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

[Mistah K88]

I think the "realistic" tone of the movies is fine. I moreso meant in my original post about the limitations they have on the villains. However as I said earlier this debate is fine (gives us something to discuss besides characters and casting while we wait the eternal wait right?) A lot of things I heard turn the villains into an assasin or a serial killer or some other type of realistic criminal. For example, some think the Mad Hatter wouldn't work without being a pedophile because his mind control schtick is "unrealistic". Even though we have a microwave emitter that doesn't affect people, sonar, and the Joker can plant all these bombs around a city without being noticed...

I know I'll probably be beat down pretty hard for this, but i didn't care for Joker not being permawhite (where did that term come from anyway?). To me, it did take away some of the mystique of the clown prince of crime. He doesn't have a background, but he's just a normal (physically) crazy man who paints his face, I don't care where he came from. To me, there's nothing really different enough about him to make me wonder "how the [BEEP] did he get like that?" (Hmm makes me want to start a new topic) I don't want to see him in Arkam in the next movie as he won't have his makeup on...or atleast shouldn't have it on... Despite all of that I still loved the character though.

 

[The Joker]

Batman is hope in Gotham, and apparently he cleaned up 90% of Gotham quicker then a team of people could rebuild a mansion, but thats not the point.

90% was cleaned up? No man, the criminal element was still very much there. The Falcone empire was still going, too, because Maroni stepped up to take charge of it.

The difference was that Batman had them scared.

I know thats how it was in TDK, but the atmosphere didn't scream corruption, chaos, or help from any citizen.

That's a contradiction. Why should the atmosphere scream all that if Batman is making a difference? If Gotham felt like that then everything he did in Begins would be rendered useless.

Batman had to be having a noticeable effect on Gotham and it's criminal element. Even Gordon noticed Batman's effect already at the end of Begins.

Gordon: "You've really started something. Bad cops running scared. Hope on the streets"

Stands to reason it would be much more noticeable in TDK.

Batman's war on crime should be endless, and his work should keep coming in.

And who says it won't? Unless you've seen the script for the sequal

And did you really feel like Gotham and all of its citizens would have been worse off if he didn't? I never felt that once throughout the entire movie.

Of course. The mob without their money is not much of a mob. But the mob was not the major threat in TDK, was it? No, The Joker was. Taking down the mob was not going to be the solution. Joker was. He took the reigns.

Joker: "Tell your men they work for me now. This is my city"

It was Joker who turned Gotham against Batman by trying to force him to unmask and turn himself in. It was Joker who took out Harvey Dent. He was the real threat.

Much like Ra's Al Ghul was the big threat in Begins, using Scarecrow and Falcone to carry out his destruction of Gotham scheme.

I guess I didn't feel for any of them, cause I just felt like Bruce wanted to take the cape off more then he wanted to be Batman. In Begins, he was the one trying to help Gotham, but in TDK, he was just looking for someone to help out, so he could take the cape off and be happy with his life. Why did he want to take the cape off so badly? To be with Rachel? I thought he had to be a protector of the city, to seek revenge over his parents, and in a sense, apease them in the afterlife.

No, he wanted to take of the cape because Joker was killing people because of HIM. Every day he didn't stop being Batman, Joker was slaughtering people.

Maroni: "Nobody's going to tell you nothin'. They're wise to your act. You've got rules. The Joker, he's got no rules. Nobody's going to cross him to you. You want this guy then you've got one way. But you already know what that is. Just take off that mask and let him come find you. Or are you going to let a couple more people get killed while you make up your mind?"

Rachel: "Harvey called. He said Batman is going to turn himself in"
Bruce: "I have no choice"
Rachel: "You really think that's going to keep the Joker from killing people?"
Bruce: "Maybe not. But I have enough blood on my hands. I've seen now what I would have to become to stop men like him"

Of course Batman doesn't want to be Batman for the rest of his life. His promise he made was to rid the city of the evil that took their lives. He saw in Harvey a symbol of hope for Gotham that he could never be.

But he doesn't quit. Much as he wanted to, he keeps on fighting because he knows he has to.

 

[Travesty]

No, he wanted to take of the cape because Joker was killing people because of HIM. Every day he didn't stop being Batman, Joker was slaughtering people.

No, he wanted to take his cape off from almost the beginning of the movie, over his jealousy of Harvey being with Rachel. Remember the dinner party? Bruce listened to what Harvey had to say, and got jealous over him and Rachel:

Harvey:Whoever Batman is, he doesn't want to do this his entire life. He's looking for someone to take up his mantle.

