The Dark Knight Rises Gotham Central

[ALP]

Why unlikely? He was an honest cop with some character development who survived TDK.

Flass survived BB yet where was he?

Went on vacation? Searching the Narrows for some falafel?

 

[The Demon's Head]

EDIT: Link doesn't work. Nevermind.

 

[The Joker]

Flass survived BB yet where was he?

Went on vacation? Searching the Narrows for some falafel?

I think Flass got scared out of Gotham since Batman became a permanent presence in Gotham, and even working with the Cops.

 

[The Demon's Head]

Considering the fact Stephens had a more substential role than Flass', I think it's a safe bet we're going to see him again.

 

[Gianakin_]

Flass survived BB yet where was he?

Went on vacation? Searching the Narrows for some falafel?

That's why I mentioned that Stephens was an honest cop, which means he can still be working in Gordon's unit.

 

[The Joker]

Plus it would give a nice sense of continuity. The GCPD felt like a little family in TDK. It was nice.

 

[Gianakin_]

Plus it would give a nice sense of continuity. The GCPD felt like a little family in TDK. It was nice.

That, plus he was so fu**king cool. I'll hijack this thread with my repetition of this, but they also need to bring back the Chechen. Best character that doesn't come from the comics, evah.

 

[The Joker]

I loved the Chechan, but I think Joker had him cut up and fed to his dogs.

 

[Gianakin_]

I loved the Chechan, but I think Joker had him cut up and fed to his dogs.

I know. They should just introduce him to the comics and be done with it. Happened with Harley and with Chloe from Smallville.

 

[The Joker]

Well the Chechen wasn't quite as big a character as those two. But I would love to see him in the comics.

 

[Gianakin_]

Well the Chechen wasn't quite as big a character as those two. But I would love to see him in the comics.

I know, man, I'm just fooling around. He's nothing without his accent, so unless they find a way to show it in the comics, I wouldn't care. The actor who played him was great, he was one of the very very few actors who could do a decent villain in CSI Las Vegas.

 

[Seen]

Searching the Narrows for some falafel?

He really likes falafel.

 

[Hardknox]

I love how Gordon's unit at the MCU is a close nit group and we get to see that.

I've really enjoyed Begins and Dark Knight's inclusion of the police element in these films. The police have a real presence, personified by these great secondary characters, like Stephens and Ramirez.

It's easily understood why they didn't use the names Bullock and Montoya. Not that it'd come from me, personally, but I could imagine an uproar about that haha For one thing, I'd never expect Montoya to be corrupt, which is why I think they didn't name her Montoya.

It'd be nice to see Bullock, Montoya and Allen used if they could fit in.

On the difference between Stephens and Bullock:
Stephens, to me, seems a bit more straight-laced while Bullock seems more like a rogue of a cop. He'll enforce the law, he fights for good, but he'll do it in his own way and he often clashes with Batman. To me, that's not the Stephens character we saw in Dark Knight. He was much more supportive of Batman's presence and Gordon in general. But who knows what he'll be like in Rises. Bullock would be an interesting addition.

Good example between the two would be: That scene with The Joker taunting Stephens to attack him in the interrogation room. The Joker had to insult him before Stephens made a move. I think Bullock would just violently hit The Joker to shut him up before he could say anything.

And I can't decide which one I like better haha

 

[The Guard]

It's kind of sad isn't it, when we feel that four or five minutes of screentime is a lot of focus on the rest of the GCPD other than Gordon?

I never said that. I said I still liked her because I understood her desperation to help her mother. I never said that condoned what she did.

Learn to read.

And right back at you, because I never said you said that.

See, to me, the two ideas, being desperate about your mother's health and medical bills, and doing something horrible, are not mutually exclusive.

Neither were they explored particularly well.

Simply having a character say "My mother is sick" is about the thinnest motivation, and thinnest execution of that concept that I can imagine. It would be one thing if we had SEEN her with her mother, or seen her trying to find other options before resorting to what she did. It would have taken all of 30, 40 seconds. Since we didn't, I could pretty much give a fig about the fact that she felt the need to justify her actions. But no, she just decided to do something horrible because her mom had some medical bills.

