashton Kutchner has re-signed for two more years of "That 70's Show", which rules him out of donning the cape.
Quote from: MacGuffinBatman: Ashton Kutchner has re-signed for two more years of "That 70's Show", which rules him out of donning the cape.
ugh... that show has overstayed its welcome.
i like that 70's show
i used to, but enough is enough.
Quote from: themodernage02www.darkhorizons.com
Al Gough as Alfred again? You're on the money. He is both Nolan's and WB's first choice, and will most likely get the role, even though the film is a restart of the franchise. (This is just a way to pay homage to the previous films and keep some familiarity with audiences, because almost nobody else from previous films will be cast)."
interesting new news...
--------------------------------------------------------------
www.darkhorizons.comBUT Michelle Pfeiffer is in talks to reprise her role as Selina Kyle - possibly outside of the leather costume - for Chris Nolan's Batman film. Nolan still wants to link the film to the others in the series it seems, but only the first couple - so word is he'd like to have Selina Kyle involved, albiet briefly, and possibly some other familiar faces. Was told the only reason Pfieffer didn't want to do another Bat flick- after Returns - was that she hated wearing the costume, so the deal this time might involve letting her reprise the role, but only as Selina, not as Catwoman.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
they need to make up their minds. are they trying to re-start the franchise? or keep it in the same universe as the burton films? i am all for michelle pfeiffers catwoman, but i think for the greater good, these films need to stand on their own. especially if its going to be a younger batman (hence an earlier story, selina kyle pfieffer doesnt make much sense). so maybe the rumor is wild.
BATMAN WANTED. NO EXPERIENCE NECESSARY. APPLY WITHIN.
It's as if Warner Bros. Pictures were shining a Bat Signal over Burbank, summoning potential Caped Crusaders. Warners and helmer Christopher Nolan are zeroing in on an actor to star in the title role of the studio's next "Batman" installment, which is scheduled to start shooting in February. Sources said that during the next three days, several young actors are expected to test for the role. The list of potential crime fighters includes Jake Gyllenhaal, Christian Bale, Joshua Jackson ("Dawson's Creek"), Cillian Murphy ("28 Days Later"), Henry Cavill ("I Capture the Castle") and Eion Bailey, who stars in the upcoming HBO feature "And Starring Pancho Villa as Himself." Meanwhile, sources say Hugh Dancy, currently shooting the Walt Disney Co.'s "King Arthur," may test if his schedule permits and he is able to shave the beard his "Arthur" character, Galahad, is sporting. (Item courtesy of THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER)
E-MAIL AUTHOR
I put the news that Bale got the job as Batman over in the Christian Bale thread....
hmm, not sure how i feel about Bale as Batman. his lips bother me. so does his "american accent", although maybe i'm just hearing the yuppie from american psycho when i think of it.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.adorocinema.com%2Fpersonalidades%2Fatores%2Fchristian-bale%2Fchristian-bale04.jpg&hash=8834e49a6a7207f575a386d25f74ac81e167dc91)
ALSO AICN says they have it confirmed that Ras Al Ghul will definitely be a villain in the film, though there may be a possibility of a small part to be played by the Scarecrow. Also the film will have a good deal to do with London this time out.
i think bale will be a good batman. Better then Val Kilmer
i dont really see him playing the caped crusader. He has more of a villain look to him. I was looking forward to a younger Batman, oh well.
Halle Berry is Catwoman right? Would be wierd if Pfeiffer was in the Nolans flick.
I think he'll do great as Batman
I'm still kind of sad for the others who didn't get the part, though
Quote from: tremoloslothI think he'll do great as Batman
I'm still kind of sad for the others who didn't get the part, though
Even Ashton Kutcher?
Quote from: Find Your MagaliQuote from: tremoloslothI think he'll do great as Batman
I'm still kind of sad for the others who didn't get the part, though
Even Ashton Kutcher?
i was going to post a Dude wheres My car/ Batman joke that just came to me but im not gonna anymore
No, I mean from the last batch that was being considered.
I think Bale's a great choice for this movie. If they were still making Batman Year One, I'd have been rooting for Cillian Murphy.
SCOOP: BATMAN insider spills secrets
The villain is immortal *Some Story Spoilers - Read At Own Risk*
Source: Cinescape
With the announcement this week of Christian Bale playing Batman, things are heating up now for Warner Bros. to get the new Bat movie greenlighted and going.
We've heard from a source about what sort of secrets the BATMAN production is keeping, and we'd like to share them with you today. Things like who the bad guy is, when this Bat-film takes place in the character's continuity, and why Bale may have won the role over other, older contenders.
"Think of Nolan's film as 'Gothamville,' the Batman version of SMALLVILLE. The entire cast is believed to be made up of young people. Warner Brothers looked across town to Culver City (Sony) and realized they needed to go SPIDER-MAN and cast young."
Bale is 29-years-old, the youngest actor to don the cowl and cape in the film series since it began back in 1988.
The majority of David Goyer's script, which no one has seen yet, is believed to take place in London and a desert locale. According to our scooper the film's primary villain is R'as al Ghul, literally the "Demon's Head" in Arabic, an immortal man seeking to save the world by controlling it. If the Joker is the dark opposite of Batman, chaos over order, insanity over reason, R'as al Ghul is the penultimate version of what drove a young Bruce Wayne to become a protector of the innocent. If Batman was born from the deaths of Bruce's parents and his drive to stop needless violence, R'as al Ghul seeks to save the world from destruction, war and obliteration by taking it over.
The villain achieves a kind of immortality by using a device called the Lazarus Pit to rejuvinate his aged body. This way R'as can watch the seeds of his many strategies bear fruit over the coming decades. R'as also admired the Batman and his mission, and in fact sought to make him his heir by marrying his daughter, Talia. He also controls a vast army of killers the world over known as the League of Assassins.
How much of R'as al Ghul's comic book origin story has been brought into Goyer's script remains unknown.
Part of our information is being corroborated by Ain't It Cool News. That site also claims that the film's villain is R'as al Ghul and that part of the film takes place in London.
While the first Batman is one of my favorite movies and Nicholson was the perfect Joker, I hope they don't go the route of bringing in a superstar for the villain roles in this picture. In fact, I hope they keep it to just one villain.
That said, so far, every decision is coming up aces. Can't wait.
Much better villian than the Scarecrow. I always thought the Scarecrow was the dorkiest criminal ever, besides Mr. Freeze. I always liked R'as al Ghul as a criminal on the animated series because batman and him both seemed like competitors on a mature level and trying to out out think and out match the other. And of course, a different storyline compared to the usual batman story. This can easily be botched and made silly or pretensious, but lets hope not.
~rougerum
in the desert and in london? younger cast? uhh, thats not batman. this is starting to terrify me.
They're taking a leap and using some imagination in the storyline. It's to be commended and it's refreshing.
they're trying to make batman into spiderman to make more money. and thats not what batman is. and its to be worried over and pissed off at.
Wow. These plot rumors and characters sound a little... strange. I'm still holding out hope though-- just barely. I trust Nolan's skills and talents and I sort of *trust* Goyer. But still, Bale's got my thumbs up. I hope he plays Genesis before he whoops a baddie's ass.
Quote from: DerekThey're taking a leap and using some imagination in the storyline. It's to be commended and it's refreshing.
Agreed. For just an action movie, dealing with this specific villian shows most room for imagination in making a good action movie. But, also, there are things to this specific villian and story that could get very corny very quickly. Nolan is going to be walking a tight rope on just handling tone and look of this film. It could be done completely serious and just look dumb. This film will be taking some risks, but good ones.
I've never thought too highly of many of the Batman films. The first is good for action and story but it declines after that. My favorite super hero is Batman, though. Its just the animated series likely brought him under the truest understanding. With the late movies, he got corny again (as like the old show) and with later comics, he got dark more for reasons of looking cool and authentic to the kids who bought them. The animated series really played it straight in identifying him as a man, a relatively normal man, but one who could get dark with what drives him. It had a nice balance to it all. I hope Nolan simply doesn't go back to the color tone and simplicity of the first but aims for the middle ground the animated series had. That would be excellent.
Also, I don't consider the spoilers on the previous page to be much of spoilers at all anyways. Anyone knowing the general story of Batman and and this villian already knows this information. It seems more like character and situation description than anything.
~rougerum
I'd like to see the Scarecrow. :(
A source for Batman on Film claims that "this is a true Batman film in every shape and form, so Gordon, Alfred, Gotham and the 'Batman mythos' will be in the film. One rumor I've heard that we'll see a pre-Batman Bruce Wayne for some of the film. He's on his world travels before he returns to Gotham and begins his life as Batman. This is what brings him to London and meeting Ra's. However, I've not heard yet that this is a flat-out 'origin' film. But I believe [Warner Bros. honcho] Alan Horn has mentioned that the studio wanted to reestablish the character in an origin film."
BOF's source added that they're uncertain if Ra's "is intended to be a true 'villain' as we are used to seeing in a Batman film. The Scarecrow – I keep hearing that he's in the film."
BOF also says to "look for [Gotham City police commissioner Jim] Gordon to at least be in his mid 40's. Here's an interesting name I've heard recently: Dennis Quaid." Quaid's name was first mentioned as a possible Gordon a few months ago. The actor has been on a comeback lately and appears in the forthcoming Cold Creek Manor and The Alamo.
Quaid, however, was supposed to star in the remake of The Flight of the Phoenix this fall. Is that project now on the backburner or will he be able to segue to Batman once that is done filming?
Batman on Film has also "heard that Michael Gough will not return as Alfred as previously rumored."
Finally, Superhero Hype has posted a brief interview with Wally Pfister, the cinematographer of the new Batman film. Pfister previously worked with Chris Nolan on both Memento and Insomnia. Pfister was tight-lipped but did confirm that he's "already begun early stages of pre-production on the project." Pfister revealed that while he was fond of the Batman TV series as a child, he "only really like the first" Batman film. "I think Tim Burton's vision was quite original," Pfister said. "This has no bearing as to the approach I will take with Chris for the upcoming film."
He added that fellow Insomnia vets Nathan Crowley will be the production designer and Emma Thomas will produce Batman.
The exciting news came last week that Christian Bale will star as Bruce Wayne in BATMAN. Now that the major casting is out of the way, speculation has turned to who might be cast alongside Bale and, considering the plot is kept under tight security, what roles might they be playing. Last week Ain't It Cool News "confirmed" through their sources that Ra's Al Ghul was involved in the film and likely too was the Scarecrow. Now we get further confirmation from Batman-on-Film, whose longtime scooper asserts that "Ra's is indeed in this film" but goes on to say he wasn't sure to what extent and that the Scarecrow too is involved. As far as other characters, Commissioner Gordon is expected to play a juicy role and immediately casting speculation has begun on who would play the role. BOF also reports that Dennis Quaid's name has come up numerous times in conjunction with the Gordon role. Has he even talked to Warner Bros about the part? That remains unclear but it seems the studio is looking for a Dennis Quaid-type actor and if you want his type, why not just get him? He's got a decent resemblence to the Gordon from the comics. One final BATMAN note: the film will reportedly concentrate more on Bruce Wayne and his becoming the Dark Knight as opposed to just having him in cape and cowl kicking butt. That's likely where the London setting rumors came from - Wayne's travels around the world before returning to Gotham to become Batman. The project seems to be shaping up very nicely and more details are leaking out no matter how close the WB keeps this to their chest. Expect more casting details soon as the film preps for an early 2004 start date.
Quote from: themodernage02they're trying to make batman into spiderman to make more money. and thats not what batman is. and its to be worried over and pissed off at.
yep
I don't think they are. The desert setting makes sense if they're using Rhas Ah Gul (sp?) as the villain, and I for one think Batman taking a trip to London sounds interesting.
I do wish they'd do a straight Batman Year One adaptation to restart the franchise. Or if they're just going to start somewhere else with new continuity, The Killing Joke would be great. But I'm happy with the direction this one seems to be taking. I think Nolan is the right man for the job. This will probably live up to the old Detective Comics moniker pretty well.
The one thing I wish they'd do is use Danny Elfman's theme music (if not just hire him again altogether). I think that score is about as iconic as the Star Wars theme, and it's hard to think of the character without it. But perhaps that would cast unfair comparison between the films.
Quote from: GhostboyThe one thing I wish they'd do is use Danny Elfman's theme music (if not just hire him again altogether). I think that score is about as iconic as the Star Wars theme, and it's hard to think of the character without it.
i agree completely. other 'themes' will just seem fake. he has a theme, i dont think i can like something else more. but the chances of that happening are probably slim to zilch wanting to 'do his own thing' probably.
also, i dont think they are really trying to make batman spiderman. but by casting younger actors, they are trying to get a broader appeal. batman is a darker character and he isnt spiderman by any means. i think the studios can see how spidey performed and how the 'difficult' hulk film performed, and see which they'd rather have. and that worries me.
Quote from: themodernage02
i agree completely. other 'themes' will just seem fake. he has a theme, i dont think i can like something else more.
I agree with you. But, just to play devil's advocate, I would offer up this comparison: I bet everyone wanted "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" to base its theme on the original music from the TV series. Turns out they didn't, but Jerry Goldsmith's new theme became just as iconic for the Star Trek franchise.
This is just a rumor.
Malkovich to be The Scarecrow?
Wednesday, October 8, 2003: I was talking via email last to another internet entertainment reporter--from one of the bigger websites you'd know--regarding the latest BATMAN casting rumors. And he reminded me that John Malkovich has long been rumored for the role of The Scarecrow. And that's true, going all the way back to the days of the long dead BATMAN TRIUMPHANT. And with the rumors that The Scarecrow could be in Chris Nolan's Bat-film, perhaps Malkovich is up for that role? I'm not saying he is--hell, I don't even know for sure that he's up for any Bat-role. But, IMO, he's make a pretty good Dr. Crane.
http://www.batman-on-film.com/b5news.html
another bit...
Somebody working at Shepperton Studios on set construction (not Batman) saw Chris Nolan talking with both John Malkovich and Dennis Quaid (at different times) over the last day or so- Ra's Al Ghul and Jim Gordon perhaps?
AICN indicates Morgan Freeman might be up for a "Dr./Scientist" role, possibly one of the villains - whilst Anthony Hopkins is being considered for "Alfred":
Just got a scoop from a source within the Batcave...the producers are looking at a few high level actors for a few of the supporting roles. It looks like they are focused on Morgan Freeman for a "Dr./Scientist" role. What this role is, I don't know for sure...but it's possibly one of the main villian roles. And get this.....they are considering Anthony Hopkins for "Alfred". Looks like they are cleaning house and not letting anyone (ie: Michael Gough) from the past 2 crapfests near this baby...This much is certain from my source...this is a fresh start for the Caped Crusader!
Quote from: MacGuffinAnthony Hopkins is being considered for "Alfred":
I can definitely see that happening. He was a fake servant in Zorro (when him and his "master", Antonio Bandaras, were at the Don's party), adjust that role a little bit and you have Alfred. To place such a large star in his role must mean that Alfred may actually have something to do with the story. I hope it works out.
Why have Hopkins as Alfred? The part is a stand in the background part usually with a no namer so as not to distract from the main actors. The only reason to consider Hopkins in this role is to elevate Alfred to a main role, but is that likely? His history of a character is pure background character and if they do elevate his character to a main role for this movie, are they to keep Hopkins in the role for all the later Batman films when it is likely the character will drop to the background again? My idea is that the rumor is a nice idea of what someone wanted then actual fact and will likely be disproved soon.
~rougerum
Isn't Alfred involved in some sort of...spy thing? I thought I remembered something like that from the animated series
Quote from: SlobhIsn't Alfred involved in some sort of...spy thing? I thought I remembered something like that from the animated series
Thats
one episode where Batman travels to England to find Alfred after he was kidnapped because he was a member of a spy organization for England years before. The people who kidnap him are trying to get a code out of him that only Alfred and his old partner knew. Batman goes there to rescue him and save the day. It was just one episode and Alfred was diminished to brief scenes per episode at best from then on.
~rougerum
Okay, well I didn't think they'd do a direct remake of that episode into a 2 hour film (perhaps show it 4 times?)
Scarecrow cameo for BATMAN 5?
Source: Cinescape
As development continues on the fifth BATMAN movie, one of our friends from across the Atlantic Ocean wrote in to tell us of a juicy casting rumor making the rounds over in England. According to our informant, there's talk that BATMAN director Christopher Nolan is seeking to cast an actor for a villain role at the beginning of the film. This character is known to fans of Batman lore, and at one time was rumored to be the main villain in a fan script known as THE FRIGHTENING: none other than The Scarecrow.
According to our source, the film's primary bad guy will remain R'as al Ghul, the immortal whose vision of a world without chaos reaches through centuries of time. But the idea is to introduce the Scarecrow early in the film to show audiences that this BATMAN movie is different than its predecessors; namely, that it's darker and scarier, and that the rogues that Batman face in Nolan's vision of Gotham City are far more dangerous than the ones seen in Joel Schumacher's BATMAN movies.
Our agent tells us that the idea is to show the Scarecrow terrorizing Gotham so Nolan's version of Batman (played by Christopher Bale) can be introduced. After bringing down Scarecrow the plot would then move on to Batman having to leave Gotham City, possibly as a result of the actions of this opening segment, and travelling to London where al Ghul is located. There the majority of the film's story takes place.
The part is small and isn't like the previous three BATMAN films which have seen the Dark Knight face two villains throughout the picture. There may be a possibility that Scarecrow could return in a future BATMAN movie but for now it's meant to be a one-time appearance and that's all.
"The person in mind to play [Scarecrow] is Christopher Eccleston," writes "Lucky Ace", our scooper. Eccleston is British and was most recently seen in Danny Boyle's post-apocalytic zombie movie 28 DAYS LATER as Major West. Curiously, one of Eccleston's co-stars in 28 DAYS LATER was also rumored to be under consideration to play the new Batman before Bale was announced in the role, Cillian Murphy.
The production is also looking to cast the role of R'as al Ghul sooner rather than later and have been considering actors from around the world. Unlike the Scarecrow gossip, our Ace in the hole didn't have any names to report at the present time but they did mention the talk is "of people like a younger Anthony Hopkins-type".
Production on BATMAN 5 is still scheduled to begin in the early months of 2004.
that sounds very interesting... I'm really looking forward to this film!
Caine Aboard Batman!
Source: Variety
Oscar-winning actor Michael Caine has agreed to play the role of Bruce Wayne's trusted butler Alfred in Warner Bros.' new Batman movie.
The film, to be helmed by Christopher Nolan and being penned by David Goyer, is expected to start shooting next year for a 2005 release. Christian Bale has been cast in the title role.
I was really excited about the possibility of Anthony Hopkins playing Alfred... but I guess Caine will make a very good british butler... hmm... I hope so!
Source: Hollywood Reporter
On the more speculative front, Batman on Film has a report today about who might be up to play the film's main villian Ra's Al-Ghul - none other than the semi-retired Daniel Day-Lewis: "One name I've heard more than once associated with Ra's is Daniel Day-Lewis; but please take this as strictly rumor right now. But yep, I've heard his name from more than one source".
...that would be cool ..but i don't DD-L does sequels.....
its not a sequel. they're starting over. so its not "batman 5", but rather batman 1: take 3.
Hmmmm.....I guess Anthony Hopkins wasn't available. I think Michael Caine will be good also
so are they gonna do the origin in this one?
Quote from: Bankyso are they gonna do the origin in this one?
no, i dont think so. aronofsky was going to do the 'origin' story, Batman: Year One. which is about his first year as a crimefighter and based on the Frank Miller storyline from the early 80s. but, i think this one is just going to sort of start. maybe some sort of flashback, but theyll probably just assume everyone already knows, or that it isnt essential to this particular story.
Batman's lady is... Dec. 1, 2003
Source: JoBlo.com, Batman on Film by: Mike Sampson
Right before I left for a little Thanksgiving vacation, I was talking to some pals who're in the know, so to speak. I asked one of them their opinion about Michael Caine starring in BATMAN as Alfred and we agreed Nolan's doing a bang-up job so far. Mr. Source then dropped a hint that he had heard Katie Holmes was up for a role. He wasn't too comfortable with the information and I promised I'd look into it once I returned. Lo and behold I return and before I can do much digging, the great Batman-on-Film.com broke the scoop that Katie Holmes is in "deep talks" to star as Bruce Wayne's (Christian Bale) love interest in BATMAN. I brought said information back to a few people I know and was able to confirm that indeed Katie Holmes is in discussions to star and in fact her talks are further along now than Michael Caine's were when that news was announced. From what I hear both actors are right around in the same stage of involvement in BATMAN but for whatever reason (prestige perhaps) the Caine news was reported first. But if all goes according to plan, expect to hear official confirmation soon in the trades. I'm a fan of Katie Holmes (THE GIFT being her favorite work of mine to date...) so I'm pleased with the news. But I'm assuming the "love interest" role isn't exactly a juicy one and doesn't require much.
In other BATMAN news, Britain's Sky News is reporting that Clint Eastwood is in talks for a role but without even running it past anyone I know, I can almost guarantee this is just a big rumor. Eastwood is very, very, VERY selective about the films he takes and hasn't starred in a film he hasn't directed since 1993's IN THE LINE OF FIRE and before that 1989's PINK CADILLAC. The chance he'd break that habit for BATMAN is highly unlikely. They dangled a huge amount of cash in front of his face to star in SIGNS but he repeatedly declined. So while it would be cool to see Eastwood in a BATMAN movie (as Ra's Al Ghul perhaps?) don't bet your ass on it.
1.) katie holmes seems too young for a love interest, even if it is a young batman.
2.) do we really need a love interest in every fucking superhero movie ever made? can we just tell a story without feeling like having to stick in a love story whether its right for the film or not?
i agree with number 2
I would like to see a love interest with Talia, Ras Al Ghul's daughter. That relationship was complicated and deep, not despensible. I also don't think Katie Holmes would fair well in a Batman film. She's too 'girl next door' for Gotham.
good point
I really like Katie Holmes, but I dont know... she is still too much in Dawson's Creek for me to see her with Batman... and she is also too young...
I also agree with the fact that Batman has had a different love story in every fucking movie so far... it would be nice to see a more dark Batman that likes to call whores and stuff hehe... or maybe that doesnt fall inlove, just dates or something like that... You do have to put some girl in there and show some booty
I don't think she can act. She might've improved since Go, but I dunno.
I think Batman Returns is the best of all of them. They should've stopped right there. The script had lots of corny puns and lines, but it was done in a self-conscious, smart way. Michael Keaton was the best Batman; he wasn't overly handsome, he was kinda ugly in fact, but very charming and enigmatic. Catwoman and Christopher Walken were terrific as villains. Classic. I could watch this one a dozen times.
foray
Its sucks hearing Katie Holmes announced for this. She is passable without being good as any typical love interest, but she'll likely be playing the role of Talia (Ras Al Ghul's daughter) and considering not many exotic beauties of Arabian descent are really in Hollywood these days, a choice like Katie Holmes is made. Still, they could have gone for someone looking more exotic in physical beauty. Even someone like Monica Belluci would be better. Katie Holmes still has the presence of the local 17 year old getting by in looking like a woman by wearing that tranining bra.
::rolls around on the floor puring gravy on himself::
tara reid...or toni colette....
"Batman" Is Hard to Swallow
A denial to a flimsy rumour, another flimsy rumour and a left-field anecdote, all up the news on the Gotham front today ain't so smooth going down:
In regards to the Clint Eastwood as the Mayor rumours that sprang up the other day, IGN Filmforce quickly shot them down, citing an interview quote Eastwood gave two months ago saying "I'm too old to make comic books. I like adventure films. I like a good adventure film as much as the next guy. But, it's not for me".
The same article however quotes another site which hinted that former Dawson's Creek babe Katie Holmes is "in deep talks to play Bruce Wayne's girlfriend". With Ra's Al-Ghul as the villian, this could possibly mean that Holmes will be his deadly but stunning daughter Talia. That would also explain the report which hinted Ghul was "a business man who once clashed with Bruce Wayne's father".
Also, a brief report over at CGQ reveals that "Buffy" creator Joss Whedon once had a Bat script in development but his pitch didn't quite work with the Warners execs - "I came up with an idea that I really loved, which was an origin story. After I finished pitching it, they looked at me like I was a video fishbowl. I came out of there thinking, 'How many more lessons do I need that the machine doesn't care about the creative process?' When I got back to my office and found that Firefly was canceled, I thought, 'Okay,
maybe one more lesson'".
Quote from: MacGuffinI think Gloria's 'Lee Harvey Snowball' avatar is her best yet!
quite agree!!
Quote from: Vile5Quote from: MacGuffinI think Gloria's 'Lee Harvey Snowball' avatar is her best yet!
quite agree!!
Thank you both. I try. :)
Quote from: MacGuffinThe same article however quotes another site which hinted that former Dawson's Creek babe Katie Holmes is "in deep talks to play Bruce Wayne's girlfriend". With Ra's Al-Ghul as the villian, this could possibly mean that Holmes will be his deadly but stunning daughter Talia. That would also explain the report which hinted Ghul was "a business man who once clashed with Bruce Wayne's father".
As for Katie Holmes playing Talia, I would be very upset. First of all, she is too young, second of all, she is too soft-spoken. Talia was an in-your-face, dark and skilled fighter. I can't see Katie Holmes in that role. I like Katie Holmes, but I think this could be a big mistake for fans of Batman.
I would rather see Monica Bellucci, Jennifer Connelly, or Catherine Zeta-Jones in the role. What would be even better is if they sign a no-name actress to the part.
Quote from: GloriaI would rather see Monica Bellucci in the role.
yes. she has the exotic looking mysterious thing going that katie holmes just aint. she's the girl next door type.
yeah thats a good call
Katie Holmes Frontrunner for Batman!
Source: Variety
Warner Bros. is zeroing in on Katie Holmes (Dawson's Creek) for the female lead of its next Batman film.
Holmes has been offered the role, subject to a screen test with Christian Bale that will be conducted by director Christopher Nolan. While Nolan considered many young actresses to play Batman's love interest Rachel, Holmes is the only actress who will do a screen test. It is considered likely that a deal will follow shortly after.
Holmes would be the third cast. Nolan, who came aboard the film with his producing partner Emma Thomas, first set Christian Bale as the Caped Crusader, and recently began negotiating with Michael Caine to play his butler, Alfred.
The film, scripted by David Goyer, is gearing up for a 2004 start date and 2005 release.
Quote from: MacGuffinKatie Holmes Frontrunner for Batman!
Source: Variety
At least it says it isn't for the role we suspected she'd get.
man these people are slow... film the fucking thing already!
Quote from: MacGuffinKatie Holmes Frontrunner for Batman!
Source: Variety
Say it isn't so!
If this does happen, I will still give her a chance. I'm too big of a Batman fan to pass up a movie just because of the casting. Who knows, she may change my opinion by giving an impressive performance. I can only hope.
While promoting his latest film - the political thriller ‘The Statement’, Caine talked briefly to Chud.com about his upcoming work in Batman where he is reported to play Alfred - Bruce Wayne's (aka Batman) Butler:
Naturally, the question came up about him taking on Batman next (which Caine quoted as the budget at being "$135 million. It's so nice to be in something like that. I'm usually going around with the guys who say, 'Can you share a car?') and what the appeal was for Caine to step into Michael Gough's shoes as Bruce Wayne's butler. "Batman is being made in England, but it's also being made quite differently," Caine reported. "I had a long conversation with Christopher Nolan before I accepted the part. I only knew him from Memento and I didn't know him personally. Funny enough, he lived near me, so he came around to the house and we had lunch, cups of tea and stuff and he explained to me what he was going to do and what his outlook on Batman was and why he wanted me in it. The short answer was, he wants it to be more natural. He regards - as I did anyway quite coincidentally - I find a lot of these comic book heroes boring because they are invincible. If you're bulletproof, where's the jeopardy for the hero? You can't gas him, you can't kill him, what's the point? And he is making a very, very natural Batman. I remember one phrase he said to me, I said, 'Well, he's very powerful and strong.' And he said, 'Yes, he is Michael, but not because of Kryptonite, it's because he does push-up's." As for whether Caine had known Bale before, Caine replied, "No, I've never met Christian Bale!"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mortensen Up For Batman?
Michael Caine, who will play Alfred the butler in the upcoming new Batman film, told SCI FI Wire that director Christopher Nolan is eyeing Lord of the Rings star Viggo Mortensen to play the villain in the film, which is slated to begin production in April 2004. In an interview, Caine wouldn't specify which villain role Mortensen (Rings' Aragorn) is up for.
Sources told The Hollywood Reporter, meanwhile, that Katie Holmes is close to being cast opposite star Christian Bale as Rachel, the love interest, contingent on a screen test.
Caine said Nolan's Batman script creates a deeper role for Alfred than previous films. "We start when Batman is a baby, so I'm more like a father," Caine said in an interview. "I'm a father who knows how to lay a table with the knives and forks in the right places."
Caine said he spoke with Nolan for three hours about his vision for the film, which included some similarities with and some variations on the previously established Batman canon. "[Nolan] said, 'We're going to have a human hero in Batman. He's powerful because he does pushups. Where does he get all his weapons? Because he's a multibillionaire, and he's in the arms business, so he gets the secret weapons instantly. Why does he wear the bloody suit? To scare the s--t out of people, because he doesn't really want to fight.'"
Quote from: MacGuffin'We're going to have a human hero in Batman. He's powerful because he does pushups. Where does he get all his weapons? Because he's a multibillionaire, and he's in the arms business, so he gets the secret weapons instantly. Why does he wear the bloody suit? To scare the s--t out of people, because he doesn't really want to fight.'"
Right on! Thats the Batman that has been lacking.
Cillian Murphy is a Villain in Batman!
Source: Variety
Cillian Murphy (28 Days Later; Girl with a Pearl Earring) has landed the role of one of the Caped Crusader's villains in Warner Bros.' new Batman film. Which villain he would play was not yet announced. The young Irish actor would become the fourth to be cast in the Christopher Nolan-helmed project that stars Christian Bale. He first came to the attention of Nolan after he tested for the role of Batman.
Michael Caine has also joined the cast to play Alfred and the producers are now zeroing in on Katie Holmes to play the female lead subject to a screen test with Nolan.
The film's plot, scripted by David Goyer, is being kept tightly under wraps, but the studio and Nolan are gearing up for a 2004 start date and 2005 release.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fus.ent4.yimg.com%2Fmovies.yahoo.com%2Fimages%2Fhv%2Fphoto%2Fmovie_pix%2Ffox_searchlight%2F28_days_later%2Fcillian_murphy%2Flater2.jpg&hash=05de88ec82e3aa0f4acfb9e2e1a5190cb3d6e414)
Rockin.
I don't think they are going to use the villians and plot we all think they are going to use.
Quote from: Gamblor du JourRockin.
Agreed. I'm glad they didn't pick an A-list celebrity. This is gonna be cool.
what a weird cast. (if its going to be all non-americans, why bother with katie holmes?) this had better be a great script for warners letting nolan make all these wild decisions with their precious franchise. i wonder if cillian will be playing the scarecrow if that rumored cameo/opening is true. hes skinny and tall.
Quote from: themodernage02this had better be a great script for warners letting nolan make all these wild decisions with their precious franchise.
Methinks Batman and Robyn took their Rolls-Royce of a franchise and turned it into a Kia Sophia.
Basically all Nolan has to due is develop it into a gritty SUV to succeed.
Too many automobile analogies?
without waiting for the trailer/tool-of-the-devil, i just know this is gonna rockkkk.
I'm pretty pleased so far with the developments of this film. Do you think its possible it wille be rated R? I hope so. I would like to see a gritty, violent, and very "real" film.
Exclusive Batman: Intimidation Scoop!!
Source: SuperheroHype!
Batman fans, are you ready? We hope you are, because Christopher Nolan's new Batman film is sounding better and better every day.
A Superhero Hype! source has confirmed that filming will take place in Iceland. The Warner Bros. production will shoot there for two weeks. We've got the exclusive scoop for you, but it's definitely spoiler material, so cover your eyes now if you'd rather not know...
