How long before the fan community turns on the Nolan films?

[Picard Sisko]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

I have no idea what the point is that you're trying to make now.

You said: "So Gotham City is like any real world city, huh?" and I responded.

Gotham's crime rate went exceptionally low after the organized crime element was taken out of the situation. And as I mentioned, what Blake said in the film...

Once again, I don't buy the fact that the Dent Act made Gotham virtually crime free.

And Nolan's view on laws and what have you are only very simplified views, such as RICO. Plus, Gotham being virtually crime free thanks to the Dent Act isn't that bad compared to China not doing one damn thing after their citizen is kidnapped and taken overseas.

You are using a movie's flaw to justify another one.

And I find it annoying when others say Batman shouldn't have quit because we always see other heroes who don't in other films or other mediums such as comics and cartoons.

"Good Lord."

I see a reason. I see a reason of there being no major crime for Batman to deal with as he sits and waits for Batman to be needed again as mentioned by Alfred in TDKR.

He could have still lived his life, instead of becoming:



Of course they come up with an easy plot device to fix his leg before he becomes Batman again. What does ignoring his company and letting it go down the drain have to do with waiting for Batman to be needed again?

Aside from fighting criminals as Batman, he was also being charitable as Bruce Wayne. That orphanage that Blake came from suffered a lot as a result.

I don't why. You said you wanted Two-Face around. So Two-Face wouldn't be a villain in your eyes?

You don't why? What does that even mean? Don't call me dense for asking THAT.

BTW, I clearly asked why does he have to be a full-blown criminal to be a villain?

[The Joker]

Two Face would actually be the perfect villain to hold a mock court. He's done it at least twice in the comics. He put both Batman and Gordon on trial.






I'd love to have seen something like that in TDKR.

[Llama_Shepherd]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

Is this a reply to what I said of Batman retiring or what? Lol. Don't know if this is backing up my statement or not. Sorry, I'm slow today, haha.

Sort of both . People say specifically Nolan's version is good because it has an ending, unlike comics which "go on forever". Because, the films go on forever too, if you ignore the fact there are different iterations like people do with the comic universes.

So it just annoys me, mainly because it's a criticism out of ignorance (like Robin is "gay"), Batman retiring, dying or having a definitive end is not a new thing to be explored.

[Picard Sisko]

Originally Posted by The Joker

Two Face would actually be the perfect villain to hold a mock court. He's done it at least twice in the comics. He put both Batman and Gordon on trial.






I'd love to have seen something like that in TDKR.

Although I really did like Crane as the Mock Judge.

Originally Posted by Llama_Shepherd

Sort of both . People say specifically Nolan's version is good because it has an ending, unlike comics which "go on forever". Because, the films go on forever too, if you ignore the fact there are different iterations like people do with the comic universes.

So it just annoys me, mainly because it's a criticism out of ignorance (like Robin is "gay"), Batman retiring, dying or having a definitive end is not a new thing to be explored.

I always liked seeing Bruce Wayne as Batman until he was much older, and retiring later on. And THEN handing over the baton to the next Batman. *Batman Beyond*

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by Picard Sisko

You said: "So Gotham City is like any real world city, huh?" and I responded.

Once again, I don't buy the fact that the Dent Act made Gotham virtually crime free.

And you responded in bringing up New York City which will always have crime, I get that, BUT...I never said Gotham had no crime, only small crimes.

Once again, what did Blake say? They(Gordon, the Dent Act, et cetera) cleaned the streets THAT WELL.

You are using a movie's flaw to justify another one.

I'm really not. I am stating that Nolan has very simple views with actual laws so if the Dent Act is this unreal, overachieving piece of work, then there's nothing to really nitpick about when we see how Nolan handles situations that can be viewed as political.

"Good Lord."

He could have still lived his life, instead of becoming:



Of course they come up with an easy plot device to fix his leg before he becomes Batman again. What does ignoring his company and letting it go down the drain have to do with waiting for Batman to be needed again?

Aside from fighting criminals as Batman, he was also being charitable as Bruce Wayne. That orphanage that Blake came from suffered a lot as a result.

He could, but then that would seem odd. He lost the only woman he thought he had a future left so his life was about Wayne Enterprises and only that and look what happened to the company after the failed clean energy project. Bruce had no life once that became a failure and ruined Bruce's company.

