"Aardman knows that DC shows are for teens and adults, right?"
I'm not sure I'd agree with that. I think fanboy culture done allot to steal this kind of entertainment from children. I'm not opposed to various interpretations of the characters, especially ones that are kid friendly. My daughter and I enjoy "Batman, The Brave and the Bold" together from time to time. It's campy super hero fun for kids. The Nolan films are for us, we should not expect it all to cater to our adult fanboy sensibility's.
As for the video clip here, I'm not 100% sure what they are aiming for there, but I chuckled once or twice. I'm easy I suppose.
Step into a comic shop, you'll know immediately that comic books are no longer "for kids only". Capes especially have aged a lot, and the majority of which are aimed at teens and up. Fanboys aren't stealing from the kids, DC and Marvel have both grown with their audiences.
Come now, the notion that comics are still kid type things is silly at best. That hasn't been the case for a long time.
Come now, the notion that comics are still kid type things is silly at best. That hasn't been the case for a long time.
Although I'd like to create an argument against this based on how Disney has been handling Marvel of late (No one will ever convince me that Disney buying Marvel is/was a good thing) simply looking at DC and more specifically my favourite super-hero of all time Batman the comics really have grown up since its creation, case-in-point the original Detective Comics/Batman comics were in many ways childish many of the villains (Joker specifically) were jokes and could hardly have been considered 'serious' villains, at least when compared to the Marvel villains of the same period.
Modern Batman however has definitely matured no longer is he the 'hey kids you shouldn't look up to crooks because without their guns they're nothing but big cowards' (Yes that is a real line from Batman #1 or 2 I can't remember at the moment) he's exactly what we've been seeing since The Batman Animated Series(Kevin Conroy is best Batman) an older, more serious hero who is the fear-inducing arse-kicking badass people know him as today rather than the pansy-ass goody two shoes of the 40s and 50s
@UPSLynx - I'm not suggesting that super hero stories can't be for an older audience. As I said, the Nolan films are for us, and I dig them, I also like The Incredibles which is for pretty much everybody.
I'm just suggesting that there need not be one narrow interpretation of the character. Lets just talk Batman. There is the Nolan interpretation grounded in some sense of reality, there is the Animated Series from the 90's that was a kind of Noir inspired Batman that walked the line between being a mature show and being kid friendly (perhaps my favorite interpretation), There is the Brave and the Bold, which is campy as heck, its obviously designed to fuel the imagination of 8 year old boys, and I'm down with that, then you have funny kid claymation Batman that's just for kicks, its a joke, and it's okay, Batman is cool and all, but it's not sacred.
My point is this. Not everything belongs to the infantile and often jaded fan boys that take this stuff a little too seriously. We can share a little, it's cool. If Cartoon Network is devoting hours and hours of programming to DC comics, I'm sure some will be more kid friendly and others will be a little more driven to a teen and up audience. Let's share this one with the kids. If in the next Nolan film, a claymation cat woman throws up a hairball, let's express outrage then.
Ah, ok. I see what you're saying. I pretty much agree with you then (obviously). I felt like you were suggesting that 'the films are adult enough, everything else is for kids.'
I do wish, however, that we had more "grown up" animated options. Both DC and Marvel alike have had some killer shows in the last decade (if you have netfix, check out Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes), but they're all early teen or younger focused. That is the typical realm of the genre, though, so it's hardly surprising.
Also, I agree with the 90's Batman The Animated Series. What a show. To this day, it's still one of my favorites.
Dang. Now I'm all nostalgic. The New Adventures of Batman and Superman was also a favorite (though it was basically a potpourri of BTAS and Superman The Animated Series.
Man, American broadcast animation at its finest. This is brilliant stuff.
Batman did get pretty dang dark, now that I think about it. There's an episode where commissioner Gordon gets shot, nearly dies. The whole scene was intense. Also, Batgirl actually dies in a later season episode. Killed by the Scarecrow. I mean crap, in the comics Barbara was shot in the spine by the Joker and permanently crippled (Alan Moore's classic The Killing Joke), but in the animated series, she straight up dies - in her fathers arms, if I remember correctly. Yeesh.
Also - Mark Hamill is STILL the greatest interpretation of the joker. DEAL WITH IT.
Dang. Now I'm all nostalgic. The New Adventures of Batman and Superman was also a favorite (though it was basically a potpourri of BTAS and Superman The Animated Series.
