The Dark Knight Rises Should "Realism" be lightened up a bit?

[Gilpesh]

When you start to take dramatic liberties with the characters, Joker perma-white, and explanation of Batman's gadgets, you lose some of the magic behind the characters. Batman should be a creature of the night, not someone who has Q-Branch at his disposal.

Wait.... you don't like Batman have a Q-Branch? But then point to Batman/Batman Returns as your favorite version of the character.... WHERE HE HAS A BATPLANE....

Then you talk about dramatic liberties with the characters with Joker using facepaint to be white.... and Batman/Batman Returns are your favorite version.... WHERE JOKER KILLS BATMAN'S PARENTS...

The feeling and tone of the Burton films are things that in my opinion can never be toped.

Never watched any other Burton movie?

I watched The Dark Knight with my family and my parents fell asleep. Being a child of the eighties and seeing one of my all time favorite characters being confined to the real world depresses me.

So the movie depressing you... means that it is completely 'soulless' and 'shallow'? Even though in Nolan's film you actually get to see Bruce as a person trying to deal with his feelings... wouldn't that mean that the movie wasn't shallow? Or at least less shallow that a movie where the good guy just kills the bad guy for revenge?

I want Batman to be in his own world, not mine.

Clearly Nolan's films are showing how a normal Gotham went from being mobsters and regular criminals to a place where freaks rule and Batman is needed more than ever...

The blurring line between fantasy and the real world is what I find insulting.

Wait... I thought it was insulting to the character. So you didn't like Batman: Year One? And thought that Frank Miller made a soulless comic about Batman?

Batman should be cinematic and visual experience, not a drama like Seven.

Um... so Batman in Hong Kong was not visual or cinematic? Armored car chase wasn't either? Bank robbery? Two-Face shooting the driver?

I just prefer my Batman dark and stylized, instead of filled with exposition and explanation.

Dark and stylized? So you want a shallow Batman movie all about the visuals?

Wasn't Dark Knight supposed to be shallow? I forget who said it...

I feel this is one of the major flaws of the new Star Wars films as well. Not everything needs to be explained, I just want to be entertained.

Alright, then just re-watch the Burton movies.

 

[Octoberist]

I wouldn't say that the Punisher War Zone is better than The Dark Knight, only because Punisher: WZ is so bad that it's good. I enjoyed Punisher war zone as a silly romp but by all means, it's not a legit good movie.

It makes me question your taste. I mean, do you prefer style over substance, Wrathof God?

 

[Octoberist]

btw, I love both the Burton films and the Nolan films.

Let's face it people: The only people who care about 'realism' are the hardcore geeks. Ask a casual fan, and they won't notice the Nolan movies being anymore realistic than Burton; just less stylized.

 

[kid dropper]

1. I think the comics and movies should be seperate as well, which is why i support the realism. if i want permawhite joker, batman in spandex swinging on ropes everywhere with a cape the size of a football field , Gotham having ultra gothic anachronistic architecture, Two Face wearing a suit that is half orange plaid, then i can read the comics for these things. when i see a 2 hour film that takes 3 years to come out, i want some spectacular new life breathed into the material, not exaggeration of comic bookish style.
2. You just said Punisher War Zone, surely the worst comic based film of the year was better than The Dark Knight. Everything you say from here on out is moot to me. i just watched that pile of crap on ninjavideo yesterday. Jesus. Really? Somethings are beyond matters of opinion, for instance you can love video games something fierce and completely loathe the mafia, but you are irredeemably stupid if you say the Van Damme Street fighter flick is a better film than The Godfather. Preferences be damned. Im not too fond of romance and love crime films, but I have to admit Shakespeare in Love is a better film than Carlito's Way:Rise To Power. Theres just no arguing these things sometimes. You are that nostalgic for Burton's flicks that it is clouding your judgement?

 

[kid dropper]

1. I think the comics and movies should be seperate as well, which is why i support the realism. if i want permawhite joker, batman in spandex swinging on ropes everywhere with a cape the size of a football field , Gotham having ultra gothic anachronistic architecture, Two Face wearing a suit that is half orange plaid, then i can read the comics for these things. when i see a 2 hour film that takes 3 years to come out, i want some spectacular new life breathed into the material, not exaggeration of comic bookish style.
2. You just said Punisher War Zone, surely the worst comic based film of the year was better than The Dark Knight. Everything you say from here on out is moot to me. i just watched that pile of crap on ninjavideo yesterday. Jesus. Really? Somethings are beyond matters of opinion, for instance you can love video games something fierce and completely loathe the mafia, but you are irredeemably stupid if you say the Van Damme Street fighter flick is a better film than The Godfather. Preferences be damned. Im not too fond of romance and love crime films, but I have to admit Shakespeare in Love is a better film than Carlito's Way:Rise To Power. Theres just no arguing these things sometimes. You are that nostalgic for Burton's flicks that it is clouding your judgement?

 

[TheWrathOfGod]

I wouldn't say that the Punisher War Zone is better than The Dark Knight, only because Punisher: WZ is so bad that it's good. I enjoyed Punisher war zone as a silly romp but by all means, it's not a legit good movie.

