Last Movie you Watched?

1485486488490491983

Comments

  • Posts: 3,336
    I enjoyed Suicide Squad. For me, it was neither good nor bad, but I haven't revisited it lately and I own the Blu Ray extended cut.

    Anyways...

    Hell Drivers (1957)

    I watched this neat little black and white film last night, I had seen the film before a few years ago, but this was the first time revisiting it. Needless to say, this is one of my favorites. I enjoyed seeing Sean Connery in the small supporting role he has, and you can really see the difference, where he is being the rough and tough Scotsmen, as opposed to his portrayal of Bond, the ultimate example of class, and sophistication. Stanley Baker is also in the film, as the lead. He's an ex-convict who is just trying to make an honest living being this truck driver, however, he keeps being bullied by these other drivers, lead by Patrick Mcgoohan, who is just plays that cocky guy that everybody has met at least once in their lifetime. I liked the little Love Triangle with the three main characters, the dance room fight, the little fight between Baker and Mcgoohan in the office, and also the final truck scene, where you see Mcgoohan and the boss go flying off a cliff, and when the truck hits the ground, you see a dummy go flying out the truck window (which reminds me of the car kick scene in For Your Eyes Only). Anyways it's a neat film, and a must see for anybody who is a fan of 50s British cinema.

    Sean Connery in a film-noir you say? Might have to give it a watch.

  • I enjoyed Suicide Squad. For me, it was neither good nor bad, but I haven't revisited it lately and I own the Blu Ray extended cut.

    Anyways...

    Hell Drivers (1957)

    I watched this neat little black and white film last night, I had seen the film before a few years ago, but this was the first time revisiting it. Needless to say, this is one of my favorites. I enjoyed seeing Sean Connery in the small supporting role he has, and you can really see the difference, where he is being the rough and tough Scotsmen, as opposed to his portrayal of Bond, the ultimate example of class, and sophistication. Stanley Baker is also in the film, as the lead. He's an ex-convict who is just trying to make an honest living being this truck driver, however, he keeps being bullied by these other drivers, lead by Patrick Mcgoohan, who is just plays that cocky guy that everybody has met at least once in their lifetime. I liked the little Love Triangle with the three main characters, the dance room fight, the little fight between Baker and Mcgoohan in the office, and also the final truck scene, where you see Mcgoohan and the boss go flying off a cliff, and when the truck hits the ground, you see a dummy go flying out the truck window (which reminds me of the car kick scene in For Your Eyes Only). Anyways it's a neat film, and a must see for anybody who is a fan of 50s British cinema.

    Sean Connery in a film-noir you say? Might have to give it a watch.

    I definitely recommend it!
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,400
    Unstoppable with Denzel Washington and Chris Pine! A great movie with lots to recommend. Denzel always seems to sparkle and shine and in this performance there is lots of evidence of that. Rosario Dawson has a nice supporting role. The action is well delivered and very realistic. I would recommend this film to anyone who is looking for a movie to entertain them.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    For how pricey Suicide Squad was, it should not be as horridly edited and paced as it is. I can't recall another big blockbuster film that is as shoddily taped together as that film is, and for all the issues I have with BvS, that film at least had a framework and attempt at story. Squad is nothing but a bunch of random, out of order images tossed at you with no character or meaning attached to them. Which is a shame, because it really could've been special.
  • Well that's what happens when you let trailer editors edit the entire movie. Ayer only had 6 weeks of development for the script as well, which for a blockbuster of this size, isn't enough time. I think it's rushed, it was good in some places, and attempted to try something different, much like BvS, but in the end just fell short. The looks of the characters just threw me off in some places, at least for BvS faults (even though I liked it), it remained faithful to the look of the characters (somewhat), but here feels like such a departure. And I really feel as if WB just shit (pardon my language) all over Ayer's film. We will probably never end up seeing the actual intended cut of Suicide Squad now, which is a shame. I only hope WW overcomes these setbacks.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Well that's what happens when you let trailer editors edit the entire movie. Ayer only had 6 weeks of development for the script as well, which for a blockbuster of this size, isn't enough time. I think it's rushed, it was good in some places, and attempted to try something different, much like BvS, but in the end just fell short. The looks of the characters just threw me off in some places, at least for BvS faults (even though I liked it), it remained faithful to the look of the characters (somewhat), but here feels like such a departure. And I really feel as if WB just shit (pardon my language) all over Ayer's film. We will probably never end up seeing the actual intended cut of Suicide Squad now, which is a shame. I only hope WW overcomes these setbacks.