Man, American broadcast animation at its finest. This is brilliant stuff.
Batman did get pretty dang dark, now that I think about it. There's an episode where commissioner Gordon gets shot, nearly dies. The whole scene was intense. Also, Batgirl actually dies in a later season episode. Killed by the Scarecrow. I mean crap, in the comics Barbara was shot in the spine by the Joker and permanently crippled (Alan Moore's classic The Killing Joke), but in the animated series, she straight up dies - in her fathers arms, if I remember correctly. Yeesh.
Also - Mark Hamill is STILL the greatest interpretation of the joker. DEAL WITH IT.
Well shit, that's another Batman tv show I have to look into oh well its Batman so it'll be fecking great either way.
Also ^This Mark Hamill IS without a doubt the greatest Joker ever, his rendition of the voice is by far what the majority of people associate Joker with (Hearing him do the voice in person is fucking scary.) the Joker's attitude in BTAS is definitely the best imo (It's the perfect mix of a sadistic, psychopathic killer and a sick, sick comedian) and his general appearance is just great YOU CANNOT DENY HIS PURPLE SUIT!
Honestly I didn't really enjoy Heath Ledger's Joker, I mean sure he was sadistic and they definitely took him a little farther than before, but I don't know I've read of and watched just about every rendition or redesign of Joker and something about the way they handled Joker in The Dark Knight just felt off.
Dude, seriously. Batman TAS is incredible. One of my all time favorites. If you have the money, pick up the show on DVD. You won't regret it. Batman fans love it, and non fans still think its awesome.
Mark Hamill, man. he is the quintessential joker. Totally iconic in every way. Ledger's joker isn't that good.
^I'm not sure if you're talking to me here or everyone in the discussion so I'll reply anyways.
I own BTAS the episodes, and the movies I'd say that I'm a huge Batman fan, but considering the posters, the games, the movies, and all the tv shows (The new adventures are the only ones I don't own, well that and The Batman and Batman the Brave and the Bold but I'll never get those, compared to BTAS they're just awful) I guess that psychopathic fan boy fits the label better.
I don't want to sound like a dick or anything but I honestly don't understand why Heath Ledger has been praised so highly for his role as the Joker, I mean even compared to the more 40s-50s era Joker's (All bad jokes, no psycho) he didn't make me think of the Joker when he was on screen so much as he made me think of a common murderer, albeit a clever one but without the proper joking attitude and outrageous sense of humour AND fashion (Again dat purple suit) it's not the Joker, perhaps I'm just to used to Mark Hamill's Joker but eh.
Also new Batman movie, don't like what they're doing with Bane and I don't like that they decided to switch it from Riddler (Tennant was going to have the role which would've been fucking brilliant) to...this Bane.
I didn't have a problem with Ledger's Joker, but I agree with you about Bane. I mean: really? Bane? He must be the least interesting, least compelling Batman villain in the entire canon. If it weren't for Hathaway's Cat Woman, I wouldn't be looking forward to the new Batman film at all.
Nerd rage is: Getting upset that an unconfirmed character was removed in favor of a character that nobody has seen in action in a reimagined universe last terrorized by a villain played by an actor nobody thought would be any good.
My problem isn't with Bane, it's with the way he's been reimagined. Bane is not a scrawny tactical genius wearing a trenchcoat (And by scrawny I mean in comparison to you know, normal Bane.)
Bane, as I know and love him is a tactical genius who also happens to be FUCKING huge because of the venom experiments from back when he was in Pena Dura
Also yes, it is nerd rage, I must admit that I was really paying a great deal of attention to the film's pre-production and when rumours of Tennant playing the Riddler arose I absolutely flipped my shit. I mean it's my favourite Batman villain (Sorry there Joker) AND my favourite Doctor being paired together and I may just be spewing shit but the pairing would've been bloody brilliant, I mean seriously who couldn't imagine Tennant playing the Riddler? He fits the general appearance and his acting style definitely lends itself to the idea of an incredibly brilliant, if somewhat crazy individual. (A Tennant-Riddler death trap would have just been gold)
I think the issue with the monstrosity that the comics generated is that it isn't feasible to enact that without "Hulk" levels of CGI and that hasn't been what Nolan did with any of the films. Personally, (being a non-fanboy and not knowing too much about the overall lore), I love what Nolan has done with the series he imagined and am throughly looking forward to the "final" movie.
