Originally posted by Master Crimzon
You watched Kill Bill? Pulp Fiction? Uma is the SHIT.And yeah, Arnold Schwarzenegger's not a great actor, but I do enjoy his performances (like in Terminator and Total Recall). He made me want to kill myself during Batman and Robin.
No but she was bad in paycheck. Did not see kill bill. It did not look amazing to me. But I heard Pulp Fiction was really good.
Originally posted by Silent Guardian
No but she was bad in paycheck. Did not see kill bill. It did not look amazing to me. But I heard Pulp Fiction was really good.
Kill Bill and Pulp Fiction are awesome. She's got a fairly major role in Pulp Fiction, but in Kill Bill, she's the protagonist. And she's oh-so-awesome.
Very good flicks, but they're really not everyone, IMO.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
That's not even beginning to mention Kilmer's flat, lifeless acting, his horrendous one-liners ("Chicks dig the car"?!?!), and his sissy-ish pretty-boy look. He was a downright horrible Batman.
Well I didn't realise Kilmer wrote the script, including the lines he had to say. 🙄
He played the part as it should have been, the character is an emotionally drained and sad individual who had to witness his parents being murdered, what do you want? When people experience bad things like trauma they put on 'masks' to hide their emotions- to not be seen as weak. Bale does it as well but his character seems to be enjoying being Batman too much. That is wrong.
His sissy-boy look? do you want Bruce Wayne to look like a mountain of muscle with scars running across his face or something? Thats the idea of a secret identity, not that ANY Batman film can keep that a secret anyway.
Originally posted by Kovacs86
Minor. Faults. No, no, no. The Dark Knight has minor faults (Batman's voice, probably some other shit). The Godfather has minor faults (length)! Shawshank has minor faults (though I can't think of any). Batman Forever had many, many major faults (Tommy Lee Jones and Jim Carrey chief among them).
I say minor faults because the only thing people seem to mention about that film is the rubber nipples. Personally, in all the times I'd watched it I'd never once noticed them at all. There are faults in the movie but the plot and the action sequences makes me forget them. Yes, Jim Carrey does alternate between Riddler and Joker, Jones does go overboard at times (he does play a mentally disturbed character you know), O'Donnell was badly miscast as Robin etc. I see all these things but its put together well into a fun movie.
I don't know if anyone has noticed this but most of what was constituted as problems in the Burton/Schumacher films are carried on in painfully obvious ways in Nolans movies so they are not above criticism, nor are they the pinnacle of what a Batman movie should be.
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
Well I didn't realise Kilmer wrote the script, including the lines he had to say. 🙄
So? The coolness of Bruce Wayne is directly related to the dialogue he says. I cannot possibly find a bad one-liner spitting Batman to be compelling; the script is directly related to making a character good or bad.
Also, he was far too obsessed with courting Kidman's weird Doctor girl. Especially as Batman; I'm sorry, Batman isn't supposed to go and personally hit on chicks. He's a tortured vigilante. Tortured vigilantes don't try to f*ck their somewhat mentally disturbed admirer.
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
He played the part as it should have been, the character is an emotionally drained and sad individual who had to witness his parents being murdered, what do you want? When people experience bad things like trauma they put on 'masks' to hide their emotions- to not be seen as weak. Bale does it as well but his character seems to be enjoying being Batman too much. That is wrong.
Umm... sorry? Kilmer hardly portrayed an emotionally drained character, with any true character depth (see above, with all the weird hitting on shallow doctors thing). Keaton was much more a recluse/mysterious dude than he was.
Plus, his performance was just lifeless and flat.
Bale really likes being Batman? Did you miss the fact that throughout the entirety of TDK, he talked about how much he wanted to retire and settle down with Rachel? He is a FAR more emotionally tortured and multi-layered character than Val Kilmer's flat Wayne.
He's the only one who honestly captures all aspects of Bruce Wayne; the billionaire playboy, the mysterious recluse, and the Batman (minus his bat voice, which I'll admit was flat-out stupid in TDK). He's simultaneously witty and brooding, which is really ideal; and as Batman, he's ****ing menacing.
Nolan's movies are also the only ones that are actually a decent study of Batman. That automatically makes his character more complex and plausible (with actual logical explanations for his motivations, his "I don't kill" law, and his personal weakness).
I believe Batman is an insane person- not unlike the Joker- who simply harnesses his insanity in a different, more beneficial manner. Nobody captures that better than Bale.
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
His sissy-boy look? do you want Bruce Wayne to look like a mountain of muscle with scars running across his face or something? Thats the idea of a secret identity, not that ANY Batman film can keep that a secret anyway.
