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

Discussion in 'The Dark Knight Rises' started by DACrowe, Jul 31, 2012.

?

When will the fans turn on TDK Trilogy in Mass?

  1. When a reboot or JL film is announced

  2. When we get a poster/stills of the reboot/JL film

  3. The new Trailer(s)

  4. Week of Release

Multiple votes are allowed.
Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. MessiahDecoy123

    MessiahDecoy123 Psychological Anarchist

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2008
    Messages:
    22,464
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can someone who loved Tree of Life explain what made the movie so symbolically resonate?

    Wasn't just nature shots mixed with 1950's small town family life?

    What was the point?
     
    #576
  2. Squaremaster316

    Squaremaster316 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2011
    Messages:
    397
    Likes Received:
    0
    If anything, the amount of fans who praise Nolan's work and declare it as the pinnacle of the live action Batman films will vastly outnumber anyone who turns against him.

    In fact, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if those fans started a petition to have Batman retire from live action, similar to the one 4 years ago to retire the Joker.
     
    #577
  3. batfreakforever

    batfreakforever A real fan

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2012
    Messages:
    1,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    Turning on a director for making something that you first liked then start to hate it later and then turn on him is strange. Movies (unless you george lucas) dont change, people do. I don't understand people that say the more I watch this film the more ''flaws'' I see. Well either you have someone living free in you head to put those opinions in there or secretly you never really liked the film in the first place. You wanted too but just cant I guess. Some people its just that they dont like it or they know why they dont.
     
    #578
  4. Clerk

    Clerk You Look Plump Today

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    14,480
    Likes Received:
    0
    I dont think that's a fair thing to say at all. Sometimes people are in different mental states when seeing movies. I thought Attack of the Clones was god tier when I saw it at a midnight release, but now I watch it and I can see that it's a **** movie. I didnt have opinions given to me after I saw it, and I secretly didn't hate the movie- in fact when I saw it the second time I still liked it. You're right about people changing, but to say "well you never really liked it" and "well someone influenced you" is silly. It's art, people can interpret it however they want whenever they want, that's the point.
     
    #579
  5. kvz5

    kvz5 HBIC

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2009
    Messages:
    24,102
    Likes Received:
    5
    I think the trilogy (especially TDKR) will take a hit once MoS comes out despite the movies sharing a lot of collaborators. I'm already seeing a bit of it now (some are warranted and I agree with but most will be baseless and just typical bandwagon bashing).
     
    #580
  6. batfreakforever

    batfreakforever A real fan

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2012
    Messages:
    1,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think some comic book fans don't like Nolan because he showed the you don't have to be a slave to the comics and still be able to tell great stories. He did follow the comics, kept the essence of the character and used story lines for the comics while putting his own spin on things. From what I read some comics fans want to cut and past from the comics with no creative input from the writers and filmakers themselves. They make changes in the comics all the time. Film are no different. Some comic fans have double standards.
     
    #581
  7. The Joker

    The Joker The Clown Prince of Crime

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2003
    Messages:
    49,530
    Likes Received:
    83
    No comic book movie franchise has been a slave to the comics. In fact Nolan has followed the comics a lot more than most directors have in many ways.
     
    #582
    Last edited: May 18, 2013
  8. Shikamaru

    Shikamaru Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    7,775
    Likes Received:
    7
    I disagree with that. TDKR's ending completely goes against the essence of Batman. In fact, the whole message of the movie overall - that anyone can be Batman, that Batman is a legacy, and that Bruce can retire the way he did - all of that is the exact opposite of what Batman's essence is all about.

    Also, one of my biggest gripes with TDKR was how cut-and-paste the story felt because the comics they chose to base TDKR on didn't mesh that well together in the execution.

    Joker also brought up a great point. No one has been a slave to the comics so far. In fact, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight are more faithful than some of the MCU movies were.
     
    #583
  9. Shikamaru

    Shikamaru Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    7,775
    Likes Received:
    7
    I disagree with that. TDKR's ending completely goes against the essence of Batman. In fact, the whole message of the movie overall - that anyone can be Batman, that Batman is a legacy, and that Bruce can retire the way he did - all of that is the exact opposite of what Batman's essence is all about.

    Also, one of my biggest gripes with TDKR was how cut-and-paste the story felt because the comics they chose to base TDKR on didn't mesh that well together in the execution.

    Joker also brought up a great point. No one has been a slave to the comics so far. In fact, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight are more faithful than some of the MCU movies were.
     
    #584
  10. DACrowe

    DACrowe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2000
    Messages:
    30,203
    Likes Received:
    2
    Indeed. BB was a loose adaptation of Year One. TDK was a loose adaptation of The Man Who Laughs, The Killing Joke and, most of all, The Long Halloween. TDKR is a VERY loose adaptation of Knightfall and No Man's Land.