I think the issue with the monstrosity that the comics generated is that it isn't feasible to enact that without "Hulk" levels of CGI and that hasn't been what Nolan did with any of the films. Personally, (being a non-fanboy and not knowing too much about the overall lore), I love what Nolan has done with the series he imagined and am throughly looking forward to the "final" movie.
I know it isn't feasible without making it look ridiculous but just from a raging fanboy perspective if Bane has to be changed SO much to simply fit into the movie at all then perhaps they should be looking at other villains to hold the movies lead role (Or at least should've its a little too late now) I mean it's the Batman world, there are literally dozens of potential villains that could've assumed a lead role (Solomon Grundy, Poison Ivy, Penguin, Killer Croc, Black Mask, etc etc.)
Personally, and from a largely biased view point I think going with Riddler would've been an infinitely better choice than Bane seeing how he's turning out in his 're-imagining'
^I'm not sure if you're talking to me here or everyone in the discussion so I'll reply anyways.
Ahhh. See, I got confused when you said "Well shit, that's another Batman tv show I have to look into". Reason why it confused me is "the new Batman-Superman Adventures" is actually just a rerun package series that showcased episodes from both Batman The Animated Series and Superman The Animated Series. I didn't explain it well enough. It wasn't a new show or new episodes, but rather a mix of the best of both shows. Each 30 minute show was one episode from either Batman TAS or Superman TAS. They did, however, create new Batman episodes to run with this series that were typically focused on Robin or other assistants to Batman, but I don't think it was a ton of new episodes. The series was created to lead up to the film "Worlds Finest".
I've always been a fan of Julie Newmar's Catwoman (DEM CURVES). I also loved Ceasar Romero's Joker.
I agree that Bane sucks. I don't even care if we haven't seen the film yet and we don't know what Nolan will do with him. He's just a bland, dumb character. I didn't care about him in DC Comics (and in the new 52 he STILL sucks), I didn't care about him in the Animated Series. I won't talk about Batman and Robin, it doesn't exist. Bane is just a crap character, and I don't believe that Nolan can save him.
Oh yeah, what I mean by 'know and love' Bane is still one of my least favourite characters in the Batman world (Freaking Calendar Man is a more interesting character than Bane and he has only recently been pulled away from the role of comic relief.) Bane isn't a very interesting character and even if Nolan thinks he can do something with the character in the new film I am hesitant to give it a look.
The Dark Knight Rises looks and feels like it's going to be a Matrix 'Reloaded' or 'Revolution' but of course that's just my opinion.
Comments
Not sure that's altogether a good thing.
Mostly my reaction is: meh.
I'm not sure I'd agree with that. I think fanboy culture done allot to steal this kind of entertainment from children. I'm not opposed to various interpretations of the characters, especially ones that are kid friendly. My daughter and I enjoy "Batman, The Brave and the Bold" together from time to time. It's campy super hero fun for kids. The Nolan films are for us, we should not expect it all to cater to our adult fanboy sensibility's.
As for the video clip here, I'm not 100% sure what they are aiming for there, but I chuckled once or twice. I'm easy I suppose.
Come now, the notion that comics are still kid type things is silly at best. That hasn't been the case for a long time.
Modern Batman however has definitely matured no longer is he the 'hey kids you shouldn't look up to crooks because without their guns they're nothing but big cowards' (Yes that is a real line from Batman #1 or 2 I can't remember at the moment) he's exactly what we've been seeing since The Batman Animated Series(Kevin Conroy is best Batman) an older, more serious hero who is the fear-inducing arse-kicking badass people know him as today rather than the pansy-ass goody two shoes of the 40s and 50s
I'm just suggesting that there need not be one narrow interpretation of the character. Lets just talk Batman. There is the Nolan interpretation grounded in some sense of reality, there is the Animated Series from the 90's that was a kind of Noir inspired Batman that walked the line between being a mature show and being kid friendly (perhaps my favorite interpretation), There is the Brave and the Bold, which is campy as heck, its obviously designed to fuel the imagination of 8 year old boys, and I'm down with that, then you have funny kid claymation Batman that's just for kicks, its a joke, and it's okay, Batman is cool and all, but it's not sacred.
My point is this. Not everything belongs to the infantile and often jaded fan boys that take this stuff a little too seriously. We can share a little, it's cool. If Cartoon Network is devoting hours and hours of programming to DC comics, I'm sure some will be more kid friendly and others will be a little more driven to a teen and up audience. Let's share this one with the kids. If in the next Nolan film, a claymation cat woman throws up a hairball, let's express outrage then.
