The Dark Knight Rises TDKR Oscar Chances? - Part 1

[BatLobster]

Watching TDKR, it plays out like LOTR movies would have if someone attempted to cram them all into a single 3 hour film; or when you see a film adaptation of a great book where corners have to be cut to fit such a massive tale into a single film.

I totally see what you're saying. TDKR did feel very much like a sprawling novel that had to be abridged for a movie. I guess what I love about it is that it's not based on a novel despite feeling like that, just the product of decades' worth of great material for this character and good writers finding inspiration in that and treating it like a true piece of American literature.

 

[CConn]

I totally see what you're saying. TDKR did feel very much like a sprawling novel that had to be abridged for a movie. I guess what I love about it is that it's not based on a novel despite feeling like that, just the product of decades' worth of great material for this character and good writers finding inspiration in that and treating it like a true piece of American literature.

Yeah, I agree.

However, I kind of wish we could actually see an unabridged script or novel of the film. It's probably be spectacular.

 

[BatLobster]

Yeah, I'd love to see Jonah's 500 page draft or whatever the heck it was.

 

[Alexei Belyakov]

No, my comment was directed to the fact that Alexei said the mystery and lack of understanding of their idealogy was to mirror Al Qeaada. Not that they didn't have an idealogy. They did, however, I feel Talia and co do not give a good reason why they pursued "Ra's al Ghul's destiny" in a suicide mission. I just can't buy it based on what she/he said in the movie.



Just because you don't buy into their idealogy doesn't make it mysterious or unexplainable. It can clearly be explained, as they have explained it. Not saying we have to agree with it. Just saying the have given their justification for what they do, so they mysterious motives is bullcrap.



And these are not mysterious motivations like you were trying to argue. Batman is not showing some kind of shcok as to why Talia and co are doing what they do due to some kind of culture shock, like you previously said. He was just shocked someone he trusted stabbed him in the back, literally. You're reading things into the scene that are not there in order to give the character more depth than they had.

I think you're not reading into things enough.

Talia's whole speech about her father solidifies her insanity & deluded mission statement. Talia & Bane want to believe more than anything that they are indeed fulfilling Ra's Al Ghul's destiny. In truth, they are not. Like the Jihad, there's no way their mass murdering is pleasing Allah. Bruce's reaction is America's reaction. Its confusion & horror.

The whole movie is filled with references to modern terrorism and its effects on Western Civilization. I think had you picked up on them more, you wouldn't have dismissed the villains & their plot to destroy Gotham.

 

[The Joker]

The plot overall was just flimsy in how it strung together all it's elements.

I think I'd compare a lot of the movie to the BB Mr. Earle subplot. If you think about Mr. Earle, other than providing some Bruce Wayne tension, his character makes no sense. Why is he bad? Because he makes weapons? So do Lucius and Wayne apparently. Because he wants to make money and wants to protect his job when Bruce returns? Why is that bad? Bruce is the one doing all the insider trading anyways. It's also not established that he warrants any of the blame for the weapon being stolen.

In TDKR you have about five or six plotlines just that pointless.

Talia for example. Had this been a three movie character, she might have worked. Instead she was just in there to force a twist a la Batman Begins. Which made no sense. By movie three you'd already established the League of Shadows, and that Ra's Al Ghul could potentially have children. The twist was unnecessary, and quite frankly smacked of being completely baffling -- even with my foreknowledge of the character, I struggled to figure out why Bane simply wasn't the man in charge.

He was the "extreme" one anyways.

Talia was "carrying on her father's legacy". Bullsh**. She was carrying on Bane's legacy, which muddles Bane being just a lackey, as opposed to an equal partner.

Had they removed the twist, they may have been able to flesh that out a little more prior to the climax.

Instead it crammed into the last five meaningful minutes, and comes off as confused.

I think actually what is my least favorite aspect of the movie in hindsight is how much I remember of Blake, Catwoman, Bane, Talia and Bruce, and how very little I remember of actual Batman (who gets about 15 minutes of screentime). That just speaks to the volume of irrelevant characters and plotlines they crammed in this thing.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[Robin91939]

No, my comment was directed to the fact that Alexei said the mystery and lack of understanding of their idealogy was to mirror Al Qeaada. Not that they didn't have an idealogy. They did, however, I feel Talia and co do not give a good reason why they pursued "Ra's al Ghul's destiny" in a suicide mission. I just can't buy it based on what she/he said in the movie.

Didn't catch that...sorry, misunderstood.

As has been pointed out a billion times Gotham was at peace time. For the best part of 8 years. They very goal they were striving for actually happened - without them having to destroy the city. And yet they decided to do it anyway for....... what exactly? The motivations were poor and in most cases a direct contradiction to what happened previously, and as Spider-fan rightfully points out, badly executed.

"It's the slow knife..."


Talia and Bane's plan strayed from the original plan of the League of Shadows and turned into one of revenge. It didn't matter that Gotham had seemingly fixed itself... Gotham still was the city that took Talia's father. It was still the city that defeated them. It had to die.

