Originally posted by Mr Parker
thats hysterical what you said about that idiot Burton doing better action sequences than Nolan. 😆 😆 🤣 😆
Uh, the fight between Batman and the guy with the katana blades in the alley was very well choreographed... Hell, even the Joker vs Batman in the cathedral was very well choreographed... As well as all the others in the movie...
The fight scene in Batman 89 though was a disgrace to his character and the comicbook though.Here's Bruce wayne-this martial arts expert who is capable of handling like a dozen bad guys at the same time,getting the crap beat out of him by that jokers goon-who had no special fighting skills by the way.I mean he was a total wuss in that fight.The Batman from the comics could have beaten that guy blindfolded,easily.I hate it when people come back with that old lame excuse also that he was hurt from the plane crash.He only had like minor scars and was climbing those stairs pretty quickly afterwards,and its not like he had a broken leg and a broken arm or anything.If THAT had been the case then I would cut Burton some slack,but that WASNT the case.He was just injured minorly and the batman from the comics has gotten himself beat up more seriously than that before and beat up villains at the same time.Thats what I loved about Begins was it showed his true martial arts skills he possessed and was able to take out dozens of goons instantly like Batman can.
Originally posted by Mr Parker
Oh.something else I should add is I like many other people I knew back in 89 who hated it THEN such as rufus firefly and scythe,also hated it because of how incredibly boring it is.I mean if you want to talk boring,look no further than batman 89.They just stood around and talked practically the whole damn time the first hour in a half with just a few brief actions scenes here and there.thats nuts for batman movie to be made where they are just standing around talking practically the whole film till the very end.You would expect a "BATMAN" movie to have LOTS of action in it.Like batman begins had.Plus I hated the burton films because they were all about the villains with THEM having the majority of the screentime and batman being just a supporting character.thats NUTS for a batman movie.I heard MANY people back then saying-that movie sucked,it should have been called the joker,thats who that movie was mostly all about.Batman Begins is the kind of batman movie true batman fans deserved to have back in 89 but were cheated out of and robbed from because it erased all those nightmare horrible mistakes batman 89 made.the casting of keaton,batman killing people,the villians being the main star,no action though most the film.Thank god for Nolan.He is a fans director.
Batman Begins was more boring than Batman 89! You can't deny that fact! Sure, it was more true to the source material, and it had a better story, but that's it! They didn't do Batman's martial arts skills justice... Sure we saw that he LEARNED the skills, but once it came time to see that he can whip ass, the camera sucked and we couldn't see anything! And THEY are the one's that stood there and talked the whole time! They had 3 real action scenes the whole movie, (Falcone Shipment scene, Batmobile chase scene, Finale) and only ONE of them had good camera angles (Batmobile chase), while 89 had 5 action scenes (Axis Chemicals scene, Batmobile chase scene, Batman vs. Joker Gang in alley scene, Batwing scene, and the Cathedral scene) and ALL of them had good camera angles...
(Note: Again, I'm NOT saying Begins was a bad movie, it was incredible, I'm only saying that Batman 89 had MORE EXCITEMENT)
And by the way, Mr. Parker, if you're refering to the big guy in the cathedral, the Batwing just crashed! He's lucky he's alive and standing! Plus, mixing his "minor wounds" with the size of the guy, plus the fact that his really came out of nowhere and attacked him by suprise, I believe that even if you're a great fighter, mixing injuries, stronger opponent, AND suprise attack, you WILL get beat up a little...
Originally posted by Bat Dude
Batman Begins was more boring than Batman 89! You can't deny that fact!
I can deny it actually. Batman(89) was a complete, 100% joke. The story-line will disappoint anyone over the age of 11. I guess anyone with ADD, or an insanely short attention span would find Batman Begins boring. But...It's actually a STORY!!! Not a ****ing joke like the 89 batman.
You obviously didn't read my entire post, I said "action-wise", not story-wise! Story-wise Begins was ten times better, but action-wise it was lagging because of TERRIBLE CAMERA ANGLES! We never saw a decent fight scene!
Batman 89 a "****ing joke"? Well that's your opinion, and I respect that, but if it was SO boring and SUCH a joke, how did it gross so much money? How did Warner Bros. let Burton direct a sequel? How did it get such good reviews like: "THE MOVIE OF THE DECADE." - KGO-TV/San Francisco. Or like: "Spectacular Entertainment!" -Gannet News Service. Or how about: "A TRIUMPH. You can't take your eyes off it." -Rolling Stone
Again, it's your opinion, but how could it get such good reviews about being entertaining or get a sequel if it was boring or "a ****ing joke"?
Well, I think the fight scenes were filmed that way on purpose to give it a sense of realism. So it seems sort of chaotic, like a real fight would be. I think in this instance the shaky angles are a good choice...but that's a 100% matter of opinion.
As for the joke thing. The art gallery scene is completely unwatchable for me. It makes me cringe more than anything I've ever seen in my life.
The gross of a movie means almost nothing to me. A lot of mediocre films make tons of money. And Batman is just about that...mediocre.
As for the reviews...I'm sure I could bring up some ecstatic reviews for 'Little Man' or 'Scary Movie', but that doesn't attest to the quality of the film.
Anything can get a sequel when it makes enough money...case in point: Fantastic Four.
I think Batman 1989 simply overall has had the most impact because it was so memorable and I do believe it was far above mediocre. I get some people do not like it now and have not liked it sense the beginning but it doesn't mean it is a bad movie IMO. I think it was well made dark, funny and intriguing
Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
And Batman Begins is really a product of the post Spiderman renaissance almost to a fault IMO.