It makes me question your taste. I mean, do you prefer style over substance, Wrathof God?

It depends on the material, I guess. For a comic film I believe that it should be very visual and stylized given the medium it's being based off of. A genuine drama should be heavy in exposition and explanation. Batman should be fun, not a study into the mind of a vigilante. If I want that I'll just read the comics. The Nolan films are very well made but they miss theatrically as visual narratives. The realism is distracting to the concept behind Batman.

 

[Gilpesh]

I think 9/11 has something to do with the urge to make things real.

:facepalm

It depends on the material, I guess. For a comic film I believe that it should be very visual and stylized given the medium it's being based off of.

:facepalm

 

[TheWrathOfGod]

:facepalm



:facepalm

There have been very few stylized movies after 9/11 and films in general have lost their magic.

 

[kid dropper]

what about every film from burton, del toro, frank miller and robert rodriguez, terry gilliam, the harry potter movies, , theyre making more stylized genre films than ever

 

[TheWrathOfGod]

what about every film from burton, del toro, frank miller and robert rodriguez, terry gilliam, the harry potter movies, , theyre making more stylized genre films than ever

Burton hasn't mad a real movie since Big Fish, Del Toro is an exception, The Harry Potter films are long and drawn out, Gilliam's last good film was Fear and Loathing and Miller should stick to comics. Like I said it's a matter of taste. If you don't see the fall of motion pictures look at Star Wars, James Bond, Indiana Jones, Terminator, and a slew of remakes.

 

[Gilpesh]

There have been very few stylized movies after 9/11 and films in general have lost their magic.

Um... there have been loads. You're not just watching them.

And the fact that you think that because Dark Knight is a comic book movie... it has to be a shallow movie that is all about visuals and presentation... and not about character or drama.... I... um...

I have to do it again...

:facepalm

 

[raybia]

There have been very few stylized movies after 9/11 and films in general have lost their magic.

Totally not correct.

 

[Borat]

I just wanted to address something that was said earlier in the thread. TDK didn't make money JUST because Heath passed. It was already the most anticipated movie of 2008 before he passed away. It makes me angry when people say that.

 

[kid dropper]

we werent talking about quality you said no one is MAKING them, as if theyd gone extinct. whether the older fantasy films were any good will always be a matter of debate as well.
Personally the harry potter series and the new Bonds are pretty decent filmmaking.

 

[TheWrathOfGod]

Um... there have been loads. You're not just watching them.

And the fact that you think that because Dark Knight is a comic book movie... it has to be a shallow movie that is all about visuals and presentation... and not about character or drama.... I... um...

I have to do it again...

:facepalm

I never said it needed to drop any exposition/plot, I'm just saying they should find a balance between the two.

 

[Octoberist]

It depends on the material, I guess. For a comic film I believe that it should be very visual and stylized given the medium it's being based off of. A genuine drama should be heavy in exposition and explanation. Batman should be fun, not a study into the mind of a vigilante. If I want that I'll just read the comics. The Nolan films are very well made but they miss theatrically as visual narratives. The realism is distracting to the concept behind Batman.

But I dont understand why they can't be 'a study into the mind of a vigilante'? That's why dark knight is getting so much attention. If it was just a fun romp, it wouldn't get so much publicity (besides Ledger). The buzz wouldn't be there; Hell, critics are claiming that this is the best comic book movie ever. Some people are saying that this is the best movie of the year. Why do you want to strip that 'title' away, from the Nolan series?

It's a damn honor, I would say, for this type of movie to get so much acclaim from fan and non-fans alike.

 

[Gilpesh]

I never said it needed to drop any exposition/plot, I'm just saying they should find a balance between the two.

Um. I give up... one second you call Dark Knight shallow... then you think there's too much exposition/plot in it.... the only thing you seem to want is all visual which would make something shallow... but then you didn't like the Dark Knight because it was shallow... but then it wasn't shallow.

Yeah. You wanted to come in here and discuss... especially with your opening "Ledger dying is the only reason this movie made money"...

 

[TheWrathOfGod]

But I dont understand why they can't be 'a study into the mind of a vigilante'? That's why dark knight is getting so much attention. If it was just a fun romp, it wouldn't get so much publicity (besides Ledger). The buzz wouldn't be there; Hell, critics are claiming that this is the best comic book movie ever. Some people are saying that this is the best movie of the year. Why do you want to strip that 'title' away, from the Nolan series?

It's a damn honor, I would say, for this type of movie to get so much acclaim from fan and non-fans alike.

It can be but Nolan overemphasizes the intellectual aspect, losing the theatrical side. I guess a perfect Batman film would be a combination of Burton's stylization and Nolan's character study. The problem is I don't find the new films fun, but it's just a matter of opinion.

 

[Borat]

But I dont understand why they can't be 'a study into the mind of a vigilante'? That's why dark knight is getting so much attention. If it was just a fun romp, it wouldn't get so much publicity (besides Ledger). The buzz wouldn't be there; Hell, critics are claiming that this is the best comic book movie ever. Some people are saying that this is the best movie of the year. Why do you want to strip that 'title' away, from the Nolan series?

