Escape to the Movies: The Losers

Recommended Videos

Pills_Here

New member
Dec 10, 2009
140
0
0
I just caught that bit of text at the end about "the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo". I might need to check that out considering how many TV spots it had a few weeks ago (which I completely forgot about until watching this).
 

Outright Villainy

New member
Jan 19, 2010
4,334
0
0
secretsantaone said:
You know that part where he starts shooting with his fingers and a guy with a sniper rifle kills them? I SWEAR I've seen that before, I just can't remember the film.

Anyone give me a hand?

EDIT: Nevermind, it was Crank.
I saw that in an episode of the X-files years ago even. And in Metal Gear Solid 4. It's pretty tropey...

Anyways, it doesn't look very interesting, but Zoe Saldana is pretty freakin' hot. Mmm...
 

Skaraa

New member
Dec 13, 2007
11
0
0
Man, I was really hoping that the movie was good. I read the comic book earlier this year. And the comic book is freaking awesome.
 

Abortedjesus

New member
Jan 22, 2010
4
0
0
MovieBob as much as I enjoy your reviews, respect and agree with most of what you say, I can't follow you on Robin. Robin is just not what the current run of Batman movies needs, Robin is a joke, and a bad one at that.

However, despite having said that, I would like to see Bat-Mite and Batzarro.
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
CK76 said:
I am surprised Bob would want to introduce Robin on the basis "it will make you money" when part of Nolan's Batman films is they have integrity to the character and have not thrown in villains for merchandise, but to fit narratives.
Bob's wants Robin in the movies because Robin is AWESOME. If "it will make more money" is what it takes to get the studio/filmmakers to do it, then so be it ;)

The problem with Robin has always been that he's a GREAT character who adds a vital extra element to the central Batman franchise... but only after you get past how stupid his existance is.

Lemme explain: From where I sit, Robin has remained a near-constant part of Batman longer than any other added-element because he improves the main character. It gives Batman someone to talk to who isn't a love-interest or a background player. It ups the stakes of the action scenes because now it's two people watching eachothers backs. It allows the exploration of just how "arrested" Batman's psyche actually is (i.e. Bruce Wayne has, in some respects, NOT matured significantly beyond whatever age his parents died at) by having him interact with someone who is a younger equivalent to himself. It helps solve the logic issues of Batman being everywhere at once. It lets you have moments of levity without compromising the lead character.

Problem is, to get ALL THAT... you have to somehow solve the problem that it makes no logical sense for any superhero, least of all Batman, to decide that adopting a troubled orphan and teaching him to be your wingman. Once you find a way around that, your golden ;)
 

Syphous

New member
Apr 6, 2009
833
0
0
I just paused the video... Robin? You're making a case FOR ROBIN? You disgust me.
 

Nomanslander

New member
Feb 21, 2009
2,963
0
0
OH FUCK NO....FUCK Robin!!!!!!...exmay on the Robin say, just say NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

XPdkwjogigjmeitgjrto;likj o vjh...XP






.....






Sorry, lost control there for a second and forgot what we were talking about...??

=)

(On a serious note, I'm sorry Bob, you might like the guy but Robin stands for everything that's wrong with the series. The whole point of his existence was that parents were afraid Batman was too dark for kids so they decided to throw in a teenage clown to PG it up and instead substituted crime and grit with pedophilic and homo erotic innuendos almost ruining Batman FOREVER.)
 

Solusumbra

New member
Apr 23, 2010
28
0
0
wolf_isthebest said:
Well 90% of the time i agree with Moviebob... But then there are this times, when he calls the recently deceased Spider-man franchise "good"
hey, the first and second spiderman movies were good. its just that third one that sucked.

i think its possible to do robin well. say what you will about the teen titans cartoon, robin was well done in it. but, i doubt Hollywood ability to portray him in a similarly awesome way...
 

Aiddon_v1legacy

New member
Nov 19, 2009
3,672
0
0
ZZoMBiE13 said:
SuperMse said:
Hey. when done right, Robin can kick some serious ass.
I never said otherwise. I said remember the last time HOLLYWOOD got ahold of the character?

Yes, he(or she) can be done well as B:TAS and Dark Knight Returns have proven. My point was that telling the suits who may be watching that adding ROBIN merely for the sake of turning more profit is a bad tightrope to walk, if you'll forgive the bad analogy considering the topic we're discussing.

All I'm saying is let it be Nolan and his creative team's decision. Don't tease the studios into doing something just for the sake of this weeks popular trend from KICK-ASS. That's what happened with O'Donnel and awful though they may be, Batman: Forever and Batman & Robin both made money. And that's all the studios care about. Development of characters should come from narrative, not a desire to sell action figures and badly made Halloween costumes for the underage set.
Which is why Nolan absolutely refuses to let him in and why he'll be wrapping up his Batman series with the third film as he knows he can't keep his storyline going on forever. Heck, he wasn't even sure he wanted to do a third film until him and his brother finally worked out the problems of the story. Plus I wonder if Warner is looking at how much of a mess Spider-Man turned into after Raimi had studio mandates shoved down his throat and decided that it's probably best to just let Nolan's team do their thing.

