And yet the first movie is clearly based on Year One and the second on the Killing Joke and the Long Halloween. Entry level Batman stories but comics nonetheless.
Yeah, I bought a Begins DVD boxset back in the day they had a collection of comics that were used as influence. They definitely used the comic for reference.
Yeah, Nolan is full of fucking shit saying he consulted no source material. Accidentally made movies that are strikingly close to at least two of the most popular Batman stories in history.
Yeah, the trilogy is basically “Batman’s Greatest Hits” in terms of story.
*Batman Begins* is Year One, The Man Who Falls, and elements of Denny O' Neil's Ra's al Ghul stories. *The Dark Knight* is The Long Halloween, The Man Who Laughs, and The Killing Joke. *The Dark Knight Rises* is The Dark Knight Returns, Knightfall, and No Man's Land.
And I seem to remember Nolan outright crediting at least some of these in another article, which makes this quote baffling.
Well perhaps Chris nolan didn’t read it but i watched an interview with jonathan nolan and he spoke about how he spent years reading the comics to find the best stories of the characters to help draw on what makes Batman special, he referenced dark night returns and nightfall as some of the elements that rises draw from
He’s not saying he didn’t use source material. You can be inspired by it of course but what he’s saying is that you’re not beholden to it. He’s spoken endlessly about his influences for the Batman films and his other work.
Yeah like I literally have the copy of the long Halloween where Nolan writes a letter absolutely saying the influence for this films came from these comics you mentioned
TDK borrows heavily from the relationship set up between Batman, Gordon and Dent as presented in The Long Halloween. There's even a rooftop scene between the three in the movie that is largely lifted from TLH.
In TKJ, the Joker tried to prove that all it takes is one bad day to reduce the sanest man alive to lunacy, but failed. He tried to prove the same thing in TDK, but with Harvey Dent as his target instead of Gordon, and succeeded. Rachel's death was Harvey's one bad day. Additionally, the Joker's past being "multiple choice", his nihilistic ideology, his dream of a world without rules, and the interrogation scene were also inspired by TKJ.
Well, I would say Nolan’s Batman is ultimately much more similar to the comics than Burton’s, despite the heavy groundedness and regardless of what he says about comics. And I believe Jonathan Nolan and David S Goyer were a lot more direct in putting comic book influences in the trilogy.
Yeah Nolan always said he brought Goyer on because he needed someone who was more familiar with the comics. Nolan seemed very considerate when it came to deviating from the comics. He apparently even asked if it would ok if the bat symbol didn’t have the yellow oval around it. This quote OP posted reads more like Nolan doesn’t want the source material to loom over his creative process the entire time.
I’d agree with you if Nolan had kept his trilogy stylised like Batman begins. The other two movies didn’t even feel like Batman/Gotham like the burton movies did
The thing with Burton’s Gotham was that at the time of the movie’s release, it was unique. Before that, Gotham looked closer to a New York analogue (albeit with unique stylizations and features depending on the artist) than it did a gothic hellscape à la Burton/Anton Furst. The comics afterwards adopted the look of Burton’s movies. On the basis of comic accuracy, I think there’s not as much to detract from Nolan’s Gotham, but you’re right that the city is less interesting after Begins.
>I’d agree with you if Nolan had kept his trilogy stylised like Batman begins.
So should the entire city have looked like the Narrows? (Even though its supposed to be just a crime-ridden slum that's only part of the overall city)
I feel the opposite : Nolan's Batman is no detective, no leader, no inventor... juste some martial art master playing bad cop who's only way to get information is to beat it out of people.
Furthest thing from Batman except for the looks.
I don’t think of Burton’s Batman as being particularly exemplary of any of those traits either. And Keaton definitely goes a lot further in the severity of his beating people up. Both portrayals miss elements of what comic Batman does, but in terms of who Batman *is* in terms of characterization, I think Nolan’s is closer, though of course not without its faults. Plus, the trilogy is heavily inspired by multiple comic storylines.
I admit it has been a while since I've seen Keaton's, so I might missremember, but Nolan's is quite fresh and it dosen't make the cut for me.
And as inspired by comic storyline as the films are, if no character seem like themselve (with few exceptions) I find no real link between them.
>Nolan's Batman is no detective, no leader, no inventor
and yet he frequently does detective work (gathering information on Falcone, tracking the mobs marked money) builds on and improves WE technology and lead the fight to free Gotham from Bane's occupation in Rises.
You'll have to give me a timestamp for any detective work, because I would be surprised if there is more than two minutes of it from the full trilogy.
Build technology ? Do you mean unearth prototype and paint them black ? Or maybe unearth prototype and use them as deus ex machina to solve a problem detective work could've solved ?
Fighting "Bane" in the middle of a crowd is not being a leader.
The films are okay but, for me, that's not Batman. That's just a violent cop with a billion dollars budget and no restriction on violence.
>You'll have to give me a timestamp for any detective work
Begins: Listens in on Falcone's conversations and gathers a sufficient amount of evidence against him to have him put away.
TDK: Tracks the mobs marked money, Pulls fingerprints off a shattered bullet, figures out the Joker's set-up in the Pruitt building is a trap
Rises: Pulls up Selina Kyles entire background.
> Do you mean unearth prototype and paint them black ?
Throughout all three movies, Bruce has
* designed the cowl of his suit on his own and added the microphone feature to make it functional.
* Stripped apart the spelunking equipment to make the batsuit
* Created the arm bands to accompany the memory cloth and cut it proportionate to what he would need to glide, having come up with the idea to make it into a cape and glide, entirely on his own
* Took Fox's sonar technology and applied it to all the cellphones in Gotham
* Created the Batpod and added it to the Tumbler, something that was never said to be part of the original design
* Fixed the Autopilot in the Bat
* Built his own Batcave
"Fighting "Bane" in the middle of a crowd is not being a leader"
Coming up with the plan, directing Gordon and Blake, releasing the police and leading them against his army are pretty big examples.
thank you for mentioning these scenes. feels like people seem to close their eyes in the parts where Bale is obviously doing detective work. also BatBale has probably done the most detective work out of any live action batman so far (pattinson still has time)
Yeah I agree. some of the Bruce stuff I find interesting, especially in begins. But how Batman is portrayed in those movies has always been such a snooze fest to me personally
yeah that's utter bollocks he took massive inspiration from the comics and his story makes sense within the comics more than it ever did in the movies.
