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

[TheWrathOfGod]

For Christ's sake, your taking everything I said out of context. I said that the story and the visuals are important. Nolan got the story down to the "T", but he struggles with visuals, and film is a visual medium. You completely omitted that I said it's a balancing act between stylization and story.

They call it Gotham city for a reason you know, because it’s um Gothic, not just Chicago. Using IMAX isn’t enough to tell an interesting visual story, it takes set design and other pre-production steps.

I’ll say this once more so that you can understand; a movie (especially a superhero film) must have an even blend of stylization and narrative to effectively use the medium of film. Plot and yes, effective mise en scene (I know how much you love the term) is essential to a movie. Nolan is a brilliant storyteller but his movies lack a creative soul behind them, leaving them to feel cold and uninviting.

Oh and for the Ledger jokes, you need to stop holding celebrities on pedestals and take a few jabs at them here and there. Heath Ledger had the world by the scrotum and he decided to OD leaving behind a widow and a child. That to me is the definition of a selfish person, who doesn’t need my respect.

 

[Gilpesh]

Oh and for the Ledger jokes, you need to stop holding celebrities on pedestals and take a few jabs at them here and there. Heath Ledger had the world by the scrotum and he decided to OD leaving behind a widow and a child. That to me is the definition of a selfish person, who doesn’t need my respect.

Um... are you missing the point of what I am saying about your 'joke'? You said the movie only made money because he died. And clearly that's false and a statement made to troll.



Also. Why the hell do you want so much style? There's enough style in Dark Knight... which works for the type of story that Nolan is telling. And of course it is going to look non-existent compared to Burton's "Screw substance" take on Batman and... everything he does. And it's not Gotham because of 'Gothic'...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotham_City

Writer Bill Finger is credited with the creation of Gotham City. Finger commented on the naming of the city and reasoning for changing Batman's locale from Manhattan to a fictional city: "Originally I was going to call Gotham City 'Civic City'. Then I tried Capital City, then Coast City. Then I flipped through the phone book and spotted the name 'Gotham Jewelers' and said, 'That's it', Gotham City. We didn't call it New York because we wanted anybody in any city to identify with it."

 

[RKO]

For Christ's sake, your taking everything I said out of context. I said that the story and the visuals are important. Nolan got the story down to the "T", but he struggles with visuals, and film is a visual medium. You completely omitted that I said it's a balancing act between stylization and story.

They call it Gotham city for a reason you know, because it’s um Gothic, not just Chicago. Using IMAX isn’t enough to tell an interesting visual story, it takes set design and other pre-production steps.

I’ll say this once more so that you can understand; a movie (especially a superhero film) must have an even blend of stylization and narrative to effectively use the medium of film. Plot and yes, effective mise en scene (I know how much you love the term) is essential to a movie. Nolan is a brilliant storyteller but his movies lack a creative soul behind them, leaving them to feel cold and uninviting.

Oh and for the Ledger jokes, you need to stop holding celebrities on pedestals and take a few jabs at them here and there. Heath Ledger had the world by the scrotum and he decided to OD leaving behind a widow and a child. That to me is the definition of a selfish person, who doesn’t need my respect.

Someone insert a facepalm pic here quick! This is too stupid for me to handle.

Oh the horror!

 

[TheWrathOfGod]

Um... are you missing the point of what I am saying about your 'joke'? You said the movie only made money because he died. And clearly that's false and a statement made to troll.



Also. Why the hell do you want so much style? There's enough style in Dark Knight... which works for the type of story that Nolan is telling. And of course it is going to look non-existent compared to Burton's "Screw substance" take on Batman and... everything he does. And it's not Gotham because of 'Gothic'...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotham_City

I'm no troll. You do have to admit that the death of Heath Ledger did help put TDK in the spotlight giving it some PR on major news stations. Most adults I know knew nothing about the film until "that drug addict died," quoting my parents.

Oh and the whole Gotham city not being Gothic...well pictures speak more than words...

 

[Crook]

Neither of you going to win that gothic argument because neither of you are particularly right or wrong. Gotham has had many stylistic interpretations, some of which adhere to a visual gothic style (per the name). It is not definitive, however.

 

[TheWrathOfGod]

Neither of you going to win that gothic argument because neither of you are particularly right or wrong. Gotham has had many stylistic interpretations, some of which adhere to a visual gothic style (per the name). It is not definitive, however.

Even Chicago??? LOL.

