Relax, Lazario. Some people genuinely like the Nolan films, and Ledger's take on the Joker. And they are good, just as Burton's films are. Both films have flaws in them. They don't have to be bashed just because you like the other ones better, it's not a contest.
For me, Mark Hamill is the best joker. He could play the funny side as well as the disturbing side of him the best. Also has the best laugh of the three (or four, if you want to count Cesar Romero too). Ledger is really scary, and funny as well. Jack Nicholson does what he does best and extremely well and is menacing just as well. Both versions are the best ones in their own worlds, and both films work because of that, I think.
"Batman (1989)".
-
ajmrowland
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 8177
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:19 pm
- Location: Appleton, WI
-
xxhplinkxx
- Collector's Edition
- Posts: 2769
- Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 7:34 am
- Location: Your mind.
-
Flanger-Hanger
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3746
- Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 3:59 pm
- Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Headquarters
Batman: the Animated Series. It's many people's, including myself, favorite Joker. When I think of the character I see the drawing and hear Hamill's voice.ajmrowland wrote:Which version was Mark Hamill in again?
Ledger was amazing because it was hard to believe it was really him. Jack was Jack as usual but it was fine for that movie.
-
Lazario
I am.KubrickFan wrote:Relax, Lazario.
I understand that. And it doesn't matter to me, one way or the other.KubrickFan wrote:Some people genuinely like the Nolan films, and Ledger's take on the Joker.
I realize that.KubrickFan wrote:They don't have to be bashed just because you like the other ones better, it's not a contest.
I'm sure The Dark Knight works, in our current time. Which in itself is an incredibly weak time for films and television programs. When original ideas are scarce and far between, writing is considered of second importance to budget, and fewer films work overall or provide true entertainment.KubrickFan wrote:Ledger is really scary, and funny as well. Jack Nicholson does what he does best and extremely well and is menacing just as well. Both versions are the best ones in their own worlds, and both films work because of that, I think.
-
Flanger-Hanger
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3746
- Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 3:59 pm
- Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Headquarters
Having gone through the entire Blu-ray (minus commentary) I feel the need to say some things about this film.
For me it's hard to choose a favorite Batman film, the 4 I love (Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, Batman Returns as this) all have their strengths and it would be unfair to compare any of them, Jokers included.
For this film I can say I love the old fashioned horror movie style approach to it. My favorite scene is in that German Expressionist surgery room of terror, with it's cold damp walls, blood stained rusty surgical tools and dim lighting. The staging of the shot (from behind for maximum effect, because what you don't see is often scarier), Jack's build up in rage and manic laugh, the smashing of the lightbulb, it's fabulous. Other scenes such as the climb up the cathedral have obvious Gothic horror overtones, and even a bit of Vertigo, and the use of the lighting, staging and props are all fantastic.
Keaton's Batman viewed only though this film is IMO a tad dull as we see too little of his character and his Bruce comes off as lackluster compared to the scene stealing Joker. Batman Returns allows us to see more of him which is one of the reasons I tend to prefer it to this film.
Jack's Joker was everyone's first pick (including Bob Kane) so there was little surprise is seeing him pull it off. He's probably the most fun Joker in terms of costume, dialogue and behavior, but I still feel Mark Hamill had the best laugh out of any Joker. Still he makes this film incredibly enjoyable and I love the contrast in his Jack form with an ever present frown and his Joker form with it's permanent smile.
The music is very good (but Returns had a more elaborate and mature score by Danny Elfman IMO) the action scenes are good enough and It has what is probably my favorite Batmobile.
For me it's hard to choose a favorite Batman film, the 4 I love (Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, Batman Returns as this) all have their strengths and it would be unfair to compare any of them, Jokers included.
For this film I can say I love the old fashioned horror movie style approach to it. My favorite scene is in that German Expressionist surgery room of terror, with it's cold damp walls, blood stained rusty surgical tools and dim lighting. The staging of the shot (from behind for maximum effect, because what you don't see is often scarier), Jack's build up in rage and manic laugh, the smashing of the lightbulb, it's fabulous. Other scenes such as the climb up the cathedral have obvious Gothic horror overtones, and even a bit of Vertigo, and the use of the lighting, staging and props are all fantastic.
