Retains the moral urgency and serious-minded pulp instincts that have made the Warners franchise a beacon of integrity in an increasingly comicbook-driven Hollywood universe.
Big-time Hollywood filmmaking at its most massively accomplished, this last installment of Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy makes everything in the rival Marvel universe look thoroughly silly and childish.
Potent and provocative, The Dark Knight Rises is the King Daddy of summer movie epics.
The Dark Knight Rises is a fitting emotional and narrative conclusion to this particular interpretation of the enduring story of Bruce Wayne the man and Batman the legend.
After a breathless, bravura final act, a nuclear payload of catharsis brings The Dark Knight Rises, and Nolan's trilogy, to a ferociously satisfying close.
The Dark Knight Rises only rarely starts to tremor under the weight of its own portent, and is not without its own sly humor. Well done.
For once a melodrama with pulp origins convinces viewers that it can be the modern equivalent to Greek myths or a Jonathan Swift satire. TDKR is that big, that bitter -- a film of grand ambitions and epic achievement.
I'm so tempted to read the reviews, but I know at least one will divulge way too much info.
I'm so tempted to read the reviews, but I know at least one will divulge way too much info.
Also am curious as to what kind of movie Nolan is going to do next.
The Dark Knight Rises is a fitting emotional and narrative conclusion to this particular interpretation of the enduring story of Bruce Wayne the man and Batman the legend.
Have the rumors about batman quoting Heidegger been confirmed? I seriously heard this was happening and I can't wait to see how awkward it is.
POPULAR MOVIE HATE THREAD PART 654
So thoughts on the rumor about JGL's true reason for being cast?
POPULAR MOVIE HATE THREAD PART 654
POPULAR MOVIE HATE THREAD PART 654
Mojo knows what's up. These hipsters are killing me, man.
:piss Boring and derivative bulllshit indie movies :piss2
:bow 500 Days of Summer :bow2
How much of the movie is shot in IMAX? The ratio switching for TDK was incredibly irritating.
Hopefully will be going to see it next Friday with this short and horny Italian chick I know.:rock
I might be wrong but I'm not recalling the format's fanfare during the production and release of Inception. I only just caught up with that one and Nolan similarily waxes about the 'grand canvas' and recapturing his youth experience of the bigscreen; the same ideal. Why didn't he go for it?
didn't really like the other two at all
will be seeing this regardless
i don't know why either
I'm with Eric, I'm the guy who thought TDK was overwrought and silly and that the trailers for this one make it look worse. I'm still going next Thursday.
Can someone explain to this filthy 3rd world poor who never watched something shot in IMAX what's this all about and what kind of difference are we talking here? I've never cared before because of its unavailability.
The review aggregation site has temporarily suspended user comments on reviews across its site after readers reacted angrily to two negative write-ups of "The Dark Knight Rises" and made threatening and derogatory remarks about the critics who wrote them.
QuoteThe review aggregation site has temporarily suspended user comments on reviews across its site after readers reacted angrily to two negative write-ups of "The Dark Knight Rises" and made threatening and derogatory remarks about the critics who wrote them.
http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/17/rotten-tomatoes-halts-reader-comments-amid-dark-knight-furor/
That's been going on for years! :lol
The Dark Knight Rises star Christian Bale has come out as an LMFAO fan.
The Batman actor was introduced to the oeuvre of the US pop-rap duo - known for their hits 'Party Rock Anthem', 'Sexy And I Know It' and 'Sorry For Party Rocking' - by his seven-year-old daughter, Emmeline.'
Rotten Tomatoes & Nolan fans. :-\
Rotten Tomatoes & Nolan fans. :-\
I wonder if Manabytes internally constructed nerd hierarchy could be played out in a visual diagram or something. Like could we quantify the difference between how terrible a Twilight fan is compared to a Nolan fan? The metrics involved are probably pretty complex.
I wonder if Manabytes internally constructed nerd hierarchy could be played out in a visual diagram or something. Like could we quantify the difference between how terrible a Twilight fan is compared to a Nolan fan? The metrics involved are probably pretty complex.
I must admit I hope TDKR doesn't break any of The Avengers' records, just to shut up Nolan fanboys. All while simultaneously hating on The Avengers every chance I get, despite not seeing it.
I must admit I hope TDKR doesn't break any of The Avengers' records, just to shut up Nolan fanboys. All while simultaneously hating on The Avengers every chance I get, despite not seeing it.
Guess that makes me the Ron Paul of this box office season
I must admit I hope TDKR doesn't break any of The Avengers' records, just to shut up Nolan fanboys. All while simultaneously hating on The Avengers every chance I get, despite not seeing it.
Guess that makes me the Ron Paul of this box office season
So basically he's a Kobe-stan, and Cameron or Nolan are guys like Wade or LeBron?
Manabyte hates the Nolan Batmans if I remember correctly.
does batman fuck catwoman in ths one or does he just go home and bitterly masturbate while still wearing his costume
Half the reason I watch Get Smart is to see Anne Hathaway in the trip-laser scene. JEEESUS.
Also its a funny movie.
How Spidey 3 should've endedThis is some amazing life changing shit right here. My eyes welled up a bit from laughing so much.
seeing this tomorrow at work
could not POSSIBLY care less
fuck this gay earth
fuck this gay earth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mfA1jNiqoU
One SPOILER questionspoiler (click to show/hide)Does Batman say "I'm too old for this shit" at any point?[close]
Come on now, Treesong, don't be disingenuous! Inception had TWO jokes, "Mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling" AND Arthur kissing Ariadne.And the part where the Indian guy maneuvers the bus through a gun fight, then turns around to receive some dap only to realize they're all sleep
Film Spoiler:spoiler (click to show/hide)So, someone was spoiling the movie for me and told me that there's a guy named John Daget that plays a business rival to Bruce Wayne. I know it isn't Black Mask but was there anything preventing that character being Roman Sionis?[close]
If I had to choose between living in the Marvel Movie Universe and the Nolan Batman Universe, JESUS FUCK I would hightail it to the Baxter Building ASAP.
Everyone else loved it more than me because it was "so serious" and "took itself seriously" and "didn't joke around like the Avengers" and "Batman is real." If you think Batman, even Nolan's Batman, is realistic then BOY you have some issues with reality.
Everyone else loved it more than me because it was "so serious" and "took itself seriously" and "didn't joke around like the Avengers" and "Batman is real." If you think Batman, even Nolan's Batman, is realistic then BOY you have some issues with reality.
ahahahahaha
can someone explain this "it has to be serious because goddamit i'm a grown up!!!!!" shit that goes on these days? is this recent? i don't get it. how can you take issue with the avengers and still CLAIM to be a comic book fan?
Also, Catwoman is a shit character and has been a waste of screen and panel time in every single Batman related media she has been sans The Animated Series and Batman Returns. Catwoman sucks and her only purpose is overt and obvious sex appeal. She is such a shit character.
Also, Catwoman is a shit character and has been a waste of screen and panel time in every single Batman related media she has been sans The Animated Series and Batman Returns. Catwoman sucks and her only purpose is overt and obvious sex appeal. She is such a shit character.
I'm hoping for a glorious sex scene of batman and catwoman while in their costumes.