Still here? Of course you are. In the scene, Batman, played by Christian Bale, will be fighting on ice with Ra's Al Ghul's #1 pupil (who that is, you'll have to figure out). They won't be fighting for real, however, as it is more of a training exercise.
We're also told by our source that Batman: Intimidation is a cross between Year One and Year Two and that it's interwoven very creatively. So start thinking about which characters appeared in each and you might get an idea. The film is also said to be very story-driven.
Of course you want to hear about the costume. Let's just say that the costume concept the production is using is awesome! Just wait and see...
This all sounds really cool, but let me get one thing straight...
It's called Batman: Intimidation???????
Nah, it's called "Batman: Infinity + 1"
Quote from: MacGuffinhimselfoWe're also told by our source that Batman: Intimidation is a cross between Year One and Year Two and that it's interwoven very creatively. So start thinking about which characters appeared in each and you might get an idea. The film is also said to be very story-driven.
I am sooooo excited for this. It's like they were listening to my prayers......Year One was awesome and I can't wait to see what they do with it.
i liked Michael Keaton, he was the best Batman so far. I havent seen him lately in any film. What happened to him?
Quote from: mollyi liked Michael Keaton, he was the best Batman so far. I havent seen him lately in any film. What happened to him?
He took a lot of time off for reasons unknown, but he made a movie for HBO last year and plays the President in the movie "First Daughter" with Katie Holmes playing his daughter that will be out some time this year.
i hope he'll be back. Thanks Mac
the two villian thing is worrisome, if not a total recipe for disaster. among the other problems in the later films, one of the biggest was attempting to cram in as many characters as possible, two villians, three, always obligatory love interest. just simplify the damn story already, you know? by the forth movie Bane was a goddamn gorilla and "julie madison"'s character arc consisted of like two scenes, "bruce, i want to get married", response 'uh, marriage, uh..." so i guess its pretty obvious cillian murphy is scarecrow then because its very unlikely he's ras al ghoul. i hope they dont fuck this up. also concerned that batman is going on some sort of world journey like james bond here. like, is is too much to ask to have it in gotham city? does he have to see exotic locations?
i'm not sure i have much faith in Nolan...
Memento - Good Idea
Insomnia - Decent direction
It's not exactly a 'requiem for a dream' type of director with limitless potential. I think this movie will really prove his talent...it will either be very safe and careful, or he could go balls out and make a great film.
Quote from: themodernage02by the forth movie Bane was a goddamn gorilla
Yeah, that really ticked me off because it wasn't the character Bane from the comics or the cartoon. He was hardly a villian, more of a henchman, which was a shame because the actual character is facinating. If you read Batman: Knightfall, you'll see what I mean.
Quote from: themodernage02also concerned that batman is going on some sort of world journey like james bond here. like, is is too much to ask to have it in gotham city? does he have to see exotic locations?
Well, they have stuck with Gotham City for the other Batmans, so I wouldn't mind
some of the movie taking place in another location. I don't think it will be like James Bond, because Batman is too dark and too insane. Ras Al Ghul was never really part of Gotham City, so I think most of that storyline will be outside Gotham (like a background story on his origins or something). The Scarecrow should stay in Gotham.
I have really high hopes for this Batman, so I'm trying to stay optimistic. With one of the 2 darkest characters in the Batman world being in the same movie, I am really looking forward to it. Hopefully the script is good enough to deal with the dark psychological issues with the characters.
"Batman" Story Details
Source: Dark Horizons
Having just read a full and in-depth synopsis of the shooting script of the upcoming "Batman" from yesterday's source, its time to share some small light on the spoiler details which will hopefully quell all the rampant speculation that will no doubt continue unless something like this is done. First off to those wondering I don't have the script or any pages from it - even if I did there's not a cat's chance in hell of me doing anything other than glancing over it and then locking it away in a drawer. I almost never read scripts because I don't like to be spoiled, and they are the studio's copyright so those who post scripts online whether it be a single page or the full baby, you are breaking all sorts of laws.
Reviews of scripts are fine, but again like most I don't want to be spoiled too much, thus what follows is tailored to that taste - there is some spoiler stuff here, almost all of it from the opening third or so, but what I've included doesn't have any real bearing on the plot, is stuff you're already familiar with and/or you'll find revealed in the film's trailers or official notes in any case. There's a few clever twists and jibes in the script, none of which I want to ruin for anyone
I was sent a multi-page breakdown/major spoiler review by this source and have since independently confirmed its genuine. The breakdown fits in with and spells out clearer the rumours heard so far, adds some whole new angles and is understandably critical about a number of points. In Nolan's hands it should be VERY different from what we come to expect from a "Batman" film (it took me a while to get used to it but I quite liked it).
After penning this item I have since deleted that breakdown as well so please don't ask me for or about it as I no longer have it. Like Warners, I don't want to see this spoiled but I will clear up some of the talk and lingering questions. This is a one-off as well, there won't be follow-up pieces or any more new details revealed although I will be able to shoot down inaccurate speculation as it comes up:
- All the characters mentioned so far are in it - Bruce Wayne/Batman, Alfred, Jim Gordon, DA asst. prosecutor Rachel, Jonathan Crane, and Ra's Al Ghul.
- Other characters include Ra's protege Ducard, Wayne Enterprise's Applied Science Dept. head Lucius Fox, mob boss Falcone, acting Wayne Enterprise head Earle, and various crims & law officials and a bunch of ninjas.
- There's no link or mention of the previous film's events, this not only ignores them completely but restarts the franchise as its essentially an 'origin' movie which changes elements such as the 'parents being shot' and 'how Bruce found the cave and took up the mantle' subplots.
- Despite the filming in London, almost all of the film is set around Gotham City (there's no mention of London) though there's numerous flashbacks to the past and early on the footage is set around a mountain monastery in China.
- The first portion of the film swaps between flashbacks and the present. In the past we see stuff we're all familiar with from the comics and earlier movies - Bruce as a child with his father Thomas Wayne, the famous alley shooting of his parents, being cared for by a younger Alfred, meeting regular beat cop Jim Gordon, etc. In the present its Wayne mano-a-mano fighting with Ducard whose 'training/testing' him as such for his master Ra's Al-Ghul whose watching from the shadows. This is no doubt the sequence being filmed in Iceland at the start of production
- With Ra's Al-Ghul he does have insidious plans but there seems to be no mention of immortality, the Lazarus Pit, or Talia. His sub-ordinate Ducard is an interesting character with a clever connection to his master.
- One subplot has Wayne Enterprise head Earle trying to take over the company and using his influence on public officials. Its revealed Gordon in the present is a Sargeant. There's also a small storyline about a mob boss whom Bruce has a personal score to settle with.
- One element I like is the discovery of the cave and its various entrances and the clever finding of the Batsuit described as "prototype spandex body armour". The Batman in full costume however doesn't appear for a while on screen (once he's there, he's there in force) which is a clever move and keeps one in anticipation.
- The Scarecrow is referred to only as Jonathan Crane who is the head of medicine at Arkham Asylum. There's a clever origin story to the fear toxin, and at certain points he covers his head in a sack/mask for protection.
- The second half (basically once the 'origin' elements are over) are more like a Batman movie we know but some cool new stuff and shots too which I won't spoil. Suffice it to say there's an elaborate plan which will wreak chaos on downtown Gotham. Key characters get drugged, Alfred pops in at the right time and place to save his master and offer wise counsel, and so on.
- Action fans will be happy with an extensive Batmobile chase through the streets, alleys and 'other surfaces' of Gotham. A decaying monorail system built by Thomas Wayne serves as the backdrop for some story elements.
- The coda includes mention of one of the Dark Knight's most famous villains - its pretty easy to guess which one.
Opinion: In the end this is one of those stories which at first glance will shock you, but then give time to process I think you'll come to really like it - fans of the comic especially should go nuts for this. With the Batman live-action movies we've become used to formula - Bats in costume hunting down a wildly costumed baddie who gets far more character development than our hero, and a dark twisted gothic fantasy sense.
That's all out the window, in this Batman really is the focus of the movie with the villains taking a sidestep. The villains themselves aren't garishly colourful or obsessively dark pastel-clothed freaks, they actually seem to be believable nutters and their connection is a quite clever twist even if their ultimate motives still feel underdone.
The love interest isn't a screaming helpless girl and how they handle it especially towards the end is quite mature, but she's not a particularly interesting character either. Alfred is handled nicely, Gordon especially seems to get some good stuff here. Even some of the plain human side characters like Lucius, Earle, Falcone, etc. are going to be interesting to see onscreen.
The action towards the end admittedly gets overly theatrical, but otherwise its quite shocking how un-blockbusterish this is, it plays more like an old-fashioned movie which allows its story to unfold than a big action spectacle - indeed the closest film I can think of in comparison is the first "Superman" and even to some extent "Spider-Man", in other words its very much a restart right from the beginning. With Nolan in charge it'll be interesting to see how it all turns out.
My confidence level in this project just sank 50%. Too much shit going on and half of it likely will come across as goofy. I mean, come on, "a bunch of ninjas"???
yeah it seems like they are packing way too much into one film.
actually reading that makes me more at ease with the whole thing. but whatever happens, at the very least its a new batman movie (and cant be any worse than Batman and Robin), and at its best it could be the best adaptation ever and a truly original different spin on a 'comic book movie' showcasing everything that makes Batman interesting and making a great movie out of it. i guess we'll see.
All I have to say is, so far, it sounds good. I'm thinking this may turn out to be a longer movie. Again, this better not suck. As for the Batman Year One references, they seem long gone by this synopsis. I'm glad Gordon and Alfred are becoming a larger part of the story. I'm a little worried about the love interest 'Rachel' that just seems to be thrown in there. I've been waiting for a strong female lead in a Batman movie, and the closest was Michelle Pfiefer as Catwoman (and now Catwoman's good name seems to be trampled on by the new movie). I'm still hoping for the best and I hope Nolan can juggle all those plot points and keep them steady.
Laurence Fishburne Up for Batman Role?
Source: Dark Horizons
The casting rumors for Batman: Intimidation are flying left and right now. Here's the latest from Dark Horizons...
Laurence Fishburne is apparently being considered for a three-picture deal (ala Michael Caine) for the small but vital role of Lucius Fox. Nolan is believed to be doggedly pursuing Chris Cooper for Gordon despite the actor turning down initial offers.
Quote from: MacGuffinNolan is believed to be doggedly pursuing Chris Cooper for Gordon despite the actor turning down initial offers.
Now that I would love to see! He would do such a great job with that role.
Freeman a "lock" for Fox? Batmobile description?
LATINO REVIEW is reporting that Morgan Freeman has "...been in talks and its 90% certain that he will get the part [of Lucius Fox]." On Monday, Batman-On-Film was the first to report this from a new source that proved to be legit. This report from LR throws a bit more weight behind that rumor.
SUPERHERO HYPE has an unconfirmed report of what the Batmobile will look like. The scooper decribes Batman's wheels as "2 F1 style tires at front, and four huge monstertruck style nobbly tires at rear. Batmobile not long, but wide, also has jet at rear. 2 seater side byside, it was mobile and driving. The one I saw had no shell." The website also claims that the "Batman costume has short ears and that the Batmobile is indeed complete and ready for filming."
Quote from: MacGuffinLATINO REVIEW is reporting that Morgan Freeman has "...been in talks and its 90% certain that he will get the part [of Lucius Fox]."
They are fitting a lot of characters into this movie. It makes me a little worried, but I like how the casting is going. I would love to see Morgan Freeman as Lucius Fox (even if the character looked like Al Roker in the cartoon).
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwf.toonzone.net%2FWF%2Fsections%2Fbios%2Fbatman%2FHeroes%2Fluciuspic.jpg&hash=5621997e8e92728d7317969fd7853b1fafda4e4c)
well if freeman turns it down, and they've already tried fishburne, they've only got samuel l. jackson left. because, you know, there are only 3 black people in hollywood, right?
Quote from: MacGuffinQuote from: themodernage02well if freeman turns it down, and they've already tried fishburne, they've only got samuel l. jackson left. because, you know, there are only 3 black people in hollywood, right?
You forgot Denzel.
You forgot Cedric
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.popmatters.com%2Ftv%2Freviews%2Fc%2Fimages%2Fcedric-the-entertainer.jpg&hash=c4226a579815a0ced833be204fc109f7ebfc29fb)
Quote from: PQuote from: MacGuffinQuote from: themodernage02well if freeman turns it down, and they've already tried fishburne, they've only got samuel l. jackson left. because, you know, there are only 3 black people in hollywood, right?
You forgot Denzel.
You forgot Cedric
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.courier-journal.com%2Ffeatures%2Fcolumns%2Fpopculture%2F2003%2Fphotos%2F20030718_2.jpg&hash=8997e9f3329b0ff88f218f572390d8afa15ab73f)
Brotherhood of the Bat?Wolf man rumored to be Bat-villain.
January 23, 2004 - Cinema Confidential claims that French actor Vincent Cassel (a.k.a. Mr. Monica Bellucci) will be playing a villain in Batman: Intimidation. The site did not specify which villain but the rumor mill has long suggested that The Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul will be Batman's enemies this time out.
According to a script overview that was recently posted online, Ra's henchman is a Frenchman named Ducard. Could that be Cassel's role if he is indeed in the film? Then again Cinema Confidential also says Michael Gough will portray Alfred the butler, which we all know is no longer the case.
Cassel's credits include Brotherhood of the Wolf, Shrek, Elizabeth, Hate, and Crimson Rivers. He's the star of the forthcoming comic book movie Blueberry and will reportedly co-star in Ocean's Twelve. Will the latter project, which begins filming this spring, conflict with Batman's shooting schedule?
In related news, Latino Review has added its voice to the chorus of news sites claiming that Morgan Freeman will play WayneCorp. exec Lucius Fox. They say Freeman has "been in talks and its 90% certain that he will get the part." Laurence Fishburne has also been rumored for the role.
Finally, Superhero Hype has posted what it claims is a description of the new Batmobile.
Thanks to Batman-on-Film for the heads-up on all of this!
-IGN.
Quote from: MacGuffinWhen was I fired from the news room and replaced by chuck? Why wasn't I notified?
It was probably that joke you made... :wink:
New script review is up. Some story spoilers but it gives a good glimpse as to how they're setting up the story:Read it here (http://www.latinoreview.com/scriptreviews/batman/script-review.html)
More Gossip on "Batman"
Superhero Hype scored an in-depth scoop on the next "Batman" which answers some of the recent rumours and adds all sorts of new things:
"The filming begins at the end of next month in Iceland and will continue until mid March before moving to the U.K. Iceland shooting-don't worry, it's not Batman on ice skates-more like all terrain vehicles, with Christian Bale not arriving till around March 1st. One of the cardington hangers being used for the film has large sets of a old train station of some sort, as well as housing the MASSIVE batcave.
Casting. First of all, Morgan Freeman is no longer up for Lucious Fox, but is up for Gordon. Initially he was, but when Chris Cooper refused, Nolan turned to Freeman. Cillian Murphy will play Jonathan Crane, and Katie Homes as Harvey Dents assisstant Rachel. Harvey Dent has yet to be casted, having Guy Pearce be the only one test for that. The role of Earle has been brought up to several people, none of them rather big name stars, but lesser known character actors. Same goes for Boss Carime Falcone. Lucius Fox is also still undecided.
The Batmobile is still being made but is not like "monster truck". Rather it is dark black. If you have the lights shut off, you ain't seeing it. It has twin jet engines in the back, with two small fins over them. It is a two seater and has two tires on the front, that, if looking from the direct front of it, are about 8-10 inches inward compared to the back two, which are slightly larger, but not that noticable. The cars are all going to be equipped with a large variety of gizmos. The jets can burn so hot it creates thick black smoke, and oil slick, all wheel drive, bat hooks, bulletproof windshield, ejection seats, and a t.v.
The costume - jet black as well. It is not spandex, under armor, or even rubber. It is a new material, that can stretch and bend easy, but won't be overly skin tight. Padding in the ribs and chest area as well as the arms and upper legs will be added, with large black boots for the feet. There will be about 4-5 of them. Batman MAY use other vehicles in the film...but I won't spoil that for you now".
Some Official "Batman" Details
Variety ran an article today with heaps of new details on the upcoming "Batman" movie set to begin shooting at the end of the month in Iceland:
It's one thing to reinvent a franchise after a few decades. It's another matter to resurrect a series that became overly stylized, even kitschy, and petered out only seven years ago -- and to convince the public that a new film could be something entirely different.
After a disappointing fourth installment, and three false starts at a fifth version, Batman will be born again. But don't call this the latest in the series. Consider it "Batman: Year One."
This time around, it's about the genesis of Batman: How billionaire Bruce Wayne makes a series of decisions that turn him into the Caped Crusader. Batman will be more realistic and less cartoonish. There are no campy villains. Wayne -- younger, more vulnerable, more human -- will be getting as much attention as his masked alter-ego.
"I felt like doing the origins story of the character, which is a story that's never been told before," says Chris Nolan ("Insomnia," "Memento"), who takes the reins of "Batman" from Tim Burton and Joel Schumacher.
Humanity and realism, says Nolan, is the crux of the new pic.
"The world of Batman is that of grounded reality," he says. Burton's and Schumacher's visions were idiosyncratic and unreal. Nolan says, "Ours will be a recognizable, contemporary reality against which an extraordinary heroic figure arises."
Nolan, a self-confessed James Bond fan as a child, is keen on reinventing Wayne as more of a modern-day Bond than hapless playboy -- an action-adventure hero who has mythic qualities and battles the odds to save the world.
With "The Matrix" series over, Warner Bros. is anxious to whip up a franchise to rival Fox's "X-Men" and Sony's "Spider-Man." Since the old Batman quartet was running out of gas, the goal is to rethink the whole thing.
WB Pictures prexy of production Jeff Robinov says, "There's an emotional component to the film which grounds it and really tells us about Bruce Wayne's struggle."
While the new Bruce Wayne is getting emphasis, Nolan, scripter David Goyer and WB have focused on fixing problems that plagued the other pics. For example, Bruce Wayne was too dark and impenetrable and had lost the humorous side found in the comics. The character was basically just dead screen time until Batman appears -- which in the new film may not happen until 40 minutes after it begins.
"If we're successful, the thing that will be talked about a lot and on what we worked on the hardest is that the audience will really care about Bruce Wayne and not just Batman," Goyer says. It doesn't matter how much you spend on special effects -- if it feels hollow, no one gives a damn."
Nolan starts helming the film next month, and its summer 2005 release will prove whether WB has been able to breathe new life into the Caped Crusader -- and to rescue its biggest franchise outside of "Harry Potter."
WB's wants to tap into the "Batman" fan base and bring back audiences that wandered away from the original quartet. The 1997 "Batman & Robin" failed with critics, fans and the B.O., becoming the series' worst performer, with just $107 million domestically.
So the new, untitled "Batman" is getting a complete overhaul, backed by a roughly $150 million budget.
Rather than pit Batman against a new set of supervillains, the new film focuses on how billionaire Bruce Wayne becomes the Dark Knight.
"It's almost impossible to reinvent Batman," says Robinov. "Chris is reintroducing Batman, and it feels smart and cool and fresh. That's no disrespect to the other movies, but it's really Chris' vision of Batman, and that's what we're supporting."
Christian Bale will don the cape and cowl inherited from Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer and George Clooney. Michael Caine (as Alfred), Katie Holmes and Cillian Murphy also star.
There'll be a new Batmobile, a new arsenal of gadgets, a new Batsuit (sans nipples) as well as a new musical theme.
Even Gotham City is getting a facelift. Previous pics made the city seem dark and claustrophobic or garishly stylized. Instead of lensing on sets built inside huge soundstages, the new film will be shot on locations in New York, London and Iceland, assembling pieces of each city to recreate Gotham as a modern-day metropolis.
"Gotham will seem like this great city in a contemporary world and will be created through various cities," Nolan says. "We are trying to avoid a villagey feel for Gotham, as it starts to get claustrophobic."
Goyer -- who penned the successful "Blade" series for New Line and was a former staffer at "Batman" publisher DC Comics -- adds: "As the Batman films progressed, they became increasingly more cartoonish and more like the campy TV show. We think the audience is tired of that, and it's at odds with the way Batman is depicted in the comicbooks over the last decade. Batman is a classic figure whose story is wrapped in tragedy."
Nolan jumps on that theme: "Few superheroes have the sense of purpose and destiny that Batman has. He is driven by an incredible sense of rage, sadness and grief because of the tragedy of his parents' murder at an early age. To me, Batman is the most interesting superhero because he doesn't have any superpowers. He is very human."
The casting of Bale, Nolan hopes, will not only give audiences a younger Batman to root for but also a weighty sense of his true character.
"Bruce Wayne is strong, and the things that are done to him to make him become Batman are all psychological and character-based," Nolan says. "We needed an actor capable of taking us along on this journey and showing the different psychological layers which inspire Bruce to become Batman."
Fans fearing that the new Batman has taken his passport and moved across the pond shouldn't fret, however. Nolan may be a fan of Bond, and the new installment may be made up of a mostly British cast, crew and locations, but Batman's remaining American.
DC Comics not only provided Nolan and Goyer with key elements of Batman's background, it also gave the filmmakers a list of what Goyer jokingly dubs "the 10 Commandments," a set of guidelines that should appear in every Batman story.
"Before they sat down with us, they had already done a tremendous amount of homework," says Paul Levitz, prexy and publisher of DC Comics. "Working with them has been a delight. We haven't been dealing with questions like, 'Is it "Bruce Wayne" or could it be "Bob Wayne" instead?'
"We started on the same emotional and intellectual level. We all want to make a movie that appeals to the most intense Batman fan as well as the person who's never seen a Batman movie or TV show before."
In terms of whether the movie will be too dark, Robinov says the film's more about conflict than darkness: about Batman's internal conflict and what drives him to suit up as a superhero.
The director's feeling the pressure to succeed. "It's an awesome responsibility," Nolan says, "because the fan base for Batman is extraordinary, and there's a lot of emotional investment in the character."
Warner Bros. also is understandably eager not to alienate or disappoint auds and hardcore fans with Batman's latest adventure.
A shroud of secrecy has surrounded the new pic since it was unveiled last year. Nolan and the new film's key creative team are reluctant to reveal too many details of the planned visuals or plot.
But daily updates and details of the new film's plot, characters and production designs are finding their way onto Web sites such as Ain't It Cool News, Batman on Film, Dark Horizons, Chud and Superhero Hype. (Finicky fans praised Bale's casting.)
The last thing Warners wants is a repeat of the early negative buzz that erupted on the Internet after Ain't It Cool News posted its scathing review of an early test screening of "Batman & Robin," which the studio said could have hurt the film's B.O. performance.
If the new film succeeds, WB's "Batman" franchise will have found a new direction for its sequels to take and compete with Sony's juggernaut "Spider-Man" and Fox's "X-Men" adventures.
Chicago Business revealed that a mystery $35 Million dollar project will be shooting in Chicago. Well, Sir Michael Caine has revealed that Batman Intimidation is the mystery film being shot there, in an interview with 15 Minutes Magazine:
Is it true you’re in the new Christian Bale-Batman film?
Yes, I’m Alfred, Batman’s butler and guardian and the film is being done by British director Christopher Nolan who did Memento. That’s an incredible choice because instead of playing it safe with a run of the mill, plodding director as they usually do, they’ve gone for experimental. I think he’ll make a great picture.
Isn’t Batman a bit old hat now?
This one is different, less comic-booky, and it starts with Batman as a baby. I am not a guy who just runs around with cups and saucers. The movie will all be shot in England in a huge Zepplin hangar in Hertfordshire, with some days in Chicago which will double for Gotham.
The more I hear about this movie, the more excited I get about seeing it. So far so good....
Dark Knight vs. Jedi Knight?
Source: Cinescape
While director Christopher Nolan continues to gather together the pieces for his next film, BATMAN: INTIMIDATION GAME, and prepares for a spring start to filming, we've received word from a trustworthy source that there is a new actor circling for a possible BATMAN role. While the actor in question has never been mentioned before in any of the BATMAN casting speculation heard so far, our source insists that they are "very likely" connected to the film now. Our source just doesn't know what role the actor is playing in the picture.
According to the source, the actor that seems to now be involved in the cast of BATMAN: INTIMIDATION GAME is Liam Neeson. A star of numerous films over the past two decades, Neeson's best known for playing Oscar Schindler in Steven Spielberg's Oscar-winning film SCHINDLER'S LIST. Genre fans will also know him as the bearded Jedi Master of young Obi-Wan Kenobi in STAR WARS, EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE. He even played a superhero that echoed elements of DC's Dark Knight in Sam Raimi's 1990 film DARKMAN.
Again, our source doesn't know which role Neeson would be (or is) playing in Nolan's BATMAN picture. If we were to speculate on possibilities, Neeson could be playing Captain Jim Gordon, the future Commissioner of Police of Gotham City...or he could just as easily be R'as al Ghul, the whispered main villain of the movie. Or maybe it's some other character that we haven't heard of yet. All we know at this time is that Neeson is either already in the cast of BATMAN or he's teetering on the cusp of being in that film's roster of talent. We'll know shortly which one it is.
Freeman & Neeson Join Chris Nolan's Batman
Source: Variety
Morgan Freeman and Liam Neeson are confirmed to have joined the cast of Warner Bros.' new Batman film, reports Variety.
Freeman will play Lucius Fox, a respected businessman and the CEO of billionaire Bruce Wayne's mega-conglom, based in Gotham City. Liam Neeson plays the villain, Ra's al Ghul, a wealthy international terrorist.
I didn't know Liam Neeson was arab.
I really can't picture Neeson as Ra's ah Ghul. Ra's ah Ghul had a sleek profile, hard lines, oh and NO IRISH ACCENT.
Neeson's to pudgy.
I know they want big names but why couldn't that have gone for someone like Oded Fehr?
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fia.imdb.com%2Fmedia%2Fimdb%2F01%2FI%2F77%2F19%2F06m.jpg&hash=177287686559639042178ad1ee6a8ab84bf5005b)
Ben Kingsley would have been the best Ra's Al Ghul, but I don't mind Liam Neeson (it could have been much, much worse.) However, he has to lose the Irish accent and change his hair. I am more worried about how they develop Ra's character. I hope they consult the comics and the cartoon. He better not seem like 'just another bad guy' because this guy was very different from the other Batman villians.
Neeson's Ducard, not Ra's!
According to VARIETY, Liam Neeson is playing Henry Ducard, not Ra's Al Ghul as everyone believed. VARIETY describes the role of Ducard as being a "mentor to Bruce Wayne." So, who the hell is going to play Ra's in this film? Could Viggo Mortensen--rumored earlier for the role--be the one that Nolan and company have in mind? Or is it someone else who's name has yet to pop up on the rumor mill? BatmanOnFilm is digging like heck to get to the bottom of this--stay tuned.
Good news.
Quote from: GloriaBen Kingsley would have been the best Ra's Al Ghul...
Great choice, but I don't see it hapenning. It'd be Ben Kingsley taking the basis of his work in
House of Sand and Fog and applying it to a role of minimal work and likely little importance to him considering how picky he is just with dramas.
Viggo wouldn't work, he has no distinctive look to really suggest Ra Al Ghul, he's just the hot choice of masculinity in movies now and if character logic comes into play, twenty years too young. I'm not sure who'd be the best choice so here's hoping to it being Ben Kingsley.
Watanabe to join cast? A MAJOR plot twist in BATMAN?
Friday, February 20, 2004: According to a new BOF scooper, actor Ken Watanabe (THE LAST SAMURAI) will soon be announced as a member of the BATMAN cast. And it is a MAJOR character--Ras Al Ghoul! This source also let me in on a HUGE plot twist that is cool as hell--and that I know to be true beyond a shadow of a doubt. And one that I wish I didn't know, to be frank with you readers. And I'll never reveal it (So DON'T email me and ask--the answer is NO!), because I respect this film....This same source has told BOF that a young Harvey Dent--not Two-Face--is indeed in the script as speculated. BOF has long reported that Dent was included in the screenplay by Goyer and Nolan. So, who is playing him? Well, if the guy they wants takes the gig, at least he's worked with Nolan before.
The ending will blow us away!
Quote from: SloyjThe ending will blow us away!
ebeaman will LOVE IT!
Ken Watanabe is playing an egyptian?
Quote from: DerekKen Watanabe is playing an egyptian?
What do you have against him? You don't think he can play one of them pyramid builders from far away?
I have nothing against him, it's just that he doesn't look egyptian...take a pill.
acceptable casting.
I wouldn't have thought of Watanabe as Ra's Al Ghul...but it could work. He has the physical build, mystery, danger and dark chrisma to carry that kind of a character. I'm still hoping for the best.
Watanabe had to decline BATMAN role? Quaid to be Gordon!?
Monday, February 23, 2004: This in overnight from one of BOF's best and longtime sources. This person knows. I know how he knows, but I can't reveal anything more about him. Let's just say that he has been dead on regarding many things beforehand--most recently with a certain girl who was cast in this film....
Ken Watanabe was offered the role of Ra's Al Ghul, and declined over scheduling problems. Warner Bros. then offered him the role of Ducard. Watanabe desperately wants to be involved in the "Batman" film, and the offer is still, apparently, there. I have no idea how this impacts on reports of Liam Neeson being cast as Ducard. Perhaps the initial reports of Nesson being cast as Ra's are correct, but I can't confirm or deny as I don't know. Also, expect a big or, at the very least, up-and-coming actor to be cast as Jim Gordon. There is a short list which I will have access to shortly. And FYI: The rumors of Laurence Fishburne being offered the part of Lucius Fox were complete lies. Fishburne is way too big a star for such a small role. That was total fanboy fantasy.
From this and what I can gather, Wantanabe is trying to get his schedule in order for him to take the role of Ra's Al Ghul. We should know how all this shakes out--plus other casting (Gordon, Falcone, & Dent) very soon....Speaking of Gordon, according to CINESCAPE ONLINE, "Dennis Quaid is 'close' to being signed for the part of Jim Gordon, the Gotham City beat cop that will one day become police Commissioner." BOF broke the story a while back that Quaid's name had been mentioned in conjunction for the role of Gordon--as far back as July of '03. I hope this pans out as I'd love to see Quaid get the role. The report also says--as BOF reported yesterday--that there is talk of making the official title of the film BATMAN BEGINS. Plus, there is a additional infor regarding The Batmobile and a fight scene. And it seems that CINESCAPE is doing the same thing that BOF and DARK HORIZONS is doing: not giving up major plot spoilers.
Christian Bale on Taking the Role of Batman
Source: Superhero Hype! Monday, February 23, 2004
Superhero Hype! reports that Christian Bale commented on why he took the role of Batman in director Chris Nolan and Warner Bros.' upcoming adaptation. He was speaking at the Berlin International Film Festival where his new film, The Machinist, was screened.
"I think Batman is probably more aggresive than most everybody I've ever played, you know. I wanted to take it, because, firstly, when I heard that there was a consideration of doing more of the movies, I just felt like I hadn't been quite satisfied with what I'd seen in the other movies. Certainly in the last two," says Bale.
He said that "it seemed as though there was actually a real character here, that it wasn't just a bland kind of superhero, one-dimensional. With him there really was an interesting character to be played. I loved the kind of fantastical notion of the superhero, but at the same time being able to bring a psychologically interesting element to that."
Bale added the people behind the film were also a deciding factor whether or not to take the role. "Then Chris Nolan is directing who, you know, is not a director I would have expected to do this movie. So that was ideal to me, I liked the fact that the people hiring Chris, hiring myself, were going with people who did want to reinvent the story and have it not just be a continuation."
Ken Watanabe is Ra's Al Ghul in Batman
Source: The Hollywood Reporter
Ken Watanabe, who is nominated for Best Supporting Actor for The Last Samurai, has been will be squaring off against Christian Bale in the upcoming new Batman movie, directed by Christopher Nolan. The Warner Bros. project is scheduled to start production next month in London.
Watanabe will play the villainous Ra's Al Ghul, an immortal strategic mastermind who wants to bring his own brand of order to the world.
