[Redcarmoose]

You made me want to watch that again, now.

There have been slight hints as to the magic above, the humor. It's still really cool all these years later. The music, the sets, oh lets just for a moment reflect on the sets. The sets had imagination, the last Batman had a set that looked like Alien and sets from Iron Man, with imagination factor -1.


Lets get back to Batman's humor. Azzflex had as much humor as a paper bag.

And they wonder how it was received. Mind you, I couldn't make a Batman movie but still, a 10 year old gets some of this stuff we are talking about. IMO

 

[WraithApe]

There have been slight hints as to the magic above, the humor. It's still really cool all these years later. The music, the sets, oh lets just for a moment reflect on the sets. The sets had imagination, the last Batman had a set that looked like Alien and sets from Iron Man, with imagination factor -1.

 
Couldn't agree more. Burton's Batman was pretty much perfect for me. Plot, pacing, casting, soundtrack - all spot on. And I'm sorry, but Jack will always be the definitive Joker for me

 I know I'm in the minority, but I haven't really enjoyed any of Nolan's efforts. The modern trend is just to go for realism and grittiness and that approach has become tired and formulaic IMO. You see the same thing in the Bond franchise, where Daniel Craig's stint has been marked by a tougher, darker feel but they just become any other action flick in the end. Same thing with Batman for me. All the sequels to the 90s Batman were pretty dreadful though!

 

[Redcarmoose]

Couldn't agree more. Burton's Batman was pretty much perfect for me. Plot, pacing, casting, soundtrack - all spot on. And I'm sorry, but Jack will always be the definitive Joker for me  I know I'm in the minority, but I haven't really enjoyed any of Nolan's efforts. The modern trend is just to go for realism and grittiness and that approach has become tired and formulaic IMO. You see the same thing in the Bond franchise, where Daniel Craig's stint has been marked by a tougher, darker feel but they just become any other action flick in the end. Same thing with Batman for me. All the sequels to the 90s Batman were pretty dreadful though!

Interesting and we still have fantasy films like Burton doing Alice In Wonderland now but so many movies having, like you say a realism in all aspects. I'm actually maybe the fan of Nolan's last Batman the most. Batman Begins just almost comes off as just dis-functional and sad. The comic books seem to get away with that sad vibe so much better than a movie does. And...........I'm not saying sad movies are bad, just you don't really want a sad Batman movie. IMO


It was like Nolan explored the realism in Batman Begins by developing these real characters with real problems and emotions. Which by the way still comes off better entertainment than the last Batman.


Still the hyper-realism of Nolan's " The Dark Knight Rises" was refreshing when combined with the pace, for me. Batman Begins only became less enjoyable later on a rewatch when I noticed it was slow and was just character development with less action.


Still I think if we are looking for all time lows this last Batman has slumped lower than 1995s Batman Forever. IMO

 

[Hutnicks]

Interesting and we still have fantasy films like Burton doing Alice In Wonderland now but so many movies having, like you say a realism in all aspects. I'm actually maybe the fan of Nolan's last Batman the most. Batman Begins just almost comes off as just dis-functional and sad. The comic books seem to get away with that sad vibe so much better than a movie does. And...........I'm not saying sad movies are bad, just you don't really want a sad Batman movie. IMO


It was like Nolan explored the realism in Batman Begins by developing these real characters with real problems and emotions. Which by the way still comes off better entertainment than the last Batman.


Still the hyper-realism of Nolan's " The Dark Knight Rises" was refreshing when combined with the pace, for me. Batman Begins only became less enjoyable later on a rewatch when I noticed it was slow and was just character development with less action.


Still I think if we are looking for all time lows this last Batman has slumped lower than 1995s Batman Forever. IMO

Conjures up an images of "Sad Keanu" as Batman How'd they miss him in casting?

 
There is realistic, and then there is depressing. Nolan went way to far into the depressing zone. Particularly with Wayne's characterizations. Keaton playing Wayne as just a little bit, well, batty was an inspired choice.  Nolan really benefits when he does not do all the writing himself. The problem with Nolans overall take on the matter is simply one of a Gotham City where no one on earth would ever want to live. Makes for a very hard sell.
 
Batman Forever. Ugh. I'll never forgive Schumacher for putting nipples on the bat suit, ever. The rest of the film was just a sad case of cramming in every FOTM actor to make sure the film appealed to everyone. Everyone but fans of Batman that is.

 

[WraithApe]

 
Conjures up an images of "Sad Keanu" as Batman How'd they miss him in casting?