*Bruce's interest peaks over Harvey's discussion*

Harvey: If I were sneaking out by now, someone would have realized.

*Bruce's eyes Harvey in jealousy, while Harvey takes Rachel's hand*

-Bruce: Well, I'm sold......

Of course Batman doesn't want to be Batman for the rest of his life. His promise he made was to rid the city of the evil that took their lives. He saw in Harvey a symbol of hope for Gotham that he could never be.

But he doesn't quit. Much as he wanted to, he keeps on fighting because he knows he has to.

I know he didn't quit, but that's not what the atmosphere in TDK felt like, as apposed to Begins. Throughout the entire movie, it felt like Bruce was just trying to take the cape off. If you didn't feel that in the movie, then I'm more then happy for you, but the dinner party at about 15 minutes into the movie kind of set the tone for duration of the flick.

 

[The Joker]

No, he wanted to take his cape off from almost the beginning of the movie, over his jealousy of Harvey being with Rachel. Remember the dinner party? Bruce listened to what Harvey had to say, and got jealous over him and Rachel:

Harvey:Whoever Batman is, he doesn't want to do this his entire life. He's looking for someone to take up his mantle.

*Bruce's interest peaks over Harvey's discussion*

Harvey: If I were sneaking out by now, someone would have realized.

*Bruce's eyes Harvey in jealousy, while Harvey takes Rachel's hand*

-Bruce: Well, I'm sold......

Are you kidding me?

If that was the case then why didn't he turn in his cape after Harvey netted all those criminals then? Why wait until the Joker was killing people in his name, and failing to squeeze info out of the mob about the Joker's whereabouts before deciding to quit?

Of course he was jealous Harvey was with Rachel because he has feelings for Rachel himself. But he was not wanting to quit because of that. No way. He really believed in Harvey. You could tell by the look of admiration he had when Harvey was comparing Batman to how to the romans defended their city. By the speech he gave at the party about how he believed in Harvey, and how Gotham can feel safer under Harvey's watch.

Harvey had proven himself after Batman delivered Lau to him.

I know he didn't quit, but that's not what the atmosphere in TDK felt like, as apposed to Begins. Throughout the entire movie, it felt like Bruce was just trying to take the cape off. If you didn't feel that in the movie, then I'm more then happy for you, but the dinner party at about 15 minutes into the movie kind of set the tone for duration of the flick.

I don't agree at all, for reasons already stated. I just don't understand how you come to some of your conclusions based on what was presented in the movie.

I won't suggest you watch the movie again. Others have already done that I guess we just interpreted the movie differently.

 

[Travesty]

Are you kidding me?

If that was the case then why didn't he turn in his cape after Harvey netted all those criminals then? Why wait until the Joker was killing people in his name, and failing to squeeze info out of the mob about the Joker's whereabouts before deciding to quit?

Of course he was jealous Harvey was with Rachel because he has feelings for Rachel himself. But he was not wanting to quit because of that. No way. He really believed in Harvey. You could tell by the look of admiration he had when Harvey was comparing Batman to how to the romans defended their city. By the speech he gave at the party about how he believed in Harvey, and how Gotham can feel safer under Harvey's watch.

Harvey had proven himself after Batman delivered Lau to him.

I know, but you keep missing my point. Of course he didn't just take his cape off right then and there, but it was apparent, at least to me, that it was his motives to give his mantle off to somebody else(Harvey), and retire his cape and be with Rachel after it was over.

I don't agree at all, for reasons already stated. I just don't understand how you come to some of your conclusions based on what was presented in the movie.

Because it kept coming up over and over again, about how much Batman wanted Harvey to basically take over, so there wont have to be a Batman anymore. This theme of Bat-retirement was setup before The Joker even made his first threat for Batman to "turn himself" in.


Now we're just getting off topic a little, and I guess we need to agree to disagree on this.

 

[RockyBatboa]

Yes, I know this, and I'm just talking form a TDK perceptive here. The atmosphere in Begins and TDK are so different, I don't think you can even say they're in the same category.

So should the "realism" be lightened up, as far as atmosphere goes? Yes, and I hope it looks and feels more like Begins.

I agree with a lot of points you've made in this thread.

Atmosphere alterations was the first thing i noticed for my first "Dark Knight" viewing. I remember how satisfied i was with Begins, and after seeing the Dark Knight teasers and trailers, Knowing that Nolan and Ledger had just nailed the Joker, and realy anticipating the ultimate aBatman/Joker showdown, i was really disappointed w/ that angle...