I'm not trying to start a shitslinging, I'm generally just fucking with you, but I find both arguments (Batman has to be super-realistic!!! and It's just a fucking dude in a bat suit, why so serious???) to be equally as fucktarded. But what I refer to:
-Year One
-Killing Joke
-The Man Who Laughs
-Dark Knight Returns
Also really like Loeb and Sale's run
meh it's not worth fighting about, I just like a serious tone with these films; it feels much more authentic to the Batman that I grew up liking
Everyone else loved it more than me because it was "so serious" and "took itself seriously" and "didn't joke around like the Avengers" and "Batman is real." If you think Batman, even Nolan's Batman, is realistic then BOY you have some issues with reality.
ahahahahaha
can someone explain this "it has to be serious because goddamit i'm a grown up!!!!!" shit that goes on these days? is this recent? i don't get it. how can you take issue with the avengers and still CLAIM to be a comic book fan?
The reason why Nolan went the realistic route was because up until Avengers, the belief was that you had to ground comic book movies in reality to appeal to the general public.
Rocket Racoon is gonna set comic book crazy back 15 years. ;_;
(I just read a blog that pointed out Rocket Raccoon is going to hit the big screen before Wonder Woman :lol)
When did the Killing Joke movie come out?
Of that list, the only one Nolan's movies is remotely like is Year One with Begins. There's a bit of Long Halloween in TDK though.
Guardians of the Galaxy is going to bomb so hard.
The Avengers wasn't that realistic but it was grounded enough that people could suspend disbelief plus those characters were relatively well-known and had enjoyable movies setting things up. Ain't nobody (general public) going to be down for no fuckin' smart ass raccoon that shoots people on a team with tree man, green chick with sword, green kratos, and Star Lord.
Guardians Of The Galaxy...lol. If it was a CGI film I could see it doing very well, but a live action comic film full of heroes no one knows about - that is only being made to introduce people to characters that will be in The Avengers 2?
The reason why Nolan went the realistic route was because up until Avengers, the belief was that you had to ground comic book movies in reality to appeal to the general public.
are the people that dislike/not really enjoy the recent batman films big comic fans?
I have to wait until sometime next week to watch TDKR. :(
The May 2008 sales estimates were that the first issue had sold 39,854 copies, making it the 61st top-selling comic title that month.[31] The first and second issues sold out;[32] they have been reprinted in a collected edition
THAT WAS... not a good movie.
THAT WAS... not a good movie.
The simplest thing I can say is that this movie took everything that was 'off' about the Dark Knight and expanded upon that. Generally... people acting really stupid and an unbelievably resourceful villain. Bad dialogue too. I wasn't pissed off too much about Catwoman honestly, well except for a few instances.
I'd kill to see a non-cheesy, well-written, awesomely violent Punisher movie.
Cajole will be the deciding vote/opinion
I'd kill to see a non-cheesy, well-written, awesomely violent Punisher movie.
GO WATCH THE MOVIE.I thought Catwoman was good and that Nolan managed to makelikable. The actor helps in that as well.spoiler (click to show/hide)Robin[close]
Wait, you're saying thatis in this movie? Answer me this:spoiler (click to show/hide)Robin[close]spoiler (click to show/hide)is he played by JGL?[close]
Another thing I noticed Eric P, was that theres a shot of Castle by his families tombstone, and then it cleverly cuts to a birds-eye view of the city, obviously because buildings look like tombstones.I'd kill to see a non-cheesy, well-written, awesomely violent Punisher movie.
like War Zone?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-20/time-warner-cancels-batman-premiere-in-paris-after-deaths.htmlI wonder which member of film gaf will be the first to mention this "externality" in a box office thread.
DKR is gonna make significantly less money this weekend because of that psycho yesterday. My friends don't want to watch it today anymore because they're so freaked out.
I know I'm a terrible person, but who the hell takes their 3-month old to a movie at midnight?
DKR is gonna make significantly less money this weekend because of that psycho yesterday. My friends don't want to watch it today anymore because they're so freaked out.
Someone's getting fired:
https://twitter.com/celebboutique/status/226369632154570752
also, Marion Cotillard is strikingly beautiful. It wasn't fair to Anne Hathaway, or anyone on planet Earth.
(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/695475/thumbs/o-CELEBBOUTIQUE-TWEET-570.jpg?4)
That person is still getting fired.
That person is still getting fired.
Oh, yeah. No doubt. But it wasn't somebody thinking "how can I turn this shooting tragedy into sales for Kim Kardashian!"
Apparently Warner Bros. is being pressured into taking this out of theatres because of the shooting? Good lord, the media in this country is atrocious.
I thought the tweet was funny, ok.
Major networks are removing TV ads from their lineups apparently (link (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-tv-ads-dark-knight-rises-20120720,0,4533122.story)). Absurd.
Major networks are removing TV ads from their lineups apparently (link (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-tv-ads-dark-knight-rises-20120720,0,4533122.story)). Absurd.
Why? That's how marketing/advertisement tends to work: when a product gets tied to something like this, ads are pulled so the brand isn't sullied temporarily.
Why? That's how marketing/advertisement tends to work: when a product gets tied to something like this, ads are pulled so the brand isn't sullied temporarily.
Major networks are removing TV ads from their lineups apparently (link (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-tv-ads-dark-knight-rises-20120720,0,4533122.story)). Absurd.
Question about JGL:spoiler (click to show/hide)Does he wear a Robin/Nightwing-esque suit at any point?[close]
spoiler (click to show/hide)Talia should have been revealed at the halfway point when Bane takes over the city.[close]
spoiler (click to show/hide)The atom bomb plot point was too forced IMO. I at no point believed there was any danger of it going off. When you escalate that much to nukes you're pretty much guaranteeing that it's not going to happen. Especially not against the city.
Bane's demise felt anti-climatic.
Overall not enough Batman action. His "return" didn't seem epic or anything. Lacked punch.
[close]
IMO I think this movie is going to far better in the long term than TDK did.
spoiler (click to show/hide)Talia should have been revealed at the halfway point when Bane takes over the city.[close]
Nah.spoiler (click to show/hide)IMO holding off made it work because they don't try to make you question the Bane origin at all. Then when they do the reveal you're like. OH. YEAH![close]
yeahspoiler (click to show/hide)They made me write off Talia after Bane's origin, so I was genuinely surprised at the reveal. Also, I'm not too bright. That helped.[close]
I heard the numbers were purposely held back... out of respect?
Also, where the fuck are the weekend box office estimates? They usually come out early afternoon on Sunday, but it's friggin' 8pm and boxofficemojo still hasn't updated. Curious to see what the film grossed.
Also, where the fuck are the weekend box office estimates? They usually come out early afternoon on Sunday, but it's friggin' 8pm and boxofficemojo still hasn't updated. Curious to see what the film grossed.
I just checked that site and thought the same thing. I checked around a few sites and the estimates range from $160-162 million.
http://www.seattlepi.com/entertainment/tv/tvguide/article/Box-Office-Dark-Knight-Rises-Expected-to-Become-3726505.php
Finally went to go see TDKR today; 45 minutes before the ending the fire department showed up and made everyone evacuate. :-\
can someone link me to scenes from the movie? Solo is talking about watching the ending about 25 times.
I suck at youtubing/googling shit,so if anyone can help me out id appreciate it.