    Which again makes claims that TDKR is a major departure from the comics a head scratcher for me.

    What you seem to be upset by is, again, that Nolan ENDED his story. You have never seen Batman retire because comics never end. By their nature they are a cyclical status quo that can always be renewed. Conversely, Nolan's films had to end one day and he chose to be the one to do it. Add in that he wants to ground his Batman somewhat in a false reality (note the words "loosely" and "false"), he had to acknowledge such a lifestyle would have negative effects on a human's body and psyche.

    I actually like TDKR all the more for its uniqueness. The movie where Bruce Wayne must give up his pain and mental anguish to move on and the one where Batman ends.

    That to me is why fans really dislike the movie.
     
    #585
  11. Brain Damage

    Brain Damage Everything Under the Sun

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,861
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think people need to stop generalizing, honestly. Different fans love and hate (and everything in between) the movie for different reasons.

    I don't hate it, nor do I love it. To me, it's a much weaker film than the previous two, but that's not because it stuck too close/didn't stick close enough to the comics nor is it because I don't think Bruce would ever give up the mantle. I find the film to be weak entirely on its own merits.

    Why must TDKR lovers and haters constantly be looking for rationalization as to why the other side feels the way they do? Can't we just accept that some people liked the film for what it is and others disliked it for the same reason?
     
    #586
  12. Shikamaru

    Shikamaru Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    7,775
    Likes Received:
    7
    That's not how I view it. All 3 films are heavily influenced by stories in the comics as opposed to being loose adaptations. The difference is that BB and TDK meshed elements from those stories together really well and created their own unique stories whereas the comic influences in TDKR's story feel a lot more cut-and-paste than in the previous two films.

    Basically, it felt to me as if Nolan sat down and said "Ok, let's have some No Man's Land stuff going on in this scene with some Knightfall stuff in these scenes with some Dark Knight Returns stuff here at the beginning and then right at the end" whereas in BB and TDK, it felt to me as if Nolan sat down and said "Ok, how could we create an interesting story out of these books we have here?" That is the difference. This is also part of the reason why I feel that unlike in BB and TDK, Nolan did not have a story to tell with TDKR even though he did say he won't come back unless he has a story.

    Also, the problems I have with the departures from the comics present in TDKR mostly are character departures and essence departures as opposed to story departures (like I said, No Man's Land and all that other stuff is still there). All of that though is on top of the fact that I don't think TDKR works as a sequel to the previous films, which has always been my biggest problem with the film, and on top of the fact that a lot of things in the movie don't make sense when you look at the whole bigger picture overall.

    That would be true if I didn't have so many problems with the film prior to the ending. The ending is a problem, arguably one of the biggest ones, but even without it, the film still has tons of flaws.

    The biggest problem with retiring Bruce are the following:
    1) It was really forced. Nolan had to contrive a story in a film series where it looked like Batman would be Batman for a long time just so that he could say "I'm done! I don't want to make any more movies." BB and TDK were never building into a trilogy; they were the first two stories in a new franchise. It wasn't until production on TDKR started when Nolan decided it would be his last film when it became considered the epic conclusion to this "epic three-act trilogy". It wouldn't be a big problem either if TDKR didn't try to act as if, in retrospect, this was always meant to be a 3-act trilogy in the same vein as Star Wars and LOTR when that is just false. Heck, it almost wasn't even a trilogy originally looked like he wasn't coming back. I believe we had this discussion before though.

    2) Overall, the whole ending was poorly executed. The way they made Bruce quit completely goes against what Batman is all about. Gotham was in a worse condition than ever before - even worse than at the end of BB and TDK respectively - and Bruce decides to hang up the cape & cowl, pass the mantle on to a rookie cop without giving him training or anything like that, and move to Europe with Selina. Technically, he didn't even need to get into the Bat since he fixed the autopilot months ago. He lied that it was broken and lied about his death - in a movie with the message that lying is wrong even if it's for the greater good - entirely out of selfish reasons. On top of that, an even bigger problem with the ending even more so than Bruce quitting is the overall message of the ending: Anyone can be Batman and Batman is a legacy. That is the message in the film that completely flies in the face of the essence of Batman and is perhaps my biggest problem with the film on top of the messages and themes ignored/contradicted from the previous 2 films. You're telling me there was no way to do an ending with Bruce retiring more in-character and in an ending that didn't have all those messages in them that go against Batman's essence?

