What are you thinking? (Part 2)

[KennedyKiller]

No, @Turo602 is right here. Batman SHOULD be made to please him. Not him personally. But him as a legit Batman fan. I'm not a Batman fan. Personally I'm a Superman guy. That being said, I have A LOT of knowledge on Batman as a comic book fan in general, and this movie sounds like a trash Batman movie. I'm not opposed to the casting of Pattinson per se. Him as Batman IDK about, but I was VERY interested on his Bruce Wayne. Then...more and more info about the film came out. And...it doesn't sound like a Batman movie. It sounds like a generic superhero/action movie that they're just calling Batman because they know the name will rake in cash. I mean...it's BATMAN lol. But if you're gonna make a movie like this, then it's COMPLETELY fair that legit passionate fans of this character with almost a full century of lore and history to draw off of, feel slighted, get upset, and vote with their wallets. So no...I'm with Turo on this one.

Also, I agree...Afleck HAS been the most comic accurate Batman. Just because the movie he was in was sh*tty, doesn't mean the character himself was bad. And hell, I actually think Batman v Superman's directors cut is a legit good film. The theatrical version only sucks because all the cut content made the story suffer. BAD. But uncut? It's awesome. Probably the DECU's best movie. Right up there with Man of Steel. So to go from the most comic accurate Batman we've ever had, to whatever this is...Is definitely a slap in the face to the fans who have made this character an icon over the course of the last nearly 100 years.

 

[Deleted member 21244]

No, @Turo602 is right here. Batman SHOULD be made to please him. Not him personally. But him as a legit Batman fan. I'm not a Batman fan. Personally I'm a Superman guy. That being said, I have A LOT of knowledge on Batman as a comic book fan in general, and this movie sounds like a trash Batman movie. I'm not opposed to the casting of Pattinson per se. Him as Batman IDK about, but I was VERY interested on his Bruce Wayne. Then...more and more info about the film came out. And...it doesn't sound like a Batman movie. It sounds like a generic superhero/action movie that they're just calling Batman because they know the name will rake in cash. I mean...it's BATMAN lol. But if you're gonna make a movie like this, then it's COMPLETELY fair that legit passionate fans of this character with almost a full century of lore and history to draw off of, feel slighted, get upset, and vote with their wallets. So no...I'm with Turo on this one.

Also, I agree...Afleck HAS been the most comic accurate Batman. Just because the movie he was in was sh*tty, doesn't mean the character himself was bad. And hell, I actually think Batman v Superman's directors cut is a legit good film. The theatrical version only sucks because all the cut content made the story suffer. BAD. But uncut? It's awesome. Probably the DECU's best movie. Right up there with Man of Steel. So to go from the most comic accurate Batman we've ever had, to whatever this is...Is definitely a slap in the face to the fans who have made this character an icon over the course of the last nearly 100 years.

I agree on this to an extent, but fan must also realize that a director had to tell the story the way he wants, and put some new stuff, just like todd Philips did whit the JOKER movie... It was new interpretation of the character, actually didn't like the movie to be fair but joaquin Phoenix was great..
Batman story was put on the big screen so many times it need to be told in a different way now

Batman v superman extended was a good movie, i admitted that above and i also admitted that Affleck was a good batman and that it wasn't his fault if his character and performance sucked in justice league, there were a lot of trouble... At least you explained you re opinion well, turo didn't

And to be fair, nolan batman trilogy isn't that true to the comic and lore, nolan invented many things in that movie, yet they are 3 masterpiece

 

[bSTAR_182]

Sure there's new content and giving things a fresh spin... but then there's ideas like making Bruce Wayne a junkie that just shouldn't be explored.

 

[Mr.R]

I agree on this to an extent, but fan must also realize that a director had to tell the story the way he wants, and put some new stuff, just like todd Philips did whit the JOKER movie... It was new interpretation of the character, actually didn't like the movie to be fair but joaquin Phoenix was great..
Batman story was put on the big screen so many times it need to be told in a different way now

If fans must realize that a director "had to tell the story the way he wants and put some new stuff" then we should never, ever criticize Paul W.Anderson on his Resident Evil movies. I mean, it's a director telling the story he wanted (only he and his wife, apparently) and definitely adding some new stuff.