I do wish, however, that we had more "grown up" animated options. Both DC and Marvel alike have had some killer shows in the last decade (if you have netfix, check out Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes), but they're all early teen or younger focused. That is the typical realm of the genre, though, so it's hardly surprising.
Also, I agree with the 90's Batman The Animated Series. What a show. To this day, it's still one of my favorites.
Man, American broadcast animation at its finest. This is brilliant stuff.
Batman did get pretty dang dark, now that I think about it. There's an episode where commissioner Gordon gets shot, nearly dies. The whole scene was intense. Also, Batgirl actually dies in a later season episode. Killed by the Scarecrow. I mean crap, in the comics Barbara was shot in the spine by the Joker and permanently crippled (Alan Moore's classic The Killing Joke), but in the animated series, she straight up dies - in her fathers arms, if I remember correctly. Yeesh.
Also - Mark Hamill is STILL the greatest interpretation of the joker. DEAL WITH IT.
Also ^This Mark Hamill IS without a doubt the greatest Joker ever, his rendition of the voice is by far what the majority of people associate Joker with (Hearing him do the voice in person is fucking scary.) the Joker's attitude in BTAS is definitely the best imo (It's the perfect mix of a sadistic, psychopathic killer and a sick, sick comedian) and his general appearance is just great YOU CANNOT DENY HIS PURPLE SUIT!
Honestly I didn't really enjoy Heath Ledger's Joker, I mean sure he was sadistic and they definitely took him a little farther than before, but I don't know I've read of and watched just about every rendition or redesign of Joker and something about the way they handled Joker in The Dark Knight just felt off.
Mark Hamill, man. he is the quintessential joker. Totally iconic in every way. Ledger's joker isn't that good.
And I should know. I've made films.
I own BTAS the episodes, and the movies I'd say that I'm a huge Batman fan, but considering the posters, the games, the movies, and all the tv shows (The new adventures are the only ones I don't own, well that and The Batman and Batman the Brave and the Bold but I'll never get those, compared to BTAS they're just awful) I guess that psychopathic fan boy fits the label better.
I don't want to sound like a dick or anything but I honestly don't understand why Heath Ledger has been praised so highly for his role as the Joker, I mean even compared to the more 40s-50s era Joker's (All bad jokes, no psycho) he didn't make me think of the Joker when he was on screen so much as he made me think of a common murderer, albeit a clever one but without the proper joking attitude and outrageous sense of humour AND fashion (Again dat purple suit) it's not the Joker, perhaps I'm just to used to Mark Hamill's Joker but eh.
Also new Batman movie, don't like what they're doing with Bane and I don't like that they decided to switch it from Riddler (Tennant was going to have the role which would've been fucking brilliant) to...this Bane.
Meow......
Bane, as I know and love him is a tactical genius who also happens to be FUCKING huge because of the venom experiments from back when he was in Pena Dura
Also yes, it is nerd rage, I must admit that I was really paying a great deal of attention to the film's pre-production and when rumours of Tennant playing the Riddler arose I absolutely flipped my shit. I mean it's my favourite Batman villain (Sorry there Joker) AND my favourite Doctor being paired together and I may just be spewing shit but the pairing would've been bloody brilliant, I mean seriously who couldn't imagine Tennant playing the Riddler? He fits the general appearance and his acting style definitely lends itself to the idea of an incredibly brilliant, if somewhat crazy individual. (A Tennant-Riddler death trap would have just been gold)
Personally, and from a largely biased view point I think going with Riddler would've been an infinitely better choice than Bane seeing how he's turning out in his 're-imagining'
And now this discussion has come full circle.
Smooth sir, very smooth
I've always been a fan of Julie Newmar's Catwoman (DEM CURVES). I also loved Ceasar Romero's Joker.
I agree that Bane sucks. I don't even care if we haven't seen the film yet and we don't know what Nolan will do with him. He's just a bland, dumb character. I didn't care about him in DC Comics (and in the new 52 he STILL sucks), I didn't care about him in the Animated Series. I won't talk about Batman and Robin, it doesn't exist. Bane is just a crap character, and I don't believe that Nolan can save him.
The Dark Knight Rises looks and feels like it's going to be a Matrix 'Reloaded' or 'Revolution' but of course that's just my opinion.