redfirebird2008
Avenger
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2005
- Messages
- 16,788
- Reaction score
- 154
- Points
- 73
If you guys want, I suppose we could move the voice discussion to the Bane thread.
Would that be an agreeable solution?
Seems like a fair idea to me.
If you guys want, I suppose we could move the voice discussion to the Bane thread.
Would that be an agreeable solution?
There you go, JungleBuckree. Guess Nolan's a hack now, right?
They haven't even edited the movie yet, so there was clearly going to be more done on the sound mixing in post.
I thought the same as well. Especially given the set photos of sections of the plane (rather than entire, intact planes).
Would you rather listen to a journalist? Or some random new guy on a message board?
depends upon the poster who's doing it. if it's the same poster who keeps on harping on every little detail that he deems negative (with almost little to nothing about what could be positive), who's to say you can't assume that it's already ruining the movie for himPeople need to stop assuming these things, just because someone says they aren't happy with one aspect of some piece of news does not mean that it's going to ruin the movie for them. Other people were concerned with the accent as well...

So is Bane the captive during the prisoner transfer, or is it Aboutboul's character?
Yep. As a fan of Bane's, I want to hear him speak clearly.

As always, for all the Batman coverage you can stand check back here regularly, and well see you tomorrow when the first theatrical trailer arrives online.

t:
I don't think there's any captive. Just that Pavel is being handed over from the Militia to the CIA for protection in exchange for money. And then Bane crashed the party!

This guy actually says the trailer hits tomorrow. Hmm.
Online journalists aren't real journalists.

This guy actually says the trailer hits tomorrow. Hmm.
I don't think there's any captive. Just that Pavel is being handed over from the Militia to the CIA for protection in exchange for money. And then Bane crashed the party!
:
When someone's goal is to make something seem real, and they go so far in that goal that they negatively impact the film, then it's a flaw. When your audience can't understand your characters, the film has been negatively impacted.
It does matter "why" it's presented that way. It could add to characterization, or the scene... or what have you. This is just silly. Again and again... there are many great movies where a character's mutability is presented for a desired effect. If Nolan wanted Bane to be fully understandable, believe me, he could achieve that goal. It seems very narrow-minded to say there's no way it can do anything but detract from the film.:If your character's dialogue cannot be understood by your audience, then it doesn't matter WHY the dialog is presented that way. Maybe you didn't realize it, or maybe you did realize it couldn't be understood, but you left it because you thought it "made it more real."
And there's no other way to convey the important aspects of a story, except through dialogue?:Either way, the film now has a flaw, because now your audience (who you're trying to show the story to) can't understand the story.
Nor does it make it bad... we have to wait and see. It sounds like your position is that garbled dialogue can't possibly add anything to the movie, despite it having been done in the past. Do you honestly think that Nolan didn't ask himself, "is Bane a little tough to understand? Maybe we should give him a normal voice?" Clearly he's made Bane into this muzzled character for a purpose, no? Why not give a little benefit to the doubt? Why latch on to this without much of any info?:To say that it's deliberate doesn't excuse it. That's just saying that Nolan's cutting his nose off to spite his face. Doing something like that intentionally doesn't make it good.