View Single Post
Old 08-13-2013, 06:07 PM   #100
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 shauner111 View Post
When I think about it, TDK's sequel couldn't have begun with Batman on the run,
And that's how you tell the hardcore apologists from reasonable supporters

active as an outlaw while there's more freaks and criminals running around. So Batman is more villainous than the freaks/criminals/mob now? No that doesn't work. He's on the level with all of them? That could work, but then why is he active?? Why is he around at all if he cant take them down without being looked at as a hero? He's not supposed to show his heroism, that's why he need to stop taking down criminals in front of people after TDK.
A semi-clever argument, flawed only by the assumption that Batman can't work on fixing things if he doesn't also make an impression on the public. What do you think of, after all, when you hear "a silent guardian, dark protector" or something along those lines? Someone who lurks in the shadows and protects without you even knowing, that's what.
COULD they have done something like this, maybe in contrast with the "I have to make headlines" MO from before? Yes - they could have.

The second assumption is that somehow the plan is hinging on him not being a good guy. Um, okay, maybe you need some suspension of disbelief in order to buy that conspiracy scenario, its feasibility, believability or necessity, but come on - let's not overdo it shall we? Convincing the public of him being outright villainous, or a greedy criminal, after all the things he's done, would seem absurd.
He's lost his heroic status, the "look not a single corpse and all delivered to the cops!" headlines from before, and become an unstable element, a crazyperson you wouldn't want to cross in a dark alley - maybe a sociopath only being heroic half of the time; or he just snapped at some point. But he's BEEN doing good things before, so why can't he keep doing them now?
Yes, better catch the ticking time bomb regardless, but the public won't start scratching its collective monkey cranium just because Batman's taken out another thug... a thug?? A murderous thug like yourself, John!!1

Nolan says for TDK ending to mean something, for the lie to mean anything, it needs to work. For it to work, Batman needs to be viewed as the villain.
I mean Garcia calls him a "murderous thug", but doing one horrible deed is enough to get you that title no matter how much arbitrary good you do otherwise.
So no one's gonna raise a brow at him... wait I'm going in circles.

Villains don't go around helping people or taking down baddies.
But come on now! This Gotham's population doesn't seem as stupid as Burton's, surely they wouldn't just sit there and swallow such an outrageous retcon? They know Batman's been fighting thugs before... MNBAHEGFCASHGF

For this to happen they obviously thought "we cant have villains roaming around with Batman retired, it doesn't seem right". Even TDKReturns tapped into that and I personally like it for the story but not for any other interpretation. If there's mobsters and freaks in Gotham, Batman has to be there.
They weren't there because the three state powers cleaned up the streets - thanks to what Dent did at the beginning of TDK and, presumably, his posthumous role model occupation.
THAT was the main point of the conspiracy, not Batman being a villain - he was just the only scapegoat they could think of pinning it on.

Which is one of the reasons why the Dent Act was put into the story, I imagine. The other thing is if the lie worked, then Dent would become the ultimate hero of Gotham City. A MASSIVE hero. I can imagine a holiday for the man or a new prison in his name, things like this. And that's what happened. Just like Batman got a statue and God knows what else once he is revealed as the true hero.
The Dent Act... seemed like a somewhat murky plot device to me, but the rest, yea, that's pretty much what was to be expected.

As for the full circle talk? To say that it's just lazy and doing something over again,
Didn't pay attention again. I wasn't saying it's wrong to bring things around, only that doing it completely off-screen was lame and ruined the impact.
It has to do with storytelling... crescendos... arcs.. structures... climaxes, those kinds of things.
If you wanna have another "rise from the bottom", better justify (i.e. not just explain away, but lead up to properly) why you're at the bottom again. Then it's cool.

Perhaps it's your beliefs, but this is why LOST is one of my favorite shows of all time and despite the controversial final season (reminds anyone of Rises?..) I loved it. All the full circle callbacks were emotional and yes it has a lot to do with "destiny".
The only thing I can find in common with Rises is the twist that did away with a really cool scenario and replaced it with something lamer.
That, and maybe a general sense of "misunderstanding" what made those previous things - incl. those "called back to", but that's where the similarities end already because I can't see anything wrong with the callbacks in Rises

Nolan says he didn't want to follow TDK with some other episodic story for Batman to deal with. 1 year on, 8 years on whatever fighting Riddler or some other villain like nothing ever happened in the previous film. Like Batman is just the villain like Riddler. Closing the chapter the way they chose to, bringing things full circle to Begins like a true trilogy should? That is far more interesting.
Okay, not gonna retread covered ground here... seriously I've so ****ing dealt with these points not one page ago

Only thing I might repeat here, is that the things TDKR concluded with were almost exclusively things set up in TDKR, not in the previous ones. Ahead of LOST in that regard, however, seeing as how Bruce Wayne's struggles with his bad mood at least had been the focus of story from the outset, whereas LOST kind of forced that angle on its conclusion.

I still think it's the strongest Batman movie to date.
Okay, so stuff like the sudden sex scene or clean slate MacGuffins or Bruce being a douche to Alfred, or Batman's open mouth didn't annoy you? Just curious - because that's kind of the stuff I constantly keep running against just as I want to enjoy Rises on its own merits.

Don't care WHAT ANYBODY says against me. I am NOT budging on my views. No man or woman has the ability to do that.
Now careful there - if you keep saying things like this out loud, some people might just start thinking of you as an insecure fanboy, and why would you want that?

Those are just basic rules to follow... you never go ATM... nver go FR... and never jump up on a rock, proudly grab your chest, and verily proclaim to the world that never shall anyone change what you are, and take it away from you, never shall you bow, and forever keep on to your heart no matter what they say, glaring fervently into the uncertain but bright future.
Oh, and saying "haha" on the internet is a no-go, as well. Welcome to the webs - I'll be your guide

Last edited by justpassinby; 08-13-2013 at 06:22 PM.
justpassinby is offline   Reply With Quote