Comic Creators Comment on Batman Movies

[Azrael]

No offense. But exactly when did Nobleman become an acknowledged and accepted authority on Batman? Was I taking a leak or something when that happened?

He did a good thing for Bill Finger's legacy and I'm not taking anything away from that. But guys like Graham Nolan, Paul Dini, Denny O'Neil, Michael Uslan or hell even Kevin Smith have bona fides that qualify their opinions above others. Nobody disputes that.

Nobleman? Seriously, what's his pedigree?

Again, not trying to trash talk you personally. I'm just a bit exasperated.

The ones you mention have a long history with Batman, yes, and credited with a lot of things. But, most paid professionals who worked in previous Batman movies, directors and actors, are hardly Batman or comic book authorities, but when they do a comment related to these things, they are endlessly quoted/shared in social media e.g. why should we care what Bale thinks about superhero movies (link)? He's an actor paid to act, not to offer analyses and opinions. Or is it fame that makes opinions more valid? This isn't against Bale, you know what I'm saying.

Anyway, I thought it was interesting to know what he thinks about BvS.

[Andrew]

It's great how Timm is complimentary to Burton's films, especially liking the creepiness and moodiness and not just complaining, like some of the fans, that some things were too different from the comics and thus bad. Also cool that Englehart could enjoy BB despite thinking Batman was a little too different.

Almost surprising but not really that several thought there was too little use of the supporting cast, that the Batman character works better having and interacting with supporting characters and that without that the movies can easily be too much more about the villains.

Weird that Millar would bash the special effects of B89, a few shots to me do look dated (as do a few from BF) but I think hardly anyone complained about them back then.

I don't really get why Alan Grant thought even the Burton films were too campy rather than real, much more than the comics, it would be interesting to see what he thought of the Nolan films.

[The Laughing Fish]

Steve Engelhart reckons that his work with Marshall Rogers for DC was used as a basis for a couple of Batman films. I should warn you all that this is a very long post, but I think it's worth reading.

These are his comments about the time he was approached to write a treatment for a dark live action Batman film, which eventually became B89.

Ten years after I wrote the "definitive Batman" for DETECTIVE COMICS, I got a call from DC Comics publisher Jenette Kahn. It seems that when those DETECTIVEs appeared, Mike Uslan, producer of the Swamp Thing film, told an interviewer they showed him, for the first time, how to do a Batman film for adults. (The Adam West "Holy Pow!" Batman was still the dominant image for the general public.)
In the ten years since, he had tried, first as an independent and later in association with Warner Brothers, to translate my story into a single film. A series of scripts involving Silver St. Cloud, Boss Thorne, and a truly insane Joker had been generated by Hollywood's finest writers, but somehow they weren't working. So now I was asked to return to the Batman.

When I got involved I was told that the Joker and the Penguin and Robin were all going to be in the picture. I argued that that was several characters too many, but was overruled, so my first treatment went that route. The Powers That Be not only liked it, but for the first time saw the Batman "picture" clearly enough to realize that two villains and a boy wonder were masking (so to speak) the Batman story, which is what it should be all about. So I got to do the second treatment with just the characters that eventually hit the screen: Bruce Wayne, the Batman, Silver St. Cloud, Boss Thorne, and the Joker.

When I was done we had all the elements in the right places, and most importantly, we had Batman's ambiance, the thing no one else could do. So screenwriter Sam Hamm and director Tim Burton took over, and three years later - after Silver and Boss Thorne had their names changed for various reasons - the one Batman movie everyone liked hit the screen. If I'd had any sense I'd have continued working in Hollywood then, but I was enjoying comics and games.

Obviously, I should have continued, since Warners later adapted DARK DETECTIVE II and III into The Dark Knight.

As you might've have guessed from that last sentence above, Engelhart goes on to make some very curious accusations over TDK for lifting characterisations and plot ideas from his unfinished Dark Detective arc.

When DC wanted to make the Batman movie from DARK DETECTIVE I, they said so, and (eventually) brought me in on the project because, they said, no one could adapt me as well as me. But afterward, they didn't want to give me any credit. So when they made a movie of DARK DETECTIVE II, they said nothing. And when I turned in DARK DETECTIVE III, it got worse. I'm afraid this is a sad story...

In DARK DETECTIVE II, I created a handsome, blond, upright politician who had become the significant other to the Batman's former girlfriend, and Marshall Rogers designed his look. There it is, up above - twice. And just to be clear, the one on the right came first.

