View Single Post
Old 11-03-2012, 07:58 PM   #277
Fudgie
Banned User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,197
Default Re: TDKR Oscar Chances? - Part 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmc View Post
The people of Gotham are exactly like the background characters in Inception - nameless, faceless, beings. That is far from being handled perfectly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmc View Post
Cinema is not a booklet of rules, I agree, but when you stray from certain conventions your executions need to be handled perfectly otherwise you're open to justifiable criticism. If Nolan and co are happy with the fact this horrific event is not seen from the perspective of regular people then that's fine, but it's not fine for me and others especially when the last two films depicted how ordinary people are affected by the insanity that is happening around them. That is why Gotham is very much a character in both films one and two, because the city is given a voice on multiple occasions by the Joe averages. In TDKR Gotham is a hollow shell of the city it was in the previous films, again if Nolan was ok with that then that's his decision and he has to live with it, but it is a valid criticism to make when people have invested so much in not just Batman but Gotham City as well throughout the whole series. To simply forget about the people of Gotham is frankly inexcusable, especially when a large part of the whole series has been about getting Gotham back on its feet. The last thing the movie needed was common citizens? Nothing could be further from the truth, this film out of all the films needed the people of Gotham to be seen and heard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmc View Post
The reason there is so much talk for a film that doesn't exists is because the ideas of that non-existent film is presented to us in Rises. Rises is a hodgepodge of ideas that could span about 3 or 4 different movies, and yet they're all presented to us in one 2 hour 45 mins time frame. That is a great deal of why many of us are unsatisfied with the final product and believe it to be a clunky movie and the worst of the series. It's trying to be simultaneously an epic blockbuster, deep character story, a war film, a crime drama, and a thinking mans movie. That's all well and good if the execution is perfect, it's ambitious as hell to try and cram so much into such a short run time (relative to the size of the story), but it's execution dependent. If those elements don't gel together perfectly you're left with a film where the ideas presented start to cancel each other out because they're all jockeying for attention, and as a consequence of that lack of cohesion the other flaws in the film become all the more adamant - plot issues, under developed characters, gaps in logic, weak motives, etc, TDK and Begins both suffer from similar problems as well to varying degrees (all films do really), but because the stories in those two films are far more focused you don't notice the flaws as much.

It's all well and good to say judge the film for what it is, but that's all any of us have done. Most of us who don't like the film as much as others have seen the film multiple times, and I'll hazard a guess it because we were trying to work out what it is about the film that didn't work for us. I'm probably not the only one who's replayed the movie in their head and altered it to follow one of the ideas presented to us, and the reason we do that is because we look at the previous two films and see what it is about them we loved about them. We feel Rises doesn't live up to those movies because there is an absence of what made those movies great. Is it fair to judge this movie based on the past two? Yes and No. I do admit every film should be judge on it's own merit, sequel or not, but in a series that has gone out of it's way to be a thinking mans superhero story to depart from certain aspects in the final chapter to many is unforgivable. Add in repeated elements from Batman Begins and Nolan entire body of film work and you've got yourself a potent mix ready for criticism if it's anything short of well executed.

I'll finish by saying I'm pretty certain those of us 'haters', 'whiners', 'nitpickers', whatever we've been labeled, can appreciate what the movie was trying to accomplish and can admire it's scope and ambition, but all we're doing is calling it as we see it, and we don't see it as good as either films one or two. Frankly, we believe there's a better movie within Rises, maybe even better than TDK, and that Nolan could have produced something far grander. In time we may be able to appreciate Rises to some degree, but we're never going to love it.
Laying it down like a boss.

Quoted for truth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Joker View Post
This more focused on Bruce Wayne argument doesn't make any sense. What kind of weak script is unable to show some Gotham reactions and still keep the story focused on Bruce?
Only the kind fanboys make up. Nolan could have done both but he didn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmc View Post
Did you even read what I just wrote or quoted it simply to make some kind of pointless comment to show your support for the film?
Pointless comment to show support. Dark Knight always pop in with the your opinion spiel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAKAVELI25 View Post
Exactly, the argument that this film didn't need the ordinary citizen's perspective is flat out ridiculous. I don't even know how people are defending Nolan's decision. TDK and BB handled the city as a whole much better than the movie that needed it the most out of the whole trilogy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAKAVELI25 View Post
I would argue that TDKR isn't on the same level as the other two. BB and TDK are head and above all other movies in the genre

BB- Did a great job of showing why someone would want/need to become a masked hero in the first place. People who don't even like movies in the superhero genre love this movie for a reason. It's definitely not a perfect movie, but it is by far the best superhero origin movie of all time

TDK- Best superhero movie ever. Manages to show the real life consequences of being a superhero, never has their world felt so real. Great villain, great performances, good writing, BB made me a Nolan fan, TDK made me a Nolan stan.

