The Dark Knight Rises The Dark Knight Rises Info Hunters Thread

[craigdbfan]

Weak. But oh well, I'm not a fan of Clark.

I do feel sorry for Supes fans who have to see villians like Brainiac/Darkseid/Doomsday realized in a movie. Instead you get Lex and evil Supermen.

Back to camping out for Batman scoops.

Thats exactly what I'm expressing over there. If there's any truth to it thats totally underwhelming and far from a brave move on WB part to save the Superman franchise.

Anyway sorry for digressing.

That news wasn't really all that "super"

More like a downer

 

[Saint]

Zod and co. are inarguably one of the most popular and recognized villains that Superman has. Surely you wouldn't begrudge that franchise of taking advantage with the opportunity to bring a fresh interpretation, when Nolan has already retreaded Joker, Two-Face, and soon with Catwoman and Bane.

The difference is that Superman's rogues gallery has an extremely limited presence on screen. Many of Batman villains, for better or worse, have been depicted. If it was just the Joker and Two-Face, again and again in every film, that wouldn't be very good, right? Superman has had Lex Luthor, Zod... and, uh, nothing else. So going for Zod and (we can assume) Luthor again is just... lame.

Also, I wanted Brainiac.

 

[Octoberist]

Eh, as much as I don't want Zod, I'll still be there during opening weekend.

Also, we don't know the whole story so we'll see what happens. Zack DID deny that Zod is involved. Unless he was lying.

 

[craigdbfan]

The difference is that Superman's rogues gallery has an extremely limited presence on screen. Many of Batman villains, for better or worse, have been depicted. If it was just the Joker and Two-Face, again and again in every film, that wouldn't be very good, right? Superman has had Lex Luthor, Zod... and, uh, nothing else. So going for Zod and (we can assume) Luthor again is just... lame.

Also, I wanted Brainiac.

He seems like the logical choice. Really hope he's involved somehow.

Eh, as much as I don't want Zod, I'll still be there during opening weekend.

Also, we don't know the whole story so we'll see what happens. Zack DID deny that Zod is involved. Unless he was lying.

I don't see why he'd lie. Maybe no Zod but just Ursa under Brainiacs manipulative and deceiving control.

Maybe something along those lines.

 

[TheBatman072]

Eh, as much as I don't want Zod, I'll still be there during opening weekend.

Also, we don't know the whole story so we'll see what happens. Zack DID deny that Zod is involved. Unless he was lying.

Somebody posted a quote from Zack a few pages back to the effect of "Zod hasn't been considered for the movie yet."

something like that.

If a nobody like Ursa is in the movie, Zod HAS to be in the movie. Which means we're getting Superman birthright and Superman 2 wrapped up in one package.

Yeah, I'm incredibly underwhelmed by the news. Wish it was Batman news(which is MUCH bigger than Superman Redu news, which makes me believe LR just wanted a huge jump in hits for the night), but since it's Superman news, I wish it was better Superman news.

 

[Nave 'Torment']

I think I'd really like something like that in TDKR.

Thanks

It was my impression that Joker and Two-Face were also a result of Batman's existence.

Same here, most of the villains are presented, at least in these films and their source materials, as reactionary entities spurred on by the presence of ol' pointy ears.

Thanks for posting that. Awesome interview. Love how he said he re-watched TDK to get him in the frame of mind for TDKR.

I know! That alone shows that he's conscious about his work.

This is how you know Catwoman, not just Selina, will be in the movie.

This is ALSO how you know Joker will NOT be in the movie, and also how you know RIDDLER will not be in the movie.

The end.

This is how I know the man has a good wit, and he's acting like the cat who just ate the canary, but how's it say that the Joker and Riddler won't be here? No, he friggin CONFIRMED they went be, a while ago. It's probably in the Hype archives.

Am I the only one who thinks that that interview doesn't sound like Nolan?

