Tdk vs Avengers

[Squaremaster316]

A Few Good Men has better performances than Back to the Future. That doesn't make A Few Good Men automatically better.

The plot and story of TDK make it better than the Avengers.

Bottom line, Ledger didn't have to "save" anything. He was simply the best among a plethora of brilliant performances.

 

[NewYorkSpider]

The more I watch the Avengers the more overrated it seems to be. I'm strongly against using the word "overrated" very often, if at all, but the Avengers is literally the second thing I have thought is truly overrated. It's good, but there a far better comic book movies. I consider Iron Man to be an excellent movie and the prime example how to make a MCU movie.

TDK easily wins in my book.

TDK is said to be overrated at times. Every film that is successful these days is gonna get that.

 

[jmc]

Words Avenger fans are not allowed to use:

Nolanite
Imagination
Pretentious
Genre
Elevate
Transcend

and we're told this by people more condescending than Comic Book Guy from the Simpsons...

but we're supposedly the closed minded fanboys, not them.

lol, nice spin fellas.

Are you honestly, and I mean this, honestly incapable of reading people posts or do you just type dribble for the sake of it? Because frankly all you sound like is nothing more than a rambling fanboy who's only form of defence against reasonable argument is to talk complete and utter rubbish in an attempt to sidestep any challenge someone poses towards you.

 

[ChukNoris]

I don't think you can really compare the two films. Nolan's batman was dark and realistic while Whedon's Avengers was light and fun. I voted for the Avengers because I liked the funner and lighter tone and I also enjoyed seeing multiple heroes on screen than focusing on just one. The Dark Knight was also 10/10 quality. I think both films are equal, just on different sides of the cbm spectrum.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Are you honestly, and I mean this, honestly incapable of reading people posts or do you just type dribble for the sake of it? Because frankly all you sound like is nothing more than a rambling fanboy who's only form of defence against reasonable argument is to talk complete and utter rubbish in an attempt to sidestep any challenge someone poses towards you.

You cherry pick my post and I cherry pick your post to find things to respond to.

I reserve the right to respond to whatever points I feel like while fully ignoring others.

You're disappointed I didn't respond directly to every point you try to make?

Sorry, maybe you can take a break and have some ice cream with gummy bears.

You obviously need some time to cool off.

 

[jmc]

You cherry pick my post and I cherry pick your post to find things to respond to.

I reserve the right to respond to whatever points I feel like while fully ignoring others.

You're disappointed I didn't respond directly to every point you try to make?

Sorry, maybe you can take a break and have some ice cream with gummy bears.

You obviously need some time to cool off.

Where did I cherry pick your post exactly? Not only have I address your posts I went into more detail than I probably should have. I'm not disappointed, I'm annoyed that you don't address the points people bring up to counter argue what you write. If you've got gripes you think are valid then say so and do it in a way that gets your point across without sounding like a rabid fanboy. At the moment someone called you out for a comment you wrote and you've yet to be able to justify it, instead you're on the defensive trying to move away from being the centre of the conversation.

 

[Steamteck]

Each time I watch the Dark knight, I personally find it seems more implausible without even the benefit of being fantastic. Don't tell me it plausible when Almost everyone has to be blind idiots with instantly changeable motivations for the Joker's schemes to work. And work they did, by getting Batman to foreswear himself as a longer incorruptible symbol to protect a dead martyr, the Joker got the last laugh.

Each time I watch TDK , I hope I'll see what you guys see in it but it just a high production film that doesn't work for me and angers me in the same way Return of The Jedi after the buildup of The Empire Strikes Back.

 

[Victarion]

Each time I watch the Dark knight, I personally find it seems more implausible without even the benefit of being fantastic. Don't tell me it plausible when Almost everyone has to be blind idiots with instantly changeable motivations for the Joker's schemes to work. And work they did, by getting Batman to foreswear himself as a longer incorruptible symbol to protect a dead martyr, the Joker got the last laugh.

Each time I watch TDK , I hope I'll see what you guys see in it but it just a high production film that doesn't work for me and angers me in the same way Return of The Jedi after the buildup of The Empire Strikes Back.

Which characters, and in what way would their motivations need to change? Are you upset that Joker won?

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Where did I cherry pick your post exactly? Not only have I address your posts I went into more detail than I probably should have. I'm not disappointed, I'm annoyed that you don't address the points people bring up to counter argue what you write. If you've got gripes you think are valid then say so and do it in a way that gets your point across without sounding like a rabid fanboy. At the moment someone called you out for a comment you wrote and you've yet to be able to justify it, instead you're on the defensive trying to move away from being the centre of the conversation.

