The 'geek/nerd/anime/comics/etc.' thread

ouu yeah this is my space, I am a big fan of series like Naruto, Naruto S., Full Metal A,Elfen lied, I can remmend you guys this one: higurashi no naku koro ni, is dramatic, gore, hipnotic and... one of the best animes that I saw in my life :)
 
Vampyrian said:
Seems George Lucas sold the rights to Star Wars (Lucasfilm) to Disney. And that's actually AWESOME NEWS! I mean, I love Star Wars, would definitely want to see another movie, but definitely not from the minds and hands of George Lucas and his pack of yes men that made the terrible prequel trilogy. With somebody else doing the writing and directing, the odds of us getting a GOOD movie increase enormously. Lucas will still be involved as a creative consultant, but I'm sure whoever ends up working on the new movies, will do their best to ignore/challenge him on all the stupid ideas Georgie's surely bound to come up with, which is something that the aforementioned pack of yes man never did. So hooray!
Click to expand...

Yeah, this was good news. Lucas' Star Wars prequels were a calamity precisely because no one was around to tell him "no" when shit like JarJar and Padme/Anakin rolling down the grass hill happened.
 
Nolan's Batman suffers from many problems, among them I consider:

where the fuck is Batman? the movies were about everyone BUT him; where is Gotham City? I thought that Gotham was very, very different than your average city shown in the movie. I felt it was slightly lenghtier than it should, slower than it should.

About the best villain, Joker was fine, but too powerful IMO. Not a fan of the (few) dialogues either on TDK, excepting for a very few Joker lines. It was kinda fun to watch once, but the 2nd time was really frustrating.

TDKR was what I was expecting, like 7/10.

From Nolan's, I think he used his best weapons in the first where the dialogues were easily the best of the trilogy, the 2nd wasn't that good IMO and this one... I feel it was rushed.

In a way, I got what Nolan tried to make here: a 'easier' movie to watch, more akin to the recent Iron Man/Avengers movie or maybe, similar to older than Miller's portrait of Batman*, but he made a mistake: he already settled Batman's movies in a way of pacing and the change might not be welcome by most.

I, for instance was reminded of ol' Batman in the fight scenes and Bane especially was that kind of ol' villain punching dudes all the time. New characters? All annoying, even Bane (I had some hard time trying to understand what he was saying). Bale? better than TDK for sure, so kudos for him and the script in that sense.

What about Gotham City? I felt it slightly more here, whereas TDK seemed to have made in your everday US city but still it's not suffice. Nolan simply couldn't set the stage properly, for example, as Burton did (cause you might hate the first Batmans, Keaton and stuff, but Gotham City WAS THERE).

Also:

What the fuck does Batman retired as his 30's with a girl who he didn't give a fuck on the whole story?

What about Robin? Nolan could have used 3 already existing Robins and what did he? put a cop with no background as one/then replacing Batman?

About the older Batman movies... I like them for what they are. Keaton was way a better Bruce than Bale, but Bale is a better Batman and I like better Nickolson than Ledger as Joker, merely for entertaining purposes and madness (cause Heath did a way too 'thinker' Joker IMO). Kilmer! oh, god, that movie could have been the best! he did an awesome Batman for sure and the movie had a brilliant idea that was underdeveloped.

The new Star Wars won't pick any written story and it'll be unrelated to the actual plot.
 
Allfader said:
The new Star Wars won't pick any written story and it'll be unrelated to the actual plot.
Click to expand...

What do you mean? I'm sure they'll use something from Lucas' 'treasure trove', something the guy's written or had planned. And by 'unrelated to the actual plot' you mean that the new movies won't have anything to do with the whole Skywalker saga and so forth? I strongly doubt they'll just ignore EVERYTHING that's already happened in those movies and start from complete scratch. That's just not going to happen. They'll most certainly use some of George's notes but hopefully they'll get a decent screenwriter to bang out a decent script using said notes.

I'm sure they'll want to move away from the original story sooner or later, with 4 billion invested, they'll definitely try to keep the franchise going as long as possible, thus using new characters, new stories and so forth, but I really cannot see them doing that right away. There will be a transition period.
 
Gotham is based on Chicago, and filmed there (I think some of the dock scenes were London?). Chicago is the iconic Great Depression-era city, and it was chosen to represent Gotham rather than New York City because, prior to Sandy, it's harder to run around New York and think of it as a dying city. Chicago is physically more spacious, with large swaths impoverished. Although that last part is slowly changing.