Again, everyone has every right to dislike "the idea" of something. We can dislike the "concept" of something. It's entirely fair. Pattinson might had grown into a decent actor, but then again, if we start selecting clips around, I'm sure we can find a good clip on every actor out there. He might be decent, but I don't see him as a good fit for Batman. As a fan of the character, I'm also already not liking the concept they're going for this film. I'll wait to see more information about it, but I don't like it so far. Some people do. And that's totally alright.

Also, just for fun, since I love fancasting, if I would choose an actor for Batman, I would go with Josh Brolin. First time I've noticed him in action was on that MIB (3?) movie and he gave me a lot of Batman vibes.

 

[KennedyKiller]

I agree on this to an extent, but fan must also realize that a director had to tell the story the way he wants, and put some new stuff, just like todd Philips did whit the JOKER movie... It was new interpretation of the character, actually didn't like the movie to be fair but joaquin Phoenix was great..
Batman story was put on the big screen so many times it need to be told in a different way now

Batman v superman extended was a good movie, i admitted that above and i also admitted that Affleck was a good batman and that it wasn't his fault if his character and performance sucked in justice league, there were a lot of trouble... At least you explained you re opinion well, turo didn't

And to be fair, nolan batman trilogy isn't that true to the comic and lore, nolan invented many things in that movie, yet they are 3 masterpiece

First of all...The Nolan movies aren't masterpieces XD. 2 are pretty good and one is...eh...

Second of all, "but fan must also realize that a director had to tell the story the way he wants, and put some new stuff," is absolute bogus here. Again, Batman has been around almost a century at this point. There is PLENTY of stuff live action films have never explored before in Batman's long history that a director can use and exploit. It would be one thing if we were talking about a small franchise, or even a sequel to a one off movie like Baby Driver (Although that movie is perfect and doesn't need a sequel), but this is Batman we're talking about. He's an established character with a LONG history. And a director doesn't need to forsake all of that, and everything the fans want and love for his own pretentious vision. A director can have a vision and that's fine. But that vision needs to somewhat align with what the fans, the people who have made this character famous, also want. Other wise it's not Batman. Its your own thing with a Batman skin that you used as a ploy to make some quick cash.

And finally - Joker isn't the same here. The reason Joker could be done in this new and interesting light is because the character is MEANT to be molded into any given scenario. No Matter what version of Batman, Joker fits. So exploring Joker is a lot easier. He doesn't have all that lore attached to him. We don't know Joker's true origin. It's shrouded in mystery. We have several conflicting stories of Joker's origin. We have several different Joker's in general, but they're all relatively similar in the grand scheme of things. Todd Phillip's Joker wasn't really that different than any other Joker we've seen before. We just got to see him without Batman present. But as a character himself? He was pretty much the same in that film as he's always been. Or at least has been since the 80's with minor tweaks. So Todd Phillip's Joker is an awful example when compared to Matt Reeve's Batman. He was still the same Joker everyone knew and loved in that film. We just got to see yet ANOTHER new possible origin story. A more apt comparison would have been the Suicide Squad Joker. Something that COMPLETELY breaks what everyone loves and knows about the character, serving only to satisfy the selfish directorial decision to try and be "Different," that fans hated. That's effectively what, so far, Matt Reeve's "The Batman" is looking like it'll turn out to be. Batman getting treated like Suicide Squad's Joker. An attempt to make him into something he's not so a studio can cash in on fan curiosity, with zero heart, soul, or care for the comics put into it.

 

[Turo602]

First of all...The Nolan movies aren't masterpieces XD. 2 are pretty good and one is...eh...

