Comments on: No Laughing Matter

by: Jesse Post

Thu, 27 Dec 2007 20:25:37 +0000

I have less of a problem with violence and whatnot in movies that kids will go to see than I do with questionable moral choices that heroes of kids movies make these days. Violence itself is a part of life, so seeing it, especially with a careful parental eye, doesn’t have to be harmful. It’s only when “heroes” use violence — fatal violence — as a first choice that I get miffed.

Back in the ’40’s when Jack Leibowitz realized that — oddly enough — millions of CHILDREN were reading his company’s comic books, he decided there should be some rules in place. Number One on the list was that heroes under the National logo would never kill.

Sure, that rule meant that heroes weren’t exactly mirror images of adult reality. But the point is they inspired young people to be optimistic, to strive for an easier solution than the one that’s immediately in front of you and seems, for this fleeting moment, to be the most satisfying. These characters are superhuman after all, what we aspire to be. And I don’t think that’s a bad thing to have in kids’ comics.

Batman’s shameful role in the death of Ras Al Ghul in “Batman Begins” turned me off to the franchise permanently. He should have found a better, more challenging way, at least for the kids who were looking up to him.

by: Unpopular

Thu, 27 Dec 2007 05:50:55 +0000

And I just want to clarify that I loved Cesar Romero and the campy Batman TV show, I loved Batman the Animated Series and Mark Hamill’s incredible Joker interpretation (probably my favorite, actually), I now merely enjoy Jack’s over-acting and snappy one-liners but probably loved it when the Tim Burton film came out, and I was NOT looking forward to “Brokeback” Joker. However, I’m duly impressed with Ledger’s Joker so far, and I probably like it for exactly the same reasons everyone else doesn’t.

I have never been a serious reader of Batman comics.

by: Steve Taylor

Thu, 27 Dec 2007 05:13:31 +0000

I’ll take a good adaptation any day. It’s the interpretations I’m having trouble with.
It’s like Jazz. If the artist is riffing on a certain song and I’m having trouble finding the initial melody then,…what’s the point. Sure,..he’s called Batman and has pointy ears,…lives in a cave,…has a butler,…etc. But,…?

by: ken

Tue, 25 Dec 2007 19:03:50 +0000

I love Batman, he was my childhood hero, and will see any movie with his name in it anywhere. This new Joker irks me because I just like my Joker to look like the Joker. Shallow perhaps, but I don’t watch Batman movies for great thespians giving master performances. I watch for all my old friends, like Batman, The Joker, Alfred…and Robin (who always gets left out of these movies for some ridiculous reason).

Anyway, I loved Jack Nicholson and Cesar Romero for different reasons , and without putting too fine a point on it, The Long Halloween was one of the worst Batman tales I’ve ever read for a bunch of reasons, and I can’t take that opinion seriously.

by: Unpopular

Tue, 25 Dec 2007 07:58:25 +0000

Steve Taylor Says:
“I think the Spider-man movies are a great example of a comic book adaptation that worked. The character looked and acted like the guy in the pamphlets,…it was pretty faithful to the source material and people flocked to it. I just don’t get why Hollywood feels like they can’t take the material “as is” and go with it. Imagine if they had given us the Ditko Goblin…and why couldn’t they, really? It seems in this day and age of computer graphics and high end motion picture technology there are no real excuses.”

Lots of people who seem to want more faithful film adaptations of comic books seem to ignore how ridiculous most superhero comics are in the first place. I just want GOOD adaptations, and they don’t have to be completely faithful to the source material in order to be good. For example, the film adaptation of Mark Millar’s Wanted looks almost nothing like the comics, and I think it works out better that way.

by: Cameron Stewart

Mon, 24 Dec 2007 16:51:35 +0000

The worst part about the Batman Begins screenplay is how sledgehammer unsubtle it is in pounding the theme into the audience - every single character makes at least one, usually more, reference to fear - “In order to conquer your fear, you must first become fear, only then can you use fear to strike fear into the fearful hearts of those who truly fear the fear, you hear?”

That and the echoing of lines spoken earlier in the story for resonance, which happens like 8 times.

