The Dark Knight Rises The 80th TDKR General Discussion & Speculation Thread

[J.Howlett]

As for Feraci's article, the first couple of paragraphs nail it. I don't think he is saying there is anything wrong with darkness and cynacism. He's saying that TDK tapped into the feelings of the audience more because that is how the world was feeling at the time.

Avengers is just brining us out of that darkness.

Care to explain Iron Man in '08?

It's not and never has been about the cynical, dark and gritty realism vs the pulpy, colorful, and playful/fun aspects of the genre on film.

It's always been and will always be about good films vs. bad films. The Dark Knight and Iron Man, released in the same summer, are good films.

End of discussion.

 

[Miranda Fox]

You know, through the last couple of years I thought I had heard it all when it came to those who disliked TDK and tried to discredit the film's successes on every level, but Faraci somehow finds a way to tip-toe around.

He's entitled to his opinion, but that article was utter ****.

Exactly.

His reasoning makes no bloody sense. If blockbusters were dependent on the mood of the times, then surely The Avengers should not have been a success? Or, to look at it another way, few big films with a dark tone would be successful because most people like escapism, according to his reasoning.

It doesn't make any sense. Some films are successful because they are good. TDK is one of them.

EDIT: J. Howlett beat me to it.

 

[Reek]

Forget what I said about Will Smith... He b**** slapped some reporter lol

 

[J.Howlett]

I counter Devin's argument with this article (http://scottalanmendelson.blogspot....ign=Feed:+MendelsonsMemos+(Mendelson's+Memos)) I posted two weeks ago....

 

[The_Raganork]

I don't see how he's trying to discredit TDK. He's just saying that it was suited to the time when it came out. The morally grey government, the paranoia about terrorism.

Terrorism isn't such a big thing anymore, people are more worried about the economy. So Avengers is perfectly suited because it's pure escapism.

He raises a good point with how superheroes became big during the 30s and 40s where economic times were hard then too.

His entire article is an attack on Nolan.

But most of all it's premature. We've yet to see how people receive TDKR, they MIGHT receive it better. Box office results are not the know-all-be-all of the G.A.'s thoughts.

Even moreso than that he tries to put all the weight on how people are feeling and ignores things like oh... Acting, Directing, Cinematography, Score, writing, character development, plot and the classic things that make a film a good film.


It's entirely possible that people may want escapism but receive a better written, directed and acted film as a superior film.

IF that turns out to be the case.

His article is self serving and attempts to pull wool over the reader's eyes but is little more than a rant on how much better the Avengers is going to be than TDKR because it's made a lot of money.

He's nothing but an educated fool.

 

[Reek]

Son, just don't. I wrote a book. She'd pick me over ou just because of that.


Now if only I could get the damn thing published, maybe she'd notice me

That belongs to ME.

 

[Narsil]

If WB doesn't step up their game in the next 60 minutes, I blow up a hospital.

 

[Greens]

Care to explain Iron Man in '08?

It's not and never has been about the cynical, dark and gritty realism vs the pulpy, colorful, and playful/fun aspects of the genre on film.

It's always been and will always be about good films vs. bad films. The Dark Knight and Iron Man, released in the same summer, are good films.

End of discussion.

Exactly. He mentions that the group shot in Avengers gives the audience a sense of unity or some ****. No, it's just a bad-ass shot.

 

[Miranda Fox]

His entire article is an attack on Nolan.

But most of all it's premature. We've yet to see how people receive TDKR, they MIGHT receive it better. Box office results are not the know-all-be-all of the G.A.'s thoughts.

Even moreso than that he tries to put all the weight on how people are feeling and ignores things like oh... Acting, Directing, Cinematography, Score, writing, character development, plot and the classic things that make a film a good film.


It's entirely possible that people may want escapism but receive a better written, directed and acted film as a superior film.

IF that turns out to be the case.

His article is self serving and attempts to pull wool over the reader's eyes but is little more than a rant on how much better the Avengers is going to be than TDKR because it's made a lot of money.

He's nothing but an educated fool.