    "Rushed" explains WB's entire approach to building their universe. WB most certainly tinkered with the film, but Ayer wants to keep working so he has to bow his head and take the blame for what they did to him. I have never believed the cut we got was what he wanted the film to be, but it doesn't matter now. It was a garbage script anyway, as pitting a bunch of mortals against metahumans stretched even the bent logic of the superhero world right down the middle.

    With an attention to real character building and a smarter use of film conventions with a more grounded story, it could've been interesting.
  • I agree, and the villains of the movie are the worst part. There is nothing memorable about Enchantress whatsoever, they either should have pit the squad against the Joker, or maybe use this as an opportunity to expand on Batman or any other DC Hero for that matter. Killer Croc was utterly useless in the movie, as was Slipknot. And The Joker just shows up here and there with little to no impact. Such a waste of the characters.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,157
    Yeah. And Captain Boomerang... Jay Courtney? When will people discover he . cannot . act!!!!!
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I thought Enchantress was very good, especially in the early scenes. Hated The Joker.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    She didn't do anything, that's the big problem. And then she has a bunch of powers that could kill everyone, but she doesn't use them. And then there's a brother or something.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited March 2017 Posts: 4,043
    I'm probably the wrong audience but Wife likes Leto so wanted to see it.

    I'm perfectly aware why I like the Nolan films so much, even the TDKR is looking good up against this.

    I'm not a comic book fan and the more fantastical they get I just tune out, the ending at times looked like they were trying to rip off the climax of Ghostbusters (the original).

    That being said even if you are a fan of these films and as some have already said there is no coherence to the plot and it just feels like a number of scenes put together hastily.

    I've heard it said the critics were unfair on this, they weren't they were on the nose it's a complete mess and the dialogue is utterly unmemorable and at times atrotious.

    Also the one aspect the film was always going to struggle with was The Joker, I don't care that Leto's snappily dressed green haired pimp is closer to the comics.

    Heath Ledger gave a performance that has set the bar not just in comic book villains but blockbusters villains full stop. With exception of Chris Waltz's Hans Landa I don't see anyone challenging him, especially Leto's unmemorable effort here. Regardless of them not using what he shot, I don't feel the danger or the charisma that dripped from the late Ledger's every scene.

    Also it was like listening to someone's ipod on shuffle for the soundtrack.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @Shardlake, I don't know who told you, but Leto's Joker is definitely not comic Joker. Or any Joker really. They didn't even get his relationship with Harley right. In the comics they have a more abuse relationship, whereas in the film they're all Romeo and Juliet for each other.

    The minute I found out that they were writing Joker and Harley to actually be in love, I knew we were headed for trouble.
  • @Shardlake, I don't know who told you, but Leto's Joker is definitely not comic Joker. Or any Joker really. They didn't even get his relationship with Harley right. In the comics they have a more abuse relationship, whereas in the film they're all Romeo and Juliet for each other.

    The minute I found out that they were writing Joker and Harley to actually be in love, I knew we were headed for trouble.

    It also seemed like he was trying to flat out impersonate Heath Ledger. The relationship between Joker and Harley also bothered me, and what seems to bother me even more, is that it seems to have become a thing for the teens to idolize. Kids are wanting for a relationship like Joker and Harley, but they're only going by this movie. Even the Batman Animated Series never shyd away from showing the abuse.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    edited March 2017 Posts: 4,043
    @Shardlake, I don't know who told you, but Leto's Joker is definitely not comic Joker. Or any Joker really. They didn't even get his relationship with Harley right. In the comics they have a more abuse relationship, whereas in the film they're all Romeo and Juliet for each other.