 

[kid dropper]

To Wrath o God, understand this if nothing else. The very idea of a man dressed as a bat and fighting killer clowns and burlap masked, fear inducing scarecrows is fantastical and visually impressive enough, even pared down to its most relatively realisitic context to where it can be enjoyed by anyone. Why do you need all the stylisitic extras? The concept itself is fantasy . nothing will ever change that. The situation of Gotham will never occur in this life.But to see it displayed in its utmost realm of plausibility is the best of both worlds . how do you not grasp it? A bat garbed vigilante is still fantastical. A man surviving,speaking, and functioning with half his face burned to the bone is fantastical. And has others have said, there is no definitve interpretation of Batman or his lore, over the past 68 years it has been portrayed with varying degrees of realism and seriousness. When he was very first created there was no gotham, he lived in straight up new york. so there, realism was always the original intention. The overt stylization of Gotham is a product of the 80s. every interpretation previous is just a rendering of a contemporary metropolis. Overstylizing an already fantastic concept removes it so much from reality its hard to care or be able to defend it as serious art/entertainment.

 

[Laderlappen]

OT: Is it possible to like one IMDb put someone on ignore? I've never needed before this.

 

[Crook]

Even Chicago??? LOL.

I'm not understanding the context to which you've placed this question.

OT: Is it possible to like one IMDb put someone on ignore? I've never needed before this.

User CP --> Settings & Options --> Edit Ignore List

 

[Octoberist]

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.

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

So by you saying that the Punisher: War Zone was better (in your opinion) than Dark Knight, I was like "what the heck?"

I really think that you're focusing way too much on the visuals. Yeah, it's a more realistic take on Batman, but I think you're taking too much away from it. You keep saying that the Nolan movies should be fun, I say it's a damn honor that it's getting the recognition that it's getting.

There are moments when I feel like Dark Knight needs to be more 'urban decay', but I overlooked that portion. Batman Begins had the perfect blend of that, honestly, and perhaps, Nolan wil revisit the Narrows in the next one. But I think the point of The Dark Knight that the city IS in social decay, despite its glamor and clean looks.

BTW, Chicago was CGI enhanced in both films, so they're not just Chicago.

 

[chamber-music]

To be honest I couldn't point the chicago skyline out of a line up. Its not city thats filmed in as often as New York and to alot of people not as easily recognised. I don't really care or mind that Gotham looked like a real city like chicago. I'll take that over some neon city with giant naked statues all over the place any day.

 

[Two-Face]

The films are fine doing with this take on Batman. Why fix it if ain't broke?

 

[MysterioMenace]

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

Well actually...I see your post more the exact opposite. It's not that he doesn't want an intelligent film, it's that you assume a film closer to the comics would be shallow that's the problem. You are a Batman fan, right? I'm questioning that. You do remember that comics are what these films are based off of, ey? Show a little respect, without them we wouldn't even have these movies. Comics are the characters main medium, not film. The fact that you think that because Batman's based off of a comic book...it must inherently be shallow and thusly worth changing...I...um...

If you're going to get arguably a perfect film interpretation, because no matter how good, they've all had moments when they missed the opportunity to improve, you're going to have a combo of Burton and Nolan. They each make up for what the other lacks. Combined they make a stronger and ideal whole.

 

[Gilpesh]

Well actually...I see your post more the exact opposite. It's not that he doesn't want an intelligent film, it's that you assume a film closer to the comics would be shallow that's the problem.

No? If you have been looking... he seems to think that because it is a comic book movie, it has to be fun and entertaining and not a look into the mind of a vigilante... it's not that I assume a comic film would be shallow, but what he wants seems to be shallow... at least for one second he wants that.

You are a Batman fan, right? I'm questioning that. You do remember that comics are what these films are based off of, ey? Show a little respect, without them we wouldn't even have these movies. Comics are the characters main medium, not film. The fact that you think that because Batman's based off of a comic book...it must inherently be shallow and thusly worth changing...I...um...

That's not a fact?

And... aren't Nolan's films influenced from Year One, and the Loeb/Sale stuff?

If you're going to get arguably a perfect film interpretation, because no matter how good, they've all had moments when they missed the opportunity to improve, you're going to have a combo of Burton and Nolan. They each make up for what the other lacks. Combined they make a stronger and ideal whole.

Not really... they're both separate adaptations that took Batman in different directions... complete opposite directions. And their views are what works for each movie...





And... Wraith of God, saying that Gotham isn't gothic and saying that Gotham isn't called Gotham because it's gothic... are two very different things. Especially when it could have easily been "Civic City".