The first time we see bruce, he seems kinda pathetic talking to alfred, and more interested in spying on Rachel in the warehouse...later he's telling rachel the time has come for Batman to retire,....???...it was at this point i was like, "what the hell???" Is this the same Batman who responded to Gordon's statement at the end of Begins, Inever said thank you, -"And you'll never have to".....it's obvious only about 6-9 months has passed between films, and bruce is already trying to throw the responsibility on someone else, just b/c he's all lonely and lusty for that dog, gyllenhal????


Nolan really needs to go Back to "Begins" territory, b/c next time he wont have a joker to depend on for success, and honestly, begins was the better movie.

 

[Punisher Rising]

My two cents is the realism should be toned down but the seriousness still kept, because more fantasy-based villains like Man-Bat and Mr. Freeze IMO would be great to see realized onscreen and kept true to their comic counterparts, and without crossing the line into camp territory like Schumacher did. Being unrealistic or fantasy/horror based doesn't equal camp if the execution is serious.

 

[RockyBatboa]

Travesty-

Btw, dont let the DronesK work you up too much. They fail to see ONE fault in this movie and all they're going to to is ceaselessly quote and respond you to death.


dont heed them too much mind, your points are accurate and, trust me, you did get the right sense when watching the film, concerning the bruce wayne flippancy over batman, ect.-it was there, and it bothered more than just you and me.

Begins was the superior film, and a little less realism and a little more fantastical foreboding is a necess for the next movie.

 

[RockyBatboa]

My two cents is the realism should be toned down but the seriousness still kept, because more fantasy-based villains like Man-Bat and Mr. Freeze IMO would be great to see realized onscreen and kept true to their comic counterparts, and without crossing the line into camp territory like Schumacher did. Being unrealistic or fantasy/horror based doesn't equal camp if the execution is serious.

Another sci-fi batman villians ****e?

JUST KIDDING!! Dont take offense.



But seriously i really like how you stated that : "Keep the seriousness, tone down the reallism".

And i like how you included "horror based" in your post. Most fans really overlook that part of the character. Arguably, Kane's original Batman was horror-genre. It was right up there w/ Dracula, Phantom of the Opera, the Shadow, ect, but , just like the Shadow, a dark hero element was added.

To me, theese are genres and tones of Batman: epic, heroe's journey, action, horror, fantasy, urban realism, sci-fi, and romance.

And So far, Nolan has done very good, but i think he could do even better.

 

[Punisher Rising]

That's what I love about Batman and especially his rogue's gallery, they run the gamut of all kinds of villains. Realistic villains who could be real people to those who come from Sci-Fi and Horror territory, etc. I would love to see Man-Bat realized onscreen as well as Freeze (done properly and true to his character from the comics and TAS, not the butchery from B&R). I think making Batman's world too realistic can be boring and mundane, as much as an unrealistic villain who isn't portrayed properly can end up being ridiculous rather than impressive.

 

[KalMart]

Let another version of Batman in the future, after the Nolan movies, push the fantasy stuff as far as they want. If this is the style/angle with which Nolan & crew want to tell these stories, and it's working as well as it is so far, then there's no reason for them to force a change just to accommodate more rogues gallery villains. These probably won't be the last movie-versions of Batman ever to be made again, so there's no need to try and shoehorn in elements that they don't need.

 

[RockyBatboa]

Catch the "9/11 hidden in holly wood vids" on youtube-they will blow your mind!

Thank God, for the most part, Batman was spared such evil in films made of him.

 

[RockyBatboa]

Catch the "9/11 hidden in holly wood vids" on youtube-they will blow your mind!

Thank God, for the most part, Batman was spared such evil in films made of him.

 

[RockyBatboa]

Btw, trying to post some important topics, and the superhero hype keeps blocking my posts and making me sign in over and over again.....

HILARIOUS!

I'm just trying to save theese people, you dictatorial creeps!!

 

[RockyBatboa]

Btw, the double post above was completely forced by the superherohype boarrds software, and was not intended at all by me. It was an attemp to make me look like a paranoid, intense loon, which i'm sure worked hook line and sinker for some of you...


A-N-Y way....back on topic.

Bear w/ me guys and gals, this is attempt number 20 for me, so here we go again.

