The Dark Knight Rises Improving Fight Scenes

[The Guard]

Batman is a well trained Ninja and Martial Artist, they should at least show all that training.

Now, now, to their credit, they did show him getting hit with sticks in BATMAN BEGINS.

 

[ChickenScratch]

If it could be seen coming from a mile away, then it would never work whether it's a real fight or not. I've seen a couple high kicks knock people's lights out (in tournaments), and these weren't exactly beginners.
You're either highly undermining its effectiveness, or you yourself aren't very skilled at the maneuver.

Neither, I'm pointing out that in a controlled environment such as a tournament where you are fighting for points it's fine. A High roundhouse or spin kick fails by being blocked, deflected, missing you are ok, it's just a point not scored. In a street fight or self defense situation you don't make it easier for someone to take you down because you want to throw some fancy kick when a punch would do. I can kick straight up vertically and stuff like that looks cool on film but in a real fight it would just give the aggressor an opening.

 

[Crook]

Neither, I'm pointing out that in a controlled environment such as a tournament where you are fighting for points it's fine. A High roundhouse or spin kick fails by being blocked, deflected, missing you are ok, it's just a point not scored.

Absolutely. At the same time, a failed kick of that caliber leaves a very wide opening for a small amount of time to be taken down very, very quickly. That is why you use the maneuver wisely. Only attempt when you know it'll connect. Because if it does connect, it can end the fight immediately.

In a street fight or self defense situation you don't make it easier for someone to take you down because you want to throw some fancy kick when a punch would do. I can kick straight up vertically and stuff like that looks cool on film but in a real fight it would just give the aggressor an opening.

I'm under the impression that you deem all high kicks "fancy". They're not. A step-back spinning roundhouse kick, for example, doubles as a defensive and offensive tactic. The step to evade or distance yourself from an attack, and the transition towards a roundhouse that the attacker will probably not see coming because of his missed hit.

I will agree that kicks aren't at all normal for a street fight. But let's face it, most of said fighters wouldn't even know how to kick properly if they tried. Nor would they expect their opponent to. All the more reason why that is an advantage, if they don't think you're going to pull such a "wild" move. You just have to be smart about how and when you use it.

 

[ChickenScratch]

I've been in a few self defense situations and the only time I've done a high kick was when I've done enough to know I've already won. Low line kicks is where it's at, if you want to inflict trauma to the head use an elbow.

 

[ChrisB]

Thanks for the input ChickenScratch. It makes sense, I watch UFC fights, and the guys are very careful about throwing high kicks.
But this is a movie, and theres just something about Batman throwing a kick and having his cape flap in the wind as he does it. I missed seeing that in TDK.

 

[Crook]

I've been in a few self defense situations and the only time I've done a high kick was when I've done enough to know I've already won. Low line kicks is where it's at, if you want to inflict trauma to the head use an elbow.

The use of body parts are all situational. Elbow hits are easier to pull off and less riskier, but high kicks have the reach advantage and a much higher infliction. There isn't really a right way to fighting. Just a smart way.

 

[ChickenScratch]

As I've said, I've used high kicks in self defense, (probably what you are talking about as the "smart way") but it was already when I had the upper hand ... as in having already hit the attacker a few times.

High kicks, flipping about and all that looks cool in movies but anyone who's had a martial arts class knows that one of the main rules is keep your feet planted on the ground or you'll end up on your back. In the case of Batman, him jumping in and high kicking an opponent may look cool but does not ring true to me at all.

 

[Crook]

Well to sway this into the context of film, the logistics of "real" fighting aren't strictly adhered to. This is not to say that I'm in favor of Jackie Chan or Matrix-like choreography, but a little flair being thrown in there isn't a detriment in the least.

You've mentioned Taken and Bourne, while their foundations were a lot more grounded than most films, I have no doubt they added some pizaz to the moves to make it more visually appealing. That is what film is about after all, to entertain our senses. This is why we have cinematographers and choreographers, they plan out most of these things to a specific criteria. Not to real-world conditions. If they didn't, we'd have rather blandly crafted products.