TDKR- Certain decisions like the 8 year absence can be excused, not showing the populace cannot. TDKR fails at the very thing its predecessors succeeded so marvelously at, making us care about the thing the hero is fighting for (the city of Gotham). I would not have gave a damn if the bomb had gone off in TDKR, yet I was tense as hell when watching that ferry scene in TDK. I've said it before and I'll say it again, it is a failure on Nolan's part that there is more tension/intrigue in a finale where only a few hundred people might die than where an entire city might be annihilated. The villain's motivations are cliche and boring, their plan is stupid and contrived.

What most of the people who think the hate for the movie is excessive don't get is that the criticism is coming from fans of the trilogy. Neither BB nor TDK were perfect movies, and they were completely different type of movies so people who say we were were expecting TDK part 2 are incorrect. I loved BB and TDK and will continue to think they are the best superhero movies ever, I am thankful to Nolan for the first two. But I was very dissappointed by the last entry
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Joker View Post
I couldn't have put it better myself. That was a huge problem with TDKR. Great characters we did care about did not get enough screen time (Selina, Alfred) or interesting things to do (Gordon). Then we had to suffer dull characters like Foley taking up precious screen time.

Very well said. BB was rife with Gotham persona who were NOT main characters;

Joe Chill, an example of the desperate who took the lives of Bruce's parents. Shows how bad in Gotham things got. An example of the kind of person who kills when they're hungry as Ra's put it.

The homeless man, a flavor of the lowest in Gotham who are not bad guys, haven't given into the desperation and accept the poverty situation of Gotham. He could have mugged Bruce or tried to steal from him, but he didn't.

D.A. Finch and his reluctance to prosecute because Falcone has half the city bought and paid for. An example of the "Good people scared" that Rachel spoke about.

Flass, the corrupt Cop. An obvious one. The rotten apples good people like Gordon has to work with and can't do anything about it.

Judge Faden, the corrupt judge. This man can set people free to line up for assassination for Falcone. An example of how Falcone's corruption has spread into the legal system.

The upper class people at the hotel scene. People who are not desperate, not affected by crime, and therefore have a divided opinion on Batman tackling crime in Gotham. Some think he's great, others think he is crazy, shouldn't take the law into his own hands etc.

Earle, more upper class. A man in power who abuses his power by covering up thefts in his company. He's not corrupt. He's just a bad egg.

The Felafel guy, the lower class. Struggles to earn a living and is abused by the corrupt like Flass by taking his money.

The Narrows kid, more lower class. The kind of good people who populate the Narrows. The "dirty" section of Gotham.

There's a whole bunch of different types and classes of Gothamites and all used effectively in the story to paint a personality and reaction to all things in Gotham.

To paraphrase what someone else said; If the story revolves around a city being taken over you need to know how the city is reacting. Gotham IMO felt more like a city in TDK than TDKR. Gotham looks in good shape to me. The "Ghost town" thing is just a cheap excuse to me to convey Gotham's state. We've seen Gotham reactions in BB and TDK a few examples being the BB dinner table scene (swimming pool), Police discussion in BB, Rachel and her lawyer friend, things working differently after Falcone's taken down, Dinner table scene in TDK, Chaos in hospitals, Ferry scene, Chaos outside TV station, Pub with Engel's Joker speech, Army around with heaps of traffic and others. All these things no matter how big or small or whether you like them or dislike them build a city outside of Batman/Gordon/Dent/Alfred etc.

Yet in TDKR the city felt contained. At NO POINT does anyone other than Blake/Gordon and that orphan really get across that the city needs/wants Batman. It is as if the city doesn't care.
Quoted for truth.

Bravo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anno_Domini View Post
So I was re-watching TDKR at a friend's house(and you all know how! Lol), and I think there is some confusion now to some who believe Bruce Wayne losing his money was the top story in that newspaper Fox handed Bruce, but it's not...it was on page 3. It was NOT the big headline for the newspaper, just as how Batman was the main headline for the newspaper at the end of Batman Begins, bumping Wayne destroying the manor to page 8.
The details of it are on page 3, the headline is on page 1. Ya see it again in Wayne Manor before he screws Talia. He puts the paper on the table.

Fudgie is offline