As for the Holmes analogy, there's a reason that the entire Holmes library is a bit of a mixed bag, as is the case with most pulp writers.
 

Decabo

New member
Dec 16, 2009
302
0
0
Why in the world are you calling for Robin? Nothing good can come from that.
 

mchoueiri

New member
Jun 10, 2009
212
0
0
well the losers looks like a fun time to spend with friends watch a action flick. the cats looks good enough but one thing in this review that troubled me. Avatar is not a better film the Star Trek. so yea just putting that out there avatar is a overhyped mess not saying is was awful but there better films out there but this is my opinion on the matter please do not bite my head off.
 

Decabo

New member
Dec 16, 2009
302
0
0
mchoueiri said:
well the losers looks like a fun time to spend with friends watch a action flick. the cats looks good enough but one thing in this review that troubled me. Avatar is not a better film the Star Trek. so yea just putting that out there avatar is a overhyped mess not saying is was awful but there better films out there but this is my opinion on the matter please do not bite my head off.
Avatar is better than Star Trek. I know hating on Avatar is popular, but the truth is Avatar is smarter, bigger, and better.
 

Nomanslander

New member
Feb 21, 2009
2,963
0
0
Oh and as for the movie, I'll tell you the first thing that strikes me from the trailers I've seen.

It reminds me of something Yahtzee said in his Uncharted 2 review talking about how Hollywood likes to take actors and personalities that look more than capable for their part and still consider them flawed.

Like one of his examples putting a Victoria model in a dirty sweater and calling her ugly, or suggesting a GQ model with a six pack is out of shape just because he grunts from jumping from one cliff edge to another.

The characters in this movie look nothing like a group of losers, they look like any generically bland cast of action figures you'd expect from a dumb as blonde movie like this. There is absolutely no attempt made to make them seem flawed in a slightest bit and yet I'm suppose to take the titles word for it?

This movie looks like 2 hours worth of fail wrapped in insult to me...:mad:
 

Solusumbra

New member
Apr 23, 2010
28
0
0
Decabo said:
Avatar is better than Star Trek. I know hating on Avatar is popular, but the truth is Avatar is smarter, bigger, and better.
avatar was not smarter. just because it played the old "respect nature and dont displace natives" card does not mean its smart. and the impressive graphics do not make it better. they just make it prettier.

im not hating on avatar. it simply was not some mind blowing experience.
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
Nomanslander said:
(On a serious note, I'm sorry Bob, you might like the guy but Robin stands for everything that's wrong with the series. The whole point of his existence was that parents were afraid Batman was too dark for kids so they decided to throw in a teenage clown to PG it up and instead substituted crime and grit with pedophilic and homo erotic innuendos almost ruining Batman FOREVER.)
Robin was added to the series in the 1940s mainly because someone at DC comics thought that having a kid the same age as most of the readers hanging out with Batman would appeal to them. Given that it's been SEVENTY years since then, and that there has been a Robin of one form or another in Batman books almost-constantly since, someone at DC comics seems to have been right about that. Just sayin' ;)

People forget this because Robin was mostly persona-non-grata in the (awful) grim-n-gritty 90s comics and didn't make it into the two Tim Burton movies, but the franchise has been "Batman & Robin" for 99% of it's existance: Batman was without a Robin for ONE YEAR - literally a mere 11 issues - of his existance. Pretty much every great Batman story ever written either involved a Robin or took place during a period when there was one.

I'm not necessarily saying that's the reason it "has to be" done... Just that there's got to be SOME reason why, no matter which version it is, he turns up in nearly every Batman retelling at some point...
 

mchoueiri

New member
Jun 10, 2009
212
0
0
Decabo said:
mchoueiri said:
well the losers looks like a fun time to spend with friends watch a action flick. the cats looks good enough but one thing in this review that troubled me. Avatar is not a better film the Star Trek. so yea just putting that out there avatar is a overhyped mess not saying is was awful but there better films out there but this is my opinion on the matter please do not bite my head off.
Avatar is better than Star Trek. I know hating on Avatar is popular, but the truth is Avatar is smarter, bigger, and better.
not not smarter but looking yea but not smarter no were close to smart. now I don't hate on avatar because everyone does I dislike it because I do not think it is a good film but I am stating my own thoughts on the matter. doesn't mean you have to agree with me or disagree.
 

J-Alfred

New member
Jul 28, 2009
608
0
0
Moviebob, your argument is flawed from the beginning. Hit Girl is getting attention for the over-the-top language she uses and violence she enacts, which can really only work in a bright, GARE-ish movie like Kick-Ass. In the darker, more subtle (kinda) Batman films, I don't think such a character would work in quite the same way as Hit Girl would.

As for Robin in a Batman film, that is a gutsy move. If they're going to put him in a Nolan Batman flick, the biggest thing they have to do is keep Robin his proper age. Don't bring in some 21-year old man who can look Batman in the eye without going on tip-toes in and say "Look! It's Robin!" Keep Robin 11. Keep him a child.