    The comics have technically given Batman a "happy ending" before (no sexual pun intended :oldrazz:). The Dark Knight Returns managed to do just that. Frank Miller made Batman retire by the end in a way that still honors everything Batman is all about and still delivers a happy Bruce Wayne by the end, hence the last line of the book being "This will be a good life, good enough". It's also important to note that Bruce has a very different outlook on life than we do. What you and I consider to be a happy life is not what he would consider to be a happy life. Bruce is a guy that constantly needs & wants to do something that benefits the world even in retirement - i.e. in TDK Returns when he decides to teach the Sons of the Batman everything he knows and guide them through everything so that they could continue his work.
     
    #587
  13. MagnarTheGreat

    MagnarTheGreat Web Ninja

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    9,274
    Likes Received:
    4
    In the 1960s, Alfred would write these imaginary stories on a typewriter (DC writers made Alfred into a secret Batman fanfiction writer within the context of that comic universe, see Batman #131 and others after) about Bruce being married and having children and later passing on Batman to Dick Grayson and Robin to his son. The thing about these 1960s stories is that they were supposed to be What-ifs/Elseworlds and not canon but later writers and the Nolan brothers took some cues from these Alfred fantasies...unfortunately.
     
    #588
    Last edited: May 18, 2013
  14. Anita18

    Anita18 DANCE FOR ME, FUNNY MAN!

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    25,884
    Likes Received:
    0
    I disagree with pretty much everything you've posted, Shikamaru, but you sound sane so I'll try my hand at offering my opinion. :yay:

    I guess that depends on how you much you buy the extent of sacrifice Bruce had to make in TDK. He entered TDK with a lot of optimism and belief in his mission...at the end of TDK, after the Joker's rampage through the city and tearing through his mission itself as well as striking Bruce personally by killing Rachel and mutilating Harvey, the city's only hope for a public hero, he's really not so sure anymore. He's not so sure if he can continue being the one-man savior for an entire city. It's a lot of responsibility, and he's not sure if continuing would be good for him or even the city.

    This manifests into seemingly contradictory actions - he quits for 8 years after TDK, trying to do good as public Bruce Wayne, then falls into a deep depression after the clean energy project fails. When you're in a deep depression and looking for a purpose, you grasp for something, anything to pull you out of your funk. That was Selina Kyle, and later Bane. Bruce has a reason to be Batman again, but in his journey, he hasn't really acknowledged the way the events in TDK have changed the game. He just needs a purpose. And after getting his ass handed to him again and the city in worse shape because of him getting ahead of himself (even Alfred points out it'd be suicide to take on Bane physically), he realizes that he can't do this forever. He makes emotional mistakes, he's too rash. And that's why he's ready to move on in TDKR.

    And of course, Miller's DKR Bruce is very different from this. Doesn't mean that Nolan's TDKR Bruce is invalid. It's just different. That's what makes Batman so intriguing - there's so many approaches to the character, and I find a lot of them interesting and valid and deep.

    Maybe he hadn't had a chance to test the autopilot before he got taken out by Bane. Lying is not necessarily wrong, but giving the people false hope is definitely wrong. That's what they did re: Harvey. Not telling Alfred was stupid, but those two guys hadn't had the best communication in a while, as shown in the movie anyway. :oldrazz:

    And sure, Batman COULD be anyone, but not everyone SHOULD be Batman. That part was clear in TDK. He didn't want untrained citizens getting themselves into trouble on his account. He CHOSE Blake to take up the mantle, because he acknowledged that Blake was not as emotionally rash as he was. Blake wouldn't make the same mistakes Bruce did. The training is nothing, the will is everything, remember? Blake isn't stupid - he'll seek out training if he thinks he needs it.

    The point of Batman possibly being anybody is for the citizens to remember that there is heroism in everyone and anyone. That's what we find masked heroes with secret identities so attractive - who are they? Could they really be walking amongst us? Could I have passed them in the street yesterday? It gives the people hope, and not necessarily false hope either. :cwink:

    I don't think Miller's Wayne really got a happy ending. He's always had a purpose, and seems to only be retired at the beginning because he thinks he's losing his edge after losing Jason. He's never lost sight of his mission even in his years of retirement.

    Bruce doesn't retire at the end of DKR. He merely goes underground, because he acknowledges that making a big public show of everything would put obstacles in his way. He would be spending more time fighting Superman and the US government, than fighting crime. He'd be doing things behind-the-scenes or on the down low. But he is still very much Batman.

    I think of Nolan's Bruce as a modern-day soldier. Soldiers go on deployment expecting that they'll return home someday. That they can live a normal life after they've put in their time or after the mission is done. Usually the mission messes them up along the way, but most of them do eventually hope to find their way back to civilian life. The ones who don't, eventually become paid mercenaries and the like, but Nolan's Bruce is not one of those people. I don't think it makes the characterization invalid or poor.
     
