View Single Post
Old 08-11-2013, 03:11 AM   #73
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 80
Default Re: Lol...if i didn´t know the critics and GA´s score for this movie...

Originally Posted by DACrowe View Post
Yes, it means they wanted a certain type of plot for Batman 3. Nolan gave them another. And they whine incessantly for over a year about it.
The thing though is that it also happens to be the "type of plot" SET UP BY THE ACTUAL MOVIE
So what you really mean is that they wanted the sequel to give some pay-offs, instead of "deconstructing" that expectation in some weird way, and that's not quite the same thing is it

Well thank God it didn't, straw man friend. But I must confess, I prefer a good film first over what's in the comics. If Nolan wanted to tell a story about an elderly Batman, I'd be interested if it makes for a good movie. WB after box office and teenage fans on the other hand...
Fair enough, but when a movie is a part of a continuous series, there's always two valid angles to consider - how it holds up on its own, and how it holds up as a follow-up.
Would you say just dropping clear, intriguing set-ups from a previous movie and doing something else entirely is a completely alright, flawless way of making a good "follow-up"?

Same, of course, applies to segments within a single movie, to a lesser degree - what if both halves are good, but the second just totally ****s on the first one? Nothing, just what it is - second half is good, but ****s on the first one. Then you review the movie as a whole, and, well.

Okay, I'll make this simple. These are ALL character or story developments that occur between BB and TDK without being shown onscreen. Therefore we get exposition.

Case in point: Where was Harvey Dent investigating crooked cops in BB? **** where were Wuretz and Martinez? What they weren't there? Then, I guess this is exposition to explain who Harvey Dent is and what has been going on inside the GCPD that could cause friction between Dent and the cops, not to mention explain why Gordon has his own division and for that matter HIS OWN BUILDING. None of which were in BB. Huh.
You're clearly grasping at straws here - he already conceded that Harvey *is* a bit of a case of that, which we'll come to in a moment, but everything else that doesn't revolve around him?
Corrupt cops - already there, now it's just different ones, occupying the same role essentially. Yes, there's an element of ambiguity to them now, Dent calling them "scum" all the time but then happily getting in the car with one of them without having warned Rachel, as well, and the rest being all surprised and flabbergasted by their betrayal... things could be used to explain it away, sure, but really I think that's an actual plot hole. But it's not the problem you pointed out - and as far as yours is concerned, they're really just corrupt cops under suspicion

His own building... come on, man.

Oh really, so where was Dent cleaning up the city and where was Gordon arresting mafiosos. It is a development never actually shown over the initial arrest of Falcone in BB, but apparently it's gotten so bad in the past 12-18 months that the mafia is having their meetings in broad daylight. It is a development that shows a major shift in power between law enforcement and organized crime that took place OFFSCREEN between BB and TDK.
When you wanna compare the two cases, DEGREES is all it comes down to, really.
What happens in the meantime there, naturally and logically flows from the events of BB - Batman comes on the scene, proves a menace for the mobsters, begins to "apply pressure" on questionable officials, and eventually gets the big dog arrested in a dramatic, demonstrative fashion. Yes... since it then quickly gets sidetracked with the bomb plot one could say it could've flshed out that development much better were it not for that, but the necessary pieces have still already been placed - what happens from there on is just more of the same.
Batman keeps intimidating mobsters... finding embarassing sex photos of fat judges... protecting targets from hitmen... more arrests are made, confidence in population and state officials increases, cue opening montage with optimistic music, two criminals scared to go through with the job, and a few lines confirming the progress that has been made since then.

Is it a flaw? Maybe - but not as serious as yours. Because you see the thing is, had TDKR picked off at a comparable spot in relation to TDK as TDK did to BB, maybe some time later, with expected but already advanced developments, keeping that same overall vibe, would any of these complaints exist? NO - they exist because in that case, the plotlines from TDK end, everything becomes peaceful and boring, and against this background completely new things like the clean energy thing start developing; Batman/Bruce has long completed his unspecified journey from active to recluse, and two entirely new characters get introduced in ways that are either kind of rushed, or really, really questionable (looking at you there, Johnnyboy).

Now I don't really have too much of a problem with Talia - but still, she's just there, Bruce trusts her, and it's never explained. Maybe befriended each other over similar causes? You're an activist and then meet a hot enthusiastic activist sharing your goals - bestest philanthrophy ever? Alas, all just left over to wild speculation.
Blake gets introduced decently as well, but then the less said about his ACTUAL introduction the better.
None of that applies to Harvey who, while his coin throwing habit, convenient nickname and somewhat murky backstories at the IA might seem somewhat artificial - he still gets the much needed solid introduction / inclusion into the theme that those other two lack, and when the foundation is good, lots of things are good.

Degrees - TDK wins.

And where was Maroni, Gambol and the Chechen? The line is in relation to Maroni running the mafia and controlling organized crime in Gotham. Yet, his claim of power, and his entire visage, is absent in BB. Ergo, there is ANOTHER development that occurred between the two films that was explained away the dreaded expository dialogue that you so despise.
So a boss got replaced (the shock), and two other mob organizations that run things (maybe centered in some other districts) apparently have been there all along, too. Big deal - they're just more of the same, not characters playing entirely new roles.
Why is Maroni absent in BB? Cause he wasn't boss. Mafia families may spread over multiple cities, maybe he was running something less important elsewhere even. All completely plausible, and not even that interesting. Yea, he was made up for the sequel, but that "new invention" isn't jarring for the named reasons.
Look at it this way - none of us complains about the cool congressman

Try again. It's been 12-18 months between BB and TDK. The last Joker crime was six months prior. That means, wait for it, the Joker has been up to no good crime offscreen between movies! I cannot believe Nolan would do that. Talk about not living up to the promise of the original film's ending.
Yea, so he had a hit one time, and then a couple others - couldn't be caught, now things start getting hot and the movie kicks in.
Again, I repeat - MORE OF THE SAME HAPPENS BETWEEN THE TWO MOVIES. In the other case, THINGS MORPH BEYOND RECOGNIZEABILITY, old stuff dropped new stuff thrown in. Difference, anywhere? Just a little one maybe... NO.

Last edited by justpassinby; 08-11-2013 at 03:49 AM.
justpassinby is offline   Reply With Quote