And then once again you talk about Bruce sticking around only as Batman and again...there was nothing for Batman to do. Please understand that before you ask again why Batman didn't stick around, lol.

You don't why? What does that even mean? Don't call me dense for asking THAT.

I don't know why*

I don't see Two-Face being a villain and that's why he was perfectly used in TDK as only this guy with one focus to exact revenge against Rachel's death and that's it.

BTW, I clearly asked why does he have to be a full-blown criminal to be a villain?

Because from Ra's al Ghul, to Scarecrow, to Joker, to Bane, to Talia al Ghul...we have only seen full-blown criminals and Two-Face could not keep his shtick from TDK with a focus of getting revenge for Rachel's death. That's why his arc best fits with one film that he wasn't a "real" villain to begin with. Let alone, The Dark Knight's title itself even fits Dent to a T.

Originally Posted by The Joker

Two Face would actually be the perfect villain to hold a mock court. He's done it at least twice in the comics. He put both Batman and Gordon on trial.






I'd love to have seen something like that in TDKR.

Agreed, Two-Face could have been great for the mock court scene as well, but again, what Nolan did with Dent was perfect enough, imo.

Originally Posted by Llama_Shepherd

Sort of both . People say specifically Nolan's version is good because it has an ending, unlike comics which "go on forever". Because, the films go on forever too, if you ignore the fact there are different iterations like people do with the comic universes.

So it just annoys me, mainly because it's a criticism out of ignorance (like Robin is "gay"), Batman retiring, dying or having a definitive end is not a new thing to be explored.

I never said Nolan's version is good because it has en ending though. I do love the ending and that Wayne received an ending to his storyline, but that doesn't make it any superior to any version.

Originally Posted by Picard Sisko

I always liked seeing Bruce Wayne as Batman until he was much older, and retiring later on. And THEN handing over the baton to the next Batman. *Batman Beyond*

If we had this long series of Batman films that chronicles Bruce's life until he was very old, then I would agree with you, but we do at least see Bruce's life in ten years and with having retired for eight years, Bruce was never going to get back in his prime having done nothing in so many years as well.

[batfreakforever]

I really like that TDKR pisses fans off otherwise the talk would be boring plus I like a good laugh.

[Anno_Domini]

^ Most of the time this happens because other fans had a special CBM that came out the same year that becomes overshadowed by TDKR.

[Sebastos]

I don't see a reason to turn except for personal preference. To me, these are the definitive Batman films and the best superhero trilogy. Sure we'll get a reboot and different installments down the line, but I'm pleased with Nolan and co.'s vision for this character. So where's the "Never" option?

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

[BH/HHH]

To be fair a lot if people have stated that although they like the Nolan films they aren't the Batman films they wanted. For me the first two are Batman films but the 3rd doesn't feel like one.

I don't think I'll see my perfect Batman in live action unless I see something with the style if
Under the Red Hood (and no that doesn't mean I want Batman in a grey costume I'm not stupid enough to think that would ever work)

[BatLobsterRises]

To me, films 1 and 3 are Bruce Wayne films, and film 2 is the Batman/Gotham film.

And as far as the topic at hand goes, I know for a fact that I will personally never turn on these films. Even if the reboot comes along and somehow blows it out of the water. These films marked basically a decade of my Bat-fandom and gave me a film series I could really attach to over a long period of time. There's no replacing the memories there. Before Batman Begins, I was absolutely desperate to see another Batman film. And now after Rises, I'm content to the point that I wish they would let the franchise lay low for another 8 years (even though that's not going to happen). That says it all for me.

[shauner111]

Yup, ill never turn on these films. Future Bat flicks may become more accurate to the source material. We may get the most iconic shots or action sequences ever. Or the "perfect Gotham" or "perfect suit".

Who knows, BUT...

I care more about good directing, filmmaking, cinematography, writing & acting and most of all i care about Bruce Wayne. And i can say that as cool as Burtons first movie was or as cool as they may get in the future...They'll never be as human or as well put together in terms of filmmaking and performance as the Nolan/Bale trilogy.