As they were going about destroying the city, Bane discovers that the uneasy peace that Gotham was experiencing was based on a lie. This knowledge allows the "saving" of Gotham to not only continue to be a revenge mission -- but also keeps it well with in line with the "most important function of the League of Shadows..."

-R

 

[Fudgie]

It didn't matter that Gotham had seemingly fixed itself... Gotham still was the city that took Talia's father. It was still the city that defeated them. It had to die.

That is the worst reason ever to kill a city. The city didn't defeat Ra's. Batman did.

 

[Alexei Belyakov]

That is the worst reason ever to kill a city. The city didn't defeat Ra's. Batman did.

People keep looking for ways to understand Talia & Bane's motives. There's no motive to terrorism other than terrorism. That's not bad writing - its life. Real life.

9/11, the Ambassador in Libya, 4000 American troops KIA in the last 10 years...

Watch the news. You'll never find a satisfying reason for Al-Qaeda's actions.

Bane & Talia were driven by madness. Ra's had a code.

Its like comparing Che Guevara to Osama Bin Laden.

 

[Fudgie]

Ehhh no Joker was a terrorist and he had a motive. He had a reason to do what he did. He had a point to prove. Crazy point but he still had a point.

Nolan gave all of his villains in BB and TDK great motives that you could buy and understand even if they were wrong. Bane and Talia's was crap and made no sense.

 

[Alexei Belyakov]

Ehhh no Joker was a terrorist and he had a motive. He had a reason to do what he did. He had a point to prove. Crazy point but he still had a point.

Nolan gave all of his villains in BB and TDK great motives that you could buy and understand even if they were wrong. Bane and Talia's was crap and made no sense.

Explain to me why Al-Qaeda does things.

Validate their actions for me.

 

[Fudgie]

Explain to me why Al-Qaeda does things.

Validate their actions for me.

I'm not paying to see Al-Qaeda as the main villains in a 2 and a half hour movie.

 

[Alexei Belyakov]

I'm not paying to see Al-Qaeda as the main villains in a 2 and a half hour movie.

You pretty much did.

The LOS in TDKR are Nolan's answer to Al-Qaeda.

 

[CConn]

The LOS' motives were ridiculously simple and easy to understand.

They were essentially Environmental Extremists who didn't believe in any type of man made organization or society. They're essentially anarchists. Hence their hatred of one of the most prominent cities in the world (Gotham), and why they didn't see Gotham as being "fixed" due to the Dent Act. To them, no city could ever possibly be "fixed", they disagree with the mere concept of a city to begin with.

 

[Fudgie]

You pretty much did.

The LOS in TDKR are Nolan's answer to Al-Qaeda.

Nope. They were the LOS brought back contradicting themselves to the Begins LOS and making their comeback look stupid and pointless which it was.

 

[BatLobster]

You pretty much did.

The LOS in TDKR are Nolan's answer to Al-Qaeda.

To back that up, from Creative Screenwriting Magazine circa 2005:

David S. Goyer, who co-wrote Batman Begins with director Christopher Nolan, says they wanted to broaden the parameters of the Batman mythology. "I think, of the Batman villains, Ra's Al Ghul is the most complex," he told Creative Screenwriting magazine. "We modelled him after Osama bin Laden. He's not crazy in the way that all the other Batman villains are. He's not bent on revenge; he's actually trying to heal the world. He's just doing it by very draconian means."

Throw in the added fire of vengeance present when the LOS resurface in TDKR and you have the most dangerous threat possible for Gotham.

 

[Alexei Belyakov]

Nope. They were the LOS brought back contradicting themselves to the Begins LOS and making their comeback look stupid and pointless which it was.

Do you watch the news?

The CIA in Kazakhstan, The Patriot Act/Dent Act, The Lazarus Pit in Syria...

You realize all these things are cinematic translations of real things?

The LOS in TDKR is not the LOS from BB.

 

[Alexei Belyakov]

To back that up, from Creative Screenwriting Magazine circa 2005:



Throw in the added fire of vengeance present when the LOS resurface in TDKR and you have the most dangerous threat possible for Gotham.

Great find! Its pretty obvious these films are very up to date in directly tackling modern issues.

I'd compare Ra's more to Che Guevara though & give Bane/Talia the Osama title.

Then again, Goyer didn't know at that point that a more extreme set of terrorists would be the villains of the third film.

 

[Fudgie]

The LOS' motives were ridiculously simple and easy to understand.

In Batman Begins they were.

They were essentially Environmental Extremists who didn't believe in any type of man made organization or society. They're essentially anarchists. Hence their hatred of one of the most prominent cities in the world (Gotham), and why they didn't see Gotham as being "fixed" due to the Dent Act. To them, no city could ever possibly be "fixed", they disagree with the mere concept of a city to begin with.

Ehhh no they never said any of that. They had nothing against cities and organizations. They just helped restore them to balance when things got out of control. They said they were a check against human corruption for thousands of years.

It helps that Nolan expositions the hell out of his villains motives. It makes it easier to show how TDKR's LOS was wrong.

Do you watch the news?

Constantly.

The CIA in Kazakhstan, The Patriot Act/Dent Act, The Lazarus Pit in Syria...

