The director didn't care for comics. He didn't even want to do these films in the first place and was egged on by his brother to do it. So he googled "best batman comics", read a couple of them and proceeded to make the most famous live-action adaptation of the character.
This summarily shits on their manchild belief that you need to read a gazillion comics and stick to the rigidly to create a good capeshit movie.
Checked and yeah, you're right. I always get a chuckle when they argue "It's a great movie but not a great Batman movie".
>"It's a great movie but not a great Batman movie".
God that's such an embarrassing argument.
Maybe I’m just newfagging hard but who even argues this? It’s a great movie and a great Batman movie how can it not be one of those?
it's fucking garbage and the Batman was better
>who even argues this?
comic purists
Pajeet opinions don't matter.
Sounds like he just got the gist of the character and was able to make kino. You don't have to read a ton of comics to get it, look how that worked out for Snyder and Batfleck.
Most capeshit fans don't even read the comics
Not like it matters, being a comic nerd is such a gay thing to be elitist about
>"I detected bits of le long halloween, year one, and dark knight returns".
I see comments like this all the time as justifications for the new Reeves movie. Like, that doesn't mean it's good. Those are the most normieshit comics in the first place. Yet Batman fans feel superior when they recognize these storylines and shit.
>Oh look le movie copied the shitty comic that every redditor likes. That means we have to lie it!
IIRC for Batman Begins, he read The man who falls while Goyer read Year one. For TDK he read the killing joke and long Halloween. I don't think he went in blind.
I'm curious what else Snyder read other than Miller's TDKR.
You're a dumbass. The Emoman is barely better than Marvel flicks. Marvel might even be better.
Idk about Snyder but if he did read TDKR it went over hid head. I have heard Affleck was a fan of the cartoon, though.
I'd put the first Ironman above The Batman at the very least. His character has been flanderised now but back in 2008 the performance was considered a revelation. The only reason he didn't get an Oscar nom for it is because it's a superhero movie and he had already been nominated for Tropic Thunder.
>comic purists
I’ve been reading Batman comics since I was like 8 what issue do people have with this movie lmao
Some retarded logic about the camera not being up Batman's ass for 2 hours, so "it's not a Batman movie."
>So he googled "best batman comics", read a couple of them and proceeded to make the most famous live-action adaptation of the character.
Ironically that's more research than they do for Marvel movies. The guys who made Dr Strange 2 couldn't even be bothered to watch Wandavision.
You mean Raimi. He said he only read a summary of WandaVision. Kek. Good on him because that show is shit.
Apparenlty Gotham isn't "gothic" enough and Bale's fighting style wasn't badass enough. Oh, I forgot, Ledger's Joker didn't have chemically bleached skin.
This is going to be a long shot, considering who you are, but have you ever been in a social situation where you're in a loud room with a group of people, and you tell a joke or make a witty remark that no one has heard, but then a louder guy next to you makes the same joke and everyone splits their sides in laughter? Being a capeshit comic reader is kind of like that. You experience a story that you hold close to your chest. But then a movie comes out that poorly apes the story you loved, and the hooting and hollering monkeys in the audience love the shitty reddit version more. This type of feel would make anyone bitter and appear to be a snob.
Don't know how much knowledge Nolan did or did not have of the characters, but he respected them more. Even in his "grounded" world Joker wore his purple suit, while Reeves dressed up Riddler in a trash bag. Nolan's Batman actually embraced being a giant bat, hiding in the shadows, scaring enemies, and the use of stealth. Reeves Batman was just Superman. Apparently that's "comic accurate" for these cope artists.
Oh, any examples?
Batman is literally not in it for most of the movie. That is where the argument comes from. It's the Joker's movie which is fine but that still doesn't make a good Batman movie. The prior Batman movies, including Begins don't have a ton of Batman in them either but what they do have is atmosphere. They have Gotham and the villains feel like they were ripped straight off the page so them getting more screentime than Batman is justified. The Dark Knight has the least Batman elements in any Batman movie. Heath Ledger gives an amazing performance but that is not the Joker from the comics. Gotham lost all of its atmosphere from Begins and it is literally just Chicago or whatever other bland city you want to call it.
Except people who identify as comic purists try to defend these garbage movies "because of the comics" even though the comics are an endless sea of everything and anything. In reality, they defend anything with Batman's name on it.
Most importantly Joker actually had a good sense of humor. Comics riddler actually has a lot of fun riddles and what does he have? "Thumb Drive"?
Watching the movie, I got the impression he didn't even finish reading the fucking title of the show before moving on and making the movie.
What kind of joker is in the comics? What kind of joker do you want in live action? What should he be like? Burton Joker? Reeves Joker? Jared Leto?
Comic books are an inherently terrible medium so they further they stray from the source material the more likely is the movie to be good. Joker is the best capeshit of all time by a country mile and then some and it only has a few references to TDKR
bro I love nolans version as much as anyone but you aren't really making any kind of argument for accuracy when you have a batman that does no detective work or makes any of his own gadgets and a joker with extremely messy makeup and greasy hair but I guess it is ok because he has on a purple coat?
But other characters need to be developed too. In Nolan's films, Gordon, Lucius, Rachel, Robin, Bruce Wayne, and "the villain" all get their own separate screen time to be real characters. Compare that to Reeves. Reeves Gordon is paper thin. Not even a real character. Just there to explain things to the audience. Same with other Reeves characters and of course with Snyder's characters. Even worse Snyder steals Spider-man's newspaper guy and makes him Gordon for one scene. If you watch Bruce Timm's animated Batman, the Joker and Harley will have their own scenes plotting and pranking. No Batman around.
Every capeshit movie brings this type of pain. It's like when you hear a friend or family member recount a past experience with you, and they say things wrong or completely make shit up. I'll just pick a simple example. Thanos' entire character and motivation were completely fabricated for the movies. None of his character was portrayed accurately. He didn't even wear his proper armor most times. But that shitty version of Thanos is the one that does the floss dance on Fortnite, and exists as a bunch of meme gifs on twitter. The shitty one is what everything thinks of when you say the name "Thanos".
I think it's weird that modern capeshit doesn't follow the Nolan Batman formula at all. These movies are classics aside from Rises which is only remembered for the opening scene but baneposters and normalfags alike.
What are you talking about? Bale is the ONLY live action Batman to make his own gadgets. What the hell did Pattinson make? Bale did some detective work in all 3 movies. It just wasn't the central plot. Reeves made it the central plot for his version, but Pattinson never actually figures anything out he just solves riddles quickly. So how much of a "detective" was Battinson really?