(To:Superhero hype board staff, I WILL get this message across)

 

[RockyBatboa]

Okay, here's attempt 20:

And after you all check out the "9/11 hidden in hollywood" vids, then check out the "rihanna umbrella occultic innitiation" vid by mr.honor-it too should cause at least a few of your brains cells to burst!-- if , after that, you're still not shakin in your batman underwear, check out the "Fema Coffins for YOU" vid

I know all this is disturbing, but you guys and gals are better off knowing all this: Just remember, it's only real life.

As for the "9/11 hidden in hollywood" vids , it looks like the Big Brother (1984) is bigger and more pervasive than any of us already thought. Not only was 9/11 an inside job, it was actually planned and pre-celebrated as early as 20 years ago! And things are finalizing, "M" (a 1927 fritz lang film) is here so looks like some of you might want to look into taking an extended vacation (and by extended, i mean, life-LONG) to Europe.

My personal suggestion is Switzerland: the women are a God-send to any straight man, and it's not just the blue eyes, blond hair thing. They're intelligent, soft-spoken, but have a vibrancy and feminity that will pleasantly shock you-much different than today's american women with their woman's lib brainwashed "i'm as good or bad as any man Is"...? I mean, why do they even have to set man as the bar if they're so independent? They need to get off the drugs, look themselves in the mirror and tell themselves, "I love you."..

Anyway, back on track; other than swiss women, the country has one of the top three econimies in the world, and the people, particularly in the countryside, are very polite and decent.

I still remember my time in Los Angelas in summer 2006 w/ two swiss girls in a hostel room we shared. Not only were they really fine, they were a pleasure to talk to --it was as is should be: man and women talking, no games, no bullcrap, just real and lively attraction/ on top of that they apparently found it appropriately to give me the favor of being my personal wakeup call in the mornings as their feet would tap on the floor as they got out of bed just loud enough to wake me up so i could catch a glimpse of them heading to the bathroom wearing nothing but their pajama tops.....

One of the two i was particularly feeling for, and i still am disappointed w/ myself i forgot her name over the years was a particular joy. I still remember the day i showed her the cover of the glamour mag w/ Brad Pitt on the cover, and asked her if she found him attractive. Her response: "Not at all.." very genuinely.

Take THAT Pitt, you government pig!


anyway, i really got way off track there....so, let's recap.

1.) watch the "9/11 hidden in hollywood" vids on youtube. (and i mean, seriously, watch them. There some of the best evidence in media today of the existense of the money-****ing elite bastards that own this and other countries, and the fact that they not only planned the 9/11 attacks , but felt very blissful about putting subliminals in their media celebrating the time which the attacks would occur.up to 20 years or more ago.)

2.) Watch the youtube "aaron russo talks about rockefeller" vid. Russo is the producr of the film "trading places", and also the indi film "america:from freedom to fascism"..it's an eye-opener!

3.) Watch the "rihanna umbrella initiation occult" vid on youtube. It's horryfying what they intention for our youth is. Rock artists were doing it in the 70's and 80's and it's been rap from 90's til now. It's disturbing. (Of particular interest is part 8 of the series, which explores the phrase "Entity" rihanna uses in the "umbrella" vid)

4.) Accquant yourself w/ the film "M" from fritz lang/ 1927, to see where this country is heading, and it's heading there RIGHT NOW.

5.) Sell everything, go to a currency exchange, and switch to euro.

6.) Get the hell out of the sinking ship:, aka, "US"

7.) Personal suggestion: switzerland.

 

[KalMart]

Are you confusing Switzerland with Sweden, at least when it comes to hair and eye color?

 

[RockyBatboa]

Now, just to let you all know i'm NOT at all a few cards short of a whole deck, i should fill in just a little bit more information.

1.) You may be asking yourself, after you read the prior posts, "Why is RockyBatboa" putting all this on a SuperheroHype message board?" Or, you might be saying, "Does he have to troll like this?"

To answer these people, it's as simple as this: Somethings are more important than batman, entertainment, ect. And this certainly qualifies.


2.) Just a little background. I have a 150 I.Q, and have been tested with high level reason and mathematical tests, and scored very high on them in each occasion. My ability of perception goes beyone what's on the surface, but to what MOTIVATES that which is clearly seen on the surface.

I am prior military service. I served my country for two years in this decade, post 9/ll. My MoS (military occupational station) was Cavalry Scout, 19 Delta. (all though on my discharge sheet, it will read InfantryMan, which is 11 Bravo-the reason for the inaccurate change from what i signed as , and what i was discharged as, is two-proned: One, the military is deceitful abvoe all things, and two, as a show of respect to me, since the cavalry unit (3-1 Cav) i was stationed at at Ft. Benning , GA was originally an infantry unit (1-30 In), and the old guard of infantry seargents were, in their frame of mind, showing me personal respect, as the infantry is more respected than the cavalry, in the military.)