Heck, i saw AMAZING movies last year. Django Unchained, Looper, The Master, Skyfall....some of them would have made my number 1 spot easily. Yet TDKR was the movie that i name the best of 2012. And it was like this for Batman Begins and the same for The Dark Knight in both 2005 and 2008. I can't say the same about any other comic book related movie.

It goes back to the idea of "Oh, the guy who made Memento is doing a Batman movie? THAT is something that id like to see. That sounds different." to quote Joseph-Gordon Levitt on BB.

Nolan brought something different to the world and ill always remember that in a positive way. His movies were the first time i saw Batman OR any superhero treated in a mature way on the big screen.

[BatLobsterRises]

Totally agree. And I think we can almost bank on the next series of films being more aesthetically like the comics, which I'll certainly enjoy too.

But like you said, it's that maturity Nolan brought to the character. It doesn't all have to be dripped in shadows for it to be "dark". Nolan was wise enough to know you can still shoot a lot of daytime scenes and use that to enhance the bleakness of the story. I love the uber-noir, uber-Gothic visual take on Batman too, I grew up on Burton and The Animated Series (ironically I find Nolan's films to be much more like film noirs in content, while those share more with it aesthetically). But the real world approach just gave the series so much weight and gravitas. Some people found it boring, but for me it was the complete opposite. It was playing up these fantastical elements against a believable backdrop that made everything seem even more incredible and massive. That happens to be my preference for most action/sci-fi, not just Batman.

[Bruce Malone]

To the OP

[Anno_Domini]

To me...The Dark Knight Trilogy is one of the greatest cinematic stories ever told and is the only great CB story ever told in a film going from Batman's origin to Bruce Wayne retiring and passing the mantle of the Batman down. I would have never expected that I would have wanted to see such a trilogy, but I am pleased that I have become a fan and went along for the ride of what Nolan gave us. All in all, it's a story about Bruce Wayne and that's what keeps me away from stating things such as TDKR not being a Batman movie or what have you.

[BH/HHH]

It's my favourite trilogy ever, I'll never turn on it. They're also done in the modern age so I doubt they'll seem dated anytime soon.

[shauner111]

Yeah. Im all for the reboot as a set of films that focus more on Batman & his missions than Bruce Wayne, the man. I'm all for a return to Burtons Gotham (just not as stagey). I'm all for a different suit, possibly a modern take on Keatons batmobile, a more silent Batman and for villains like Freeze, Riddler and Penguin. I'm not tooo keen on them going all "3D" but i may have to live with that..

It's ALL GOOD! But the direction this trilogy took has to be my number 1 preference.

Let me put it this way (for the reboot). If they do an updated/modern & more comic accurate take on Burtons original Batman...then ill be a happy man. And i believe that's the way to go. But it wont beat this trilogy for me.

[the last son]

I have not read any of this thread but I'm sure others have said it. People don't turn on a series because of any other reason it was not that good to begin with. Or it was overrated,

[JDonaldD]

I think when BB came out, the audience wasn't ready for the kind of movies Marvel is making now. Marvel is making what I'm assuming the Batman reboot will attempt which is a replica of the current comic book world. The Arkham games do this pretty well. Basically what I'm saying is that Marvel's movies couldn't have existed without BB and BB couldn't have existed w/o Burton's films and so forth. BB and specifically TDK were perfect Batman films for the time they were created. They were what audiences wanted. I think a lot of the flack TDKR gets is because what to expect out of a superhero movie is changing. It wasn't as "real" as TDK for some and it wasn't comic accurate for others.

[Frodo]

I think the Nolan films benefited from not only Burton but from the Marvel films before it. There were 2 Spiderman, X Men , and Blade films which had restroyed the viability of Superhero films to the public after B&R and before BB was released. Batman was off the screen for 8 years , and in that time WB was too spooked to really pull the trigger because of B&R.

Between 1999-2005 , The first 2 Blade, X Men, and Spiderman films demonstrated that these characters could be more complex and be taken seriously , and be accepted by the public. We have to keep in mind that these films have all influenced each other in a sense.