    The minute I found out that they were writing Joker and Harley to actually be in love, I knew we were headed for trouble.

    I don't really know the comic book Joker its just what I gathered from people who said they did.

    I find those most likely to criticise Ledger's take it's because diverts too much from the comic book version, that and I think they got sick of everyone going rightly ga ga over it.

    I can't see how anyone could have a problem with Ledger, that performance is like a force of nature.

    The amount of flack Nolan got for casting him, it was only when we saw it up on screen we knew he'd seen something that a good number of ignorant people hadn't.

    Ledger totally emerged himself in the character, I think its so much better when an actor doesn't have such a huge personality is cast in such a role.

    With Nicholson I just saw Jack in make up not The Joker. Strangely though an actor as huge in personality as Al Pacino managed to totally submerge himself in the role of Big Boy Caprice in Dick Tracy, sometimes I even forget it is Pacino playing him.

    Much more successful than Nicholson's version and Dick Tracy is so much more satisfying for me than Batman 89, a truly underated film.

    I did get the feeling though that Ledger was trying not to do a Ledger impression but seemed too concious of that version and in the end couldn't help but echo it but without the power that Ledger bought to it, a cheap and nasty knock off of a truly masterful performance.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Shardlake wrote: »
    @Shardlake, I don't know who told you, but Leto's Joker is definitely not comic Joker. Or any Joker really. They didn't even get his relationship with Harley right. In the comics they have a more abuse relationship, whereas in the film they're all Romeo and Juliet for each other.

    The minute I found out that they were writing Joker and Harley to actually be in love, I knew we were headed for trouble.

    I don't really know the comic book Joker its just what I gathered from people who said they did.

    I find those most likely to criticise Ledger's take it's because diverts too much from the comic book version, that and I think they got sick of everyone going rightly ga ga over it.

    I can't see how anyone could have a problem with Ledger, that performance is like a force of nature.

    The amount of flack Nolan got for casting him, it was only when we saw it up on screen we knew he'd seen something that a good number of ignorant people hadn't.

    Ledger totally emerged himself in the character, I think its so much better when an actor doesn't have such a huge personality is cast in such a role.

    With Nicholson I just saw Jack in make up not The Joker. Strangely though an actor as huge in personality as Al Pacino managed to totally submerge himself in the role of Big Boy Caprice in Dick Tracy, sometimes I even forget it is Pacino playing him.

    Much more successful than Nicholson's version and Dick Tracy is so much more satisfying for me than Batman 89, a truly underated film.

    I did get the feeling though that Ledger was trying not to do a Ledger impression but seemed too concious of that version and in the end couldn't help but echo it but without the power that Ledger bought to it, a cheap and nasty knock off of a truly masterful performance.

    Ledger's is actually far, far closer to the comic version, actually, and in many ways is the closest yet, despite being more grounded. He's my favorite kind of Joker, basically a philosophizer who acts to show people how false and hilariously pathetic the codes and rules they live their lives by are. He's muddled about his past, having multiple histories for himself, and is the human embodiment of chaos and unpredictability, unable to kill Batman for the kick the hero gives him.

    I get what you mean when you talk about Leto doing a Ledger impression. While I don't think this is the case for much of it, there are times where the way Leto speaks sounds very similar to Ledger, in that very heavy, slightly mumbling kind of way. And they tried to make Joker a crazy, unpredictable psycho but failed because there wasn't the wealth of character like in Ledger's take. With Ledger's Joker, I feel bad for rooting for him, whereas I couldn't wait for Leto's prison/mobster/gangster Joker to leave.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I agree that Ledger was the closest we've had so far to the comic version & the character was brilliantly realized by Ledger. He didn't look so much like the comic version but they were able to create a suitable & credible embodiment of his physical menace for film. They did the same thing with Bane. Nolan is truly a genius.
  • Lancaster007Lancaster007 Shrublands Health Clinic, England
    Posts: 1,874
    I enjoyed Suicide Squad. For me, it was neither good nor bad, but I haven't revisited it lately and I own the Blu Ray extended cut.