Movie was awesome!!!!!
the Bane/Batman fights where great, it was good to finally see batman in a cool fistfight.
Only problem I had with the movie is that it needed to be longer.
jarosh went on a twitter rant about how awful this movie was. oh jarosh :(
...I actually like that, though. Then again, I'm not your average filmgoer so whatever.
To be fair, his criticism of the pacing is legitimate.
I love the guy but I don't think I've ever seen him enjoy a movie that wasn't "Panty-Wearing Swedes: Why Can't I Wear Skinny Jeans" indie films
The music when Bruce was in the pit was awesome
TDKR is better than TDK and is better on rewatches
I think my favorite scene in the movie isspoiler (click to show/hide)When Selina Kyle is leading Batman down into the sewers, specifically the brief little clip where a guy starts shooting at Batman and in between the flashes Batman appears closer and closer to the camera. It's so deliciously weird.
Also, that one cop that doesn't even get a name in the movie but keeps getting these stupid lines and his acting is really terrible but somehow I kept laughing every time he spoke. :lol[close]
That was hardly a rant. I could go on one, but what's the point?
That was hardly a rant. I could go on one, but what's the point?
Speak of the devil and he shall appear! :omg
Another scene I liked:spoiler (click to show/hide)When Batman beats Bane and then starts yelling at him about the location of the detonator. He sounded EXACTLY like all those parody videos where Batman just yells/growls incoherently at everyone. :lol[close]
cloud told me about this thread :ninja
Another scene I liked:spoiler (click to show/hide)When Batman beats Bane and then starts yelling at him about the location of the detonator. He sounded EXACTLY like all those parody videos where Batman just yells/growls incoherently at everyone. :lol[close]
cloud told me about this thread :ninja
:heartbeat
i thought TDKR blew. this was a batman movie? okay so where the fuck was batman? seriously how much screen time did batman actually have in a 3-hour long batman movie... 10 minutes? because that's what it felt like.
i like the previous two films, but this movie was a hot mess. the pacing was so fucked up it was jarring at times. the plot was weak. the exposition was clumsy as fuck. bane was lame as shit as a villain, Joker in the last film completely annihilates him in that respect. batman was barely ever on screen.
i liked hathaway as catwoman, though, she pulled it off much better than expected. joseph gordon levitt was good too. that's about it.
amazing spider man was way better than this crap.
TDKR > TDK
... why
I was laughing hysterically during that scene for this exact reason. :lol
Another scene I liked:spoiler (click to show/hide)When Batman beats Bane and then starts yelling at him about the location of the detonator. He sounded EXACTLY like all those parody videos where Batman just yells/growls incoherently at everyone. :lol[close]
I don't think any of Nolan's Batman movies posess much character insight (there's a glimmer of it in the Joker character) or even actual character development. It's all just superficial make-believe: tedious exposition, trite, simplistic visual and spoken metaphors.
I loved this movie a lot- fuk off haters
Also I thought filmmaking was an art- who cares if he isnt doing it how people expect it to be done. blahhhh people need to just enjoy movies
I loved this movie a lot- fuk off haters
Also I thought filmmaking was an art- who cares if he isnt doing it how people expect it to be done. blahhhh people need to just enjoy movies
TDKR looks like it's probably going to settle in somewhere around $450 million, quite a bit less than TDK but still a ton of money. The more interesting number right now is the overseas total, where Batman had traditionally not been as successful as other superhero movies. TDK actually made more money domestically than overseas, which is almost unheard of for modern blockbusters. Looking at the all-time chart, you'd have to go all the way down to the Hunger Games [at #50] to find another movie released within the past decade that did that. Anyway, TDKR's overseas number look really good so far and that's with only two major markets [UK and Australia].
i support stop thinking nerd
Quote from: jaroshI don't think any of Nolan's Batman movies posess much character insight (there's a glimmer of it in the Joker character) or even actual character development. It's all just superficial make-believe: tedious exposition, trite, simplistic visual and spoken metaphors.
so what you're saying is that it's a comic book movie.
i coulda told you that because it stars a man who dresses like a nocturnal rodent and features an antagonist named "bane"
i support stop thinking nerd
this is shocking, considering the books you read
legit criticism is fine, but it seems like jarosh's issues stem from the genre and not the film. the movie is a fucking super hero flick, probably the least subtle film genre out there next to hardcore porn and children television/films
legit criticism is fine, but it seems like jarosh's issues stem from the genre and not the film. the movie is a fucking super hero flick, probably the least subtle film genre out there next to hardcore porn and children television/films.
So now we have definitive proof that TDK exploded at the BO because of Ledger's death
youre clearly butthurt about SOMETHIN!
youre clearly butthurt about SOMETHIN!
i was kidding with you about the books, man :P
But it's still ultimately a man in a bat suit. Serious, realistic, and even sophisticated are not really accurate descriptors despite the tone.
Quote from: jaroshI don't think any of Nolan's Batman movies posess much character insight (there's a glimmer of it in the Joker character) or even actual character development. It's all just superficial make-believe: tedious exposition, trite, simplistic visual and spoken metaphors.
so what you're saying is that it's a comic book movie.
i coulda told you that because it stars a man who dresses like a nocturnal rodent and features an antagonist named "bane"
Pretty much is what I think. This isn't fucking Oscar-bait
Did you know that Egans spelled backwards is Snage?
Snage
A female homosapien with beautious qualities. Most notably surrounding the buttox. Her booty to overall body size ratio is estimated around 50/1. Directly influencing history, the Snage booty has even being blamed for the sack of Rome in 500AD. Overall, Some would compare the urban legend of Snage to Bigfoot... if bigfoot was hairless and had the body of a godess...
Alex: "look at the BUNS on that Snage"
I don't know what you mean tried to be more than a comic story considering the second half of the story is ripped right out of No Man's Land.
Again, this tone is consistent with Batman stories.
Then again sometimes I think not everyone wants to talk about what makes a movie like Johnny Mnemonic so brilliant.
Inception had some pretty good action scenes [thinking specifically about the hotel fight with JGL].
then again I have yet to see a Nolan film that I would rate as anything less than "very good" personally, so I guess it was right in my wheelhouse.
Nolan's Batman's are still very comic booky, the real pretentiousness comes from fans looking for it, putting up Nolan's trilogy on a pedestal.
As a huge Batmantard and Nolan fanboy, they are very pulpy comic books with over the top characters. Hell TDKR is arguably the most like a comic book out of the 3.
You and me both, brother. Let's go somewhere quiet and talk about how awesome Nolan is.
Quote from: jaroshI don't think any of Nolan's Batman movies posess much character insight (there's a glimmer of it in the Joker character) or even actual character development. It's all just superficial make-believe: tedious exposition, trite, simplistic visual and spoken metaphors.
so what you're saying is that it's a comic book movie.
i coulda told you that because it stars a man who dresses like a nocturnal rodent and features an antagonist named "bane"
Pretty much is what I think. This isn't fucking Oscar-bait
That would be a fair argument had the movie aimed to be your average comic book flick, however it aspired to be something more complex, with depth, and strong themes. It tried more than any other movie in the genre to blur the comic books lines and tropes. So I think it's fair to call it out on its failure to reach those lofty goals. Nolan tried to set his trilogy aside from the pack and push it into different directions, so get used to it being judged based on different standards.
