The Dark Knight My new article on BOF... Regarding Nolan and fanboy demands...

[batmaluco]

Well, he certainly has listened to at least one fanboy, Goyer.

But it's also a fact he doesn't post on internet boards, thus in another words, he is not listening to us anyway.

But yeah, I agree that he shouldn't be forced to do something that he doesn't fell passionate with. My opinion, if the studio starts demanding stuff that he doesn't feel comfortable for to do, he should just leave. But it's not what is happening now, as far as we know.

 

[Jack Napier]

I think Batman Begins would be a lot harder to make work with audiences than The Dark Knight. Nolan basically took the Batman films that'd been made, and made something tonally different. Most everyone liked it though, and there must have been a real sigh of relief on WB's part. Now that that movie was successful though, they just have to apply that filter to the story of the Joker and Harvey Dent, and even people who thought BB was "too realistic" are psyched to see this.

My only problem with BB was that it had an action sequence or two that I didn't care about. The train sequence at the end was uninteresting, and I felt that the tumbler scene was too much of a setpiece.

However, the Wachowskis made Matrix 2 and 3 with no intervention from WB. Can you imagine how much BETTER parts 2 and 3 would've been if WB had the power to say "no"?

 

[regwec]

I have grown tired of the term "fanboy". Why are comic fans so self loathing? Whenever the word is used, it is laced with hypocrisy and generally reflects badly on everyone.

 

[ultimatefan]

IF... well, I feel that Nolan is doing a good job; therefore—under the conditions of the argument as presented—I am under no obligation to “deal” with or “accept” anything.

Damn loopholes!

You´re not under obligation to accept or deal with anything in any situation, but unless you want a replacement, complain that Nolan doesn´t see the franchise the exact same way you do won´t go anywhere.

 

[ultimatefan]

IF... well, I feel that Nolan is doing a good job; therefore—under the conditions of the argument as presented—I am under no obligation to “deal” with or “accept” anything.

Damn loopholes!

You´re not under obligation to accept or deal with anything in any situation, but unless you want a replacement, complain that Nolan doesn´t see everything about the franchise the exact same way you do won´t go anywhere.

 

[ultimatefan]

Venom was not a last minute addition forced by the studio. Raimi had plenty of time to substantially develop the character of Venom in the script if he cared to.

However, lack of screentime aside, it seems to me that most fans feel that Raimi actually portrayed Venom quite well. Although there was a lot of criticism at first, most fans have come to feel that Topher Grace was inspired casting. His performance was great, and Venom looked pretty badass visually. The only major complaint, really, is that he did not refer to himself in the plural or call himself "Venom." And, of course, that he died. Like I said, if Raimi had simply let Brock survive, even just that would have been a big improvement.

You realize I don't mean problems with personal taste, right? Putting aside your indifference toward the character, what are these number of problems with Venom? What problems does his character pose that characters like Green Goblin, Dr. Octopus, and Sandman don't?

Robin, for example, is an inherently problematic character for a serious Batman film, because the notion of Batman hunting down psychotic serial killers and mob bosses with an adolescent (named after a bird, no less) at his side is ludicrous.

Venom, on the other hand, is an entirely feasible character within the world of Raimi's Spider-Man movies.

First of all, that´s not true. According to Raimi himself, he worked on the storyline for SM3 for a long time with his brother without Venom and THEN Avi Arad came and told him to put Venom in the movie. Get your facts right.

Second, that´s not quite what I get from the SM boards. It feels to me like A LOT of fans were not quite happy with how Venom ultimately turned out in the movie.

We´re getting away from the point, like I said, how I feel about the character is not the point here. I have enumerated my problems with Venom in many occasions, but it´s just my problem, It doesn´t matter if Venom is a good character or not, the central argument is Raimi didn´t want to include him and worked on a story without him and then Arad made him change his mind because of fanboy requests. That´s the relevant issue.

 

[ultimatefan]

I have grown tired of the term "fanboy". Why are comic fans so self loathing? Whenever the word is used, it is laced with hypocrisy and generally reflects badly on everyone.

I´m a fanboy and proud to be one too, but there´s an extremist, often unreasonable portion of the fanboy community that makes us all look bad and be perceived by the outside world as the comic book guy from The Simpsons. That´s to a big extent, our image to the non-fans, and it´s thanks to that portion.