I actually saw this cretin quoted in the Independent recently. It made me make this face:

 

[The Morningstar]

His entire article is an attack on Nolan.

But most of all it's premature. We've yet to see how people receive TDKR, they MIGHT receive it better. Box office results are not the know-all-be-all of the G.A.'s thoughts.

Even moreso than that he tries to put all the weight on how people are feeling and ignores things like oh... Acting, Directing, Cinematography, Score, writing, character development, plot and the classic things that make a film a good film.


It's entirely possible that people may want escapism but receive a better written, directed and acted film as a superior film.

IF that turns out to be the case.

His article is self serving and attempts to pull wool over the reader's eyes but is little more than a rant on how much better the Avengers is going to be than TDKR because it's made a lot of money.

He's nothing but an educated fool.

I didn't read the whole article, i'm just basing it off the first few paragraphs which i think he was spot on about.

And general audiences don't give a **** about cinematography and technical aspects really. You won't see the average movie goer saying "Oh the contrast and lighting in that scene was superb" or "the framing and scene transitioning was excellent". No, they just say "holy **** that looked cool!"

I didn't get the vibe that he was saying TDK was ONLY successful because it resonated with audiences on an existential level, at all. Seemed to me he was just attributing the successes of two very different films to the two very different eras they were released in.

 

[DoomsdayApex]

I don't see how he's trying to discredit TDK. He's just saying that it was suited to the time when it came out. The morally grey government, the paranoia about terrorism.

Terrorism isn't such a big thing anymore, people are more worried about the economy. So Avengers is perfectly suited because it's pure escapism.

He raises a good point with how superheroes became big during the 30s and 40s where economic times were hard then too.

Dude, the title speaks volumes itself.

Faraci's argument is that The Avengers' colorful and light-hearted tone has cured America of 'cynicism' lmao. Look, I loved the movie but that's a load. It is perhaps one of the most fanboy-ish articles I have ever read, especially with his starting points (that Nolan is 'ashamed' of the CBM genre and seeks to stray away from comic book elements).



After reading that article, I need a shot of tequila.

 

[Miranda Fox]

Dude, the title speaks volumes itself.

Faraci's argument is that The Avengers' colorful and light-hearted tone has cured America of 'cynicism' lmao. Look, I loved the movie but that's a load. It is perhaps one of the most fanboy-ish articles I have ever read, especially with his starting points (that Nolan is 'ashamed' of the CBM genre and seeks to stray away from comic book elements).



After reading that article, I need a shot of tequila.

I've read that so many times, from Faraci and on here, and I still don't get it. If Nolan was ashamed of the genre, surely he wouldn't have chosen to work in it in the first place.

 

[A.Stabelli]

Devin needs to realize, people can't be happy go lucky ALL OF THE TIME. Tragedy happens, a family member passes away, someone gets a terrible disease. We are living in an economic downturn right now. People can't find jobs. College students can't find jobs. It's okay to be happy, but sometimes life just gets in the way. Depression happens. It's a facet of everyday life.

 

[BatLobster]

Devin is just another annoying, pompous, condescending blogger, and one who blatantly doesn't care for Batman. This has a fairly high probability of blowing up in his face.

It's almost as if he gave Inception a rave just so he could have more credibility for his inevitable "meh" TDKR review.

 

[ChrisB]

When are they going to fix the SHH forums? Don't they realize they're pretty popular?

 

[DoomsdayApex]

I've read that so many times, from Faraci and on here, and I still don't get it. If Nolan was ashamed of the genre, surely he wouldn't have chosen to work in it in the first place.

Seriously, I can't wrap my mind around the stupidity of that 'point'.

I mean, what the hell was Iron Man back in 2008? Did the movie save us (the audience) from the darkness? Both TDK and IM were fantastic movies from different ends of the spectrum. Neither one eclipsed the other because of the tone.

Ugh, I can't wait for TDKR to come out.

