This Movie Is Going To Suck

Deckard · 08-02-2008, 07:12 PM

NO those movies rocked because they DID stick to the source material. :> Man i can't wait to own Dark Knight.

Dream · 08-02-2008, 07:15 PM

Scarecrow being a drug dealer???
I don't remember that in the comics.

Deckard · 08-02-2008, 07:17 PM

he wasnt a true drug dealer...and they tried to wrap that character up i would assume in the movie verse. I suppose what I liked most about these movies is the massive lack of neon and nipples on the bat suits and just how dark it is and how much better of a cast they have had in these movies(katie holmes in the first one aside)

Monkeywrench · 08-02-2008, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shockblast

A crappy movie is getting us Resolute a PG-13 cartoon, besides how many lines can they possibly give Ripcord.

I got news for you. Ripcord is a major part of this movie

SportingViper · 08-02-2008, 10:13 PM

Batman(begins,DK) does stick to the source material. I'd say 90% of the bat movie. Just about all characters looked and acted like their comic counterpart.Looking at the stuff and rumors from the Joe movie so far I say only 10%.

spacemonkeymafia · 08-02-2008, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dream

Yes, because Batman Begins and the Dark Knight sucked ass because they didn't stick to the source material.

Ummm they did.........BatMan Begins was based on Frank Millers BatMan Year One.........

The Dark Knights Joker was the way he was when he first came around in the 30s........

The Bat Flicks have stayed true..........so your point?

spacemonkeymafia · 08-02-2008, 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dream

Scarecrow being a drug dealer???
I don't remember that in the comics.

He wasnt a Drug Dealer in the movies......he was being used by Ra...

Deckard · 08-02-2008, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacemonkeymafia

He wasnt a Drug Dealer in the movies......he was being used by Ra...

He meant in the very beginning of Dark knight. The scarecrow was posing as a dealer to sell his tainted drugs he had left, but they tossed him in really just to kinda explain what happened to him since he seemingly got away in the first film.

Monkeywrench · 08-02-2008, 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deckard

He meant in the very beginning of Dark knight. The scarecrow was posing as a dealer to sell his tainted drugs he had left, but they tossed him in really just to kinda explain what happened to him since he seemingly got away in the first film.

true. I thought it was really cool that they did that too. It kindof completed the first film.

spacemonkeymafia · 08-02-2008, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deckard

He meant in the very beginning of Dark knight. The scarecrow was posing as a dealer to sell his tainted drugs he had left, but they tossed him in really just to kinda explain what happened to him since he seemingly got away in the first film.

...or it could have been meant to be like in the comics were you see a baddie.....at the beginning just to say hey this dude has enemies he sees here and there....and who escape Arkum........