Yeah, I want Bruce Wayne to at least look like a guy who can kick someone's ass. He should never, under any circumstances, look like a rather feminine 'pretty boy'. His appearance really bothered me, much more so than the much-bashed 'Short, pudgy' Keaton.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
That's not even beginning to mention Kilmer's flat, lifeless acting, his horrendous one-liners ("Chicks dig the car"?!?!), and his sissy-ish pretty-boy look. He was a downright horrible Batman.
god I cant believe this is STILL going on.Yeah Kilmer as Batman had a lot of flat lifeless acting.He was a good bruce wayne but bad Batman.Keaton was flat and lifeless and Bruce wayne.He was a horrible Bruce Wayne but a good Batman.Bale on the other hand,was mazing as BOTH Bruce wayne AND Batman.Bale is the one and only true Bruce wayne/batman to play the role so far.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
So? The coolness of Bruce Wayne is directly related to the dialogue he says. I cannot possibly find a bad one-liner spitting Batman to be compelling; the script is directly related to making a character good or bad.Also, he was far too obsessed with courting Kidman's weird Doctor girl. Especially as Batman; I'm sorry, Batman isn't supposed to go and personally hit on chicks. He's a tortured vigilante. Tortured vigilantes don't try to f*ck their somewhat mentally disturbed admirer.
Whether or not Kilmer delivers his lines well in this movie is a question of opinion, you hated it, I didn't. The love story with Chase Meridian is a plot point from the scripwriter/director and has no bearing whatsoever with Kilmer's performance as Bruce Wayne/Batman.
Also there has been an annoying love interest clouding the films Batman, Batman Returns, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight so its not exlusive to Batman Forever.
Originally posted by Master CrimzonUmm... sorry? Kilmer hardly portrayed an emotionally drained character, with any true character depth (see above, with all the weird hitting on shallow doctors thing). Keaton was much more a recluse/mysterious dude than he was.
Plus, his performance was just lifeless and flat.
Bale really likes being Batman? Did you miss the fact that throughout the entirety of TDK, he talked about how much he wanted to retire and settle down with Rachel? He is a FAR more emotionally tortured and multi-layered character than Val Kilmer's flat Wayne.
He's the only one who honestly captures all aspects of Bruce Wayne; the billionaire playboy, the mysterious recluse, and the Batman (minus his bat voice, which I'll admit was flat-out stupid in TDK). He's simultaneously witty and brooding, which is really ideal; and as Batman, he's ****ing menacing.
Nolan's movies are also the only ones that are actually a decent study of Batman. That automatically makes his character more complex and plausible (with actual logical explanations for his motivations, his "I don't kill" law, and his personal weakness).
I believe Batman is an insane person- not unlike the Joker- who simply harnesses his insanity in a different, more beneficial manner. Nobody captures that better than Bale.
I refuse to watch The Dark Knight because I fail to see the link between the character I know with the person I see on the trailers riding around on a 'Batpod' firing at things with the cannons he's got on it. Yeah, such a deep representation of Batman there. 🙄
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
Whether or not Kilmer delivers his lines well in this movie is a question of opinion, you hated it, I didn't. The love story with Chase Meridian is a plot point from the scripwriter/director and has no bearing whatsoever with Kilmer's performance as Bruce Wayne/Batman.Also there has been an annoying love interest clouding the films Batman, Batman Returns, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight so its not exlusive to Batman Forever.
It's all a matter of opinion. And the love subplot is important to the character because it represents his actions. It's integral to Val Kilmer's Bruce Wayne, and I found it highly annoying and out of 'Batman's' character.
The original Batman (which I dislike almost completely) contains an immensely annoying, cheesy, and shallow love interest which I also disliked. Batman Return's subplot however... it was, to put it simply, great. The 'union of the freaks' (which made sense, and is taken from the comics) and Michelle Pfeiffer's superb Catwoman make it a gazillion times better than Batman Forever's idiotic love-interest. In Forever, the love-interest is a James Bond kind of thing, with the exploitation of Chase's fascination with Batman and the usage of the Batman identity to 'score chicks'. It was far too easy for him to be with her- a very important concept of Batman is that his role as Batman prevents him from having a real love.
And so we come to Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. Rachel Dawes, while not exactly well-played by either one of her actresses, is a logical and far less one-dimensional love interest for Batman; she is, like him, a person looking for justice in a thoroughly corrupt city and a link to his childhood. He also can't be with her because of his 'job'.
As for the Dark Knight, Rachel acts more as a catalyst for events than an actual character; she is important, however, because she represents the emotional conflict of Bruce Wayne vs. Batman. Selfishness vs. The Common Good. It's part of his vital emotional turmoil as a tortured man who has no choice than to be an inhuman 'symbol'. A Dark Knight, as Gordon puts it. This is also part of his relationship with Harvey Dent (once again; endorse Harvey or engage in petty rivalries? Selfishness vs. The Common Good) and her ultimate decision, death, and subsequent consequences (Two-Face!) is vital to the film's tragedy and plot.