He joins Bale, cast as Bruce Wayne/Batman; Michael Caine as Wayne's trusted butler Alfred; Katie Holmes as a childhood friend of Wayne's; Liam Neeson as Wayne's mentor Henri Ducard; and Morgan Freeman as Lucius Fox, a former board member and sidelined employee of Wayne Enterprises.
Watanabe made his English-language debut with Warner Bros.' "Samurai," though he has been acting since the early 1980s in Japan, where he is a household name, known for playing heroic samurai roles.
man this is a crazy foreign cast... i really like it!
Goer Blabs Batman
"Our movie is not Year One."
Ain't It Cool News chatted with Batman screenwriter David Goyer about The Dark Knight's big-screen return. "There were parts of the first and second films that I liked, but it was not, taking nothing away from [director Tim] Burton, there's never been Batman on film or TV that would be the Batman that I wanted," admits Goyer. "Except for the movie that we're doing. That's the Batman I want."
Goyer advised the site that he and director Chris Nolan "spent two days with [DC Comics president and publisher] Paul Levitz and the editorial staff of Batman, told them what we were proposing, and said, 'Is there anything that we're doing that you think is (wrong)?' I mean, we did stuff in Batman that has never been told before, but we didn't contradict anything."
The comics definitely influenced Goyer and Nolan's screenplay, particularly Jeph Loeb and Tim Sale's Dark Victory and The Long Halloween. "I think those were really good. And that approach influenced us. Our movie is not Year One, this or that, or any of those, but that approach did influence us," said Goyer. "Ours is definitely not [Frank] Miller. I'm not taking anything away from it, but it's definitely not Miller. All I can tell you is that DC was extremely happy."
Goyer got more specific when the issue of casting was brought up. "We were torn between [Christian] Bale and Jake Gyllenhaal, because we wanted to go in a different direction. But I think Bale at the end… I loved Jake, but Bale just seemed the right way. Knowing the story that we're telling… it's hard for everyone else because they don't know the story that we're telling, but it ultimately was the right way to go. And Michael Caine… I was just freaking out when we got Michael Caine."
The Blade filmmaker was mostly mum when asked about Batman's new costume. "Fans will like it. No nipples. No codpieces." And should fans expect another sequel after this installment? "We've set it up… the way it ends, there's clearly going to be another one."
For far more of what David Goyer had to say about Batman (as well as Superman and Blade: Trinity), check out AICN (http://aint-it-cool.com/display.cgi?id=17068).
Finally, Batman-on-Film claims that "Guy Pearce will be Harvey Dent – IF he wants to do it." The site also adds that the likeliest contender to play Jim Gordon remains Dennis Quaid.
According to Variety, The studio has chosen "Batman Begins" as the title of the fifth installment, described as an origins story of how billionaire Bruce Wayne becomes the Caped Crusader and faces his first foes in Gotham City.
Quote from: MacGuffinAccording to Variety, The studio has chosen "Batman Begins" as the title of the fifth installment
I always loved the fact that they were starting from scratch, and ignoring the previous ones, but come on, they can do better than that. With "Returns" already taken, what's the sequel gonna be called? "Batman Continues"? They should've stuck with "Indimidation Game" (if that ever even was the title)
Reasons:
1) Breaking the old title structure signals a new start better than "Begins" in the title. It doesn't say "Die Hard 1" on the poster does it.
2) If this is the first of a bunch of sequels, people (me, at least) will eventually tire of names like "Batman Lives", "Batman Survives", "Batman Forgets" etc.
With the "Batman(colon)" kinda name, you could start with "Batman: Intimidation Game", then continue with the sequel which could be called "Batman: some thing really cool that doesn't have to be one word, but in fact a whole damn sentence if you like".
I have no idea of why I really feel this is important, but damn it, it is.
begins is terrible. how about atleast : the beginning?
I don't like any of those titles or any title that feels like a continuation of the old series by having it "Batman: blah blah". My suggestion is the simple, "The Shadow of the Bat". Its the name of one of the comics and suggests a new era of Batman storytelling.
That would be great, in fact, or at least something to that effect. Why the hell did they lock themselves to the "Batman (something)" title pattern to begin with? What the hell does "Batman Forever" have to do with the movie anyway?
When do they start shooting?
verbing batman.
Verbing Batman 2: Noun-Island 3D
"Adjective! Interjection!"
- Ebert
"Movie Title verb in the past tense noun verbing!"
- Gene Shalit
Holy shit, this movie is going to rule! (http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=17118) Or at least the cast is. I hope Variety confirms this ASAP.
Quote from: GhostboyI hope Variety confirms this ASAP.
How about Hollywood Reporter?
Gary Oldman is Gordon in Batman BeginsSource: The Hollywood Reporter
Gary Oldman will star as Lt. Jim Gordon, detective on the Gotham police force, in Warner Bros.' Batman Begins. The film, which has begun production in Iceland, is directed by Christopher Nolan. It will also be filmed in London and Chicago.
He joins Christian Bale, cast as Bruce Wayne/Batman; Michael Caine as Wayne's trusted butler, Alfred; Katie Holmes as a childhood friend of Wayne's; Liam Neeson as Wayne's mentor Henri Ducard; and Morgan Freeman as Lucius Fox, a former board member and sidelined employee of Wayne Enterprises.
Quote from: MacGuffinGary Oldman is Gordon in Batman Begins
OH.....MY.........GOD..... :shock:
Quote from: themodernage02Quote from: MacGuffinGary Oldman is Gordon in Batman Begins
OH.....MY.........GOD..... :shock:
Yay.
I wonder what it is about this project that is attracting these actors?
So where do you think Nolan hid Schumachers body?
Quote from: WithnailSo where do you think Nolan hid Schumachers body?
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cinema.com%2Fimage_lib%2F4493_043_thumb.jpg&hash=ce0520ad0c65c5f3236ec506fcf1077cecdbce7f)
Here might be a good place to start looking.
.
Quote from: GhostboyHoly shit, this movie is going to rule.
yeah, you're right. either 1.) this movie needs to stop ruling, or 2.) other movies neednt bother even coming out next year because this is going to rule them all right off the planet.
I'm sure it will be great. As soon as I heard Nolan was directing, I had some hope, but until now I've been put off by the fact that it's a sequel. Now that I realise it's the rebirth of the franchise (which I'd been hoping they would do, but never thought the studio's would have to balls to start from scratch), I have much more hope for the film, and Nolan will be free to start fresh, rather than be restricted by the trashy films before it. Looks like this will be a much more mature and thoughtful interpretation.
batman has a history of being reborn almost every decade, this looks to be by far the coolest yet. thanks to our cool generation.
http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=17128
Scan from Entertainment Weekly:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.batman-on-film.com%2Fimages%2Fewbatmanpage.jpg&hash=d8405c9a16d36e9c2b334e3d9faeaa681f17b530)
That sure looks like some good casting. :) A good way for non-comic fans to see who's playing what character.
That is some awesome comic artwork as well.
i don't like that when any time studios need an older black man in an important role, morgan freeman is ALWAYS cast.
i guarantee you that after this movie, whenever somebody needs a creepy chinese man, they will go to ken watanabe.
This movie might lose Freeman his crown of "The King Of Phoned-In Performances."
i'd like to see Cillian Murphy kick some ass
logo here...
http://batmanbegins.warnerbros.com/
i like it
Man, that Batmobile sounds kinda like the one in The Dark Knight Returns. Exciting.
And that logo is brilliant.
Total isolation from the previous outings is what that logo shows. Brilliant indeed. Classy.
Someone sent some photos of some Batmobile to AICN, claiming it's the one from the upcoming film, but I don't buy it for a second. Mainly because it looks incredibly shitty.
yeah they printed FAKE on them a few hours later after they confirmed they were not real.
'Bat'-casting for Wilkinson, Hauer
Oscar nominee Tom Wilkinson and Rutger Hauer have joined the cast of Warner Bros. Pictures' "Batman Begins." Christopher Nolan is directing the latest incarnation of Warners' Caped Crusader franchise, which is being produced by Emma Thomas, Charles Roven and Larry Franco. Wilkinson plays Falcone, one of the leading crime figures in Gotham City, while Hauer portrays Earle, a business contemporary of Bruce Wayne's murdered father who has designs on the Wayne corporate empire. The actors join Christian Bale as Wayne/Batman; Michael Caine as Wayne's trusted butler, Alfred; Katie Holmes as a childhood friend of Wayne's; Liam Neeson as Wayne's mentor, Henri Ducard; Morgan Freeman as Lucius Fox, a former board member and sidelined employee of Wayne Enterprises; Gary Oldman as Lt. James Gordon; and Ken Watanabe as the villainous Ra's Al Ghul. Wilkinson, who was nominated for an Academy Award for his role in "In the Bedroom," appears in "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind." The actor, who is repped by Gersh and Lou Coulson in London, received an Emmy nomination last year for his work in HBO's "Normal." Hauer recently appeared in the TV series "Alias" and "Smallville" and in the film "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind." He next appears in TNT's "Salem's Lot" opposite Rob Lowe and James Cromwell.
The Casting is getting better and better for this flick
This film is seriously getting into great casting overload. Too much I mean. Where are they gonna find the screentime to do the supporting roles justice? I'm betting a lot of these will be really small parts, glorified cameos. Or, perhaps they're going for a highly unlikely three hour route.
There are many good movies where almost everyone is a well known actor even when they have a tiny part that is somehow important despite of the screentime they get... I think this will definetly be a 2 hour + film and it will rock!
ensemble batman?
could work.
The Caped Crusader Speaks
Exclusive: Christian Bale talks Bat
The May issue of Empire magazine landed an exclusive audience with the man some call the Caped Crusader, and Christian spilled a few beans about his plans for the Bat. Now shooting in Iceland and England, Batman Begins has so far assembled one of the most heavyweight casts ever to take on a superhero franchise – Liam Neeson, Ken Watanabe and Morgan Freeman for example, not to mention Bale himself. So what can we expect?
“I believe that there’s an opportunity with that character to do things that I, personally, have never seen done,” says Bale. “There are choices you can make with such a character. You can go very camp with it, like the TV series, but that’s been done. You can’t outdo Adam West with that kind of deal. So what else do you do? There’s a really interesting character there, and that’s what I’m aiming for.”
For all the Bale-heads out there dying for their next fix, the actor will be appearing in The Machinist later this year, a part for which he lost 60lbs – that’s a whopping one-third of his body weight, fact fans! Never fear, however, as he put the weight back on to play the Dark Knight.
“It’s very much like going from one extreme to the other. Batman is a guy who has to be able to tear apart a room, scale walls and do phenomenal things.”
The Batmobile Has Been Spotted!
Source: Warner Bros. Pictures
Warner Bros. Pictures has released the first two pictures of the Batmobile from director Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins, due out the summer of 2005.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbatmanbegins.warnerbros.com%2Fimg%2F5BAS0030.jpg&hash=643a23e042ff3aa1c47c42a9871f561a021ff9df)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbatmanbegins.warnerbros.com%2Fimg%2F5BAS0004.jpg&hash=6862524129df248a85abfc27f7fcac7dcdf839d3)
hhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....................
That's not a batmobile.
That's a sex tank.
I wonder what kind of gas mileage it gets.
batman would never drive an suv. he loves the enviroment. gotham city is very polluted and batman would get hung by the lib crowd in that. Unless batman suffers from adaptation movie/the 3 split personality.
thats fucking awsome...
Oh it's Kickass...
When will this movie stop getting cooler? That's everything I hoped for from the description.
Quote from: GhostboyWhen will this movie stop getting cooler? That's everything I hoped for from the description.
it will stop getting cooler when WB realizes how cool it is and fires Nolan and replaces him with Renny Harlin.
Quote from: StefenQuote from: GhostboyWhen will this movie stop getting cooler? That's everything I hoped for from the description.
it will stop getting cooler when WB realizes how cool it is and fires Nolan and replaces him with Renny Harlin.
:lol:
Quote from: StefenQuote from: GhostboyWhen will this movie stop getting cooler? That's everything I hoped for from the description.
it will stop getting cooler when WB realizes how cool it is and fires Nolan and replaces him with Renny Harlin.
:yabbse-thumbup: Brilliant!
Pictures of Bruce Wayne:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thezreview.co.uk%2Fimages3%2Fbatman14.jpg&hash=382ac60085c91e6f42c9d3dc6bf1ff432a77990b)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thezreview.co.uk%2Fimages3%2Fbatman10.jpg&hash=b5088119cbc82405a93726730ebd4e53456201a0)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thezreview.co.uk%2Fimages3%2Fbatman02.jpg&hash=6689d55bdee022dbdea229bda61fb41e18ea0e20)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thezreview.co.uk%2Fimages3%2Fbatman05.jpg&hash=6fa2957d8a538470a81df352eb7660c263517d09)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thezreview.co.uk%2Fimages3%2Fbatman09.jpg&hash=f88977ec5ce5a0866bcfe33f31f12c526bdf0b97)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thezreview.co.uk%2Fimages3%2Fbatman13.jpg&hash=e9fea74981582d4670b9c13079bfc2b1b2139778)
oh hell yeah
bale is the best bruce wayne ever... i wanna see this movie right now!
Quote from: MacGuffinPictures of Bruce Wayne:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thezreview.co.uk%2Fimages3%2Fbatman10.jpg&hash=b5088119cbc82405a93726730ebd4e53456201a0)
am i the only one who thinks he looks a lot like tom cruise in this picture?
Christian Bale really looks like Bruce Wayne. He just looks so suave and charismatic in those pictures. Perfect Bruce Wayne look. Now, lets see if he can pull off the batsuit. :)
I'm not impressed with those first few shots of Bale as Wayne. Sure, he pulls off the corporate identity of Wayne off, but Wayne was an outsider to that world and all ID of that is gone. Bale had a menacing look and presence in American Psycho and I feel it is being subdued in these first shots. Michael Keaton had the looks, Bale has the build.
But those are just tabloid snapshots of him on set waiting for the cameras to roll. You can't judge a performance on something like that.
GT can...
he must be menacing between takes!
Quote from: GhostboyBut those are just tabloid snapshots of him on set waiting for the cameras to roll. You can't judge a performance on something like that.
I was judging with limitations. my thoughts were in the context of just those shots and so of course what I said was limited. It was meant to be. Its just Keaton bled Batman just with his look and I'm pointing that out. Also, its conveniant other people made grander statements about Bale as Batman and they are ignored simply because mine was the only one that was negative.
Point taken, although I think there's a difference between saying something 'looks cool' in a casual photograph and examining nuances of character and performance based on the same images.
keaton oozes bruce wayne now. But I don't think he did when the first bat movie was being made. I was just a wee baby then, but i've heard people were crying outloud pissed that Keaton was cast as Wayne/bats. So far I think Bale is perfect for this role. Those on set pictures just make it more perfect.
Gotham City liscence plate... nice touch.
if anyone cares, here is a rendering of the batsuit from the descriptions that have been confirmed by inside sources...
SPOILERS IF YOU DONT WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE BATSUIT MIGHT LOOK LIKE
http://www.batman-on-film.com/batmanpics/bbsuitdomain.jpg
http://www.batman-on-film.com/images/bbhead1-domain.jpg
i really hope the head isnt that bulky. it looks like a helmet, and i thought it was going to be more streamlined to his head. i hope the real thing looks better.
I think it actually is streamlined to the head in those sketches...it's just that the head is drawn with such an impossibly angled jaw that it ends up looking like a helmet. In any case, it looks like Batman -- nothing out there, nothing too minimal.
Look's like Tim Burton's Batman...
Batman is Revealed!
Entertainment Weekly has an exclusive first look in its new issue at Christian Bale as both Batman and Bruce Wayne in Christopher Nolan's upcoming Batman Begins, which Warner Bros. will release on June 17, 2005. The new film explores the origins of the Batman legend and the Dark Knight's emergence as a force for good in Gotham.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.angelfire.com%2Ffilm%2Fmacguffin3%2Fbatmanew.jpg&hash=67379d57de85372e61b640f1123b9999f940dc4e)
In case the photo link breaks, go here. (http://www.superherohype.com/batman/index.php?id=1298)
Mysterious.
Oooh. The "ears" are shot! Nice. It kind of looks like armor, real bulky.
Looks like a cheap 1980s special effects outfit that show how bad Hollywood use to be in effects, but maybe the barbiarity of it is the point. Not that big of a deal, but on a level of coolness, Burton's original Batman still rules. This is still just one pic and Batman in motion may change my mind.
Warner Bros. has just added 3 new images of Christian Bale on their official site for "Batman Begins."
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbatmanbegins.warnerbros.com%2Fimages%2Fbatimage2.jpg&hash=a6ec7d9a05d489dbe98cf5b1b145598375edaca9)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbatmanbegins.warnerbros.com%2Fimages%2Fbatimage3.jpg&hash=a491e746c8f6cc7de7cffc3c846e0cd477858ffa)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbatmanbegins.warnerbros.com%2Fimages%2Fbatimage1.jpg&hash=623552f395e9b3a35c962d67e1acca59a41a788f)
Bat[e]man! Bat[e]man! Bat[e]man!
FUDGE!!! Why have I never made that connection before??
okay, i think the reason the head seemed bulky is that the ears are smaller and actually going in a little and not straight up like the burton batsuit. from that first non-ew shot i can see where it would look like that but on the 3rd non-ew picture it looks kind of cool. this looks very good. although you still cant really SEE much of the suit, but its pretty cool they released this stuff a full year in advance.
In case anticipation has disipated at all...
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aintitcool.com%2Fimage%2Fbbc.jpg&hash=477c70f251061a6eda63552b7b6866424428fffd)
Damn!
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aint-it-cool-news.com%2Fimage%2Fbbc2.jpg&hash=a6d8013756eb05fc62bfac83ee33b166e299b9da)
just finished reading the script -- very atmospheric,character driven --im very excited -- thats all i've got to say about that.
Quote from: GhostboyIn case anticipation has disipated at all...
it hasnt. Batman Begins and The Life Aquatic are my reasons to live for the next year.
Quote from: themodernage02Quote from: GhostboyIn case anticipation has disipated at all...
it hasnt. Batman Begins and The Life Aquatic are my reasons to live for the next year.
im sorry
Article on MSN (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5197046/site/newsweek/)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.joblo.com%2Fnewsimages1%2Fnews-batlogo-2-2.jpg&hash=a4bee2c8d01299692007d112d2f1e92bdc8666fa)
new image of the batsuit:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v345/batmanonfilm/beginsbatmanpic.jpg
Trailer up here (http://batmanbegins.warnerbros.com/).
Sooner than I expected. Think it was a reaction to the bashing they took at Comicon? I like how they're rolling out the advertising though, showing us a little bit. Very un-Lucas-ey.
The kid looks a little like the one in The Omen.
Good teaser IMO.
I love the new vibe that the teaser makes it seem like it's going to have and the cinematography is top-shelf but it didn't hit me until seeing it just how much of an uphill battle this movie is going to have to get out of the shadow of Tim Burton.
But it looks better than Insomnia and that's all that matters.
I agree. I felt sufficiently teased. Also makes it clear that the movie is to focus more on Bruce Wayne and the psychology of fear, rather than just Batman. Similar in the way that Spider-Man 2 focuses more on Peter Parker and the psychology of that weight and guilt he feels that drives him to be a superhero versus his desire for a normal life.
It's good, I think that focus on the human side is part of what made Spider-Man 2 good, what will probably make Batman Begins good, and what explains why the last two Batmans (and this new Catwoman movie) were so bad.
i particularly enjoy the new well-inspired villain
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpicolas.jaako.com%2Fwell.jpg&hash=ec6ba0f3d42f7837b58344b0ff0e8ff9324be766)
because if you really think about it, people are always falling down wells. and how do you kill a well? you can't shoot it, you can't drown it, blowing it up only makes it deeper, tightening its choke-hold on the city. you could fill it with dirt, but then you'd just have another well somewhere else. really cool.
Quote from: picolasi particularly enjoy the new well-inspired villain
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpicolas.jaako.com%2Fwell.jpg&hash=ec6ba0f3d42f7837b58344b0ff0e8ff9324be766)
because if you really think about it, people are always falling down wells. and how do you kill a well? you can't shoot it, you can't drown it, blowing it up only makes it deeper, tightening its choke-hold on the city. you could fill it with dirt, but then you'd just have another well somewhere else. really cool.
The only solution is to dive into it and destroy it from the inside out.
Well, I don't feel the way I thought I would after seeing the teaser, but then again, it didn't show too much did it. Like hacksparrow I'm worried that it won't hold up to Burton, or more spesifically Elfman's brilliant theme.
what sort of bashing did it get at ComiCon?
it's easy to beat a tim burton batman: provide an actual bruce wayne character and more interesting action scenes, that's it.
crowd: "ooooooh"
Quote from: peteit's easy to beat a tim burton batman: provide an actual bruce wayne character and more interesting action scenes, that's it.
True, but the Burton Batman's (in my case) have the benefit of nostalgia, of being one of my favorite childhood films. Elfman's theme will be hard as hell to top, though I'm betting, like the film, the music goes into a more sombre, downplayed and entirely different territory. Neither does Nolan have a quarter of Burton's eye for visuals, though in the long run I'll probably take a preferance to Nolan's version, on the grounds that all of the things I've stated as qualities in the Burtons I'll substitute anyday for exactly the things you mention; better characters and fight scenes that are actually put some work into.
Quote from: Sleuthwhat sort of bashing did it get at ComiCon?
Well, the teaser was expected to play there, and when it didn't the fans felt ripped off. Also, Bale and Nolan taped a 45-second video segment where they apologized for not being there, during which Bale looked bored/pissed off. Cillian Murphy, who was there also had the bored/pissed off vibe (from the reports I've heard) down pat, and no information that really wasn't already known was presented.
Quote from: DerekQuote from: Sleuthwhat sort of bashing did it get at ComiCon?
Also, Bale and Nolan taped a 45-second video segment where they apologized for not being there, during which Bale looked bored/pissed off.
............well,, you cant really blame bale for being like that.........nolan is one boring guy........his commentaries and interviews are so slow-paced and tiresome.........even nolan seems bored by his onself......
i would rather watch a crack head mother breast feed my best friend than listen to nolan talk............
Not only does that not sound boring, It actaully sounds pretty damned interesting in a Harmony Korrine kinda way.
Scorsese should make a movie of The Dark Knight Returns.
Quote from: ShanghaiOrangeScorsese should make a movie of The Dark Knight Returns.
I'd be willing to see that, but doubt that will ever happen.
Can we get Tim Burton to make Goodfellas 2 right after?
;)
If Tim Burton did Goodfellas Henry Hill would be an eccentric, pasty-white guy and the Mob would be a strange, dark fantasy.
Yeah but if Scorsese did Batman, Gotham City would be a city of mobsters (but not stylized comic book types, just the tough-talking ball-busting types) and Batman would be... Henry Hill.
and if i did sumthin then yeah.
Having the strong willpower that I do, I read the script for this the other day. I am still excited about it, but the script isn't quite so fantastic as we've been led to believe on this. It's good, but not great.
Does an Alien and Predator show up at the end? Because I think that's what's been missing.
Batmobile in action:
http://www.croqaudile.com/index.php?page=clips&id=4114
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.score.fr%2Fimages%2Fcouv.27Grand.jpg&hash=9e594fa62a2cda4c302ab5daffdcb9dfdcbc338f)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgoing24-7.com%2Fpins%2Fimages2%2Fhammcone.jpg&hash=755b973fa46f52411e0beac3bb6309f10a4fd346)
"impressive wingspan"
Howard in tune with Zimmer for 'Batman'
Source: Hollywood Reporter
James Newton Howard and Hans Zimmer, two of the film industry's most prominent composers, are in discussions to collaborate on Warner Bros. Pictures' "Batman Begins," which Christopher Nolan is directing. While it is not uncommon for multiple composers to write the score for a movie, those efforts are not typically collaborative. In this case, longtime friends Zimmer and Howard are looking to join forces. A spokeswoman for Howard confirmed that the co-composing plan for "Batman" is "very likely to happen" but that exact plans will be formalized "closer toward January," with scoring set to begin "in April or May." A spokesman for Zimmer would not comment on the possibility of the collaboration, saying only that "Batman" is a sensitive project and the composers' "schedules are hectic." "Batman," starring Christian Bale, is scheduled to be released domestically June 17.
New photos from the official site:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbatmanbegins.warnerbros.com%2Fimages%2F04.jpg&hash=ecdfb93583f09f7e57f6944bd3edeb4f007e4106) (https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbatmanbegins.warnerbros.com%2Fimages%2F05.jpg&hash=c8ca0dc8e2442d8fd157271612453c0d1f2e47cc)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbatmanbegins.warnerbros.com%2Fimages%2F06.jpg&hash=13e5bfefeaea9b2f05597f48578849779a7173b2) (https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbatmanbegins.warnerbros.com%2Fimages%2F07.jpg&hash=71f8f3e78264faf06b0bbcee32ed7bfa987a8f78)
Are you sure those are new?
Quote from: SleuthAre you sure those are new?
When you haven't seen them before, and weren't previously posted in the thread, they're new. Just like these:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbatmanbegins.warnerbros.com%2Fimages%2F10.jpg&hash=91833b1eae7e3ca8a0f1d60f4266731eae53eaf2) (https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbatmanbegins.warnerbros.com%2Fimages%2F11.jpg&hash=4dc099abf186f6579166fe3928b062477669ab63)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbatmanbegins.warnerbros.com%2Fimages%2F12.jpg&hash=cca6bb1f2bdf138a681224e0f1659ff85e84ccac)
ken wantanabe rules!
Quote from: MacGuffin(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbatmanbegins.warnerbros.com%2Fimages%2F10.jpg&hash=91833b1eae7e3ca8a0f1d60f4266731eae53eaf2)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.comicskins.com%2Fscreen_test%2Fbatman%2FScreenTest_Bat_RasAlGhul.jpg&hash=56cb779385ec9fad7d7b0786433e39f579661739)
I think they have the right idea..... :)
I'm liking this very much...
does anyone know where I can find the script??
Will you stay around after you've got the link?
Quote from: Withnail & GarfunkelWill you stay around after you've got the link?
everyone does...
Quote from: T.J. mackiedoes anyone know where I can find the script??
Warner Bros. Studios
Hollywood CA
USA
Batman-On-Film got the following report from one of BOF's oldest and best industry insiders. The person behind this info was instrumental in BOF nailing several scoops--among them the casting of Ken Watanabe and Katie Holmes. This source has also been very valuable to me personally in educating me about how the movie business works. Anyway, here is what he had to say about Guy Pearce, Two-Face and The Joker--
*READ AT OWN RISK*
The Harvey Dent/Guy Pearce rumor. It's been mooted for a long time now, but no one will confirm it to me, which I take as "it ain't gonna happen." Guy is heading for Queensland, Australia shortly to shoot a project penned by alternative rocker Nick Cave. The fan-based rumor that he will be jetting off to London to shoot his "top secret" scenes appear to be just that -- a rumor. The so-called "re-shoots" in London are not, in fact, re-shoots; they are what are known as "pick-ups" -- i.e. shooting time already built into the schedule to allow the director to "pick-up" any additional shots he didn't know he would need until after viewing a rough assemblage of the footage. Main cast are rarely used on big budget production "pick-ups", as their schedules have to pinned down way in advance. So don't hold your breath for a Guy Pearce cameo.
The Harvey Dent in the sequel rumor. The cat is pretty much out of the bag on this one. Most of my sources confirm that, at this VERY EARLY stage, Dent will be the featured new character in the Begins sequel. He will, of course, be transformed into Two-Face. That strikes The Joker out for the time being, but another rumor relating to the Dent/Two-Face plot-line has Dent putting a dangerous criminal behind bars in the sequel. It will be one scene, possibly Dent's intro scene as District Attorney. Later in the series, this criminal MAY re-emerge as The Joker. Which leads us to...
The Joker plotline. (Note: BIG RUMOR -- only one source on this). Anyone who knows their Batman lore knows how The Joker enjoys revenge. One tidbit thrown my way indicates that when The Joker finally does enter the new series (and believe me, he will), it will be a mesh of two or three very famous Joker plotlines from the comic books. Most fans will probably assume that this means a certain one-off comic from the 1980s, but fans will have to dig a lot deeper -- and a lot further into the past -- than that. Remember: The key words here are "origin" and "revenge."
Sequel casting. Jude Law's name has been bandied about the Batman projects for a few years now. (In fact, you may remember that Law's L.A. reps were being seriously romanced to entice the Brit thesp into the cowl and cape when Schumacher, and then Aronofsky, were attached to develop a new Bat project.) Now Law's name is being mooted as a possible Joker. Not true. But that's not to say that some VERY LIGHT discussions haven't taken place about Law in another villain role for the sequel. Another rumor I can dispell: Steve Buscemi was never considered as a possible Joker; nor was Robin Williams. Although Chris Nolan has not expressed any particular preference (the Joker casting rumors were started out of a certain office on the Warners Burbank lot), the general feeling is that he will go the same way he did in casting the Batman role this time around -- i.e. they are looking for actors, not stars. I can confirm that the Lachy Hulme ("Sparks" from THE MATRIX films) rumor was dead on the money. That certain office in Burbank has even gone so far as to do mock-ups of the Aussie in white-face and green-hair, which apparently look pretty good (I haven't seen them). One definite (I have three sources on this) is that whenever The Joker does appear, they (Warners and Nolan) will be looking for a deadly serious match for Bale's Batman -- which is a big call. That means someone taller than Bale, someone very menacing, and someone who can actually kick Batman's ass. Nice work if you can get it.
Quote from: MacGuffin(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbatmanbegins.warnerbros.com%2Fimages%2F04.jpg&hash=ecdfb93583f09f7e57f6944bd3edeb4f007e4106)
Qui-Gon! You're back!
Quote from: MacGuffin(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbatmanbegins.warnerbros.com%2Fimages%2F07.jpg&hash=71f8f3e78264faf06b0bbcee32ed7bfa987a8f78)
Yay.
Oh my god, yes people, the actors look like the characters.. its mind-blowing, i know.
Quote from: CinephileOh my god, yes people, the actors look like the characters.. its mind-blowing, i know.
I know, isn't it? :shock:
Quote from: CinephileOh my god, yes people, the actors look like the characters.. its mind-blowing, i know.
After the whole Catwoman costume/movie cat-astrophe...I need reassurance that this movie won't mess up any more of my beloved Batman characters. So far, they seem to have the looks down, and that's a plus.
Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes here. (http://movies.warnerbros.com/wbnewsletter/photos/photo2.html)
Rutger Hauer as Mr. Earle here. (http://movies.warnerbros.com/wbnewsletter/photos/photo3.html)
Cillian Murphy as Dr. Jonathan Crane here. (http://movies.warnerbros.com/wbnewsletter/photos/photo1.html)
Rutger Hauer is underrated.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F216.77.188.54%2FcoDataImages%2Fp%2FGroups%2F99%2F99226%2Ffolders%2F179636%2F1336537teaserposter.jpg&hash=b124b46baeae69bd9f0f4c8ce46eac95a718aa7f)
I like that!!!
I need to find that poster and buy it. It looks like the weight of the world on his shoulders...conflicted....standing alone...dawn of a new day -- I like it.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.empireonline.co.uk%2Fsite%2Fimages%2Fimage_index%2F6936.jpg&hash=4582e600ef9eadb687e8fd3090210243448fa1ba)
International Poster
whoaaa i like that one even better... this movie will rock
Very good posters. I'm really, really hoping this one will be terrific.
It will be the best Batman since the original but I don't think it will top Burton's effort.
my god, they're just posters :shock:
No you are
New Trailer here (http://www.themoviebox.net/movies/2005/0-9ABC/BatmanBegins/trailer.php), better version on monday
Quote from: EEz28New Trailer here (http://www.themoviebox.net/movies/2005/0-9ABC/BatmanBegins/trailer.php), better version on monday
WOW! What a kick ASS trailer!
:-D
This movie is going to rule..
lookin really good. hope it doesn't get fucked up along the way.
Quicktime Trailer here. (http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/batman_begins/trailer/)
Trailer crashes for me towards the last 2/3..
