What Happened to ... Wayne Enterprises, the Monorail

[Brem]

Originally Posted by deathfromabove

"much more subtle."

why must everything be rammed down our throats?

Exactly. It was a piece of the Batman Begins story that brought on its conclusion.

In The Dark Knight, it's a public transport system, but all the main characters are using cars.

[gwynplaine]

Strangely enough, I didn't miss the monorail too much in TDK.

[scifiwolf]

I read through this thread because I have been mildly curious about these things, but some of the other posters seem to really be bothered. I don't think either is needed. Gotham is so expansive, I'm kind of glad we're seeing more of the city in subsequent films.

[Mr. Earle]

Originally Posted by deathfromabove

the final showdown in both movies takes place on the same freaking street for goodness sakes!

We barely get a chance to see W tower when the confrontation happens. Of course the confrontation is the important thing, but what i am saying, is that Wayne tower was just barely seen in a scene that didnt have time to spare for scenery. Though, a good scenery shot could have made the fight more epic and less gritty.

just because it shows different parts of the city and has different color palate its not in the same universe??

For me its a sum of many things. One of them are the landmarks. The other is the direction itself. Nolan really changed his scope on the city. Remember Bats and Ras confrontation? Well the city doesnt have the same feeling as in TDK. I dont want to repeat myself, so to sum this up, in BB Gotham had a more picturesque and comicbooky feel. But not just Gotham, but the way Nolan directed too. It might have had many shots in the gritty Narrows but all in all it was kinda....cute if you get what i mean. It felt realistic, but also beautiful and inspired. Clayface could exist there.

Now its a sterile surgeon's table of a city. Detroit has more charm than that. The aerial shots lasted 2-3 seconds giving us less time to embrace it. The only lasting aerial shots were the one in Hong Kong (so not Gotham) and the one where batman hears about Patrick Harvey and Richard Dent which was a bad shot of the city to begin with. In this gritty and super realistic city i cant see how batman can even exist, not to mention Clayface.

Originally Posted by Brem

Probably a stupid thought, and it might have even been mentioned but the way I figure it it's logical they might move locations.

When I think about why they're in a different tower, I take into consideration that in Batman Begins, it was stated the tower was made into the unofficial center of Gotham where everything connects up.

After the events in Batman Begins, I was thinking it's entirely possible they didn't want to risk anything like that happening again so they switched locations, probably removed anything connected to water and so forth and maybe even removed the monorail from that location. From the looks of things it was going straight into the tower and having move from one building to another, they may have decided to remove parts.

There we go again with people making their own assumptions. Might as well throw a Death Star in there.

Originally Posted by Brem

Exactly. It was a piece of the Batman Begins story that brought on its conclusion.

In The Dark Knight, it's a public transport system, but all the main characters are using cars.

I consider it one of Gotham's jewels. It wasnt just a public transport on which they staged a confrontation. Along with the Narrows and the beautiful skyline its what makes this city special, comicbooky, different from GODDAMN CHICAGO, ITS WHAT MAKES IT GOTHAM. AND ITS WHAT MAKES THE MOVIE BEAUTIFUL. IN A MOVIE ABOUT BATMAN, I EXPECT TO SEE PLOT + ATMOSPHERE.
In bb there was no part of the city without the monorail. Now you tell me that all of the hundrends of places that this movie took us just happen to not have the monorail pass through them? Yeah right! The whole direction reeked of realism. Its much more than "the monorail wasnt plot related this time".


Coclusion: To me the difference in atmosphere between the two nolan movies is the same as it was in the burton ones. And i will keep supporting my point as long as the opposition does the same. Besides, who knows, maybe people from WB lurk these places. Maybe they will correct it in the third one.

[El Payaso]

Originally Posted by gwynplaine

Strangely enough, I didn't miss the monorail too much in TDK.

Somehow I knew the monorail and Narrows weren't going to be there again for the second movie. It happens that way too often.

[Mr. Earle]

Originally Posted by scifiwolf

I read through this thread because I have been mildly curious about these things, but some of the other posters seem to really be bothered. I don't think either is needed. Gotham is so expansive, I'm kind of glad we're seeing more of the city in subsequent films.

Agreed. But its not like TDK gave us any new special places, except maybe the Docks (which really needed a great CGI aerial shot if you ask me) and the other tower of Wayne Ind.

All the other shots of it were crap. Bland buildings and random chicago corners. Nothing for us to keep remembering and admiring really.
People say that an abandoned amusement park would be too cheesy as a hideout for the joker (i beg to differ) but the point is that it would be something other than crap warehouses and detroit alleys.