Second of all, "but fan must also realize that a director had to tell the story the way he wants, and put some new stuff," is absolute bogus here. Again, Batman has been around almost a century at this point. There is PLENTY of stuff live action films have never explored before in Batman's long history that a director can use and exploit. It would be one thing if we were talking about a small franchise, or even a sequel to a one off movie like Baby Driver (Although that movie is perfect and doesn't need a sequel), but this is Batman we're talking about. He's an established character with a LONG history. And a director doesn't need to forsake all of that, and everything the fans want and love for his own pretentious vision. A director can have a vision and that's fine. But that vision needs to somewhat align with what the fans, the people who have made this character famous, also want. Other wise it's not Batman. Its your own thing with a Batman skin that you used as a ploy to make some quick cash.

And finally - Joker isn't the same here. The reason Joker could be done in this new and interesting light is because the character is MEANT to be molded into any given scenario. No Matter what version of Batman, Joker fits. So exploring Joker is a lot easier. He doesn't have all that lore attached to him. We don't know Joker's true origin. It's shrouded in mystery. We have several conflicting stories of Joker's origin. We have several different Joker's in general, but they're all relatively similar in the grand scheme of things. Todd Phillip's Joker wasn't really that different than any other Joker we've seen before. We just got to see him without Batman present. But as a character himself? He was pretty much the same in that film as he's always been. Or at least has been since the 80's with minor tweaks. So Todd Phillip's Joker is an awful example when compared to Matt Reeve's Batman. He was still the same Joker everyone knew and loved in that film. We just got to see yet ANOTHER new possible origin story. A more apt comparison would have been the Suicide Squad Joker. Something that COMPLETELY breaks what everyone loves and knows about the character, serving only to satisfy the selfish directorial decision to try and be "Different," that fans hated. That's effectively what, so far, Matt Reeve's "The Batman" is looking like it'll turn out to be. Batman getting treated like Suicide Squad's Joker. An attempt to make him into something he's not so a studio can cash in on fan curiosity, with zero heart, soul, or care for the comics put into it.

Damn, this is so much better than any of my opinions.

 

[KennedyKiller]

Damn, this is so much better than any of my opinions.

Assuming this isn't sarcasm, I'm happy to help XD. Thank you.

 

[Deleted member 21244]

First of all...The Nolan movies aren't masterpieces XD. 2 are pretty good and one is...eh...

Second of all, "but fan must also realize that a director had to tell the story the way he wants, and put some new stuff," is absolute bogus here. Again, Batman has been around almost a century at this point. There is PLENTY of stuff live action films have never explored before in Batman's long history that a director can use and exploit. It would be one thing if we were talking about a small franchise, or even a sequel to a one off movie like Baby Driver (Although that movie is perfect and doesn't need a sequel), but this is Batman we're talking about. He's an established character with a LONG history. And a director doesn't need to forsake all of that, and everything the fans want and love for his own pretentious vision. A director can have a vision and that's fine. But that vision needs to somewhat align with what the fans, the people who have made this character famous, also want. Other wise it's not Batman. Its your own thing with a Batman skin that you used as a ploy to make some quick cash.

And finally - Joker isn't the same here. The reason Joker could be done in this new and interesting light is because the character is MEANT to be molded into any given scenario. No Matter what version of Batman, Joker fits. So exploring Joker is a lot easier. He doesn't have all that lore attached to him. We don't know Joker's true origin. It's shrouded in mystery. We have several conflicting stories of Joker's origin. We have several different Joker's in general, but they're all relatively similar in the grand scheme of things. Todd Phillip's Joker wasn't really that different than any other Joker we've seen before. We just got to see him without Batman present. But as a character himself? He was pretty much the same in that film as he's always been. Or at least has been since the 80's with minor tweaks. So Todd Phillip's Joker is an awful example when compared to Matt Reeve's Batman. He was still the same Joker everyone knew and loved in that film. We just got to see yet ANOTHER new possible origin story. A more apt comparison would have been the Suicide Squad Joker. Something that COMPLETELY breaks what everyone loves and knows about the character, serving only to satisfy the selfish directorial decision to try and be "Different," that fans hated. That's effectively what, so far, Matt Reeve's "The Batman" is looking like it'll turn out to be. Batman getting treated like Suicide Squad's Joker. An attempt to make him into something he's not so a studio can cash in on fan curiosity, with zero heart, soul, or care for the comics put into it.

