Full throttle? Making Brutal Legend an RTS...Mullahgrrl said:
Given the subject matter, I thought it was appropriateCousin_IT said:
Burton's Busts
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
So, in your schema of Burton-themed movies, where does Corpse Bride fit in? Good, bad, stellar, just-good-enough-to-not-make-the-shit-list, smack dab in the middle?
I utterly loathe Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory to the point that I would not even watch the remake when it came out until I was convinced that they weren't the same. Nothing about the first one appeals to me at all. So I watched the Burton one. It felt completely and utterly Burton, and that annoyed me, but otherwise I rather enjoyed Depp's significantly more malicious and indifferent approach to playing Wonka.
Then I read the book, watched Willy Wonka again, and my particularly purist side when it comes to adaptations would not stop screaming.
Neither of the movies really captured Wonka, but Wonka is a short little troll man who is significantly creepier than Wilder or Depp.
I also hate the Burton Bat-movies. I like Adam West's Batman, and the Conroy-voiced Animated Batman more. Significantly more. I don't actually recognize "Forever" and "Batman and Robin" unless I absolutely have to. Everything about the Burton-Bats are really what Bob said. Michael Keaton was also a horrible choice and utterly failed to convince me that he was either Batman or Bruce Wayne.
Then I read the book, watched Willy Wonka again, and my particularly purist side when it comes to adaptations would not stop screaming.
Neither of the movies really captured Wonka, but Wonka is a short little troll man who is significantly creepier than Wilder or Depp.
I also hate the Burton Bat-movies. I like Adam West's Batman, and the Conroy-voiced Animated Batman more. Significantly more. I don't actually recognize "Forever" and "Batman and Robin" unless I absolutely have to. Everything about the Burton-Bats are really what Bob said. Michael Keaton was also a horrible choice and utterly failed to convince me that he was either Batman or Bruce Wayne.
No, you're not the only one.iddstar said:
I saw Batman when I was 11, I loved it. I still watched the Batman TV series with Adam West on TV, so the zanny-over the top cheese wasn't a problem for me, but the fact that it was so much darker and violent (the joker's buzzer gave me nightmares) really thrilled me and made an impression. It was the first movie I bought (got the VHS).
I didn't like Batman Return so much... the movie is bad. There's a lot of fridge logic going on in it and while it looked cool and stylish and all that... a bad script is a bad script.
A few years back (early 2000s) I saw Batman again. I don't even have a VHS player anymore and it had been years since I had seen it... and my god did it not age well. It's terrible really. Groan inducing - the 'funny' bits aren't funny anymore, they're retarded. I wonder how long it has been since the people defending it have actually seen it.
It doesn't take away from the fact that this movie did a lot for geek culture and I loved it when I was a young teenager... but yeah, is it a good movie? Not really.
I really enjoy many of Burton's films because I grew up watching them. He may not be my favourite director but he generally gets the job done in the entertainment category. However I too agree that he has made some "turkeys" as MovieBob put it. I am one of few who disliked Beetle Juice, for instance, and even one of fewer who hated Nightmare Before Christmas. But Big Fish is an incredible yarn, I still love the Keaton-era Batman movies, and Sweeney Todd was nothing except hilariously Gothic entertainment in its purest form.
...
Reading back, I don't know the point I was trying to get across when I wrote this. This was a bit of a rambling session I guess. So to change the topic to something a little more straightforward: I lmao'd when Bob compared Will Smaith to Taft. He is my least favourite US President (including Dubya) and I'm glad to see someone else taking a swipe at him. lol good show.
...
Reading back, I don't know the point I was trying to get across when I wrote this. This was a bit of a rambling session I guess. So to change the topic to something a little more straightforward: I lmao'd when Bob compared Will Smaith to Taft. He is my least favourite US President (including Dubya) and I'm glad to see someone else taking a swipe at him. lol good show.
I am not going to debate whether Burton's Batman films were faithful adaptations or not because I do not care. Burton's Batman films were great movies and Moviebob is simply being closed minded to an alternate interpretation of the character which will happen when any character shifts mediums. In my estimation, if MovieBob would remove his geek hat for his analysis hat he would be a much better reviewer.