    Anyways...

    Hell Drivers (1957)

    I watched this neat little black and white film last night, I had seen the film before a few years ago, but this was the first time revisiting it. Needless to say, this is one of my favorites. I enjoyed seeing Sean Connery in the small supporting role he has, and you can really see the difference, where he is being the rough and tough Scotsmen, as opposed to his portrayal of Bond, the ultimate example of class, and sophistication. Stanley Baker is also in the film, as the lead. He's an ex-convict who is just trying to make an honest living being this truck driver, however, he keeps being bullied by these other drivers, lead by Patrick Mcgoohan, who is just plays that cocky guy that everybody has met at least once in their lifetime. I liked the little Love Triangle with the three main characters, the dance room fight, the little fight between Baker and Mcgoohan in the office, and also the final truck scene, where you see Mcgoohan and the boss go flying off a cliff, and when the truck hits the ground, you see a dummy go flying out the truck window (which reminds me of the car kick scene in For Your Eyes Only). Anyways it's a neat film, and a must see for anybody who is a fan of 50s British cinema.

    Sean Connery in a film-noir you say? Might have to give it a watch.

    I definitely recommend it!

    Network are releasing in on blu-ray and separate DVD this coming Monday. Very tempted to purchase the BD.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited March 2017 Posts: 15,423
    Ledger was sensational as The Joker, but he was nowhere near to being anything close to the comic book Joker. That would be Jack Nicholson. As for Leto, I don't know. He's definitely not the pre-New 52 Joker and by a wide margin he isn't. Don't know about the New 52 Joker and onward. But, I doubt he's a pimp as Leto's psuedo Johnny Depp wannabe was.
  • Ledger was sensational as The Joker, but he was nowhere near to being anything close to the comic book Joker. That would be Jack Nicholson. As for Leto, I don't know. He's definitely not the pre-New 52 Joker and by a wide margin he isn't. Don't know about the New 52 Joker and onward. But, I doubt he's a pimp as Leto's psuedo Johnny Depp wannabe was.

    In terms of Nicholson, even then he didn't quite capture the essence of the comic Joker. Of the three he is the one closest to the look of the character, and on paper probably the best actor to have played the part, but his portrayal was incredibly goofy. He had some of those moments where he could be really vicious, and I loved the origin story for him, but I got a sort of "prankster" vibe off him. I was hoping Leto would be the best of both worlds tbh.
  • Posts: 12,462
    My personal Mt. Rushmore of Joker actors is Jack Nicholson, Heath Ledger, Mark Hamill, and John DiMaggio. All amazing. Hamill is the best, most well-rounded Joker.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited March 2017 Posts: 24,157
    @FoxRox speaks words of wisdom. Hamill is my favourite Joker by a long shot.

    Nicholson redid Romero more than the 'comic book Joker', if one actually exists. Ledger portrayed a post-9/11 anarchist, the closest thing to a madman Nolan would allow in his naturalistic vision of Batman. Leto was severely underused and got the short end of the stick; I'm confident his Joker had potential.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Mark Hamill IS The Joker. Hands down.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Ledger was sensational as The Joker, but he was nowhere near to being anything close to the comic book Joker. That would be Jack Nicholson. As for Leto, I don't know. He's definitely not the pre-New 52 Joker and by a wide margin he isn't. Don't know about the New 52 Joker and onward. But, I doubt he's a pimp as Leto's psuedo Johnny Depp wannabe was.

    You're reading the wrong comics.
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    @FoxRox speaks words of wisdom. Hamill is my favourite Joker by a long shot.

    Nicholson redid Romero more than the 'comic book Joker', if one actually exists. Ledger portrayed a post-9/11 anarchist, the closest thing to a madman Nolan would allow in his naturalistic vision of Batman. Leto was severely underused and got the short end of the stick; I'm confident his Joker had potential.

