- Welcome to Batman-Online.com.
Recent posts
#1
Movies / Re: Beetlejuice Beetlejuice (2...
Last post by The Dark Knight - Today at 09:34This excites me a lot, particularly how the CGI is limited with a focus on practical effects. That makes it feel like a true sequel to the original and it's a brave and fun choice for a modern movie. I'm digging the character of Beetlejuice a lot too with the resurgence of the franchise. Keaton and Burton were doing The Mask routine well before Jim Carrey came on to the scene.
#2
Other comics / Re: Superman 80th Anniversary ...
Last post by thecolorsblend - Today at 05:34An interesting tidbit about Superman's return during/after the Reign Of The Supermen storyline was how his uniform was subtly different from what it was before.
First, arguably, the chest symbol was bigger than it had been before. This is a little subjective, granted. But it looked TO ME like the symbol was larger than it used to be.
Second, the cape seemed to get noticeably longer. Which, again, is kind of subjective. Different artists, different interpretations and so forth. But I always got the idea that the cape was longer, fuller and more "billowy".
Third, what's NOT subjective is the blue bodysuit shifting from a softer powder blue (which is what it had been up through the Doomsday storyline) over to more of a shade of navy blue. The bodysuit is undeniably darker than it had been before.
Fourth, there's obviously his long hair. Again, different artists interpreted "long hair" in different ways. Jackson Guice drew it as slightly mullety. Jon Bogdanove drew it like a rock star's hair. Finally, Tom Grummett and Dan Jurgens drew it as thick, flowing and just a bit longer than before.
Basically, after ROTS, Superman was drawn to more greatly resemble Dean Cain in the first few episodes of Lois & Clark. The larger chest symbol, the royal cape, the darker bodysuit and the hair were intended to match up with Dean Cain.
In the L&C pilot and in the first few episodes of L&C, Dean Cain had thick hair. And obviously, the various Superman artists interpreted "longer hair" in their own individual ways. And eventually, comic book Superman's hair looked not very much at all like Dean Cain's hair, esp after Cain got a haircut in the first season. But still, the intent seems to have been there.
For anyone who doubts this, keep in mind that the only reason that the Doomsday/Funeral For A Friend/Reign Of The Supermen trilogy ever existed in the first place is because Mike Carlin delayed Lois and Clark's wedding to (eventually) coincidence with Lois & Clark's eventual wedding. So, if Carlin was willing to throw out firmly laid plans for Lois and Clark to get married in the comics (and obviously, he was willing to do that), then why wouldn't he visually realign comic book Superman's appearance with TV Superman?
I can't prove any of the above about Superman's appearance. But the changes simply look too big and substantial AND TOO SIMILAR to L&C for me to think it was all just a big coincidence.
No, I think there was an editorial agenda going on with that stuff.
First, arguably, the chest symbol was bigger than it had been before. This is a little subjective, granted. But it looked TO ME like the symbol was larger than it used to be.
Second, the cape seemed to get noticeably longer. Which, again, is kind of subjective. Different artists, different interpretations and so forth. But I always got the idea that the cape was longer, fuller and more "billowy".
Third, what's NOT subjective is the blue bodysuit shifting from a softer powder blue (which is what it had been up through the Doomsday storyline) over to more of a shade of navy blue. The bodysuit is undeniably darker than it had been before.
Fourth, there's obviously his long hair. Again, different artists interpreted "long hair" in different ways. Jackson Guice drew it as slightly mullety. Jon Bogdanove drew it like a rock star's hair. Finally, Tom Grummett and Dan Jurgens drew it as thick, flowing and just a bit longer than before.
Basically, after ROTS, Superman was drawn to more greatly resemble Dean Cain in the first few episodes of Lois & Clark. The larger chest symbol, the royal cape, the darker bodysuit and the hair were intended to match up with Dean Cain.
In the L&C pilot and in the first few episodes of L&C, Dean Cain had thick hair. And obviously, the various Superman artists interpreted "longer hair" in their own individual ways. And eventually, comic book Superman's hair looked not very much at all like Dean Cain's hair, esp after Cain got a haircut in the first season. But still, the intent seems to have been there.
For anyone who doubts this, keep in mind that the only reason that the Doomsday/Funeral For A Friend/Reign Of The Supermen trilogy ever existed in the first place is because Mike Carlin delayed Lois and Clark's wedding to (eventually) coincidence with Lois & Clark's eventual wedding. So, if Carlin was willing to throw out firmly laid plans for Lois and Clark to get married in the comics (and obviously, he was willing to do that), then why wouldn't he visually realign comic book Superman's appearance with TV Superman?
I can't prove any of the above about Superman's appearance. But the changes simply look too big and substantial AND TOO SIMILAR to L&C for me to think it was all just a big coincidence.
No, I think there was an editorial agenda going on with that stuff.
#3
Other comics / Re: Superman 80th Anniversary ...
Last post by The Joker - Today at 00:30DC Comics house advertisement for late 1993 following the conclusion of the "Death of Superman/Funeral for a Friend/Reign of the Supermen" trilogy story arcs.
#4
Animated Batman / Re: Batman Beyond
Last post by The Joker - Today at 00:251999 Wizard Mag article scans for "Batman Beyond".
#5
Movies / Re: Beetlejuice Beetlejuice (2...