If they just wanted corrupt cops, they just should have presented them as corrupt cops. It wasn't a surprise when they turned out bad, because we were told they were bad, and there wasn't a whole lot of focus on what they
did that was really good.

Now then...

There is absolutely no reason that Bullock and Montoya shouldn't have been in this franchise from Day One. They would have reinforced and informed the themes of the movies wonderfully, and there' snothing to say Stephens and Ramirez, or two other randomly named characters couldn't have existed in THE DARK KNIGHT.

 

[AllyBabble]

I think Flass got scared out of Gotham since Batman became a permanent presence in Gotham, and even working with the Cops.

I was thinking that, once he became a liutenant, Gordon would have sacked his ass, as all the proof he needed of his corruption was his first hand witness of Flass taking bribes.

btw the actor who plays Detective Stephens plays the main villan role in season3 of 'Angel' , except he is a good guy too, like, he was a vampire hunter in the middle ages who travels through time to go after his main enemy who escaped him , Angel, who of course is a good guy now as he got his soul back. He is awesome in the role, and I was very pleased to see him in TDK.

 

[The Joker]

It's kind of sad isn't it, when we feel that four or five minutes of screentime is a lot of focus on the rest of the GCPD other than Gordon?

I don't think anyone said there was a lot of focus. People are saying there was more focus. Not a lot of focus. And it was really good.

And right back at you, because I never said you said that.

Then you should have clarified that instead of just quoting me and saying that.

See, to me, the two ideas, being desperate about your mother's health and medical bills, and doing something horrible, are not mutually exclusive.

Neither were they explored particularly well.

Simply having a character say "My mother is sick" is about the thinnest motivation, and thinnest execution of that concept that I can imagine. It would be one thing if we had SEEN her with her mother, or seen her trying to find other options before resorting to what she did. It would have taken all of 30, 40 seconds. Since we didn't, I could pretty much give a fig about the fact that she felt the need to justify her actions. But no, she just decided to do something horrible because her mom had some medical bills.

Couldn't disagree more.

For starters, doing something out of desperation for a loved one is one of the most solid motivations a person can have. Second, there was absolutely no need to see this sick mother in hospital.

People sometimes complain that Nolan goes into way too much detail and spoon feeds the audience too much. Actually showing us Ramirez's sick mother in hospital would have been just that. We didn't need to see her. We knew of her existence, that she was ill enough to be checked back into the hospital, which implies she's been there before. Not to mention Gordon asks Ramirez if she had to go and look after her mother.

Plus Ramirez came across as totally sincere in her scene with Two Face.

 

[Jokers_Wild]

Flass was mentioned in the viral marketing for TDK I remember way back in 2007. I think it was wiretap audio from Betty's House of Pies. The cops or Maroni's goons (I can't remember which) mentioned that Flass had completely lost his mind from the fear toxin.

 

[chamber-music]

According to The Gotham Times (a marketing site for The Dark Knight) Flass spent some time in a mental hospital, but he was charged with corruption by Harvey Dent. After getting dismissed from the GCPD, he loses his disability pension.

In the Comics he went on to work as a bouncer at a sleazy strip club and later got killed.

 

[ALP]

Haha, that is awesome about the Gotham Times stuff.

 

[The Guard]

Then you should have clarified that instead of just quoting me and saying that.

I should have clarified your misunderstanding before you made it?

I was making a point. That is what message boards are for.

I quite clearly did not say "You said this", or attribute any of what I implied to you. I was making a sarcastic point, and rather than ask what I meant, you said "Learn to read", etc.

Couldn't disagree more. For starters, doing something out of desperation for a loved one is one of the most solid motivations a person can have. Second, there was absolutely no need to see this sick mother in hospital.

You disagree with what? All of what I said there?

Am I to believe then, that you feel this was a good exploration of the concept introduced in the movie?

In the world of Chris Nolan, it seems there's little need to see much of anything character development-wise beyond Batman and the villains.