And in case anyone wants to know I saw the Batman films a couple of years ago and did not grow up with them.
And in case anyone wants to know I saw the Batman films a couple of years ago and did not grow up with them.
Someone give this soul a media outlet.ShinningDesertEagle said:
- The world would benefit from it, I guarantee.
Ah, the Escapist Forums. So full of people so full of their own intelligence that anyone that disagrees is obviously an idiot. How do you people have friends if you can't converse and disagree? I mean, Jesus Christ, you're like children.
I watched both Burton films recently, and while they are entertaining, they aren't really all that great either. I can only conclude that people that still love them are full of nostalgia. "It's got style!" Well, that's nice and all, but style isn't everything.
In particular, I blame Batman Returns (and in some ways even Jack's portrayal of the Joker) for ruining the later films. See, having The Penguin have weird gadgets, penguins with jetpacks and giant rubber ducks, it all basically meant Batman villains were supposed to be absurd to a comedic, evil clown extent. Hence Two Face being a ridiculous attempt at being another version of the Joker and The Riddler...well, under certain circumstances Jim Carry could be an excellent Edward Nigma, actually. But that variation was just basically a typecasting. Basically, they were just trying to fit a model established by Burton.
Nolan's Batman has actually done a similar harm to the potential of the franchise. By being grounded in reality so much you'll never see Victor Freize, who is PERFECT for the atmosphere and mood Nolan is going for. A man that isn't necessarily evil, but does evil things. Unfortunately, you can't do Mr. Freeze without breaking reality (and considering Nolan is more interested in the comics anyway, he likely wouldn't be interested; Mr. Freeze was always a joke until The Animated Series made him something awesome).
I actually dig Planet of the Apes for what it is, but it lacks something. The original was a very different movie, but it also felt like it had more meaning and purpose to it. To this day I enjoy watching it.
As for Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, maybe movie buffs have a reason for preferring Gene Wilder but I swear NO ONE CARED about Willy Wonka until Tim Burton "remade" it (which is more like "reinterpreted" it). It's the biggest cluster of bullshit that people hate on it JUST because Gene Wilder was "better". He may have been, but the first movie is still boring and a victim to the time period (or maybe the studio? I can't even tell it's that uninteresting).
It's worse than when people ***** about the new Producers being so much worse than the original and yatta yatta, even though it's based off the script WRITTEN BY MEL BROOKS. "Ferris Bueller is totally wrong for the role! Gene Wilder was perfect!" Gee, it's a shame because that's who Mel Brooks cast for the stage version. Guess he was wrong!
I do feel the need to mention Sweeney Todd is a film I have not yet seen, because I saw the stage version before the film was in the works, thought it was awesome (a friend was basically proving to me that there are musicals that aren't complete gay-bait), loved the music. Then Tim Burton comes along and takes an aggressive psychotic intent on revenge and casts an actor who is more fit playing a timid psychotic intent on stalking your adolescent daughter. Not only that, but I've heard the film soundtrack and neither Johnny Depp nor Moira-from-Fight-Club are right for the roles because they can't sing them right.
Everyone makes a big deal out of it, like Tim Burton made this awesome film when he took an established piece of excellent entertainment and did it anything but justice. I'm sure the film is entertaining, but because I know there were better performances out there it will always be ruined for me. Now I can't wait until he ruins Into the Woods and all the little Hot Topic girls with their plastic vampire fangs squeel about how awesomely dark it is without even getting the point of the play.
Argh.
Rant over.
I watched both Burton films recently, and while they are entertaining, they aren't really all that great either. I can only conclude that people that still love them are full of nostalgia. "It's got style!" Well, that's nice and all, but style isn't everything.