I too want to see new parts of the city, but i'd like to see something that would stay with me when i leave the theatre. Maybe an impressive power plant, an abandoned amusement park, a picturesque or gritty neighbourhood. And above all, a directing style that lets me understand, navigate and finally embrace this city.

Sorry if i am whining too much brahs.

[Mr. Earle]

Originally Posted by El Payaso

Somehow I knew the monorail and Narrows weren't going to be there again for the second movie. It happens that way too often.

Yes, in BB, alleys, rooftops, and balconies were batman's playground. In this one he was mostly walking and driving around. He didnt get to play that much. Too bad, because the whole scene in BB where he infiltrates scarecrow's narrows appartment is beatiful.

[Kahoot]

Originally Posted by deathfromabove

rightly thinking its not a sequel? ok man please pass that over here. i want some of whatever it is you are taking.

the final showdown in both movies takes place on the same freaking street for goodness sakes! just because it shows different parts of the city and has different color palate its not in the same universe??

im sorry but dont need landmarks and obvious connections shoved down my throat.

oh my god! empire strikes back doesnt take place in the death star? an ice planet? how can they call that a sequel!!!???

Phrases like "almost as if" just go right over some people's heads.

I'm not saying because it was such a big part of BB that the monorail should be an equally big part in TDK but one clear shot of it when Batman drives underneath it to go save Rachel or something less subtle that a tiny 3 pixels (or film equivalent) on a shot of another random Wayne building.

As for your Star Wars thing, that doesn't work since Star Wars is in a whole Galaxy and Batman (for the most part) takes place in one city.

[Mr. Earle]

Originally Posted by Kahoot

Phrases like "almost as if" just go right over some people's heads.

I'm not saying because it was such a big part of BB that the monorail should be an equally big part in TDK but one clear shot of it when Batman drives underneath it to go save Rachel or something less subtle that a tiny 3 pixels (or film equivalent) on a shot of another random Wayne building.

As for your Star Wars thing, that doesn't work since Star Wars is in a whole Galaxy and Batman (for the most part) takes place in one city.

I am with you man!

[Brem]

Originally Posted by Mr. Earle

There we go again with people making their own assumptions. Might as well throw a Death Star in there.

I consider it one of Gotham's jewels. It wasnt just a public transport on which they staged a confrontation. Along with the Narrows and the beautiful skyline its what makes this city special, comicbooky, different from GODDAMN CHICAGO, ITS WHAT MAKES IT GOTHAM. AND ITS WHAT MAKES THE MOVIE BEAUTIFUL. IN A MOVIE ABOUT BATMAN, I EXPECT TO SEE PLOT + ATMOSPHERE.
In bb there was no part of the city without the monorail. Now you tell me that all of the hundrends of places that this movie took us just happen to not have the monorail pass through them? Yeah right! The whole direction reeked of realism. Its much more than "the monorail wasnt plot related this time".


Coclusion: To me the difference in atmosphere between the two nolan movies is the same as it was in the burton ones. And i will keep supporting my point as long as the opposition does the same. Besides, who knows, maybe people from WB lurk these places. Maybe they will correct it in the third one.

And there was me thinking we could leave the film with our own thoughts on how things may or may not have changed over the past few Months/Year between Batman Begins and The Dark Knight.

Ok, so YOU consider it that. That doesn't have to apply to every other person who watched the film. There's a time period between both films where anything could have happened. For all we know, they could have decided to stop the Monorail altogether.

And it isn't more than it wasn't plot related. It wasn't. It would have been pushed into our faces to say "HERE IT IS!". Then you'd get the complete opposite. You'd be sat there with a big smile on you face, but someone else would be sat there thinking "What was the point?".

I'm still glad it isn't in there. Like I said, for one thing it'd feel like they're pushing it in my face to try and make me remember it still exists and another thing is it gives Batman Begins its own unique feel compared to The Dark Knight.

[Mr. Earle]

Originally Posted by Brem

And it isn't more than it wasn't plot related. It wasn't. It would have been pushed into our faces to say "HERE IT IS!". Then you'd get the complete opposite. You'd be sat there with a big smile on you face, but someone else would be sat there thinking "What was the point?".

The point was to make Gotham a bit distinct from reality and to garnish it up. Then they decided to use it as a stage for a fight. So robbing one of gotham's most distinctive assets because "it would be in our face" is ridiculous to say the least. Yeah, lets get rid of the iconic exterior shots of the Daily Planet. We already saw it in Superman Begins. Whats the point in The Super Knight?

gives Batman Begins its own unique feel compared to The Dark Knight.

Well since the stories of the two movies are 6 months apart, forgive me if i want the tone to be continuous so that it bonds them. Perhaps you want the next movie to be different too. Lets model gotham after New Orleans now. Right?