" In short, the film will be a murder mystery which takes cues from Batman: The Long Halloween, a 13-issue comic book limited series written by Jeph Loeb with art by Tim Sale"
So by leak and rumor The movie is inspired from a comic issue, only that they will probably put some new stuff like they always did in any of the batman movie so far...

The joker character in that movie as nothing to do whit the comic book joker, so does the story, it's just a complete new story whit a character called Arthur fleck that will later became joker... The movie accuracy to the comic is zero

The director of suicide squad just writed an awful joker and Leto performance was bad... Dosent mean that mat reeves will write an awful batman and that Pattinson will give a bad performance

@Mr.R we can criticize the Paul ws Anderson resident evil because we watched them, and we know that they are bad, but here people are criticizing a movie from just some rumor, big difference... Yeah you can dislike the concept, that true , but there a whole difference in disliking the concept and saying this movie is trash and Pattinson i dumb whitout even having watched the movie and his performance and not giving any actual explanation on this

@Turo602 yeah KennedyKiller did explain himself very well, giving his opinion whit reason and basis, you just write the movie is dumb, Pattinson is dumb, whitout any ground and any actual explanation... What kennedy did write was worth reading

Also returning to Pattinson decision to not work out during quarantine that's actually fair since Warner brows say that they have no hurry in continuing filming the movie due to the pandemic, so it's useless for Pattinson to put useless effort now if the film will start filming again next year

 

[Turo602]

@Turo602 yeah KennedyKiller did explain himself very well, giving his opinion whit reason and basis, you just write the movie is dumb, Pattinson is dumb, whitout any ground and any actual explanation... What kennedy did write was worth reading

You're right, he completely ****tered your lame arguments. Get 'em, King!

 

[Deleted member 21244]

You're right, he completely ****tered your lame arguments. Get 'em, King!

Bha you're ridicolous
My argument was lame by your saying but you argument actually have zero ground and sense

 

[Jen]

I have never had a Flake before. Every time I end up in Europe or a store that carries British candy, I end up buying Wispa or Maltesers due to my dear New Zealand Brother-in-laws influence. He told me not to buy Aero anymore and get Wispa and I have to say, it was the right call. Are Flakes any good? Describe them to me.

Wispa and Maltesers are great. I only have Maltesers once a year at Christmas, and I swear they're addictive.

Well, a Flake is basically a textured stick of chocolate that crumbles to pieces as soon as you bite it, making one hell of a mess but delicious all the same. If you've ever had a Twirl (another Cadbury one), it's exactly that without the coating to keep all the chocolate together. If you Google the image, you'll see why it falls apart.

To me, nothing in this world can beat Cadbury - or at least old skool Cadbury before Kraft took over and made everything smaller and less tasty. No offence to all you Americans, but you're not great at chocolate. Have a Hershey Bar and then a block of Cadbury Dairy Milk and you'll see the difference immediately. Hershey tastes like wax.

You do, however, absolutely smash it when it comes to sweets - I could eat Twizzlers for eternity and never be sick of them. And the range of soft drinks? Outstanding.

But ur choklit iz teh sux0r.

Definitely agree about Cadbury being the best chocolate. The only exception for me is Guylian chocolate seashells (I love Belgian chocolate), or Terry's Chocolate Orange. Those are up there with Cadbury. I think I prefer Twirl over Flake though, purely because it has a much more intense chocolate flavour to me. But both are delicious and I'd never say no to either.