You realize all these things are cinematic translations of real things?

Yeah and all those things make sense. TDKR's didn't. Except for the Pit. The purpose of that was obvious.

The LOS in TDKR is not the LOS from BB.

Darn right. TDKR's LOS didn't make any sense and their plan was a bog contradiction.

 

[Fudgie]

To back that up, from Creative Screenwriting Magazine circa 2005:



Throw in the added fire of vengeance present when the LOS resurface in TDKR and you have the most dangerous threat possible for Gotham.

Thanks for proving our point. Proving Ra's had a purpose that made sense.

 

[Alexei Belyakov]

TDKR's LOS didn't make any sense and their plan was a bog contradiction.

So Al-Qaeda's plans make sense to you?

What does blowing up The World Trade Center do for Al-Qaeda other than fulfill a desire for American blood spilled?

What does blowing up Gotham City do for Talia & Bane's LOS other than fulfill a desire for American blood spilled?

Exacto mondo.

 

[Fudgie]

So Al-Qaeda's plans make sense to you?

What does blowing up The World Trade Center do for Al-Qaeda other than fulfill a desire for American blood spilled?

If I ever got meet Osama Bin Laden I'd ask him what his agenda was. What ever it is I bet it didn't contradict the guy he was supposed to be fulfilling the destiny of.

What does blowing up Gotham City do for Talia & Bane's LOS other than fulfill a desire for American blood spilled?

They said it was to fulfill Ra's work. Ra's didn't want to kill crime free cities. Just ones that needed to be put in check against human corruption. So what does that mean. It means Bane and Talia's plot was bull.

Ra's plan was great. Joker's plan was great. Both crazy, but made sense and you could buy why they were doing it. Bane and Talia's is nonsense. Contradiction.

 

[BatLobster]

Then again, Goyer didn't know at that point that a more extreme set of terrorists would be the villains of the third film.

Yeah, I think the point of what Goyer was saying was just to show that they're treating this with a degree of seriousness and reality and that they're looking for aspects of the Batman world that can have parallels to the current day sociopolitical climate.

Thanks for proving our point. Proving Ra's had a purpose that made sense.

I was backing up Alexei's point that Al-Qaeda was considered in the minds of the creators when they first decided to adapt the Ra's/The League in these films. It's always been a staple of the Ra's character that he's trying to save the world through terrorism. It's the same for Bane and Talia, but they're different people with more extreme methods and different personal stakes. They use Ra's name to justify their mission, but ultimately they're bending it to fit what they want.

I like that for Ra's, Bane and Talia, their personal motivations for becoming evil are explained, but their actual ideologies are pretty much analogous to the ones of real life terrorists. Whereas for The Joker, we get a deep look inside his head and how he sees the world, but his personal motivation for becoming this way is kept a mystery. It provides a nice contrast. Ra's, Bane and Talia all start as very human characters with human emotions (Two-Face as well for that matter), whereas The Joker is a monster all the way through and that's all we get to see. You could boil down The Joker to being pretty much Satan incarnate, just like you can boil down the LOS to being pretty much Al-Qaeda.

If I ever got meet Osama Bin Laden I'd ask him what his agenda was. What ever it is I bet it didn't contradict the guy he was supposed to be fulfilling the destiny of.

You mean Allah?

 

[Alexei Belyakov]

If I ever got meet Osama Bin Laden I'd ask him what his agenda was. What ever it is I bet it didn't contradict the guy he was supposed to be fulfilling the destiny of.

Exactly. Bane & Talia thought they were fulfilling Ra's Al Ghul destiny. They weren't.

The Jihad think they're fulfilling Allah's wishes. They're not.

The LOS in TDKR is a mutated version of Ra's LOS.

You're deeming their motivations wrong & the writing bad because you failed to understand both.

 

[Alexei Belyakov]

Yeah, I think the point of what Goyer was saying was just to show that they're treating this with a degree of seriousness and reality and that they're looking for aspects of the Batman world that can have parallels to the current day sociopolitical climate.



I was backing up Alexei's point that Al-Qaeda was considered in the minds of the creators when they first decided to adapt the Ra's/The League in these films. It's always been a staple of the Ra's character that he's trying to save the world through terrorism. It's the same for Bane and Talia, but they're different people with more extreme methods and different personal stakes.

I like that for Ra's, Bane and Talia, their personal motivations for becoming evil are explained, but their actual ideologies are pretty much analogous to the ones of real life terrorists. Whereas for The Joker, we get a deep look inside his head and how he sees the world, but his personal motivation for becoming this way is kept a mystery. It provides a nice contrast. Ra's, Bane and Talia all start as very human characters with human emotions (Two-Face as well for that matter), whereas The Joker is a monster all the way through and that's all we get to see. You could boil down The Joker to being pretty much Satan incarnate, just like you can boil down the LOS to being pretty much Al-Qaeda.

Great post all-around.

And I love the bit about The Joker being Satan. He pretty much was. Since TDK was essentially a battle of good vs. evil, its very fitting for him to be compared to Satan.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

The Dark Knight Rises s not worthy of any Oscars apart from maybe some technical nominations.