Edit: Whoops, beaten by Egan.
I think what Jarosh has a problem with is the fact that Nolan makes it appear as though his Batman series is serious and sophisticated when really it has all the superficiality that's expected from comic book pap. It doesn't justify it's own pretentiousness. I don't necessarily agree with this, but I think an argument could definitely be made.
but what about TEH THEMES in my comic book summer blockbuster filmzDid *I* create the themes? Did you? Or any of the critics? No, it was Nolan. And if you inject your movie with all these grim, serious, delicate and complex themes, then you better know how to explore them properly. Otherwise, don't bother. It is not enough to try. If your movie simply doesn't *attempt* to explore complex themes and/or at least doesn't proudly, obnoxiously wear them on its sleeve, there's nothing wrong with that; it can shine in other areas instead. It's not a necessity for a movie to feature an array of themes that are difficult to tackle for it to be good/fun/interesting/entertaining.
Which leads right into my next point. Never once did I say that the movie failed to live up to any of my previously held personal expectations. I had *zero* "hype" built up for it. I do not and never have cared about "hype". I don't go out of my way to watch trailers or read *anything* about the movies I intend to watch. I do not participate in message board threads about them. I do not even read reviews before watching a movie unless I have zero interest in it. There is nothing I could care less about than movie hype.
What I *am* complaining about are the expectations the movie itself builds up. Which really should have been obvious from my previous posts. No, again, I'm not talking about interviews any of the film crew might have given in advance of the release. It is the movie that sets up something it never delivers on. It repeatedly informs the viewer of its intentions in the most un-subtle way imaginable, mostly through dry, heavy-handed and artless dialogue/exposition, but then never has anything interesting to say about any of the subjects or ideas it puts into the spotlight. This is pretty awkward. Of course if you stop at the movie's intentions - which, sadly, most critics are pretty content to do - you'll find yourself with a film that *has* a lot of themes and then frequently gets praised for that simple achievement of posessing them versus Actually Having Something To Say About Them.
Here's a positive example from the second movie (TDK): I was really quite surprised on how the little stories the Joker tells about the origin of his disfigured face were handled. I don't remember if he tells two or three of these and I don't recall any of the details, but it doesn't matter. He first tells the story about his face to, I believe, one of his "victims". It's something about his childhood, maybe something about a knife being used to cut a permanent smile into his face. It doesn't matter. I remember my reaction to it: I thought it was a moderately interesting backstory, but nothing that added all that much to his personality, but I had also almost kind of hoped his origins, his history and motives would have stayed completely in the dark. Then, a while later, he tells an entirely different story about those same cuts to someone else. Now, this was interesting. All of a sudden we wonder: Obviously the earlier story couldn't have been true. Is this one? Probably not. Why does he make up these elaborate, cruel stories about the origin of his disfigurement? Now here's an interesting aspect of his personality, more so than the (made up) story about his childhood (which once again would have been nothing more than exposition feigning insight); here's something we are watching the character do right now on screen, something that goes beyond the *literal* content of the dialogue. I admit I half expected one of the Joker's goons to openly start wondering about the reasons for his deception, in typical Nolan fashion, and then for the Joker to answer with a throwaway quip/faux insight about The Nature Of Truth. Thankfully that didn't happen.
Now, letting your characters say how they feel about themselves or others, letting them tell stories about their past and/or how that changed who they are today, letting them state their opinions (most of which consist of platitudes and vague moralistic or spiritual truisms) about The Themes, none of that is good or interesting writing, none of it *really* tells us anything about the characters, it's just pretense, affectation. Characters don't *do* anything to show that something shaped them in a certain way, something that will make us go "oh, that's interesting", they simply *say* that it happened and move on. It's really a simple case of Tell over Show, something that Nolan has yet to learn about apparently. And this has *nothing* to do with genres or super hero movies. Hell, lose the themes, tell us something true about the characters instead, independent from any overarching, crude attempt at letting us know - nudge nudge wink wink - that you have something important to say about the human condition. Or at least have good action, or be FUNNY - or something. Don't waste so much time and energy on trying to convince us that your movie is something it so clearly *isn't*. Iron Man, Spider-Man 1 and 2 are all ultimately more successful movies than TDKR, because, for the most part, they don't try so goddamn hard to be more than comic book movies.
So, then, Amazing Spider-Man. A great movie? Hardly. But an entertaining one. It has plenty of problems too and it is ultimately probably pretty forgettable, but it has one thing over Nolan's Batman movies (more than one really, but I'll focus on this one): It has moments of genuine, heartfelt human connection, of compassion and empathy. One example: When Parker comes home to Aunt May late at night, after he's been beaten up, nearly died, but still, naturally, finally saved the day, they share a quiet intimate moment. They look at each other, her full of sorrow but finally relieved to see him alive, him guilty about the earlier argument. Then they exchange a few words, finally hug each other. It's brief and very simple, nothing rich with meaning or subtext or anything, but it feels genuine. Moments like these are *nowhere* to be found in TDKR (they are plentiful in Raimi's Spider-Man 2 as well) . It simply doesn't have time for them. It's a 3 hour long montage, mercilessly scored into the ground by Zimmer. It never comes to a halt, but still has many long, oddly paced and even boring stretches. Because, while it doesn't take the time to explore some, *any* of its themes or characters in more detail - which would require the odd quiet moment without music or expository dialogue or (shockingly conventional) action - it does take the the time to linger on inane plot details and devices that further the story for no other reason than to further the story. The script is pragmatically, hurriedly working down a list of story bullet points and at the end is finally relieved when it's all over, and that everything sort of fit into those 164 minutes.spoiler (click to show/hide)Ang Lee's Hulk, by the way, for all its faults, has ten times the character depth and insight of Nolan's Batman movies, but is magnitudes less Dark with a capital D.[close]
but what about TEH THEMES in my comic book summer blockbuster filmzDid *I* create the themes? Did you? Or any of the critics? No, it was Nolan. And if you inject your movie with all these grim, serious, delicate and complex themes, then you better know how to explore them properly. Otherwise, don't bother. It is not enough to try. If your movie simply doesn't *attempt* to explore complex themes and/or at least doesn't proudly, obnoxiously wear them on its sleeve, there's nothing wrong with that; it can shine in other areas instead. It's not a necessity for a movie to feature an array of themes that are difficult to tackle for it to be good/fun/interesting/entertaining.
Which leads right into my next point. Never once did I say that the movie failed to live up to any of my previously held personal expectations. I had *zero* "hype" built up for it. I do not and never have cared about "hype". I don't go out of my way to watch trailers or read *anything* about the movies I intend to watch. I do not participate in message board threads about them. I do not even read reviews before watching a movie unless I have zero interest in it. There is nothing I could care less about than movie hype.
What I *am* complaining about are the expectations the movie itself builds up. Which really should have been obvious from my previous posts. No, again, I'm not talking about interviews any of the film crew might have given in advance of the release. It is the movie that sets up something it never delivers on. It repeatedly informs the viewer of its intentions in the most un-subtle way imaginable, mostly through dry, heavy-handed and artless dialogue/exposition, but then never has anything interesting to say about any of the subjects or ideas it puts into the spotlight. This is pretty awkward. Of course if you stop at the movie's intentions - which, sadly, most critics are pretty content to do - you'll find yourself with a film that *has* a lot of themes and then frequently gets praised for that simple achievement of posessing them versus Actually Having Something To Say About Them.
