06-19-2005, 11:36 PM
Just got back from seeing this and I am not impressed at all, it was a good film but thats about it. Bale was a good batman but not so much better that he blew keaton out of the water and the 1989 version still is the best because of Nicholson. Liam Neeson was stiffer than kevin costner in... well kevin costner in any film. Neeson was trying to pull off the older, wiser, teacher figure but without the older and wiser credibility. The origins part was interesting and much better done, it wasnt overblown and gaudy like the others but thats what gotham city is. It got silly naturally after the first 2 but to me 1989's batman is still the better one.
Also all this talk about darkness is being so overused this year, star wars is darker, batman is darker.... nothing is ever going to be "darker" in movies ever again with all the PC mumbo jumbo and parent groups, etc. There really is nothing dark about either of these films but I liked both.
Also all this talk about darkness is being so overused this year, star wars is darker, batman is darker.... nothing is ever going to be "darker" in movies ever again with all the PC mumbo jumbo and parent groups, etc. There really is nothing dark about either of these films but I liked both.
![[Image: BT-vivalaevolucion-gallery-2756.jpg]](http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i242/gonzostyle/BT-vivalaevolucion-gallery-2756.jpg)
http://www.dvdspot.com/member=Gonzostyle
http://www.myspace.com/brooklyngonzo
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=770777388
diceisgod Wrote:I LOVE YOU GONZY WONZY SNOOKIE WOOKIE DUMPLIN BUNS!