    #589
  15. Snow Queen

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Messages:
    11,259
    Likes Received:
    9
    Agreed and, to use a line from Batwoman 0:

     
    #590
  16. Anno_Domini

    Anno_Domini Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    17,997
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't understand how someone has a problem with that happened with Bruce in TDKR, but yet they're fine when Bruce mentioned creating a symbol that's everlasting back in BB.
     
    #591
  17. doobie

    doobie Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    542
    Likes Received:
    0
    Speaking of adaptions, I always thought the different movies had specific "era feels" putting aside the actual plots - BB felt like Miller and the 1930s, TDK felt like the 70s crime drama type stories like Laughing Fish, and Rises feels like a big 90s crossover, with lots of characters and the whole city in chaos. And I mean that as a compliment to Rises.
     
    #592
  18. MagnarTheGreat

    MagnarTheGreat Web Ninja

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    9,274
    Likes Received:
    4
    Maybe if TDK didn't exist, things would be different. Bruce spent that movie after a point looking for a way to shut down the Batman project, denounced copycats, wanted to leave a non-Batman successor, and retire with his childhood friend. And then he corrupted his incorruptible symbol at the end of TDK. The character as written just flip flops in whatever direction they decided to take, a very "the ends justify the means" style of writing in particular seems to be employed in TDKR.
     
    #593
  19. Ryan

    Ryan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,315
    Likes Received:
    1
    Its been awhile since I've seen BB so I could be wrong. As I understood it, in BB the idea was of creating a symbol that people could be inspired by. Bruce realized that just being Bruce Wayne wouldn't work and so he had to create something bigger...hence why he created the Batman persona. Was it referred to in BB that Batman could be anyone? In TDKR he clearly states that to Blake, but I don't recall that in BB or in TDK. I could be wrong though.
     
    #594
  20. milost

    milost Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2013
    Messages:
    1,005
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nope, he never says that.
     
    #595
  21. Anno_Domini

    Anno_Domini Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    17,997
    Likes Received:
    0
    I find that to work hand in hand with whatever TDK was trying to say, though. There couldn't be a non-Batman successor, and the person who was had to be lifted through a lie, so the hero with a face for Gotham has to be Batman, but it doesn't have to exactly be Bruce Wayne behind that mask and it can't be someone who think they can pretend to be Batman and carry around guns. The person who wanted to create something bigger, to create this everlasting legend in Batman Begins doesn't have to be Batman forever, nor could he.
     
    #596
  22. DACrowe

    DACrowe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2000
    Messages:
    30,203
    Likes Received:
    2
    I understand that they're all their own creatures, which is why they are so enjoyable. I was just pointing out TDKR is along those lines. Nolan wanted to tell a story of a physical force defeating Batman (Bane) and an event so catastrophic that it forces Batman to become more than a vigilante for the city, but its actual symbol of hope and order in total chaos (No Man's Land). It was most certainly built on its own themes of revolution, social decay, militant uprising, false populism, etc. Just because you do not like those themes does not mean it did not build those elements around the story. Nolan did not even know Bane broke Batman when he was crafting this story.

    That seems a personal issue though. Nolan chose to make it a trilogy and you did not like to see it as such. He also claims he did not necessarily plan an exact sequel to BB with the Joker. Like the first two, TDKR is its own animal. I appreciate that.

    In your opinion. Nolan chose to deal with ending the story in a way that left nothing ambiguous (other than what exact costume Blake would wear). Bruce has moved on. Eventually, Bruce Wayne either would die or let go. Nolan chose the latter. And I think either one would have left fans unsatisfied, because the comics NEVER end the story.

    Yes, TDK Returns gave Bruce an ending...one in which he continues to be Batman in secret and enlists hundreds of druggies and freaks to continue on his mantle. The war is not over and he subsists on it. It also got a sequel.

    TDK Rises will have no sequel. Bruce Wayne let go of Batman because the only other final ending is death.

    I like that Nolan chose to go there. Many fans do not.
     
    #597
  23. zeroapoc

    zeroapoc Eldritch Abomination

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2013
    Messages:
    8,199
    Likes Received:
    0
    I turned on The Dark Knight Rises the minute I saw it.

    But not the entire Trilogy.
     
    #598
  24. JackWhite

    JackWhite Third Man

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    3,595
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's fair. Turning on BB and TDK, especially if you really loved those films, would be petty.
     
    #599
  25. Anno_Domini

    Anno_Domini Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    17,997
    Likes Received:
    0
    I hope you turned on TDKR the minute you finished watching the film. Turning on the film the minute you saw it sounds unfair :oldrazz:
     
    #600

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"