 
You get Seedy Keanu in Refn's latest one - there's a sight to behold! There was an audible titter from the audience the first time he appeared, which I thought was a bit harsh!

 

[mutabor]

Call me old fashioned or just call me old, 1992 had a singularity of style and form. Casting was perfect, acting ? Well...................10/10.

So what is so hard about doing it again? That is what is special, that lighting never hits in the same place twice.

 
In my opinion modern pop-corn films are self-conscious with political issues ( racial, gender etc). You just can't make an actioner with a macho male character because it will be considered sexist and patriarchal. That is why male action characters in modern films are consciously made vulnerable and there is a lot of drama involving themes of guilt or weakness. Good example is an introvert serious dark tone and slow pace of James Bond: Skyfall movie. It was not fun. 

 

[WraithApe]

   
In my opinion modern pop-corn films are self-conscious with political issues ( racial, gender etc). You just can't make an actioner with a macho male character because it will be considered sexist and patriarchal. That is why male action characters in modern films are consciously made vulnerable and there is a lot of drama involving themes of guilt or weakness. Good example is an introvert dark tone and slow pace of James Bond: Skyfall movie.

 
I don't think that's always the case - look at franchises like Transporter; the macho action hero is still alive and kicking. The problem as I see it is the lack of imagination and the obsession with gritty realism. Flawed characters, or anti-heroes, are part and parcel of that.

 

[mutabor]

   
I don't think that's always the case - look at franchises like Transporter; the macho action hero is still alive and kicking. The problem as I see it is the lack of imagination and the obsession with gritty realism. Flawed characters, or anti-heroes, are part and parcel of that.

 
But Transporter is a French movie. Europe is very different than America. Asia is free from sensitivities of America as well.
 
In Hollywood nowadays if it is a macho then he is portrayed as an idiot or a comedic person. Like Jason Statham in Spy movie. Or as I wrote above there have to be a lot of drama and guilt in a character.

 

[WraithApe]

   
But Transporter is a French movie. Europe is very different than America. Asia is free from sensitivities of America as well.

 
Well yeah, but it's still popcorn fare. Anyway, I just think the point being made about films like Batman Returns not getting made any more was more about the style of the movie than a question of gender politics. I do agree though that mainstream America is far more PC than most other countries.

 

[mutabor]

I think that it is PC consciousness which had brought realism in pop corn flicks. Even modern comedies turned into dramas. PC consciousness goes against instinctive approach. Cinema of the past was instinctive. Now being instinctive is offensive.

 

[Redcarmoose]

  I think that it is PC consciousness which had brought realism in pop corn flicks. Even modern comedies turned into dramas. PC consciousness goes against instinctive approach. Cinema of the past was instinctive. Now being instinctive is offensive.

 
Tarzan 2016 was more of an old-fashioned male role model. But you bring up some great points about modern movies becoming PC confused much like the population. I just need to think about it, but it does make a valid point.
 
Movies in the 1970s had characters though hyper macho, the roles were loved just due to their simple charm. Dirty Harry was at the edge of PC correctness even then, and there was the simple genius. Today the movies are walking a thin line where, as you say they don't appear as humans being natural.
 
 
I actually watch very few modern movies but will fit the possible blockbusters in just due to simple curiosity.
 
 
 
 
Many of us are maybe older viewers, but the disturbing question is what happens to the young. We already know that life reflects art. We already know how these male role models in movies set the trend and form the subconscious of the young male. It's not maybe that the mainstream is going to be violent due to the movies but maybe an influence of attitude or life perspective.
 
 
In ending here, we view the best male role models in movies as being the quintessential character that wise elders described for 1000s of years around campfires at night, all to the amazement of wide young hyper open eyes. The character was given life problems and fixed the situation in an out of the box and grown-up way for the benefit of the tribe.
 
Today in the US it may really be true that movies now go on to show the importance of using the PC vocabulary as to not offend, to offer the right bathroom, as to not offend and to hold actions of the male to be parallel very close to that neurotic tiny dog you see on a leash?
 
How can a super hero even take place in such climate?

 

[Hutnicks]

I am a little perplexed by all this. PC is simply the new Mom Apple Pie and Flag waving of cinema. It's always been there and there have been few American films that dramatically go outside the envelope. In the 40's and 50's it was Mickey Rooney in the Andy Hardy series which made him the highest earning actor of the era. Move forward and you get any of the myriad Jimmy Stewart flics with much the same feel good vibe.
 
