The Dark Knight "Realism"

Superhobo

Superhero
Joined
Jun 29, 2004
Messages
6,254
Reaction score
0
Points
31
Earlier, I posted this in response to something on 4chan - thought I'd put it up here as well:

"It's not so much a question of it being a big FU as it is that, instead of treating the fantastic elements as they are, which is fantastical elements in a real world, he decides instead to make the characters themselves "more real."

Instead of having the Joker have bleached skin, he has him slather make up all over his face, for a good example - and, while I like where they're going with the character, I think they missed out on an opportunity to just have him be something completely - other. As it stands right now, visually, he reminds me a little of a skinnier John Wayne Gacy, which isn't at all a bad thing (I...think).

He seems to have gotten down the characters themselves, and they're not at all bad films ("Begins" hairlines past "Batman" as best bat-film, but only just) but -

Discuss.
 
Not this again :o

This is just as annoying as senselessly supporting "realism".
 
I just thought I'd post it, I mean. I'm not at all railing against realism, per se.
 
I'm getting sick of the term realism altogether. We should abolish its use. Even for things that are VERY true to life...
 
I'm getting sick of the term realism altogether. We should abolish its use. Even for things that are VERY true to life...

Whilst we're at it, can we also do the same for permawhite, at least realism is an actual word.
 
Whether or not Nolan's Batman is more "realistic", which is a whole debate unto itself, people just need to stop defending or decrying whatever choices Nolan has made by waving the term "realism" around. The use of the word has nothing to do anymore with "reality", but has come to replace the words "good" or "bad", depending on whether you're a fan of Nolan's approach or not. Therefor, the word, in this context, is now void.
 
Whether or not Nolan's Batman is more "realistic", which is a whole debate unto itself, people just need to stop defending or decrying whatever choices Nolan has made by waving the term "realism" around. The use of the word has nothing to do anymore with "reality", but has come to replace the words "good" or "bad", depending on whether you're a fan of Nolan's approach or not. Therefor, the word, in this context, is now void.
signed.

I hate the second there is something that seems like a new change (Harvey deformed by gasoline) then people say stuff like "well this way is better because its more realistic." Then when its proven wrong they say "well acid makes sense because its more realistic"
agh!
 
The thing that's annoying about the rampant use of the word 'realism' is that its simply misconstrued to a large degree. Christopher Nolan never set out to make a realistic Batman film. In fact, I don't think anyone wants to see a realistic Batman film, because it'd end up with his ass either in jail or dead. There's a great difference in presenting a fantasy-based fictional character in a less dramatic framework and what truly qualifies as realism. Fortunately, Nolan is smart enough to understand this. Unfortunately, it seems lost on some of his more vocal supporters.

As much as that term is bandied about, and as much as I've come to revile its casual usage, it's not the director who has drawn my ire (though I don't particularly care for a number of his inclusions). It's those that have bastardized his intent in crafting his art, usually while reveling in sycophancy, practically rendering the word meaningless.
 
The thing is, most of the time Nolan himself says similar things. It's a short-hand, lazy way of describing what he's trying to do to interviewers, which is ok in itself but becomes deeply irritating when a million eager fans exaggerate or misconstrue it
 
Surely. I've seen him mention realism; more specifically 'heightened realism'. However, there's hardly anything realistic about Batman Begins and The Dark Knight will similarly follow suit. The usage context should make what he's getting at apparent. Somehow, it gets lost in translation.
 
Here's why I like the realistic approach:

Batman is a superhero without superpowers. He's a fantastic character but he pales to many others (Superman, Spider-Man, Iron Man) in terms of action potential in the modern movie setting -- you aren't going to have incredible CGI flying battle sequences with Batman because he can't do those things.

So what do you do with Batman? Emphasize the fact that he doesn't have those powers. The fact that realistically he's just a man. Use the incredible cast of characters surrounding him and create an in-depth story about seemingly real characters. I think it's a fantastic approach.

After Nolan is done with his movies, I would love to see a more fantastical, stylistic Batman movie. But I also think there's a ton of merit in what Nolan is doing, and I think he's making GREAT films.
 
