The Dark Knight Rises The Joker (The Dark Knight) vs. Bane (TDKR)

[BatmanGoesToRio]

Then you have TDKR's Gotham which looks more like Metropolis than Gotham, both during the day and at night. Found Gotham in TDKR to be very disappointing.

It was. I understand that they were not going the "full Gothic road" like in B89 or BR. But Gotham should have been a little more unique in TDK and TDKR. BB's Gotham is my favourite on screen portrayal of that city. I will never understand why they left this route in the sequels.

 

[BatmanGoesToRio]

I loved Gotham in all three films. Even if TDK/TDKR's Gotham looked much more clean, Nolan at least dropped in hints like the monorail in both films.

Even in the comic books Gotham often looked like a usual big American city. Especially in the 70s comics it often reminds me of New Yor City.

But in the context of the trilogy it just doesn't work. BB introduced that dirty "Blade Runner" style dump of a city. You could feel the crime and corruption in every scene Gotham was shown. And then they switched to this clean and usual American city.

I dig the style of BB so I was disappointed of TDK's and TDKR's Gotham.

 

[milost]

I didn't like how TDKR just dropped Chicago out of the blue. That didn't make any sense. For years since 2005, Nolan was like "Chicago is the perfect Gotham", then in 2011 and 2012 it's all "Gotham is naturally New York".

A bulk/majority of the locations seem to be in Pittsburgh and LA anyway, so yeah, pretty strange. Pretty much a far cry from what was shown in Batman Begins. I always loved the grittiness of the city. The graffiti, the hazed, the rust colored look, the rain. It was great, they nailed the look there from the Narrows to central Gotham (where Bruce looks like a hooded bum, listening to conversations). It looked like a completely different city and world compared to later films. Atleast The Dark Knight was still in Chicago like Begins though. It was sort of like the jump from the Anton Furst Gotham from '89 (probably my favorite Gotham, Begins following second) to the Bo Welch Gotham. The two looked completely different. Returns even had that same atmospheric, blue glow cinematography that The Dark Knight has.


Then of course TDKR had the Pittsburgh Steelers. The Steelers in a Batman movie. That will never sit right with me.

 

[BatmanGoesToRio]

A bulk/majority of the locations seem to be in Pittsburgh and LA anyway, so yeah, pretty strange. Pretty much a far cry from what was shown in Batman Begins. I always loved the grittiness of the city. The graffiti, the hazed, the rust colored look, the rain. It was great, they nailed the look there from the Narrows to central Gotham (where Bruce looks like a hooded bum, listening to conversations). It looked like a completely different city and world compared to later films. Atleast The Dark Knight was still in Chicago like Begins though. It was sort of like the jump from the Anton Furst Gotham from '89 (probably my favorite Gotham, Begins following second) to the Bo Welch Gotham. The two looked completely different. Returns even had that same atmospheric, blue glow cinematography that The Dark Knight has.

I loved the monorail in Begins - especially the inside of the trains. Graffitis, rotten -yes. The scene of Bruce and his parents sitting in the monorail was spot on. I missed that style of Gotham a lot in the sequels.

 

[milost]

There was a lot of CGI enhancements (that's quite noticeable) in Begins though, but I have a huge appreciation for built sets especially the labor that goes into making them. So as far as the city goes from the Nolan films, I'll always prefer Begins.

It's something building from scratch as opposed to going out to some location that everyone knows to shoot. I still can't believe how clever the Pinewood Studios Gotham City from the first Batman was. There's something really cool about the actual built set with your own locations, plus large scaled models and matte paintings. The work that goes into that old school way of film making is enormous.

 

[georgec]

Man, those TDK set pictures are almost SIX years old. Unbelievable.

 

[JackWhite]

Did anyone here call that 1-800 number to hear the guy getting tortured by the Joker? Oh man, I could re-live that whole experience/buildup.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Even in the comic books Gotham often looked like a usual big American city. Especially in the 70s comics it often reminds me of New Yor City.

But in the context of the trilogy it just doesn't work. BB introduced that dirty "Blade Runner" style dump of a city. You could feel the crime and corruption in every scene Gotham was shown. And then they switched to this clean and usual American city.

I dig the style of BB so I was disappointed of TDK's and TDKR's Gotham.

I feel only the set of the Narrows has that style of a "dump", and then that small snippet of the hobo-looking Bruce overhearing Rachel and Finch talking, but that's about it. All other places, we are given the Chicago Gotham City. And we still see the Gordon's place in TDK.

I didn't like how TDKR just dropped Chicago out of the blue. That didn't make any sense. For years since 2005, Nolan was like "Chicago is the perfect Gotham", then in 2011 and 2012 it's all "Gotham is naturally New York".

A bulk/majority of the locations seem to be in Pittsburgh and LA anyway, so yeah, pretty strange. Pretty much a far cry from what was shown in Batman Begins. I always loved the grittiness of the city. The graffiti, the hazed, the rust colored look, the rain. It was great, they nailed the look there from the Narrows to central Gotham (where Bruce looks like a hooded bum, listening to conversations). It looked like a completely different city and world compared to later films. Atleast The Dark Knight was still in Chicago like Begins though. It was sort of like the jump from the Anton Furst Gotham from '89 (probably my favorite Gotham, Begins following second) to the Bo Welch Gotham. The two looked completely different. Returns even had that same atmospheric, blue glow cinematography that The Dark Knight has.


