The Dark Knight Rises 6 Minutes of TDKR footage attached to Mission Impossible 4! - Part 6

Status
Not open for further replies.
So is Bane the captive during the prisoner transfer, or is it Aboutboul's character?
 
lol, I doubt Bane will talk gentleman british, some people seem to have the wrong idea of an accent and it only being able to sound in one way or able to convey one feeling only.
 
Now the question is - will the audio be fixed before

tumblr_llj4j2s9lr1qfjej5o1_r1_400.gif

:funny:
 
I thought the same as well. Especially given the set photos of sections of the plane (rather than entire, intact planes).

Yeah, and given what they said about it being like a James Bond film, anyone else think of the iconic scene from Goldfinger?
 
People 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...
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 him:awesome:
 
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!
 
These descriptions pretty much debunk the "killing a dictator for LOS" deal. So now I take all the leaked descriptions from Rocketman's source as likely wrong.

I mean the crashing plane thing was pretty much known already by reports and set-pics.
 

@krolljvar
Justin Kroll

Late to the party but the "Dark Knight Rises" footage was awesome and probably the best action sequence I have seen in awhile
 
This guy actually says the trailer hits tomorrow. Hmm.

I wonder if he knows it as a fact or just speculating that it's what the viral will reveal tomorrow?
 
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!

They didn't invite him. So he crashed!
 
:

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.

...And if part of understanding the character is a recognition that he can't be easily understood? It's not a flaw if it's purposeful, and there's a number of reasons why it might be purposeful. Ignoring those reasons doesn't help your fight on this. I really don't think Bane's voice is about realism so much, honestly.... I think it's more about creating a desired effect for the audience.

: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."
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.

: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.
And there's no other way to convey the important aspects of a story, except through dialogue?

: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.
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?

It'll be fun to sorta keep this conversation going in a week, that's for sure.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"