Quote from: MyxomatosisTrailer crashes for me towards the last 2/3..
Is that a euphamism for saying you don't like the last two thirds, or did the file just not play?
If it's the former, I agree with you.
I have enough faith in Nolan to not judge this trailer. I think this looks fantastic, I trust what he's doing with it.
Quote from: GhostboyQuote from: MyxomatosisTrailer crashes for me towards the last 2/3..
Is that a euphamism for saying you don't like the last two thirds, or did the file just not play?
If it's the former, I agree with you.
The last third makes Batman out to be a horror villain. :?
Never understood why they strayed so far from Burton's look of Batman 1 and 2. I mean, come on. I mean please, George Clooney as Batman? I'm really glad to see a relative unknown back behind the mask. Here's to a really great film noir version of the Dark Knight.
Of course, we have the villains. (Cillian Murphy is from 28 Days Later, for those who don't know. He is the lead in that movie. Interesting choice for Scarecrow. I kinda wish they'd just stick to one bad guy though and give us some character development like the Joker had.)
For those who want to know more about the bad guys..
(SPOILERS)
Ken Watanabe .... Ra's Al Ghul
-Powers-
While Ra's al Ghul possesses no super-human powers, he has remarkable strength and stamina. He is a skilled hand-tohand combatant and a master swordsman.
Whenever Ra's is near death, he can extend his lifespan and renew his vitality through his immersion into the Lazarus Pit, a combination of secret chemicals that roil and bubble in a vat deep within al Ghul's headquarters. Its only known side effect is the demeanor and strength of a madman that it temporarily induces in al Ghul once he surfaces.
-History-
Ra's al Ghul is a megalomaniac who places himself above society's laws and conventions in pursuit of his private vision of a "better world." To that end, he commands a small army of fanatical followers who are adept with both ancient and futuristic weaponry. Despite his great power and lofty goals, however, he will never be successful in taking control of the world...not so long as the Batman has anything to say about it.
Very little is known of Ra's al Ghul's background. Ra's al Ghul ("the demon's head" in Arabic) is assumed to be an alias, his real name lost to the mists of time. No one is entirely certain of his age, save that he has lived far beyond a normal human lifespan thanks to the regenerative powers of the Lazarus Pit, a bath of unknown chemicals fatal to others but always able to restore al Ghul to health and life. What is known is that, during World War II, al Ghul commanded an organization of his own which he often used to combat Axis powers. Two of his most trusted agents perished at Hiroshima, leaving al Gul to care for their teen-aged son as if the youth were his own. From the moment of his parents' death, the boy became fatalistic and moody and adopted the name Qayin, after a variation on Cain, the Biblical murderer. Sadly, it was Qayin who was then responsible for the death of al Ghul's beautiful wife, Melisande, whom he accidentally pushed into the Lazarus Pit; she met her gruesome end in front of Talia, the al Ghul's only child.
Many years later, Batman met Talia when he rescued her from a former employee of Ra's al Ghul's who intended to create a criminal cartel to rival his former master's. Shortly thereafter, al Ghul proceeded to test the Batman's fabled skills by arranging for a "mysterious party" -- secretly himself-- to kidnap both Dick Grayson (the first Robin) and Talia, but the Dark Knight was on to Al Ghul almost from the start. Once Robin was freed and safe, Batman was appalled to learn that he was being tested for his worthiness as a husband for Talia and an heir to al Ghul's international cartel. Despite his attraction to Talia, the Batman declined the offer.
Since then, the Batman has tirelessly opposed al Ghul's acts of worldwide terrorism. The job has not been easy; not only is al Ghul's personal fortune far in excess of even the Batman's, but Ra's is his foe's equal in brilliance and long ago deduced the secret of Batman's double identity of Bruce Wayne. On rare occasions, al Ghul has even fought at Batman's side, such as the time the two men worked together to apprehend the adult Qayin, who had become a formidable Mideastern terrorist.
Cillian Murphy .... Dr. Jonathan Crane/The Scarecrow
-Powers-
One of the most intelligent foes the Batman has ever faced, the Scarecrow is a brilliant, yet twisted, scientist. The Scarecrow's finest creation is his "fear gas," a powerful hallucinogen that brings a person's greatest fears to life. A surprizingly good hand-to-hand combatant considering his physique, the Scarecrow has studied the crane style of kung fu and perfected his own unique fighting style which he calls "violent dancing."
-History-
Thin and lanky as a child, Jonathan Crane was shunned by his peers and found lonely and solitary comfort in books. As Crane got older, he buried himself deeper and deeper in his studies. He created a disaffected outer persona to hide the hurt and anger within him, releasing his rage only to frighten small, defenseless creatures. Cultivating this interest in fear led to Crane getting his doctoral degree in psychology, specializing in the study of phobias. Fired from his teaching post at Gotham University because of his bizarre teaching methods, Crane instead turned to a life of crime. Taking a cue from an old childhood nickname, Crane became the Scarecrow -- taking his delight in frightening his victims as he steals the wealth he needs to fund his next experiment in terror.
A trailer's just a trailer, but I found myself dissapointed by the trailer before Ocean's. I could tell they prolly used a very limited amount of the footage in the film for the trailer, but it seemed like another action film with the usual action film tricks. It is nice the film is stepping back into a more appropriate style, but the first Batman holds up very well to this day for me so they'll have to add something more.
New photos:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos.imageevent.com%2Fbatmanonfilm%2Fbofimagesbofimages%2Flatimes_batmanpic2.jpg&hash=7c9a495a06452e79315db10b69e21d9d9f2ce6c9) (https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos.imageevent.com%2Fbatmanonfilm%2Fbofimagesbofimages%2Fbatman_inbatmobile1_sm.jpg&hash=a12229ef2f4395a2b4d477f75d7e3ad7923cdfc6)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos.imageevent.com%2Fbatmanonfilm%2Fbofimagesbofimages%2Fholmes_bale_begins1.jpg&hash=41f8f1cb39d226c382f082fdfdf79bbe9fbd0fad)
the suit looks cool... i cant wait!
Quote from: MacGuffin(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos.imageevent.com%2Fbatmanonfilm%2Fbofimagesbofimages%2Flatimes_batmanpic2.jpg&hash=7c9a495a06452e79315db10b69e21d9d9f2ce6c9)
Soooo comic book. Very cool!
Quote from: MacGuffin(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos.imageevent.com%2Fbatmanonfilm%2Fbofimagesbofimages%2Fbatman_inbatmobile1_sm.jpg&hash=a12229ef2f4395a2b4d477f75d7e3ad7923cdfc6)
Hmmm...Batman seems to be wearing lipstick in this one. :yabbse-undecided:
Dark Horizons Set Report
When it comes to the BATMAN movies, the last thing I remember is leaving the cinema on a cold June day in 1997. I had just watched Joel Schumacher hammer the final nail into coffin in which lay the beloved Warner Bros. franchise. Online speculation had been rife and early word suggested that this wasn't exactly the film that fans had hoped for. The naysayers were correct, and even over $US100 million worldwide has failed to soften the negative impact that this film had on the series.
Now, with a few months left before it's release, the world is waiting to see how talented director Christopher Nolan will breathe new life into the Warner Bros. franchise with BATMAN BEGINS. Starring 5 Oscar nominees, this version couldn't be more different than Schumacher's project. The trailers have been intriguing, the artwork is impressive and the film could be exactly what we've been waiting for.
September 2004. Dark Horizons has been invited to visit the set of BATMAN BEGINS, which is currently filming for Warner Bros. in England. A series of 'fortunate events' have led me to London and it is at my new home in the UK that I get the call from Garth to report for duty.
On a windy but pleasant day, I find myself in one of the largest aircraft hangers in the world, located just outside London. As we take our seats within the hanger, we are told that we should get to meet director Christopher Nolan (MEMENTO, INSOMNIA), his partner and producer Emma Thomas, production designer Nathan Crowley and hopefully some of the cast, which includes Christian Bale as Batman, Michael Caine as Alfred, Morgan Freeman, Gary Oldman as Lt. Gordon, Liam Neeson as Henri Ducard, Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes and Ken Watanabe as our villain, Ra's Al Ghul.
Christian Bale and Gary Oldman are both on set today and on the live feed from the shooting set, we can see repeated takes of Batman jumping out of his newly designed batmobile and after some dialogue which explains that *SPOILER ALERT* someone is about to release a toxic nerve gas on the city of Gotham. In take after take, we see Batman throw Lieutenant Gordon the keys to the awesome vehicle. Oldman seems in great spirits and when he appears to have trouble catching the keys, he bursts into laughter and jokes that he may as well give up. Not to worry Gary, only a couple of days left on this shoot - we are visiting on day 126 of 128.
In total there have been 163 sets built for this production and we are about to see one of the most incredible, which is Christopher Nolan's vision of the Gotham City slums. Production designer Nathan Crowley began his career as a Junior Set Designer on Steven Spielberg's HOOK and has since worked on BRAVEHEART, MAVERICK, MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 2, BEHIND ENEMY LINES and INSOMNIA. As he leads us through the enormous hanger, it becomes evident that Nolan has taken his cue from the Burton installments of the caped crusader's story, and completely ignored the hyper-realistic neon circus of Joel Schumacher's outings. Yellow cabs in various states of disrepair litter the streets below the elevated train tracks and to the side of one building lies a full sized train carriage-set, which is graffiti sprayed and I imagine authentic right down to the gum beneath the seats. Everything looks and feels like a dirty, cold, and dangerous city. We are brought into an area called 'The Narrows', the part of Gotham which is the slums and has been designed with images of a poor 'shanty town' in mind. The fully realized buildings rise towards the ceiling of the hanger, and seem to be linked by a web of clothes lines which stretch from one window to another. Nathan Crowley tells us that these buildings were heavily based on areas just outside Hong Kong, where the poor residents live in layers upon layers of small flats, which have grown almost organically upon one another.
Nathan introduces us to Andy Smith, who helped design and build the new batmobile. Moving away from the sleek cat-like design of the first four films, Christopher Nolan and Crowley tried to create a more functional and "realistic" car for our hero to drive. Andy and his team then built 5 of these fully working "sports-tanks", and an interior set (for shots inside the vehicle). Smith actually a hand in the design of the previous car according to Tim Burton's specifications, however this is the car he really wanted to build.
As he describes it, this batmobile is for men who really appreciate cars. Weighing in at 2.5 tonnes, the car has a 5.7 litre 350 Chevy engine and can do "0-60 in less than 6 seconds". After making sure that cameras and sound weren't rolling on the set, Andy actually started the engine of the car. Loud doesn't even begin to describe the noise from this beast. Whilst shooting exteriors in America, Andy said they really got to "try her out" and there is simply no contest between this and previous models.
After getting a good up-close look at the car, and wandering past the immense front steps to Arkham Asylum, we are taken back to our waiting room, where Christopher Nolan's wife and producer Emma Thomas explained how they approached the mammoth task of delivering the new Batman film and possibly revive the troubled franchise. "I don't think that we're feeling that pressure specifically, its not like we've got to do this, and they're breathing down our necks and [saying] 'This is our Golden Goose'' and 'revive it'. I think more than anything else Chris saw a story that he felt hadn't been told and really would love to make. This is a separate film and it's something Chris felt passionate about and has always wanted to do. It's not a specific pressure that we're feeling although obviously that is what we're doing." The studio has been sent dailies from the beginning and although it's more interesting for press to report clashes between the production and the studio, Emma explains that they have been "more supportive than interfering...and very hands off since we've been shooting".
When he first heard that another film was being discussed at the studio, Chris went to Warner Brothers and told them his initial ideas for the project. Then, Emma continues "we brought David Goyer on and came up with a much more firm idea of what the script was going to be and we went in and we pitched that, and the studio loved it. They absolutely adored what it was going to be and we were all very much on the same page right from the beginning."
Clearly impressed with the cast that they have managed to assemble for this film, Emma told us how lucky she feels to have an actor of Bale's caliber as their leading man. "Christian is a hugely talented actor and one of the things that our film does differently than the others is that you see a lot more of Bruce Wayne than you did in the other movies. He's as much of a character as Batman, and what Chris wanted to do was really understand who Bruce Wayne was so that Batman becomes a character that the audience can identify with or understand rather more. And so we need to cast an actor who had the range to play a fully fledge character and Christian is an enormously driven guy who is very very focused on his work and I think that that's a very important quality that Bruce Wayne has and so there's a certain identification between the two and he's quite amazing"
Emma mentioned her relief to the positive coverage the film has been receiving online. "I'm very happy that so far people seem to be happy with the choices that we've made and I hope that they'll continue to be happy. I mean one of the biggest pressures about making a film like this is that Batman is such a beloved character, that not only do we have to match our own expectations, but there's a lot of other people who've expectations that we need to live up to as well and that's enormously important to us. Having said all that, we do have to [be] focused on what we're doing and make the best film that we can make and hope that everyone agrees".
There have been rumors that Guy Pearce would make an appearance as Harvey Dent (who as many of us know, becomes the villainous Two-Face). Emma laughs and responds, "I love all these rumors. I won't be ruining it by saying he's NOT in the film. But I LOVE all these rumors, I don't know where they come from." We're also informed that there are no other surprise cameos.
It was almost lunchtime, and next up we were given some precious time with the man in charge of bringing this new version of Batman to the screen, acclaimed director Christopher Nolan.
First of all Nolan echoes everyone else's feelings that they are in control of a very important franchise, but must carry on and do what he feels is best. But why go from smaller, intimate thrillers to a big budget blockbuster? "I grew up watching huge blockbusters and really enjoying them as a kid and everything so I've always enjoyed films that, create a whole world and provide escapism [and that] create worlds outside of the one that you're actually in so it's been a great opportunity to actually try that."
"I mean obviously they had this great character sitting there and they weren't doing a thing with it because the previous round of sequels had sort of run their course. So I heard they were looking for something to do with it....[They were] looking for somebody to have a vision for what they'd do with it. And I was just very interested in the idea of creating a Batman from what I thought had never been made, which is in a way the one which you would expect them to make first, which is the origin story and the journey of the character from an ordinary person to Batman."
The thought of sequels is far from Nolan's mind at this stage. "I'm just concentrating on this one for now to be honest and trying to put as much as possible into this one. But clearly, the character has a limitless potential in terms of stories and movies. He's lasted as long as he has for that very reason." This film is clearly based more in reality than previous films. Nolan calls it a "heightened reality". As he explains "It's a recognizable world, it's a contemporary world, and yet extraordinary things are happening within it. It's trying to find a grounded basis in reality for all of the more extraordinary elements of the story."
As we board the coach to head back to London town, June 2005 seems too far away. The excitement on the set of BATMAN BEGINS is infectious, and as costume designer Day Murch had hoped, this one will erase any bad feelings about this particular franchise.
Super Bowl TV spot here. (http://pdl.warnerbros.com/wbmovies/batmanbegins/super_tvspot/super_tvspot_hi/super_tvspot_a.mov)
Quote from: MacGuffinSuper Bowl TV spot here. (http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/batman_begins/tvspot/)
the intended response to all superbowl teasers, especially War of the Worlds and now this: "CARCHASES!"
These Batman teasers are just getting increasingly boring the more action they show.
The, "Can I get it in black" line hurt my feelings. Shut up, Batman trailers, I wanted to see you.
Gotta have dialogue like that to show the masses that this Batman has a sense of humor!
:yabbse-undecided:
You have to remember though, that this commercial is for SuperBowl fans.
It needs to be loud and fast and appeal to stupid drunk people.
I actually really liked it... not because it's a good trailer, but because I got to see more of what I'm hoping is a good movie. I really like the look and feel of this. There is no way it could be as bad as the last two films.
I liked it, I'm really looking forward to this movie, I don't feel myself growing critical when I watch these trailers. It's weird, but I trust Christopher Nolan and Christian Bale enough to make something good (I've liked everything he's made so far).
Bale on How This "Batman" Movie Differs from Previous Films
Source: About.com
“Batman Begins” star Christian Bale made a special appearance at the 2005 WonderCon in San Francisco. Speaking before a packed crowd of “Batman” fanatics, Bale seemed focused on assuring the fans he knows the importance of his role in breathing new life into Batman on the big screen, and that he tackled the part with the utmost seriousness.
In addition to answering questions regarding stunt work, fighting, and getting to tool around in the Batmobile in “Batman Begins,” Bale told the fans he and director Christopher Nolan were committed to giving audiences what they deserve but haven’t received in past “Batman” incarnations. The fans were overwhelmingly positive about the new approach to “Batman” on film and after getting to see new clips (including a little bit of the backstory and a scene with Scarecrow facing off with Batman), the mood of the crowd overall was definitely upbeat and positive.
Prior to answering probing “Batman Begins” questions from devoted Bale and/or ”Batman” fans, the star of “Batman Begins” sat down with a small group of journalists to discuss the heavily anticipated rebirth of the “Batman” movie franchise.
CHRISTIAN BALE ON "BATMAN BEGINS:
How did Christopher Nolan help to shepherd you through "Batman Begins?"
Christopher’s really the reason I wanted to do it. I had first read a graphic novel - I’m not a comic book fan at all, I never have been - but had, I kind of forget how I actually ended up getting this, but somehow I got offered “Asylum” and read it and was really intrigued by it because it was nothing like it seemed in the "Batman" TV series, nothing like it seemed in the "Batman" movies either. I thought it was so much more interesting. I read "Batman Year One" and like the "Dark Victory" and stuff, and I thought, “This is good stuff. There’s a really great character here. The way that they play it is fantastic. Why has there never been a movie done?”
I had heard that Darren Aronofsky was planning on doing a version, which fell apart for reasons I’m not sure why. But then Chris Nolan comes on board, another really interesting director, somebody who [with] just the fact that they asked him to do it meant that they didn’t want the same thing we’d seen before, which is what I was interested in, creating something completely new.
We just had our first conversation and really Chris very much wanted to focus on those graphic novels, on "Batman Year One," on "The Long Halloween," etc. And he seemed to just like what I was coming up with, you know? It was a long shoot but it was very rare that we kind of actually stopped and had to work something out because it was going terribly wrong. He usually enjoyed sitting back and seeing what I was going to come up with. And, you know, generally we communicated enough beforehand that he liked it, that he enjoyed it throughout.
The main thing he had to guide me on was just about the physicality because I was coming into the part being extremely scrawny and skinny and he was just kind of terrified that I wasn’t going to be able to look believable playing the Dark Knight, but we got that worked out.
Have you seen a rough cut of the film yet?
Well, I’ve been told I’d get shot or something if I said that (laughing). But yeah, no, I expect very good things.
Does it look like how you thought it would look like?
Yes. I’m not sure how much I should go into…
You can tell us anything. All of it.
First of all, it is obviously the genesis and it’s not referring to any of the other movies. It’s not a prequel. It’s not a sequel. None of that. It’s just the beginning. We weren’t referring to any of the other movies whatsoever. It’s far more human than any of the others.
You know, we’re taking advantage of using the great story of how he came to invent Batman so [it's] his early days, the beginnings of Bruce Wayne. A very large part of the movie is taken up with that before you even see any ears at all. But then also I think that one very big difference, at least in my eyes, is just the way that we chose to portray the Batman himself. Just because I realized that the TV series was a spoof on what the original Bob Kane intentions had been. I never felt that I’d seen it adequately done in any of the other movies either, in that I really attempted to become a different creature that just kind of ceases to be human at that point. And frankly I had to do that out of necessity just because I felt like an idiot when I was just standing in the Batsuit and being a guy. You just can’t. You can’t hang out in that suit. You have to be in control. You have to be focused.
I would always remember about the fact that this is somebody who is fanatical, you know? If you think about the obsession that somebody must have to retain the pain and anger from an incident that happened 20 years previously and is still in the forefront of his mind. You know that’s an incredible obsession. I mean, that’s an unhealthy obsession. So concentrating on the fact that he’s attempting to take his pain and his guilt and his anger and the rage and do something good with it, even though his impulses are that he does just want to rage and break bones and do damage. So there’s always that conflict. And so, for me, it was very much about remembering that. I would refer to the different graphic novels. I had them on the set with me all the time just because I loved the imagery of it so much.
And remembering that I never wanted to appear to be Bruce Wayne in a Batsuit when I was playing the Batman. That he just becomes - that it is an alter ego completely.
With Patrick Bateman from "American Psycho," Trevor Reznik in "The Machinist," and this, you seem to have this attraction to obsessive characters.
I’ve done many other different characters that aren’t so obsessive as well, but I think I would imagine to everybody here I’d be very surprised if anybody here wouldn’t say that an obsessive character is not illuminating in some way. That they are people who you wouldn’t necessarily want to have in your life, but you certainly enjoy hearing about them and watching them. I mean, pretty much anybody you look at throughout history who’s achieved great things, they were obsessive about it. And it also means that with characters who are as obsessive as that, you can kind of make up your own rules because they’re not playing by society’s rules that we all kind of know and acknowledge each and every day of how to get through life without upsetting everybody around you at any given moment. And you can kind of chuck all that out of the window when you’re playing those kind of characters, so they are enjoyable.
There is a legacy of "Batman" and the actors who've played him. How does your approach differ?
I think that you have with the Tim Burton ones a great stylized version. But to me, whilst I enjoyed those ones, it was more the stylization of the villains than Batman himself. I didn’t see a whole lot going on in Batman. The other ones just weren’t my thing at all. And I just felt that I wanted to attempt to base it in reality, starting from a realistic point of view of the pain and the trauma that a child has been through, and really looking at it as that instead of just [he's] this incredibly theatrical character that jumps around in a Batsuit, which to me would be kind of stupid if I met him in the street. You know, I don’t think I would be intimidated. I would laugh at him.
You had to get to a point where the audience would be drawn in enough to believe that this guy has gone through so much pain and anger, and then we have a really nice backstory about how he creates the Batman. And also, there’s a very nice practical backstory to every gadget, and to the Batsuit and to everything. Everything is explained in the movie. Nothing was taken for granted at all. There’s no assumptions that the audience would just understand it immediately. We wanted to show how did this happen and why did he choose everything. And it’s all explained very, very well and in detail. And in making that kind of approach, I think it couldn’t help but appear different because you got a real character, you know?
We were focusing on Bruce Wayne and Batman, whereas what I would find in watching most of the other movies, and also the TV series and things, I always found the villains much more interesting. And that was the main revelation to me in reading one of the graphic novels. Batman is the most interesting of them all, you know? I mean, he’s the really on-the-edge one because he’s the guy that, okay, he’s doing good but he’s the Dark Knight. I mean, a knight is meant to be in shining armor and he’s the Dark Knight. He could do good things but man, he could just as easily flip over and become like the ultimate villain. Hopefully we’ve been able to portray that in a more character-based way than has been shown before.
What’s your favorite gadget from the film?
The car. It has to be because they’ve done such a radically different thing with it. What I love about it is that aesthetically it kicks ass. It looks f***ing stunning.
There were a couple of times driving down the street in Chicago where it’s like, “We can load it on the truck or just drive 5 minutes down there,” and they just drove 5 minutes down there. And you see that thing just going down the street and everybody is stopping and looking. “What the hell is this?” There was even this guy who crashed into it. This poor drunken guy who didn’t have a license, who said he got so panicked when he saw the car he thought aliens were landing and he put the pedal to the medal. I wasn’t in it – it was the stunt driver driving it at the time. He put the pedal to the medal and sideswiped the Batmobile. So, you know, it has this affect upon people.
I just loved how it’s indicative of the way that we are making the movie as a whole. It looks nothing like any Batmobile that has come before it. And it completely has practical applications which are explained and are very smart, and make complete sense. That’s indicative of what we’ve done with everything that has to do with the movie, including the explanation of the suit, the cowl, all the different gadgets that he comes up with and where he comes to them.
How did the Batmobile handle?
Stunning. Fantastic. I wish I got to drive it more, you know? The guy with the coolest job on the set was the stunt driver. I got a lot of attention the first few days I had the Batsuit on and then after a while you get used to me sitting around in a Batsuit. The stunt driver, every time he came on the set everyone was just in awe. (Laughing) “Here comes the man. This is the guy who’s really going to make the movie." And it is stunning. The things that they did with it. The actual engineering of it is stunning. I don’t know an awful lot about cars, but apparently it’s the first car ever designed without any kind of front axle. It really can do the things that you see in the movie. The actual cars really did do them. They built like 12 or 13 of them.
Did you get to keep one?
That was the first question [I asked]. They looked at me and they went, “You f***ing kidding?” So I didn’t get to keep one of them. But it is a fantastic drive. I’ve always been a fan of motorbikes and not so much of cars. You get in that and you just can’t help but love cars because you see all of the inner workings inside of it. You can see the functionality of everything that’s going on. And it screams when you get it up to a high speed.
It really flies. They couldn’t keep up with it – the camera cars. They were having trouble keeping up with it. They were having to ask, “Can you please slow down a little bit because we just can’t keep up with the thing?” But it screams in your ear and you’ve got this smell and everything inside of it. It’s elating. My heart was pounding every time I stepped out of that thing.
Some of the other actors have had a tough time acting in the suit. Was that a problem?
It wasn’t. I think some of them were talking about just the physical stamina that you kind of need for being in that. When you first put it on, you feel like you’re scuba diving or something, and it feels kind of claustrophobic. But you know, I just sat with it for a while and like I said, I could not wear that suit without making myself feel like some kind of beast. And so I found it just happened really kind of organically and I just went with as much aggression and rage as I could, bordering on appearing like a bad guy when he’s got the suit on. That you should be unsure when you’re faced with him.
First of all, I wanted it to be that he was never somebody that kind of just stood still saying, “Hi, I’m Mr. Batman. How are you?” That it should always be almost as if you’re witnessing a very rare and dangerous creature in the jungle or something. Like somebody that you just glimpse momentarily. And also I think that they made a lot of advances in the actual makeup of the suit. It was kind of like they cooked it, really. It was like a kitchen where they were boiling up all these different ingredients to try and get just the perfect level of mobility and rigidity in certain areas, etc. So I think I, by far, have had the easiest time of anybody short of probably Adam West who I think was trotting around in some kind of cotton get-up or something. They really came up with some good stuff. It’s much more mobile than any of the other suits have been.
How heavy was the suit and what was your first reaction when you saw yourself in it?
Actual poundage, I’m not sure of how heavy it really was. And my first reaction in seeing it... I remember I tried on one of the old ones for the screen test they had to do, but, you know, it didn’t fit exactly. It hadn’t been made for me. The first time I put on the one that actually was made for me, it was like I said. It was like looking at a creature. It kind of wasn’t me in there at all, and that’s how I liked it. I didn’t want to have any kind of recognition of myself or Bruce Wayne, once he’s inside of it at all.
But it was kick as well as a high. You’re getting into that suit and you’re looking in the mirror and seeing it, and staring back at yourself.
And, you know, it’s a long shoot. It was about seven months. You can start to get kind of blasé about it. “Well, you know, I’ve got a Batsuit on…” That was why I kept the images around me all the time, to remind myself of that initial feeling. Because it was a very strong feeling when I first put that on of feeling like a very dangerous creature to be around.
Batman and Bruce Wayne each have interesting foils including Alfred, James Gordon, Scarecrow, etc. Which character that you played off of told you the most about your own character?
I think certainly Michael Caine as Alfred in terms of the past. I think that he certainly was the most informative of the characters because, first of all, he plays it brilliantly. He’s so good. He’s funny but you know you really get to feel and witness the pain that this guy has been through, and that the ones who love him have had to sit back and see him go through, being tortured through his teenage years and everything, and not really being able to reach out and help him. Everybody else kind of is controlled more by Batman, whereas the Alfred character is the only one who’s able to get behind that mask and know exactly who Bruce is and knows his weak points and can push any buttons that he wants, because he’s his surrogate father.
Of Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer, George Clooney – which one of the previous Batmans added the most amount of credibility to the role?
You know, they did it in different ways. I think what Adam West did was great. I just didn’t realize when I was watching it as a kid that it was a spoof, you know? It was a very campy kind of thing, performance that he was doing. After that, I would say Michael Keaton because of Tim Burton and the way that he approached the movie. However we didn’t want to do anything like that either. To me, that isn’t what I was seeing in the graphic novels at all. And I’d never really felt the danger of Batman that I felt should be appropriate.
It was also in reading a forward by Frank Miller that I believe is in "Batman Year One" about when he first saw Batman and how he says to him Batman was never funny. And I liked that because that’s what I had always thought. That this should not be that there can be a lot of comedy through it, but coming from other people. But the actual Batman himself, you know, I think had gotten lost in a lot of little one liners and quips that reduced the edge and the reason that he had become this Batman in the first place, which was this incredible pain, anger, guilt and rage that he had within.
Is he mentally ill?
I think probably some psychiatrists would say yes for hanging on to that pain intentionally, keeping hold of it and letting it rule much of his life. I wouldn’t say he’s schizophrenic or something, like it’s an actual – or multiple personalities where he’s unable to control. He can control it, but it’s intense discipline that he’s learned to be able to function in everyday life. And in many ways, the Bruce Wayne character, the playboy, the cad, etc., the business man, he’s actually the mask. He is the performance. Nobody would say it would be a healthy state of mind to be in, but I’m not suggesting that he’s actually got multiple personality disorder or anything like that. Although, personally, I think that’d be quite an interesting way to take it if you wanted to really go to extremes with him.
okay i'm excited.
Quote from: MacGuffinBale on How This "Batman" Movie Differs from Previous Films
It was also in reading a forward by Frank Miller that I believe is in "Batman Year One" about when he first saw Batman and how he says to him Batman was never funny. And I liked that because that's what I had always thought. That this should not be that there can be a lot of comedy through it, but coming from other people. But the actual Batman himself, you know, I think had gotten lost in a lot of little one liners and quips that reduced the edge and the reason that he had become this Batman in the first place, which was this incredible pain, anger, guilt and rage that he had within.
yeah, but the trailer shows that they still couldn't resist those one liners like when he's driving the Batmobile and comes to a quick stop and says "Does it come in blue?" or something along that line.
exactly. They better have a swelling and ominous score under that line :yabbse-angry:
hahaha..... :yabbse-thumbup:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos.imageevent.com%2Fbatmanonfilm%2Fbofimagesbofimages%2Fbatman_batsignal.jpg&hash=898038196710eb21af4e5855615b8499f2a3ae67)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos.imageevent.com%2Fbatmanonfilm%2Fbofimagesbofimages%2Fscarecrow_horseback.jpg&hash=36da961843b6d811e5b4a2bd335ec71699b5ec5e)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.omelete.com.br%2Fimagens%2Fcinema%2Fnews%2Fbatman_begins%2F22.jpg&hash=5ce7657687a91a7215c5d2e0f08725e4cdf4f3eb)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos.imageevent.com%2Fbatmanonfilm%2Fbofimagesbofimages%2Fwebsize%2Fbatman_arkham1.jpg&hash=32805e398fd7e4b7b8d31c09c5cedaa4bbae2e1b)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos.imageevent.com%2Fbatmanonfilm%2Fbofimagesbofimages%2Fwebsize%2Fbegins_batman_rain.jpg&hash=daf12a80f5b96b7c57871d3cfc9c659edd04c76a)
Quote from: MacGuffin(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos.imageevent.com%2Fbatmanonfilm%2Fbofimagesbofimages%2Fwebsize%2Fbegins_batman_rain.jpg&hash=daf12a80f5b96b7c57871d3cfc9c659edd04c76a)
They're going to kiss. I just know it.
These pictures are the first I've seen that have really made me somewhat excited about the movie (not counting the excitement I felt when they first announced the cast, which faded with the underwhelming trailers). The Scarewcrow looks great. And that shot of Batman being pulled down by the crowd is amazing...wonderfully dynamic.
Quote from: GhostboyAnd that shot of Batman being pulled down by the crowd is amazing...wonderfully dynamic.
Yeah, I liked that one especially. Hmm, it's probably just this set of pictures, but the colors are so neutral, they're almost hard to look at, but hey anything is better than neons and bright glowstick colors that looks like an ecstasy cabaret.
Also, anyone know what city is in the background of the first pic? London?
