The Dark Knight The New Gotham City

ThePoisonPuppet

Civilian
Joined
Jul 30, 2008
Messages
318
Reaction score
1
Points
11
Having seen the movie three times now, I have had a chance to focus on some of the less obvious things, like the various sets used in the film, and on that note I have to say I much preferred the versions of Gotham City from Batman Begins and even Batman '89.

I know that Nolan is trying to get a more realistic look to the city, and while thats fine, I think he almost stripped Gotham of its identity in the new film and really all I can think of when I see the cityscape in the movie is Chicago. Now this might be simply because I live in the Midwest and have been to Chicago a dozen or so times, so I am pretty familiar with it. (I recognized probably half the locations seen), but the absence of the huge art deco and beaux arts buildings that I think of when someone says Gotham disappointed me none the less.

Now this is just one guys opinion, and I love the movie (which should be obvious considering I've seen it 3 times) so please no Nolan fan boys chew me out for saying all this. Still though I'd like to hear other peoples opinions on what they thought of the city and what they might hope to see of Gotham in a sequel.
 
I see what you're saying, but I think it works for the film. Begins had the Narrows, which did seem very "Gotham" to me, so that would have been cool to see again. But when I think about The Dark Knight I think about escalation, and I think all the different sets somehow capture that. Everything is on a larger scale, and I find it very intimidating. Or at least, it seems like it would be intimidating if I were in the film. I guess it's hard to explain what I mean, but I think the type of setting they used works for The Dark Knight.
 
You are right. For consistencies sake, they should have had some Wayne-monorail shots, at the least. Or Wayne tower.

I'm glad they left out the "Narrows" and the streets looked more like a stage set than an actual street in Begins.
 
I understand that Nolan's going for a real city. But I would be completely distracted if I could recognize minor landmarks and locations. It would take me out of the experience and I'm grateful I'm not a Chicago resident for the reason that I can't recognize most of the locations.
 
I had started a thread a week or so ago on a similar topic. While I absolutely love TDK and its settings, apart of me does feel like Gotham should've been "dressed up" more to give it more character. It does look like a regular city. And I miss the narrows too, which I thought was gonna be back in TDK. Thats why I like the Gotham from BB. If you compare BB to the Burton/Shumaker franchise, it is the most realistic but to me, especially if you compare BB to TDK, BB has a more fantasy vibe to it than TDK just by the look and tone of that movie. TDK felt like a crime drama (which I know what the filmmakers were going for).
 
I understand that Nolan's going for a real city. But I would be completely distracted if I could recognize minor landmarks and locations. It would take me out of the experience and I'm grateful I'm not a Chicago resident for the reason that I can't recognize most of the locations.
Yup, as a fellow resident of NYC I feel the same exact way, having never been to the Chi.
 
That's one of the things I like about Marvel. No made up American cities. Gotham and Metropolis are freaking ridiculous.
 
I agree with the OP. I loved the movie, and I can understand the real-city look they were going for, but it just ends up lacking some character. Gotham in Begins had character. It was this grimey, hell-hole of a place, and that was created a great deal with the brownish filter. The Gotham of TDK felt more like Metropolis than Gotham.
 
I remember remarking to a friend after seeing the movie that one of the only things I didn't like about TDK was the lack of gargoyles. I know, BB didn't have them either, but it at least had that grungy, decaying look to it, especially in the Narrows. I really do like the realistic city feel, but you can have that and still keep some of the gothic elements in Gotham. My city's not that big or that old, but even here some of the buildings have gargoyles on them.
 
I prefer the more gritty look from Batman Begins but I can understand the new look in the context of the story. In BB, Bruce is returning to a crime infested, corrupt, broken city, so it should look dark and threatening. In TDK, Gordon and Bats have made significant headway in their fight against organized crime, so in a way, things should be a bit more beautiful. Also, I think the Yellow-ish orange from BB progressing to the Dark Blue Hue is a subtle transition from dusk to night. I wouldn't be surprised if the next film is gray, to represent the dawn
 
I loved the look of Gotham in Batman Begins, but I felt the look for this film fit well tone-wise.
 
