The Dark Knight Can The Dark Knight win an Oscar

[BatScot]

Batman 89 won an Oscar but this is not used to prove that it is a better movie.

Oh, I’m certain someone has made that argument. But if not, it doesn’t change the fact that the floodgates would have opened had Begins won one.

 

[Punch]

No, because it most likely won't deserve one.

Anyone thinking that BB was mature and realistic is fooling themselves. It was no different than Spder-Man. In fact it was less "mature" than SM because it took itself so seriously.

 

[Hunter Rider]

I very much doubt it

 

[JokerNick]

^talk about taking itself to seriously

 

[Castlewood]

Anyone thinking that BB was mature and realistic is fooling themselves. It was no different than Spder-Man. In fact it was less "mature" than SM because it took itself so seriously.

Wow. So, SO WRONG. It almost saddens me.

 

[Punch]

Wow. So, SO WRONG. It almost saddens me.

actually, I can't be wrong.

 

[JokerNick]

actually, I can't be wrong.

chicken or the egg.... what came first.....

 

[Hunter Rider]

^talk about taking itself to seriously

 

[Revovler]

I think he was talking to punch. Who is wrong.

 

[JokerNick]

i was talking about the post above ya.......

love your sig too.... only a sith deals in absolutes.... such a jab at Bush, love it

 

[Hunter Rider]

i was talking about the post above ya.......

love your sig too.... only a sith deals in absolutes.... such a jab at Bush, love it

Oh ok,my mistake

 

[Anita18]

I think it has a chance, but it's definitely straddling the line between summer blockbuster and possible Oscar contender, and its Oscar chances could depend on what WB and/or Nolan decides what it will be. The first (and arguably second) third of BB was Oscar material, while the third act was pretty much action-oriented for the summer movie genre.

It's pretty much a given that most studios release their Oscar contenders in the fall and winter. If TDK is to have a realistic shot at a serious Oscar, it would probably have to be released then. I highly doubt that happening, really, but I would love to see Nolan go all out dramatic and serious with TDK. I don't think WB would allow him to do that though.

 

[Punch]

awww did I hurt the wittle babies feewings?

 

[Poetic Chaos]

I think this franchise does take itself a bit too seriously. Like saying they'll never do Robin. He's just as tragic a character as Batman and everone knows the Robin's have made Batman what he is in the comics. He's not a pure camp character. Batman creating a Bat family is completely logical considering the isolation he's been through after losing his parents. Sidekicks get a bad rap.

 

[Dr. MIX]

Sidekicks get a bad rap.

Yes, because of Robin...

 

[batsone]

"Can the Dark knight win an Oscar?"

Only if it was released at thanksgiving would it even get a nomination.

 

[CConn]

Yes, because of Robin...

Because of an interpretation of Robin that is outdated by about 40 years. An interpretation that made Batman himself look more like a joke than a superhero.

 

[Dr. MIX]

Because of an interpretation of Robin that is outdated by about 40 years. An interpretation that made Batman himself look more like a joke than a superhero.

An interpretation that is still regarded as the only interpretation for anyone outside of these boards, not everyone reads comic books, therefore the average joe's only memories of Robin is through the TV series and.. schumacher. I know he can be handled seriously, but when it boils down to Nolan's gritty and reaslitic vision, Robin cannot find his place in it. Unless the character is drastically altered to make it seem justifiable for Batman to adopt an infant and train him into becoming a crime fighter. That's going be a hard sell.

 

[Batty Belfry]

I don't personally care whether or not TDK wins an oscar, I just want a jaw-dropping Batman film. I do however think it could win an oscar.

 

[CConn]

An interpretation that is still regarded as the only interpretation for anyone outside of these boards, not everyone reads comic books, therefore the average joe's only memories of Robin is through the TV series and.. schumacher.

And it was the same case with Batman before B89 was made. Yet they still made him dark, and they were still successful.

I know he can be handled seriously, but when it boils down to Nolan's gritty and reaslitic vision, Robin cannot find his place in it. Unless the character is drastically altered to make it seem justifiable for Batman to adopt an infant and train him into becoming a crime fighter. That's going be a hard sell.

Whether or not (and how) Robin can fit into a Nolan Batman movie is a whole different ball of wax, my point simply is that Robin's current interpretation is as legitimate as any other superhero, and he's no longer the useless appendage people think he is.

EDIT: I'll tell you though, one sidekick that would fit seemlessly with Nolan's vision; Cassandra Cain Batgirl. A little girl raised - and abused - by a father who's trying to turn her into the perfect martial artist. It's dark, it's brutal, it's believable (well, as believable as Batman himself is). Very little changes would have to be made with her character.

 

[Dr. MIX]

Point taken

 

[Jason Ryder]

JokerNick, about actors being nominated for playing the same character in a sequel. Paul Newman won an Oscar for The Color Of Money and that was a sequel to his movie The Hustler.

 

[ultimatefan]

And yet each film you list was in fact recognized by the Academy, all more so than Begins, and two actually won an Oscar, with an Honorary Oscar being given to a third, and the films that won Best Picture those years, Oliver and Ghandi, each met with universal critical acclaim. And of the Best Picture nominations there are dramas, stage adaptations, musicals, sci-fi, and comedies... quite a mix of genres, and it might just be that these ‘limitations’ are simply indicative of the fact that certain films lost out to more deserving ones—in either nomination or award—and it makes no difference in that sense whether or not you’re talking about a technical Oscar or one of the ‘Big Ones'.

The major categories make a difference, Nolan´s BB had a technical nomination and Im sure the others will. But to the eye of the public there IS a difference between the technical Oscars and the "big ones", the technical ones are generally perceived as the "second-rate" ones. And no, none of these won "major" ones in their time. A lot of movies that won major Oscars are not remembered now as being classics of their times, many of the movies that make the lists of greatest movies of all time never won best picture or even any of the major Oscars. Directors like Scorsese, Chaplin, Orson Welles, Kubrick and Hitchcock never won the Best Director Oscar.

 

[Katsuro]

And it was the same case with Batman before B89 was made. Yet they still made him dark, and they were still successful.

Everyone always forgets that. They forget that before Batman 89 came out, common perception of Batman was very, very campy. Most people remembered the 60's TV show, or the comics of that era which were very, very similar.

Hell, Batman 89 was almost an updated version of that. Michael Uslan had a hell of a time convincing them to do a dark Batman film, they wanted to go with another comedy starring Bill Murray.

 

[Sharkboy]

No, because it most likely won't deserve one.

Anyone thinking that BB was mature and realistic is fooling themselves. It was no different than Spder-Man. In fact it was less "mature" than SM because it took itself so seriously.

You are wrong, but thats all im going to say, you can badmouth begins all you want. I havent got anything bad to say about someone who quotes Vonnegut jr in their sig carry on good sir, bash away.