Keth Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) First posted some stuff about it here <div style="background-color:#000000;width:520px;"><div style="padding:4px;"><p style="text-align:left;background-color:#FFFFFF;padding:4px;margin-top:4px;margin-bottom:0px;font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;">Get More: <a href="http://www.mtv.com/ontv/" style="color:#439CD8;" target="_blank">MTV Shows</a></p></div></div> Could be very cool since it'll be split into two parts. I'm not crazy about the animation, but most if not all of the characters look right. Still looks promising (even though this probably kills any chance of the live action version) more info here Edited July 31, 2012 by axel_napalm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alive she cried Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Can't wait for this. Year One was fantastic. What I don't understand is why they don't just release this theatrically? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Well, it seems all the people that own the rights to major superhero properties have come to the conclusion that animated superhero movies flop if released theatrically, but can be profitable in the direct-to-home market. I can't recall an animated movie of any Marvel of DC hero being released theatrically since Batman: Mask of the Phantasm bombed in 1993, and that movie's failure to make money cannot be blamed on either its quality (as it is a top notch Batman story and there was a concensus among critics at the time to that effect) nor on its release date, which was Christmas Day (which is a good release date, at least in the US). But releasing a movie in theaters adds costs to releasing a movie that direct-to-video doesn't have. Namely, theaters have to get a cut of the tickets and it costs a lot of money to market a theatrical release effectively. Unfortunately, while a live action Batman movie can gross $1 billion worldwide, a vast majority of the people that would go see a live action Batman movie would never go see an animated Batman movie, even if every critic agreed it blew the whole Nolan trilogy out of the water (many critics said Mask of the Phantasm surpassed Burton's two movies, both of which were generally liked in their day). Direct-to-home allows these animated movies to be likely enough to turn a profit for studios to keep on producing them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (many critics said Mask of the Phantasm surpassed Burton's two movies, both of which were generally liked in their day). It definitely did. Mask of the Phantasm was, for many years, by far the best Batman film ever made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Hakujin Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I think Mask of the Phantasm suffered from two things: poor marketing and being/looking too much like the animated series. Pixar proved Jax'sanimated superhero movie theory wrong w/ The Incredibles. I wonder if Marvel could do a animated theatrical integration of Spidey and/or FF into the Marvel Movie U? As for TDKR animated feature, it looks spectacular. Not too sure if I like Robocop voicing aged Batman though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 (edited) I wouldn't call it my theory, I was explaining why studios do the things they do. Also, I was talking about existing properties. The Incrediblea was a new IP, and frankly, Pixar has a brand, people go see Pixar movies because they trust the Pixar brand, and that was even more true before Cars 2. Also, the public perspection of hand drawn animation is very different from CGI. After all, Megamind was a hit too. So I will clarify: I'm talking about traditional 2D animated film versions of established comic book superheroes. It definitely did. Mask of the Phantasm was, for many years, by far the best Batman film ever made. Yeah, you can find threads from back in 2002 here where I say it was the best Batmovie. Edited August 1, 2012 by Reverend Jax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Yeah, you can find threads from back in 2002 here where I say it was the best Batmovie. Better than Batman vs. Dracula? Never sir. I just feel like making the responses everyone expects out of me now. Wheres a Beatles thread so I can call Pete Best the unsung hero of the group? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 You're typecast. We need to find your Truman Show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maldron Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 http://www.hondosbar.com/forum/index.php?/topic/8956-the-beatles/page__hl__beatles__fromsearch__1 I'm more of an "enable it" sort of fellow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 You're typecast. We need to find your Truman Show. Ed TV was better Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Ohhh that 'Baytor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Better than Batman vs. Dracula? Never sir. No, not never. In 2002, it was certainly the better movie, because Batman Vs Dracula hadn't come out yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maldron Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Guys, Guys, Please. You're all idiots. It was The Batman vs. Dracula. THE Batman. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 (edited) No, not never. In 2002, it was certainly the better movie, because Batman Vs Dracula hadn't come out yet. Edited August 1, 2012 by Iambaytor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maldron Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Visitant Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 It definitely did. Mask of the Phantasm was, for many years, by far the best Batman film ever made. It's still my favorite Batman movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelogan Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Mine too. It's just that it at least has some competition now. Pre-Begins, it wasn't even a subject worthy of debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Visitant Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 I just wish something GOOD came of the Phantasm in the comics the way Harley was adapted. She was pretty much shit on in the comics if I remember correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 So both parts have been released, and maybe it's just been years since reading the book, but ti seems like the filmmakers decided to turn Frank Miller's right-wing wet dream non-sense to eleven. I mean, I remember it in the books, but it seems more prominent in this movie. Anyone else seen it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrizzle Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 I remember the book being pretty balanced, politically. Are you sure you're not letting post-9/11-lunatic-Frank Miller color that perception? I can think of half a dozen things off the top of my head that are pretty liberal notions in that book. I haven't seen the cartoon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 I remember the book being pretty balanced, politically. Are you sure you're not letting post-9/11-lunatic-Frank Miller color that perception? I can think of half a dozen things off the top of my head that are pretty liberal notions in that book. I haven't seen the cartoon. Well there's the notion that not only are the police/government incapable of protecting the public, making them incompetent, (as they are in most vigilante hero stories), but they are willfully adversarial to the only force that can protect the public, a great individual. There's Carrie Kelly's parents and the Joker's therapist, who are the cartoonish epitome of the 80's right-wing's disgust with 60's liberalism, who they see as ascribing guilt to the only force for good in the world. The Joker's therapist gets his comeuppance for his naivete. Again, I'm not remembering how much of this was in the book, as I haven't read it in about 8 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrizzle Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 Fair enough. I thought of the Kelly parents, but I think it was more a mockery of hippies in general ("we're gonna change the world by getting stoned and listening to music maaaaaaaan") Here's what else you have though: a caricature of Reagan as a fumbling, catch phrase spewing buffoon. A decorated veteran who has to sell guns to criminals because his sick wife lost her health care. The openly far left wing Green Arrow as one of the most likable characters. Direct criticism of the idiocy and danger of the cold war. It's political commentary, no doubt, but I think Miller was actually a pretty liberal dude back then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keth Posted April 23, 2013 Author Share Posted April 23, 2013 i thought the cartoon was almost entirely faithful minus batman's inner monologue, which is one of the best parts of the book Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.