Actually parts of the interview are on youtube. SHH mainpage released a bit of it, especially the part about Aniston. Nolan smiled, the crowd laughed. He said "eh...Not...really." He also went ahead to say that Superman was now "his problem not mine," smiled coyly, said "I'm going to be very busy." They totally quoted that with much less controversial words in print though.

Nolan is such a tease.

Ha, ha! You gotta love the guy. He goes on to say that RW realised how he wasn't receptive to the jokes. Hahaha, imagine that on set!

That's not at all what happened.

Bane told her to "continue doing what you do" - which meant stealing (valuables, information, etc.), not anything to do with Batman. His demand was that she work for him - fencing through his organization (so he gets a cut of whatever she steals) and performing specialized tasks for him, when he required it.

That's pretty much what I said. It was meant to distract Batman, wasn't it?

Yes, Catwoman did show an attitude with Bane - but she didn't reject or spite him. She agreed to work with him (but not "for" him). And her reaction wasn't due to anger at Bane breaking Batman, but simply at his arrogance in implying that she should have to work for him (not "with" him as business partners).

But she did rail against him... and Jean-Paul. All within the Knightfall trilogy.

I think that Nolan just finds it incredibly amusing at how far fans and the media are trying to read into the statement that "Selina Kyle" (as opposed to Catwoman) is going to be in the film. And he's right - it's hilarious. So he's having fun with it.

It is! Who wouldn't do the same thing? You don't go ahead and ask that question, it's a show of courtesy maybe, but not a serious question. But good dialogue all in all Nolan reminds me a lot of his Lucius Fox.

I think there needs to be an interview with Tom Hardy

He's already running around taking photos wearing Bat-shirts and Lucha-libre masks right? Ha, ha. I'm sure we'll get something as soon as he's done shooting his current film.

I want that printed on a T-shirt.

I second that!

That's exactly what I was thinking.

Why would Nolan name-drop Aronofsky? People never do that in Hollywood, it's always "another director passed on the project," etc. etc.

Considering the website, I'm calling B.S. on that interview. They're lucky they don't get sued if it IS fake.

Actually the source has been listed, and it's on YouTube too (at least parts of it). Look it up It ain't all B-S. And he hasn't said anything offensive about Aronofsky, or Aniston. Nothing offensive at all.

Also, since when does Nolan make jabs at other actors [ Jennifer Aniston ].

I don't think this is real. Might be just like the fake Bale interview.

I don't think we have any way of knowing WHAT is a fake Bale interview anymore everything the man says outside of films carry the potential to become MEMES. Memes I tell you! And, Nolan didn't take a jab at Aniston, he said he doesn't want to do a romantic comedy. Why...So...Serious?

 

[Octoberist]

Nolan didn't get a jab at Jennifer Aniston tough he remained mum on doing romantic comedies. it was just a joke and it's real. it's all on video for a recent film fest.

 

[Nave 'Torment']

I won't lie and say it's not incredibly frustrating how tightly secure these movies are. Not prior to release, as I'm not a fan of spoilers, but even post release. The DVD features are okay, but nothing special. No commentary is a huge bummer.

Nolan is my favorite filmmaker. There are other directors, like Kubrick and Hitchcock, who have directed movies that I like more than some Nolan movies, but also movies that I can take or leave, or outright dislike. Nolan is the only director who's 7 for 7 with me.

Add that to the fact that Batman is my favorite comic character, and it's a perfect match, but also terribly frustrating.

I want to know every aspect that went into the making of these films. I want to hear every little detail. See every rejected costume test. Every character or plot point dropped during rewrites.

I respect Nolan's commitment to maintaining the "magic" of filmmaking. But for a huge admirer, and someone interesting in the behind the scenes of filmmaking, it's aggravating.

I wish, even if it's in 20 years, that a comprehensive chronicle of his Batman films is eventually released. Something like those "Making of" Star Wars books.

I hope that too, I really like the way he explains his writing process though. (Minus allusions to head-bashing walls). A 'Making of' book or documentary would be phenomenal.