[Brem]

Originally Posted by Mr. Earle

The point was to make Gotham a bit distinct from reality and to garnish it up. Then they decided to use it as a stage for a fight. So robbing one of gotham's most distinctive assets because "it would be in our face" is ridiculous to say the least. Yeah, lets get rid of the iconic exterior shots of the Daily Planet. We already saw it in Superman Begins. Whats the point in The Super Knight?


Well since the stories of the two movies are 6 months apart, forgive me if i want the tone to be continuous so that it bonds them. Perhaps you want the next movie to be different too. Lets model gotham after New Orleans now. Right?

I have honestly never seen someone crying so much because one thing isn't thrown straight in your face. The problem here is this is what you want. Unfortunately, it's not about what you want. I still stand by what I said. It would have been forced, completely pointless and wouldn't fit the tone of the film.

The thing here is the monorail is there, sure for a moment, but long enough to let the audience know they haven't forgotten.

You have this idea that nothing should nor can change within six Months to a year. Anything could have happened. Gotham didn't just suddenly freeze between Batman Begins and The Dark Knight.

I couldn't care less what they do with the next film, actually. You're the one getting upset because the monorail is shown in the background. Not me.

Clearly you're not going to get over this, and just continue moaning until you're blue in the face.

I've made my points and expressed my views/opinions. If moaning about the monorail helps you sleep at night, then fair enough.

[Mr. Earle]

Originally Posted by Brem

I have honestly never seen someone crying so much because one thing isn't thrown straight in your face.

Oh when someone is supporting his views he is crying? I dont see you quitting either.

The thing here is the monorail is there, sure for a moment, but long enough to let the audience know they haven't forgotten.

Yes, in like.... 3 pixels of a wide aerial shot. My god.... ITS IN MY FREAKING FACE!

Clearly you're not going to get over this, and just continue moaning until you're blue in the face.

So i have to accept your opinion and what Nolan did or i am a loser? No, i am displeased about this issue and as long as someone wants to talk about it, give me opposite arguements, etc, i will give my own and contribute to the discussion. So i dont have to accept anything, i can have my own opinion and if its different from yours or Nolan's please dont condescend me by tagging my posts as whining.

Seriously, i hope Nolan uses Paris for his Gotham in the third film because if i see even one building from TDK again, IT WILL BE FORCED AND IN MA FACE, OMG THE MOVIE WILL SAAAACK.

[Kahoot]

Originally Posted by Brem

And it isn't more than it wasn't plot related. It wasn't. It would have been pushed into our faces to say "HERE IT IS!". Then you'd get the complete opposite. You'd be sat there with a big smile on you face, but someone else would be sat there thinking "What was the point?".

Like in Spider-Man 3 there was the gratuitous shot of Spider-Man landing and running in front of the American flag. But then again in Spider-Man 1 and 2 there are shots of the American flag that aren't forced at all. It all depends on how they do it.

[Cagefighterkip]

didn't the monorail blow up at the end of Batman Begins?
maybe they simply didn't rebuild it.

First time I saw TDK I was really miffed by the complete change in artistic direction. A lot of the scenes took place in sterile daylight, a stark contrast to Batman Begins, which created a "world" - a believable and yet still comic-influenced Gotham. Not including the monorail, part of the Wayne's legacy in TDK annoyed me. I can see what people are saying about there were some HINTS it was still there, so that one annoys me the least.

It was actually moving WAYNE ENTERPRISES that annoyed me the most, I finally saw it in an IMAX double bill last night with BEGINS and noticed the tower in the background of the truck flipping scene - it was brief, and seemed unlabeled, but it was nice to see it in a film that seemed more CHICAGO than GOTHAM.

I get Nolan going for the "realist" angle by filming lots of exteriors, but changing building for Wayne into a suckier, potentially shorter building for the everything else grander scale sequel seemed more unrelated to the plot than it would be to just reuse exteriors of Wayne Tower.

The lack of the narrows - where Arkham Asylum was - was another irritant. In BB it was like some sort of shakespearean london - full of poverty and crime, a genuinely intimidating place, and to simply forget about it in the Dark Knight lost even more of the sense of Gotham so specifically created in Batman Begins.

I hope that Wayne Tower is in the inevitable third movie, and they hopefully make reference to criminals roaming the narrows. With any luck, the Dark knight commentary may allude to some of these irksome quirks!

[Octoberist]

i wouldn't be surprised if Wayne tower ends being another building in the next one - or Akrham being in a different part of town in Gotham.