 

[Angel]

Ooh yeah, them seashells be amazeballs. They nearly always have them cheap at Home Bargains, but I've not even attempted to shop there since March and the Great Toilet Roll Famine

 

[KennedyKiller]

[QUOTE="Albertwesker959, post: 206675, member: 21244"

The joker character in that movie as nothing to do whit the comic book joker, so does the story, it's just a complete new story whit a character called Arthur fleck that will later became joker... The movie accuracy to the comic is zero
[/QUOTE]
No. You misunderstand what I said. The Joker himself, in the film Joker, is effectively no different than our normal mainstay comic book Joker. Only difference is yet another new origin story. Once he makes that transformation to "The Joker," there's nothing new or radical about him that's different from the comics pertaining to him as a CHARACTER. We just look at the character a different way due to how his origin is shown. Basically, the character himself didn't change or stray from his comic book persona. Our perception of him changed because of the origin story. As opposed to Leto, and now Pattinson, who are being changed by directors, in effort to go a different route. My point being, The Joker film is still a poor comparison to this upcoming Batman film.

 

[UniqTeas]

I am very invested in Hershey, but I won't lie. I think that Cadbury makes better chocolate over all. But I don't think it is all that different. Hershey has a deeper cacao taste and I like the hardness it provides. But Cadbury wins in flavor in general. Depending on how honeymoon plans go (ranging from Italy-Greece, to Ireland-England-France, to maybe tropical locations?) I might end up trying a lot more British candy. That OR I go to the British Butcher I know in Queens, NY and see what they have. My brother-in-law Neil will give me the top reccomendations.

And for The Batman record - I like the casting of Robert Pattinson. I thought the Twilight saga was very poorly written and the only one worth any viewing at all was the first one. But I thought Robert did great with the bad story lines and remainder of the cast. Plus, he looks like a Bruce Wayne to me. Pale, strong, handsome - but there is a brain in there. I just hope that he comes off as a Bruce Wayne depending on how this team is putting The Batman together. Honestly, it looks like they may be tapping in some Kevin Smith story lines and I personally think he did some bad story line writing - at least for Batman.

 

[KManX89]

Amidst all this Battinson chaos (which he himself hasn't helped by saying he's not working out, hence isn't taking the role seriously, which is another can of worms and a huge red flag) is one giant ass elephant in the room...

Snyder Cut is happening, betches.

It may still suck, but at least I have a glimmer of hope for this one, unlike the Trank Cut of F4 which he himself admitted doesn't exist and probably would've still been awful even if it did. This also means we'll finally get to see live action Darkseid, which seemed like a pipe dream at this point, though that also probably means it's not canon.

 

[Turo602]

Amidst all this Battinson chaos (which he himself hasn't helped by saying he's not working out, hence isn't taking the role seriously, which is another can of worms and a huge red flag) is one giant ass elephant in the room...

Snyder Cut is happening, betches.

It may still suck, but at least I have a glimmer of hope for this one, unlike the Trank Cut of F4 which he himself admitted doesn't exist and probably would've still been awful even if it did. This also means we'll finally get to see live action Darkseid, which seemed like a pipe dream at this point, though that also probably means it's not canon.

Whether it's good or bad, I don't really care. What matters is that the Justice League we got was the product of studio interference to the highest degree and the final result was a frankensteined film. I never understood why so many idiots were adamant that the Snyder Cut didn't exist and had a problem with DC fans wanting to see the original vision. It's more Justice League and it's a completely different film from the one we got. The salty tears have been amazing to witness on social media.

Also, just finished watching Justice League Dark: Apokolips War and holy sh*t, what a movie. That was some Endgame caliber sh*t, but better. Wow. Today has definitely been a great day for the Justice League.

 

[Deleted member 21244]

Amidst all this Battinson chaos (which he himself hasn't helped by saying he's not working out, hence isn't taking the role seriously, which is another can of worms and a huge red flag) is one giant ass elephant in the room...

Snyder Cut is happening, betches.

It may still suck, but at least I have a glimmer of hope for this one, unlike the Trank Cut of F4 which he himself admitted doesn't exist and probably would've still been awful even if it did. This also means we'll finally get to see live action Darkseid, which seemed like a pipe dream at this point, though that also probably means it's not canon.