Quote from: Gamblor Ain'tWorthADollarAlso, anyone know what city is in the background of the first pic? London?
Maybe Chicago. I know they've been filming there.
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetQuote from: Gamblor Ain'tWorthADollarAlso, anyone know what city is in the background of the first pic? London?
Maybe Chicago. I know they've been filming there.
aye, that's true. they've also been filming in gotham city.
Scan of new poster:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimagecache2.allposters.com%2Fimages%2F153%2F1123408.jpg&hash=6b49690adf84920a9a393b4cdb4a555e95ae0fed)
That's the worst of the three posters I've seen for this. Photoshopped stills from the movie bug me.
actually, its my favorite.
Yeah, that poster gets me more excited than any of the trailers have. It's a real beaut.
(And all posters are Photoshopped stills, when you think about it, unless they're of the rare handpainted/illustrated variety).
It just looks like it was made by a fan on photoshop, I suppose was my point.
atleast it was a very talented fan who spent a long time in photoshop. as gb said, the painted variety is a dying breed unfortunately.
Four TV Spots here. (http://www.worldofkj.com/batmanbeginsTVa.php)
First two are 10 seconds long, the last two are 30 seconds.
I saw one of the TV spots. I'm really losing enthusiasm for this film. I have a feeling Burton's original will still stand after this one. I'm thinking the filmmakers for the new one believe the key to Batman's story is telling his entire story to really achieve depth in his character. I never believed so. For a comic book adaptation, I believe the key lies in the image and the actor. I have no clue what my reaction to the new film will be, but Batman (1989) engrained images into me that made the Joker a monster and Bruce Wayne a tormented soul reality. The film still carries a large impression when I watch it. Sure, the story is basic as one can get, but the production value to recreate Gotham is incredible. Also the performance of Michael Keaton and Jack Nicholson are perfect. They apply a seriousness to the story one wouldn't expect an actor to give. Thus the film remains for me (at the moment) the definition of what will likely ever be achieved in this series.
The only thing I'm doubting is how much humor is in the film and its necessity. "You should see my other one" "does it come in black" "Anyone who would dress up as a bat..." I dunno, these are pretty self-referential lines. It might fuck up the movie. But I still trust Nolan with anything.
Is anyone suprised at the real lack of marketing this movie? Remember when Burton's version came out in 1989?
Has Batman gotten old?
I think they're purposely trying to play it low for right now. The barrage will start in May
It's starting up. There are posters and billboards all over Los Angeles. Those commecials ran during the NCAA Tournament. Word is there there may be a new trailer attached to House Of Wax (May 5th).
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos.imageevent.com%2Fbatmanonfilm%2Fbofimagesbofimages%2Fbeginsposter4.jpg&hash=f47276e82097975fdae04ab05b1553d0b8039323)
I dont like that poster... its like the other one posted before but worse... like he is desintegrating or something
yeah they should've stopped at the last one. this isnt terrible, but its definitely worst.
Quote from: andykallike he is desintegrating or something
or forming? this one is better than the last. tho they all suck so far.
it looks like batman is asking someone out. WEAK!
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos.imageevent.com%2Fbatmanonfilm%2Fbofimagesbofimages%2Fbatman_romantic2.jpg&hash=d322fb0be029e8f85bd70cc5ae56c2fbe917930e)
I still say the very first poster was the best.
god, thats an ugly fucking poster
Yeah, THAT one looks like a really bad Photoshop job.
Batman Gets Married ?
Morgan Freeman?
Can someone PLEASE photoshop him as Batman?
That would be glorious/hilarious.
is that sposed to be katie holmes? if so, good nip. and SPOILS.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.actuacine.net%2FPoster%2Fbatman-begins06.jpg&hash=d748956ce07bd8e47654c8f50a5b7414679325e6)
its getting to the point that there will soon be more posters than actual frames in the film. (but this one is cool).
Dear Warner Brothers,
We know what Batman looks like, we know the sky in Gotham city looks like copper, we know he likes bats, cut it out.
Sincerely,
that would actually look good with sum music.
Actually he's looking down at his Batmobile and wondering if it comes in black
NEW TRAILER: http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1500723/04252005/story.jhtml
HOLY SHIT. This looks so good. I feel even better about this film. I can't wait.
Quote from: Pubrickis that sposed to be katie holmes? if so, good nip. and SPOILS.
i was right. awesome. and SPOILS.
I disapprove but I'll pay to see it anyway :violin:
Direct trailer link here. (http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/batman_begins/trailer4/)
The trailer is almost identical in style to the Spiderman 2 trailer.
Let's just hope the bread doesn't come out of the oven early so I can go see this in June.
Writing Batman Begins
"He contemplates first-degree murder."
The latest issue of Scr(i)pt magazine features a cover story penned by Batman Begins co-screenwriter David Goyer. He goes into great detail about what the filmmakers were intending to do with the Dark Knight's return. Here's a taste:
"Bruce's main conflict in the film is his struggle with his desire for revenge. He is torn between justice and revenge. This is a theme that is repeated throughout the movie – in scenes with Rachel (his childhood sweetheart), in scenes with Ducard (his mentor), and even in a scene with Falcone (mob boss of Gotham)."
"Batman Begins is definitely the darkest depiction of Bruce Wayne yet seen on film. It is also the most realistic depiction of Bruce. He contemplates first-degree murder. We felt we needed to go there in order to justify Bruce's donning the Batman costume. Fortunately, Warner Bros. was very supportive of this approach."
"In terms of craft, I used a slightly different voice for this screenplay. Because I wanted this version of Batman to be epic, but also grounded, I tried to stay away from any flowery prose. The script was very minimalist, very sober. Very real. I didn't write it like a superhero film. My point of reference were classic adventure films like The Man Who Would Be King and Lawrence of Arabia."
Batman Fights Joker Next?
Batman Begins screenwriter David Goyer was surprisingly candid about plans for future Bat-sequels in an interview that appears in the latest issue of Premiere Magazine, according to Empire Online.
Essentially confirming longtime Web rumors, Goyer is said to have advised the mag, "The next one would have Batman enlisting the aid of [Jim] Gordon and [D.A. Harvey] Dent in bringing down the Joker... but not killing him, which is a mistake they made in the first one. ... In the third, the Joker would go on trial, scarring Dent in the process" and thus creating Two-Face.
So maybe fans will see Guy Pearce as Harvey Dent after all?
International Trailer here. (http://pdl.warnerbros.com/wbol/uk/movies/batman_begins/F4/batman_begins_tlrf4_qt_500.mov)
Rescuing Batman
Studio politics and creative misfires sent the Dark Knight's fortunes into precipitous decline. Could something in his past save him? Source: Los Angeles Times
When David Goyer, co-writer of the eagerly awaited "Batman Begins," attended a comic book convention in San Diego last summer, the audience of 7,000 was noticeably antsy. It was the first time anyone associated with the film was speaking publicly. "The first question I got," recalls Goyer, "was someone stood up in the audience and said, 'How can you guarantee this movie won't suck?' And everyone applauded."
In a way, that's the dilemma facing Warner Bros. as it gets ready to release the first Batman film in eight years on June 15. The challenge for the studio is to overcome the stigma of the last Batman film, the much-maligned "Batman & Robin" — a film so disliked it nearly killed off a franchise that has made $1.2 billion in worldwide box office grosses.
Why a company would let a product as profitable as Batman lapse for that long is an example of how bad judgment, studio politics and the vagaries of the creative process can stall even the most commercial projects. While Warner Bros. struggled to figure out how to distance the franchise from "Batman & Robin," the best strategy ultimately may have turned out to be just allowing enough time to pass. What made that solution particularly galling for the studio, which owns DC Comics, was that while Batman and Superman lay dormant, rival Marvel Enterprises comic characters such as Spider-Man, X-Men and Blade were creating hits all over town for competing studios Sony, 20th Century Fox and New Line Cinema, respectively.
Warner Bros. attempted to resurrect Batman four times before it finally decided to go ahead with "Batman Begins." "It took us a number of tries and a number of people to get to the place we got to," admits Warner Bros. president of production Jeff Robinov. "I think it would certainly be more helpful not to say someone failed. All that matters is we found the person who we believed in to do it."
That person was Christopher Nolan, the 34-year-old director of the indie hit "Memento" and the edgy (for a studio) "Insomnia," a remake of a Swedish art house favorite that Warners distributed but declined to finance.
If Nolan's credentials made him an unlikely choice to raise Batman from the dead, he obviously told executives at the studio exactly what they had been hoping to hear. After a 45-minute, point-by-point pitch, Warner Bros. signed Nolan to a pay-or-play deal on the spot without even a treatment or a script in place.
Nolan envisioned Batman as a real person and promised to present a story unlike other comic book adaptations. "What I wanted to do is make the audience believe in the reality of this character," he says. "Batman is unique among superheroes in presenting that opportunity. He really is just a guy that does a lot of push-ups."
A CHARACTER WITH LEGS
That Batman has had such longevity is a testament to the character created by Bob Kane in 1939. The myth, or "canon," as comic book fans like to call it, of Batman describes a child, Bruce Wayne, who witnesses the murder of his parents and, out of regret and revenge, becomes a crime fighter when he grows up.
But how Batman actually became Batman had never been chronicled on film or in the comics, and Nolan saw that as a gap in film history that he could fill. It's a direction Warner Bros. could have taken with the first Batman film, in 1989, but instead it chose Tim Burton's more idiosyncratic vision (designed by Anton Furst).
"That first film didn't really address the origin or frame Batman as an extraordinary figure in an ordinary world," says Nolan. "Instead, the environment was as extraordinary as the character. I think it was basically the studio's way of convincing the public that you could have a very cool Batman film."
Burton's "Batman" got the enterprise off to a promising start, making $411 million worldwide. "Batman Returns" arrived in theaters just three years later, but business fell off considerably, delivering only $266 million. Fearing that Burton's vision was too dark for the mainstream audience, the studio brought in Joel Schumacher ("The Phantom of the Opera") to give the series a glossy shine. With Val Kilmer replacing Michael Keaton as Batman, the series bounced back with "Batman Forever," which brought in $336 million.
Warner Bros. was convinced it was on the right track and pretty much gave Schumacher carte blanche for the next installment, "Batman & Robin" (1997), with George Clooney as Batman. By then the film's tone had departed so dramatically from the character's dark origins in DC comics, with Mr. Freeze (Arnold Schwarzenegger) and his henchman ice-skating around a museum while pulling off a heist, that hard-core comic fans and general audiences alike found the action more kitschy than entertaining, and grosses dropped to a new low for the franchise, $238 million. The addition of nipples and a codpiece to Batman's costume may be the film's lasting legacy. (Schumacher declined to be interviewed for this story.)
Right up until the opening of the film, Warner Bros. was anticipating a blockbuster and expected to keep churning out sequels every few years. "We all thought we were making the biggest Batman ever at the time," says Bill Gerber, then co-president of production. Schumacher started working on the next installment with writer Mark Protosevich ("The Cell"), continuing in the same vein with multiple villains and more silliness.
As a writer who worked on one of the abandoned Batman projects put it, the studio was reluctant to give up its notion of who Batman was — a guy who makes a lot of money.
Even when the blockbuster failed to materialize, Warner Bros. had plenty of motivation to keep the series going. The franchise was a merchandising bonanza. According to one source, toy manufacturers had been invited to sit in on creative meetings for "Batman & Robin." "Sometimes it looks like a business masquerading as a movie," says Peter Guber, producer (with Jon Peters) of the first two Batman films and co-host of AMC's "Sunday Morning Shootout." "People in house say, 'Make it, make it, so I can sell my ancillary products.' "
The public's rejection of "Batman & Robin" and the studio's lack of a creative solution kept Warner's from racing ahead with a new version. "You wouldn't have just naturally gone from Batman 4 to have a Batman in the theater 18 months or two years later," suggests Robinov. "I do think there was a natural sort of breathing period. It was a question of finding the right approach."
And coming off big-budget flops such as "The Postman" (1997), "Wild Wild West" (1999) and "Batman & Robin," the studio may have been less than eager to risk investing in its franchises without a clue how to make them work. After "Batman & Robin," the only direction Batman could go was forward to the future or back to the original story, and Warner Bros. didn't know which way to turn.
In April 1998, a surprising move signaled the troubled tenor of the studio. President of production Lorenzo di Bonaventura pulled the plug three months before shooting was to start on a $150-million production of "Superman," to be directed by Burton and starring Nicolas Cage, "until such time as the budget is appropriate and the script realizes its potential."
IN THE THROES OF DEVELOPMENT
While Warners labored to mount Batman for the big screen, its television division found the material more manageable, with several animated versions and even plans for a Bruce Wayne TV series. In 1999, "Batman Beyond," an animated kids' program set 40 years in the future, featured a retired Batman who has become the mentor to a young crime fighter. By the following year, the film side of the studio was thinking this might be the way to go for a live-action feature.
Director Boaz Yakin ("Remember the Titans") was brought in and started working on a script with the show's creators, Paul Dini and Alan Burnett. What Yakin had in mind was a futuristic "Blade Runner"-type Batman. His dream casting had Clint Eastwood playing the former Dark Knight.
Dini and Burnett worked on a draft with the director, but the studio soon lost interest in the concept, at least the way Yakin saw it. His idea was a hard-edged, darker and nihilistic Batman with swearing and violence. There's no way it would have been PG-13. Clearly this was not the same Batman Warner Bros. was looking for. Unwilling to bend to the studio, Yakin went off to work on another project, effectively ending "Batman Beyond." As Warner Bros. was cooling to "Batman Beyond," it was warming to the idea of developing a story about the hero's origins. In the late '80s, Frank Miller (writer and co-director of "Sin City") had revitalized the Batman character with a series of dark and gritty graphic novels, four of which were later packaged as "Batman: Year One," dealing with his first adventures as the Caped Crusader.
Much to the shock and delight of most Bat-observers, the studio signed daring indie director Darren Aronofsky, who to that point had released only "Pi," an innovative black-and-white film about a deranged math genius.
Most fans, still smarting from "Batman & Robin," applauded the teaming of Aronofsky and Miller, but few believed that Warner Bros. would actually make the film.
Perhaps the only surprise when Aronofsky and Miller delivered their script was that the studio was surprised by what it got. Their Batman was a brooding hero with a complex psychology, and the action was realistic and violent. "That was the way we pitched it, and that was the script we delivered. They knew what was coming, so their response was definitely confusing," says Eric Watson, Aronofsky's longtime producing partner.
The Aronofsky-Miller script surely would have produced an unflinching R-rated movie, not something the studio could afford to do. "It was clear that making a large film of the nature of 'Batman,' and what it means to Time Warner, they're going to want the rating to be a certain way," says Watson. "They needed a PG-13."
Robinov's recollection of the "Batman: Year One" experience is decidedly different. " 'Batman: Year One' never went very far," he says. "We never made a deal. There was never a script done. It didn't go further than it did because the intention of that movie didn't feel right."
The merger of Time Warner with AOL in January 2001 and the company's subsequent free fall perhaps put further pressure on the film division to rescue the day with one of its superheroes. At the same time, the pressure may have been paralyzing. After veteran studio bosses Terry Semel and Bob Daly departed in late 1999, their replacement, Alan Horn, had promised to build the studio's release schedule around five tent-pole pictures a year.
"When Alan Horn first took the job, he said he wanted to revive the Superman and Batman characters," says Robinov. "That was a priority for him." So the studio was throwing as much as it could into the hopper, hoping something would stick.
As "Batman: Year One" was sinking, the studio decided to try yet another approach. What if Batman and Superman faced off in one film as they had done many times in World's Finest Comics? Wolfgang Petersen ("The Perfect Storm") was hired to direct the project, and he, in turn, brought in writer Andrew Kevin Walker ("Seven") to write the screenplay, later polished by Akiva Goldsman ("A Beautiful Mind").
Petersen envisioned a clash between a big-city, brooding Batman motivated by anger, pain and guilt, and a Superman who was all-American, small-town and innocent. He promised "a true existential experience with visual fun." If all went well, he said, the film could be in theaters by summer 2004.
But things did not go well. In addition to creative issues, "Superman Vs. Batman" fell victim to cutthroat studio politics that pitted Di Bonaventura against Horn over the kind of films the studio was making, a dispute that ultimately stretched as far as corporate headquarters in New York.
Meanwhile, a script by J.J. Abrams (creator of TV's "Lost" and "Alias") for another Superman film, the first part of a proposed trilogy, had gained favor at the studio. Horn was said to prefer the optimism of the "Superman" script to the darkness of the "Superman Vs. Batman" screenplay. He then took a step that was bizarre even by Hollywood standards: He distributed copies of both scripts to 10 other company executives and solicited their opinions.
According to an executive involved in the debate, Di Bonaventura argued that "Superman Vs. Batman" boiled down the characters to their essence; not going ahead with it, he said, would be "one of the great mistakes of all time."
Robinov agrees that it was an excellent script, but "rather than reintroduce the two characters in one film, we made a conscious decision to try and introduce the two characters independently. I think it gave us a lot more latitude to continue with Batman," he says.
The vote was 11-1 in favor of "Superman" — Di Bonaventura's was the one dissenting vote. For Di Bonaventura, the "Superman Vs. Batman" episode was just symptomatic of a larger rift, and he resigned his post the following month, in September 2002.
In the eyes of many comic book boosters, Warner Bros. made the right decision. " 'Batman Vs. Superman' is where you go when you admit to yourself that you've exhausted all possibilities," says Goyer, who wrote the screenplays for "Blade" and its two sequels. "It's like 'Frankenstein meets Wolfman' or 'Freddy Vs. Jason.' It's somewhat of an admission that this franchise is on its last gasp."
But the move left Warner Bros. without a franchise film for either summer 2003 or 2004. So it looked again to Batman — sort of. A production of "Catwoman," a Batman spinoff the studio had been trying to put together for at least 10 years, was hastily assembled with Halle Berry replacing Ashley Judd, who had long been attached to the project. The problem was that the film had nothing to do with Batman or the history of the Catwoman comic book character. The $100-million movie took in a mere $40 million.
STARTING OVER
Although the impulse in Hollywood is often to keep cranking out films and milking a franchise until it's dry, some observers believe the delay in mounting a new Batman was not a bad thing. "I don't think eight years is that long," says Guber, who took nine years to put together the first Batman film. "What they were doing was resting the franchise, and maybe they should have rested it even longer. They needed to get the other film out of the marketplace and out of the consciousness of the core audience."
"After 'Batman & Robin,' it was necessary to do what we call in comic book terms 'a reboot,' " says Goyer. "Say you've had 187 issues of 'The Incredible Hulk' and you decide you're going to introduce a new Issue 1. You pretend like those first 187 issues never happened, and you start the story from the beginning and the slate is wiped clean, and no one blinks.
"One of the reasons they do that is after 10 years of telling the same story, it gets stale and times change. So we did the cinematic equivalent of a reboot, and by doing that, setting it at the beginning, you're instantly distancing yourself from anything that's come before."
In the marketing of "Batman Begins," "We wanted to make sure ads and the teasers and trailers looked nothing like the previous films, and we were very careful about what we released to the public," says Goyer. "We had to reeducate everyone that this is not the same kind of story."
For Nolan and Goyer, Batman, by his very nature, is a romantic character. In their script, a disillusioned Bruce Wayne sets out to the four corners of the world to amass the experience and training that will eventually make him Batman. "I was not just making a darker version of the central character but also a larger, more sweeping version of the origin story," says Nolan. Cinematically he was thinking more of "Lawrence of Arabia" than a comic book.
And Gotham, which for Burton and Schumacher did not seem to exist in the real world, became more familiar. Nolan shot exteriors in London, New York and Chicago, so Batman's hometown now intentionally looks like a recognizable place (mostly Chicago).
Before Goyer started working on the script, he wanted to know if there were any restrictions or mandates from the studio. Among the few conditions was that the film not be R-rated, but the ratings question was a nonissue for Nolan. "My view was that this is a movie I wanted to see when I was 11 years old, so in my mind it's always been PG-13. I never really addressed that issue specifically. I just assumed that's what it would be." When it came to casting the Caped Crusader, the rumor mills were working overtime (everyone from Ashton Kutcher to Jake Gyllenhaal to Billy Crudup), but Nolan wanted the relatively unknown Christian Bale. Still no balking from Warner Bros.
The studio didn't mind if "Batman Begins" was dark as long as they could still market it as a "four quadrant" film, which means appealing to kids and adults, males and females. The last thing Robinov wanted to know was whether Nolan could deliver the film in a specified period of time. "He said, 'Yes, absolutely,' and we said, 'Great, let's do it,' " recalls Robinov.
After eight years of false starts and misfires, the studio finally seems to have figured out how to get one of these movies made: Commit to a skilled team with a vision and then leave them alone. "I think they knew they had to do something different in terms of reinventing the franchise," says Goyer, "and I think they knew it wasn't a film that could be made by committee."
And now that the franchise is up and running again, the studio is keen to keep it that way. Nolan and Goyer have a rough idea where the next couple of films would go, and in fact the last scene of "Batman Begins" could be the first scene of the next film. But Goyer and Nolan won't commit until they see how this one is received. After all, no one — not the filmmakers or the studio executives — wants the financial, historical or moral responsibility for having killed off a superhero.
Quote from: MacGuffinlater polished by Akiva Goldsman ("A Beautiful Mind").
please, in an article talking about the death of the batman 'franchise', to include HIS name without mentioning that HE was responsible for THAT TURD 'B&R' is just not right. to make it worse, trying to throw in A Beautiful Mind like that makes him a better quality screenwriter??!
Especially since A Beautiful Mind was, in its own way, almost as bad as Batman & Robin.
Okay, maybe that's a BIT extreme.
Anyway, I'll bet the sequel to Batman Begins will be better than this one. I can't wait to see The Joker portrayed as a realistic psycho.
Quote from: GhostboyI can't wait to see The Joker portrayed as a realistic psycho.
also played by christian bale, in a dual role!
Quote from: GhostboyI can't wait to see The Joker portrayed as a realistic psycho.
A 'realistic psycho' will be a new portrait, but I can't see how it will be more interesting than Nicholson's interpretation in the original. The original Batman stands because of Nicholson's performance. The film is mostly trite, but Nicholson's performance alone is an astounding performance to capture the grotesqueness of mass media in our times. Its not that his performance is an interpretation of how mass media created a monster, but an interpretation of a monster that can stand as tall as that evil and be its representation in the form of a killer. For as illogical as the character of the Joker is, Nicholson imagining the character in the form of a greater evil that is mass media makes sense. He performs the role so seriously and absurdly it really works.
Oh no, don't get me wrong - I'll defend everything about Burton's Batman anyday. But Nicholson's brilliant Joker is the root of all the hammy, over-the-top villains we've been plagued with ever since, and I can't imagine that Nolan wouldn't take the approach did with The Dark Knight Returns or (even better) Alan Moore in The Killing Joke - in which The Joker is a seriously deranged sociopath - the kind of villain who isn't 'cool' the way Nicholson's was.
And one of they key elements of The Killing Joke was the mirrored psychoses of Batman and The Joker - and thus, themodernage, I actually think your suggestion about casting Bale in both roles is grounded and would be very interesting - if not exactly appropriate.
Quote from: GhostboyOh no, don't get me wrong - I'll defend everything about Burton's Batman anyday. But Nicholson's brilliant Joker is the root of all the hammy, over-the-top villains we've been plagued with ever since, and I can't imagine that Nolan wouldn't take the approach did with The Dark Knight Returns or (even better) Alan Moore in The Killing Joke - in which The Joker is a seriously deranged sociopath - the kind of villain who isn't 'cool' the way Nicholson's was.
And one of they key elements of The Killing Joke was the mirrored psychoses of Batman and The Joker - and thus, themodernage, I actually think your suggestion about casting Bale in both roles is grounded and would be very interesting - if not exactly appropriate.
On the Nicholson point, very much agreed.
On the point of Bale as both, I can't. Interesting idea, but all it does is reduce the film down to a gimmick. Its obvious how both Batman and Joker are similiar, so why hammer the nail by going to this length? Make it a theme instead of a weak attempt to be an art film when the film has no great intentions to be one.
Yeah, as I said - interesting, but not exactly appropriate.
Wow, you'd think I'm a big Batman nut reading these last few posts of mine...
Time to get back to my real roots and head over the Star Wars thread.
Quote from: themodernage02Quote from: GhostboyI can't wait to see The Joker portrayed as a realistic psycho.
also played by christian bale, in a dual role!
From Batman-On-Film:
Here's a bit of news about another possible candidate for The Joker in the (hopefully) upcoming sequels--
I've got another name for you that may be in the mix for The Joker - Crispin Glover. Now here's the thing, I don't know where this is coming from. It could be coming from Glover's "people" to get his name out there, or it could be coming from Warners. I know that Glover is sort of a "fan-favorite," so maybe they [Warner Bros.] is taking that into account. Hell, they cast Christian Bale, didn't they? Thought you would want to know.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fphotos.imageevent.com%2Fbatmanonfilm%2Fbofimagesbofimages%2Fbegins_gotmilkad.jpg&hash=4554e3cc82244a146833258b46cc25cca7c3dfe2)
Eh.
Still not as awful (sacrilegious) as Yoda schilling Pepsi while Darth Vader is in pursuit of Burger King. At least milk is sort of ostensibly good for you.
Quote from: GhostboyAt least milk is sort of ostensibly good for you.
I don't think that that's a vegan enough statement.
Oops, sorry! My amendment follows:
At least milk has nutrients that are necessary for healthy growth (although these nutrients could certainly be had via other more reasonable means than an excretion intended for baby cows which is really not all that healthy for humans, especially what with the hormones that are added, not to mention the treament given to the cows who provide it, and don't go touting your Free Range groceries because Free Range is a standard-free standard, not sanctioned by anyone or anything, and can be used to describe a steel grate as much as it can an open meadow).
Quote from: matt35mmQuote from: GhostboyAt least milk is sort of ostensibly good for you.
I don't think that that's a vegan enough statement.
Quote from: GhostboyOops, sorry! My amendment follows:
At least milk has nutrients that are necessary for healthy growth (although these nutrients could certainly be had via other more reasonable means than an excretion intended for baby cows which is really not all that healthy for humans, especially what with the hormones that are added, not to mention the treament given to the cows who provide it, and don't go touting your Free Range groceries because Free Range is a standard-free standard, not sanctioned by anyone or anything, and can be used to describe a steel grate as much as it can an open meadow).
Pwned!
Quote from: MyxomatosisQuote from: matt35mmQuote from: GhostboyAt least milk is sort of ostensibly good for you.
I don't think that that's a vegan enough statement.
Quote from: GhostboyOops, sorry! My amendment follows:
At least milk has nutrients that are necessary for healthy growth (although these nutrients could certainly be had via other more reasonable means than an excretion intended for baby cows which is really not all that healthy for humans, especially what with the hormones that are added, not to mention the treament given to the cows who provide it, and don't go touting your Free Range groceries because Free Range is a standard-free standard, not sanctioned by anyone or anything, and can be used to describe a steel grate as much as it can an open meadow).
Pwned!
Why Pwned? That was just the response I was looking for in the first place. Good job Ghostboy.
haha, it appears myxo has been re-pwned.
If any one has bit torrent...
http://livetorrents.com/torrents/d5b9922cface18272e5197d55332958f90728566/The.Batman.Begins.10.Minute.Preview.From.Smallville-1.avi_[www.LiveTorrents.com].torrent
ABOUT A BAT
Christopher Nolan takes a fresh look at the Dark Knight’s origins
~ By ANDY KLEIN ~
The character of Batman remains one of Warner Bros.’ most potentially valuable franchises – in both aesthetic and commercial terms. The decision, back in the ’80s, to entrust it to Tim Burton was a daring and admirable one: Rather than play it safe with some commercial hack, the studio chose a filmmaker with a strong and idiosyncratic style, but not much of a track record.
Of course, when Burton’s Batman Returns (1992) didn’t match the first entry’s phenomenal box office, Warners reverted to big-studio form by turning the next two episodes over to Joel Schumacher, the classic “safe choice.” Schumacher’s Batman Forever (1995) did better financially, but his followup, Batman and Robin (1997), was another disappointment.
After an eight-year hiatus, the company has taken an even more admirable risk by hiring Christopher Nolan to direct Batman Begins. Due out June 15, the film has Christian Bale in the title role, Michael Caine as Alfred, and Gary Oldman as Lt. (not yet Commissioner) Gordon, amid an international cast that includes Liam Neeson, Morgan Freeman, Ken Watanabe, Katie Holmes, Cillian Murphy, Tom Wilkinson, and Rutger Hauer.
It’s not merely that Nolan had only made three features. More to the point, his first film, Following (1998), was a complex thriller, shot on a shoestring budget over the course of a year; and his second, Memento (2000) – a big hit only by indie standards – was one of the most challenging, talked about, and analyzed films of the last decade. Even its detractors would be unlikely to label it “the same old thing.”
After helming the first-rate, but more conventional, Insomnia (2002), he was working on a script about Howard Hughes. When Martin Scorsese started shooting The Aviator, Nolan put it aside. “I looked around and found a different story about an orphaned billionaire who goes nuts,” he says in a recent interview.
He heard that Warners wanted to reinvent the Batman franchise but didn’t have any specific ideas. “So I got in touch with them and pitched my take on it. A very loose take. Then I refined it a bit and got more specific with it, based on their comments … . And we settled on the notion of it being an origin story.”
Looking at the entirety of the Batman canon with co-scripter David S. Goyer, Nolan discovered that there isn’t a single definitive account of the hero’s origin: Different writers had experimented with different ideas through the years. “Some elements stuck, others didn’t,” Nolan says. “We looked for the things that stuck and therefore are essential to the character.” While he cites Frank Miller’s Batman: Year One and Jeph Loeb’s The Long Halloween as influences, he was determined that this film should be a fresh take on the character – his interpretation of its essence from six decades of stories by scores of writers.
Greg Silverman at Warners sent him “The Man Who Falls,” in which Bruce Wayne leaves Gotham for seven years and travels the world, learning the different skills that he will put to use as Batman. “I found that a fascinating jumping-off point,” Nolan says. “You know, Bruce Wayne as a little boy being traumatized by an encounter with bats and how that influences his life.”
The unproduced Hughes script, which Nolan hopes to revive some day, couldn’t help but influence Batman Begins. “The fascinating thing for me about Hughes was that he could do anything,” the director says. “He had essentially limitless finances. His parents both died when he was young, and he was left with the keys to the kingdom … not unlike Bruce Wayne. That’s a fascinating situation for somebody to be in – to have all kinds of potential, all kinds of power, but also have these inner demons. Where those things lead is pretty fascinating in both stories.”
One earmark of the Batman films, under both Burton and Schumacher, has been the surreal, elaborately designed environments in which they unfold. Nolan wanted to use a different approach, closer to his earlier films. He says that “[production designer] Nathan [Crowley] and I didn’t sit there and go, ‘Okay, let’s create an art deco world or an art nouveau world or a modernist world.’ We didn’t want to stylize Gotham in that way. First, that’s already been done very, very effectively by Anton Furst and Tim Burton and the rest.
“But also, the whole point to me is to have Batman be an extraordinary figure against a relatively ordinary background. That way, you get to experience what the people of Gotham would experience, which is seeing Batman as this incredible figure. And so our Gotham arose from looking at modern cities, from looking at New York, Chicago, London, Tokyo – all these places – and really just putting together the elements of those that fit our story.”
Memento is famous for its amazingly clever (and justified) scrambling of chronology, a directorial tendency that could be spotted in nascent form in Following. But Batman Begins, like Insomnia, is more normal and linear. Still, Nolan admits that the first third of the story comprises a very fractured narrative, in part to present a long series of events in a short span of screen time, but also to emphasize the connection between Bruce Wayne’s past, present, and future.
The movie basically starts with Bruce Wayne as a young man in jail somewhere in China. “He’s truly lost, and he’s flashing back to his childhood,” says Nolan. “And everything he’s dealing with in the present points very strongly toward what we all know he’s going to become. That’s the advantage of making a film about a character everyone is familiar with. It was the same with Hughes. If you can assume that the audience knows where the character is heading, you can play around a lot with the chronology … . There are interesting resonances in the way we jump between the elements of the younger Bruce Wayne and the older Bruce Wayne.”