In DARK DETECTIVE II, that handsome, blond, upright politician - Evan Gregory - was a brave guy who fought crime in Gotham City because it was the right thing to do. He thrust himself into a fight with the Joker to save the woman he loved, and paid a horrible price for it as his entire left side was damaged beyond repair. The man who had been noble and handsome became a mutilated cripple.

In the next segment, DARK DETECTIVE III, that handsome, blond, upright politician was extremely depressed over losing his left side and his woman. Then Two-Face came to him in his depression and had a heart-to-heart, in which Two-Face convinced him that life is meaningless, that the woman in his life is beyond his reach, and that that handsome, blond, upright politician should make a hundred-eighty degree turn to the dark side. Which he did.

In my version, it's Two-Face talking to another guy who's been heavily damaged on the left side, and who is another "golden boy" politician, so it makes sense that Two-Face could convince Evan Gregory. They share a bond. In the film version, it's the Joker talking to Harvey Dent. Those two have nothing in common, and Dent has hated the Joker the entire movie. It was a storyline in search of a reason to be there.

(DD3 was written two years after DD2, which is why the last half hour of The Dark Knight feels so tacked on. It didn't exist when they started the film.)

In Batman, they changed Silver St. Cloud to "Vicki Vale" and Boss Thorne to "Boss Grissom." In The Dark Knight, they changed Evan Gregory to "Harvey Dent" and Two-Face to the Joker. But the plot and the look are clear. The original Harvey Dent had a different origin, no Joker, and brown hair combed straight back.

To top it all off, they changed Dark Detective to "Dark Knight."

And let's not forget where the completely irrational Joker and the Batman with a sex life came from in the first place.

I figure 70 per cent of Batman was based on my stories and treatments. I'd peg The Dark Knight about the same, since all the main concepts are mine, though the usage of them was more free-form. As a writer, it's very satisfying to have created two Batman films, but it would have been nice to be treated like a human being, so I would sincerely hope that it'll never happen again. But there's still the unpublished Mad Hatter story in their drawer, and the unpublished Joker...

Sources:
http://www.steveenglehart.com/Film/Batman%20movie.html
http://www.steveenglehart.com/Film/Dark%20Knight%20movie.html

Just to be clear, Engelhart and Rogers conceived Dark Detective as a sequel to their 1970s Detective Comics run. The first six part mini-series, which Engelhart refers to as "Dark Detective 2", was released in 2005. The script for the next mini-series (as Engelhart dubs as Dark Detective 3) was finished, but the series never got to be released to the public because Marshall Rogers passed away, and the artwork remained unfinished to this day. But nowadays, Engelhart sells his DD3 scripts to fans who are willing to pay for them: http://www.steveenglehart.com/Comics/Dark%20Detective%20III.html

I took some time this week to read Dark Detective 2 this week. Here are a few more examples I connected that Engelhart didn't mention.

DD2 and TDK both featured a love triangle. The comics had Silver St Cloud, Batman and Evan Gregory, whereas the film had Rachel Dawes, Batman and Harvey Dent.

But the difference is the comics explores its love triangle much deeper with existing material. In Engelhart and Rogers' original Detective Comics run, Bruce and Silver were dating each other, but Silver decided to break up after discovering Bruce was Batman, because she couldn't cope with the fear of losing him if he didn't survive from his nightly duties one day. In Dark Detective, Silver moved on and was engaged with Senator Evan Gregory. Long story short though, Batman and Silver had been poisoned by the Scarecrow's fear toxin, and as they survived their own personal demon and fears, they realised they were still in love with each other, and rekindled their relationship. Later, Silver tells the truth to Evan, and calls off their engagement. In comparison, the film's love triangle is pretty shallow and there wasn't enough time to develop it because of too many plot points going on. Not to mention that Bruce's relationship with Rachel in the films was far less intimate compared to his comics counterpart and Silver.

The only thing these versions have in common is neither Gregory or Dent ever suspected Bruce is Batman. Of course, Dent never learned that Bruce was still in love with his fiance, unlike Gregory.

Batman fights off cops. In DD, Batman is no longer legitimised by the GCPD. He constantly fights off cops trying to arrest him. In the film, he starts fighting off cops to stop them from killing hostages and became an outlaw because of the Dent cover-up. For reasons unknown, Commissioner Gordon is nowhere to be seen in the comic.

Fundraiser ballroom scenes. In DD, the story features Bruce Wayne attending a fundraising party for Senator Gregory, who is running for Governor. In TDK, Bruce hosts fundraising party for Dent at his own penthouse. Another curious similarity in DD is Batman has a secret closet located at the hotel hosting the party, where he can change out of costume and vice versa. In TDK, Bruce enters through a panic room in front of a couple of onlookers, right before fighting the Joker. And yes, DD has Batman confronting the Joker at the party too.