Here's a positive example from the second movie (TDK): I was really quite surprised on how the little stories the Joker tells about the origin of his disfigured face were handled. I don't remember if he tells two or three of these and I don't recall any of the details, but it doesn't matter. He first tells the story about his face to, I believe, one of his "victims". It's something about his childhood, maybe something about a knife being used to cut a permanent smile into his face. It doesn't matter. I remember my reaction to it: I thought it was a moderately interesting backstory, but nothing that added all that much to his personality, but I had also almost kind of hoped his origins, his history and motives would have stayed completely in the dark. Then, a while later, he tells an entirely different story about those same cuts to someone else. Now, this was interesting. All of a sudden we wonder: Obviously the earlier story couldn't have been true. Is this one? Probably not. Why does he make up these elaborate, cruel stories about the origin of his disfigurement? Now here's an interesting aspect of his personality, more so than the (made up) story about his childhood (which once again would have been nothing more than exposition feigning insight); here's something we are watching the character do right now on screen, something that goes beyond the *literal* content of the dialogue. I admit I half expected one of the Joker's goons to openly start wondering about the reasons for his deception, in typical Nolan fashion, and then for the Joker to answer with a throwaway quip/faux insight about The Nature Of Truth. Thankfully that didn't happen.
Now, letting your characters say how they feel about themselves or others, letting them tell stories about their past and/or how that changed who they are today, letting them state their opinions (most of which consist of platitudes and vague moralistic or spiritual truisms) about The Themes, none of that is good or interesting writing, none of it *really* tells us anything about the characters, it's just pretense, affectation. Characters don't *do* anything to show that something shaped them in a certain way, something that will make us go "oh, that's interesting", they simply *say* that it happened and move on. It's really a simple case of Tell over Show, something that Nolan has yet to learn about apparently. And this has *nothing* to do with genres or super hero movies. Hell, lose the themes, tell us something true about the characters instead, independent from any overarching, crude attempt at letting us know - nudge nudge wink wink - that you have something important to say about the human condition. Or at least have good action, or be FUNNY - or something. Don't waste so much time and energy on trying to convince us that your movie is something it so clearly *isn't*. Iron Man, Spider-Man 1 and 2 are all ultimately more successful movies than TDKR, because, for the most part, they don't try so goddamn hard to be more than comic book movies.
So, then, Amazing Spider-Man. A great movie? Hardly. But an entertaining one. It has plenty of problems too and it is ultimately probably pretty forgettable, but it has one thing over Nolan's Batman movies (more than one really, but I'll focus on this one): It has moments of genuine, heartfelt human connection, of compassion and empathy. One example: When Parker comes home to Aunt May late at night, after he's been beaten up, nearly died, but still, naturally, finally saved the day, they share a quiet intimate moment. They look at each other, her full of sorrow but finally relieved to see him alive, him guilty about the earlier argument. Then they exchange a few words, finally hug each other. It's brief and very simple, nothing rich with meaning or subtext or anything, but it feels genuine. Moments like these are *nowhere* to be found in TDKR (they are plentiful in Raimi's Spider-Man 2 as well) . It simply doesn't have time for them. It's a 3 hour long montage, mercilessly scored into the ground by Zimmer. It never comes to a halt, but still has many long, oddly paced and even boring stretches. Because, while it doesn't take the time to explore some, *any* of its themes or characters in more detail - which would require the odd quiet moment without music or expository dialogue or (shockingly conventional) action - it does take the the time to linger on inane plot details and devices that further the story for no other reason than to further the story. The script is pragmatically, hurriedly working down a list of story bullet points and at the end is finally relieved when it's all over, and that everything sort of fit into those 164 minutes.spoiler (click to show/hide)Ang Lee's Hulk, by the way, for all its faults, has ten times the character depth and insight of Nolan's Batman movies, but is magnitudes less Dark with a capital D.[close]
but what about TEH THEMES in my comic book summer blockbuster filmzDid *I* create the themes? Did you? Or any of the critics? No, it was Nolan. And if you inject your movie with all these grim, serious, delicate and complex themes, then you better know how to explore them properly. Otherwise, don't bother. It is not enough to try. If your movie simply doesn't *attempt* to explore complex themes and/or at least doesn't proudly, obnoxiously wear them on its sleeve, there's nothing wrong with that; it can shine in other areas instead. It's not a necessity for a movie to feature an array of themes that are difficult to tackle for it to be good/fun/interesting/entertaining.
Which leads right into my next point. Never once did I say that the movie failed to live up to any of my previously held personal expectations. I had *zero* "hype" built up for it. I do not and never have cared about "hype". I don't go out of my way to watch trailers or read *anything* about the movies I intend to watch. I do not participate in message board threads about them. I do not even read reviews before watching a movie unless I have zero interest in it. There is nothing I could care less about than movie hype.
What I *am* complaining about are the expectations the movie itself builds up. Which really should have been obvious from my previous posts. No, again, I'm not talking about interviews any of the film crew might have given in advance of the release. It is the movie that sets up something it never delivers on. It repeatedly informs the viewer of its intentions in the most un-subtle way imaginable, mostly through dry, heavy-handed and artless dialogue/exposition, but then never has anything interesting to say about any of the subjects or ideas it puts into the spotlight. This is pretty awkward. Of course if you stop at the movie's intentions - which, sadly, most critics are pretty content to do - you'll find yourself with a film that *has* a lot of themes and then frequently gets praised for that simple achievement of posessing them versus Actually Having Something To Say About Them.
Here's a positive example from the second movie (TDK): I was really quite surprised on how the little stories the Joker tells about the origin of his disfigured face were handled. I don't remember if he tells two or three of these and I don't recall any of the details, but it doesn't matter. He first tells the story about his face to, I believe, one of his "victims". It's something about his childhood, maybe something about a knife being used to cut a permanent smile into his face. It doesn't matter. I remember my reaction to it: I thought it was a moderately interesting backstory, but nothing that added all that much to his personality, but I had also almost kind of hoped his origins, his history and motives would have stayed completely in the dark. Then, a while later, he tells an entirely different story about those same cuts to someone else. Now, this was interesting. All of a sudden we wonder: Obviously the earlier story couldn't have been true. Is this one? Probably not. Why does he make up these elaborate, cruel stories about the origin of his disfigurement? Now here's an interesting aspect of his personality, more so than the (made up) story about his childhood (which once again would have been nothing more than exposition feigning insight); here's something we are watching the character do right now on screen, something that goes beyond the *literal* content of the dialogue. I admit I half expected one of the Joker's goons to openly start wondering about the reasons for his deception, in typical Nolan fashion, and then for the Joker to answer with a throwaway quip/faux insight about The Nature Of Truth. Thankfully that didn't happen.