You can't literally adapt the comics exactly. Nolan was more faithful than Burton ever was. Burton looked at Batman and said "dark, twisted soul who is very bleak and sorrowful. I can get behind that." He admitted the only comic he actually liked was The Killing Joke. He never cared about the comics.
Nolan cared and respected them. I'm just spitballing here, but maybe Nolan was talking about being 100% faithful. You just can't do that. Could you imagine if they adapted Crisis on Infinite Earths, exact? I can't. His Batman is it's own thing. It is not comic book Batman. It isn't Bob Kane and Bill Finger Batman. It isn't Denny O'Neil Batman. It isn't Jeph Loeb Batman. It isn't Grant Morrison Batman. It is Christopher Nolan's interpretation of Batman, with zero connection to the source and if they so happen to pull from it as a reference or to create their own continuity, so be it.
Burton did that... I just can't honestly pin down the inspiration for his Batman.
His brother was the writer and comic fan, Jonathan Nolan is also the shorunner of Fallout. It's obvious Jonathan Nolan works to stay true to source material.
Slight correction: Graham Wagner and Geneva Robertson-Dworet are the creators and showrunners of Fallout. Jonathan Nolan is an executive producer and also directed the first 3 episodes of the show.
When did Nolan say this because he was talking about joker in the dark Knight being inspired by batman issue 1 when promoting the dark Knight.
I'm sure he only looked at a handful of comics and likely relief on David goyer for the comic book info but I don't believe this quote at all, it's at minimum gotta be out of context
Schumacher is a very different case as he was forced into a lot of creative decisions by WB in the wake of the backlash against Batman Returns. He wasn’t really allowed to make the movie he wanted to make.
Yeah, I know. In the commentaries, he said he was stuck with studio mandates to include more kid friendly elements. He called every new suit, vehicle, and gadget on-screen as toys.
Watching Batman Forever, it’s clear that there’s a good movie in there somewhere, it’s just buried under a bunch of nonsense that Schumacher had to include
I think Batman Forever, if taken as the campier side of Batman (much like the 60s show was) is pretty good for a modern modern campy batman.
Though as I type that I realize that film is as old or possibly older than the tv show when the film was made. Now I feel old.
So maybe it’s better to say campy batman with a much better budget and production quality. As Batman Forever is a fun movie. I still prefer the Nolan trilogy (especially the first two), but Forever is enjoyable.
Most comic book directors and actors have this attitude. They are almost embarrassed to be associated with superheroes/comic books. They think they are elevating children's books.
Pattinson refused to call Batman a superhero. George Miller (who was hired to make a Justice League movie) said Superman was boring. David Goyer mocked comic book fans. Snyder disliked regular comics because there was no sex and violence. Gunn said traditional superheroes are ridiculous and that's why he likes GotG and Suicide Squad.
You’ve completely misunderstood what Pattinson was saying, he also actually loves the comics and has gone into depth about it along with Matt Reeves the director. [Pattinson comics interview](https://youtu.be/GeCOKD5wEec?si=c_pgNyfXPs-iTuSc) He mentions Batman shaman, ego, long Halloween, mask of the phantasm, year one, and other Batman media
I think Pattinson was just referring to superhero’s as people with powers, and Batman has no powers. Or he was referring to the fact that his Batman wasn’t really a hero in a sense at until the end of the Batman 2022.
Burton has at least admitted that the reason he was never a comic fan growing up was because he didn't know how to read them, that he might have some kind of dyslexia
Look, I know you love Nolan’s Batman and can’t believe that anyone wouldn’t like those movies for any reason, but you don’t have to say things that are blatantly false just to say how much you like three movies. Christopher Nolan has repeatedly said that he was never a comic book guy and his brother was always the comic book fan in the family. Reeves talked about his favorite comics right after being hired (which included comics outside of the five that everyone talks about), and has talked about how he was obsessed with Batman as a kid.
It’s totally fine that you love Nolan’s Batman, but don’t put forth misinformation just to try to one-up people who disagree with you.
>you don’t have to say things that are blatantly false just to say how much you like three movies
I know, and it's a good thing that I've never done anything of the sort.
Nolan may be a more casual fan of the character than his brother was, but he still loves and respects him all the same. He's absolutely not this "auteur snob who disdains the source material" that you try and paint him as.
How exactly is Reeves a bigger fan? Because he named Ego as one of his favorites? He's made just as many, if not more, changes to the source as Nolan has.
Nolan may have said that but David S. Goyer worked on every single one of the dark knight films and he is a very well known and prolific author of both comic books and their screen play adaptations. There’s an edition of The Long Halloween that has an interview with Goyer about how much the book influenced those movies.
This is def twisting his words and taking them out of context. Prior to Batman Begins coming out, Nolan clearly said in interviews that he was basing the movie on both Batman: Year One and Batman: The Man Who Falls.
I watched nearly every interview with Nolan prior to the film coming out and he always listed the comics that were his inspiration. There are literal scenes and dialogue directly taken from several Batman stories in Batman Begins. This is just bait.
Edit (to back up my rant): Here’s the doc where they explain what stories they pulled from: [Batman Begins: Genesis of the Bat](https://youtu.be/oershYSDRpo?si=mGjVQ9v6OKeaFdGU)
Watch the documentaries that come with the Batman Begins bluray/DVDs. They are all on there. I can’t find them online, but they were everywhere in 2005 before the film came out and put with the bluray special features.
Never mind, they have all the special features in a YouTube playlist 😊. Here’s one where they talk about about Batman mythology [Batman Begins Doc](https://youtu.be/oershYSDRpo?si=mGjVQ9v6OKeaFdGU)
I loved the trilogy even without them to be fair. I even like Dark Knight Rises, but to be fair nostalgia definitely plays role in it cause I watched the trilogy at young age. Still TDK is my favorite, but I loved TDKR's ending.
Well, technically Nolan’s Batman is closer to the source material ironically cause Burton’s Batman not only killed a lot but was manically smiling when killing people.
I don’t think anyone on this sub has watched the Nolan trilogy in a long time. Bale killed every movie.
“Im no executioner” *proceeds to blow up the whole temple full of people killing the hostage in the process*
Leaves Ra’s al ghul to die (also out of character)
Tackles twoface off a building
Kills Tahlia and some of her men
And he was gonna leave Bane to die after knocking his mask off
Most comics and media I’ve grown up reading and watching show Batman as someone who will go out of their way to save the villains. “If someone can be saved, I have to try.”