Keaton's Batman viewed only though this film is IMO a tad dull as we see too little of his character and his Bruce comes off as lackluster compared to the scene stealing Joker. Batman Returns allows us to see more of him which is one of the reasons I tend to prefer it to this film.
Jack's Joker was everyone's first pick (including Bob Kane) so there was little surprise is seeing him pull it off. He's probably the most fun Joker in terms of costume, dialogue and behavior, but I still feel Mark Hamill had the best laugh out of any Joker. Still he makes this film incredibly enjoyable and I love the contrast in his Jack form with an ever present frown and his Joker form with it's permanent smile.
The music is very good (but Returns had a more elaborate and mature score by Danny Elfman IMO) the action scenes are good enough and It has what is probably my favorite Batmobile.
-
Flanger-Hanger
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3746
- Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 3:59 pm
- Location: S.H.I.E.L.D. Headquarters
For me the Blu-ray was worth it because I never bought the DVD and I needed to replace my VHS copy which no longer functions. As far as I know the bonus features are the same as the special edition DVD, but I can't comment on how much improved the picture was since I have yet to see any good quality comparisons on DVDbeaver.com or something. I like the digibooks Warner does so I thought that packaging was attractive. I guess if you love the film you'll love having it in HD.
I'm glad you two liked my comments though!
I'm glad you two liked my comments though!
-
Super Aurora
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4835
- Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 7:59 am
I always love Burton's and Nolan's take on Batman (love Bruce Timm and his staff take on it the best but that probably not a surprise).
Now both have strong and weak point here. And most of what Flangy-Hangy said I agree a lot with.
I'm not going to go too much into what I see in the films but I just want bring out one of them.
One of the amazing thing I like about Burton's film that the Nolan's lacked, was the environment and atmosphere. Batman and Batman Return really made what makes Gotham City...Gotham City. When I watched them, they really give off the gritty feeling and criminal air to it. Such as Axis Chemical lab or the alleyway or the sewers. It also added bits of Art Deco like the Grissom's office or statues in front of City Hall in Batman, and the big human statues in the city square in Batman Return.
This also adds why I like Batman the animated series.
When I saw Nolan's films, I can't help but didn't feel like I was seeing Gotham City. It felt like a generic city to me. Thus the mood of the environment didn't captivate me like Burton's.
That's not to say Nolan's version were terrible either. Nolan's had some strong points that Burton's version lacked.
Now both have strong and weak point here. And most of what Flangy-Hangy said I agree a lot with.
I'm not going to go too much into what I see in the films but I just want bring out one of them.
One of the amazing thing I like about Burton's film that the Nolan's lacked, was the environment and atmosphere. Batman and Batman Return really made what makes Gotham City...Gotham City. When I watched them, they really give off the gritty feeling and criminal air to it. Such as Axis Chemical lab or the alleyway or the sewers. It also added bits of Art Deco like the Grissom's office or statues in front of City Hall in Batman, and the big human statues in the city square in Batman Return.
This also adds why I like Batman the animated series.
When I saw Nolan's films, I can't help but didn't feel like I was seeing Gotham City. It felt like a generic city to me. Thus the mood of the environment didn't captivate me like Burton's.
That's not to say Nolan's version were terrible either. Nolan's had some strong points that Burton's version lacked.
-
Lazario
Very true.Super Aurora wrote:One of the amazing thing I like about Burton's film that the Nolan's lacked, was the environment and atmosphere. Batman and Batman Return really made what makes Gotham City...Gotham City. When I watched them, they really give off the gritty feeling and criminal air to it. Such as Axis Chemical lab or the alleyway or the sewers. It also added bits of Art Deco like the Grissom's office or statues in front of City Hall in Batman, and the big human statues in the city square in Batman Return.
This also adds why I like Batman the animated series.
When I saw Nolan's films, I can't help but didn't feel like I was seeing Gotham City. It felt like a generic city to me. Thus the mood of the environment didn't captivate me like Burton's.