Now, letting your characters say how they feel about themselves or others, letting them tell stories about their past and/or how that changed who they are today, letting them state their opinions (most of which consist of platitudes and vague moralistic or spiritual truisms) about The Themes, none of that is good or interesting writing, none of it *really* tells us anything about the characters, it's just pretense, affectation. Characters don't *do* anything to show that something shaped them in a certain way, something that will make us go "oh, that's interesting", they simply *say* that it happened and move on. It's really a simple case of Tell over Show, something that Nolan has yet to learn about apparently. And this has *nothing* to do with genres or super hero movies. Hell, lose the themes, tell us something true about the characters instead, independent from any overarching, crude attempt at letting us know - nudge nudge wink wink - that you have something important to say about the human condition. Or at least have good action, or be FUNNY - or something. Don't waste so much time and energy on trying to convince us that your movie is something it so clearly *isn't*. Iron Man, Spider-Man 1 and 2 are all ultimately more successful movies than TDKR, because, for the most part, they don't try so goddamn hard to be more than comic book movies.
So, then, Amazing Spider-Man. A great movie? Hardly. But an entertaining one. It has plenty of problems too and it is ultimately probably pretty forgettable, but it has one thing over Nolan's Batman movies (more than one really, but I'll focus on this one): It has moments of genuine, heartfelt human connection, of compassion and empathy. One example: When Parker comes home to Aunt May late at night, after he's been beaten up, nearly died, but still, naturally, finally saved the day, they share a quiet intimate moment. They look at each other, her full of sorrow but finally relieved to see him alive, him guilty about the earlier argument. Then they exchange a few words, finally hug each other. It's brief and very simple, nothing rich with meaning or subtext or anything, but it feels genuine. Moments like these are *nowhere* to be found in TDKR (they are plentiful in Raimi's Spider-Man 2 as well) . It simply doesn't have time for them. It's a 3 hour long montage, mercilessly scored into the ground by Zimmer. It never comes to a halt, but still has many long, oddly paced and even boring stretches. Because, while it doesn't take the time to explore some, *any* of its themes or characters in more detail - which would require the odd quiet moment without music or expository dialogue or (shockingly conventional) action - it does take the the time to linger on inane plot details and devices that further the story for no other reason than to further the story. The script is pragmatically, hurriedly working down a list of story bullet points and at the end is finally relieved when it's all over, and that everything sort of fit into those 164 minutes.spoiler (click to show/hide)Ang Lee's Hulk, by the way, for all its faults, has ten times the character depth and insight of Nolan's Batman movies, but is magnitudes less Dark with a capital D.[close]
Not sure *what* I was expecting. Clearly I've given you guys way too much credit.
Not sure *what* I was expecting. Clearly I've given you guys way too much credit.a picture is better than ten thousands of words man
Here's a clearly more worthwhile subject to discuss and obsess over then, currently at 650 pages: http://www.thebore.com/forum/index.php?topic=35993.0
Have at it!
Not sure *what* I was expecting. Clearly I've given you guys way too much credit.
And you wonder why quality posters like me don't bother anymore guys.
Shame.
but what about TEH THEMES in my comic book summer blockbuster filmzDid *I* create the themes? Did you? Or any of the critics? No, it was Nolan. And if you inject your movie with all these grim, serious, delicate and complex themes, then you better know how to explore them properly. Otherwise, don't bother. It is not enough to try. If your movie simply doesn't *attempt* to explore complex themes and/or at least doesn't proudly, obnoxiously wear them on its sleeve, there's nothing wrong with that; it can shine in other areas instead. It's not a necessity for a movie to feature an array of themes that are difficult to tackle for it to be good/fun/interesting/entertaining.
Which leads right into my next point. Never once did I say that the movie failed to live up to any of my previously held personal expectations. I had *zero* "hype" built up for it. I do not and never have cared about "hype". I don't go out of my way to watch trailers or read *anything* about the movies I intend to watch. I do not participate in message board threads about them. I do not even read reviews before watching a movie unless I have zero interest in it. There is nothing I could care less about than movie hype.
What I *am* complaining about are the expectations the movie itself builds up. Which really should have been obvious from my previous posts. No, again, I'm not talking about interviews any of the film crew might have given in advance of the release. It is the movie that sets up something it never delivers on. It repeatedly informs the viewer of its intentions in the most un-subtle way imaginable, mostly through dry, heavy-handed and artless dialogue/exposition, but then never has anything interesting to say about any of the subjects or ideas it puts into the spotlight. This is pretty awkward. Of course if you stop at the movie's intentions - which, sadly, most critics are pretty content to do - you'll find yourself with a film that *has* a lot of themes and then frequently gets praised for that simple achievement of posessing them versus Actually Having Something To Say About Them.
Here's a positive example from the second movie (TDK): I was really quite surprised on how the little stories the Joker tells about the origin of his disfigured face were handled. I don't remember if he tells two or three of these and I don't recall any of the details, but it doesn't matter. He first tells the story about his face to, I believe, one of his "victims". It's something about his childhood, maybe something about a knife being used to cut a permanent smile into his face. It doesn't matter. I remember my reaction to it: I thought it was a moderately interesting backstory, but nothing that added all that much to his personality, but I had also almost kind of hoped his origins, his history and motives would have stayed completely in the dark. Then, a while later, he tells an entirely different story about those same cuts to someone else. Now, this was interesting. All of a sudden we wonder: Obviously the earlier story couldn't have been true. Is this one? Probably not. Why does he make up these elaborate, cruel stories about the origin of his disfigurement? Now here's an interesting aspect of his personality, more so than the (made up) story about his childhood (which once again would have been nothing more than exposition feigning insight); here's something we are watching the character do right now on screen, something that goes beyond the *literal* content of the dialogue. I admit I half expected one of the Joker's goons to openly start wondering about the reasons for his deception, in typical Nolan fashion, and then for the Joker to answer with a throwaway quip/faux insight about The Nature Of Truth. Thankfully that didn't happen.
Now, letting your characters say how they feel about themselves or others, letting them tell stories about their past and/or how that changed who they are today, letting them state their opinions (most of which consist of platitudes and vague moralistic or spiritual truisms) about The Themes, none of that is good or interesting writing, none of it *really* tells us anything about the characters, it's just pretense, affectation. Characters don't *do* anything to show that something shaped them in a certain way, something that will make us go "oh, that's interesting", they simply *say* that it happened and move on. It's really a simple case of Tell over Show, something that Nolan has yet to learn about apparently. And this has *nothing* to do with genres or super hero movies. Hell, lose the themes, tell us something true about the characters instead, independent from any overarching, crude attempt at letting us know - nudge nudge wink wink - that you have something important to say about the human condition. Or at least have good action, or be FUNNY - or something. Don't waste so much time and energy on trying to convince us that your movie is something it so clearly *isn't*. Iron Man, Spider-Man 1 and 2 are all ultimately more successful movies than TDKR, because, for the most part, they don't try so goddamn hard to be more than comic book movies.