No need to be disappointed or annoyed.

If you make short and concise points it greatly increases the chances of a direct response.


To be perfectly honest I have no idea what point you keep angrily referring to but your piss-poor attitude doesn't make me any more urgent to address it.

 

[jmc]

No need to be disappointed or annoyed.

If you make short and concise points it greatly increases the chances of a direct response.


To be perfectly honest I have no idea what point you keep angrily referring to but your piss-poor attitude doesn't make me any more urgent to address it.

You kept painting Nolan's film making process with a broad brush and crapping on about the realism aspect, I went in great length to explain to you that the actual goals were to go beyond the conventions of the genre in order to make the best possible movie, to take risks, to ask the audience to pay attention, something even your precious MCU is starting to do, but all you do is keep bringing the argument back to the realism/plausibility thing - you're not even arguing anything in particular. You took comments I made regarding future Marvel movies completely out of context just to slam TDK. I don't know why you're equating going beyond genre conventions to realism, those two don't go hand in hand, realism is just and aesthetic and stylistic choice. Why don't you understand that?

 

[DACrowe]

Nolan goes beyond basic style or costume choices for plausibility. The Chicago/Pittsburgh setting, the crime drama story structure, the complete avoidance of imaginative villains and fantasy concepts, etc.

I'm not sure why there's this denial that Nolan's approach embraces plausibility over imagination. It's more than obvious.

and movies like IM3, MOS, and ASM following TDK's grounded approach doesn't really help your argument. The all pale in comparison to Avengers which blows them all away in term of pure entertainment value.

Not all superheroes need the imagination sucked away. Even Batman could use some these days.

What Nolan did is see beyond costumes or gargoyles and cut to the heart of the Batman character. In general, Batman works best as a figure fighting crime and corruption in a bleak city. I.E. as a crime drama. Most of the recognized great works of Batman feature a form of urban decay or even nihilism (TDKR and everyone Miller ever influenced), cops and mobsters (Year One, The Long Halloween) or pure social anarchy (most Joker stories, No Man's Land, etc.).

While I get that you do not care for Nolan's aesthetic, he recognized that a superhero movie can be more than hero + love interest + jokes + wacky villain with undercooked scheme = $$$.

And while I do not think he is the first superhero filmmaker to do that (Singer should get credit to an extent for his X-Men films), nobody had done it as well as The Dark Knight had or has since. And with $1 billion worldwide and a Best Supporting Actor Oscar, people stopped and took notice.

We have seen the initial reaction of just copying his aesthetic with anemic to mixed results (cough-The Amazing Spider-Man, Skyfall, Star Trek into Darkness and Man of Steel-cough).

But his actual approach--boiling the character down to its essence beyond the mask and crafting a story around THAT--appears to finally be taking root. Iron Man 3 was more of an action/comedy along the lines of Lethal Weapon or Die Hard from the '80s. They even got Shane Black to do it. Thor: The Dark World looks like pure fantasy, right down to its Star Wars-esque cover poster. X-Men: First Class was a stylish period piece that felt as much like a later Sean Connery/early Roger Moore Bond movie as a superhero film. The Wolverine could basically be any Clint Eastwood movie from the '70s, except replace the guns with claws. And Captain America 2 is obviously going for a spy/thriller vibe. Hence the casting of Robert Redford.

This is the true longer impact of Nolan. Forget about making a "superhero movie." Make it more true to whatever genre the character is from. Nolan made the "crime drama" with TDK. And now everyone is slowly starting to follow suit with the cards they have.

You can count on it.

 

[Green Goblin]

What Nolan did is see beyond costumes or gargoyles and cut to the heart of the Batman character. In general, Batman works best as a figure fighting crime and corruption in a bleak city. I.E. as a crime drama. Most of the recognized great works of Batman feature a form of urban decay or even nihilism (TDKR and everyone Miller ever influenced), cops and mobsters (Year One, The Long Halloween) or pure social anarchy (most Joker stories, No Man's Land, etc.).

While I get that you do not care for Nolan's aesthetic, he recognized that a superhero movie can be more than hero + love interest + jokes + wacky villain with undercooked scheme = $$$.