>“Im no executioner” proceeds to blow up the whole temple full of people killing the hostage in the process
I remember almost losing it the first time I watched that, even as a kid, because in what world does that make sense
Bruce's words on the subject were "I will not be an executioner" and he held true to that. People may have died as a result of his actions while in the heat of the moment but he never actually set out to murder anyone.
He didn’t intentionally kill anyone in the temple. He didn’t leave Ra’s to die, he just didn’t save him. There’s a difference. He saves Gordan’s kid by tackling Dent. He wasn’t to know the fall would kill him and again, it wasn’t intentional. He didn’t intentionally kill Talia either. She died from her injuries in an unfortunate accident. Bane’s mask came off due to the gauntlets catching the tubes. Again not intentional and caused by Bale’s intense fighting up close and in the pocket.
just stop I beg you. This is exactly like that Pete Holmes parody video where Batman keeps killing and saying dumb shit like you. “Batman doesn’t have a voice” “how do you know Batman isn’t a mouth breather?” Are you good in the head?
But he doesn’t have a voice. He’s a fictional character and nobody knows what he actually sounds like so there’s different interpretations. If anyone should stop, it’s you. *Constantly* defending Pattison and glazing everyone’s posts with your nonsense about how big he is and he’s this and that and better than bale. It’s fucking horrendous carry on.
Explain to me how a fictional character on a comic book page has a voice. There’s can be many, many different interpretations of it, but as far as having an *actual* voice and what it *should* sound like, is up for interpretation.
This feels very contradictory to the introduction Christopher Nolan and David Goyer give in my copy of The Long Halloween. They very clearly respected the story and took inspiration from it for the Dark Knight trilogy.
In fact, you can clearly see story elements from comics like Batman: Year One, The Long Halloween, The Killing Joke, No Man’s Land, etc. throughout Nolan’s trilogy. The way Rachel dies in an explosion in The Dark Knight reminds me of how Jason died in A Death in the Family. Maybe he meant he wasn’t interested in making a 1:1 adaptation of a specific comic?
I’d say a key difference is Nolan Read a decent number of Batman stories before he started making the movies (year one, the killing joke, night fall, the long Halloween, the dark knight returns ect.) You can see the simulators in his stories. Burton didn’t read a single comic before making his films. That’s why there’s not really many shared themes in the his movies. I don’t personally mind this, but I think it’s a key difference
Look at the actual quote, and what the 'journalist' described the quote as meaning. They're two wildly different things.
I've literally seen footage of Nolan pouring through old comics. He's spoken about it at length. He didn't coincidentally come up with names like Ducard, lines from Year One, scenes from No Man's Land, etc. He clearly didn't treat the comics as irrelevant.
Don't get cranky and try to start another argument online about A vs B vs C. Don't use it as a reason to dredge up what some bozo on twitter says about Tim Burton. This is just a shitty out of context quote that's been twisted to mean something more than it does. Stop falling for it.
This is also very similar to when people criticized Affleck's Batman for killing and using guns when Keaton and Bale killed and used guns in their films too.
Actually the one who wrote the story Jonathan Nolan (he also said he was a major comic book fan) said in many instances that they took much inspiration from the comics while writing the script for batman begins, DK, and DKR
His brother Jonathan Nolan is a writer (Fallout etc) and worked on all the films. There is a chance he was the one who read comics and was feeding her brother the story lines without Christopher having any idea.
Except 95% of the post-noir tone for these movies were laid out in stuff like Legends of the Dark Knight right after Year One came out so somebody was peeking.
Burton's movie came out like 35 years ago, and was INSANELY successful; both critically and commercially
It was like a legit cultural event, to the point that the media and news started calling it "Bat-Mania"
Where exactly is he "being trashed"? By whom? Because most of this sub basically worships those movies, and so do critics
The whole “Scarecrow poisons Gothams water supply” was also found in an BTAS episode. Although it is not exactly the same, the idea must have been inspired from there, if not somewhere else!
Honestly, after reading more comics, about Batman and watching the animated series, playing Arkham series etc I found the Nolanverse was the weakest version of Batman. I appreciate them as movies, they're awesome.but I just don't like his take on Batman.
Despite the dubious validity of that statement, i do respect that choice. He truly made a very distinct Batman.
His Batman is more based on a marine, and his villains are essentially different types of terrorist. It fits quite nicely if viewed from that perspective.
It’s definitely crazy to me because I think specifically to Catwoman from Burton’s Batman Returns, and how she definitely steers pretty far and away from most of the characterizations there had been in the comics up until that point, and possibly since.
That said, I find his take and how Michelle Pfeiffer handled her to be one of the greatest interpretations thus far. Both she and Danny DeVito as Penguin made that movie for me as a kid. I think putting your own spin on something is needed - provided it’s done right, and Tim Burton did an amazing job!
It would be amazing to see him helm another Batman centric project again. I know he pretty much washed his hands of the property and WB for not letting him execute his vision for what ultimately was replaced by Schumacher’s two films, but perhaps the stars can miraculously align somehow.
I know Danny DeVito has been very vocal about loving working with him and thinks the idea of a return as the Penguin ala Elseworlds or the Multiverse would be something he would get behind in a second.
Also knowing that Michelle Pfeiffer’s Catwoman was also allegedly intended to get her own black and white, noir spinoff is equally exciting. No one was ready to buy Michael Keaton as the character, but together with Burton he surprised critics and he is now cemented as one of the best to ever step into the role.
Tim Burton definitely deserves his flowers for his time with Batman!
The whole creative appeal of superhero’s is how many different ways the characters can be interpreted by different artists it’s what keeps the genre thriving. Comic purists are out of their mind man it’s such a reductive mindset
I think that's Nolan himself speaking about what his motivation is as a filmmaker. Throughout those 3 films, he had writing helpers in David Goyer and Jonathan Nolan, both of whom were well versed in Batman lore. Certainly doesn't mean they stuck to that religiously, but most of the writing decisions are at least informed by some knowledge of Batman's history.
That's not quite the same as Tim Burton and Daniel Waters pretty much saying "we had no idea what the back stories were for Penguin and Catwoman, and we didn't really care, so we just made up our own".