Right, but that would only teach you how Nolan does things. He certainly has great taste, but his way of doing things should not be blindly copied, which I think would happen if he publicized all of his decisions.

This is true as well. Especially if you consider the number of 'dark and gritty' 'reboots' that Begins and TDK inspired among producers. I know that reboots would've happened any way, but Nolan made a franchise out of one during a time when reboots began to grow stale. He embraced a very tricky trend of 'modernisation' that has a tendency to fall apart - but he didn't let his projects fall apart. There's still a lot of people who don't get his films, and finds the references to noir elements frustrating. The other night I was discussing Inception with this photographer cousin of mine, and he was all smug about it, going "It's too mainstream, Hollywood is too afraid to take risks and experiment, unlike the Japanese or European film industries." He did have a point, but Inception was the absolute worst example of it. It felt like a story that Nolan wrote -after- he had been done experimenting with block buster films and found a good balance between art and product. Anyway, knowing more about his processes wouldn't hamper any truly interested/aspiring fans, it would allow us to know how he does it and then compare it with whatever processes we have for ourselves. If it helps his fans, then why not? Even Alan Moore released that 'how to write comics' book.

 

[Nave 'Torment']

The difference is that Superman's rogues gallery has an extremely limited presence on screen. Many of Batman villains, for better or worse, have been depicted. If it was just the Joker and Two-Face, again and again in every film, that wouldn't be very good, right? Superman has had Lex Luthor, Zod... and, uh, nothing else. So going for Zod and (we can assume) Luthor again is just... lame.

Also, I wanted Brainiac.

Good point, I'd say the same

Eh, as much as I don't want Zod, I'll still be there during opening weekend.

Also, we don't know the whole story so we'll see what happens. Zack DID deny that Zod is involved. Unless he was lying.

Hopefully it'll be a different Zod altogether, though I don't see how that would work. I wanted this franchise to stand apart from the previous series

 

[The Demon's Head]

Has anyone around here watched "Prince Of the City"? Wally Pfister said in his interview that he watched the film with Nolan, and he said that it's very similar to Nolan's Batman movies.

 

[frakkingoff]

That's pretty much what I said. It was meant to distract Batman, wasn't it?

No, it sounds like you didn't read what I wrote. Again, it had nothing to do with Batman. Bane was simply consolidating his power and exerting a monopolistic influence over all crime in Gotham City, because he saw himself as the king of Gotham at that point. Batman was no longer a consideration in any way.

But she did rail against him...

No, she didn't. She actually agreed to work with him, and that was the extent of their interactions.

...and Jean-Paul. All within the Knightfall trilogy.

She also barely had any interaction at all with Jean-Paul. Their paths crossed during "Knightsend," but they didn't share any dialogue or have any kind of confrontation that lasted more than one or two panels. She was dealing with a storyline of her own, which happened to share a character with Jean-Paul's storyline (hence them being in the same room at one point, pursuing the same character).

 

[Saint]

She also barely had any interaction at all with Jean-Paul. Their paths crossed during "Knightsend," but they didn't share any dialogue or have any kind of confrontation that lasted more than one or two panels. She was dealing with a storyline of her own, which happened to share a character with Jean-Paul's storyline (hence them being in the same room at one point, pursuing the same character).

Actually, Catwoman shared a few issues with Jean Paul during Knightquest. Bottom line, she knew almost immediately that he wasn't Batman, and declared him an undersexed moron. Jean Paul panted over her in a really pathetic, creepy way.

Like most of Knightquest, is pretty tiresome to read. They were trying way too hard to make Jean Paul look like a worthless jerk, and since he was the driving force of the issues at that time, it just because unpleasant to read. Zero subtlety. They should have done a slow build with Jean Paul.

 

[insider1970]

Wow, has this been posted before? http://bigfanboy.com/wp/?p=6094

What do you think of that? I mean..Robin?