In particular, I blame Batman Returns (and in some ways even Jack's portrayal of the Joker) for ruining the later films. See, having The Penguin have weird gadgets, penguins with jetpacks and giant rubber ducks, it all basically meant Batman villains were supposed to be absurd to a comedic, evil clown extent. Hence Two Face being a ridiculous attempt at being another version of the Joker and The Riddler...well, under certain circumstances Jim Carry could be an excellent Edward Nigma, actually. But that variation was just basically a typecasting. Basically, they were just trying to fit a model established by Burton.
Nolan's Batman has actually done a similar harm to the potential of the franchise. By being grounded in reality so much you'll never see Victor Freize, who is PERFECT for the atmosphere and mood Nolan is going for. A man that isn't necessarily evil, but does evil things. Unfortunately, you can't do Mr. Freeze without breaking reality (and considering Nolan is more interested in the comics anyway, he likely wouldn't be interested; Mr. Freeze was always a joke until The Animated Series made him something awesome).
I actually dig Planet of the Apes for what it is, but it lacks something. The original was a very different movie, but it also felt like it had more meaning and purpose to it. To this day I enjoy watching it.
As for Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, maybe movie buffs have a reason for preferring Gene Wilder but I swear NO ONE CARED about Willy Wonka until Tim Burton "remade" it (which is more like "reinterpreted" it). It's the biggest cluster of bullshit that people hate on it JUST because Gene Wilder was "better". He may have been, but the first movie is still boring and a victim to the time period (or maybe the studio? I can't even tell it's that uninteresting).
It's worse than when people ***** about the new Producers being so much worse than the original and yatta yatta, even though it's based off the script WRITTEN BY MEL BROOKS. "Ferris Bueller is totally wrong for the role! Gene Wilder was perfect!" Gee, it's a shame because that's who Mel Brooks cast for the stage version. Guess he was wrong!
I do feel the need to mention Sweeney Todd is a film I have not yet seen, because I saw the stage version before the film was in the works, thought it was awesome (a friend was basically proving to me that there are musicals that aren't complete gay-bait), loved the music. Then Tim Burton comes along and takes an aggressive psychotic intent on revenge and casts an actor who is more fit playing a timid psychotic intent on stalking your adolescent daughter. Not only that, but I've heard the film soundtrack and neither Johnny Depp nor Moira-from-Fight-Club are right for the roles because they can't sing them right.
Everyone makes a big deal out of it, like Tim Burton made this awesome film when he took an established piece of excellent entertainment and did it anything but justice. I'm sure the film is entertaining, but because I know there were better performances out there it will always be ruined for me. Now I can't wait until he ruins Into the Woods and all the little Hot Topic girls with their plastic vampire fangs squeel about how awesomely dark it is without even getting the point of the play.
Argh.
Rant over.
Isnt that because he is GOOD??Le Tueur said:
Sweeny Todd, Edward Scissor-Hands and various others are all my deepest favourite movies and i can safely say that they rank higher then Twilight and Newmoon, both of which have to come second to any Tim Burton movie that has Johnny Depp and even better, Johnny Depp with Helena Bonham Carter ^^ excellent actor/actresse and i love them both. Not totally sure if im going to like Alice in Wonderland as previous ones have been good already and this one just seems... OTT for my liking.
Is a director using the same actors in his movies such a bad thing? Every time I hear people complaining about Burton re-using Depp and Carter, I can't help but think of Osamu Tezuka's method of placing characters he created into different roles within his all of his books. He equated this to a director using the same actors in his movies in order to create a sort of mythology surrounding the director's resume. Burton does this, Kevin Smith does this, and it's worked for them.
i agree completely, for the most part. i hated charlie and the chocolate factory. admittedly, i wasn't a massive fan of the original, but it was still SO much better than the new one. johnny depps performance was depressing and it was magnified by the fact that the movie was focused around him instead of CHARLIE - who is IN THE FUCKING TITLE. granted - charlies performance was just as bad, so maybe it was a good thing:S
Regarding Charlie, I liked it myself, but it was really a very hit or miss thing for a lot of people and very understandably so (and even though I liked it, there are some creep factors that do creep a bit too much--but then, is it possible to creep too much in an adaptation of a Roald Dahl story?)