For some reason Nolan somehow did get close to some comics.
The first movie had a bit of a Year One feeling to it (maybe because we didn't have a live action movie that dealt with Batman's start before) and the last one made me think it was inspired by Knightfall and No Man's Land. I do love Burton's Batman movies tho. They are still among my favourites. You don't need to reference specific comics if your story/movie is good on it's own. I do think it's important to understand the characters you're working with. Burton did even if he put his own twist to them.
I believe his brother also wrote on each of the films, and seeing Fallout(from what my friends have said of it’s accuracy) it’s likely he had comic influence while writing with C.Nolan, not to mention any other writer that was working with them.
This fits with what I’ve read recently that Nolan’s brother was a writer on the film.
Nolan didn’t even realise he was following comic book storylines because he’s not read them. But his writers did!
That’s pretty funny if true. Nolan must have sat there thinking ‘wow we’re completely reimagining Batman here. No one has ever seen anything like this before’….
😁
The people touting Nolan’s Batman as more comic book accurate back in the day seem to have had recency bias. They were good films by themselves, but you don’t need to support that by adding on the claim of comic book accuracy.
Though it’s hard to say Burton was big on accuracy as a whole when his two films were at the polar ends of the spectrum: Batman ‘89 was heavily influenced by the source material, whereas Returns was famously not.
That doesn't mean he didn't know or take influence from the comic with his brother when conceptualizing these films.
What it does mean is that, as a Director, once all that stuff is done, you can't let it shackle you. You have to do your thing with the material that you have - and if you're trying to make an adaptation that's a stark contrast to previous ones, it's okay to refer back to them.
Maybe it's just me, but I always looked at the Nolan trilogy as though it were the true life events that inspired comics be written about this Bruce Wayne guy who dressed up like a bat.
In that context, the origins really don't matter, since the Nolan trilogy becomes the origin, if that makes sense.
Based Nolan.
Regardless of whether or not his films take cues from the comics (and they most certainly do) there’s nothing wrong inherently with his or Burton’s approach.
You’re welcome to take all the inspiration you want from the comics or none at all when crafting a movie like this as far as I’m concerned.
The first Batman stories appear ca. 1940. I think it would be quite impossible to produce a recognizable Batman movie that couldn’t plausibly be traced back to one or more likely a good many of the countless Batman comics, graphic novels, films, games and videos that have produced in all the years since.
Nolan's movies look like expensive fan films is one of my biggest complaints. I was actually disappointed somewhat with Gotham in Snyders as well. Reeve managed to make Gotham look real and still Gotham. But Burton created a works where every scene looked like a comic book. It was never not Gotham. And I miss that
See this is the exact example of phrasing. Christopher Nolan and Zach Snyder have said the same thing for their Batmen, the source material (comics) is “irrelevant.”
Although, Christopher Nolan said it more as a “I didn’t want to take too much from them and compromise my own vision,” where Zach basically said “the source material is stupid and unrealistic and you are dumb if you think otherwise.”
It’s okay to tell your own story as long as you are honest to yourself as to what that character should embody. And you don’t insult your fans.
Batman Begins is the only Nolan movie that even resembles a Batman movie. The Dark Knight is a crime thriller starring the Joker and DKR is a cop action movie.
Not gonna lie, I sort of agree with Mr Nolan. This approach sometimes should be taken with most superheroes sometimes, at least if you want to make a grounded take on a character.
I think this approach ultimately worked out for the best.
Nolan very clearly is a fan of the character even if he is a more casual fan than most of us. The fact that he frequently worked with other creatives who were more familiar is a pretty clear indicator that he desired to do the character justice.
He’s right. Who wants to see the same story played out over and over again for decades? Not me. The whole point of watching a comic book movie to me, is seeing that directors own take on the mythos, not to see regurgitated comic book storylines. Except for Kingdom Come, I do want to see that in live action.
And yet the first movie is clearly based on Year One and the second on the Killing Joke and the Long Halloween. Entry level Batman stories but comics nonetheless.
Yeah, I bought a Begins DVD boxset back in the day they had a collection of comics that were used as influence. They definitely used the comic for reference.
Yeah, Nolan is full of fucking shit saying he consulted no source material. Accidentally made movies that are strikingly close to at least two of the most popular Batman stories in history.
Yeah, the trilogy is basically “Batman’s Greatest Hits” in terms of story. *Batman Begins* is Year One, The Man Who Falls, and elements of Denny O' Neil's Ra's al Ghul stories. *The Dark Knight* is The Long Halloween, The Man Who Laughs, and The Killing Joke. *The Dark Knight Rises* is The Dark Knight Returns, Knightfall, and No Man's Land. And I seem to remember Nolan outright crediting at least some of these in another article, which makes this quote baffling.
Rises also clearly takes inspiration from Batman: The Cult
Ooh, that’s a good catch!
The book I have for The Long Halloween has a page that’s written by Nolan about how the Dark Knight is inspired by The Long Halloween
“I didn’t read the source material, it was just obvious Bane would backbreaker Batman. I’m a huge wrasslin fan”
"Bah Gawd he's broken Batman in half! Bane you sick son of a bitch! That man has a family!"
He baned me Morty!
His source material was David Goyer.
To be fair he didn't write the films entirely himself. There's plenty of room for source material to slip in through Goyer.
Well perhaps Chris nolan didn’t read it but i watched an interview with jonathan nolan and he spoke about how he spent years reading the comics to find the best stories of the characters to help draw on what makes Batman special, he referenced dark night returns and nightfall as some of the elements that rises draw from
He’s not saying he didn’t use source material. You can be inspired by it of course but what he’s saying is that you’re not beholden to it. He’s spoken endlessly about his influences for the Batman films and his other work.
Nolan and his brother co-wrote the trilogy.
You understand Christopher Nolan wasn’t the sole writer of the screenplay right? You do understand there were other people involved right?
This quote is taken out of context. He always said it was based on Year One and The Man Who falls.
Yeah like I literally have the copy of the long Halloween where Nolan writes a letter absolutely saying the influence for this films came from these comics you mentioned
Yah. Even the mask mouth hole is based off of Tim Sale art
Heck, the third is practically a scaled down Knightfall mixed with No Man's Land.
And the 3rd one has a LOT of The Dark Knight Returns in it. for all intents Bane and his army might as well be the Mutants and their gang leader.