Batman has support from a political figure. It's revealed at the start of DD that Senator Gregory wants to permit Batman with legal authority again, and is willing to use his help when the Joker had kidnapped Silver. In the film, Dent relies on Batman to get Lau to indict the Maroni mob, and forces his hand to go after the Joker instead of turning himself over to the police.

There is a difference between the two characters' disfigurements. As Engelhart mentioned, Gregory had his entire left side damaged. To be specific, his left arm and leg have been severed by scythe when he tried to go after Silver when she was kept hostage in the Joker's hideout, an abandoned home set up with death traps. In the film, Dent tried to keep Rachel safe from the Joker, but got his left side of his face burned following a series of convoluted circumstances thanks to the Joker.

That planned character development for Evan Gregory as he meets Two-Face and becoming a villain does make a lot of sense and I would've liked to read that in a comic. It would've made another aspect of Two-Face's mythology rich: seeing a mirror image of somebody else who was exactly like Harvey Dent. Ambitious, politically-driven, brave, idealistic - until their lives was destroyed by fate, and thus, the only thing to do next is to embrace the darkness and exact vengeance against everybody. A vicious cycle of emptiness and hatred repeats itself once more. Sounds like working as a lawyer and a Senator in Gotham City will always lead to tragedy, and an indicator alone that the town can never be reformed.

Joker makes threats, and murders people via unconventional means. In DD, the Joker challenges Senator Gregory and announces his intention to run for Governor, and threatens to kill those who refuse to support him. He proceeds to do so to his unsuspecting victims e.g. audio CDs laced with Joker venom. In TDK, he announces he'll start killing spree if Batman doesn't turn himself in, and does so by bombing unsuspecting victims, tainting drinks with acid and so on. Another similarity is a victim sees the Joker's calling card before they die in a bomb explosion: Two-Face's clone in DD (long story, don't ask), and a judge in TDK.

Keep in mind though, TDK isn't a shot-by-shot ripoff of Engelhart's mini-series. There are differences, particularly the plot overall. But I understand why Engelhart would feel aggrieved that his work was used as an influence without getting any recognition for it.
Sadly, as Alan Moore once said, comics have become storyboard for films, and I suspect a lot of artists don't get compensated if ideas from their work get adapted. Particularly as something as obscure as Dark Detective.

You got to admit though, you can't help but laugh when Engelhart compares the likeness between Gregory and actor Aaron Eckhart.

[The Laughing Fish]

Mark Millar has expressed his distaste for BvS multiple times, this is his latest.



Way to undermine the integrity of all the lives lost in the Vietnam War by comparing your trivial dislike of a movie, Millar, you incomprehensible moron.

Besides, he should take a good look at himself in the mirror, because that piece of garbage Kick-Ass could easily be compared to child abuse. After all, it does feature a ten year old girl, who kills people and gets beaten up by a GROWN MAN. Pathetic excuse for a film, possibly even more pathetic excuse for a comic. Talk about living in glass houses.

[The Laughing Fish]

I've never heard of Jamal Igle before, but he did work for DC Comics at one stage. Some of his writing credits include working on Superman, Green Lantern, Nightwing and Supergirl. He's a BvS detractor, and this was his "insightful" criticism of the helipad scene between Superman and Lex:

Superman, at that point, had nothing to do with Luthor's plan. A plan, which makes zero sense. If his plan was to stop Darkseid, who he claims is the real threat, why send him to kill Batman? Why create Doomsday? It's a stupid plan.

Source: https://twitter.com/JAMALIGLE/status/991136235652435968



There's no animated GIF in the world that could convey the utter disbelief at Igle's blatant misunderstanding of Lex's plan. Either he has never watched the film and jumped on the hate bandwagon...or he has watched it, but didn't pay any attention to what was going on. Regardless, you have to laugh at the utter ignorance and stupidity of what he wrote. Even people who hated the film could understand that undermining Superman was the whole point of Lex's plan.

The talking down and mild ridicule Igle got from fan replies in that Twitter thread was totally deserved.

[thecolorsblend]

I've never heard of Jamal Igle before

You're not missing much.

Superman, at that point, had nothing to do with Luthor's plan. A plan, which makes zero sense. If his plan was to stop Darkseid, who he claims is the real threat, why send him to kill Batman? Why create Doomsday? It's a stupid plan.

Igle is missing the point, either on purpose or by accident. Either way, it's hard to know how all those scenes of Lex explaining his hatred of Superman went by him. But I've kept a close enough eye on Igle over the years to know that he's not exactly the deepest well on the farm.