My advice for how Robin would work best would probably earn a lot of hate mail if enacted. I would:

Make Robin an 11 year old child who lost his parents under similar circumstances to Bruce Wayne. However, rather then spending years globetrotting and training to become the best superhero he can be, he just dives right into crime fighting, earning a name for himself.

In the mean time, Batman's alter ego, Wayne, is suffering mentally from his actions in The Dark Knight. Being on the run from the police has made him largely ineffective, as he has no friends on the streets of Gotham. The crooks he hunts all try to kill him, the police are trying to kill him, and even the common folks on the street will try to kill him if they see him. He is torn between the vow he made to his parents to save Gotham, and the realization that Gotham no longer wants him. He begins to debate hanging up the cowl for good.

One night, the night that is supposed to be his last night as Batman, he spies the young vigilante known as Robin getting his ass kicked. At first Batman is in shock over Robin's age, as the criminals defeated by Robin have lied about it in order to save face (no one wants to admit to being beaten up by a pre-teen). However, when it becomes clear that Robin needs Batman's help, he swoops in and saves the day, spiriting Robin away to the Batcave.

When Robin awakes, he finds that his wounds have been treated, but his mask has not been removed. Batman comes down to the cave and tells his story, how his parents were killed and how he too chose to become a vigilante, and how he is now starting to regret his choice. He tries to convince Robin to give up crime fighting, but Robin says that he can't; he made a promise to his parents to fight the evil that took their lives. Shocked by this remarkable similarity, Batman agrees to help Robin in his crusade, though Bruce has still chosen to retire his Batman persona (in the sense that he will no longer go out and fight crime).

He helps him by providing Robin with some of his martial arts training, as well as giving him his own utility belt and gadgets.

In the mean time, whatever villain they've put in the movie has slowly been assembling all
(s)he needs for their masterstroke. Batman has been trying to figure out what the plan is, and finally realizes that the big bad thing is being disguised as some benevolent act, so for him to attempt to stop it would make him even more of a monster in the eyes of Gotham City. This stuns him, and he can't bring himself to stop it. However, Robin is disgusted that Batman can break his promise to his parents so easily, and goes out alone to stop the bad guy. Batman of course realizes that Robin is right and helps him defeat the villain. However, at the last minute, Batman is detained by the big bad while Robin is caught, unmasked, and arrested.

At Robin's trial, Robin is aquitted after lawyers (paid for by Wayne) point out that according to all of Robin's victims, Robin is a man in his late teens or 20s, so this pre-teen can't be the real Robin, only some pretender. However, being so young and an orphan, the court rules that Robin will be a ward of the state, which fills Robin with dread, as he knows that due to the corrupt nature of the Gothom Police will allow them to force Robin into a situation where he can be killed. However, Bruce Wayne comes to Robin's rescue, making him his ward.

Back at Wayne Manor, Robin is wary of Bruce until he meets Alfred, who Robin recognizes from his time in the Batcave. Realizing who really adopted him, Robin asks Batman when he gets to go back out and fight crime. Batman says that "Robin" isn't going to anymore, that he needs a new name, like... "Nightwing".

The film ends with Batman and Nightwing going out into the night to clean up Gotham City.

Now I realize that there are some plot holes, and things that make little sense, and I know comic fans would be pissed that at the end Nightwing would be played by an 11 year old, but I think this would be the best way to work Robin into a Nolan Batman film.
 

Escapefromwhatever

New member
Feb 21, 2009
2,368
0
0
ZZoMBiE13 said:
SuperMse said:
Hey. when done right, Robin can kick some serious ass.
I never said otherwise. I said remember the last time HOLLYWOOD got ahold of the character?

Yes, he(or she) can be done well as B:TAS and Dark Knight Returns have proven. My point was that telling the suits who may be watching that adding ROBIN merely for the sake of turning more profit is a bad tightrope to walk, if you'll forgive the bad analogy considering the topic we're discussing.

All I'm saying is let it be Nolan and his creative team's decision. Don't tease the studios into doing something just for the sake of this weeks popular trend from KICK-ASS. That's what happened with O'Donnel and awful though they may be, Batman: Forever and Batman & Robin both made money. And that's all the studios care about. Development of characters should come from narrative, not a desire to sell action figures and badly made Halloween costumes for the underage set.
Alright. I'm sorry if it seemed like I was offending you; I was actually trying to say that just because it had been done badly in the past does not mean that we should not consider it for future installments. But yes, I agree that this should only be done if that's what Nolan's team wants.
 

LazyAza

New member
May 28, 2008
716
0
0
I think a good batman and robin could be done, robin would have to be really fucked up though for it to work. Like a kid who has an alcoholic abusive father and is hopelessly addicted to narcotics while also being regularly bullied at school before Bruce Wayne through some unlikely co-incidence runs in to him and takes pity on the little shit then chooses to raise him like a son or something. I dunno I'm not a writer. Though I imagine if they go for PG-13 that kind of story wont be possible so they'll probably steer clear of all things Robin. :p