 

[TheWrathOfGod]

There’s no convincing you, I said it before and I’ll say it again it comes down to taste. Personally I think the fan film Batman Dead End is the perfect example of a proper adaptation of the comic book, minus the Aliens, LOL. If Nolan would just lay off the realism bit and take advantage of the full cinematic possibilities of the character on film, I would be happy. Here’s Dead End if anyone hasn’t seen it…

[YT]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Hjp0I_okX0w&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Hjp0I_okX0w&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/YT]

 

[StorminNorman]

Dead End is stupid as hell.

 

[TheWrathOfGod]

Dead End is stupid as hell.

Blasphemy most high. It’s best adaptation of the character I’ve ever seen.

 

[StorminNorman]

Its poorly acted, the costume looks ridiculous, the plot...is there a plot?

The best scene in the entire movie is the shot of Batman rising from the ground with the cape around him - but besides that its a complete waste of time.

His World's Finest trailer was, IMO, a tad bit better. My favorite personal Batman fan film/trailer is Grayson.

 

[TheWrathOfGod]

Its poorly acted, the costume looks ridiculous, the plot...is there a plot?

It's only a fan film. And as far as the costume, that's exactly how Batman looks in the comics. The guy who played the Joker, Andrew Koenig, and I know I'm going to get death threats for saying this, did a better job than Ledger. The lip smacking is what did if for me.

 

[StorminNorman]

Thats not even worth a response.

 

[The Guard]

Personally I think the fan film Batman Dead End is the perfect example of a proper adaptation of the comic book.

So...you think that a proper adaption of Batman comics equals "they got Batman's costume sort of right"?

Nevermind that they didn't even get that right on any real level. Batman has been wearing armor for almost twenty years in the comics, and Clark Bartram's costume was clearly just spandex, and meant to be just spandex.

That, and Batman's not supposed to look like he's five foot three.

The best scene in the entire movie is the shot of Batman rising from the ground with the cape around him - but besides that its a complete waste of time.

The shot itself denotes a waste of time. If Batman's hunting The Joker, he's not going take the time to make sure his cape looks cool when he's standing up. He's going to get up and keep pursuing The Joker.

 

[Doc Samson]

The comics and the movies should be two separate entities. But look at Punisher: War Zone, very true to the comics and very stylized. Personally I think it was better than The Dark Knight. It just comes down to taste, I like theatrical cinematic experiences and today people like realism. I think 9/11 has something to do with the urge to make things real. And yes I would like to go back to the Burton films, they are what I grew up with and were my first introduction to Batman.

No disrespect Wrath, but if that was your first introduction to the character than that explains where your coming from. But to me, Batman isn't about a visual style or flair, it isn't about how they shoot the action or what the locations look like, it's about his characterization, and in that respect, Burton's films were completely disrespectful towards Batman in ways that Nolan isn't even close to approaching.

I've said a few times around here that certain aspects of Burtons movie will always appeal to me, mostly his visual style, which was/is, fantastic. I also think Nolan's handcuffed from some of the more interesting villains that may be too far-fetched. However, Nolan absolutely hit the nail on the head of every single character he introduced, and IMO, that's way more important. I can't honestly say, especially in Batman Returns, that I was actually watching any kind of Batman I grew up on.

 

[hatebox]

The guy who played the Joker, Andrew Koenig, and I know I'm going to get death threats for saying this, did a better job than Ledger. The lip smacking is what did if for me.

I think your posting history has pretty much been building up to a statement along these lines, and there it is...

 

[raybia]

There’s no convincing you, I said it before and I’ll say it again it comes down to taste. Personally I think the fan film Batman Dead End is the perfect example of a proper adaptation of the comic book, minus the Aliens, LOL. If Nolan would just lay off the realism bit and take advantage of the full cinematic possibilities of the character on film, I would be happy. Here’s Dead End if anyone hasn’t seen it…

[YT]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Hjp0I_okX0w&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Hjp0I_okX0w&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/YT]

And there lies the real agenda. This movie wasn't for you...nor was it for me.

It was for general moviegoers and that is one of the reasons it was successful.

 

[StorminNorman]

The shot itself denotes a waste of time. If Batman's hunting The Joker, he's not going take the time to make sure his cape looks cool when he's standing up. He's going to get up and keep pursuing The Joker.

I mean visually since it was obvious there wasn't a single point of the plot worth applauding.