Better than Chase "One-dimensional sexist stereotype" meridian.
Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
I refuse to watch The Dark Knight because I fail to see the link between the character I know with the person I see on the trailers riding around on a 'Batpod' firing at things with the cannons he's got on it. Yeah, such a deep representation of Batman there. roll eyes (sarcastic)
And neon-Batmobile, corny one-liners, no emotional value, and a silly love interest is better?
I bet the Batman you know is Adam West.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
It's integral to Val Kilmer's Bruce Wayne, and I found it highly annoying and out of 'Batman's' character.In Forever, the love-interest is a James Bond kind of thing,
Rachel Dawes, while not exactly well-played by either one of her actresses, is a logical and far less one-dimensional love interest for Batman; she is, like him, a person looking for justice in a thoroughly corrupt city and a link to his childhood. He also can't be with her because of his 'job'.
1. Val Kilmer does not account for Nicole Kidmans' performance or purpose in the film i.e. to be in love with Batman. Her character is not as weird as you see her. Many people, for the wrong reasons fall victim to their emotions (even abnormal psychiatrists) and she is a representation of that.
2. All the love interests are 'James Bond' kind of things running from Batman 89 to Batman Forever, i.e . they are hopelessly attracted to the main character for whatever goofy reason and they only last one film before they are gone. So once again that is not exclusive to Forever.
3. It doesn't matter whether Rachel Dawes is similar to Bruce, or represents the same values in a different way. Her existence in these films is so that Warner Bros. can re-hash the same 'girl in trouble' storylines that Superman movies always come out with.
As for your quote ' He also can't be with her because of his 'job' illustrates how pathetic the character has become. He's become this hobbled Superhero who can't fight crime because he moralises about the live he could have with some plain-looking irritant.
Originally posted by Master CrimzonAnd neon-Batmobile, corny one-liners, no emotional value, and a silly love interest is better?
I bet the Batman you know is Adam West.
Its better than the drab, unimaginative 'Tumbler' or 'Batpod' vehicles, the one-liners are far worse in Begins and all films have had a silly love interest.
I'm not referring to Adam West at all. I visibly cringe when I catch an episode of the original Batman. I was referring to the cool character in the comics, who never kills, shoots only to disarm (when necessary)
doesn't have machine guns/rockets attached to his batmobile and isn't in some complicated love story in every single issue.
Look, mate, it all comes down to several things that I feel are pretty much inarguable.
1. Without Rachel Dawes, the Nolan films would lose a huge amount of their quality and drama. Without Chase Meridian, Batman Forever would be a gazillion times better (although it would still suck). She's disposable, uninteresting, and rather disturbed; not to mention that Kilmer's Wayne takes advantage of that. Batman isn't supposed to just 'hit on the girls' whenever he likes. It doesn't make any sense.
2. Seriously? That fish-looking glowing Batmobile is better than the Tumbler? I suppose that they both parallel their films perfectly. Neonmobile is silly, campy, impractical, and over-the-top. The Tumbler is realistic, gritty, and hella cool. Choose which one youlike better. And Batman Begins' one-liners are actually witty and funny ("Nice coat" vs. "I'll get drive through"? Really?)
3. You seem to be like one of these people who think that an emotionally conflicted Batman is a 'wussy' or something. Sorry, the Dark Knight and Batman Begins feature realistic human drama and conflict for its main character. It's not 'pathetic' when a guy who is forced to done a mask throughout basically his entire life (playboy Bruce and Batman), tortures himself throughout nights, etc. has to cope with moral choices and the genuine will to retire.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
1. Without Rachel Dawes, the Nolan films would lose a huge amount of their quality and drama. Without Chase Meridian, Batman Forever would be a gazillion times better (although it would still suck). She's disposable, uninteresting, and rather disturbed; not to mention that Kilmer's Wayne takes advantage of that. Batman isn't supposed to just 'hit on the girls' whenever he likes. It doesn't make any sense.
Agreed.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
2. Seriously? That fish-looking glowing Batmobile is better than the Tumbler? I suppose that they both parallel their films perfectly. Neonmobile is silly, campy, impractical, and over-the-top. The Tumbler is realistic, gritty, and hella cool. Choose which one youlike better. And Batman Begins' one-liners are actually witty and funny ("Nice coat" vs. "I'll get drive through"? Really?)
Agreed.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
3. You seem to be like one of these people who think that an emotionally conflicted Batman is a 'wussy' or something. Sorry, the Dark Knight and Batman Begins feature realistic human drama and conflict for its main character. It's not 'pathetic' when a guy who is forced to done a mask throughout basically his entire life (playboy Bruce and Batman), tortures himself throughout nights, etc. has to cope with moral choices and the genuine will to retire.
Agreed!