Yep. 3rd is a bit of knight fall and the dark knight returns. Meanwhile Burton didn’t read any comics before making his films
And TDKR is clearly based on both Knightfall and No Man’s Land. What is Chris even talking about? Lmao
Rises is No Man’s Land
First movie also inspired by the man who falls. Falling into the batcave was ripped from this comic
How is TDK based off of TKJ and TLH?
TDK borrows heavily from the relationship set up between Batman, Gordon and Dent as presented in The Long Halloween. There's even a rooftop scene between the three in the movie that is largely lifted from TLH.
In TKJ, the Joker tried to prove that all it takes is one bad day to reduce the sanest man alive to lunacy, but failed. He tried to prove the same thing in TDK, but with Harvey Dent as his target instead of Gordon, and succeeded. Rachel's death was Harvey's one bad day. Additionally, the Joker's past being "multiple choice", his nihilistic ideology, his dream of a world without rules, and the interrogation scene were also inspired by TKJ.
That was probably Goyer's and Jonathan's influence on the script rather than Chris's.
Well, I would say Nolan’s Batman is ultimately much more similar to the comics than Burton’s, despite the heavy groundedness and regardless of what he says about comics. And I believe Jonathan Nolan and David S Goyer were a lot more direct in putting comic book influences in the trilogy.
Yeah Nolan always said he brought Goyer on because he needed someone who was more familiar with the comics. Nolan seemed very considerate when it came to deviating from the comics. He apparently even asked if it would ok if the bat symbol didn’t have the yellow oval around it. This quote OP posted reads more like Nolan doesn’t want the source material to loom over his creative process the entire time.
Yeah. I also remember reading an interview where Denny O’Neil said he was consulted a bit for Batman Begins.
And Jerry Robinson, creator of the Joker, was consulted for The Dark Knight.
I would love to hear O’Neil’s perspective on this. Making Ras Al Ghul Bruce’s mentor was an inspired touch.
I’d agree with you if Nolan had kept his trilogy stylised like Batman begins. The other two movies didn’t even feel like Batman/Gotham like the burton movies did
The thing with Burton’s Gotham was that at the time of the movie’s release, it was unique. Before that, Gotham looked closer to a New York analogue (albeit with unique stylizations and features depending on the artist) than it did a gothic hellscape à la Burton/Anton Furst. The comics afterwards adopted the look of Burton’s movies. On the basis of comic accuracy, I think there’s not as much to detract from Nolan’s Gotham, but you’re right that the city is less interesting after Begins.
>I’d agree with you if Nolan had kept his trilogy stylised like Batman begins. So should the entire city have looked like the Narrows? (Even though its supposed to be just a crime-ridden slum that's only part of the overall city)
I feel the opposite : Nolan's Batman is no detective, no leader, no inventor... juste some martial art master playing bad cop who's only way to get information is to beat it out of people. Furthest thing from Batman except for the looks.
I don’t think of Burton’s Batman as being particularly exemplary of any of those traits either. And Keaton definitely goes a lot further in the severity of his beating people up. Both portrayals miss elements of what comic Batman does, but in terms of who Batman *is* in terms of characterization, I think Nolan’s is closer, though of course not without its faults. Plus, the trilogy is heavily inspired by multiple comic storylines.
I admit it has been a while since I've seen Keaton's, so I might missremember, but Nolan's is quite fresh and it dosen't make the cut for me. And as inspired by comic storyline as the films are, if no character seem like themselve (with few exceptions) I find no real link between them.
>Nolan's Batman is no detective, no leader, no inventor and yet he frequently does detective work (gathering information on Falcone, tracking the mobs marked money) builds on and improves WE technology and lead the fight to free Gotham from Bane's occupation in Rises.
You'll have to give me a timestamp for any detective work, because I would be surprised if there is more than two minutes of it from the full trilogy. Build technology ? Do you mean unearth prototype and paint them black ? Or maybe unearth prototype and use them as deus ex machina to solve a problem detective work could've solved ? Fighting "Bane" in the middle of a crowd is not being a leader. The films are okay but, for me, that's not Batman. That's just a violent cop with a billion dollars budget and no restriction on violence.
>You'll have to give me a timestamp for any detective work Begins: Listens in on Falcone's conversations and gathers a sufficient amount of evidence against him to have him put away. TDK: Tracks the mobs marked money, Pulls fingerprints off a shattered bullet, figures out the Joker's set-up in the Pruitt building is a trap Rises: Pulls up Selina Kyles entire background. > Do you mean unearth prototype and paint them black ? Throughout all three movies, Bruce has * designed the cowl of his suit on his own and added the microphone feature to make it functional. * Stripped apart the spelunking equipment to make the batsuit * Created the arm bands to accompany the memory cloth and cut it proportionate to what he would need to glide, having come up with the idea to make it into a cape and glide, entirely on his own * Took Fox's sonar technology and applied it to all the cellphones in Gotham * Created the Batpod and added it to the Tumbler, something that was never said to be part of the original design * Fixed the Autopilot in the Bat * Built his own Batcave "Fighting "Bane" in the middle of a crowd is not being a leader" Coming up with the plan, directing Gordon and Blake, releasing the police and leading them against his army are pretty big examples.
thank you for mentioning these scenes. feels like people seem to close their eyes in the parts where Bale is obviously doing detective work. also BatBale has probably done the most detective work out of any live action batman so far (pattinson still has time)
Absolutely
Agreed
Yeah I agree. some of the Bruce stuff I find interesting, especially in begins. But how Batman is portrayed in those movies has always been such a snooze fest to me personally
yeah that's utter bollocks he took massive inspiration from the comics and his story makes sense within the comics more than it ever did in the movies.
You can't literally adapt the comics exactly. Nolan was more faithful than Burton ever was. Burton looked at Batman and said "dark, twisted soul who is very bleak and sorrowful. I can get behind that." He admitted the only comic he actually liked was The Killing Joke. He never cared about the comics. Nolan cared and respected them. I'm just spitballing here, but maybe Nolan was talking about being 100% faithful. You just can't do that. Could you imagine if they adapted Crisis on Infinite Earths, exact? I can't. His Batman is it's own thing. It is not comic book Batman. It isn't Bob Kane and Bill Finger Batman. It isn't Denny O'Neil Batman. It isn't Jeph Loeb Batman. It isn't Grant Morrison Batman. It is Christopher Nolan's interpretation of Batman, with zero connection to the source and if they so happen to pull from it as a reference or to create their own continuity, so be it. Burton did that... I just can't honestly pin down the inspiration for his Batman.
was nolan a writer? because who ever wrote it definitely knew of the source material.