While Nolan – as in his previous films – clings rigorously to the hero’s subjective POV, the nature of the story required that he occasionally step outside the character. “For example, it was always important to me that, when Batman first appears, we see him from the criminals’ point of view, in order to show the effect that his use of theatricality – his use of symbolism – is going to have on them.”
Nolan is reluctant to go into greater detail about the plot, but I am able to nail him down on one point. His earlier films end with no chance of sequels, so I ask if it’s safe to assume that Batman doesn’t die in the last 10 minutes.
He laughs. “Well, I think it would have been pretty hard to sell that one to the studio … . Besides, I wanted to leave it very, very open-ended – much more open-ended, I think, than the other films in a lot of ways … . I was trying to paint a film on the broadest possible canvas, to create the epic that I think the character has always deserved. And part of that is to finish the story but leave things so that the audience can imagine the characters continue, broaden, and experience further stories.”
There is yet another reason, and Nolan struggles to explain it without spoiling things. “I’ll put it this way: There’s a nice idea at present in one of the comics that Batman, in using this extreme symbolism, this extreme behavior, essentially winds up attracting lunacy to Gotham. He elicits a response from those he’s fighting with. I like the bittersweet notion that the end is a kind of Pyrrhic victory. Because, when you’ve got a character who adopts such extreme tactics, it’s bound to have long-term repercussions.”
I went to the movies with my friend and this trailer came on and he's afraid of bats so he literally vomited everywhere
success!
Quote from: SleuthI went to the movies with my friend and this trailer came on and he's afraid of bats so he literally vomited everywhere
what were u going to see?
Roger Ebert already called this one of the best films of the year, saying how Spider-Man got it right last year, Batman gets it right this year.
Time for your collagatar, mod.
And for anyone who knows how much I love Spider-Man 2, you know how excited that makes me. I was on the fence before, waiting for reviews, and now I'm excited.
woo hoooo
Quote from: MacGuffinTime for your collagatar spoilatar, mod.
BAM!
i cant wait. the hopes are high. i hope it gets it more right than spider-man though.
Quote from: matt35mmAnd for anyone who knows how much I love Spider-Man 2, you know how excited that makes me. I was on the fence before, waiting for reviews, and now I'm excited.
I feel the same way now. None of the trailers have impressed me, but damn if I didn't feel the same way about Spidey 2 as Ebert did.
So check back here at this time tomorrow night, when I post my review.
Interview: Christopher Nolan
We chat with the Batman filmmaker.
Genre movie fans rejoiced when Warner Bros. hired filmmaker Christopher Nolan to helm Batman Begins, their gritty relaunch of the comic-based franchise. With the film opening next week, anticipation is higher than ever. Has Nolan delivered, as early word seems to suggest, the quintessential Batman flick? Only time will tell.
Nolan recently sat down with journalists, including IGN FilmForce's Jeff Otto, to chat about the film...
Q: Batman Begins seems darker than the previous film. Do you think kids will be into it?
CHRISTOPHER NOLAN: I think there has been this increasing misperception that kids will not respond to something because it's also for adults. I think that often that tends to get underestimated.
Q: Do you want to do bigger movies after this one?
NOLAN: To be honest, I really couldn't do much bigger than this one. I would certainly love to do something on this scale again, because I enjoyed it. But I would also be interested to go back to something smaller. I think there are advantages to different scales of filmmaking. You wouldn't want to do just one thing.
Q: This film seems to deal a lot with the underlying issues of what makes Bruce Wayne become Batman. How much of his anger is really under control by the end of this film?
NOLAN: Well, I think when it's harnessed, and that is a form of control, that doesn't mean it's not there and it doesn't mean it's suppressed it's channeled and it's harnessed. And that to me is what keeps him as a character frightening to his opponents and all of us to some extent.
Q: What was the creative mandate going in for a new audience?
NOLAN: The creative mandate was really to do something fresh and original. And that was coming straight from the studio. And if it wasn't, I wouldn't have gotten involved with the project because it's pretty rare to have an iconic figure that's owned and controlled by a studio that's asking you to do something different with it. That really was the mandate. For me, what that became was my desire to do something we hadn't seen before, a superhero story told in a realistic fashion. And doesn't step outside itself and acknowledge the form and the medium it's coming from, but one in which the audience is just immersed in the reality that's going on.
Q: What was your inspiration for the look of Gotham City?
NOLAN: We tried not to be too specific. When Nathan Crowley, my production designer, started discussing the look of the film with me, we immediately rejected any reductive notions. The driving force was not to, "OK, they've done an art deco city, we'll do a modernist city," nothing like that. We wanted something that reflects the reality of a large modern city which is a tremendous variety of architecture. A tremendous variety of periods in which things were built. We wanted a history to the place as well as a contemporary feel. What we wound up doing, is that the way that we approached Gotham as an exaggeration of New York, an exaggeration of a modern American city was to look at interesting geographical features of different cities of the world. A lot from New York, some from Chicago, a lot from Tokyo because of elevated freeways and monorails. From Hong Kong we took the walled city of Kalhoon [which] is the basis for the narrows which is this kind of walled in slum. So what we really did was putting together the elements that let you exaggerate all the socio-economic factors that feed into Gotham as an exaggeration of the modern American city.
Q: Are you up for making any sequels?
NOLAN: Well, I enjoyed making this film very much. So, I would be open to it. But I wouldn't want to jump into it straight away.
Q: How hard was it to co-ordinate all the practical effects in the movie?
NOLAN: The challenge wasn't really to me, it was to the stunt co-coordinator and the physical effects guy. And they rode to this admirably. In a day and age when so much is done with computers they really rose to the opportunity. They really enjoyed the opportunity which is performing amazing feats and building amazing things that can actually work in the real world. To me, once I set that all in motion it was really just a question of filming it and trying to be disciplined about not listening to the little voices in your ear that says, "Well, you could do this with visual effects. You could leave this for now." You could move on and not [be] effective. I'm very glad we held to that discipline, because it meant in post production when we did get into our visual effects components we had all the right materials to make that stuff look great and not have to do too much of it. And we had the time to do what we did do. We had the time to perfect it, because we weren't doing four to five times the number of shots we said we were going to do which is what happened on a lot of these films.
Q: What is the next comic book character that you would like to tackle?
NOLAN: I don't know what I want to do next. My brother is actually working on a screenplay that is based on a comic called The Exec that you know we're quite excited about. But I really don't know how I'll end up choosing my next project; it just kinds of happens.
Q: What kind of approach did you take with the actors?
NOLAN: My approach with actors is to try and give them whatever it is they need from me. Direction to me is about listening and responding and realizing how much they need to know from me and how much they have figured out for themselves, really. And this was a very, very talented bunch of actors and they were very specific in what they wanted to do. What was nice about that is that they were very relaxed with the notion that I had a lot of other things to worry about, because of the scale of the film. In the past with my films I've been able to concentrate very, very much with the performances of the actors. With this film there were all kinds of other things to take into consideration. But as very talented and generous actors, they allowed me to do that without feeling shortchanged. They seemed to accommodate that very easily.
Q: If you were to come back for a sequel, have you given any though to the story? It seems like the last scene sets things up for one.
NOLAN: Yes, it does but for me that was just a way to send the audience out with a sense of possibility and sense of excitement about where this character could go. I certainly share that sense and we've certainly talked in vague terms about how you could follow on from this film absolutely. But at the same time, it's very important that this film stand on its own.
Q: What was your visual agenda for the film and how much was discovered in the editing room?
NOLAN: Well, you always discover a lot in the editing room. Particularly the action, because you have to over-shoot a lot and shoot an enormous amount of material because many of the sequences have to be discovered in the editing and manipulation of it. But for the rest of it, my shooting style was the same as it's been on previous films. I don't think there was any accommodation. [I think] one of the trickier things was having the guts to build colossal sets and not shoot them. To just shoot the scene the way I thought it should be shot. But everybody was OK with that. It worked out.
Q: Can you talk a little about Katie Holmes and her appeal?
NOLAN: I think she's got a wonderfully, warm and generous presence that's very glamorous. Very girl next door at the same time. But she also has this maturity beyond her years which the character really needed. Because Rachel really is Bruce Wayne's conscious in a sense. She has to stand for a couple of things. She has to be the life he might have had, what he lost, but she also has to be the voice of his conscious and keep him on his toes. And I think Katie did those things very well.
Q: Did you give Christian Bale direction on expression through his mask more?
NOLAN: Yes, to a certain extent, but he was also very specific in what he wanted to do and he drew from a lot of certain influences that I agreed with in terms of the graphic novels. A lot of what he was able to turn into performance comes from that material.
So....
It's much more like Spiderman than Spiderman 2, in that its a good movie, with moments of greatness and a crappy villain.
Even though there was a lot that I found underwhelming, it was still really neat to see a movie where I basically had no concept of what might happen - the trailers really have been wonderfully spoiler free. So my first response will follow suit:
a.) Wantanabe was criminally wasted
b.) GARY OLDMAN OWNS THIS MOVIE. Seriously.
So basically, this is exactly what I thought it would be. A good movie setting us up for a really great sequel. At this point, I prefer the gothic fairie tale style of the Burton version, but that may change two years from now, when we get the best Batman film ever made.
From this point on, I'll still be completely spoiler free, but I'll talk a little bit more about the movie. If you're a purist like Pubrick, this warning's for you.
***
The development of Bruce Wayne up to the point where he first puts on the suit is great. I had some problems with certain details of the training stuff, problems that were exacerbated later, but for the most part it works wonderfully. All the technical details are fantastic - its really all very applicable in a real world setting. The way Alfred and Lucius Fox (Freeman's character) help Bruce build his persona is great.
The movie doesn't really have any grand entrance for its hereo in the manner of Batman's first appearance in Burton's version, but that's forgiveable. Again, real world stuff.
I mentioned that the villain sucks, just like the Green Goblin did in Spiderman. In fact, The Green Goblin was a better villain than what we get here, simply because he was a classic character brought to life somewhat memorably. Rahs Ah Guls is a character from the comics that no one but fans no about, and they basically just used the name for a new character. It would have been better if the villain had been Falconi (Tom Wilkinson's great gangster character) and the corrupt city officials of Gotham. All that stuff, which is pretty much along the lines of Miller's 'Year One,' is far more compelling than Rahs Ah Gul's plot to destroy the city. And they could have kept the Scarecrow, since he's really only an incidental character, and is handled pretty well.
Quote from: velveteenQuote from: Ghostboyb.) GARY OLDMAN OWNS THIS MOVIE. Seriously.
How?
he's gary fuckin' oldman period!!!
How good is Bale as Batman? I hope he kicks ass
Bale is great. He's a brilliant Bruce Wayne, showing all the different sides of him (his billionaire playboy persona is hilarious) and all the changes he goes through over the years. Because of this, interestingly, his Batman is just another facet of Wayne, and isn't as impressive as Keaton's. In my opinion.
Another thing I forgot to mention was the opening title. Really wonderful stuff there.
I'm looking forward to next week when other people see it so we can talk spoilers.
Goyer, Bale and Nolan on Batman Sequel
The writer, director and star open to returning.
Batman Begins doesn't even hit screens for another ten days, but sequel talk is already brewing. After the overwhelming response to this weekend's press screenings, I think there will certainly be sequel plans put into motion shortly after the reaction is in from the general public.
At the press day for Batman Begins this weekend, IGN FilmForce spoke to Chris Nolan, David Goyer and Christian Bale about the possibilities of a sequel.
Goyer on where the sequel would take us: "Who knows, honestly. I'm not being coy, but none of us are signed for another yet. We're all sort of waiting to see what Chris wants to do, so we'll see."
Bale is already signed for multiple films. His hope is that Nolan returns for part two. "The sequel, obviously if it were to happen, people would have said, 'Yes, we like the way that you've played Batman and we like the style in which the movie [went].' So, a continuation, you can push it forward. There's a lot of room for embellishing this character for new sites and new stories with him. There's kind of no limit to it and there's also so much material that you can reference in all of the graphic novels, that it's kind of limitless with what could be brought up. That's something that you'd have to speak more about with hopefully Chris Nolan. He's kind of keeping tight-lipped about if he'd be interested in doing a second one, but whoever was to end up directing that."
Nolan is not signed on for a sequel, but he sounds interested in returning. "Well, I enjoyed making this film very much. So, I would be open to it. But I wouldn't want to jump into it straight away." There is an obvious sequel tease at the end which I don't want to spoil for fans. Nolan comments on this, careful not to reveal a spoiler. "Yes, it was, but for me it was just a way to send the audience out with a sense of possibility and send of excitement and where this character could go. I certainly share that sense and we've certainly talked in vague terms about how you could follow on from this film absolutely. But at the same time, it's very important that this film stand on its own."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goyer and Bale Talk Batman Vs. Superman
Comic battle royale still ahead?
Batman Begins hits theaters on June 15th and Bryan Singer's Superman only recently went into production. Now that new life has been breathed into both projects, an ultimate showdown between the two comic kings could come together finally one of these days. Talking to David Goyer, Charles Roven and Christian Bale about it this weekend, it sounds like a possibility, but probably not for a while.
"Maybe one day," says Goyer. "I think with this new film, they're not going to do it for a while. The fact that Warners owns DC and those guys are both DC properties, makes it more likely."
Producer Charles Roven also discussed the project: "I would think that if there was another Batman in the near future, whether any of us would be involved, it would most probably flow from this. Plus you also have to wait and see what Bryan Singer's Superman's going to be… I don't think that the Batman Vs. Superman movie's even gonna be brought up until those kind of decisions [are made and] that movie's seen."
Bale is not opposed to the idea, but also doesn't see it happening straight off. "You know, I think that's something that would be a ways down track. I haven't read it. There is a, I believe a comic book or graphic novel which is specifically about that. I haven't read that one either. You know, if it was something good, but I think that would be something way down track if that was ever to happen."
Interview: Keaton and Bale
Two Batmans talk to IGN FilmForce.
As we near the release of a new entry into the Batman film legacy and likely the beginning of a new franchise, IGN FilmForce got the chance to talk to both the new Batman, Christian Bale, as well as, arguably, the best Batman of the prior films, Michael Keaton. While Keaton's run in the series came to an abrupt end during casting of the third film, when Warner inexplicably decided to go in a new, cornier direction with director Joel Schumacher, Bale's run is just beginning, at the hands of talented director Christopher Nolan.
The 1989 Batman and the new film, Batman Begins, are very different films. Personally, I liked both in different ways and for different reasons. Begins is more of a story of Batman's personal journey, an origin of how he became what he is. Batman picked up the story after Batman became Batman, with the only origin being a brief flashback to the death of his parents. The villain, The Joker (famously played by Jack Nicholson), was as much if not more a star of the show as Batman himself.
In Los Angeles this weekend, both actors were on hand promoting their new projects. Although Keaton had little knowledge of the new film, he didn't mind talking about it and setting the record straight on why he left the series in the first place.
Keaton admits that it's a little weird doing press the same weekend that a new Batman film is also doing press. "I didn't really put that together until I started doing press… I wasn't aware of what was coming out when. That is funny…"
When asked what he thinks of the idea of a new film, Keaton admits he hasn't given it much thought. "Oh man, you know, I don't know. I'm a farmer, I don't know. I don't do that for a living… I have not [seen it]. I think Maria Full of Grace was the last movie I saw."
Keaton says that he doesn't have any Batman advice for Bale. "No, he's a really, really good actor. He knows what to do, and all those actors are really good. It's got a great cast and a really great director… I think they're in good shape."
For Bale, taking on a role that had already been portrayed by so many actors provided an additional challenge as well as a certain level to live up to. "I think that just the script by itself is, you can't do anything but make it your own. Like I said, I don't feel like it's been defined before. I just don't feel like it's ever been satisfactorily played. There's a lot of room for what is so good about this character that just has never been shown before. He's a severe character. All I had to do was just ignore everything that's been done before. We were gonna be coming up with something new and original regardless. The last thing that I ever wanted to be doing was to be stealing from anybody else."
After the second film, Batman Returns, Keaton was open to the idea of returning a third time. Unfortunately, the series was headed down a different path, and Keaton smartly decided not to be involved. "You know, you get a script. Here's the first one, here's how it works. 'Hey, there's this movie coming, they're gonna do Batman. You wanna read it?' I read it, I go, 'Wow, this is pretty good! This could be really good.' You go and talk to Tim [Burton] and he has the same ideas, you say, 'Yeah,' okay then you go do that. Then you say, 'You wanna do another one?' You go, 'Well, let's talk about what it's gonna be?' [And I say], 'Oh yeah, and those people will be in it? Yeah, okay, let's do that too. That sounds good.' Then you do that. Then they say, 'Wanna do the third one?' I go, 'I don't know, let's read it.' And I go, 'Oooh, that's not too good.' (Laughs) I'm giving you the Cliff Notes of the Cliff Notes version. And then you say, 'So, well how about this?' I go, 'Nah.'"
Somewhat ironically in light of the new film, it was Keaton that first suggested the idea of a prequel way back during negotiations for the third Batman film. "I [said], 'You know, I'm not into this, but you know what would be interesting? Kind of a prequel and, you gotta hang on – we lost a little bit of that kind of danger thing we had in the first one, that kind of darkness.' People always throw that word around, darkness, but I'm being lazy today, so I'll use it too. [And I said], 'I'd be into that' and [they said] 'Well, we're not gonna do that,' and I said, 'Well, all right, I won't do it. Thank you.' [It was] really that simple."
Batman Begins hasn't even released yet, but talk is already brewing for a sequel. Assuming the film succeeds financially, it's inevitable, but Bale says he is ready to continue the role, hopefully with Nolan at the helm again. "It was a consideration of mine that it could be such a monster of a movie that I wouldn't really know how to deal with the actual making of it, but I think that the saving grace there was that Chris comes from more independent movies as well and so he, alright there was more resources, but he wanted to make the actual day to day interaction very similar to making a more independent movie… It was really great story with fantastic potential and I didn't want to be scared off by any notion of the consequences of making that choice… The sequel, if it was to happen, obviously people would have said, 'Yes we like the way you played Batman and we liked the style in which the movie adopts, so a continuation you can push it further.' There's a lot of room for embellishing this character for new sides and new stories with him. There's no limit to it and there's so much material you can reference in all of the graphic novels…"
Although Keaton hasn't seen the film, he admits that, at least based on the trailer, it looks pretty good. "So now there's this one, and I know nothing about it, except the other day I caught a bit of the end of the trailer. No, no, no, the other day I saw the whole trailer at my house. I was in my kitchen and it was on and I kind of watched that. The trailer looked really good to me. I don't know if it is or not, but it looked pretty good to me."
Nothing could be cooler than having Batman for a dad. Keaton said his son was pretty young at the time, but seemed to enjoy the idea. "Batman he thought was quite cool."
Along with playing a part like this comes the obligatory marketing bonanza, including your very own action figure. "It was such a long process," says Bale. We had to get in these computerized outfits and look really stupid in these flesh stockings for them to get all of the 3-D imagery and everything like that. It was still a kick seeing it. Kind of bizarre. I never thought I would be in a movie where they would make a doll out of me. That's a bit of a trippy one, but not something I've dwelled on too much. Hopefully something my daughter will one day be able to enjoy. Sinking it in the pool or blowing it up."
Yet another connection to the new film for Keaton is that he recently played Katie Holmes' dad in First Daughter. "Yes, in a batsuit by the way." (Laughs)
Rumors persist of a new Special Edition of the two Keaton Batman films later this year. Warners is likely holding them to avoid any connection with the new franchise. For now, we're stuck watching them on the same old crappy editions that released when DVD was first conceived.
Batman Begins opens nationwide on June 15th in both regular theaters and IMAX. I highly recommend the IMAX if you have the opportunity.
I think it's funny that the latest commercials say this movie "finally gets it right!"
As a fan, and a critic, I KNOW that this is true. It's a li'l pathetic though thinking that the studio (or whomever) had to make THIS Batman seem good by comparing to the other "shitty" Batmans.
ALTHOUGH WE ALL KNOW THAT BATMAN AND ROBIN WAS THE ONE THAT OFFICIALLY FUCKED THE BATMAN MOVIES AND PUT THEM ON A 7-YEAR HIATUS!
(bitter?)
I've only been enthused about two Comic movies since I've hit puberty: XMen 2 and This one.
and SinCitywaskindacool.
Every other one you knew they were gonna fuck up.
Bats Bats Everywhere
http://members.aol.com/bats4kids/
Where In The World Do They Live?
Bats can be found in almost every part of the world except where it is very, very hot or in the really cold areas and on some remote islands. They live on all continents except Antarctica. You can find more species of bats (different kinds) where the weather is nice and warm. Those warm spots are near the equator and are called the "tropics" and "rain forests." On islands that are far from continents, there are only a few species of bats. That's because it's too far for most bats to fly this great distance to reach those islands. In the United States, the greatest number of bat species live in the southwestern part of the country. This area has a variety of places where bats can live and there is a lot of food available during most of the year . For example, Texas has 32 different kinds of bats while Maine has only 8; and Arizona has 28 species, but Michigan has just 10. Do you know how many different kinds of bats live in your part of the world? Do you know what they are? Check with your library to find the answers to these questions.
WHAT DOES A BAT LOOK LIKE?
A BAT'S BODY DOES MANY THINGS
THAT HELP IT LIVE.
EARS: Bats have very good hearing. They use it for finding food and locating their babies. For insect and fish eaters, the big ears help with echolocation. Usually, echoes are received by funnel-shaped ears that face forward.
NOSE: The sense of smell is well developed in most bats. It is used to find and identify certain foods and to recognize roost mates and young. Fruit eating bats can find their food by the smell of the ripening fruit. Nectar seeking bats gather pollen on their snout, and by going from flower to flower help create new plants.
EYES: Bats are not blind! For example, flying fox bats have very good eyesight and they use their eyes along with their excellent sense of smell to help find food in the dark. Bats' eyes are better at seeing in the dark. Most see objects only in black and white, but color vision is known to exist in some old world fruit bats.
FEET: With their strong claws, bats are able to hang upside down in their roosts. Fishing bats also use their claws to scoop up the fish they will eat.
HANDS AND WINGS: Bats fly by using their hands and wings. While the wings are flapping, bats can go up or down by moving the membrane between the body and fifth finger. This is called "lift." Bats move forward (called "thrust") by changing the shape of the membrane between the second and fifth fingers.
FUR ON THEIR BODY: You can tell that a bat is a mammal because it has fur or hair on its body. The fur protects the bat because different colors and designs can serve as camouflage and they can hide from danger. The fur is kept clean by regular licking, somewhat like what a cat does. In the winter it helps keep the bat warm.
IF THEY FLY, WHY AREN'T THEY BIRDS?
Bats are mammals. They have fur or hair. A baby bat is born live. The babies nurse from their mom. Bats have arms, hands and feet. They are warm blooded. Birds Are...well...birds! They are hatched from eggs. Birds have feathers, not fur or hair. Babies are fed from mom's mouth. They have wings, but no hands and fingers.
So, are bats and birds different? Yes they are. And, a bat is the only mammal that can truly fly...even though it is not a bird! Isn't that amazing? Aren't bats really amazing?
DON'T YOU BELIEVE IT!
The greatest harm to bats is not knowing anything about them , and this creates: FEARS, DISLIKES, DESTRUCTION, AND POSSIBLE EXTINCTION OF BATS. This is caused by MYTHS or untrue stories!
SO, LET'S STAMP OUT MYTHS!
ARE BATS BLIND?
NO!
No, bats are not blind and many can see very well. Insect-eating bats depend on sound and very good hearing to find food and to get around in the dark. So don't say, "...as blind as a bat" because it is not true!
DO BATS GET CAUGHT IN YOUR HAIR?
NO!
If bats can find tiny insects in total darkness, would they
get tangled up in your hair? No! They are much too smart to fly
into people.
BATS ARE FLYING MICE, RIGHT?
NO!
While both bats and mice are mammals, bats are not rodents and are more closely related to primates and people. Besides...mice can't fly!
ARE BATS DIRTY AND DO THEY ALL CARRY RABIES?
NO!
Bats are very clean and groom themselves just like cats. Bats can get rabies, like all mammals, but few ever do. Remember, bats are wild animals. You have nothing to fear if you never touch a bat.
OTHER MAMMALS CAN FLY LIKE BATS, RIGHT?
NO!
Some mammals, like the flying squirrels can glide, but bats are the only mammals that can really fly. There are many different ways bats fly. Some can hover like hummingbirds while feeding on nectar, and a few flying foxes can soar in the air like eagles.
BATS ARE WORTHLESS ANIMALS.
NO!
Bats are very, very helpful! They help control the insect population, reseed cut forests, and pollinate plants that provide food for humans. Bats also taught us about sonar. Bacteria in their guano is useful in improving soaps, making gasohol and producing antibiotics, besides being a fertilizer.
Hmm. Informative. And it assuaged most of my fears about bats. Perhaps I can finally go see this movie without pissing my pants.
Thanks, BATS4KIDS!
I especially liked:
Quote from: Bats4KidsBATS ARE WORTHLESS ANIMALS.
NO!
I think they are confusing our impressions of bats with those of pigeons. Pigeons are truely worthless flying rats.
Best movie of the year. I haven't felt so good about seeing a movie since Eternal Sunshine.
Quote from: Gamblor Posts DrunkBest movie of the year. .
I would agree. If you ask me, Batman has the 2 best Super Hero films now.
Quote from: MacGuffinRoger Ebert already called this one of the best films of the year, saying how Spider-Man got it right last year, Batman gets it right this year.
Time for your collagatar, mod.
Damn... I hated Spider-Man 2 to the point of disgust, I hope Batman gets it 'right' in different ways than Spidey.
Quote from: Pas RapportQuote from: MacGuffinRoger Ebert already called this one of the best films of the year, saying how Spider-Man got it right last year, Batman gets it right this year.
Time for your collagatar, mod.
Damn... I hated Spider-Man 2 to the point of disgust, I hope Batman gets it 'right' in different ways than Spidey.
Aside from the ways that Spidey got it "right" with a touch of cheese, overdone speeches, and elasticity, Batman actually gets everything fucking right with the dark tone, the characters, the city, the history, the mythology, the action, and the humanity. It's right on.
I'm going tonight! :yabbse-grin:
I hated the scenes in Asia. They were cut like a trailer. Then there's the one-liners which we could tell would be a problem.
Everything else is special
oh I forgot, Katie Holmes is kind of not
I am really excited for this movie, but I just have one worry...
Did Katie Holmes fuck it up?
I didn't hate Holmes or the one-liners. The former is mostly inconsequential and harmless, the latter appropriately funny.
My full review is here. (http://www.road-dog-productions.com/reviews/archives/2005/06/batman_begins.html)
Well she doesn't fuck it up, she's just a little wooden playing against the rest of the cast.
spoilers
Ghostboat, I'm not sure why you say Oldman stole the film when to me he felt just as right as the majority of the cast (also, he had maybe the worst line: "I've got to get me one of those!" That's from Men In Black, everyone knows that). Cillian Murphy was good enough to merit my excitement when we first found out he was cast. I like how his longevity was due to craftiness and escaping, and then how he was taken care of easily. That sort of realism made the drug-effects kind of scary. (Is he gone for good?)
Ghostboy, on your interview with Don Hertzfelt, which I have not read yet but will shortly, is he the same fellow with those banned, hilarious, stick figure commercials? The one's with "I'm a banana!" and "My spoon is too big!" Because those are fucking great.
Yeah,one and the same.
Holmes is fine, but she never dropped this strange acting twitch she's had since Dawson's Creek. I call the Katie Shake. She'll say something, and cock her lips to the side a little bit, and then just shake her very slightly, like a mild tremor.
Cillian Murphy is a god. He was so perfectly cast. Gary Oldman has never been so familial and comforting. After tonight, when I see it again, I'll write a real review, of some kind.
Quote from: UltrahipGhostboy, on your interview with Don Hertzfelt, which I have not read yet but will shortly, is he the same fellow with those banned, hilarious, stick figure commercials? The one's with "I'm a banana!" and "My spoon is too big!" Because those are fucking great.
Rejected ;) AIM me if you want a copy
Spoilers, perhaps.
The scenes went by at a brisk pace, almost too brisk, as it was hard to find solid ground during the movie. The city was a bit of a let down, and speaking of which Gotham has a fuckload of cleaning up to do. It went balls out for sure, but it was an enjoyable experience, and an overall good movie.
Quote from: UltrahipGhostboy, on your interview with Don Hertzfelt, which I have not read yet but will shortly, is he the same fellow with those banned, hilarious, stick figure commercials? The one's with "I'm a banana!" and "My spoon is too big!" Because those are fucking great.
like my avatar...
Yes, those are the one's!
Spoilers, Perhaps?
I agree with Losing the Horse on the briskness of the scenes. It was a little disorienting. Like when Batman busts the dock workers bringing in the drugs and the homeless guy with the coat is there all of a sudden. Or when Rutger Hauer comes in to question Morgan Freeman about the lost cargo piece and then just fires him, to move onto the next scene. "WTF?" But those are small little things. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. And I'll take one Gary Oldman one-liner over too many shitty ones from Schwarzenegger.
Definitely the best Batman movie, by far!
for some stupid reason I didn't recognize Cillian Murphy and somehow my imagination equated him to be Zach Braff with cheekbones.
The movie is worth the bucks. A couple one liners, a few recurring 'themes' repeated verbally, Katie Holmes (even though we'd all do her)...but it was made up for by most everything else. Even the blurriness and the closeups of the action seemed visceral. And Tom Wilkinson NOT playing a doctor? Whew!
Oh, Christian Bale, that cinematography just makes me wanna :kiss: ya
well...my Christian Bale I still mean Katie Holmes.
Speaking of Mr. Freeze one-liners...the better part of my last fall semester was spent spouting lines like "ICE TO SEE YOU!" and "I thought I'd order a pizza with extra FREEZE!!" in an Arnie voice. Pretty soon we just yelled stupid shit like "BLIZZARD!". Man we milked that for about 3 weeks :yabbse-grin:
I thought it was an excellent Batman film. It was much more of a character study than a loud action movie. Bale was great as Batman and the rest of the cast was strong (except Katie Holmes was a litte stiff). The writing was very good and Christopher Nolan did a wonderful job with the camera work. At first I thought the scenes were moving a little too fast like they were trying to cram it all in. But it wore off after a while and became solid as a whole. Easily one of the year's best.
I really enjoyed this one, but everyone who is saying this movie "got it right" probably aren't that familiar with Batman.
What I liked is that it changed almost all the right things.
I think Bale is the best as Batman the person, but when it comes to being behind the mask, Keaton has him totally beat.
If this follows the latest trend where the sequel is better than the next one will be the best of the current batch.
oh yeah... and DC's intro is a little too much like Marvel's.
Quote from: RegularKarate
oh yeah... and DC's intro is a little too much like Marvel's.
cuz DC know they ain't got SHIT on Marvel
Christopher Nolan interview that aired today on The Treatment with Elvis Mitchell:
http://kcrw.com/cgi-bin/ram_wrap.cgi?/tt/tt050615Christopher_Nolan
Quote from: RegularKarate
I think Bale is the best as Batman the person, but when it comes to being behind the mask, Keaton has him totally beat.
Agreed.
I liked it... but I was sorta dissapointed... I thought I was gonna love it. Love it like I did with Star Wars ROTS.
++++ BIG SPOILERS ++++
Bruce Wayne was very good as himself, not so much as Batman.
Cillian Murphy was bad.
The dialogue was pretty bad most of the time.
I didnt like Liam Nesson being the bad guy, and at the same time the mentor. Its kinda like Obi Wan turning to the Dark Side.
The Morgan Freeman character conflicts a lot with Alfred. Neither one got enough attention or credit for their influence in Bruce.