[The Laughing Fish]

Mark Millar has expressed his distaste for BvS multiple times, this is his latest.



Way to undermine the integrity of all the lives lost in the Vietnam War by comparing your trivial dislike of a movie, Millar, you incomprehensible moron.

Besides, he should take a good look at himself in the mirror, because that piece of garbage Kick-Ass could easily be compared to child abuse. After all, it does feature a ten year old girl, who kills people and gets beaten up by a GROWN MAN. Pathetic excuse for a film, possibly even more pathetic excuse for a comic. Talk about living in glass houses.

This Mark Millar is even more screwed up than I thought. He had allegedly wrote a treatment of Wonder Woman getting raped for a storyline.

I pitched this to DC for a laugh years back. The idea was that, like Death of Superman, we had Rape of Wonder Woman; a twenty-two page rape scene that opened up into a gatefold at the end just like Superman did.

Source: http://lostmediaarchive.wikia.com/wiki/The_Rape_of_Wonder_Woman_(Unreleased_Mark_Millar_Comic_Book_Script)

I've heard of his obsession with women and girls getting sexually assaulted or facing threats of such abuse in the comics he writes. And this disturbed man has the nerve to post such hyperbolic condemnation of BvS? If degenerates like Millar are that successful, it's no wonder why the comics industry is dying.

[thecolorsblend]

Mark Millar has expressed his distaste for BvS multiple times, this is his latest.



Way to undermine the integrity of all the lives lost in the Vietnam War by comparing your trivial dislike of a movie, Millar, you incomprehensible moron.

Besides, he should take a good look at himself in the mirror, because that piece of garbage Kick-Ass could easily be compared to child abuse. After all, it does feature a ten year old girl, who kills people and gets beaten up by a GROWN MAN. Pathetic excuse for a film, possibly even more pathetic excuse for a comic. Talk about living in glass houses.

This Mark Millar is even more screwed up than I thought. He had allegedly wrote a treatment of Wonder Woman getting raped for a storyline.

I pitched this to DC for a laugh years back. The idea was that, like Death of Superman, we had Rape of Wonder Woman; a twenty-two page rape scene that opened up into a gatefold at the end just like Superman did.

Source: http://lostmediaarchive.wikia.com/wiki/The_Rape_of_Wonder_Woman_(Unreleased_Mark_Millar_Comic_Book_Script)

I've heard of his obsession with women and girls getting sexually assaulted or facing threats of such abuse in the comics he writes. And this disturbed man has the nerve to post such hyperbolic condemnation of BvS? If degenerates like Millar are that successful, it's no wonder why the comics industry is dying.

Honestly, the main reason the comic biz is dying is probably because people like Millar and Igle run it. And I'm not talking about their joyous personalities either.

I mean that literally people like them run the industry. Instead of hiring someone with legit publishing experience and an understanding of how periodicals should work, artists and writers tend to get those jobs. They may be incredibly talented in their crafts too. I'm not knocking them either way.

But if you look at the book publishing world, the talent generally writes the books and the management generally publishes the books.

Same thing with the world of talk radio. The talent always has a microphone near his mouth while the management handles the day-to-day business of running the program.

But in comics, it isn't that way. In comics, some jerkwad who doesn't know the first thing about publishing comics but who can draw one helluva poster is too often tasked with keeping a given book publishing on schedule. It's a completely insane system and I think it's a minor miracle that the industry is even still around.

Then again, it could just be inertia.

Either way, the comic industry is nuts.

[Silver Nemesis]

Steve Englehart shared his thoughts on the 1989 film in a piece he wrote for 13thDimension.com last June:

Nicholson is a legitimate legend, and Basinger was far better than she's remembered as being, but I really want to applaud Michael Keaton.

The story I heard at the time was, no "major" actor wanted to do a movie with a mask over his face, so director Tim Burton turned to his Beetlejuice star by default. However, it went down, Keaton really was the "definitive Batman" I'd written.

His characteristic dark internal tension was perfectly centered and perfectly under control, but the audience could always feel it. For my money, Christian Bale looked like Batman on the outside but Keaton looked like Batman on the inside, which is where Batman lives.

https://13thdimension.com/batman-89-an-appreciation-by-steve-englehart/

Keaton fans should make good use of that last sentence the next time haters trash his performance.

[thecolorsblend]

At some point this weekend, I'll try to transcribe some comic pros remarks about Batman Forever. These are hot takes made just after seeing the movie for the first time. And some of them are kind of surprising.