 

[ChickenScratch]

I hear you man. But personally, I prefer things closer to the real thing, maybe it's my 23 years in karate but 99% of fights on film just look like crap to me. Unrealistic, telegraphed, nonsensical moves, pulled punches ... makes a guy hang his head in disgust. The Batman fights may not be pretty and there may be some amount of telegraphing but it does come closer to real fighting. Fast, almost nose to nose close, savage, oft times bloody for both parties.

 

[Crook]

I agree, we take fighting for granted. A lot of it is all spectacle, with little finesse. But eh, there are the few gems like Bourne that widdle their way out every now and then. I pray for a Batman movie that follows through with combat, because I certainly haven't witnessed it yet.

As for the Nolan films, BB I can agree with to a point, but TDK was absolutely atrocious imo. The single most important aspect of depicting fighting, the intensity/speed, was non-existent. Didn't help that it looked blatantly choreographed.

 

[Piuchén]

The fights were not perfect but I think that transmit more than a lot of films we always see, BJ Penn said once "Fighting is caos" and that"s was Nolan is trying to show, I "m not saying that Nolan is perfect but he wanted this way and I prefer it thank see slow motions "a la Matrix". Of course Jason Bourne Style would be cool to see. Maybe if he fights against a skilled oponent we would see something diferent.

By the way, in Begins Batman did 2 high kicks.

 

[ClarkLuther55]

The fighting is fine. Maybe take the camera out a little bit further, and make the moves somewhat more clear for the audience to see.

The best part about Nolan's fight scenes, which I think gets overlooked and unappreciated by many fanboys, is that they feel dangerous. You get the sense that people are really getting hurt, and it's not pretty. You see that Batman is a no-nonsense ass kicker. The scenes don't shift the focus of the movie away from the danger and suspense and onto some show-off acrobatics.

I'm not saying Nolan's fights can't be improved upon, but I vastly prefer them to the alternative on the other end of the spectrum: soft, overly slow-mo, balletic "fights" that look more like elaborate dances than actual combat. That crap went out after the Matrix sequels bombed, but has started to reappear in things like Zach Snyder's films.

I hate that style. The second such a movie goes into slow-mo (which will last for the next 10 seconds to a minute), you instantly lose any sense of danger for the hero. He's too busy looking kewl. Slow-mo is for highlighting key moments, not entire fights like in 300. The best fight in Watchmen was when Ozymandias fought Rorschach and Nite Owl near the end. That was fast and looked like an actual fight. Not like the the earlier prison riot, where Dan and Laurie toyed with helpless thugs in slow-mo for a full minute straight.

I agree with ChickenScratch. Look at Bourne and Taken (I'd also like to add Casino Royale) for inspiration, not the dime-a-dozen wire-fu dance movies.

No movie fight is TRULY realistic, even the ones in Nolan's Batman or the examples I listed above. However there are different levels of realism. Go for verisimilitude in fight scenes, the way everything else in Nolan's Batman movies was done.

 

[Crook]

The best part about Nolan's fight scenes, which I think gets overlooked and unappreciated by many fanboys, is that they feel dangerous. You get the sense that people are really getting hurt, and it's not pretty. You see that Batman is a no-nonsense ass kicker. The scenes don't shift the focus of the movie away from the danger and suspense and onto some show-off acrobatics.

I'm sorry, but I truly did just laugh.

You watched those fights and actually felt danger? As in "ohmygod that's really happening"? Can you please cite what scenes conjured up such feelings? Bourne and Taken, I can see. Because you literally feel the hits. And in the theater, I really did hear people saying "ooh!", "ouch!", or "whoa!". The crowd reacted very well. I honestly did not see that type of reaction from the crowds in all 5 times I went to see TDK. It was indifferent.

I don't know, I just...can't believe I read that.

 

[Eric Brooks]

I'm sorry, but I truly did just laugh.

You watched those fights and actually felt danger? As in "ohmygod that's really happening"? Can you please cite what scenes conjured up such feelings? Bourne and Taken, I can see. Because you literally feel the hits. And in the theater, I really did hear people saying "ooh!", "ouch!", or "whoa!". The crowd reacted very well. I honestly did not see that type of reaction from the crowds in all 5 times I went to see TDK. It was indifferent.