(Personal note: though i originally intented to join in the intelligence field, their entrance requirements are very high. Though my test score (overall) was 111/112, to make intelligence you can not have any prior discrepancies w/ the law, and i had a few minor ones)

Nevertheless, i learned quite a few interesting things while serving my country and i will share one w/ you.

Most people in america are sure , or at least pretty sure, by now that the war w/ iraq had nothing to do w/ 9/11 , but truly with us oil interests.
This is true, but is only the half of it.
In 1991, the US participated in a war concerning Iraq and Kuwait, we all "Know" as "Persian Gulf". The US actually aided Iraq in this war AGAINST Kuwait. The reason for this, was that Iraq, one of the leading oil countries, were to, in exchange for our help, sign a treaty w/ us that they would only sell oil to countries that bought it w/ american currency. Keep in mind, this treaty (nothing more than a semi-monopoly on iraq oil interests) did NOT stipulate that iraq could only sell oil to America. It only stipulated that any country who bought iraq oil, had to buy it w/ american currency.

Put yourself in other nations' shoes. If you're France, do you want to exchange your currency for the us dollar, just to buy iraq oil. It's like a slap in the face.

And France is particularly important in this story, b/c France is the country that Iraq broke their treaty w/ us to, b/c in 2000, France bought iraq oil without the us currency as backing it, and this, upset and angerede US interest.

That is why we went to war w/ Iraq.


3.) Do investigating on your own. Dont let me tell me you what to think. I'm just trying to fill in some details and point you to what i think is the right direction.

You make the call. It's your life.

Mock me, or make a joke of this if you will, but i'm telling you people, this is all serious. And your lives are worth more than what they think.

 

[RockyBatboa]

Are you confusing Switzerland with Sweden, at least when it comes to hair and eye color?

?????????

Uh. Yeah. they were swiss..


(this one is lost)

 

[KalMart]

?????????

Uh. Yeah. they were swiss..


(this one is lost)

Not sure the Swiss are known for 'blue eyes and blonde hair' (AKA Scandinavian features) as much as the Swedes are.

 

[RockyBatboa]

I will give you on other military tidbit.

After you sign up for the military and take the plane to your Basic Training installation (mine was Ft. Knox, KY.), you are first placed in a building called an AIG (mine in Ft. Knox was 46 AIG)-this is a building where you essentially do nothing but sleep eat, do guard duty, and wait for your paper orders to come in, for you take the bus to your actual basic training unit.

(*In my opinion AIG stands for "army in gestation", since as a soldier in Basic Training, you are not yet considered an actual "Soldier". You are still a civillian, and are only deemed an actual soldier when you graduate from the basic training process-which is nothing short of one long brainwashing process. Which they Failed to indoctrinate me with-my drill sergeants were constantly complaining about me being an individual, however my level of physical fitness was so high, and my perception so adept, i was made platoon guide -the highest position a new recruit can have in basic training.)

Anyway, back to point. When you first arrive at AIG, the first thing they give you is army sweat pants and shirt. Next three things are a belt, a canteen, and the Army Manual.

And my second tidbit is this: anyone who's been in the military knows that in this manual, it outlines that if any time FEMA declares martial law in the United States, any civillian of the country can be considered and enemy of the U.S, and as an american soldier, you can, and Will be called upon, to destroy theese enemies.

However, today's american soldier is more or less nothin more than a joke, cannon fodder, either to or from. The real threat now is the United Nations Army, which as far as i know, been operating drills in the US since October 2008.

Just food for thought.

 

[RockyBatboa]

Not sure the Swiss are known for 'blue eyes and blonde hair' as much as the Swedes are.

Good Night.

 

[KalMart]

Got any Batman tidbits?

 

[KalMart]

Good Night.

Good luck.

 

[RockyBatboa]

Not sure the Swiss are known for 'blue eyes and blonde hair' (AKA Scandinavian features) as much as the Swedes are.

Well then, let me apologize for insulting you heritage (assuming you are scandanavian)

Send me a pm and i'll send you a dozen roses, baby girl.


Btw, your comedic timing is genious! Ever thought of making movies?

Now, this time for real, good night. Too tired to perpetuate your pointless joke. If you werent interested in the info i was providing (non-Batman nevertheless), you could just ignore the posts of mine.

No need to be a twit.