 

[regwec]

I think the biggest problem that we have collectively as comicbook fans is that we treat our own interests as embarassments. This projects an image of subcultural introversion into broader society. I don't think that terms like "fanboy" really help, because they imply that we denegrate others for sharing our own enthusiasms. It is like gay people calling each other "****". You are quite right that some of us are too dismissive of any re imagining of our favorite characters and stories, but I think that those people are better described as "fussy" than "fanboyish".

 

[ultimatefan]

I think the biggest problem that we have collectively as comicbook fans is that we treat our own interests as embarassments. This projects an image of subcultural introversion into broader society. I don't think that terms like "fanboy" really help, because they imply that we denegrate others for sharing our own enthusiasms. It is like gay people calling each other "****". You are quite right that some of us are too dismissive of any re imagining of our favorite characters and stories, but I think that those people are better described as "fussy" than "fanboyish".

I think that embarrassment is fed on us by the people who don´t get that passion. I know I suffered a lot in my childhood and puberty by being mocked by my older brothers for my comic book interests. I actually got a little revenge later on, my brother, who´s a big reader, couldn´t get his daughter to get interested in reading, then it was me who finally made her enjoy it with my Carl Barks Uncle Scrooge paperbacks, hehe...

 

[The Guard]

Venom is not a complex character. He's not really all that interesting beyond the basics, either (Though I would never call him "dull"). Sam Raimi's SPIDER-MAN 3 is the perfect example of giving a director/writer a bit too much leeway. SPIDER-MAN 3 was an entertaining movie, but the flack it's getting is the flack it deserves to get, in my mind. No one is saying it's a poor adaption. But it is a subpar film in terms of pacing, story points, and a lot of the execution.

Nolan is not perfect. BATMAN BEGINS was a good movie, but it still had flaws, many of which were due to overcrowding, some of which were do to the writing. I do not think he should be given carte blanche in his adapting. I don't think he will use it responsibly.

I've never thought that fan desires have any impact on what shows up onscreen anyway. Fans asked for a more comic-faithful suit, and were rewarded with more black rubber. Fans asked not to be saddled with several villains, and were given three. Fans asked not to have Batman's identity revealed to a lover, and...

And so on and so forth.

 

[Leon the Professional]

First of all, that´s not true. According to Raimi himself, he worked on the storyline for SM3 for a long time with his brother without Venom and THEN Avi Arad came and told him to put Venom in the movie. Get your facts right.

Second, that´s not quite what I get from the SM boards. It feels to me like A LOT of fans were not quite happy with how Venom ultimately turned out in the movie.

We´re getting away from the point, like I said, how I feel about the character is not the point here. I have enumerated my problems with Venom in many occasions, but it´s just my problem, It doesn´t matter if Venom is a good character or not, the central argument is Raimi didn´t want to include him and worked on a story without him and then Arad made him change his mind because of fanboy requests. That´s the relevant issue.

I realize that Raimi worked on a Venom-less script for a while. My point is that the incorporation of Venom was not some last minute rush job. Venom was worked in later in the game than Sandman, of course, but Raimi still had ample time to flesh out his character in the story if he cared to.

As for the SM3 boards, I have gotten the distinct impression that Venom fans are for the most part happy with Venom's portrayal, the only big let down being that he did not refer to himself in the plural. Besides that, fans are just disappointed by his lack of screentime and completely unnecessary death. But his actual portrayal, both visually and as performed by Grace, seem to be viewed favorably by most.

I understand that you just picked Venom as an example to argue your point, which I'll say again that I agree with. I just think this is a better example of a director being obstinate than of fanboys being wrong. There was absolutely nothing unreasonable about Spider-Man fans wanting to see Venom. Not to mention SM3 has much bigger problems than the size of Venom's role, so it's not like his inclusion ruined an otherwise fantastic sequel.

 

[ultimatefan]

I realize that Raimi worked on a Venom-less script for a while. My point is that the incorporation of Venom was not some last minute rush job. Venom was worked in later in the game than Sandman, of course, but Raimi still had ample time to flesh out his character in the story if he cared to.