The whole deal with the CEO of Wayne Enterprises is also wrong. The guy was really protecting Bruce's interests for 20 years, and sold the company, and did everything a businessman does. He wasnt involved in all the shit. So why does he get fired? And why does he fire Fox in the first place? He looks like the bad guy but its not clear.
Tom Wilkinson seemed like a great bad guy a the beginning and ends up being nothing.
So yes I liked the film... I enjoyed it... but is not as good as Batman 1 with the Joker. I think Christian Bale is awsome and I was happy that he landed this role and he played it well. But I was really expecting MORE in the script, more in the dialogue, more in general.
I liked Batman Begins but I too felt that overall it was rushed and that neither Morgan Freeman nor Michael Caine's characters were in it enough. And it was cool that the villains weren't as over-the-top as in previous films. Overall it was good, and I certainly liked that it tried to be "realistic," but I didn't think it lives up to all the ecstatic praise.
And Holmes is just another in a line of uncharismatic women in superhero films.
It was weird seeing Cillian Murphy (Cheekbones) and Tom Wilkinson in the same film again, as I just watched Girl with a Pearl Earring a couple of days ago.
..caught Bale and Nolan on Charlie Rose tonight. It was a good interview. I'm very impressed with the amount of Batman lore that Bale took it upon himself to read about.
Quote from: UltrahipGhostboy, on your interview with Don Hertzfelt, which I have not read yet but will shortly, is he the same fellow with those banned, hilarious, stick figure commercials? The one's with "I'm a banana!" and "My spoon is too big!" Because those are fucking great.
go to www.bitterfilms.com and see his other stuff which hasn't been referenced to death..
Quote from: PubrickQuote from: UltrahipGhostboy, on your interview with Don Hertzfelt, which I have not read yet but will shortly, is he the same fellow with those banned, hilarious, stick figure commercials? The one's with "I'm a banana!" and "My spoon is too big!" Because those are fucking great.
go to www.bitterfilms.com and see his other stuff which hasn't been referenced to death..
Hertzfeldt has some great shorts on The Animation Show, Vol. 1 DVD available at theanimationshow.com. Billy's Balloon is just wonderful, although when we screened it--no one laughed and I'm in the back cracking up. I think it could be rather disturbing if you don't know his style before hand.
Intermission in the 3rd Dimension was also a standout. Plus, everyone should own The Animation Show DVD just because of all the great work on it. It will make your DVD collection a better place.
Quote from: RaikusQuote from: PubrickQuote from: UltrahipGhostboy, on your interview with Don Hertzfelt, which I have not read yet but will shortly, is he the same fellow with those banned, hilarious, stick figure commercials? The one's with "I'm a banana!" and "My spoon is too big!" Because those are fucking great.
go to www.bitterfilms.com and see his other stuff which hasn't been referenced to death..
Hertzfeldt has some great shorts on The Animation Show, Vol. 1 DVD available at theanimationshow.com. Billy's Balloon is just wonderful, although when we screened it--no one laughed and I'm in the back cracking up. I think it could be rather disturbing if you don't know his style before hand.
Intermission in the 3rd Dimension was also a standout. Plus, everyone should own The Animation Show DVD just because of all the great work on it. It will make your DVD collection a better place.
I just wish they would've released the entire Animation Show from last year on it :(
New 'Batman' begins with a $15.1 mil bang
The highly anticipated return of the Dark Knight to the silver screen became a reality Wednesday, when Warner Bros. Pictures' "Batman Begins" took flight in 3,718 theaters and grossed a solid but not record-breaking $15.1 million.
"We're ecstatic about the opening for "Batman Begins," said Dan Fellman, president of domestic distribution for Warner Bros. "It's the first 'Batman' movie that ever opened on a Wednesday, and it's the largest Wednesday opening in June for Warner Bros." Fellman noted that the last "Batman" film to hit theaters, "Batman and Robin" in June 1997, grossed $16.1 million its first day of release, which was a Friday.
The latest and fifth film in the "Batman" franchise stars Christian Bale as the caped crusader and was helmed by Christopher Nolan. Prior to Bale, Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer and George Clooney have donned the cape.
The theater count for "Batman Begins" expands slightly today, moving to 3,858 theaters.
Although the Wednesday debut fell short of industry records, it was the 11th-biggest Wednesday opening of all time. The PG-13-rated film has been generating primarily positive reviews, and Fellman said the exit polls were outstanding. Heading into the weekend, "Batman Begins" most likely will have at least $25 million under its boxoffice utility belt.
My Pubrick-esque review:
worked
bale as batman
murphy doing depp
no CGI overdose
failed
"I gotta get me one of those"
not enough oldman (except above)
the open ending for sequel
winner
katie's nipples
NOT BAD AT ALL :bravo:
that was amazing
purely amazing
I really liked it. Not too much I'd do different. :oops:
High point = Theology behind Batman and the League of Shadows
Low point = All of the Batman's have made me feel a little claustraphobic because of the tight sets.
Whoever said Tom Wilkinson should have been the main bad guy got it spot on. I like the way that the scarecrow had a less over-the-top alter-ego, though. I've had enough of science experiments gone wrong (and boy did I hate seeing that Fantastic4 trailer again, today).
My main fear - the obligatory gadget selection montage was actually really well done and setup. And thank god for Michael Caine! As great as Gary Oldman was I think Caine was my favourite - completely the opposite of the twee embarassment I feared the part would be.
I liked the sequel setup but Im dissapointed that it was the Joker. Im not sure how that works in with Burton's Batman. I suppose its not meant to, but who the hell can they get to play the Joker who will make the part just as iconic and more his own than the Jack?
Quote from: ®edlumI liked the sequel setup but Im dissapointed that it was the Joker. Im not sure how that works in with Burton's Batman. I suppose its not meant to, but who the hell can they get to play the Joker who will make the part just as iconic and more his own than the Jack?
That's a good question. If they get the casting right on a young Joker, it will make the sequel. However, somebody who people can't picture (in spirit) as a young Jack Nicholson will tank.
Don't you think they established this as a completely separate continuity enough to get a brand new Joker? He doesn't need to be anything like Nicholson if they're staying true to (the best of the) comic book incarnations.
Quote from: ®edlumwho the hell can they get to play the Joker who will make the part just as iconic and more his own than the Jack?
Quote from: hacksparrowdepp
Yeah I guess you're right. A young Joker doesnt work anyway because I dont beleive that would fit with how The Joker is established in Batman. It's been such a long time since Ive seen it - I guess that's why Ive ignored other elements that make any continuation or overlap impossible.
The 'Begins' is slightly misleading, though. I did presume that these were prequels of some form, I was wrong.
Hmm Depp....nope, I just think of Jack. Considering John C Reileys desire to play Willy Wonka, though - he would be a fantastical but interesting casting choice.
They should go really young and go with Jonathan Lipnicki. Does he have a little brother? Or maybe that Dakota Fanning....that kid can act! :oops:
Johnny Depp would be a great joker... maybe they should get Chris Rock and make a black joker... he has the smile with no surgery
..watch they'll cast Hayden Christensen as a young joker..
:yabbse-undecided:
Hopefully they won't go any further with the Batman series. This prequel leads right into the first Batman movie (Tim Burton's version) and the joker even hints at that. The studio might get persuaded to do another one since it'll make a lot of money, but this series and Star Wars they should seriously leave alone.
Quote from: Small Town LonerHopefully they won't go any further with the Batman series. This prequel leads right into the first Batman movie (Tim Burton's version) and the joker even hints at that. The studio might get persuaded to do another one since it'll make a lot of money, but this series and Star Wars they should seriously leave alone.
Basically, none of this makes any sense at all.
totally, this movie was as if batman in all his manifestations had never ever EVER existed before it. man i dug
they re-started the whole deal... Batman 1... then we have Batman 2... its clear enough already
Christian Bale is a cool Batman... I hope he stays for the next one
Quote from: ®edlumbut who the hell can they get to play the Joker who will make the part just as iconic and more his own than the Jack?
Crispin Glover. Johnny Depp should be saved for Two-Face.
General: The fuck is with people calling this the most realistic Batman movie ever like that makes it the best Batman movie ever? Don't get me wrong, it was good and healthy and even exciting to see it handled that way, but that should have nothing at all to do with which Batman movie is better. Maybe if the movie topic was abortion or the war in Iraq, but it's a guy, a billionare even, in a fucking batsuit fighting crime. Realistic does not mean better.
I had a hell of a time with Batman Begins, every time I see a commericial for the movie I want to see it again, but Batman left an indelible impression on me and I honestly believe that out of the Batman movies which have been made it is the likeliest to be remembered most fondly.
Quote from: Small Town LonerHopefully they won't go any further with the Batman series. This prequel leads right into the first Batman movie (Tim Burton's version) and the joker even hints at that. The studio might get persuaded to do another one since it'll make a lot of money, but this series and Star Wars they should seriously leave alone.
hahaha
reasons it can't lead into Burton's:
-different killer of his parents
-much OLDER Bruce Wayne
-rebuilt mansion like WAHT?
-different batmobile
-wtf happened to Holmes's character?
I don't think Depp can do it (oh god I hope not) judging simply by the Willy Wonka trailer... but I have seen that like 10 times in the last 4 days, so..
Spoilers..
Saw this tonight. Overall it is one hell of an uppercut.
Bale has all of the rage and darkness required for this role. (He is the Dark Knight)
The scene with Scarecrow getting a "taste of his own medicine" was quite possibly the coolest scene of any Batman movie, period. Same goes for the red eyed demonic Batman toward the end.
Disappointing:
There is an element of Batman that I missed in this film which Burton got right. Keaton had a way of staring off into the distance, totally unaware of the people who loved him. I missed a particular brand of anguish and the consuming looks that Keaton was so good at.
The not so great:
Katie Holmes was her usual robotic self, going through the motions of a forgettable character. I'm not sure she needed to be anything other than one dimensional, but might have been cast better.
Anyone else here notice how confusing the action was? I realize Nolan didn't make a martial arts film, but could we at least get some choreography please? Whenever Batman was kicking some ass I felt like I was watching the opening battle scene in Gladiator.
Overall:
It's a great film which doesn't quite top Burton's first chapter but destroys the other three.
(The ending was a little awkward and our introduction to the Joker is totally different in Burton's film. I don't see Nolan's vision as a bridge, as much as I see him being able to re-make the piece of shit movies that Joel Schumacher came up with. He'll have to be careful with the Joker story though. To me, Nicholson's work is some sacred stuff and a pretty hard act to follow.)
Quote from: Myxomatosis
It's a great film which doesn't quite top Burton's first chapter but destroys the other three.
that pretty much says it all
Quote from: andy gekkoQuote from: Myxomatosis
It's a great film which doesn't quite top Burton's first chapter but destroys the other three.
that pretty much says it all
id say a "well made" film that doesn't hold a candle to either of Burton's films.
went into this wanting to love it and was let down - expected more from nolan.
Am I the only person who's gone tabula rasa and doesn't really care if the next Joker isn't as good as Nicholson?
And cowboy, I think you're still harboring pain from this (http://www.xixax.com/viewtopic.php?p=125932#125932).
could someone explain the high pedestal burton's batman films are being put on here? in my opinion, jack nicholson is grand fun and michael keaton has a very soothing voice, but everything else more or less sucks...the action is appalingly staged (i know it's 89 but still, it's hardly better than the adam west stuff) kim basinger and the other newsdude are from another, even worse 80s movie. the last scene in the bell tower is excruciatingly long and bland, so totally devoid of anyting remotely near supsense or excitement or climax.
batman begins has a constant pulse, and it has cillian murphy, who as someone else said in another thread, is a fucking gem.
Quote from: Ultrahipcould someone explain the high pedestal burton's batman films are being put on here?
His films were highly stylized, supported by a wonderful cast. How do you explain what makes them good? It's not really one thing or another but the overall atmosphere that Burton created.
As far as the action goes, I'd love to hear how it is appallingly staged. The fight scenes are well choreographed. Better yet, you can actually see what the hell is going on as opposed to half second jerky camera movements in Batman Begins. Great examples..
..the alley fight scene with Keaton and the two thieves..
..the fight scenes on the bell tower..
How about Gotham City in this film, compared to Burton's? I think Burton's is far more comic book esque and unreal. It's not a bad thing that Nolan created something visceral, but Burton was in touch with Batman, his villains and Gotham being bizarre and eccentric. I loved the brilliant use of colors with the Joker and how Prince's music drives the insanity. I'm not much of a fan when it comes to Batman 2 but the first chapter is, I believe, still the greatest superhero movie ever made.
by appalingly staged i mean that in no way is it threatening or exhilerating, rather, it looks like a cheap circus production. however, i think if burton were handed a batman film today with a 150 mil budget, that might not be the case.
I watched Burton's two films the other week, and it's true that the first doesn't quite hold up as well as it does in memory. It was Burton's first big budget film, and it shows. It's still a good Batman movie, but its actually sort of underwhelming by today's standards.
The second one, however, was and remains a masterpiece - but it's a Burton film, in the purest sense, and not a Batman film.
Quote from: Ultrahipthe action is appalingly staged
i personally thought the action was pretty poorly done in B Begins. Every single action scene was shot by shaking a long lens cutting every .05 seconds - you couldn't see anything happening.
I think my biggest problem was in the tone. Burton had fun with it. Nolan took it a little too serious. It's Batman for god sake. The darkness and rage people keep mentioning, seemed laughable to me. The overwrought character development of the first act just didn't resonate. I'm too familiar with this story to feel emotionally engaged. It's Batman - let's not pretend this is a brilliant character study.
Also the stylizaton (or lack of). I thought Gotham was pretty bland.
The climax was stale. Just another derrivitive CGI train crash. The potential it had with the city going crazy and the inmates being let out was quickly diffused. We never really saw any terror occur. There was never any ounce of threat that Batman had his hands full.
Also I think another strength in Burton's that was lackig here was the Bruce Wayne persona. Even down to the dynamic between the love interest. Keaton/Bassinger were much more palpable. Holmes was flat.
I was just wasn't engaged at any point. The slick production took away any character for me.
I still feel Burton's Batman and Dick Tracy are the only two comic films to get it right.
i forgot the score as well - weak
personally i LIKED the fact that the fights/action sequences werent as choreographed...it went well with the tone of the movie. i dont think i wouldve enjoyed seeing them go into choreographed martial arts moves with wide shots so you could notice every one of their "cool" moves, which wouldve made it like any other action film since the matrix (or maybe even before that but im not that much into the genre to know). the action felt gritty and brutal and IMO worked well with the fact that this is a guy that is STARTING to do this kind of thing...
Batman never had his hands full near the climax? how about when he got knocked down and almost ripped apart Dawn-of-the-Dead style?
I tought it was a really good movie and the best I've seen so far this year. I would say best action flick since the Matrix Reloaded but I won't.
the action was rad. it was all about the sound, mans!
Spolier Review:
I saw this right after crash, a double hitter. I haven't had this much exileration seeing two movies like these in a long while. So, here we go: the first part where we were seeing him training himself dragged on just a tiny bit I thought but other than that I really enjoyed it. The whole cast did an amazing job. Gary Oldman, especially, was kickass. Bale really knows how to play drunk pretty damn well. I was wondering if Pubrick, had seeen this yet, and if has, did he notice Eyes Wide Shut's Mr. Milich as the homeless man who takes the coat, if not P, did anyone notice him. Also, the hotel desk clerk from memento had a quirky little role too. I had a lot of fun watching this. As far as the whole Joker/Jack Nicholson Debate: if cast just right, they just might pull it off, although I doubt many hardcore Batman fanatics will Forget Jack as the joker.
The ending last minutes with everyone who was poisoned with Gas was walking around felt like it was a scene from a George Romero classic.
Quote from: SiliasRubyI was wondering if Pubrick, had seeen this yet, and if has, did he notice Eyes Wide Shut's Mr. Milich as the homeless man who takes the coat, if not P, did anyone notice him.
Rade Serbedzija. I didn't think it could be him at first, since it's such a tiny part, but sure enough - even the bums get played by first rate actors in this film.
http://imdb.com/name/nm0784884/
I remembered him more from Eurotrip and The Saint, but yeah
Quote from: cowboykurtisI still feel Burton's Batman and Dick Tracy are the only two comic films to get it right.
So Joker's Magnum shooting down the 1.5 million dollar bulletproof Batplane with one shot is getting it right?
That scene practically ruined the entire movie.
my excitement for this has waned since i saw it on wednesday, and that doesn't bode well for how i'll view it when i see it again or on dvd. but, i will say that all the performances were great, and i even thought holmes was fine. though...her constant nippage was very distracting. a movie like this didn't need to stoop to that level.
Quote from: B.C. LongQuote from: cowboykurtisI still feel Burton's Batman and Dick Tracy are the only two comic films to get it right.
So Joker's Magnum shooting down the 1.5 million dollar bulletproof Batplane with one shot is getting it right?
That scene practically ruined the entire movie.
its a comic book movie
for me, "right" doesn't mean realistic. again it's a comic book.
calling attention to "unrealistic" elements is arbitrary.
making a "realistic" adaptation of a comic book is boring to me.
Batman Begins keeps garnering praise for being so realistic. for me realism isn't a virtue when it comes to comic books films.
- its a matter of taste.
cowboy, I really agree about the score. Two great composers and they just mickeymouse the entire film.
I don't even remember the score but I largely agree with what cowboykurtis is saying. The city especially is getting way too much slack, it was an ugly mesh of major cities, most notably Hong Kong, Chicago, and Big Tall Buildings.
Does anyone else feel that it would have been way more interesting if Wayne HAD chopped the guys head off? That would have had so much more depth to the character. You could either take it really dark with Batman as a criminal killing machine...or you could have Wayne really conflicted with himself as he tries to reconsile what he has done with what he's really out to accomplish. They scarificed this opportunity for commercialism.
Quote from: metroshaneDoes anyone else feel that it would have been way more interesting if Wayne HAD chopped the guys head off? That would have had so much more depth to the character. You could either take it really dark with Batman as a criminal killing machine...or you could have Wayne really conflicted with himself as he tries to reconsile what he has done with what he's really out to accomplish. They scarificed this opportunity for commercialism.
Anakin Skywalker... (Count Dooku)...
PG-13.
Are you saying they should make movies according to what MPAA rating they want?
Technically, it's not for commercial reasons or because of the MPAA, but because, narratively, Bruce had already reconciled himself to not killing after the whole courthouse incident. If there was an opportunity for the filmmakers to let him to actually commit murder, that would have been it - obviously, they figured intent to kill was sufficient enough.
Quote from: Ghostboynarratively, Bruce had already reconciled himself to not killing after the whole courthouse incident. If there was an opportunity for the filmmakers to let him to actually commit murder, that would have been it - obviously, they figured intent to kill was sufficient enough.
this didn't work for me -- he wasn't willing to kill a man who was a criminal - however he was willing to kill a flock of ninjas and blow up there compound.
Furthermore, Bruce doesn't want to inflict harm, yet he probably killed a few cops during that beligerant car chase.
Yeah that police car flipping around was so stupid, the officers in it are obviously dead.
Quote from: Pas RapportYeah that police car flipping around was so stupid, the officers in it are obviously dead.
It's a movie.
Quote from: KLAUS NOMIQuote from: Pas RapportYeah that police car flipping around was so stupid, the officers in it are obviously dead.
It's a movie.
which betrays its own logic.
Pas, I got it.
i know people who've survived car flippings . a racer friend of mine has been involved in two.
:)
Quote from: PubrickQuote from: KLAUS NOMIQuote from: Pas RapportYeah that police car flipping around was so stupid, the officers in it are obviously dead.
It's a movie.
which betrays its own logic.
Right. Logic must be obeyed.
Really, cronopio? TWO car flippings and he survived?
he's lucky i guess. he smokes too much marihuana and hash though.
Quote from: KLAUS NOMIQuote from: PubrickQuote from: KLAUS NOMIQuote from: Pas RapportYeah that police car flipping around was so stupid, the officers in it are obviously dead.
It's a movie.
which betrays its own logic.
Right. Logic must be obeyed.
key words: "its own".
movies hav their own logic. their own logic. own. their own internal logic. key words: "its own".
Quote from: cowboykurtisQuote from: Ghostboynarratively, Bruce had already reconciled himself to not killing after the whole courthouse incident. If there was an opportunity for the filmmakers to let him to actually commit murder, that would have been it - obviously, they figured intent to kill was sufficient enough.
this didn't work for me -- he wasn't willing to kill a man who was a criminal - however he was willing to kill a flock of ninjas and blow up there compound.
He was willing. Someone else killed him before he got to.
I liked this one okay. I liked how the bad guy was ruining the city through like horror images. that's kinda cool. the action scenes were pretty bad. either incomprehensive or just simply boring eg. gary oldman pulling an anakin skywalker in episode one. however, compared to the previous four batman films, including tim burton's two boringtacular watch-how-cool-my-sets-are cirque de solei-without-burnout-gymnasts overrated crapfests, this one was way better. its characters at least had some depth and at least the camera moves every once in a while. it was a little bit fun and a little bit deep, perhaps a bit too self-referencial for its own good, but I guess that's what happens when you make a prequel.
Quote from: RaviQuote from: cowboykurtisQuote from: Ghostboynarratively, Bruce had already reconciled himself to not killing after the whole courthouse incident. If there was an opportunity for the filmmakers to let him to actually commit murder, that would have been it - obviously, they figured intent to kill was sufficient enough.
this didn't work for me -- he wasn't willing to kill a man who was a criminal - however he was willing to kill a flock of ninjas and blow up there compound.
He was willing. Someone else killed him before he got to.
i don't recall this
I like the reinterpretation of the Scarecrow too...though the actor sucked ass..not in in his acting but in his being a dipshit
Quote from: PubrickQuote from: KLAUS NOMIQuote from: PubrickQuote from: KLAUS NOMIQuote from: Pas RapportYeah that police car flipping around was so stupid, the officers in it are obviously dead.
It's a movie.
which betrays its own logic.
Right. Logic must be obeyed.
key words: "its own".
movies hav their own logic. their own logic. own. their own internal logic. key words: "its own".
"own"ed.
Quote from: cowboykurtisQuote from: RaviQuote from: cowboykurtisQuote from: Ghostboynarratively, Bruce had already reconciled himself to not killing after the whole courthouse incident. If there was an opportunity for the filmmakers to let him to actually commit murder, that would have been it - obviously, they figured intent to kill was sufficient enough.
this didn't work for me -- he wasn't willing to kill a man who was a criminal - however he was willing to kill a flock of ninjas and blow up there compound.
He was willing. Someone else killed him before he got to.
i don't recall this
He was at the courthouse at the hearing with a gun up his sleeve, and someone else shot him... right before Rachel took him down and showed him where Falconi was.
he never killed the ninjas... he just torched their base
Quote from: BrazoliangeQuote from: cowboykurtisQuote from: RaviQuote from: cowboykurtisQuote from: Ghostboynarratively, Bruce had already reconciled himself to not killing after the whole courthouse incident. If there was an opportunity for the filmmakers to let him to actually commit murder, that would have been it - obviously, they figured intent to kill was sufficient enough.
this didn't work for me -- he wasn't willing to kill a man who was a criminal - however he was willing to kill a flock of ninjas and blow up there compound.
He was willing. Someone else killed him before he got to.
i don't recall this
He was at the courthouse at the hearing with a gun up his sleeve, and someone else shot him... right before Rachel took him down and showed him where Falconi was.
he never killed the ninjas... he just torched their base
well, its clear now that his response was after not reading my post closely - i was speaking about the beheading of the criminal that the ninjas had captive - i never once mentioned the incident at court.
and by torching their base, which resulted in a catastrophic explosion - do you not think anyone was killed?
I think some probably were, including 'Ra's Al Ghul'... but it was a few of them, or Gotham City. And he didn't deliberately kill them.
This movie made me very, very happy. The standout performance goes to Gary Oldman as Gordon...he was perfect. Also, Cillian as Scarecrow was facinating...great casting. I really like how Batman's history was shown. The shot with the young Bruce looking over his slain parents was heartbreaking.
As for the action sequences...some seemed excessive and edited way too quickly. I forgave this, because everything else was so well done.
SPOILER!
However, I was disappointed that Bruce revealed who he was to Rachel. That didn't seem right...Batman is much more protective about his identity.
END SPOILER!
I hope a better love interest comes along in the next movie (Talia played by Monica Belluci would rock...but seems unlikely).
Quote from: Gloria
SPOILER!
However, I was disappointed that Bruce revealed who he was to Rachel. That didn't seem right...Batman is much more protective about his identity.
END SPOILER!.
good call. WORST SUPERHERO MOVIE TREND
EVER.
From IMDB:
Holmes Dropped from 'Batman' Sequel
Christian Bale, Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman have signed to star in a second Batman movie, but love interest Katie Holmes has been dropped. Movie bosses are thrilled with the response to Batman Begins - it took $46.9 million in its first weekend at the US box office - and have snapped up the film's stars for a sequel. Bale as Batman was the first to put pen to paper, followed by Caine as butler Alfred and Freeman as Bruce Wayne's business associate Lucius Fox. But Holmes won't reprise her role as district attorney Rachel Dawes - reportedly because Warner Bros is angry her engagement to Tom Cruise has stolen media attention away from the movie. A source tells Pagesix.Com, "Everyone is in agreement that the movie's strength is with Christian Bale, Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman." Adding of Holmes, "She won't be in the sequel... the next romantic interest will be a much stronger actress. Warner is happy that people are now focusing on who'll be playing the Joker rather than Katie and Tom."
---------
Rejoice!
Quote from: A Matter Of ChanceFrom IMDB:
Holmes Dropped from 'Batman' Sequel
Christian Bale, Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman have signed to star in a second Batman movie, but love interest Katie Holmes has been dropped. Movie bosses are thrilled with the response to Batman Begins - it took $46.9 million in its first weekend at the US box office - and have snapped up the film's stars for a sequel. Bale as Batman was the first to put pen to paper, followed by Caine as butler Alfred and Freeman as Bruce Wayne's business associate Lucius Fox. But Holmes won't reprise her role as district attorney Rachel Dawes - reportedly because Warner Bros is angry her engagement to Tom Cruise has stolen media attention away from the movie. A source tells Pagesix.Com, "Everyone is in agreement that the movie's strength is with Christian Bale, Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman." Adding of Holmes, "She won't be in the sequel... the next romantic interest will be a much stronger actress. Warner is happy that people are now focusing on who'll be playing the Joker rather than Katie and Tom."
---------
Rejoice!
Rejoice? I think not... this whole movie seemed to be about his humanity, and the loss of his only friend and the one nearest to his heart will have to have a VERY good explanation behind it...
I would say Alfred is closer and nearer to his heart. If you ask me, Wayne and Dawes did not seem close at all in the film. Childhood friends who had grown apart. You could tell everytime Holmes stopped by, and she basically told him off at the end.
Quote from: BrazoliangeQuote from: A Matter Of ChanceFrom IMDB:
Holmes Dropped from 'Batman' Sequel
Christian Bale, Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman have signed to star in a second Batman movie, but love interest Katie Holmes has been dropped. Movie bosses are thrilled with the response to Batman Begins - it took $46.9 million in its first weekend at the US box office - and have snapped up the film's stars for a sequel. Bale as Batman was the first to put pen to paper, followed by Caine as butler Alfred and Freeman as Bruce Wayne's business associate Lucius Fox. But Holmes won't reprise her role as district attorney Rachel Dawes - reportedly because Warner Bros is angry her engagement to Tom Cruise has stolen media attention away from the movie. A source tells Pagesix.Com, "Everyone is in agreement that the movie's strength is with Christian Bale, Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman." Adding of Holmes, "She won't be in the sequel... the next romantic interest will be a much stronger actress. Warner is happy that people are now focusing on who'll be playing the Joker rather than Katie and Tom."
---------
Rejoice!
Rejoice? I think not... this whole movie seemed to be about his humanity, and the loss of his only friend and the one nearest to his heart will have to have a VERY good explanation behind it...
We may have seen two different films.
This movie was not about his humanity, rather the LOSS of his humanity. The bat has taken over the person. When did he display on ounce of humanity once he was "batman". By the end of the film He and Katie are far from "best friends". I'd say they're estranged at best. She even vocalizes that his "batman" persona has overtaken the man - and the whole film pretty much drove this theme home, in my opinion. vengence overtook his humanity.
Quote from: cowboykurtis
This movie was not about his humanity, rather the LOSS of his humanity. The bat has taken over the person. When did he display on ounce of humanity once he was "batman". By the end of the film He and Katie are far from "best friends". I'd say they're estranged at best. She even vocalizes that his "batman" persona has overtaken the man - and the whole film pretty much drove this theme home, in my opinion. vengence overtook his humanity.
Did you miss the scene where he refuses to behead the man? Is that not showing humanity? He's trying to make Gotham a better place and refused to go along with Ra's to destroy the city. How is this not humane? If anything he started to lose his humanity when he decided he was going to kill Joe Chill. If vengence had overtaken the humanity he would of gone along with Ra's and taked out all his hatred on Gotham. I thought that was pretty straightforward.
Quote from: B.C. LongQuote from: cowboykurtis
This movie was not about his humanity, rather the LOSS of his humanity. When did he display on ounce of humanity ONCE he was "batman".
Did you miss the scene where he refuses to behead the man? Is that not showing humanity? If vengence had overtaken the humanity he would of gone along with Ra's and taked out all his hatred on Gotham. I thought that was pretty straightforward.
Regarding the beheading of the man - read what I wrote one more time - I thought that was pretty straightforward.
Regarding his hatred of Gotham - I never recall him expressing HATE for Gotham -
If hated gotham he WOULD have gone along with the plan and probably wouldn't bother trying to "save" it.
I believe his vengence was always about ridding the city of evil, so other's wouldn't go through what he did with losing his parents.
Humanity pertains to being part of a group, communicating and relating to those of that said group - humans.
Does he not say, I need to become MORE than human... Which he does. He becomes obsessed with his quest for vengence. The Bat overtakes the Human. The monster overtakes the Man (a monster with "good" intentions, but still a monster).
And to fully dedicate his life to vengence, to his quest, it means detatching/abandoning those who were closest to him (holmes and caine) - i.e. humans...i.e. loss of humanity.
ugh.... no, no, no... :nono:
he became more of a man in that he became a symbol that there needed be no fear of the evil and corrupt, because someone would be there to protect them and watch over them. the problem is that in a city so corrupt, not many can relate to him, not vice versa... he talks only with Gordon as Batman because noone else will believe in what he believes in, which is a city without fear as means of power. Falconi had impact on Bruce when he said "This is a world you'll never understand. And you always fear what you don't understand". He needs the people of Gotham to stop turning their backs on what's going on and actively try to clean the place up.
I'm going off on a tangent now, be back in a bit
Quote from: Brazoliange
he became a symbol.
the problem is that in a city so corrupt, not many can relate to him, not vice versa... he talks only with Gordon as Batman because noone else will believe in what he believes in
In becoming a "symbol", in dedicating his life, he has abandoned his "other" life. His "human" life. Gordon is not the only one who knows him as batman. Both Caine and Holmes do as well. And neither one of them seem too excited about what this obsession has done to Bruce Wayne - the human they new and cared for.
Of course gordon, "relates" to him - Batman will make his job easier. And he never new Bruce Wayne to begin with.
Don't you understand that Bruce Wayne in essence has died to make room for Batman. That was pretty much the new angle to this franchise.
Nevertheless, this conversation has become laborious, becuase it's very obviously that the word "humanity" is being viewed in a different regard from person to person.
Quote from: Brazoliangeugh.... no, no, no... :nono:
also this little zinger, made my opinion of you fall into the gutter - and it wasn't very high to begin with.
just had to get that off my chest.
I don't think he becomes a bat or a monster so much as figure of legendary status. He lives a dual life as a man and as something greater than a man, but that does not imply that second life is not human, lacking humanity, or inhumane. Anyway, I know what I mean, I don't feel like explaining it.
How did we forget that Tom Wilkinson was badass as fuck in this??? If only for that scene in the bar.