That's really a great news, i was waiting to see the Snyder cut since i watched that pity justice league movie...
I really hopes it to be good and have success, so that Warner brows will stop interfearing whit zack Snyder if he will continue the DCeu... cutting of batman v superman and completely destroying his justice league were really stupid decision

@KennedyKiller i personally don't see how the joker from that movie resemble the joker from the comic, but maybe it's just me... I personally remember that joker was one hell of a mastermind, an extremely mad evil person... Here we just have a guy who have a laugh Desease and that have a bad time in life like everyone in the world, than meet some bully in the metro and he begin to murder, he than have fantasy about a girl, he is no real mastermind, this is not the joker, is an emo teenager in my opinion

 

[KManX89]

That's really a great news, i was waiting to see the Snyder cut since i watched that pity justice league movie...
I really hopes it to be good and have success, so that Warner brows will stop interfearing whit zack Snyder if he will continue the DCeu... cutting of batman v superman and completely destroying his justice league were really stupid decision

@KennedyKiller i personally don't see how the joker from that movie resemble the joker from the comic, but maybe it's just me... I personally remember that joker was one hell of a mastermind, an extremely mad evil person... Here we just have a guy who have a laugh Desease and that have a bad time in life like everyone in the world, than meet some bully in the metro and he begin to murder, he than have fantasy about a girl, he is no real mastermind, this is not the joker, is an emo teenager in my opinion

To be fair, the first two shots on the train were in self-defense (which he categorizes as them being awful, as if that somehow justifies killing 3 men in cold blood). He also gets mugged at work, then fired from his job, gets mocked by his idol (twice, might I add), loses access to his medication, then finds out his mother abused and malnourished him as a kid and that she might not be his real mom and was potentially having an affair with the guy sending the city into a wealth power struggle at his (and others like him's) expense, so it was more than just a "he had a condition and fell on hard times like everyone else" situation, it was a mentally-ill man driven insane and literally everything that could've pushed him off the edge did. I thought they played the descent into madness angle perfectly in the movie, plot holes aside (who in their right mind would take their kid to a movie in the middle of a riot?).

Arthur said it himself "what do you get when you cross a mentally-ill loner with a society that abandons him and treats him like trash? I'll tell you what you get, you get what you f*cking deserve!"

 

[Deleted member 21244]

To be fair, the first two shots on the train were in self-defense (which he categorizes as them being awful, as if that somehow justifies killing 3 men in cold blood). He also gets mugged at work, then fired from his job, gets mocked by his idol (twice, might I add), loses access to his medication, then finds out his mother abused and malnourished him as a kid and that she might not be his real mom and was potentially having an affair with the guy sending the city into a wealth power struggle at his (and others like him's) expense, so it was more than just a "he had a condition and fell on hard times like everyone else" situation, it was a mentally-ill man driven insane and literally everything that could've pushed him off the edge did. I thought they played the descent into madness angle perfectly in the movie, plot holes aside (who in their right mind would take their kid to a movie in the middle of a riot?).

Arthur said it himself "what do you get when you cross a mentally-ill loner with a society that abandons him and treats him like trash? I'll tell you what you get, you get what you f*cking deserve!"

Yeah true but your post also confirmed that this character have nothing to do whit the comic book joker...

Is just a guy whit mental problem that call himself joker... There is no actual accuracy whit the comic... If it wasn't for joaquin Phoenix amazing performance it would have been just a movie about a mentally insane guy...

 

[Turo602]

The movie Joker takes inspiration from movies like The King of Comedy and Taxi Driver, but still has basis as a Joker story. The Killing Joke and The Dark Knight Returns being the most prominent references with the whole failed comedian angle, one bad day, and talk show scene. The film goes in different directions from the comics because it's not a direct adaptation of The Killing Joke and no such story even exists for the character in any official capacity, which is why Joker himself states he prefers his origin to be multiple choice, which this film explores as the events of the movie are widely open to interpretation because Joker isn't a reliable narrator.

To say the film isn't "comic accurate" or has nothing to do with Joker is just very uninformed.