So, then, Amazing Spider-Man. A great movie? Hardly. But an entertaining one. It has plenty of problems too and it is ultimately probably pretty forgettable, but it has one thing over Nolan's Batman movies (more than one really, but I'll focus on this one): It has moments of genuine, heartfelt human connection, of compassion and empathy. One example: When Parker comes home to Aunt May late at night, after he's been beaten up, nearly died, but still, naturally, finally saved the day, they share a quiet intimate moment. They look at each other, her full of sorrow but finally relieved to see him alive, him guilty about the earlier argument. Then they exchange a few words, finally hug each other. It's brief and very simple, nothing rich with meaning or subtext or anything, but it feels genuine. Moments like these are *nowhere* to be found in TDKR (they are plentiful in Raimi's Spider-Man 2 as well) . It simply doesn't have time for them. It's a 3 hour long montage, mercilessly scored into the ground by Zimmer. It never comes to a halt, but still has many long, oddly paced and even boring stretches. Because, while it doesn't take the time to explore some, *any* of its themes or characters in more detail - which would require the odd quiet moment without music or expository dialogue or (shockingly conventional) action - it does take the the time to linger on inane plot details and devices that further the story for no other reason than to further the story. The script is pragmatically, hurriedly working down a list of story bullet points and at the end is finally relieved when it's all over, and that everything sort of fit into those 164 minutes.spoiler (click to show/hide)Ang Lee's Hulk, by the way, for all its faults, has ten times the character depth and insight of Nolan's Batman movies, but is magnitudes less Dark with a capital D.[close]
Here's a clearly more worthwhile subject to discuss and obsess over then, currently at 650 pages: http://www.thebore.com/forum/index.php?topic=35993.0(http://gifsforum.com/images/gif/did%20not%20read/grand/19374988_did-not-read_gif.gif)
Have at it!
wow what a rebel you are, PD. Couldn't afford it because they'd get in the way of Olive Garden night? :smug
I liked all the super hero movies this year- they were all fun. Maybe its cause I went in thinking -hey! comic book movies!
Memento was my first Nolan movie- but I liked Prestige the best. I havent got around to watching Inception or Insomnia
The only bad bad bad thing about TDKR is the that ending, it's almost up there with Indiana surviving a nuclear blast in the fridge.
The only bad bad bad thing about TDKR is the that ending, it's almost up there with Indiana surviving a nuclear blast in the fridge.spoiler (click to show/hide)he escaped from the bat long before it exploded. not really comparable.[close]
Appropriate:
https://twitter.com/mattzollerseitz/status/229678224051929089
spoiler (click to show/hide)To where? This is a nuclear bomb with a huge blast radius. Also where was the Tsunami after the blast? The chopper flew super low there should have been a motherfucking wave of water[close]
I liked all the super hero movies this year- they were all fun. Maybe its cause I went in thinking -hey! comic book movies!
spoiler (click to show/hide)To where? This is a nuclear bomb with a huge blast radius. Also where was the Tsunami after the blast? The chopper flew super low there should have been a motherfucking wave of water[close]spoiler (click to show/hide)i dunno. sometime before it exploded? it's not really up for debate, they make it blatantly obvious he wasn't in the bat later on when the Wayne tech said that the autopilot on the Bat systems had been repaired months earlier. he escaped. doesn't matter how really.[close]
I liked all the super hero movies this year- they were all fun. Maybe its cause I went in thinking -hey! comic book movies!maybe it would have helped hide some of the shitty character development, plot, and pacing?
PD, while you're making fun of Jarosh he's living happily ever after with Cloud.
spoiler (click to show/hide)What about the killer tsunami from the blast? The Bat only had seconds to fly away from the city[close]
PD, while you're making fun of Jarosh he's living happily ever after with Cloud.
For me it's not a small detail that's the problem, the world where this is happening should still be governed by physics.
For me it's not a small detail that's the problem, the world where this is happening should still be governed by physics.
do you have any evidence that it would have created a tsunami? doing some quick google searches, i've found that a bomb like this probably wouldnt cause a tsunami.
Not sure *what* I was expecting. Clearly I've given you guys way too much credit.
Not sure *what* I was expecting. Clearly I've given you guys way too much credit.
The problem is that you're far more passionate about tearing the movie down than any of us here are in building it up.
Memento was my first Nolan movie- but I liked Prestige the best. I havent got around to watching Inception or Insomnia
OH GOD DAMN YOU
*wall of text here
OH GOD DAMN YOU
*wall of text here
did not read
Well he WAS for a time so DEAL DUDE DEAAAAAAAAAAAALLL
or whatever, what do I care
Here's a good one from Emerson about TDKR and Nolan in general, really great bits he's taken from interviews with the man himself that help explain some of the typical Nolan problems:
http://blogs.suntimes.com/scanners/2012/07/good_bad_or_mediocre_theres_st.html#more
Be warned, contains about 5 times as many words as my big post there. But he does have a comment section, so you can just post your LOL DIDN'T READ GIFS there.
(http://tinyurl.com/cstjfu9)
The 8 year retirement - this is the hero Gotham needs? Batman gets shot in the leg and just gives up? His whole deal is supposedly boundless determination and devotion to an ideal. Yes, it makes for an entertaining (if super predictable) story to see him torn down, then rise up...but it's alien to me. This is the tension caused by trying to have character growth in a comic character that only makes sense if it never changes.
Spider-Man should not ever be an Avenger and Spider-Man being an Avenger is fucking gay in the first place.
(http://tinyurl.com/cstjfu9)
(http://i.imgur.com/1wD35.jpg)
The 8 year retirement - this is the hero Gotham needs? Batman gets shot in the leg and just gives up? His whole deal is supposedly boundless determination and devotion to an ideal. Yes, it makes for an entertaining (if super predictable) story to see him torn down, then rise up...but it's alien to me. This is the tension caused by trying to have character growth in a comic character that only makes sense if it never changes.
This bothered me too, as well as his retirement at the end. The Batman in the comics fights crime until he is absolutely physically unable to in like his 50's or whatever.
But let's think about this for a moment. After TDK ends, all five (?) mob bosses and their gangs have been killed/taken out by the Joker and cops. I guarantee you that was like 95% of the crime in Gotham. After that, Batman probably had almost nothing to do anyways. Especially with the Harvey Dent law or whatever.
The Gotham in the movies isn't the Gotham in the comics, the one that has always been and will always be an absolute garbage dump with a 99% crime rate or whatever, no matter what Batman does. In fitting with the actual movies, it's a bit more realistic. It can change.
Also, Bruce was close to giving up in TDK anyways so it's not like there wasn't precedence.
Bane's motivation: Doesn't this completely fall apart?spoiler (click to show/hide)What does he actually do that has any meaning after he takes over? All the rhetoric about freeing the oppressed and bringing judgement to the rich 1% and shit is exposed as meaningless once it becomes apparent that the bomb is going to kill EVERYONE no matter what. It also weakens his motivation massively when we find out he is just Talia's stooge, although I grant that that was a nice piece of storytelling with a good headfake or two, and it deepened Bane's backstory greatly.