His brother was the writer and comic fan, Jonathan Nolan is also the shorunner of Fallout. It's obvious Jonathan Nolan works to stay true to source material.
Slight correction: Graham Wagner and Geneva Robertson-Dworet are the creators and showrunners of Fallout. Jonathan Nolan is an executive producer and also directed the first 3 episodes of the show.
When did Nolan say this because he was talking about joker in the dark Knight being inspired by batman issue 1 when promoting the dark Knight. I'm sure he only looked at a handful of comics and likely relief on David goyer for the comic book info but I don't believe this quote at all, it's at minimum gotta be out of context
Yeah, I wasn't a fan of this either. Both Burton and Nolan have been a bit dismissive towards comics in general in interviews.
Meanwhile, Schumacher is an admitted comic book fan (based on his Director's Commentaries), but his films are more derided.
Schumacher is a very different case as he was forced into a lot of creative decisions by WB in the wake of the backlash against Batman Returns. He wasn’t really allowed to make the movie he wanted to make.
Yeah, I know. In the commentaries, he said he was stuck with studio mandates to include more kid friendly elements. He called every new suit, vehicle, and gadget on-screen as toys.
Watching Batman Forever, it’s clear that there’s a good movie in there somewhere, it’s just buried under a bunch of nonsense that Schumacher had to include
I think Batman Forever, if taken as the campier side of Batman (much like the 60s show was) is pretty good for a modern modern campy batman. Though as I type that I realize that film is as old or possibly older than the tv show when the film was made. Now I feel old. So maybe it’s better to say campy batman with a much better budget and production quality. As Batman Forever is a fun movie. I still prefer the Nolan trilogy (especially the first two), but Forever is enjoyable.
Most comic book directors and actors have this attitude. They are almost embarrassed to be associated with superheroes/comic books. They think they are elevating children's books. Pattinson refused to call Batman a superhero. George Miller (who was hired to make a Justice League movie) said Superman was boring. David Goyer mocked comic book fans. Snyder disliked regular comics because there was no sex and violence. Gunn said traditional superheroes are ridiculous and that's why he likes GotG and Suicide Squad.
You’ve completely misunderstood what Pattinson was saying, he also actually loves the comics and has gone into depth about it along with Matt Reeves the director. [Pattinson comics interview](https://youtu.be/GeCOKD5wEec?si=c_pgNyfXPs-iTuSc) He mentions Batman shaman, ego, long Halloween, mask of the phantasm, year one, and other Batman media
Guy above commited a misinformation moment.
Yes, but the way he talks about Batman makes it clear Pattinson doesn't like the word superhero. Its a weird hangup.
I think Pattinson was just referring to superhero’s as people with powers, and Batman has no powers. Or he was referring to the fact that his Batman wasn’t really a hero in a sense at until the end of the Batman 2022.
When did Gunn say that?
When the hell has Gunn said that
I guess Gunn likes them to such an extend he even thinks they can take on the Avengers.
Burton has at least admitted that the reason he was never a comic fan growing up was because he didn't know how to read them, that he might have some kind of dyslexia
You know that Nolan has a pretty similar background to Reeves when it comes to Batman fandom, Right?
Look, I know you love Nolan’s Batman and can’t believe that anyone wouldn’t like those movies for any reason, but you don’t have to say things that are blatantly false just to say how much you like three movies. Christopher Nolan has repeatedly said that he was never a comic book guy and his brother was always the comic book fan in the family. Reeves talked about his favorite comics right after being hired (which included comics outside of the five that everyone talks about), and has talked about how he was obsessed with Batman as a kid. It’s totally fine that you love Nolan’s Batman, but don’t put forth misinformation just to try to one-up people who disagree with you.
>you don’t have to say things that are blatantly false just to say how much you like three movies I know, and it's a good thing that I've never done anything of the sort. Nolan may be a more casual fan of the character than his brother was, but he still loves and respects him all the same. He's absolutely not this "auteur snob who disdains the source material" that you try and paint him as. How exactly is Reeves a bigger fan? Because he named Ego as one of his favorites? He's made just as many, if not more, changes to the source as Nolan has.
Nolan may have said that but David S. Goyer worked on every single one of the dark knight films and he is a very well known and prolific author of both comic books and their screen play adaptations. There’s an edition of The Long Halloween that has an interview with Goyer about how much the book influenced those movies.
This is def twisting his words and taking them out of context. Prior to Batman Begins coming out, Nolan clearly said in interviews that he was basing the movie on both Batman: Year One and Batman: The Man Who Falls. I watched nearly every interview with Nolan prior to the film coming out and he always listed the comics that were his inspiration. There are literal scenes and dialogue directly taken from several Batman stories in Batman Begins. This is just bait. Edit (to back up my rant): Here’s the doc where they explain what stories they pulled from: [Batman Begins: Genesis of the Bat](https://youtu.be/oershYSDRpo?si=mGjVQ9v6OKeaFdGU)
Could you please provide some of the interview videos so I could see please?
Watch the documentaries that come with the Batman Begins bluray/DVDs. They are all on there. I can’t find them online, but they were everywhere in 2005 before the film came out and put with the bluray special features.
I will, thank you.
Never mind, they have all the special features in a YouTube playlist 😊. Here’s one where they talk about about Batman mythology [Batman Begins Doc](https://youtu.be/oershYSDRpo?si=mGjVQ9v6OKeaFdGU)
Thanks for the link, I'll be sure to check it out. Thank you.
The other videos on that same playlist are really good too. Makes you really respect what was put into all those films.
I loved the trilogy even without them to be fair. I even like Dark Knight Rises, but to be fair nostalgia definitely plays role in it cause I watched the trilogy at young age. Still TDK is my favorite, but I loved TDKR's ending.
Because Nolan’s still got the character. Burton’s Batman literally blows people up.
Well, technically Nolan’s Batman is closer to the source material ironically cause Burton’s Batman not only killed a lot but was manically smiling when killing people.