Quote from: cowboykurtisQuote from: Brazoliangeugh.... no, no, no... :nono:
also this little zinger, made my opinion of you fall into the gutter - and it wasn't very high to begin with.
just had to get that off my chest.
sorry, I know that sounded like shit but there was no other way I could think of putting it... I meant it to sound like I was murmuring it to myself
now that you put it that way though, I can see your side of this as working too... though I'd think it'd make Gordon's job harder, because he was content to let most of the corruption slide until Batman arrived
Quote from: Brazoliangethough I'd think it'd make Gordon's job harder, because he was content to let most of the corruption slide until Batman arrived
i dont think he was content - i just thinking he didn't have the power behind him to do anything about it.
Rant/Review (SPOILERS)
Damn, maybe I just don't see enough action movies... but I thought it was great.
I went in with pretty high expectations, I loved how much darker than the previous 4. The first-person shots of the effect of the Scarecrow's gas was really cool, I mean when the Scarecrow was sprayed with a "dose of his own medicine" and seeing a black devil Batman spewing black goo was reall fucking cool. Also have to mention everyone seeing a flying devil Batman was awesome as well. The darker images/tone like these are something the other Batman movies dared to do.
The older movies were too over the top, this was much more realistic and for me the believability of it helped. There were some almost cheesy one liners, but nothing that stood out as really bad (nothing like NOOOOO in Star Wars III). Same with the Katie Holmes characer. This movie didn't have a "love interest". She was a friend from childhood that he's always adored and did love her, but she wasn't a "love interest" character. In the end they kissed and walked away as friends.
I think people are being led to think that she is a typical super hero movie girl. I thought of her just like another character in the movie with a recognizable face (Murphy, Caine, Oldman) and they were all treated with equal time and interest, not just thrown in. Most of everyone's complaint is with her character, and it didn't bother me at all.
I've also been hearing gripes about the action and I thought it was pretty good. There isn't a ton of action, but enough to look believeable and interesting. The last shot of him jump out the back the falling train and making the wings shoot out was really fucking cool as well.
I think the sequel is going to be really good. It will be almost all action and Baman vs. The Joker and The Scarecrow (she didn't kill him and he got away.. I think he'll be in the sequel and sort of partner up with The Joker) for the entire 2 hours.
The Latest Joker in the Deck
Cool new Batman sequel buzz!
Batman-on-Film suggests that Bettany may be a candidate for the role of Batman's greatest enemy. "Bettany joins Lachy Hulme and Crispin Glover in the mix to play The Crown Prince of Crime."
In related sequel buzz, director Christopher Nolan reportedly spoke candidly with a small English publication, the Laceby News, about the next Bat-flick.
"If David's writing it, Christian's still Batman, and everyone else is returning....me not returning would be like the only student of a graduating class skipping the big day to wash the car," Nolan apparently said.
"Like Begins, one clear cut villain isn't the plan," Nolan added. And what of the Boy Wonder? "The studio wasn't interested in Robin. We weren't either. This is a young Batman, so Robin's a few films....not for a few pictures anyway. Dick Grayson's still in a crib somewhere. I seriously doubt I will even be involved when Robin's in the franchise."
I have nothing against this guy... but he talks like if he created the character and he is the key to the success of this franchise...
Quote from: andy gekkoI have nothing against this guy... but he talks like if he created the character and he is the key to the success of this franchise...
this isn't Burton's Batman, and it doesn't follow his or Schumacher's storyline, it's one Nolan made...
so in reality Nolan(/Bale) helmed this Batman franchise
Quote from: BrazoliangeQuote from: andy gekkoI have nothing against this guy... but he talks like if he created the character and he is the key to the success of this franchise...
this isn't Burton's Batman, and it doesn't follow his or Schumacher's storyline, it's one Nolan made...
so in reality Nolan(/Bale) helmed this Batman franchise
i was under the impression that this franchise spin came from frank miller's comic books...anyone?
Quote from: cowboykurtisQuote from: BrazoliangeQuote from: andy gekkoI have nothing against this guy... but he talks like if he created the character and he is the key to the success of this franchise...
this isn't Burton's Batman, and it doesn't follow his or Schumacher's storyline, it's one Nolan made...
so in reality Nolan(/Bale) helmed this Batman franchise
i was under the impression that this franchise spin came from frank miller's comic books...anyone?
*Sigh* I guess no one reads the articles I post. :cry:
Quote from: On Page 24, MacGuffinHe heard that Warners wanted to reinvent the Batman franchise but didn’t have any specific ideas. “So I got in touch with them and pitched my take on it. A very loose take. Then I refined it a bit and got more specific with it, based on their comments … . And we settled on the notion of it being an origin story.”
Looking at the entirety of the Batman canon with co-scripter David S. Goyer, Nolan discovered that there isn’t a single definitive account of the hero’s origin: Different writers had experimented with different ideas through the years. “Some elements stuck, others didn’t,” Nolan says. “We looked for the things that stuck and therefore are essential to the character.” While he cites Frank Miller’s Batman: Year One and Jeph Loeb’s The Long Halloween as influences, he was determined that this film should be a fresh take on the character – his interpretation of its essence from six decades of stories by scores of writers.
Greg Silverman at Warners sent him “The Man Who Falls,” in which Bruce Wayne leaves Gotham for seven years and travels the world, learning the different skills that he will put to use as Batman. “I found that a fascinating jumping-off point,” Nolan says. “You know, Bruce Wayne as a little boy being traumatized by an encounter with bats and how that influences his life.”
..anyone?
am i going to fail the class now?
it might have been better if he did go off frank millers.
So.....Sean Penn as the joker?
http://www.aintitcoolnews.com/display.cgi?id=20563
year one is almost more focused on Gordon than Batman. its really good. Penn seems like a cool choice except kinda old considering the younger casting of bale. atleast he has a babyface.
IF they cast Sean Penn as the Joker, they might as well cast Dakota Fanning as Harley to complete this crappy casting rumor.
would be really nice if they included Harley Quinn this time around
I just saw this last night and I know I am a little late, but here is the main thing I took away from this. Since they explored fear so much in this one, and used the Scarecrow so well to do it, won't they have to explore insanity (even on Batman's side) in the next one? If they can keep relating Batman to his villains like this, then they can keep up a good franchise. Then once they reach Two-Face they can explore vengance, etc . . .
In any case, I still maintain that Katie Holmes was the worst part of this movie. It's just something about the way she says things and how her lips get crooked and her voice that just don't sit well with me. But I thought the rest was really good, I didn't even mind the one liners (either because there were so few or because the actors were so good). Plus, it's nice to see Gary Oldman blowing shit up. Tom Wilkinson (doing his best Brando) was also a nice little addition to the case, not to mention Cillian Murphy.
And I don't think what's bad about Sean Penn as the Joker.
Quote from: A Matter Of ChanceI just saw this last night and I know I am a little late, but here is the main thing I took away from this. Since they explored fear so much in this one, and used the Scarecrow so well to do it, won't they have to explore insanity (even on Batman's side) in the next one? If they can keep relating Batman to his villains like this, then they can keep up a good franchise. Then once they reach Two-Face they can explore vengance, etc . .
yep that approach is definitely the best aspect of the movie.
the only thing i really couldn't get over, and i havn't checked if anyone's mentioned it yet: HUMANS ARE TWO THIRDS WATER.
still great tho.
Quote from: PubrickHUMANS ARE TWO THIRDS WATER.
:ponder:
do you mean they don't drink too much water in the movie? can you elaborate ?
any whoo0, i saw it yesterday for the third time and i still liked it quite a lot. even batman's solid snake voice was cool. i'm echoing ghost boy here but gary oldman was the man. i like how he looks when he enters arkham, skinny but brave because he knows batman's inside. i'm definetely reading batman year one sometime soon. also that scene at the police station right after the murder is very moving, how gordon looks at lil' bruce as if all chance of gotham getting better had disappeared that night.
the kid sucked at some scenes, specially the one in the train, where he anticipates almost every line by thomas wayne, and i don't buy how did that nose turn into christian bale's . rachel was a brat. that's it.
I'm seeing it for the third time today too. It probably won't be thrilling as it was the first couple of times but hopefully still very good. I just think this is one of the best posters ever:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv720%2Fithica45%2Fbatman_begins.jpg&hash=2f23a07ec1c54a80929973eeb3a827360648df16)
Quote from: cronopioQuote from: PubrickHUMANS ARE TWO THIRDS WATER.
:ponder:
do you mean they don't drink too much water in the movie? can you elaborate ?
i mean, how was the vaporization microwave not working at least on the ppl standing right next to it?! steam should've been coming out of everyone's ears!
it's like in Ocean's 11 (remake) when cheadle detonates the pinch, he covers his balzac in a comical fashion, cos he understands the joke in the basic physics of the thing. with batman i guess it's a matter of disbelief, but even as far as this movie goes, that's pushing it. it's a pretty major part of the climax/threat to the city.
gotcha.
to be honest i don't pay much attention on the concepts of world ruling devices, like that one or doc ocks tentacles, but you're right. i was talking with redlum yesterday about how aside from its greatness, it still had those paperwork scenes, because he was complaining about that scene with the guys at the waterplant, how there wasn't any real need for those scenes, and he's right, the man says "this whole building's gonna blow!" two times in a row or something. that six flags rollercoaster shot of the train was weak too,. my belief is that was out of nolan's control, but being that warner seems pleased by the fact that people is appreciating it for its 'psychology' rather than the whole spectale, next time there's gonna be more rocknroll.
It had a human dodging adapter, sleep well now
Quote from: SleuthIt had a human dodging adapter, sleep well now
was that mentioned in the movie? i ask cos i stepped out for a minute to hang a slash.
and what a glorious slash it was.
If you can go to see a film like Batman (or any other good film) and you go out of the theatre in the middle, for any reason, I dont think you have what it takes to judge it or say that its wrong... cause obviously you didnt pay enough attention, or you werent that into the movie to hold it
:kiss:
Quote from: andy gekkoIf you can go to see a film like Batman (or any other good film) and you go out of the theatre in the middle, for any reason, I dont think you have what it takes to judge it or say that its wrong... cause obviously you didnt pay enough attention, or you werent that into the movie to hold it
:kiss:
I've seen some great films (this might be a funny thread to start) where I couldn't take it anymore and had to go piss. At some point the discomfort of sitting in your seat has to be a big enough distraction that it's worth it to just hurry up and go. Pick a good time (right after a major action sequence usually) and haul ass.
Finished seeing it for the third time and it's still great.
Quote from: andy gekkoIf you can go to see a film like Batman (or any other good film) and you go out of the theatre in the middle, for any reason, I dont think you have what it takes to judge it or say that its wrong... cause obviously you didnt pay enough attention, or you werent that into the movie to hold it
:kiss:
nah, i value my balzac more.
This movie, while hitting all of the right notes I suppose what the hardcore fans wanted to see as far as origin.............seemed to lack the FUN of Burton's '89 Batman. I liked Keaton's nutcase Bruce Wayne better than Bale's noble one as well, he always seemed like a bit of a space cadet (Keaton) as Wayne and incredibly focused as Batman.
Spoilers, maybe?
I love the movie overall. I do like how, once Christian Bale became Batman, they had Tom Waits do his voice over.
This movie was really well done, and really dug into the story aspect of Batman, which is what makes him so intriguing. The Burton perspectives were very cool, but they didn't have much to do with Batman, but more with his enemies. The movies weren't about who Batman was or really the method to how he fought crime as much as it was the capers of his enemies.
I've hardly looked at this thread, so if anything comes off as running dialogue to what everyone is saying then I really am that lame.
Anyways, having seen it a third time, what is impressive is how fresh it still was on my third time. Acting wise, the one person who diminished was Katie Holmes. Her Dawson Creek casting really was perfect. She's still an older actor than she looks and when she tries to play adult roles, she comes off with little sway or interest. A teenager's body too.
On the lack of focus to the bad guys, I appreciated it. Each bad guy was picked and used as building blocks to really detail Batman and why he become who he is. As far as I know, no super hero has ever used villians to such a sensible tool. They never try to. Super hero movies are just build up of unbelievable characters to a point so basically they can fight each other. This film actually follows the role of a true character movie.
Also no major criminal of interest in the film so the fact Scarecrow is nothing more than a doctor at Arkham doing hustle work for a bigger criminal actually suggests some realism in a hopless genre. But mainly it just allows the film to flow better without getting invested in bad scenarios of how someone became evil due to whatever freak accident they can make up based on limited scientific information. The Spiderman clause really has been over done.
Also proves to me the best super hero movies have little influence from their comic book origins. Claiming the first two Superman movies the ideal, Batman follows suit in traditional storytelling that has little to do with snappy edits or over the top, quick (again) snappy lines. This film isn't very realistic or very deep, but it uses enough drama to tell its fantastic story a little bit better. Realism is in this film really is its decor.
Looking forward to the sequel, I think the title could be "The Joker" instead of "Batman". This film gave us Batman's story. It only makes sense for the second to really give us the story of Batman's arch nemesis in its entirety, even if Batman will be entangled in it. I'm just glad this series has the promise to really push forward in a story and not a franchise.
Basic, blah thoughts.
nicely said
I finally saw this today, and I admit I had my doubts about it going in, but it absolutely kicked my ass. Awesome movie.
2LB
Libertarians are on Batman's side
The Caped Crusader's latest film exploits strike a chord with advocates of individualism.
Holy smaller government and lower taxes, Batman!
"Batman Begins," Christopher Nolan's brooding comic-book blockbuster, has been embraced by its fans for many things: Nolan's dark, shadowy aesthetic; the detail with which he has teased out Batman's mythic origins; and Christian Bale's wholly credible performance as the psychologically complex billionaire-turned-Dark Knight.
But "Batman Begins" has become something of a cult hit among fans of free markets, individualism and Ayn Rand, among other things. Perform a cursory Google search with the terms "Batman Begins" and "capitalism," for instance, and you come up with a blogosphere love-fest, with conservative and especially libertarian commentators praising the film's pro-business, anti-statist themes.
The film explores how Bruce Wayne, an otherwise mild-mannered heir to a billion-dollar fortune, became Gotham City's Caped Crusader, representing his good-hearted parents as paragons of noblesse oblige, who use their wealth to build a high-tech monorail system for Gotham, among other civic projects.
When the Waynes are murdered in front of their young son and their killer is sent not to prison but to a psychiatric hospital, Bruce goes away for seven years, trains as a vigilante and returns to Gotham — now a cesspool of criminal and governmental corruption — to mete out justice.
Along the way, he stages a hostile takeover of the publicly traded Wayne Enterprises, puts a dent in an evil mental health system, proves that individual initiative and guts are more effective than entrenched bureaucracies (in this case, Gotham's compromised police department) and, perhaps most notably, turns the typical Hollywood trope of rich-businessman-as-villain on its immaculately coiffed head.
David Boaz, executive vice president of the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, saw "Batman Begins" recently at the encouragement of a friend at the Objectivist Center, which, according to its website, champions "reason, individualism, freedom and achievement."
Boaz was happily struck by the fact that the hero was a businessman, he says, "but I think what was more interesting ... is that the movie takes a strong stand that some things are evil, some people are evil. Crime is bad. And criminals need to be punished, not to be understood and coddled and let out of jail for more therapy."
Boaz says he was gratified as well to see a heroic portrayal of individualism and the idea "that it's up to each person to take a stand and [that] each person has his own talents, abilities and opportunities. Bruce Wayne, because of his money and training, has more talent and opportunities to do these things than most of us, but it's made clear that it's important for everybody to take a stand."
Although Hollywood often takes the rap for touting reflexively left-wing pieties, Boaz says the ideas that run through "Batman Begins" actually aren't that rare at the multiplex or on TV; he cites such hits as "The Aviator," with its multimillionaire hero, and "The Incredibles," with its sly critiques of egalitarianism ("If everybody's special, then nobody is"), as only the most recent examples.
"America is basically a libertarian country," Boaz says, "so Americans are going to put libertarian themes into the art they create, and sometimes it's more explicit and sometimes it's less so.
"But it's not a big surprise to see individualism, anti-totalitarianism and fighting for freedom and social tolerance showing up in American art."
Quote from: MacGuffin"America is basically a libertarian country," Boaz says, "so Americans are going to put libertarian themes into the art they create, and sometimes it's more explicit and sometimes it's less so.
Psst... who's going to tell this doofus that this
Batman was written, directed, and largely acted by Brits? (Be gentle... he probably hasn't been out of his parents' basement in a while.)
2LB
Batman Sequel Game Plan
The latest rumors about the Dark Knight's return.
The online rumor mill has already kicked into overdrive on the inevitable Batman sequels. There have been some interesting casting rumors flying around (such as Paul Bettany or Sean Penn as The Joker) and just as unsubstantiated but far less believable ones (like Justin Timberlake as Two-Face).
As it was during the long development and production period for Batman Begins, Batman-on-Film remains the leading authority on what's happening with the Dark Knight onscreen. BoF now reports from a longtime, trusty source that the Bat-sequels might film back-to-back, a la the sequels to Pirates of the Caribbean and Back to the Future.
"This makes sense as the 2 stories are going to be connected. Whether Mr. Bale will be able to handle all that time in the Bat suit is another matter of course," claims Bof's source.
The two stories the scooper refers to is another rumor that BoF first reported. Apparently, the gist of the follow-ups is that, with The Joker "introduced" at the end of Begins, the second film follows Batman's first battle with the Clown Prince of Crime. In addition to (a still not yet commissioner) Jim Gordon, Batman will be aided by Gotham's new district attorney, Harvey Dent. You may recall that Dent's predecessor, Finch (Larry Holden), was killed near the end of Begins. The third film reportedly follows Dent's ill-fated prosecution of The Joker, where acid will transform Dent into the twisted Two-Face.
Besides Timberlake, the rumored contenders to portray Harvey Dent include Guy Pearce and Liev Schreiber (The Manchurian Candidate).
Loved BB. Cilian Murphy kicks ass.
And Vincent Cassell IS the Joker.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg168.imageshack.us%2Fimg168%2F9034%2Fcasselasjoker7pg.jpg&hash=e39e1a51c6b3557a25f30fc829be1f856a619706)
Does anyone know where to find pictures from the set in Iceland. They filmed at Skaftafell in Austerland (east Iceland) where I were a week ago. So I really enjoyed the part filmed there. Can't wait for the sequel! Let's hope Nolan, Bale, Freeman, Murphy and Cane is back.
We've gotten word from sources on the contents of the 2-disc DVD set (tentative street date 10/18 ), which we now expect to include anamorphic widescreen video, Dolby Digital 5.1 audio, audio commentary with director Christopher Nolan and co-writer David Goyer, 10 behind-the-scenes featurettes (including The Journey Begins, Genesis of the Bat, Path to Discovery, Shaping Mind and Body, Gotham City Rises, Cape and Cowl, The Tumbler, Saving Gotham City, Reflections on Writing and Digital Batman), the film's teaser and theatrical trailers and at least a few Easter eggs. Most of this information appears to be confirmed by a quick search of the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) website. The BBFC reviews film and DVD content in advance of release and issues ratings (much like the MPAA does in the U.S. for theatrical films).
The Joker is a Virgin?
Steve Carrell addresses those Batman rumors!
The chit-chat these days around the Internet water cooler is that Steve Carrell (TV's The Daily Show, Anchorman) is in the running for the role of The Joker in the next Batman movie.
Carrell's first leading role in a feature film is in The 40-Year-Old Virgin, which opens August 19th. Carrell also is attached to star in the big-screen remake of Get Smart, which is being produced by Batman Begins' Charles Roven.
Batman-on-Film first reported that Warner Bros. "wants to get someone relatively known, and can do comedy and drama. One guy brought up the idea of Steve Carell ... and the studio is starting to like the idea." BoF adds, however, that "Carell is not one of the actors who are being screentested [for the role of The Joker] this Fall or early Winter."
IGN FilmForce attended a press junket today for The 40-Year-Old Virgin and here's what Carrell himself had to say about The Joker buzz. "I just heard that for the first time this morning and I had no… Yeah! That would be hilar - I would love to do that! But I doubt that it's true. (Laughs) ... No, he's [possibly Charles Roven] never said anything about that, so I think that's probably completely fabricated. But I love it. I love the rumor. That would be cool. (laughs)"
So there you have it.
BoF adds "that one of the 'big names' said to be in the mix to play The Joker, isn't. ... 'Don't look for another 'Nicholson' situation this time,' a sourced informed BOF. The actor(s) that is/are getting a screentest - according more than one BOF source - would not be considered a 'star' or a 'big name' per se."
The thesps most oft-mentioned for The Joker nowadays are Sean Penn, Paul Bettany and unknown Lachy Hulme.
Moviehole, meanwhile, "can finally debunk reports that Isla Fisher is up for a role in the sequel. Apparently there's no love interest even pencilled in for the film yet, so it's too early to even talk about who'd be donning the dress in such a part, says an insider."
Scarecrow in Batman 2?
Cillian Murphy talks about a Batman return.
As talk brews of an impending sequel to Batman Begins, speculation on which cast members may return and which new characters will be a part of the sequel is swirling around the internet.
IGN FilmForce was on hand for the Red Eye junket at the Regent Beverly Wilshire this weekend where we had the chance to ask Cillian Murphy about returning to the role of Scarecrow.
"If they decide to make another Batman I'd love to be in it. The main attraction to me for that film was Chris Nolan directing it, but I don't know what I'm gonna do next…"
Murphy is indeed signed for sequels should producers decide to leverage his option. "I think they have options on us, yes."
I asked Murphy whether he thought that a sequel might further explore the back story of Dr. Jonathan Crane. "Yeah. That would be cool, wouldn't it? I'd love to do that. I just read - DC sent me all the comics. He was one of the oldest villains from the comic books, so I read all of those. That's where you get all the back story, you know?"
Since playing Scarecrow, Murphy says that his life hasn't changed that much. "Not really, you know? People tend to be very sweet. In Ireland, obviously the level of recognition is quite high, and people tend to be very sweet. I have quite a quiet life. I don't tend to go to openings or parties or any of that stuff, so as a result you don't tend to end up in the paper, then as a result people don't have such a huge recognition of you…"
Playing one of the legendary Batman villains undoubtedly opens the door to comic conventions and the like. "I did Comic-Con last year. That was mad. That was quite overwhelming… [The] press conference was, like, 6,000 people… It was f***ing crazy. With those, for the comic book movies, obviously because people have so much invested in these characters for so long. They really, really want you to treat them well, you know, so you really feel that… Yeah, of course you want to give back to the fans and everything because they're the people you're making it for."
I just remembered that I never reviewed this. I really liked Batman Begins but I didn't love it. I was a little disappointed it was not the ultimate/definitive Batman film I had been hearing & hoping it was going to be and something about it kept me at an arms length. In fact, and perhaps I'm in the minority here, I still prefer Batman and Batman Returns to this film.
The fight scenes were too disorienting. Rachel was unneccesary. Scarecrow was underused. Ras was overused. Bale's voice was a little strange (and unnatural) in the suit. I kinda prefer Keatons bat-voice. Or the one from the Animated Series. They spent too much time in Ras mountain hideout. Gotham still felt isolated and didn't seem to 'breathe' like a real city. Little nitpicks, I guess.
But even beyond those, I felt the movie was missing certain beats I think would've helped it a great deal. The movie needed Bruce to attempt to fight crime without his Bat-costume to discover that he NEEDS the costume to make the criminals afraid of him (like in Year One). Otherwise, why go to SUCH lengths right off the bat? He needed to try to foil some thugs and almost get killed doing it. THEN before the Falcone round-up being the FIRST Batman sighting there should've been a short montage (like Spider-Man) showing Batman starting to clean up the city and starting a groundswell of rumors about him. Is he real? Is he crazy? You know, from the criminals up to the police force it should've showed the word getting out and people being interested. Perhaps Nolan & Goyer stayed away from this because it was touched on in the first Batman film, but without it, it feels too isolated.
His relationship with Gordon also shouldn't have been so easy. He wouldn't have known he could trust Gordon so easily and Gordon CERTAINLY wouldn't have been so trusting of a vigilante without knowing a little more about him. All that should've culminated with the Falcone arrest. It would've probably taken about 4 minutes they could've easily shaved off the training during the first hour and I think would've improved the film greatly.
I loved many of the supporting characters and thought Gordon especially but also Falcone, Crane and Fox could've all used more screentime. Though that would've made the movie even longer. I also thought for the romance to be more convincing that could've used a little strenghtening as well, but it was sort of shoehorned into the story and unneccesary though Holmes was still pretty good at what she was given. They definitely could've done without that angle. So the movie was probably a little too crowded with characters and stuff to the point where the big plot to destroy Gotham felt a little out of place with the rest of the film. Taking down the corrupt police force and starting to restore Gotham would've been enough.
With all the work they did to ground the film in reality I guess maybe I wanted a little more of a grand presentation with things like the score (a Batman theme somewhere?) Or the villlain, the Joker is just so much more interesting. Though I can understand why they wanted to focus on Batman, they sort of shortchanged Ras and Scarecrow and Falcone in the process by having all of them. Though I see how they were linking everything in the movie with the 'fear' theme but it got a little crowded even if they werent all action figure villains. The twist with Ras was interesting and I didn't really see it coming. One of my biggest pet peeve's was letting Rachel into the Batcave. Can ONE superhero movie go by without someone learning his identity?
What did I love?
I loved the approach they took with the first Batman scene as far as playing it like a horror movie. That was something that we had never seen before and the scene was executed perfectly. Bale, despite my early reservations proved to be a great Bruce Wayne & Batman. The acting all around was top-notch, the material was treated seriously & the focus on Bruce Wayne's character was what helped the movie connect on an emotional level. (Like I mentioned elsewhere, I teared up when Bruce's parents were killed). And like many others, probably my favorite part of the movie was the damn last 30 seconds! THAT was truly perfect.
I guess from the people involved/early word/pictures/trailers/reviews, I had built in my head the perfect (Batman) film, which was not what I got. But over time I've come to look at the movie for what it really is, a very good movie but not a perfect one. So overall an A maybe? or A- (where I wanted an A+.) So this may not have been the definitive Batman film but I have hope that the next one will be.
DVD News: http://www.dvdanswers.com/index.php?r=0&s=1&c=7452&n=1&burl=
damnit! i like the single disc art better. just like spider-man (with full-screen).
Quote from: MacGuffin2MediaThe Joker is a Virgin?
Steve Carrell addresses those Batman rumors!
The thesps most oft-mentioned for The Joker nowadays are Sean Penn, Paul Bettany and unknown Lachy Hulme.
Sean Penn as the Joker? LOL....Paul Bettany wouldn't be bad, but Sean Penn? Come on now.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000AU9UYM/102-6574194-6321767
Amazon has it for pre-order, and for nearly 50% off retail price.
Interview: Christopher Nolan
The Batman director begins anew on DVD with his franchise-launcher - but without a commentary track.
The first things you'll notice when you pop in the new Batman Begins DVD are the top-shelf picture and sound... they are most choice. Bat-filmmaker Christopher Nolan told us these were his top priorities while preparing his fresh take on the classic comic-based franchise for home release.
"On the sound end, our mixers didn't just take the theatrical mix and use it, which sometimes happens," he told us. "They remixed the audio for home systems to better translate what we were trying to do in the theater. On the picture side, we spent many, many weeks -- into months, actually -- approving every aspect of the transfer. We were really working hard to give the best experience to people that would be seeing the film for the first time, as well as fans who were collecting the film, having seen it at the cinema. We wanted to recreate the theatrical experience with the home release."
In addition to the excellent audio and video quality on the Begins DVD, it's also packed with a plethora of behind-the-scenes features. "I very much enjoyed all the material relating to how we made the film," Nolan told us. "I hope the fans enjoy it as well. I think our EPK crew and DVD guys were able to get an enormous amount of footage, and they really got a lot of the most interesting parts of the filmmaking process. As a movie fan, I just have always loved getting information about the ways that movies get made and I think there are a lot of people out there who feel the same way I do."
The feature on creating the "Tumbler"/Batmobile will surely be a favorite of fans that have welcomed Nolan's gritty, reality-based take on the Dark Knight. The director says, "However much I tell people that we wanted to do it real and that we made a real car... When you see it in the film you never quite know what's real and what's trickery. When you see the DVD extra, and the thing without its finished body being tested, you really begin to gain an appreciation of all the engineering that these guys were able to put into this vehicle."
"The Tumbler was one of the things the designer and I created to initially test our idea with the studio. We put together our design and that was the first thing we showed them. We felt we could use it to express the tonal ideas of how this film was going to be radically different than anything that had been done before in the Batman films. And we wanted to show them how it was very different, but very much true to the comics. And they completely got it and they were excited about it, and it just set us off on the right path."
Nolan explained that this total reboot of the franchise was what attracted him to the project. "For me the excitement in doing a Batman film was to do something completely different than what had come before," he says. "And the way in which I characterized that difference with everybody I was working with is a feeling of reality -- a grounded quality. Batman, to me, is the ideal character to do a large-scale action film about."
One thing Bat-fans might be bummed about on the new DVD is the lack of an audio track with more of this kind of commentary from the director.
Nolan says told us that he feels including one might've been premature. He says, "I didn't do a commentary on the DVD, which people were maybe surprised by. To be honest, my feeling is that commentaries are very tricky because I feel like the audience completes the film, and until a film gets out there you almost don't know exactly what it is that you've done. You have to do commentaries these days before the movie is even in theaters, so I wanted to hold off and instead just have them use the material that we generated during production to explain our intentions."
So, what about the inclusion of a commentary on a future home format release? Maybe. But don't hold your breath. "At some point, I think it'd be interesting to do a commentary and everything," Nolan says. "But I think they've managed to get all the best material in this package. For me, personally, it's just a wonderful record of what we did and all the people I was working with. From a selfish point-of-view its just a wonderful archival tool."
Nolan confirms that fully intends to helm the next Batman movie, but he's mum on the details. And it seems that fans will have to wait a bit for the next installment as he'll be making another flick first.
"I can't really talk about it other than to say that we are talking about doing a sequel right now," he says. "David [Goyer] and I have been talking about where we're taking the characters. ... We know what we're doing and we're pretty excited about it, but it's still very early. I'm actually making another film first that I'm just in preproduction on, so it's a bit of a ways off."
And although Nolan didn't toss us any Scarecrow casting possibilities, he did drop a couple of familiar names that are being eyed for his next project. He says, "It's a film called The Prestige - the Christopher Priest novel. We start shooting in January and we're talking to Hugh Jackman and Christian Bale about starring."
Michael Caine has also been rumored to be up for a role in the project which was adapted for the screen by Nolan's younger brother Jonathan (Memento). The novel centers on the rivalry of two young stage magicians in turn-of-the-century London.
As for the expectations that go with being hitched to such a big movie franchise, Nolan says, "I wouldn't consider doing a Batman sequel unless I felt like it could be a great film, a film even better than the one we already made. But I certainly couldn't do another one on such a large scale right after having finished this one. I'm very glad to be doing something completely different."
Quote from: MacGuffinAnd although Nolan didn't toss us any Scarecrow casting possibilities
SPOILERcillian murphy
Mod... you're a, a Psychic?
Am I the only one who couldn't find a Deluxe Edition yesterday?
circuit city was sold out and i found one in a cardboard box unshelved at best buy.
Wal-Mart had the DE edition listed as $15.71 on their website yesterday. So I go to the store, find it, and check out and it rings up 24.99. So I told them to put it back and ordered it off the website. Order went through but now they don't have the DE listed anymore, only the regular edition. They better not screw me. I'm still miffed about that Amazon.com huge box set of classic movies for $3.95 or whatever it was.
I finally get to read this thread cuz I watched the movie. Sigh, I'd like to have Christian Bale's babies (but he's married with children)... and because that will never happen, maybe I'll buy the movie and watch it over, and over, and over, and over again. But seriously, Damn, did I enjoy that flick... so entertaining.
I look like Christian Bale by the way. Machinist era though.
Quote from: POZER! on November 14, 2005, 09:13:31 PM
I look like Christian Bale by the way.
you want a cookie?
Quote from: POZER! on November 14, 2005, 09:13:31 PM
Machinist era though.
seriously, go eat a cookie.