To be fair, it's the same Gotham, minus the Narrows really (and the Wayne Tower changes). CGI was still used to make the Chicago looking very vast in some shots, and to make Lake Michigan into the Atlantic. Check out the links for more details (It's not just Chicago with any enhancements)

http://www.framestore-cfc.com/#/Film.../TheDarkKnight,
http://www.dneg.com/projects/the_dark_knight_129.html


I think the point being is that Nolan wanted Gotham to be a nice looking town, but very cold. The grit comes from the characters.

[Mr. Earle]

Originally Posted by Octoberist

i wouldn't be surprised if Wayne tower ends being another building in the next one - or Akrham being in a different part of town in Gotham.

To be fair, it's the same Gotham, minus the Narrows really (and the Wayne Tower changes). CGI was still used to make the Chicago looking very vast in some shots, and to make Lake Michigan into the Atlantic. Check out the links for more details (It's not just Chicago with any enhancements)

http://www.framestore-cfc.com/#/Film.../TheDarkKnight,
http://www.dneg.com/projects/the_dark_knight_129.html


I think the point being is that Nolan wanted Gotham to be a nice looking town, but very cold. The grit comes from the characters.

The Wayne Tower was still the same building. It can be seen during the batman-joker confrontation. Also, when the chopper first appears over the city ("lets give them some of their own medicine"), you can see that the whole city is normally lit, but Wayne tower is lit like a Christmas tree and it stands out. I dont think they would have done that for a random tower. It is Wayne tower.
That brown building that the meeting was held was just another Wayne Ind. building.

[Octoberist]

You might be right.

In the script (from what I've seen) never states it as Wayne Tower..hmm.

[crazyrabbits]

Originally Posted by Octoberist

i wouldn't be surprised if Wayne tower ends being another building in the next one - or Akrham being in a different part of town in Gotham.

To be fair, it's the same Gotham, minus the Narrows really (and the Wayne Tower changes). CGI was still used to make the Chicago looking very vast in some shots, and to make Lake Michigan into the Atlantic. Check out the links for more details (It's not just Chicago with any enhancements)

http://www.framestore-cfc.com/#/Film.../TheDarkKnight,
http://www.dneg.com/projects/the_dark_knight_129.html


I think the point being is that Nolan wanted Gotham to be a nice looking town, but very cold. The grit comes from the characters.

Got a quick question: would you know how to download the company showreel off the Double Negative site? They had a great little shot of the Joker looking all sinister as stares at Batman getting to the top of the building.

EDIT: Actually, nevermind, I was able to find it.

[Batman jr.]

Diggin' up an old thread, but I think there's a good reason for it:

The monorail is back!

See it here, taken from Nolanfans.com:



But...

1) Is this a complete CGI-shot?
2) Is this supposed to be the same Wayne Enterprises building as seen in TDK, but from a different angle?

I was gonna make a new thread about this, but...

[Fudgie]

Nice catch, pal.

[The Joker]

That screen shot has been shown before. It's really easy to miss though when you watch the movie. Your eyes are focused on the W.E. building. But still the monorail is intact.

[GRangerPrimeNYC]

After reading all the posts by people back in 2008, I'm amazed by how narrow minded some people are about this issue. Gotham just felt like Chicago in TDK.

Also, the building during the chase scene in TDK was a building in Chicago Wayne Tower's design was based on. Wayne Tower in BB was a radically different building. Just compare them.

Too bad these two features never made a prominent return in TDKR. Gotham in TDKR just looked like New York with more bridges, some Los Angelos skyline, and Pittsburgh.
Heck, even Wayne Enterprises is now in another giant black box and this isn't even the same building as the black box in TDK.

[Batman jr.]

Originally Posted by GRangerPrimeNYC

After reading all the posts by people back in 2008, I'm amazed by how narrow minded some people are about this issue. Gotham just felt like Chicago in TDK.

Also, the building during the chase scene in TDK was a building in Chicago Wayne Tower's design was based on. Wayne Tower in BB was a radically different building. Just compare them.

Too bad these two features never made a prominent return in TDKR. Gotham in TDKR just looked like New York with more bridges, some Los Angelos skyline, and Pittsburgh.
Heck, even Wayne Enterprises is now in another giant black box and this isn't even the same building as the black box in TDK.

You do realize that TDKR takes place in a different area of the city?

Just search for the official map of the Nolan-universe on the interwebs. Besides, I think that a big company like WE has multiple buildings + 8 years have passed since TDK, so...



The locations in this trilogy came from the UK, Chicago, NY, Pittsburgh & LA, but Gotham is fictional, so those are "Gotham landmarks." Besides, I don't think that the WE tower is meant to a literal copy of the Chicago board of trade. The fight between Bats & Joker in TDK takes place in front of another Gotham building, so to speak.

See the Nokia Gotham 3D map.