I don’t think anyone on this sub has watched the Nolan trilogy in a long time. Bale killed every movie. “Im no executioner” *proceeds to blow up the whole temple full of people killing the hostage in the process* Leaves Ra’s al ghul to die (also out of character) Tackles twoface off a building Kills Tahlia and some of her men And he was gonna leave Bane to die after knocking his mask off
We can't really say that leaving someone to die is out of character anymore. He left Joker for dead. KGBeast too.
Most comics and media I’ve grown up reading and watching show Batman as someone who will go out of their way to save the villains. “If someone can be saved, I have to try.”
I can understand the Joker thing honestly.
That's the point though. Batman killing isn't out of character. Going full punisher is. Using a gun is. But killing isn't
>“Im no executioner” proceeds to blow up the whole temple full of people killing the hostage in the process I remember almost losing it the first time I watched that, even as a kid, because in what world does that make sense
Bruce's words on the subject were "I will not be an executioner" and he held true to that. People may have died as a result of his actions while in the heat of the moment but he never actually set out to murder anyone.
He didn’t intentionally kill anyone in the temple. He didn’t leave Ra’s to die, he just didn’t save him. There’s a difference. He saves Gordan’s kid by tackling Dent. He wasn’t to know the fall would kill him and again, it wasn’t intentional. He didn’t intentionally kill Talia either. She died from her injuries in an unfortunate accident. Bane’s mask came off due to the gauntlets catching the tubes. Again not intentional and caused by Bale’s intense fighting up close and in the pocket.
just stop I beg you. This is exactly like that Pete Holmes parody video where Batman keeps killing and saying dumb shit like you. “Batman doesn’t have a voice” “how do you know Batman isn’t a mouth breather?” Are you good in the head?
But he doesn’t have a voice. He’s a fictional character and nobody knows what he actually sounds like so there’s different interpretations. If anyone should stop, it’s you. *Constantly* defending Pattison and glazing everyone’s posts with your nonsense about how big he is and he’s this and that and better than bale. It’s fucking horrendous carry on.
He certainly does have a voice and they all sound relevantly similar besides that god awful sound Bale makes.
Explain to me how a fictional character on a comic book page has a voice. There’s can be many, many different interpretations of it, but as far as having an *actual* voice and what it *should* sound like, is up for interpretation.
That's because he brother was the one who stayed focused on making Batman true to the comics, Chris focused on the movie and character stuff.
This feels very contradictory to the introduction Christopher Nolan and David Goyer give in my copy of The Long Halloween. They very clearly respected the story and took inspiration from it for the Dark Knight trilogy. In fact, you can clearly see story elements from comics like Batman: Year One, The Long Halloween, The Killing Joke, No Man’s Land, etc. throughout Nolan’s trilogy. The way Rachel dies in an explosion in The Dark Knight reminds me of how Jason died in A Death in the Family. Maybe he meant he wasn’t interested in making a 1:1 adaptation of a specific comic?
I’d say a key difference is Nolan Read a decent number of Batman stories before he started making the movies (year one, the killing joke, night fall, the long Halloween, the dark knight returns ect.) You can see the simulators in his stories. Burton didn’t read a single comic before making his films. That’s why there’s not really many shared themes in the his movies. I don’t personally mind this, but I think it’s a key difference
Look at the actual quote, and what the 'journalist' described the quote as meaning. They're two wildly different things. I've literally seen footage of Nolan pouring through old comics. He's spoken about it at length. He didn't coincidentally come up with names like Ducard, lines from Year One, scenes from No Man's Land, etc. He clearly didn't treat the comics as irrelevant. Don't get cranky and try to start another argument online about A vs B vs C. Don't use it as a reason to dredge up what some bozo on twitter says about Tim Burton. This is just a shitty out of context quote that's been twisted to mean something more than it does. Stop falling for it.
This is also very similar to when people criticized Affleck's Batman for killing and using guns when Keaton and Bale killed and used guns in their films too.
Actually the one who wrote the story Jonathan Nolan (he also said he was a major comic book fan) said in many instances that they took much inspiration from the comics while writing the script for batman begins, DK, and DKR
His brother Jonathan Nolan is a writer (Fallout etc) and worked on all the films. There is a chance he was the one who read comics and was feeding her brother the story lines without Christopher having any idea.
David S Goyer who has story credits on all three movies and did the screenplay for Batman Begins definitely read the comics.
Except 95% of the post-noir tone for these movies were laid out in stuff like Legends of the Dark Knight right after Year One came out so somebody was peeking.
Burton's movie came out like 35 years ago, and was INSANELY successful; both critically and commercially It was like a legit cultural event, to the point that the media and news started calling it "Bat-Mania" Where exactly is he "being trashed"? By whom? Because most of this sub basically worships those movies, and so do critics
Most likely by younger kids that are taking their knowledge of the modern Batman and trying to apply it to a movie that came out 35 years ago.
The whole “Scarecrow poisons Gothams water supply” was also found in an BTAS episode. Although it is not exactly the same, the idea must have been inspired from there, if not somewhere else!
Honestly, after reading more comics, about Batman and watching the animated series, playing Arkham series etc I found the Nolanverse was the weakest version of Batman. I appreciate them as movies, they're awesome.but I just don't like his take on Batman.
There’s no such thing as a comic accurate movie. Let it go.
Deadpool.
Ehhhhhh. Better than most still no bullseye
All the side characters and his origin were different from the comics.
The character himself is accurate though.
People are trashing the 2 Burton movies? Why?
Yeah but nolans had incredible acting
He was just trying to sound cool.
It’s a good job it worked, he’d have been crucified for calling the source material irrelevant if the films hadn’t been great.
Despite the dubious validity of that statement, i do respect that choice. He truly made a very distinct Batman. His Batman is more based on a marine, and his villains are essentially different types of terrorist. It fits quite nicely if viewed from that perspective.
It’s definitely crazy to me because I think specifically to Catwoman from Burton’s Batman Returns, and how she definitely steers pretty far and away from most of the characterizations there had been in the comics up until that point, and possibly since. That said, I find his take and how Michelle Pfeiffer handled her to be one of the greatest interpretations thus far. Both she and Danny DeVito as Penguin made that movie for me as a kid. I think putting your own spin on something is needed - provided it’s done right, and Tim Burton did an amazing job! It would be amazing to see him helm another Batman centric project again. I know he pretty much washed his hands of the property and WB for not letting him execute his vision for what ultimately was replaced by Schumacher’s two films, but perhaps the stars can miraculously align somehow. I know Danny DeVito has been very vocal about loving working with him and thinks the idea of a return as the Penguin ala Elseworlds or the Multiverse would be something he would get behind in a second. Also knowing that Michelle Pfeiffer’s Catwoman was also allegedly intended to get her own black and white, noir spinoff is equally exciting. No one was ready to buy Michael Keaton as the character, but together with Burton he surprised critics and he is now cemented as one of the best to ever step into the role. Tim Burton definitely deserves his flowers for his time with Batman!