 It took the likes of Peckinpah to really ring in the anti hero and dirty things up.
 
Siegel's Dirty Harry directly owes it's existence to the Italian Westerns that put a new light on the lone hero and offered up an alternative to the regular western fare. Lets remember the 70's was well polluted with "Sensitive Guy" films as well.
 
 We are not seeing any really challenging American films simply because they don't make money. A studio will fund Avengers 34857 in a heartbeat but the next "Resevoir Dogs" is probably waiting while the director begs for money to get it made.
 
 It's not PC, it's junk food consumption that has mired the industry into endless McMovies that demand the same formula be adhered to. As long as Marvel's crap de jour and Warcraft make zillions on release, there is simply no perceived demand for any alternative film styles.
 
The whole PC flimflam is well summed up by viewing Clooney arrogant "Hollywood is ahead of the curve" speech. Self indulgent congratulatory claptrap from an industry that values the 30 minute marriage, statutory rape and substance abuse. These films are made to sell us on something that simply does not exist. It's still white pickett fences by any other name and selling like hotcakes.

 

[oqvist]

Prometheus... 3rd time around and better then I remembered it. Awesome in 3D and virtual reality 9/10.
 
Well it´s a 10/10 experience just not 10/10 script. But the experience is better then going to the cinemas while image quality is almost there. Absolutely bonkers what movie experience we will get in the future and there will be less war on the tv when everybody can just watch their own channel with their own vr headsets. 

 

[Redcarmoose]

I am a little perplexed by all this. PC is simply the new Mom Apple Pie and Flag waving of cinema. It's always been there and there have been few American films that dramatically go outside the envelope. In the 40's and 50's it was Mickey Rooney in the Andy Hardy series which made him the highest earning actor of the era. Move forward and you get any of the myriad Jimmy Stewart flics with much the same feel good vibe.

 It took the likes of Peckinpah to really ring in the anti hero and dirty things up.

Siegel's Dirty Harry directly owes it's existence to the Italian Westerns that put a new light on the lone hero and offered up an alternative to the regular western fare. Lets remember the 70's was well polluted with "Sensitive Guy" films as well.

 We are not seeing any really challenging American films simply because they don't make money. A studio will fund Avengers 34857 in a heartbeat but the next "Resevoir Dogs" is probably waiting while the director begs for money to get it made.

 It's not PC, it's junk food consumption that has mired the industry into endless McMovies that demand the same formula be adhered to. As long as Marvel's crap de jour and Warcraft make zillions on release, there is simply no perceived demand for any alternative film styles.

The whole PC flimflam is well summed up by viewing Clooney arrogant "Hollywood is ahead of the curve" speech. Self indulgent congratulatory claptrap from an industry that values the 30 minute marriage, statutory rape and substance abuse. These films are made to sell us on something that simply does not exist. It's still white pickett fences by any other name and selling like hotcakes.

Really? I think even the sensitive guys had balls in the past?

[VIDEO]. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Mp7ls002Dk8 [/VIDEO]



But I see this hero creation conversation leading up to Vanishing Point. Ok so the hero does take cross-tops. But he has to stay awake because he is delivering drugs and driving farther than most drive in a single run. Ok, so he only smokes pot and gets sexed up in the export cut of the film, as those two small scenes where too much for the USA at the time. Even when many were having casual sex and smoking joints, it was too heavy for the censors.

But we now have actually a calm and cool antihero. This movie was groundbreaking for it's time as such an antihero did not exist in film. The fact that his car could outrun the police was taken to the level of mythology. And the film went on to inspire many film makers of today all due in part to the non-PC it contained. He was in fact the definitive sensitive guy hero, though not PC.




The main character became a counter-culture hero.

 

[mutabor]

  Today the movies are walking a thin line where, as you say they don't appear as humans being natural.

 
Tough guys are no longer role models in today Hollywood. But did they disappear as dinosaurs? No. Hollywood just stopped reflecting needs of this type of males. There are geek types dominating. Even if there are tough guys left which are very few they have to conform to a more feminine image of a modern man. On the other hand sexy female type is also dying because sexy feminine woman is a relic of a patriarchal society ( which is demonized) as a strong tough male type.
 
When I watch a European movie I see people on micro scale, I watch their personal interactions. When I watch an American movie I don't see individuals I see social types. Here is a bad-ass woman ( they want women to be presented as strong), here is a black guy as a scientist ( they want to present black people as intellectuals), here is a hipster guy ( a role model for all men nowadays). So American movies are getting more and more righteous and didactic in social sense.