Still, I enjoy the movie a lot.

by: rich

Mon, 24 Dec 2007 15:27:34 +0000

Dialogue: I thought BATMAN BEGINS had some terrible scripting, if only because everyone seems to make these over-the-top speeches. From Falcone to Wayne, to Whatshername to Ras Al Ghul.

by: Steve Taylor

Mon, 24 Dec 2007 15:02:48 +0000

I think the Spider-man movies are a great example of a comic book adaptation that worked. Well,…actually, I can only talk about the first two,…haven’t seen the third one yet. The character looked and acted like the guy in the pamphlets,…it was pretty faithful to the source material and people flocked to it. I just don’t get why Hollywood feels like they can’t take the material “as is” and go with it. Sure, there were some things that weren’t spot on. Invariably, those were the things that didn’t work for me. The armored Green Goblin for example. Imagine if they had given us the Ditko Goblin…and why couldn’t they, really? It seems in this day and age of computer graphics and high end motion picture technology there are no real excuses. It is my apprehension that, for the most part, what we get is what the director can deliver. You’re not going to find that many directors committed to the material, like say, Sam Raimi seems to be with Spidey. They seem to be making other movies that they are interested in,… wrapped in a thin choclatey outer layer of the character(s) that they have to make reference to in order to satisfy their contracts and then justify their way out of it. The bulky armored bat-suit is a good example. You’ll read where the producers/director maintains that it’s more believable that a guy fighting crime out on the streets would protect himself with a little more than spandex long johns. But then, of course, it is no stretch to have the Bat-tank race up the side of a building.

by: Unpopular

Mon, 24 Dec 2007 12:53:34 +0000

I never said “aimed at kids”. I mentioned what kids were watching. Two totally different things.

I didn’t find the Spider-Man films family friendly. There are plenty of PG films that feature content I wouldn’t find family friendly. Alvin and the Chipmunks comes to mind. Enchanted sent a bad message as well. Just to name a few.

by: Christopher Moonlight

Mon, 24 Dec 2007 07:09:55 +0000

Just when you think you have the answers, we change the questions. Just kidding… I mean, yeah, why not Phantasm? It had everything all the other movies didn’t. They played it strait and had fun. In fact, I think on our schools next movie night, I’ll show it to my students. I always try to show films that are relevant to art, and that one sure is. We last showed one about David Mack, and that went over great. I try to time it along with the release of Dark Night, and see what happens.

by: Marcus Lusk

Mon, 24 Dec 2007 05:50:08 +0000

Well, sure.
But I thought we were talkin’ live action films here.

by: Christopher Moonlight

Sun, 23 Dec 2007 22:45:40 +0000

“to me, it was called MASK OF THE PHANTASM.”

Yeah. You’re right.

by: mark coale

Sun, 23 Dec 2007 22:22:09 +0000

‘They still haven’t made the definitive Batman movie in my opinion.’

to me, it was called MASK OF THE PHANTASM.

by: Marcus Lusk

Sun, 23 Dec 2007 20:48:23 +0000

Unpopular said:”It’s not for kids…. it skews older?? Have you seen what kids are watching these days? I work in a movie theatre, so I have. Batman films are on the more family friendly side by comparison. ”

Okay, what are some of the rough things aimed at kids that you’ve seen? Name some examples.
Having 2 kids myself, I’d wager I’ve had to suffer through at least as many “family films” over the past decade, so I’m wondering which ones you’d single out.

I think the Batman films should be just as family-friendly as the Spider-man flicks have been, if for no other reason than Batman’s iconic status.
I don’t want to see Batman return to campiness, not even in the bizarro Burton style, but I too thought “Begins” skewed older” in unnecessary ways.

They still haven’t made the definitive Batman movie in my opinion.

by: Christopher Moonlight

Sun, 23 Dec 2007 19:33:57 +0000

A few comments on some of the above:
The Burton Batman movies weren’t really for kids ether. Batman Killed (wrong, wrong, wrong) and the Penguin was enticed with the prospect of “poon-tang.” I remember as a kid being bored to tears by the first Batman film, but anyone can chalk that up to taste. I’m cool with that, but I think it’ll hold true with others my age. The best Joker for me, will always be Mark Hamel, in the animated movie. That was a powerful believable story that pushed the limits, without being to raw for children. Yes, kids do see a lot these days, but that’s because we push it on them. If I ask any kid if they like something, for the most part, they just give me what they’ve heard about it on TV (Adults do that, too.) but if they think I’m not listening, I hear what they really think. For the most part, I overhear them talking about manga, and High School Musical. All the other stuff just comes and goes in their minds, and then that’s the end of it. There’s one other thing that I don’t understand. Where’s the value in these one liners everyone keeps talking about? One liners, do not a movie make. Sure they’re fun, but we should be going for substance here.

by: Unpopular

Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:30:13 +0000

Loved Batman Begins. Enjoyed the Burton ones.