I don't know, I just...can't believe I read that.

agreed

 

[ClarkLuther55]

More dangerous than the numerous Matrix knockoffs that have appeared over this decade. Or 300 which hit you over the head with how uber,l33t, and unbeatable the Spartans were (until they were betrayed by their own genetically deformed outcast). Or the prison fight in Watchmen where Dan and Laurie goof off against helpless thugs who posed no threat to them.

In Nolan's movies, Batman is supremely skilled but still mortal. He can get swarmed over by thugs or delusional crowds. He can get slammed and pinned to the floor by Ra's Al Ghul. He can get the crap beat out of him by the Joker wielding a steel pipe. Yes, Nolan's movies felt a lot more dangerous than the elaborate acrobatic shows I compared them to.

 

[Crook]

...

 

[Crook]

I'm not sure where exactly you're going with that. Scenarios in which the main player is being defeated or going against the odds is apparent in 99% of all fight scenes. The scenarios you describe are nothing unique.

Which is why I asked you to precisely point out fight scenes in particular that were so "dangerous". What creates tension is the execution. And as I've noted, you hear no one but fanboys exclaiming how good they were. And rag on 300 all you want, but there were several instances where it got a reaction from the crowd because of a blow or special move. That is how I gauge a film's effectiveness.

 

[returntovoid]

As far as hand-to-hand combat fight scenes go, I was really impressed by fights in all the Bruce Lee movies and the bar brawl in Daredevil.

 

[ClarkLuther55]

I'm not sure where exactly you're going with that. Scenarios in which the main player is being defeated or going against the odds is apparent in 99% of all fight scenes. The scenarios you describe are nothing unique.

No. It is completely absent from fight scenes where the hero is showing off, dancing, and effortlessly toying with enemies who pose no threat to him.

Which is why I asked you to precisely point out fight scenes in particular that were so "dangerous". What creates tension is the execution.

I did. Batman struggling against Ra's on the train. Ra's, who taught him how to fight and was built up as the superior fighter for the entire movie. With Batman pinned to the floor and time running out as the train was about to fly off the tracks.

Or Batman getting attack dogs sicced on him, and then getting pummeled across the floor by a pipe-wielding Joker. With time running out on the bombs that Joker had planted on those ships.

And as I've noted, you hear no one but fanboys exclaiming how good they were.

No, you hear EVERYONE talking about how the good the movies were. Few people single out the fight scenes, but that's because the Nolan movies have so much more in them than just fighting. And the fighting was integrated into the plots, rather than stopping the plots and hijacking the movie for several minutes of show-off, slow-mo acrobatics.

And rag on 300 all you want, but there were several instances where it got a reaction from the crowd because of a blow or special move. That is how I gauge a film's effectiveness.

300 went for the easy reactions with blatant and over-the-top gore. Don't pretend like the Spartans were actually in danger when they were putting down, mocking, and effortlessly embarrassing all the Persians who fought them.

 

[Crook]

No. It is completely absent from fight scenes where the hero is showing off, dancing, and effortlessly toying with enemies who pose no threat to him.

Batman in all of his live-action films has toyed with his enemies in fighting. Are you kidding? Even in BB's dock scene, he effortlessly laid down an entire GROUP of thugs that were surrounding him. I don't even consider that a bad thing, but you should at least be consistent with your critiques.

I did. Batman struggling against Ra's on the train. Ra's, who taught him how to fight and was built up as the superior fighter for the entire movie. With Batman pinned to the floor and time running out as the train was about to fly off the tracks.

Or Batman getting attack dogs sicced on him, and then getting pummeled across the floor by a pipe-wielding Joker. With time running out on the bombs that Joker had planted on those ships.

But did you actually feel real sense of danger? Like you didn't know if Bats was going to get out of it? I can't help but think that's beyond naive. Granted, I myself have found very few instances in film where I did feel genuine fear of what was to happen to the main character.

No, you hear EVERYONE talking about how the good the movies were. Few people single out the fight scenes, but that's because the Nolan movies have so much more in them than just fighting. And the fighting was integrated into the plots, rather than stopping the plots and hijacking the movie for several minutes of show-off, slow-mo acrobatics.