And while I do not think he is the first superhero filmmaker to do that (Singer should get credit to an extent for his X-Men films), nobody had done it as well as The Dark Knight had or has since. And with $1 billion worldwide and a Best Supporting Actor Oscar, people stopped and took notice.

We have seen the initial reaction of just copying his aesthetic with anemic to mixed results (cough-The Amazing Spider-Man, Skyfall, Star Trek into Darkness and Man of Steel-cough).

But his actual approach--boiling the character down to its essence beyond the mask and crafting a story around THAT--appears to finally be taking root. Iron Man 3 was more of an action/comedy along the lines of Lethal Weapon or Die Hard from the '80s. They even got Shane Black to do it. Thor: The Dark World looks like pure fantasy, right down to its Star Wars-esque cover poster. X-Men: First Class was a stylish period piece that felt as much like a later Sean Connery/early Roger Moore Bond movie as a superhero film. The Wolverine could basically be any Clint Eastwood movie from the '70s, except replace the guns with claws. And Captain America 2 is obviously going for a spy/thriller vibe. Hence the casting of Robert Redford.

This is the true longer impact of Nolan. Forget about making a "superhero movie." Make it more true to whatever genre the character is from. Nolan made the "crime drama" with TDK. And now everyone is slowly starting to follow suit with the cards they have.

You can count on it.

There are different types of grounded. Nolan's was making everything grounded but films like TASM only made the characters and setting feel grounded. How is STID influenced by TDK? Just because your bad guy escapes doesn't mean it's just mimicking it's formula.

 

[batfreakforever]

Are there fans that enjoy both of these films? I enjoy all types of comic book films and wish them all success. As another poster said on the hype, comic books aren't a genre they are a medium. There is plenty of room for different types of comic book films.

 

[DACrowe]

There are different types of grounded. Nolan's was making everything grounded but films like TASM only made the characters and setting feel grounded. How is STID influenced by TDK? Just because your bad guy escapes doesn't mean it's just mimicking it's formula.

Turning your villain into a post-9/11 terrorist whose schemes and plot points are thinly veiled allegories for post-9/11 America, though done very poorly and stupidly in STID it is there, and then having him crash flying vehicles into buildings? Not to mention that yes he escapes in the second act as part of his plan...it is kind of obvious.

****, the writers even called Khan "Star Trek's Joker" after the movie came out. He even stands in the poster in a ruined city cut out in the Star Trek image (not unlike the poster for TDKR) in the Joker's pose. Like Silvia in Skyfall, it was this franchise's attempt to mimic Ledger's Joker.

It came to very poor effect, however. Mostly because that movie was inept.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Yeah, ok, Nolan grounded some stuff:
1. No chemical bath for Joker
2. No Lazarus Pit
3. No Venom for Bane
4. Batman doesn't posses every kind of knowledge

But the cape, the car, the jet, Batman fighting as much as he does in one night without tiring, the harbor fight, Two-Face eye not burning or itching from no cover, Joker plans and how they are achieved without anyone noticing, the trip from Hong Kong to Gotham, Batman's back breaking and still doing that jump the only one managed to do before him is Talia when she was very young, day turning to night in less than 8 minutes, the way Batman glides,etc....

Still fantastical

 

[OcStat]

Are there fans that enjoy both of these films? I enjoy all types of comic book films and wish them all success. As another poster said on the hype, comic books aren't a genre they are a medium. There is plenty of room for different types of comic book films.

Thank you sir!

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Are there fans that enjoy both of these films? I enjoy all types of comic book films and wish them all success. As another poster said on the hype, comic books aren't a genre they are a medium. There is plenty of room for different types of comic book films.

They are both in my signature stating my favorite comic book movies

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Are there fans that enjoy both of these films? I enjoy all types of comic book films and wish them all success. As another poster said on the hype, comic books aren't a genre they are a medium. There is plenty of room for different types of comic book films.

Of course. I liked Avengers and all the MCU films, even the lesser ones. I am quite satisfied with what Marvel is churning out.

Just because they aren't nearly as good as TDK, doesn't mean they aren't enjoyable.

 

[Green Goblin]

I liked TA but it's TDK all the way man.

 

[Steamteck]

Which characters, and in what way would their motivations need to change? Are you upset that Joker won?

Just off the top of my head because I literally could go on for hours. No way in heaven or hell would those thugs have let him burn the mountain of money. Their motivation was not chaos but greed . No matter how scarey he was they had machine guns. Even if they handwave that no reaction what so ever.