[batfreakforever]

The Nolan films are hits because the people behind the films love the character. They know where they wanted to go, how they wanted to do it,what story they wanted to tell. It's a very bold trilogy for a very well loved and known character. It never seemed dull, boring or old ground. Everything was new ground for the Batman universe on film. If the crew that made these films are happy with what they have done and have completed what they set out to achieve then what is there to say. They gave me questions and answers that I would never of dreamed of thinking about the characters. Fresh takes on old characters. They understood that its Bruce waynes journey and the villians he fights are different sides of him. They took what the characters and themes are in the books and drove them straight home.

[theman]

i just think the films are overrated and over time i think people eventually will wake up to the fact that while they may be decent movies, as batman/comic book movies they arent as good as people have made them out to be. i think people just like batman and as long as hes dark they will swallow it up. but i guess im more picky, i prefer the stylized batman of yesteryear, not the overboard realism nolan has done. there needs to be a return to the "fun" of the character.

[theman]

Originally Posted by shauner111

So Batman 89s 40's feel is timeless (and 80s Prince)...but ur saying TDK Trilogy will be dated because it was set in our world? I dont buy that at all.

If anything Burtons artificial looking Gotham is dated. And Returns looks like an early 90s Burton movie not even a Batman movie. The 40s hats and coats, "acting" by the cops,etc AND soundtrack that you talk about? That's all pretty dated nowadays. Nolans never went into detail with what year it was, they just showed Iceland (as a fill-in for China), India and various American cities. These cities have looked this way for a while and will continue to look like this for decades. It's not like the architecture will change drastically or the mountains and desert will leave or suddenly flying cars will enter these cities. Not in my lifetime.

We also didn't hear any music from the "bands of the era". Like Burton, Shumacher, Marc Webb liked to use. Their films will never be as timeless for that very reason.

I like some fantasy and comic book elements in Batman. A gothic Gotham here....a Mr. Freeze there....but i think Batman BELONGS in a more real world. He doesn't have superpowers, his greatest psychological villains are barely far-fetched. It wasn't til the 50s where we really started seeing fantastical elements being used in a big way. And for the next 20 years it wasn't even used well. Here we are 75 years into it and i still dont feel we have classic comics with these fantastical characters. The ODD Mr. Freeze or Clayface depiction and it's usually in other forms of animation. It's very rare, and i dont personally believe that it represents Batman to the fullest.

The level of acting, filmmaking, the exclusive soundtrack , how it was more relatable for human beings than any of the other past Batman movies. All of this will make the trilogy more timeless. For all the liberties Nolan took with changing the characters, they still reference more individual comic stories than anything thus far.

(PS: NO im not saying future movies can't do it better than Nolan. It probably will happen. At least in terms of accuracy to the source material. Im just comparing it to the past)

dont agree, sorry. burtons style of gotham was intentionally trying to look as if it could have been a movie made in the 1930's or 40's, and the "old school" special effects of those films only add to that. burton talked about this on the commentary of B89. then you have nolans gotham that has ****ing texting and cell phones and ipads things etc. when new technology comes out this will all look as dated as that black pimp guy in Superman the movie.

[BatLobsterRises]

Meh, I don't think there's anything wrong with having some technology of the times in films.

By that logic, ALL films being made today will be dated in the future. And while that's true to a degree, that doesn't necessarily make it a bad thing. A good film is a good film.

[BatBat]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

And I find it annoying when others say Batman shouldn't have quit because we always see other heroes who don't in other films or other mediums such as comics and cartoons.



I see a reason. I see a reason of there being no major crime for Batman to deal with as he sits and waits for Batman to be needed again as mentioned by Alfred in TDKR.

And Bruce Wayne did stay around longer working on the clean energy project and only went into exile three years before TDKR because he failed his father's company. Don't see how no one understands that quite well. Ruining the company ruined him even more.

Yeah that doesn't sound very much like BATMAN does it???

[BatBat]

Originally Posted by theman

i just think the films are overrated and over time i think people eventually will wake up to the fact that while they may be decent movies, as batman/comic book movies they arent as good as people have made them out to be. i think people just like batman and as long as hes dark they will swallow it up. but i guess im more picky, i prefer the stylized batman of yesteryear, not the overboard realism nolan has done. there needs to be a return to the "fun" of the character.

While I partially agree with this I can't see a return to the "fun" helping things any. Shoemaker tried that and look how THAT worked out...
I like the realism. I just don't like how Nolan skimped out on character to better fit "his" story.