You are right. For consistencies sake, they should have had some Wayne-monorail shots, at the least. Or Wayne tower.

I'm glad they left out the "Narrows" and the streets looked more like a stage set than an actual street in Begins.

Actually I thought they were driving under the monorail (Well the El Rail in Chicago) in the scene where Bruce was in the Mercedes and Gordon was protecting Reese.

Oh and something else I noticed that I can't decide if I like or not, I guess in the Nolan universe, Gotham isn't just a city but a whole state, seeing as how it has its own license plates...Ones that look an awful lot like Illinois's to be exact.
 
LOL

That's just ******ed! I'll have to look for that.

30.jpg


:o
 
I loved Gotham in The Dark Knight. I am from the Chicago area, and I thought it was so cool being able to recognize 90% of the places in the film. I had a band concert in the place where Harvey Dent gave his "a new dawn is coming" speech! The batpod drove through the train station that I used to commute to and from the city every weekday. I ate at the restaurant where Gordon arrested the mob guys (I actually went with my grandpa there for his birthday). In my opinion, watching the Dark Knight and knowing that those scenes were shot in places where you have been thousands of times is a really cool feeling.

I like that gotham looks like a real city. It adds to the more realistic feel of the Nolan Batman universe. Also too, gotham looks a lot more grand in this movie than in batman begins, perhaps hinting at the improvements that were caused by batman, harvey, and gordon ridding the city of crime between the two movies.
 
I loved Gotham in The Dark Knight. I am from the Chicago area, and I thought it was so cool being able to recognize 90% of the places in the film. I had a band concert in the place where Harvey Dent gave his "a new dawn is coming" speech! The batpod drove through the train station that I used to commute to and from the city every weekday. I ate at the restaurant where Gordon arrested the mob guys (I actually went with my grandpa there for his birthday). In my opinion, watching the Dark Knight and knowing that those scenes were shot in places where you have been thousands of times is a really cool feeling.

I like that gotham looks like a real city. It adds to the more realistic feel of the Nolan Batman universe. Also too, gotham looks a lot more grand in this movie than in batman begins, perhaps hinting at the improvements that were caused by batman, harvey, and gordon ridding the city of crime between the two movies.

That's cool, I live in IL too and go to the downtown area once in a while. Where's that restaurant at? I may want to eat there some time =)

It's finally nice to see a hero battle in the streets of Chicago.
 
I think Gotham City was accurately and realistically portrayed in this film.
 
Actually I thought they were driving under the monorail (Well the El Rail in Chicago) in the scene where Bruce was in the Mercedes and Gordon was protecting Reese.

Oh and something else I noticed that I can't decide if I like or not, I guess in the Nolan universe, Gotham isn't just a city but a whole state, seeing as how it has its own license plates...Ones that look an awful lot like Illinois's to be exact.

I think that was a regular aerial subway.
 
That's one of the things I like about Marvel. No made up American cities. Gotham and Metropolis are freaking ridiculous.


You are SO right. A magical human spider and an angry green:bh:on the other hand. Not at all ridiculous.

I mean really. Where do these comic book writers come up with these insane ideas for comics.... Cities loosely based on real places but with different names? Preposterous.
 
I have a question!

Was Gotham City ever some post-modern art deco goth (insert term) city scape before Burton? Or was it just a regular modern looking American City that could be Chicago/New York?
 
I just think that the on-location shooting gives the whole production a much more authentic feel to it. I loved Burton's Gotham in Batman '89, and I thought Begins was great as well, but The Dark Knight seemed so much grittier, which is how I picture Gotham City to be.
 
I have a question!

Was Gotham City ever some post-modern art deco goth (insert term) city scape before Burton? Or was it just a regular modern looking American City that could be Chicago/New York?

Gotham has had the more art deco feel for a while now...Mainly because in the older versions it was based on New York, particularly below 14th street.

While Chicago of course has some of the Beaux Arts and Art Deco buildings, New York has always been the true home of these styles. Chicago is more known for the unique style that is a bit more modern in feel that we see in TDK.
 
I've never been to Chicargo and don't know its cityscape or landmarks so it doesn't bother me.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"