Actually I was really hoping they would acknowledge the Joker won. Then it actually been OK if Bruce admitted " Well, he certainly manipulated me into that one. Not only am I and my legacy tainted but any similar heroes who come after me. Ruining a living active protector and symbol on exchange for a dead martyr seemed like a better idea at the time."

I know I'll be team jumped but my main problem with the Joker is almost none of his schemes even pass the rudimentary sniff test IMO.

If that was the Batman we deserved or needed or whatever it seems pretty sad to me. If it had given me personally any of the stuff others seen in it I could overlook most of these things but it gave me very little positive. I really wish there wasn't a thread every week or so about how perfect it was and no one can challenge that. For me the Avengers was pretty near flawless but I don't need to reaffirm my opinion constantly by forcing on others and belittling the competition.

 

[Green Goblin]

Turning your villain into a post-9/11 terrorist whose schemes and plot points are thinly veiled allegories for post-9/11 America, though done very poorly and stupidly in STID it is there, and then having him crash flying vehicles into buildings? Not to mention that yes he escapes in the second act as part of his plan...it is kind of obvious.

****, the writers even called Khan "Star Trek's Joker" after the movie came out. He even stands in the poster in a ruined city cut out in the Star Trek image (not unlike the poster for TDKR) in the Joker's pose. Like Silvia in Skyfall, it was this franchise's attempt to mimic Ledger's Joker.

It came to very poor effect, however. Mostly because that movie was inept.

Fair point about the movie but the comment about the poster is ridiculous. There are alot of posters in games/films that are similar but I fail to see how that means a film is a "ripoff".

 

[Thoix]

Of course. I liked Avengers and all the MCU films, even the lesser ones. I am quite satisfied with what Marvel is churning out.

Just because they aren't nearly as good as TDK, doesn't mean they aren't enjoyable.

Same here.

 

[The Joker]

Just off the top of my head because I literally could go on for hours. No way in heaven or hell would those thugs have let him burn the mountain of money. Their motivation was not chaos but greed . No matter how scarey he was they had machine guns. Even if they handwave that no reaction what so ever.

How do you know they wouldn't have let him burn the money? Plenty more where that came from, especially if Joker intended to take over the city like he said he was.

Furthermore Joker was also attracting crazies to his group, like Thomas Schiff the paranoid schizo, and that looney guy with voices in his head that Joker stitched a bomb into.

Actually I was really hoping they would acknowledge the Joker won. Then it actually been OK if Bruce admitted " Well, he certainly manipulated me into that one. Not only am I and my legacy tainted but any similar heroes who come after me. Ruining a living active protector and symbol on exchange for a dead martyr seemed like a better idea at the time."

Gordon: "The Joker won"

Batman: "Gotham needs it's true hero and I let that murdering psychopath blow him half to hell"

 

[Victarion]

Just off the top of my head because I literally could go on for hours. No way in heaven or hell would those thugs have let him burn the mountain of money. Their motivation was not chaos but greed . No matter how scarey he was they had machine guns. Even if they handwave that no reaction what so ever.

Actually I was really hoping they would acknowledge the Joker won. Then it actually been OK if Bruce admitted " Well, he certainly manipulated me into that one. Not only am I and my legacy tainted but any similar heroes who come after me. Ruining a living active protector and symbol on exchange for a dead martyr seemed like a better idea at the time."

I know I'll be team jumped but my main problem with the Joker is almost none of his schemes even pass the rudimentary sniff test IMO.

If that was the Batman we deserved or needed or whatever it seems pretty sad to me. If it had given me personally any of the stuff others seen in it I could overlook most of these things but it gave me very little positive. I really wish there wasn't a thread every week or so about how perfect it was and no one can challenge that. For me the Avengers was pretty near flawless but I don't need to reaffirm my opinion constantly by forcing on others and belittling the competition.

You say Joker's thugs are working for money. Since they were with Joker in that scene, they were clearly being paid. So, what's a pile of money to them? I must ask for specifics about the sniff test. I disagree about the Batman. Give me a hard-won, almost pyrrhic victory over something that everyone walks out of with a grin on their face. Real life is scarcely like that; I'd rather heroes I can relate to.

While Bruce acknowledged the Joker's victory, verbally, showing it through the ending of TDK, and first act of TDKR always beats telling. I'll go ahead and let everyone know I enjoyed Iron Man 3, so I'm not here to engage an a fanboy's crusade.

 

[Tequilla]

Some users sound mad with the results

Chill. It's just a poll.