Since we're referencing parts of a whole, I think it's more than fair to judge them on an individual basis. Yes, the Nolan films, collectively, are great pieces of filmmaking. Doesn't change that the action by itself has been deemed so-so or forgettable by the majority of audiences. It's nice that they moved the plot along and weren't existing to check off a set-piece criteria, but I'd like the spectacle and visual glamour as well. No reason why it can't achieve both forms.

300 went for the easy reactions with blatant and over-the-top gore. Don't pretend like the Spartans were actually in danger when they were putting down, mocking, and effortlessly embarrassing all the Persians who fought them.

I never once pretended they were in danger. I noted that the action scenes resonated to the audience because of the eye-candy and brutal hits. Not everything has to be suspenseful to be entertaining.

 

[COMPO]

In TDK the garage fight and the nightclub scenes were the best whereas the party fight and site fight seemed more choreographed it seemed like the bad guys were waiting for the move to comes were as it should be more quicker so it looks like they're actually surprised. Bale or the stuntman looked like he was thinking what to do after one move

 

[ClarkLuther55]

Batman in all of his live-action films has toyed with his enemies in fighting. Are you kidding? Even in BB's dock scene, he effortlessly laid down an entire GROUP of thugs that were surrounding him. I don't even consider that a bad thing, but you should at least be consistent with your critiques.

I never said he didn't toy with some thugs. But when he fought for real, in the big climatic action sequences or against the actual star villains of the movie it was dangerous for him.

The differences between BB's dock scene and the Matrix-wannabe acrobatics I denounced are creativity, time, and story progression. Movies where the hero shows off in plot-stopping slow-mo are a dime a dozen. Movies where the hero skillfully beats his enemies with psychology are not as common. When Batman drops down onto that group of thugs, he takes them down within seconds without wasting lots of time that could be going toward the plot.

That scene wasn't meant to be a fight, with Batman in danger. It was Batman's superheroic debut, and the downfall of Falcone. There were consequences to the story. That was a lot more interesting to me than it would have been if Batman took 3 minutes somersaulting around those thugs in slow-motion.

It's nice that they moved the plot along and weren't existing to check off a set-piece criteria, but I'd like the spectacle and visual glamour as well. No reason why it can't achieve both forms.

I thought it looked pretty good when Batman was on the gassed-up streets of The Narrows, suffocated by the zombie crowds. Or when he was grabbing thugs and zipping away into the darkness like a horror movie monster. Or when the Jokers repeatedly smacked him across the floor.

This is an issue of opinion. There's nothing more to argue.

 

[Piuchén]

I never said he didn't toy with some thugs. But when he fought for real, in the big climatic action sequences or against the actual star villains of the movie it was dangerous for him.

The differences between BB's dock scene and the Matrix-wannabe acrobatics I denounced are creativity, time, and story progression. Movies where the hero shows off in plot-stopping slow-mo are a dime a dozen. Movies where the hero skillfully beats his enemies with psychology are not as common. When Batman drops down onto that group of thugs, he takes them down within seconds without wasting lots of time that could be going toward the plot.

That scene wasn't meant to be a fight, with Batman in danger. It was Batman's superheroic debut, and the downfall of Falcone. There were consequences to the story. That was a lot more interesting to me than it would have been if Batman took 3 minutes somersaulting around those thugs in slow-motion.



I thought it looked pretty good when Batman was on the gassed-up streets of The Narrows, suffocated by the zombie crowds. Or when he was grabbing thugs and zipping away into the darkness like a horror movie monster. Or when the Jokers repeatedly smacked him across the floor.

This is an issue of opinion. There's nothing more to argue.

I agree, Bourne looked great and Taken too, but it was a little fantastic also, I mean, no Secret Agent is so badass, at least Batman get hurt with the suit, he has more money etc...

The fight felt real and most of the people I know liked it, in theses days nobody wants to see a lot of flips,most of the real fights have some brawling, even between skilled fighters.

 

[COMPO]

to be honest the thing about Keysi is that it takes aspects of other martial arts so in a way it fits Batman since he would have to meld a whole arsenal of martial arts know how into one attack.

 

[nathaniel]

All i hear is a bunch of people trying to justify a poor representation of Batmans prowess in Nolans films.

I will bet my house on all these fans suddenlt converting completely if Nolan had a change of heart for the last film and added a slightly more fantasy element to the fight scenes in B3.