Here's why I like the realistic approach:

Batman is a superhero without superpowers. He's a fantastic character but he pales to many others (Superman, Spider-Man, Iron Man) in terms of action potential in the modern movie setting -- you aren't going to have incredible CGI flying battle sequences with Batman because he can't do those things.

So what do you do with Batman? Emphasize the fact that he doesn't have those powers. The fact that realistically he's just a man. Use the incredible cast of characters surrounding him and create an in-depth story about seemingly real characters. I think it's a fantastic approach.

After Nolan is done with his movies, I would love to see a more fantastical, stylistic Batman movie. But I also think there's a ton of merit in what Nolan is doing, and I think he's making GREAT films.
Ya, that is the chief reason why I love Batman. He is just a man, and yet he performs feats that not everyone can do. His primary power could be his mental instability that he can relate to all his villains who are reflections of his own personal choices. Realism brings the character closer to home and show that this man could be true.
 
In fact, I don't think anyone wants to see a realistic Batman film, because it'd end up with his ass either in jail or dead.

As blasphemous as this probably is for me to say, I would LOOOVE to see the Joker kill Batman. Thatd be the greatest superhero movie of all time, IMHO. Where the villain wins completely.
 
Like someone said in a previous thread Batman isn't real so there is no need for this realism BS.
 
"To the realists.— You sober people who feel well armed against passion and fantasies and would like to turn your emptiness into a matter of pride and an ornament: you call yourselves realists and hint that the world really is the way it appears to you. As if reality stood unveiled before you only, and you yourselves were perhaps the best part of it—Oh you beloved images of Sais! But in your unveiled state are not even you still very passionate and dark creatures compared to fish, and still far too similar to an artist in love?— And what is "reality" for an artist in love! You are still burdened with those estimates of things that have their origin in the passions and loves of former centuries! Your sobriety still contains a secret and inextinguishable drunkenness! Your love of "reality," for example—oh, that is a primeval "love"! Every feeling and sensation contains a piece of this old love; and some fantasy, some prejudice, some unreason, some ignorance, some fear, and ever so much else has contributed to it and worked on it. That mountain there! That cloud there! What is "real" in that? Subtract the phantasm and every human contribution from it, my sober friends! If you can! If you can forget your descent, your past, your training—all of your humanity and animality! There is no "reality" for us—not for you either, my sober friends,—we are not nearly as different as you think, and perhaps our good will to transcend intoxication is as respectable as your faith that you are altogether incapable of intoxication."

-Friedrich Nietzsche
 
Geez I never looked at the joker and thought "Wow he looks like John Wayne Gacy" or whatever that guys name is. I like what they did with the Joker. I found Jack Nicholson's (sp?) Joker to be more comic bookish. Ledger's potrayel is more real. I think people read to much into things.
 
It could be absolutely absurd in every aspect except Heaths Joker, and Id still be HYPED OUT OF MY SKULL for this flick. Ive never anticipated a comic book movie before, hell... Im 24 years old and IVE NEVER READ A COMIC BOOK MY WHOLE LIFE. The only reason I got into TDK so hard is because I saw the first full trailer right when it came out and went "OMFG WHAT HAVE I BEEN MISSIN???" Now Im starting to go to comic shops and getting into this whole culture of superhero stuff that Ive never been a part of.

For the first time, Im getting into the whole comic universe, and I know one thing... It has absolutely NOTHING to do with the "realism" of TDK... it has to do with the acting and the story I know of thus far.

The only interaction Ive had with superheroes so far are the old superman and Batman movies, and I wish I wouldve been more interested as a kid because Ive missed out on SO MUCH. But my point is this... If I wanted to see something 100% "real" I wouldnt be interested in Superheroes. So screw realism. I watch movies like Superman and Batman to ESCAPE the real world.

And even though Nolans Batman flicks are meant to be more "real" or whatev you wanna call it... I just hope (especially as a new-comer to all this Superhero/Comic book stuff) that I see something in TDK thats UNBELIEVABLE and BLOWS MY MIND :-D
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"