I will quibble with one criticism: Mike TeeVee's sin was NOT being intelligent. Mike TeeVee's sin was taking his intelligence and using it to behave in real life like a troll does on the Internet: nitpicking over silly things, belittling others around him, and trying to draw attention to himself for no good reason, rather than apply his intellect to being helpful or useful.
Back to the article at hand... to be fair, I also enjoyed the Batman films, especially Returns, even for all its flaws.
So the article's informed me I probably will like Alice in Wonderland in general, but balk at a few details.
I will quibble with one criticism: Mike TeeVee's sin was NOT being intelligent. Mike TeeVee's sin was taking his intelligence and using it to behave in real life like a troll does on the Internet: nitpicking over silly things, belittling others around him, and trying to draw attention to himself for no good reason, rather than apply his intellect to being helpful or useful.
Back to the article at hand... to be fair, I also enjoyed the Batman films, especially Returns, even for all its flaws.
So the article's informed me I probably will like Alice in Wonderland in general, but balk at a few details.
I disagree about the Batman movies, although I do agree they are flawed. Returns more than the original. But not the director's worst. (Well, maybe for Returns) To replace them, I would offer the following:
Mars Attacks was joyless and just plain stupid. It was about as funny as making salad dressing out of hamsters.
A second replacement is not as easy to pick. Edward Scissorhands was dull and uninspired (masterpiece?). Sweeny Todd would have been better without the songs. Don't make Johnny Depp sing ever again. But I'll have to go with Corpse bride as this was a movie with no reason to be. It brought nothing new to the table. Told no story worth hearing and showed that Burton's style was now becoming a cliche. What was once fresh is now stale. I do not think he will ever recover from that.
Mars Attacks was joyless and just plain stupid. It was about as funny as making salad dressing out of hamsters.
A second replacement is not as easy to pick. Edward Scissorhands was dull and uninspired (masterpiece?). Sweeny Todd would have been better without the songs. Don't make Johnny Depp sing ever again. But I'll have to go with Corpse bride as this was a movie with no reason to be. It brought nothing new to the table. Told no story worth hearing and showed that Burton's style was now becoming a cliche. What was once fresh is now stale. I do not think he will ever recover from that.
I honestly enjoyed Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Not really for the movie but I more or less enjoyed the songs and the bright colors. Yes occasionally you can win me over with pretty sparkly things on a screen.
I'm figuring if he hated Charlie I'll probably like Alice.Latinidiot said:
Yeah I figured Corpse Bride would be the number 1 worst movie.the antithesis said:
It had no climax, no drive, no real emotion to it. I kept watching it waiting for the story to start.
Just imagine if Planet of the Apes had been done up with all of this Gothic carnival glory with Depp as the Spaceman. It wouldn't have been forgettable, and it would have been unforgivably mismatched in premise-meets-style.
Yes Planet of the Apes was a terrible failure and should have been given to someone else to be done, like Johnathan Frakes (who directed Star Trek: First Contact) or Peter Jackson (who at the time was affordable but would have jumped at the chance to show off some epic-ness).
Yes Planet of the Apes was a terrible failure and should have been given to someone else to be done, like Johnathan Frakes (who directed Star Trek: First Contact) or Peter Jackson (who at the time was affordable but would have jumped at the chance to show off some epic-ness).
Charlie was boring and so moral as to be annoying too. Really that story was all over the place too. I don't know, it just sucked, though I have my own issues with the original.michael_sturtridge92 said:
I really think Burton needs to get some new friends in Hollywood. I'm starting to get a little tired of the same lineup of actors in each Burton film. It's nice that Depp can remain comfortable in the knowledge that, as long as Burton is still making movies, he'll always have a job in the acting profession. But, when it gets the point where the audience can usually accurately guess the director of a film based only on its actors, then it's time to start looking around for a new line-up.
For the record, I rather liked Batman. That said, I watched it ages ago, so I guess my opinion could conceivably have skewed over the years. Note to self: rent Batman.
For the record, I rather liked Batman. That said, I watched it ages ago, so I guess my opinion could conceivably have skewed over the years. Note to self: rent Batman.