If they were going to explore the concept of this woman and her agonizing over what she had to do, or some remotely difficult decision to do something awful to save her mother, then yeah, if that was to be executed well, it would be neccessary to see her mother, or at least to know more about the situation than "I needed the money", if we're to give two ****s about her gray area in relation to her crime. Tossing two or three lines of dialogue in there and expecting that to stand up as a valid or remotely interesting motivation is lazy, and its cheap.

So no, I do not think it is executed particularly well. At all.

That element was the kind of forced, mostly empty "emotional" screenwriting that plagues nearly every ****e comedy and half-ass action film out there.

People sometimes complain that Nolan goes into way too much detail and spoon feeds the audience too much. Actually showing us Ramirez's sick mother in hospital would have been just that.

How would fleshing out a character or scene with a few more details be considered spoonfeeding?

Was Nolan spoonfeeding when he showed as Bruce Wayne in the hospital? No. He was fleshing out an emotional element of the story. One that ended up being fairly satisfying.

Nevermind that, in the end, he DID spoonfeed us why she did what she did. Because she told Harvey why she'd done it. Come to think of it, for all we know, based on what we heard, her mother is a drug addict or something.

We didn't need to see her. We knew of her existence, that she was ill enough to be checked back into the hospital, which implies she's been there before. Not to mention Gordon asks Ramirez if she had to go and look after her mother.

I'm aware that she's been there before, and that she's been taking care of her mother in some fashion.

Saying something is happening doesn't make the conflict unique, and it doesn't make the exploration of it interesting. That is simply not enough information or exploration for this "reveal" to really have any impact whatsoever. It was a poor execution of the concept, and as such, felt forced and unneccessary, and worse, lazy.

If all you're going to do as a writer is have a character essentially say:

"My mom is sick again".

And then go from that to:

"I turned your friend and one of Gothan's brightest hopes over to the mob because I need money for my sick mom".

And then you think you've somehow justified that action, or created some sort of gray area, or anything interesting?

Nope. You'd have failed to execute it in an interesting or remotely interesting manner.

Might as well have left the dialogue out and added a few seconds for another "hiliarious police officer one liner".

I'd rather her just be pure, corrupted evil than to see the potential of that idea passed over with a cheap throwaway like there was in TDK. At least then I wouldn't be taking out of the movie by the ****** exploration of a potentially interesting and somewhat realistic element at a key point.

As you said, Nolan likes to spoonfeed. But the meals aren't always particularly satisfying. There's a lot of tell, and less show, when it should be the other way around.

Plus Ramirez came across as totally sincere in her scene with Two Face.

Of course she was sincere. She got caught and he was dangerous.

She still did something wrong. Something very wrong

But since when did aiding in a kidnapping because you sort of vaguely need the money for hospital bills become okay, or an admirable trait?

 

[The Joker]

I should have clarified your misunderstanding before you made it?

No, you should have clarified what you were saying to avoid any misunderstanding.

I was making a point. That is what message boards are for.

Your point making abilities need some fine tuning.

I quite clearly did not say "You said this", or attribute any of what I implied to you. I was making a sarcastic point, and rather than ask what I meant, you said "Learn to read", etc.

You quoted me and made some blanket statement with huge implication as to that's what I was saying in my post.

You disagree with what? All of what I said there?

Pretty much.

Am I to believe then, that you feel this was a good exploration of the concept introduced in the movie?

Absolutely. Ramirez was not a major character, or even a big supporting character. We were told a backstory about her. There was nothing in the movie that suggested she was lying about what she said.

We got some 30 second bit of dialogue from Ra's about him losing his wife, and that's what made him turn out the way he was. He was the main villain, but I think there was no necessity to have flashbacks and see this any more than there was to see Ramirez's mother.

In the world of Chris Nolan, it seems there's little need to see much of anything character development-wise beyond Batman and the villains.

So you feel Jim Gordon was unexplored?

If they were going to explore the concept of this woman and her agonizing over what she had to do, or some remotely difficult decision to do something awful to save her mother, then yeah, if that was to be executed well, it would be neccessary to see her mother, or at least to know more about the situation than "I needed the money", if we're to give two ****s about her gray area in relation to her crime. Tossing two or three lines of dialogue in there and expecting that to stand up as a valid or remotely interesting motivation is lazy, and its cheap.

