Gender: Male Location: Welfare Kingdom of California
It's been repeated before and I'll repeat it again. The artwork of Batman (1989) is far more fancy than the one from Begins. A total different concept of Gotham City. BB brings out more of the characters by going in depth. In Batman (1989) we hardly see anything from Commisoner Gordon. Whereas BB did justice to the character by making him look more into the movie rather than being a spectator.
and dont forget to mention that unlike Batman 89,Batman Begins did justice to the main character as well and unlike batman 89, did not rape it to death.
I hate he fact that Burton jmade 2 key characters into background and f**ked them up:
Harvey Dent was a ****ing black dude and had about 1 scene
Commisioner Gordon was a fat ************* and had less screen time than some guy they made up... that Eckhart dude? Gordon was a ckumsy fat oaf! But in BB, he was basically Yr1 Gordon...
__________________
Thanks to Badwolf for the great sig!
But doesnt it depend as to which characters are integral to what sort of Batman is being portrayed. In Begins, Gordon was needed as a main character. In 89, he wasn't that important, similar to 66 Gordon, he never did anything but sit in his office and answer the phone. It all depends on the story.
IMO, there is no real BATMAN batman anymore. The character is a mixture of different people's vision and so where one peron sees a character as integral, someone else can give them lesser importance. Batman has been changed so many times and been portrayed in so many types... (camp, serious etc...) that all the types use each other and the end result is a bit of everything. Thats why sometimes Gordon is important (BB) or not so important (B89).
Granted he a key character and he has to be there in the movies otherwise Batman wouldn't work but whether the character is integral to the script depends on what the story is and how much emphasis the director wants on gordon.
Even though Pat Hingle/Gordon looks like a bumbling oaf, he was the man in charge of the police and didn't take lightly to others musceling in. Do you remember the bit where he says to Eckhart when napier goes to the chemical factory that "im the commisioner' or something similar. he isn't taking shit from no-one. so although he hasn't been given a key part, he does have an important one.
I thought people could just stop arguing and move on. This is pointless since people won't even try to understand other's point of view. Syndicate Lord, you're right when saying Gordon should have a bigger part and what miss used in the four movies but Smiley8 is also right when saying that it all depends on the story. Now could you guys get over it? It's a movie that some people like and others don't. Stop living in the past and think about the future. Talk about the next movie. We can agree more on that.
Well, saying Burton is an ass cause he did a movie you don't like is a bad argument but still an argument. But it's true this is a discussion. But there is no point in discussing when it is done in a bad way by calling people names and saying the same thing again and again just to prove that the guy doesn't like the movie, which everyone already knows.
People have been having this "fair and valid discussion" since before I came to this forum, over two years ago. There's no use getting in a tizzy because some people are sick of it.
__________________ "Men curse the Communist Party, but eventually it may release them. If hell were endless, then God would be worse than our Secret Police."--Pastor Valentin
true, but the forums get new members or 'newbies' as they're called all the time so everyone is entitled to discuss their opinions. if some people are sick of it then its up to them to ignore the thread and move on to the next one leaving the people who want to discuss to do so.
KMC Community Forums
Apr 17th, 2006 08:28 PM