Is Chicago more typically "American" than the other two gigantic U.S. cities? Less cosmopolitan and affluent than New York and L.A., that's for sure. Not that I like Chicago less than L.A.
 
Vampyrian said:
Seems George Lucas sold the rights to Star Wars (Lucasfilm) to Disney. And that's actually AWESOME NEWS! I mean, I love Star Wars, would definitely want to see another movie, but definitely not from the minds and hands of George Lucas and his pack of yes men that made the terrible prequel trilogy. With somebody else doing the writing and directing, the odds of us getting a GOOD movie increase enormously. Lucas will still be involved as a creative consultant, but I'm sure whoever ends up working on the new movies, will do their best to ignore/challenge him on all the stupid ideas Georgie's surely bound to come up with, which is something that the aforementioned pack of yes man never did. So hooray!
Click to expand...

George Lucas sold his whole company Lucasfilm, he sold everything for 4.5 billion dollars and he's donating the money to education charity. George is retired he won't be working on them but he's there as a guide to maintain the Star Wars feel plus he does have hundreds of storyline ideas. I know Episodes 7, 8, and 9 will be based off of rough ideas from George and the people at Disney will make the film. Luke Skywalker, Princess Leia, and Han Solo are set to return in them.
 
The less involved Lucas is one the development of the new SW, the better.

Chicago? I haven't been in USA, but Nolan didn't translate the Gotham from the comics to the movie, that's a fact. Burton did a way, way better job in this respect.
 
i have to get off line in 8 min
but i will come back and make several lengthy posts on this thread tmrw
 
Allfader said:
Chicago? I haven't been in USA, but Nolan didn't translate the Gotham from the comics to the movie, that's a fact. Burton did a way, way better job in this respect.
Click to expand...

At least in the first of his three Batman movies, most people lauded the use of Chicago as Gotham. New York in the late 80s / early 90s would have worked for Nolan, as it had a real rough patch from the early 70s until the early 90s. The NYC of the 2000s is way too affluent to use as "crime-ridden" city. Parts of NYC are rough, but using Washington Heights and South Bronx as the film base will highlight the fact that NYC is one of the safest cities of such vast size in the world, with a few exceptions.

So, Nolan had to come up with a large city, one that physically demonstrates (like Gotham), that its best days are past. Chicago is certainly very affluent, but physically Chicago bears some of the scars of the urban crisis in the U.S., and of the various downturns / depressions. Unlike, NYC, Chicago has large swaths of poverty juxtaposed with very wealthy neighborhoods. Chicago also has a far higher crime rate than NYC, and that crime is really wonky in that it's not containerized to just certain neighborhoods. At the same time, that crime still is more pervasive in some places than others.

So, as to why Chicago as the location... Nolan probably thought it would feel more authentic than what Burton did, which was use a suburb of London, and convert it into a mini-city that looked very much like NYC in the late 70s/80s.

So, it's the difference between using a studio and a city model, and actually using a city. I like Nolan's use of Chicago a lot, especially in the first two Batman movies. It would be pretty difficult to do some of the batmobile / train scenes in a studio.

Maybe I'm a Chicago homer, but people here associate Chicago with labor unrest and depression-era politics. So, on the surface at least, it's a good "Gotham."
 
As I said, I don't know USA, so I'm not aware of the history of their cities. Still I think the aesthetics were lacking and to film almost the entire movies at daylight (WTF) didn't help either.
 
Naglfar said:
By the way, I'm not arguing Tim Burton's Batman was bad. I LOVE the Tim Burton Batman films. They were amazing. I'm just pointing out that Tim Burton had almost no use for anything to do whatsoever with Batman lore. At all. Yet, you still think (like any person with any modicum of good taste) that they're great movies. And you're perfectly correct.

There aren't that many high-profile directors who are supergeeks like Joss Wheadon. I think that the existence of a few, which we're all glad for, isn't indicative of how making good movies is just a matter of finding people invested and knowledgeable about source material.
Click to expand...

i wouldn't be able to believe anyone that says the tim burton movies were flat-out-bad
but my point in mentioning the burton films was that i actually feel that burton's films were ACTUALLY BETTER THAN the ones Nolan did

burtons joker was unlike anything that had appeared in the comics, catwoman and penguin never interacted with each other (still haven't as far as i'm aware) but burton was still the right guy for the job of making batman movies
they hired the director of beetlejuice to give them a batman movie, and they got (in my opinion) better movies out of burton that they did out of Nolan

but when i try to tell people burton's movie were better than nolan's movies people always respond with "but heath ledger's joker was awesome"
which is a stupid response for several different reasons