 

[Seen]

It's possible they are only setting up Zod, Ursa, etc. in this installment and alluding a bigger appearance in a sequel. We don't know what involvement they might have, if any (providing that article has a shred of credence, which it might not).

If this film centers mostly around Clark's origins, it is possible that Zod, Ursa and other Kryptonians have a presence but aren't the actual villains this time around.

It would be slightly comedic and ironic, though, if Kryptonians are the villains of the film since Superman Returns co-writer Michael Doughterty basically admitted that Kryptonians would have been the villains for the proposed Returns sequel which had the alleged working title The Man of Steel. I would just find it funny that after all the negative backlash Superman Returns received from fans, that the next big screen incarnation of Superman would essentially have the same villains as the Returns sequel would have had with (tentatively) the same title.

 

[Nave 'Torment']

So...Detroit, huh? Isn't that RoboCop's old neighbourhood?
"Evening Officer Duffy...you're a rotten cop!" Heck, it almost makes for a believable Gotham, that OCP-controlled town of chaos.

 

[Secret Fawful]

Wow, has this been posted before? http://bigfanboy.com/wp/?p=6094

What do you think of that? I mean..Robin?

What do I think?

 

[Saint]

So...Detroit, huh? Isn't that RoboCop's old neighbourhood?
"Evening Officer Duffy...you're a rotten cop!" Heck, it almost makes for a believable Gotham, that OCP-controlled town of chaos.

Whenever somebody quotes Robocop, a sci-fi writer gets his wings--so quote it enough, and eventually another goddamn movie will get made. Do it.

And tell your friends.

 

[Wolverine1988]

I am thinking that it's total BS,I doubt someone like Nolan would go as far as using the same Superman villain that has be used in every film almost.

No more Zod and company, lets see someone else for christs sake we have seen 5 movies and the only villains we have seen are Zod and Lex Luthor!

 

[RustyCage]

I think Zod is great, worthy of reinterpretation, and perfect for Zack Snyder's style.

So...Detroit, huh? Isn't that RoboCop's old neighbourhood?
"Evening Officer Duffy...you're a rotten cop!" Heck, it almost makes for a believable Gotham, that OCP-controlled town of chaos.

Peter Weller confirmed for Batman?

 

[Symbiotic]

Bah, I wanna see the questions Ben Lyons asked Nolan last night, and the answers he got in return.

 

[Travesty]

Peter Weller confirmed for Batman?

Holy ****, I never thought of Weller as Freeze, but he would be totally badass for the part.

As for Robocop, I actually watched 1 and 2 last weekend. I love Robocop, and I got to say, Robocop2 is one of my favorite comedies.

-Robo: Doesn't the moon look wonderful tonight!?
-Lewis: It's not even dark out!
-Robo: It's the thought that counts.

 

[the amazing fro]

ZOD!?

Cod testicles.

Man that blows chunks . So there is no way brainiac is in this movie (since lex is more than likely in it)?

rasa frats.

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

Who's going to get excited over URSA??!!

Fine, release the scoop telling us thats shes in the film... but don't make out like it's some kind of orgasmic revealation LR.

Nice to know... but over hyped by the website.

 

[The Demon's Head]

According to IGN, it's Catwoman's emergence that brings Batman back into action.

Their sources claim that Catwoman is a vigilante who steps in to replace Batman. What if she rips off mob dealers, stealing money from the Falcone family, until Alberto decides to place a bounty on her head, just like The Roman did in TLH. Now, she's hunted by both the mob and the cops, like Batman, which forces him to step in.

What do you think?

 

[Travesty]

According to IGN, it's Catwoman's emergence that brings Batman back into action.

Their sources claim that Catwoman is a vigilante who steps in to replace Batman. What if she rips off mob dealers, stealing money from the Falcone family, until Alberto decides to place a bounty on her head, just like The Roman did in TLH. Now, she's hunted by both the mob and the cops, like Batman, which forces him to step in.

What do you think?

That is a very interesting theory.....