Then of course TDKR had the Pittsburgh Steelers. The Steelers in a Batman movie. That will never sit right with me.

Lol...is there anything you DID like in TDKR? All you do is badmouth the film, and you're the only one I know on here that just badmouths the film. At least guys like The Joker has parts of the film they do like, lol.

 

[milost]

I like Catwoman, I like the Batman reveal/return in the tunnels with the EMP gun, I like the action sequences throughout the movie and the chase scene at the end.

I mentioned how I appreciate built sets, I really loved the sewer complex that they built.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Lol, odd...you don't seem to like TDKR and enjoy the ending chase scene...I love TDKR and didn't really enjoy the ending chase scene

 

[milost]

Oh and the fight scenes were improved this time around. Only difference is this time around I didn't care about who was dunking it out with who.

 

[Brain Damage]

I still think the fights in Begins were the best.

 

[Shikamaru]

Lol...is there anything you DID like in TDKR? All you do is badmouth the film, and you're the only one I know on here that just badmouths the film. At least guys like The Joker has parts of the film they do like, lol.

Hey! I like parts of TDKR too . lol

 

[Shikamaru]

I still think the fights in Begins were the best.

All 3 movies had really bad to decent choreographed fights IMO. It was just a lot less noticeable in BB and TDK.

In BB, you couldn't notice the bad fights due to the shaky cameras. Many people have problems with it but I think it was done as a style. I think Nolan wanted to leave what happens up to the audience's interpretation especially since Batman is considered to be something other than human by a lot of people throughout most of the movie .

In TDK, you couldn't notice the bad fights due to the darkness and shadows. Most of the fights happened when the lighting wasn't exactly bright and once again, I thought it looked pretty cool visually and was done as a style thing.

Then in TDKR, we see every single fight as clear as you can get especially during the scenes that take place at day time. Thus the bad choreography is clearly visible and there are no shadows or shaky cameras to hide it.

Nolan was pretty bad at action in my opinion, or at least action involving fights between Batman and other people. Lots of people complain that Nolan's Batman is not the martial artist of the comics but personally, I see that as less of a flaw of the character and more of a directing flaw. I think within the context of the Nolanverse, Batman was supposed a far superior fighter than what we saw on screen. It is just that Nolan is not able to direct good fight sequences. I mean, going by the fighting abilities Nolan's Batman displayed throughout the trilogy, he should be barely able to take on any person. Heck, he doesn't even look like he was trained by the LOS going by both of his fights with Bane.


I started watching the new Green Arrow show that airs on CW a few months back. I found it really sad that that show has better choreographed and more memorable fights than the fights in the TDK trilogy.

 

[milost]

C'mon, stop linking that everywhere with triple posts.

 

[ques]

Do you really think Bane's brutality and straightforwardness could overcome Joker's
laconicism and dinamics?
I guess no.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Dynamics*

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Problem with Bane was the twist. After we find out he's not the brain behind the scheme he turns into a puppie-eyed lamb and lost all gravitas. It was such a shame.

Ledger's Joker on the other hand was masterfully performed and they script gave him a nice closure. But he should have come back.

I still think the fights in Begins were the best.

Must disagree. you couldn't see a thing. And that's bad for a Batman movie, not being able to see Batman.

 

[Shikamaru]

I prefer not seeing the fights clearly and leaving them up to my interpretation over seeing Nolan's horribly choreographed fights that put Batman's fighting abilities to shame.

 

[jonathancrane]

I did not see Bane as Talia's tool, but, partner in crime. There's a difference between their relationship and that of R'as and Strange in AC.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

I prefer not seeing the fights clearly and leaving them up to my interpretation over seeing Nolan's horribly choreographed fights that put Batman's fighting abilities to shame.

In a Batman movie, Batman must be seen in action. If you're not able to do that then it's not a good Batman movie.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

I did not see Bane as Talia's tool, but, partner in crime. There's a difference between their relationship and that of R'as and Strange in AC.

Theoretically, yes. But in the execution Bane got all puppy-eyed and was never again scary. Not to mention that he was killed in a most underwhelming way (for a character so terrifying). Add to that that Talia didn't have half of the charisma Bane had.

 

[Shikamaru]

In a Batman movie, Batman must be seen in action. If you're not able to do that then it's not a good Batman movie.

Even if it is horrendous action that embarrasses Batman?

Plus, what about story, themes, character development, characters in general, plot twists, depth, messages, and all the other stuff? But nah, the action is what determines whether or not you made a good Batman movie.

Comics like The Killing Joke must be terrible.

 

[jonathancrane]

In terms of Bolland's aristry, The Killing Joke is unrivaled. The argument is interesting, but, I never cared for how he treated Barbara (another example of Moore's comic misogyny.)

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Even if it is horrendous action that puts embarrasses Batman?

Well, we're talking here about a Batman movie that would suck because of the bad action and a Batman movie that would suck because of the bad action. The action in every case is bad for different reasons but it's bad in both cases. They're both unacceptable.

Plus, what about story, themes, character development, characters in general, plot twists, depth, messages, and all the other stuff? But nah, the action is what determines whether or not you made a good Batman movie.

Action is very important, regardless of some other goodies. I think Batman Begins is good, like 3.5/5, but it's not great in my book precisely because the action is lousy, the dialogue is many times poor and the Scarecrow is poorly developed.

Comics like The Killing Joke must be terrible.

I don't think so.

I'm sorry, you missed the part when I said "Batman movie," did you?