ouinon wrote:
KaiG wrote:
Tim Burton's Batman movies were nothing like Batman is meant to be, though. I normally like Tim Burton, but the guy definately wasn't striving for fidelity to the source material. Batman is not meant to be funny!
I don't think that Burton's Batman films are funny at all. I think that "Batman Returns" in particular is a profundly moving tragic story.
I wonder whether the people who prefer Nolan's version do so precisely because it "ignores" the comic book "frame", and as such perhaps replicates their experience of the stories, the degree to which they "forgot about" the medium while reading, whereas the few that I have read I remained constantly aware of the medium/the "form" in which they came, as I do with Tintin too!

.
Jamesy wrote:
I can talk because I watched the girtty cartoons. Its not about what batman is suppoused to about its making a good movie that is interesting and entertaining to watch that matter.
And yes, I think that part of Batman's original success may have had a lot to do with the combination of the comic book and the story; what in a "serious" book/novel form would have looked like pretentious dreary cliched "drama" was given energy and life by its setting in the comics, their ephemerality.
And Nolan has, IMO, made the mistake of trying to tell the story as if it can be separated from its medium and still stand up as "great", whereas it was always melodramatic, overdone, etc, just saved by the "camp" of the comic book setting ( which Burton replaced with his visuals and excess ).
.