As for the SM3 boards, I have gotten the distinct impression that Venom fans are for the most part happy with Venom's portrayal, the only big let down being that he did not refer to himself in the plural. Besides that, fans are just disappointed by his lack of screentime and completely unnecessary death. But his actual portrayal, both visually and as performed by Grace, seem to be viewed favorably by most.

I understand that you just picked Venom as an example to argue your point, which I'll say again that I agree with. I just think this is a better example of a director being obstinate than of fanboys being wrong. There was absolutely nothing unreasonable about Spider-Man fans wanting to see Venom. Not to mention SM3 has much bigger problems than the size of Venom's role, so it's not like his inclusion ruined an otherwise fantastic sequel.

"If he cared to" comes back to my point that the director felt forced to include the character and it shows.

I never said it´s unreasonable for fans to want Venom. Fans can ask for all they like, it´s how the studio and filmmakers balance out the need to make the movie work as a movie and to please the fans that´s the issue being discussed.

 

[Lobster Charlie]

Venom is not a complex character. He's not really all that interesting beyond the basics, either (Though I would never call him "dull"). Sam Raimi's SPIDER-MAN 3 is the perfect example of giving a director/writer a bit too much leeway. SPIDER-MAN 3 was an entertaining movie, but the flack it's getting is the flack it deserves to get, in my mind. No one is saying it's a poor adaption. But it is a subpar film in terms of pacing, story points, and a lot of the execution.

Completely agree with you here. I sensed Raimi "getting too comfortable" with some of the nuances of Spiderman 2, and 3 basically showed me that he had far too much freedom to just do "whatever" with the characters and story.

Suffice it to say I find the first Spiderman to be the best one, crap Green Goblin suit and all. Tobey was in better shape, the acting was tighter, there was a good mixture of fun, adventure, sadness, drama. J. Jonah was a legitimate d*ckhead, and not a spoof of himself.

The #1 thing that kept coming to mind while watching SM3 was--"What's the point of all this?"

 

[kenellard]

I find it odd that the venom thing is catching so much heat when there's a far more glaring flaw in the whole simbiote storyline. Raimi had the chance to really show peters dark side when he had the black suit, however for the most part he just acted like a goon with an emo haircut, I actually muttered "what the f**k" to myself in the theatre when he strutted down the street like john friggin' travolta

 

[Lobster Charlie]

Oh, I caught that aspect as well. Was just talking to a friend about how it was less "dark spiderman" and more "dark" peter. I think the film should've been *all* Black spiderman until the very end, which would've helped a bit.

 

[Nepenthes]

He really just acted like he was drunk.

 

[Nepenthes]

He really just acted like he was drunk.

 

[deathfromabove]

b) Unlike Singer, he hasn't made enough films to prove he's a successful mainstream director, so WB WILL remain involved in production.

Let's hope the script is good, because that's the main worry...

nolan has been responsible for more critical acclaim and various awards and nominations than singer who has only directed 2 or 3 more "films" than nolan. i would say nolan has a slightly stronger track record. a track record which includes filming an academy award nominated script based on his brother johnathan's short story. in fact christopher and johnathan nolan's past collaborations have garnered more awards and nominations than singer's whole career.

and of the two, nolan and singer, who has delivered what is (at least in perception if not reality) the better superhero film for the wb?

 

[itsthebatman]

nolan has been responsible for more critical acclaim and various awards and nominations than singer who has only directed 2 or 3 more "films" than nolan. i would say nolan has a slightly stronger track record. a track record which includes filming an academy award nominated script based on his brother johnathan's short story. in fact christopher and johnathan nolan's past collaborations have garnered more awards and nominations than singer's whole career.

and of the two, nolan and singer, who has delivered what is (at least in perception if not reality) the better superhero film for the wb?

Well put. We all need to find a partner to sleep with and take your words of wisdom to heart.
In other words:
Let's make love, and listen to deathfromabove.

 

[regwec]

I have a partner to sleep with, and I'm still a spikey, aggressive bastard, so there really is no hope other than a frontal lobotomy.

 

[itsthebatman]

I have a partner to sleep with, and I'm still a spikey, aggressive bastard, so there really is no hope other than a frontal lobotomy.

Is that another CSS song title? It's not very catchy.