Wouldn't it have made far more sense for him to make a ransom demand of some sort?[close]
spoiler (click to show/hide)OK, but that makes it entirely uninteresting, and takes the teeth from most of what he does. It makes him a stooge who merely bought into the rhetoric of Ra's al Ghul, not an independent thinker. He ultimately brought nothing new to the table in terms of ideology or themes. He was just a more bad-assed version of Ra's, with the same daft philosophy. A genuine Marxist class warfare-advocating madman would have been much more interesting to me.[close]
ok the did not read gifs officially jumped the shark HARD itt. please let them go away forever now
ok the did not read gifs officially jumped the shark HARD itt. please let them go away forever now
I have a question for you comic book nerds, I always thought Gotham was a fictional city and it never got mentioned that it was in the States. Then suddenly in this one you got that lil kid singing the anthem and the stars and stripes. Is Gotham this explicitly in the USA in the comics?
spoiler (click to show/hide)OK, but that makes it entirely uninteresting, and takes the teeth from most of what he does. It makes him a stooge who merely bought into the rhetoric of Ra's al Ghul, not an independent thinker. He ultimately brought nothing new to the table in terms of ideology or themes. He was just a more bad-assed version of Ra's, with the same daft philosophy. A genuine Marxist class warfare-advocating madman would have been much more interesting to me.[close]
I have a question for you comic book nerds, I always thought Gotham was a fictional city and it never got mentioned that it was in the States. Then suddenly in this one you got that lil kid singing the anthem and the stars and stripes. Is Gotham this explicitly in the USA in the comics?
The majority of appearances place Gotham on the Northeastern coast of the United States, where New York City is located. Also, Manhattan is an island in the Northeastern United States, which corresponds to maps depicting Gotham City. However, the 1990 Atlas of the DC Universe states that Gotham is located in New Jersey, across the Delaware Bay from Metropolis, which would place it on the southern coast of New Jersey. Like Gotham, Metropolis' location has also varied over the years. The distance between Gotham and Metropolis has varied greatly over the years, with depictions of the two ranging from being hundreds of miles apart to Gotham and Metropolis being shown as twin cities on opposite sides of Delaware Bay, with Gotham City in New Jersey and Metropolis in Delaware.
I'm just jilted that jarosh completely ignores us for seven months....and only comes back to make his first posts since December 2011 in order to bitch at us for liking a gawdamned Batman movie.
Really, jarosh? This is how you do us? :-\
So, I thought it was very very entertaining but hollow, unconvincing, had a cheap-ass, unearned ending, and featured a Batman that bears no relation to any Batman I've been reading for most of my life. Totally agree on the lack of any natural human interaction as well...the Bruce/Selina relationship was particularly hard to buy, other than on sheer 'match.com' style bulletpoints (i.e. She's hot! He's hot too! She's into cosplay! So is he! BOOM)
That lead to the whole thing feeling cold and distant. I can see Batman getting beat down, but I don't actually CARE the way I should because he is such a cipher. He only ever spoke to Rachel in plot summations so I never bought that they were that deeply in love. They barely even smiled at each other for two whole movies....
Bane was a great villain up until the ol' switcheroo at the end which made a nonsense of his whole cause - turned out he didn't really give a shit about the oppressed 99% at all and was just trying to impress some hot chick he was hung up on.
The 8 year retirement - this is the hero Gotham needs? Batman gets shot in the leg and just gives up? His whole deal is supposedly boundless determination and devotion to an ideal. Yes, it makes for an entertaining (if super predictable) story to see him torn down, then rise up...but it's alien to me. This is the tension caused by trying to have character growth in a comic character that only makes sense if it never changes.
The happy ending - very enjoyable to watch, because of course it's always nice to see the beat-down hero win and get a shot at happiness. But it wasn't organic at all. There was no internal struggle with continuing the mission. Despite the 8 year retirement, as soon as something 'interesting' happened (Catwoman appearing), Bruce just becomes Batman again. As if all he was waiting for was a hot chick or something to stroke his ego. Mere muggers or rapists literally weren't worth his getting out of bed. But once he does become Batman again, there is no agonizing over whether it is the right thing to do or not. It's all externalized in the incredibly heavy-handed bitching from Alfred. There was no 'I'm too old for this shit' or 'Oh God, Catwoman is SOOO HOT I want to sex with her but this Batman thing is getting in the way'. The big decision to quit just happens literally in a flash, with Batman offscreen. Not a single human moment of indecision or longing or anything to justify what he did, unless you count looking miserable for the entire duration of the film. It is also reasonable to ask - if he wasn't happy being an idle billionaire playboy OR a crusading CEO OR a sexy masked vigilante....why the fuck is he going to be happy sipping cappucinos in Florence or whatever? What is his conscience telling him for the rest of his life?
oh crap well past TLDR gif territory so better stop there for now.
The weirdest thing about it is that I genuinely enjoyed the crap out of it, for the most part! But for a movie that invites you to think about it, it sure gets worse and worse the more you do...
I am also attracted to Anne Hathaway- so its easy to believe. Maybe Bruce saw the laser scene in Get Smart.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqEjNLAA9fM
ok the did not read gifs officially jumped the shark HARD itt.
I need to know that I can be taken seriously every now and then. :(/
I thought that was exactly how it was intended.
and both anne hathaway and joseph gordon-levitt turned in good performances. anne hathaway still doesn't LOOK the part, but she played it convincingly. christian bale's batvoice gets stupider with each installment.
somewhere there's probably a person who loved bat nipples/booty and thus hates the more "realistic" Nolan versions.There's some people on GAF who complain about the lack of camp in modern batman movies a la Schumacher's versions.
Bold and Brave ain't half bad. I mean, the superdickery episode (http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=425538) alone redeems it.
At least it was doing its own thing and not trying to ape TAS like The Batman.
Those people can suck on the bat-ass and bat-nipples in that YouTube, or in the This Ain't Batman XXX film, which offers the stylings of the TV sitcom. Or they can DIAF.somewhere there's probably a person who loved bat nipples/booty and thus hates the more "realistic" Nolan versions.There's some people on GAF who complain about the lack of camp in modern batman movies a la Schumacher's versions.
finally saw this. plot really WAS comic book convoluted to the point of nearly nonsense, but overall i liked it. i agree with mandark's assessment: bruce wayne as sulking self-absorbed wunderkind works better than bruce wayne as altruistic dark hero. unfortunately, there *is* a bit of disconnect between the comic book plot and villains and the slightly deeper characterizations and message, but when HAVEN'T modern (read: pretentious) comic books about dudes in tights been totes schizophrenic? thumbs up, by and large.Convoluted, yes. In essence, there was this giant plan and each portion of it had to go perfectly -- and it did. I wasn't fond of how Bane seemed to understand almost magically what would be the outcome out of every situation. I loved that kind of thing, how it was handled in the first Die Hard movie; it was perfect there. Here, there's no explanation or even exposition on why he can predict it so easily and fully.
Bane's motivation: Doesn't this completely fall apart?spoiler (click to show/hide)What does he actually do that has any meaning after he takes over? All the rhetoric about freeing the oppressed and bringing judgement to the rich 1% and shit is exposed as meaningless once it becomes apparent that the bomb is going to kill EVERYONE no matter what. It also weakens his motivation massively when we find out he is just Talia's stooge, although I grant that that was a nice piece of storytelling with a good headfake or two, and it deepened Bane's backstory greatly.
Wouldn't it have made far more sense for him to make a ransom demand of some sort?[close]spoiler (click to show/hide)Isn't his motivation the same as Ra's al Ghul's? Gotham was beyond saving so the only thing left was to destroy it. Talia had the added motivation of wanting to avenger her father's death and Bane had the added motivation of being in love with Talia, but it all came back to what Ra's was doing in BB. It was never about punishing the 1% and freeing the oppressed, that was just part of Bane's giving the people a sliver of hope before crushing it right at the last second.[close]