I think it’s that the new films aren’t for hardcore Batman fans. I like comics and I like the look of this new Batman film. You don’t make a 100 million dollar film for at most 100,000 people.

It’s not for kids…. it skews older?? Have you seen what kids are watching these days? I work in a movie theatre, so I have. Batman films are on the more family friendly side by comparison.

I like what I’ve seen so far of Ledger’s Joker. He looks like a deranged psychopath laughing in the face of certain death. Seems pitch-perfect to me.

I can’t quote Batman Begins, but I can quote all of the lines from the new film’s trailer. I watch it twice a day.

by: Cameron Stewart

Sun, 23 Dec 2007 05:02:20 +0000

“They really fucked up big time on that aspect of the latest movie, Ledger’s take on the Joker is just W R O N G, that is in no way how the Joker should act, be visualised/portrayed.”

This statement is more than a little absurd because in his 60+ year history in all media, the Joker has been portrayed so many different and conflicting ways that no one interpretation of him can be considered “correct.” The Joker is Cesar Romero camping it up in a whited-out moustache, and he is also the sadistic, black-humoured torturer-rapist of Alan Moore’s Killing Joke. Ledger’s portrayal is one interpretation out of dozens, no less valid than any other save that it doesn’t match up to whatever particular version of the character you have idealized in your head (and it should go without saying that your personal favourite reading of the Joker may very well be W R O N G to someone else). Couple that with the fact that all you or anyone else has seen of Ledger’s Joker is a handful of photos and about 30 seconds of out-of-context dialogue and I don’t think it’s fair at all to say that they “fucked it up.”

I quite like Batman Begins, although on subsequent viewings its weaknesses are more apparent. I still prefer it to the 89 Burton film, which I adored as a 13-year-old (and some would say that’s the point) but I think really hasn’t aged well at all.

by: phil

Sun, 23 Dec 2007 03:05:37 +0000

I’m going to actually wait and see Ledger’s performance before I decide what he is or isn’t. I’m kinda suprised how many people prefer Burton’s version. Batman killing in cold blood? Jerry Hall? The Prince music number? Plus Batman Returns was, I think, three and a half hours long.

by: Marcus Lusk

Sun, 23 Dec 2007 00:38:38 +0000

The only line I can remember from “Batman Begins” came from my 6-year old son, an hour into the film: “WHEN is he gonna BEGIN, Daddy?”

by: Mourad

Sat, 22 Dec 2007 21:39:15 +0000

This whole batman discussion is just too sweet to miss out on, so yeah, here’s my 2 cents. Those latest batman movies simply suck, period. They miss everything that made the old movies classic. How can you title a movie Batman Begins and expect people to take you seriously. Almost any superhero flick usually has bad acting. With that said, it really makes you wonder why all these “filmmakers” waste their precious time and a shitload of money trying to please audiences with garbage storytelling and over the top special effects. As for staying true to the original material, don’t even get me started on that issue. One of the best villains of all time for example, the Joker. They really fucked up big time on that aspect of the latest movie, Ledger’s take on the Joker is just W R O N G, that is in no way how the Joker should act, be visualised/portrayed. The Joker is no transsexual idiot with some retarded make up, he’s a brilliant charismatic madman who simply laughs in the face of death. No matter what you fuckin’ throw at him he’ll ALWAYS have the “last laugh”, so to speak. Now, Jack Nicholson understood that, Ledger however didn’t. But yeah, whatever brings in the “big bucks”, if you’re into allot of action sequences, a shitload o’ exploding stuff, and that sort o’ thing you might just get turned on by ol’ bathead begins. Anyway, take care everybody.