That's a good point... Batman Begins shows the direction comic book movies went in after Spider-Man...
While Batman 89 shows the "true" comic book movie (post Superman) in it's infancy...
Overall, both are great movies imo but why people continue to bash anything "Pre Begins" I will never understand... I think it's just fan boys that want it perfect or it can burn in hell... Why can't we all just accept them as two different universes (three actually) as follows (this is how I separate them in "Crisis on Infinite Earths" style)
Batman 89 and Batman Returns: Earth One (serious but not overly so)
Batman Forever and Batman and Robin: Earth Two (a camp fest)
Batman Begins, The Dark Knight and Unnamed TDK sequel: The "true" Batman (the modern day Batman)
I'll take Batman Forever anyday of the year over the first two batman movies,batman and robin is a different story though.I rank batman returns and batman and robin as equally horrible as the other.Val Kilmer as Bruce wayne alone is why I can tolerate Batman Forever unlike the first two films.Batman Forever to me is the only batman film of the Burton/schumacher movies that I CAN tolerate somewhat and find watchable.Kilmer at least actedfir the role of Bruce wayne and at least came close to looking the part of Bruce wayneand more imporatantly,had the right physical buile like bruce wayne has and it had lots more action in it like I was expecting to see in the first movie,plus it was all about batman for a change instead of being all about the villains.The thing that ruind that movie for me more than anything else though was the horrible casting choice of chris o'donnel as robin.If not for him,I would have enjoyed the movie so much more.Not only was his acting horrible but he was wayyy too old to be adopted as Robin.He looked the same age as kilmer.He pretty much ruined that movie the same way Keaton did for the batman movies for me.
Originally posted by Bat Dude
Batman Begins was more boring than Batman 89! You can't deny that fact! Sure, it was more true to the source material, and it had a better story, but that's it! They didn't do Batman's martial arts skills justice... Sure we saw that he LEARNED the skills, but once it came time to see that he can whip ass, the camera sucked and we couldn't see anything! And THEY are the one's that stood there and talked the whole time! They had 3 real action scenes the whole movie, (Falcone Shipment scene, Batmobile chase scene, Finale) and only ONE of them had good camera angles (Batmobile chase), while 89 had 5 action scenes (Axis Chemicals scene, Batmobile chase scene, Batman vs. Joker Gang in alley scene, Batwing scene, and the Cathedral scene) and ALL of them had good camera angles...(Note: Again, I'm NOT saying Begins was a bad movie, it was incredible, I'm only saying that Batman 89 had MORE EXCITEMENT)
And by the way, Mr. Parker, if you're refering to the big guy in the cathedral, the Batwing just crashed! He's lucky he's alive and standing! Plus, mixing his "minor wounds" with the size of the guy, plus the fact that his really came out of nowhere and attacked him by suprise, I believe that even if you're a great fighter, mixing injuries, stronger opponent, AND suprise attack, you WILL get beat up a little...
Dude up till now you made some good points but thats the most redicules thing you have ever said.thats the most absurd thing for you to say that batman begins was more boring that batman 89 was.Batman 89 was a snoozefest.I like many countless people I spoke to back then,had a hard time not falling asleep in the first hour in a half of that movie because it was so incredibly boring. 😠 I wanted to see BATMAN on the screen most the time,not the joker.AGAIN the movie should have been called the joker because nicholson had the majority of screentime in that movie,and batman was just a supporting character.no wonder nicholson got top billing over keaton in that movie.he deserved it.the first hour in half,people had a hard time like myself not falling asleep in that movie because it was so incredibly boring.with just a few brief action scenes here and there,the first hour in a half,they just stood around talking the whole damn time!!!!!!!!!! thats nuts and absurd for a batman film.a batman movie should have tons of action in it and thats where begins delivered and batman 89 failed.your clearly living in denial here.batman 89 was a hundred times more boring than batman begins.YOU cant deny that fact. 😛 batman returns you can say had had some good action in it and wasnt so boring,that movie was just more horribly written than the first one was,dont even get me started on Returns.-but batman 89? please give me a break,your crippling your arguments here big time. 😆
Originally posted by Mr Parker
Dude up till now you made some good points but thats the most redicules thing you have ever said.thats the most absurd thing for you to say that batman begins was more boring that batman 89 was.Batman 89 was a snoozefest.I like many countless people I spoke to back then,had a hard time not falling asleep in the first hour in a half of that movie because it was so incredibly boring. 😠 I wanted to see BATMAN on the screen most the time,not the joker.AGAIN the movie should have been called the joker because nicholson had the majority of screentime in that movie,and batman was just a supporting character.no wonder nicholson got top billing over keaton in that movie.he deserved it.the first hour in half,people had a hard time like myself not falling asleep in that movie because it was so incredibly boring.with just a few brief action scenes here and there,the first hour in a half,they just stood around talking the whole damn time!!!!!!!!!! thats nuts and absurd for a batman film.a batman movie should have tons of action in it and thats where begins delivered and batman 89 failed.your clearly living in denial here.batman 89 was a hundred times more boring than batman begins.YOU cant deny that fact. 😛 batman returns you can say had had some good action in it and wasnt so boring,that movie was just more horribly written than the first one was,dont even get me started on Returns.-but batman 89? please give me a break,your crippling your arguments here big time. 😆
Ok, whatever, I give up... There's obviously no way you will just respect the fact that people happen to like those movies... And there's no way I'll ever make my arguments at least sound intelligent, so fine... You win, I surrender... How someone can't be a "True fan of Batman" and like the Burton films at the same time, I'll never understand (there both Batman! Different time periods, but Batman all the same), but you win this battle Mr. Parker, I'm done for now...