    Very much agreed, @DarthDimi. I think Nolan was clearly inspired by the Joker of The Killing Joke for Ledger, and his overall character arc in the film of proving a point through his mad acts. Batman finds out over time that he isn't just an insane man, there's a method to that madness that is scary. Like in The Long Halloween Joker also gets involved in the crime underworld and shakes things up in a big way, and overall in relation to Batman Joker has a "can't live without you" kind of vibe as in The Dark Knight Returns.

    In short, he's an amalgam of a lot of great interpretations on the character, from his philosophy, mercurial nature, sadism and dark humor, along with some of Ledger's own ticks and twists like the intonations and lip licking.

    I think Nicholson was almost a bit too theatrical at times in a Romero way, but that's what the film called for. His work is unfortunately undervalued by the arc of his character and the past he has with Bruce. Fun to watch, but not a third as captivating as Heath.

    Leto's Joker doesn't even need to be talked about. A Joker that actually loves Harley, wears a bunch of meta tattoos, a grill and walks around with a robe and short shorts? Give me a break.
  • I don't remember the short shorts part. My favorite is Mark Hamil as well, but if we're talking live action, I personally prefer Nicholson as Joker, but that's probably down to pure nostalgia, as Batman 89 is still my favorite superhero movie.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I don't remember the short shorts part. My favorite is Mark Hamil as well, but if we're talking live action, I personally prefer Nicholson as Joker, but that's probably down to pure nostalgia, as Batman 89 is still my favorite superhero movie.

    It's a good one, despite the flaws I see in it. Batman has never been more gothic and atmospheric on screen, and we might not see that level of world building again. Even with a lot of the same sets under use, those films felt like they were in Gotham City, and Burton's bent and slightly bizarre style really suited it.
  • edited March 2017 Posts: 2,264
    I don't remember the short shorts part. My favorite is Mark Hamil as well, but if we're talking live action, I personally prefer Nicholson as Joker, but that's probably down to pure nostalgia, as Batman 89 is still my favorite superhero movie.

    It's a good one, despite the flaws I see in it. Batman has never been more gothic and atmospheric on screen, and we might not see that level of world building again. Even with a lot of the same sets under use, those films felt like they were in Gotham City, and Burton's bent and slightly bizarre style really suited it.

    It does have a lot of flaws in it. Of coarse subjectively speaking there are plenty of superhero movies that are better, and TDK for me stands as the ultimate example of what a superhero could be. But I really love the 1989 film. Anton Furst deserves a huge round of applause for the sets in this film, it's too bad he commuted suicide not long after the film was completed. The sets for Batman Returns, while still being visually appealing, didn't look as good as they in the first.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I don't remember the short shorts part. My favorite is Mark Hamil as well, but if we're talking live action, I personally prefer Nicholson as Joker, but that's probably down to pure nostalgia, as Batman 89 is still my favorite superhero movie.

    It's a good one, despite the flaws I see in it. Batman has never been more gothic and atmospheric on screen, and we might not see that level of world building again. Even with a lot of the same sets under use, those films felt like they were in Gotham City, and Burton's bent and slightly bizarre style really suited it.

    It does have a lot of flaws in it. Of coarse subjectively speaking there are plenty of superhero movies that are better, and TDK for me stands as the ultimate example of what a superhero could be. But I really love the 1989 film. Anton Furst deserves a huge round of applause for the sets in this film, it's too bad he commuted suicide not long after the film was completed. The sets for Batman Returns, while still being visually appealing, didn't look as good as they in the first.

    I have an issue with how Batman is portrayed, as I think they went too far, but everything beyond that is a nitpick. The film has to be respected for truly making superhero films a viable option in the future, as Donner's Superman had shown in maybe a less urgent way before. It's fitting that Superman and Batman were the two heroes to almost create the genre we know of today, just as they did in comics decades before.