 

[The Morningstar]

Devin needs to realize, people can't be happy go lucky ALL OF THE TIME. Tragedy happens, a family member passes away, someone gets a terrible disease. We are living in an economic downturn right now. People can't find jobs. College students can't find jobs. It's okay to be happy, but sometimes life just gets in the way. Depression happens. It's a facet of everyday life.

He does realise this, that is why he is attributing Avengers success to it. People are depressed about the economy, they worried about their bills. Well, when they are in the cinema watching Avengers those problems don't exist for 2 and a half hours. It's escapism. Like how superheroes came into the forefront in the 30s during the Great Depression. It's escapism.

It's funny to see the righteous indignation about how he is attributing TDKs success to the era and mentality of the time. Yea well, he's doing exactly the same with Avengers, but you don't see anyone kicking up a stink saying "OH SO HE'S SAYING AVENGERS WAS ONLY SUCCESSFUL BECAUSE IT'S ESCAPISM!"

 

[Ramsay Snow]

When are they going to fix the SHH forums? Don't they realize they're pretty popular?

BAMF said that they're working on it, and unfortunately it might get worse as they fix it

 

[Hype_the_Hero]

When are they going to fix the SHH forums? Don't they realize they're pretty popular?

What's wrong with them

 

[The Morningstar]

Whenever you hit a link it says it can't connect. Well, not every time, but i've had occasions where it's taken me like 8 times to post something.

 

[DoomsdayApex]

Whenever you hit a link it says it can't connect. Well, not every time, but i've had occasions where it's taken me like 8 times to post something.

Same here. At times, I've pressed the submit button like 15x.

 

[Hype_the_Hero]

Whenever you hit a link it says it can't connect. Well, not every time, but i've had occasions where it's taken me like 8 times to post something.

My God! I thought I was the only one! I was ready to call the cable company and everything. I really thought it was just my connection, I was freaking out.

 

[The_Raganork]

I didn't read the whole article, i'm just basing it off the first few paragraphs which i think he was spot on about.

even so. It's still premature and neither you or him have any basis for claiming any of what he said as fact...yet.

And general audiences don't give a **** about cinematography and technical aspects really. You won't see the average movie goer saying "Oh the contrast and lighting in that scene was superb" or "the framing and scene transitioning was excellent". No, they just say "holy **** that looked cool!"

Of course Cinematography is supposed to enhance that. So if it looks cool and the cinematography is superb it looks BETTER audience can and do appreciate that. Seeing something blow up in meh Cinematography and seeing something blow up in Superb Cinematography are two different things and G.A. will notice it.

Plus you ignored the other technical aspects like editing, acting, Score and writing to which the G.A. does pick up on.

Its not about..."I'm going to this movie to get away from my economic woes" people don't think that. People go to the movies to be entertained and that comes from a compelling story and good acting first and foremost. Not from escapism or anything else.

You provide them with a good story and good acting and most people will like it.

And also, you say people are not thinking about terrorism but Economy and TDKR seems to be focused on Economy and class warfare quite a bit.

So even moreso TDKR is on the pulse of the living world today and people would, seemingly, find themselves more drawn into a world they recognize than a world that they don't.

This is 08' all over again, all the reasons why Iron Man was going to be a superior film whilst ignoring all the credits TDK deserved as being derived from Nolan and acted by its cast.

People like to Take Avengers as it's own but turn TDKR into TDK and tell us that Avengers is going to be better than TDKR because TDKR for some reason is equated to TDK.

Let's wait until TDKR is released to see if people are through with tough and gritty. It seems pretty damn stupid to suggest they are and the film is still 59 days from release.

I didn't get the vibe that he was saying TDK was ONLY successful because it resonated with audiences on an existential level, at all. Seemed to me he was just attributing the successes of two very different films to the two very different eras they were released in.

Next time read the entire article before creating such an opinion because the article kind of refutes this.

 

[Reek]

Yea, Bamf said it might take a few weeks as well...so if TDKR drops some marketing bombs on us... be prepped for your computer to explode.

 

[A.Stabelli]

I don't know why the Nolan films have attracted such a big backlash. It just baffles me.