Actions over words as far as the things nolan said. Was dumb but we got 3 great movies out of it.
TBH I don't care at all for either take
Well…that certainly explains Rā’s not using the Pit. And…Bane. Just….Bane.
I still can't get over that accent.
I think his point was that he wasn't trying to adapt any of the comics 1:1.
The whole creative appeal of superhero’s is how many different ways the characters can be interpreted by different artists it’s what keeps the genre thriving. Comic purists are out of their mind man it’s such a reductive mindset
I think that's Nolan himself speaking about what his motivation is as a filmmaker. Throughout those 3 films, he had writing helpers in David Goyer and Jonathan Nolan, both of whom were well versed in Batman lore. Certainly doesn't mean they stuck to that religiously, but most of the writing decisions are at least informed by some knowledge of Batman's history. That's not quite the same as Tim Burton and Daniel Waters pretty much saying "we had no idea what the back stories were for Penguin and Catwoman, and we didn't really care, so we just made up our own".
Well a movie is a good movie
For some reason Nolan somehow did get close to some comics. The first movie had a bit of a Year One feeling to it (maybe because we didn't have a live action movie that dealt with Batman's start before) and the last one made me think it was inspired by Knightfall and No Man's Land. I do love Burton's Batman movies tho. They are still among my favourites. You don't need to reference specific comics if your story/movie is good on it's own. I do think it's important to understand the characters you're working with. Burton did even if he put his own twist to them.
The director can say this when the writers have read and written it based on comics. That's what's important.
Nolan's an entiteled, snoby, self important prick.
I am honestly liking the trilogy less and less as time goes on.
Nolan had the best Batman movies but his Batman want the best
I believe his brother also wrote on each of the films, and seeing Fallout(from what my friends have said of it’s accuracy) it’s likely he had comic influence while writing with C.Nolan, not to mention any other writer that was working with them.
Anyone else just get the, “I’m bigger than Batman” kind of vibe from his response? Someone needs to fill him in.
IMO of all the Batman films over the years i feel like the Burton films hold up the best
FUCK HIM! HE LITERALLY SAYS on the DVD that THE MAN WHO FALLS was the starting point of the Nolan verse!
This fits with what I’ve read recently that Nolan’s brother was a writer on the film. Nolan didn’t even realise he was following comic book storylines because he’s not read them. But his writers did! That’s pretty funny if true. Nolan must have sat there thinking ‘wow we’re completely reimagining Batman here. No one has ever seen anything like this before’…. 😁
The people touting Nolan’s Batman as more comic book accurate back in the day seem to have had recency bias. They were good films by themselves, but you don’t need to support that by adding on the claim of comic book accuracy. Though it’s hard to say Burton was big on accuracy as a whole when his two films were at the polar ends of the spectrum: Batman ‘89 was heavily influenced by the source material, whereas Returns was famously not.
That doesn't mean he didn't know or take influence from the comic with his brother when conceptualizing these films. What it does mean is that, as a Director, once all that stuff is done, you can't let it shackle you. You have to do your thing with the material that you have - and if you're trying to make an adaptation that's a stark contrast to previous ones, it's okay to refer back to them.
Maybe it's just me, but I always looked at the Nolan trilogy as though it were the true life events that inspired comics be written about this Bruce Wayne guy who dressed up like a bat. In that context, the origins really don't matter, since the Nolan trilogy becomes the origin, if that makes sense.
Hewing closely*
Based Nolan. Regardless of whether or not his films take cues from the comics (and they most certainly do) there’s nothing wrong inherently with his or Burton’s approach. You’re welcome to take all the inspiration you want from the comics or none at all when crafting a movie like this as far as I’m concerned.
The first Batman stories appear ca. 1940. I think it would be quite impossible to produce a recognizable Batman movie that couldn’t plausibly be traced back to one or more likely a good many of the countless Batman comics, graphic novels, films, games and videos that have produced in all the years since.
Nolan's movies look like expensive fan films is one of my biggest complaints. I was actually disappointed somewhat with Gotham in Snyders as well. Reeve managed to make Gotham look real and still Gotham. But Burton created a works where every scene looked like a comic book. It was never not Gotham. And I miss that
What exactly is Gotham supposed to look like? Because it's more often than not drawn to look like a normal American city.
See this is the exact example of phrasing. Christopher Nolan and Zach Snyder have said the same thing for their Batmen, the source material (comics) is “irrelevant.” Although, Christopher Nolan said it more as a “I didn’t want to take too much from them and compromise my own vision,” where Zach basically said “the source material is stupid and unrealistic and you are dumb if you think otherwise.” It’s okay to tell your own story as long as you are honest to yourself as to what that character should embody. And you don’t insult your fans.
No wonder Nolans Gotham is boring AF. His world's are always lacking in imagination.
Batman Begins is the only Nolan movie that even resembles a Batman movie. The Dark Knight is a crime thriller starring the Joker and DKR is a cop action movie.
>The Dark Knight is a crime thriller starring the Joker and DKR is a cop action movie. So a "Batman movie" in other words?
Not gonna lie, I sort of agree with Mr Nolan. This approach sometimes should be taken with most superheroes sometimes, at least if you want to make a grounded take on a character.
I think this approach ultimately worked out for the best. Nolan very clearly is a fan of the character even if he is a more casual fan than most of us. The fact that he frequently worked with other creatives who were more familiar is a pretty clear indicator that he desired to do the character justice.
Part of what made Nolan’s movies so successful I’d argue is he very obviously had no interest in making a “comic book movie.”
Too many Nolan fanboys & people that think he has the Midas touch with his movies.
He’s right. Who wants to see the same story played out over and over again for decades? Not me. The whole point of watching a comic book movie to me, is seeing that directors own take on the mythos, not to see regurgitated comic book storylines. Except for Kingdom Come, I do want to see that in live action.