    I can't really compare Batman 89 with Returns in my head at the moment, but I never felt like it wasn't the same city as before, and it's clear that the sequel benefitted from having more resources and wider sets. Returns still carries that mood of Gotham City for me, and at the end as Batman approaches Penguin in the snow, I get chills. For all the zaniness, quirky characters and penguins shooting missiles from their backs, there's also shots like that of a devilish, horned Batman wafting through a charred battleground to show you that the film means business.
  • edited March 2017 Posts: 2,264
    I guess that it's something to look at it from the time it was made. Keaton's portrayal was a breath of fresh air, because up until that point, Adam West was burned in the minds of audiences after the huge success of the 60s TV show, and the audiences embraced the dark roots of the character, and Keaton captured that duality of Bruce Wayne and Batman perfectly at the time. But this was also at a time when superhero movies were really an untested concept in Hollywood. You had Donner's Superman Films, and a few other obscure movies, but when Batman came out it was such a smash hit. Now a days, I don't think you could get away with doing a stylized version of that, certainly not in a post Nolan age. Thats also one of the criticisms I had for Suicide Squad was that it just felt a little too "glamour" and "pretty flashing lights" for my tasting. Kid you not I once read a criticism of the film, where someone called it the "spiritual sequal" to Batman and Robin, and that isn't far off.

    Also when the 89 film was made, I don't really think that there was that respect for the character of Batman as a pop culture icon like there is now.

    Mod edit; please use the EDIT button and avoid double posts.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @007ClassicBondFan, I think in many ways, 89 Batman is responsible for building that pop culture response for the character. The 66 Batman made people view Batman as lighter fare, not to be taken too seriously, and the comics were seen as kids items, but that film changed everything. Whenever people I know who were alive to see it in theaters talk about it, it's like they're discussing a spiritual experience. It was a big, big deal, and created a pre-Batman 89 and post-Batman 89 world in many ways.

    As for Suicide Squad, I don't think I'd compare it to Batman & Robin, as that's too harsh. It was poorly cobbled together, but it didn't seem like it was taking the piss at every second either and it's usage of characters wasn't that criminal. The problem with the film in style was that they tried to go with a sort of garage punk aesthetic, but didn't really back up that unique style with a lot of character or personality. If you watch the film, we get flashing two second bios of the characters on the screen, then their histories are never delved into again. We know a bit about Harley, Deadshot and Joker because those three actors were the big stars, but nobody else gets anything interesting done with their character.

    The Guardians of the Galaxy argument could be made, and why that film worked and this one failed is because the former had characters that were all fleshed out and given moments to shine, whereas in the latter you forget what the hell is going on most of the time because it gives you nothing to work with. I can't believe that film was allowed to release like that; it blows my mind. Squad was also trying to inject music into the film like Guardians did, but went way overboard. In Guardians the songs commented on the actual moment they were played over, and in many ways became character anthems to tell us who the characters were over time. Squad feels like someone just threw a Top 40 list from the 70s, 80s and 90s at the post-production team and said, "Throw some of those in." There's a lack of coherent design, which is inevitable for a film that had so many cooks in its kitchen with various edits of it swimming around.
  • edited March 2017 Posts: 2,264
    Agreed. And for its time, Batman 89 was the biggest grossing movie, or something alongside that. That's really saying something, especially when you look at the movies released in that season. Let's see there was Lethal Weapon 2, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Licence to Kill, and a few others. I would actually argue that the point where comics as a medium become less kiddie was with Frank Miller and TDKR, as well as The Killing Joke. With those comics you certainly saw the beginning of a change not only for Batman, but for all Superheroes, Marvel or DC. Those two comics are held in such high regards, they're absolute classics. But the 89 film was launched Batman as a pop culture icon no doubt. That poster alone is just epic. I mean it has dated, especially in light of the superhero film "Renaissance" as it were, but it's still one hell of a ride. And with what you said about Suicide Squad, that's why it, to me anyways, feels like a throwback to the heavily stylized Batman movies of Joel Schumacer. In that retrospect, the looks, the choice of music, and the aesthetic is very similar to both Batman Forever and Batman and Robin. I mean people compare to Guardians of the Galaxy, and those are the most obvious, but those aren't the problems that stick out for me.
Sign In or Register to comment.