1
heath ledger's joker sucked, there, i said it, i just can't bring myself to jump onto the whole dead-guy-bandwagon and say that heath ledger's joker was good just because joker was the last role the dead guy played before he died
heath ledger's joker sucked
2
the plot was done badly (see the post i made oct 5th)
3
even if heath ledger's joker really was good, that doesn't make the rest of the movie watchable (see post i made oct 5th)
4
the 2nd in a trilogy being good doesn't retro-actively make the 1st one good
5
as horrible as the 2nd nolan movie was, the 3rd one was worse
6
Batman Begins was (imo) un-questionably the best in the trilogy


also
so far these movies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvel_Cinematic_Universe
have been all awesome
why can't DC follow whatever it is that Disney/Marvel are doing and make some great movies??
DC will eventually make a Justice League movie
and as awesome as it could potentially be, the execs at WB won't get their shit together and it's going to suck
 
Allfader said:
Nolan's Batman suffers from many problems, among them I consider:

where the fuck is Batman? the movies were about everyone BUT him; where is Gotham City? I thought that Gotham was very, very different than your average city shown in the movie. I felt it was slightly lenghtier than it should, slower than it should.

About the best villain, Joker was fine, but too powerful IMO. Not a fan of the (few) dialogues either on TDK, excepting for a very few Joker lines. It was kinda fun to watch once, but the 2nd time was really frustrating.

TDKR was what I was expecting, like 7/10.

From Nolan's, I think he used his best weapons in the first where the dialogues were easily the best of the trilogy, the 2nd wasn't that good IMO and this one... I feel it was rushed.

In a way, I got what Nolan tried to make here: a 'easier' movie to watch, more akin to the recent Iron Man/Avengers movie or maybe, similar to older than Miller's portrait of Batman*, but he made a mistake: he already settled Batman's movies in a way of pacing and the change might not be welcome by most.

I, for instance was reminded of ol' Batman in the fight scenes and Bane especially was that kind of ol' villain punching dudes all the time. New characters? All annoying, even Bane (I had some hard time trying to understand what he was saying). Bale? better than TDK for sure, so kudos for him and the script in that sense.

What about Gotham City? I felt it slightly more here, whereas TDK seemed to have made in your everday US city but still it's not suffice. Nolan simply couldn't set the stage properly, for example, as Burton did (cause you might hate the first Batmans, Keaton and stuff, but Gotham City WAS THERE).

Also:

What the fuck does Batman retired as his 30's with a girl who he didn't give a fuck on the whole story?

What about Robin? Nolan could have used 3 already existing Robins and what did he? put a cop with no background as one/then replacing Batman?

About the older Batman movies... I like them for what they are. Keaton was way a better Bruce than Bale, but Bale is a better Batman and I like better Nickolson than Ledger as Joker, merely for entertaining purposes and madness (cause Heath did a way too 'thinker' Joker IMO). Kilmer! oh, god, that movie could have been the best! he did an awesome Batman for sure and the movie had a brilliant idea that was underdeveloped.

The new Star Wars won't pick any written story and it'll be unrelated to the actual plot.
Click to expand...

i agree with everything in this^^^ post

also
i think it's possible that Disney might fuck up the Star Wars movies
Disney might loose money on this the way that Disney lost money on
Pluto Nash, Mars Needs Moms, and John Carter

also
i've heard that Disney actually has plans for doing re-makes/sequels/pre-quels to ALL OF THE LUCASFILM MOVIES, not just merely Starwars
 
tobz said:
Well, I'm just happy I finally got hold of the trilogy DVD set which contains both the re-make AND the original of the old Star Wars, as well as the prequel trilogy. Now I'm set for some time :D
Click to expand...

The films look great in blu ray also. So you're saying you have the special editions as well as the unaltered versions?
 
Allfader said:
As I said, I don't know USA, so I'm not aware of the history of their cities. Still I think the aesthetics were lacking and to film almost the entire movies at daylight (WTF) didn't help either.
Click to expand...

Again, since the biggest audience these American-made movies are for are Americans, using American comic lore, there are decisions about locale that have to be made. Chicago's downtown area is pretty wide open compared to most very large cities.

The purpose, of course, was to make it seem like a big, empty, hollow city. Which was was the subplot of the first of Nolan's Batman movies, the use of economic decline as a weapon.

I'm not defending the plot (although I thought Batman Begins was excellent), just saying that American and Western European audiences would have been more familiar with depression-era images, and using Chicago specifically is a good choice if you want to convey that!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back