No, it's not. Offering us no explanation at all, or just having her says she was desperate, or was threatened into it etc would be cheap and lazy.

The fact they went to the trouble to created a backstory of her having a sick relative who was hospitalized added credence to the character. We knew she had a solid motive.

So no, I do not think it is executed particularly well. At all.

That's fine.

That element was the kind of forced, mostly empty "emotional" screenwriting that plagues nearly every ****e comedy and half-ass action film out there.

If it was done for the main characters, I'd agree. Or even one of the major supporting characters like Gordon, Alfred, or Lucius. Ramirez was nothing more than a side character.

How would fleshing out a character or scene with a few more details be considered spoonfeeding?

Because we were TOLD she has a sick mother. Actually seeing the mother wasn't necessary. We were never led to believe she was lying. She never ever came across as a vindictive nasty person.

Was Nolan spoonfeeding when he showed as Bruce Wayne in the hospital? No. He was fleshing out an emotional element of the story. One that ended up being fairly satisfying.

What hospital scene with Bruce are you talking about? The one where Batman left Harvey's coin by the bed? Yeah that's a good analogy, compare a little side character like Ramirez to Batman and Harvey Dent.

Nevermind that, in the end, he DID spoonfeed us why she did what she did. Because she told Harvey why she'd done it. Come to think of it, for all we know, based on what we heard, her mother is a drug addict or something.

Yeah, trying to explain herself to Harvey when he had a gun on her, that was spoonfeeding

A drug addict eh. How did you come to that well thought out conclusion? Or is the medical care for elderly women where you are so brilliant that one trip to the doctor is all that's required no matter what illness or disability you suffer from?

I'm aware that she's been there before, and that she's been taking care of her mother in some fashion.

Saying something is happening doesn't make the conflict unique, and it doesn't make the exploration of it interesting. That is simply not enough information or exploration for this "reveal" to really have any impact whatsoever. It was a poor execution of the concept, and as such, felt forced and unneccessary, and worse, lazy.

You say tomatoe I say tomato. You wanted exploration of a side character beyond being concisely told what her motives were for doing what she did.

I don't need my hand held like that with every character to understand or believe them. If you want a story made out of every character that shows some semblance of depth, then you'd have one very crammed movie.

If all you're going to do as a writer is have a character essentially say:

"My mom is sick again".

And then go from that to:

"I turned your friend and one of Gothan's brightest hopes over to the mob because I need money for my sick mom".

And then you think you've somehow justified that action, or created some sort of gray area, or anything interesting?

Nope. You'd have failed to execute it in an interesting or remotely interesting manner.

Might as well have left the dialogue out and added a few seconds for another "hiliarious police officer one liner".

There was a gray area. She didn't do it out of spite, or because she enjoyed being corrupt, or because she just liked having extra money in her pocket etc. She did it out of desperation for her mother.

I can't imagine many people not doing such a thing for their mothers out of desperation.

I'd rather her just be pure, corrupted evil than to see the potential of that idea passed over with a cheap throwaway like there was in TDK. At least then I wouldn't be taking out of the movie by the ****** exploration of a potentially interesting and somewhat realistic element at a key point.

No offense, but you're very easily taken out of the movie then.

As you said, Nolan likes to spoonfeed. But the meals aren't always particularly satisfying. There's a lot of tell, and less show, when it should be the other way around.

But the difference is there was needless show, and necessary show. Seeing Ramirez's mother would have been the former. We knew about her existence and situation. Seeing her wouldn't have changed that. Still be the same story.

Of course she was sincere. She got caught and he was dangerous.

She still did something wrong. Something very wrong

And she didn't deny what she did. Unlike with Wurtz, who couldn't deny it because he was the one that delivered Harvey to them.

We as an audience knew she was telling the truth because we already knew she was looking after a sick mother.

But since when did aiding in a kidnapping because you sort of vaguely need the money for hospital bills become okay, or an admirable trait?

Who said it was ok or admirable?

Understandable, definitely. Admirable or ok, no.