Last post by The Joker - Today at 00:09Fun trailer! Going off the latest trailer, this does very much appear to be taking the "Ghostbusters 2" route, in that the sequel is apparently taking a lot of inspiration from the Beetlejuice animated series from the early '90's. Which isn't entirely a bad thing, but I would gage that making Beetlejuice something of a comedic anti-hero is going to bring a new dichotomy for a whole lot of people, who only are familiar with the 1988 film. Where Beetlejuice was decidedly a villain, and only briefly in the movie itself (12-15 minutes? Something like that).
But yeah, it's cool to see Burton return to something that he had such a personal stamp of influence on from his younger days, and Keaton returning to yet another signature role is always a treat. Keats excels at comedy. Always has.
Character posters.
Remember the scene where Beetlejuice pulls out a wedding ring in order to marry Lydia ("I'm telling you, she meant nothing to me! Nothing at all!"), and it has a finger attached to it?
Oh, and did anyone catch the brief appearance from Danny Devito?
But yeah, it's cool to see Burton return to something that he had such a personal stamp of influence on from his younger days, and Keaton returning to yet another signature role is always a treat. Keats excels at comedy. Always has.
Character posters.
Remember the scene where Beetlejuice pulls out a wedding ring in order to marry Lydia ("I'm telling you, she meant nothing to me! Nothing at all!"), and it has a finger attached to it?
Oh, and did anyone catch the brief appearance from Danny Devito?
#7
Movies / Re: The Star Trek Thread
Last post by Kamdan - Thu, 23 May 2024, 23:48Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Wed, 22 May 2024, 17:47It's time to return to Genesis. Star Trek III: The Search for Spock is getting a 40th anniversary theatrical rerelease on June 14th. A new poster has been created by artist Matt Ferguson.
Here's the quad poster for UK cinemas.
I'm definitely going to catch a screening. I've always liked The Search for Spock, ever since I first saw it on TV back in the early nineties. Hopefully this rerelease will encourage more sci-fi enthusiasts and cinephiles to give it another chance. It's badly underrated IMO.
I wonder if this means we'll be getting a theatrical rerelease of The Voyage Home in 2026.
So far, there have only been indications of the UK getting this theatrical rerelease and none of the kind for an American release. I do hope that changes because this is my favorite of the trilogy of Star Trek films. There have been numerous rereleases of Wrath of Khan over the years and there was an opportunity to see Voyage Home back in 2021 in theaters, but to my knowledge, that hasn't been the case for Search for Spock.
#8
Movies / Re: The Star Trek Thread
Last post by Silver Nemesis - Wed, 22 May 2024, 17:47It's time to return to Genesis. Star Trek III: The Search for Spock is getting a 40th anniversary theatrical rerelease on June 14th. A new poster has been created by artist Matt Ferguson.
Here's the quad poster for UK cinemas.
I'm definitely going to catch a screening. I've always liked The Search for Spock, ever since I first saw it on TV back in the early nineties. Hopefully this rerelease will encourage more sci-fi enthusiasts and cinephiles to give it another chance. It's badly underrated IMO.
I wonder if this means we'll be getting a theatrical rerelease of The Voyage Home in 2026.
Here's the quad poster for UK cinemas.
I'm definitely going to catch a screening. I've always liked The Search for Spock, ever since I first saw it on TV back in the early nineties. Hopefully this rerelease will encourage more sci-fi enthusiasts and cinephiles to give it another chance. It's badly underrated IMO.
I wonder if this means we'll be getting a theatrical rerelease of The Voyage Home in 2026.
#9
Batman Returns (1992) / Re: Should Knox have returned ...
Last post by The Dark Knight - Mon, 20 May 2024, 12:30Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Mon, 20 May 2024, 11:19I'm still fine with Knox being absent in Returns. If Vicki wasn't going to appear I don't think Knox should've either. They were a tag team and their dynamic worked very well in the first movie. I'm optimistic Batman Resurrection gives Knox a mention, however. Wuhl himself looks really good and in good spirits. No sour grapes at all. Understanding there just wasn't a part there for him in the sequel. He arguably starred in the most important Batman film of all time anyway, even though Returns is amazing in its own way.Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Mon, 1 Oct 2012, 13:05I'd have liked Batman Returns to have been more of a direct sequel to the first film like in Hamm's original script. And as part of that, I would have liked to have seen Knox return.
Twelve years later, and I no longer hold this view. I love Batman Returns' individuality and the older I get the fewer things I'd want to change about it. Maybe tone down some of the sexual innuendo and pervy Penguin moments, but other than that I'd leave it as it is.
Anyway, I saw this video praising Batman Returns on YouTube. The most interesting part of it is a Robert Wuhl cameo at the 17:00 mark. He briefly chimes in to discuss his feelings about not being in Batman Returns and also shares his opinion on the declining quality of the Burton-Schumacher series as a whole.
It's good to see he still has such affection for the role.
#10
Batman Returns (1992) / Re: Should Knox have returned ...
Last post by Silver Nemesis - Mon, 20 May 2024, 11:19Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Mon, 1 Oct 2012, 13:05I'd have liked Batman Returns to have been more of a direct sequel to the first film like in Hamm's original script. And as part of that, I would have liked to have seen Knox return.
Twelve years later, and I no longer hold this view. I love Batman Returns' individuality and the older I get the fewer things I'd want to change about it. Maybe tone down some of the sexual innuendo and pervy Penguin moments, but other than that I'd leave it as it is.
Anyway, I saw this video praising Batman Returns on YouTube. The most interesting part of it is a Robert Wuhl cameo at the 17:00 mark. He briefly chimes in to discuss his feelings about not being in Batman Returns and also shares his opinion on the declining quality of the Burton-Schumacher series as a whole.
It's good to see he still has such affection for the role.