It's a damn honor, I would say, for this type of movie to get so much acclaim from fan and non-fans alike.

This is why everyone should be happy. TDK has opened the way for comic book movies.

 

[TheWrathOfGod]

This is why everyone should be happy. TDK has opened the way for comic book movies.

I still almost fell asleep watching it a third time with my parents. I knew I would get a lot of flak for my opening comments, but after watching the Dark Knight and then 89', I couldn't hold back.

 

[Gilpesh]

Did anyone notice this?

It depends on the material, I guess. For a comic film I believe that it should be very visual and stylized given the medium it's being based off of. A genuine drama should be heavy in exposition and explanation. Batman should be fun, not a study into the mind of a vigilante. If I want that I'll just read the comics. The Nolan films are very well made but they miss theatrically as visual narratives. The realism is distracting to the concept behind Batman.

One opinion...

It depends on the material, I guess. For a comic film I believe that it should be very visual and stylized given the medium it's being based off of. A genuine drama should be heavy in exposition and explanation. Batman should be fun, not a study into the mind of a vigilante. If I want that I'll just read the comics. The Nolan films are very well made but they miss theatrically as visual narratives. The realism is distracting to the concept behind Batman.

Opinion number two...

It depends on the material, I guess. For a comic film I believe that it should be very visual and stylized given the medium it's being based off of. A genuine drama should be heavy in exposition and explanation. Batman should be fun, not a study into the mind of a vigilante. If I want that I'll just read the comics. The Nolan films are very well made but they miss theatrically as visual narratives. The realism is distracting to the concept behind Batman.

Statement that pretty much throws everything else out the window...


And hand to the Flying Spaghetti Monster, I did not alter a single word of that post.

 

[TheWrathOfGod]

Batman should be fun!!! The comics make up for all of the narrative **** in the format in which it's told. Comics are a visual medium. Nolan forgot this.

 

[Gilpesh]

You want pretty pictures that are nothing more than pretty pictures... you want Nolan to make his movie more shallow.... so when you called it shallow earlier, you were just making s**t up to pad your post before you dropped the Ledger snipe.

And I'd like to see one example of the "mise en scene" problem that Dark Knight had.

 

[TheWrathOfGod]

You want pretty pictures that are nothing more than pretty pictures... you want Nolan to make his movie more shallow.... so when you called it shallow earlier, you were just making s**t up to pad your post before you dropped the Ledger snipe.

And I'd like to see one example of the "mise en scene" problem that Dark Knight had.

Getting a little testy aren't we? Why do you care if I made fun of Heath Ledger? He's dead and your alive, so why get all sentimental about it.

My thesis if you will is that Nolan should have used the imagery of Burton; combined with his own narrative skills and I would have liked TDK more. It's a balancing act of sorts. As far as Mise en scene is concerned, most of the shots were very singular and static. The open spaces in the entire picture de-emphasized the characters Nolan painstakingly tried to develop. The color tones of blue and grey left the movie feeling cold and barren. The new Batcave resembled an Apple store. Also Nolan still has trouble shooting action sequences in my opinion, they are often fast and confusing (maybe that’s what he wanted). Burton used Dutch angles and complex sets to blend story with the location. Nolan, however hard he tires, can’t make Chicago look like Gotham City.

 

[Gilpesh]

Getting a little testy aren't we? Why do you care if I made fun of Heath Ledger? He's dead and your alive, so why get all sentimental about it.

I don't actually. It was just that your first post was a clear trolling remark even though you had said... not a trolling post. To think that someone dying is the only reason the Dark Knight made money is very stupid... especially just because your gripe is that the Dark Knight isn't more shallow like Burton's movies.

My thesis if you will is that Nolan should have used the imagery of Burton;

No. Just no. Not everyone has a hard-on for dark places, strange buildings, and random guy statutes holding globes... and plus, why make the sets do all the work of making you feel like something dark and scary is happening when the actors clearly should have that weight on their shoulders.

As far as Mise en scene is concerned, most of the shots were very singular and static.

Which wouldn't you agree would make the times when it wasn't stand out even more, adding to the overall feeling that the story is suddenly going chaotic as the camera is no longer staying in its usual pattern.

The open spaces in the entire picture de-emphasize the characters Nolan painstakingly tried to develop.

Or emphasize the power/influence that one person can have to an entire city?

The color tones of blue and grey left the movie feeling cold and barren.

Seeing as part of the movie was one man scaring the entire city off the streets... cold and barren worked for the streets.

The new Batcave resembled an Apple store.

One white ceiling and it's an Apple store? Not really. Also... wasn't that place just a stand-in while Bruce couldn't really access the batcave?

So wouldn't that put utility at the forefront of designing it?

Also Nolan still has trouble shooting action sequences in my opinion, they are often fast and confusing (maybe that’s what he wanted).

Yeah, he sucks at it. But it is a little better than Begins' crazy close-up fights.

Burton used Dutch angles and complex sets to blend story with the location. Nolan, however hard he tires, can’t make Chicago look like Gotham City.

So... tilting the camera and making crazy statues in the background of shots is what does it for you?