The Dark Knight The Realism Debate thread

[The Batman]

Now...the first thread...degenerated into a ridiculous mess, went off topic, and all that other crap.

The second thread was stickied, but certain posters felt that select opinions being stickied up was unfair. Ok. Fair enough.

The topic of Nolans realism is something that should be discussed, because...well...IMO, i dont think most people actually understand what nolans going for. Some people think otherwise. People interperet Nolans work in different ways, and this thread is a place where you can discuss these interpretations, and whether or not you think this vision is right for the character of Batman. Keep in mind two very important things, however:

1. Those who do support Nolans vision are not simply those who want to see Batman as a documentary set in very real world standards, who dont care about the comics whatsoever.

2. By that same token, those who want to see the comics DO NOT...i repeat....DO NOT want to see Adam West return as batman or Batman and Robin, and quite frankly, its assinine to assume that.

The first two threads, I admit, did not consider the ideas of others. Hopefully, this thread changes that...unless people want to be immature again and start bashing others....

 

[creamyiraq]

I shall say this. Someone said on these boards once that "If you want realism, then don't watch movies about comic books."

Now, I realize that Chris Nolan is trying to bring a sense of believeability to the movies, which he successfully did in Begins. However, there is only so much you can get to as far as realism with characters like The Joker and Two-Face.

Now, I believe that using the direction that Begins steered the franchise towards that a sense of realism can be brought to these characters, but I don't expect to be lead to believe that (Example) I can jump into a vat of chemicals and come out with green hair and white skin, or come out alive at all for that matter. Or, in the same sense, that I can use acid to burn my face in half and wind up with split-personality disorder.

What I'm saying here is that I like what Nolan is doing, that what he is trying to do with the series is great, and that people who want either complete realism or complete true-to-the-comic adaptations are going to be disappointed. This is just like writing comics. Every writer has a different vision of Batman, The Joker, etc. They take the general idea of what the character is and expand on them in their own way. There is no way to say that "Batman does things like this" or "The Joker acts this way" because every writer portrays them differently. It is no different with film, and this movie is Nolan's idea of what these characters are like.

 

[Steelsheen]

.... trying to bring a sense of believeability to the movies

this pretty much sums the Realism debate for me. and its is applicable to all Comic Book Movies, whether its Batman, Superman, Spiderman etc.

 

[batman11]

I'm not sure why people HATE the realism idea. I say watch the movie and enjoy it for what it is. For me, Batman's my hero, and I'll enjoy watching him in just about anything, even Batman and Robin.

 

[JStorm]

This vision is right for Nolan.

We, or atleast I do, read comics on a regular basis. As far back as I can remember, said comic changed teams(writer, artist, inker, etc) every few issues. And sometimes, I, and I am sure us, did not like some of the art and/or writing.

My point, any adaptation is that writers, directors, producers vision of said material.

I will not damn a character or said material because it doesn't match to my vision, etc.

 

[Nepenthes]

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

"I liked Nolans World but I think he can push the comic aspects a little further in TDK. I think Nolans World was crucial to the success of BB but not every other Batman movie forthcoming. To say this vision is not right for Batman is missing the point; it's right for these movies and this director."

 

[batman11]

This vision is right for Nolan.

We, or atleast I do, read comics on a regular basis. As far back as I can remember, said comic changed teams(writer, artist, inker, etc) every few issues. And sometimes, I, and I am sure us, did not like some of the art and/or writing.

My point, any adaptation is that writers, directors, producers vision of said material.

I will not damn a character or said material because it doesn't match to my vision, etc.

Well said. Just because its not exactly what you want, doesn't mean you have to condemn it to hell for all eternity.

 

[KOLLUS]

BB: real enough.

 

[Carnotaur3]

Nolan's world is as realistc as any movie can be. Movies aren't realistic anyway. If they were, there wouldn't be any story structure, or rising action for the characters to go through.

Having said that, Nolan does understand that the comics have a role in his films, but like any director, the comics (or an source material) are not going to get in the way of his vision for this movie. Director's don't copy pre-existing work, they make their own work, which is what makes movies refreshing, exciting, and surprising.

 

[The Kid]

Payaso summed it up for me. All Nolan needs to do is make his epic comic-book worthy shots last longer than 2 frames and it's all good.

 

[dude stannis]

I think Begins was a little too grounded for me. Only a little. I'd like to see TDK be a touch more fantastical.

 

[Road Warrior]

Someone said on these boards once that "If you want realism, then don't watch movies about comic books."

I think that's all that needs to be said. I understand that Nolan wants believability but he doesn't need Gotham to look like Chicago in order to achieve it. I think Tom Mankiewicz (writer of Superman I & II) said it best, "don't be smarter than the material." Is Clark Kent's glasses thing idiotic? Yes. BUT, just accept it and don't look down at it.

 

[Solidus]

I think Nolan has it just right.

You know I find it so funny that so many people think that if it is a comic, or comic based, it has to be as fantasy based as possible. Just because something is drawn to help tell the story such as a comic book, does not mean it needs to be campy and fantasy based. Who the hell decides this? Batman was one of the few super heros that had no super powers what so ever, he was a man flesh and blood, so Nolan created a real world for a technicaly real person.

With all the other comics you usually have some sort of person that is geneticaly different or altered, and with that you can have a more campy/fantasy based movie.

But with Batman I think thats why in my opinion Burton and Joel really screwed up with Batman, even a lot of the comic writers did, brining Batman into a realm of reality just fit properly, and worked for many people. If you want more fantasy based elements, go watch Spider-Man, Superman, X-Men. It is nice to have one super hero based more in the 'real world' but with great adventures.

I think too many people think comics, they think automaticaly it cannot mimic the real world. I think Nolan's translation is a powerful one, that still keeps the core of Batman but brining it to a way different/better enviornment.

And I think Nolan is one of the few that will not listen to comic book fans, I think he sees what happens to movies such as Spidey 3 when comic fans complain about certian things. I think Nolan is a genius film maker, and he will do what he feel is necessary. And what I mean by that he won't listen to little small complaints that us comic book fans make big deals out of.

 

[Catman]

I find it so funny that so many people think that if it is a comic, or comic based, it has to be as fantasy based as possible.

No one is saying that, Solidus. What many people are saying is that this is the story of a guy who dresses up as a bat and fights villains like Clay-Face. And, is also a member of the Justice League!

 

[Doc Holliday]

How many times are we going to discuss it? I think the other one went off topic because everyone had pretty much stated their opinion, so is it really necessary again?

Anyway, what we have in BB and TDK is a fantasy movie with relatively realistic aspects. Not the other way around. If this movie was as realistic as some say it is, then it would suck, because things such as a billionaire vigilante dressing up like a bat to fight crime or a secret ninja gang that sacked Rome and Constantinople aren't very realistic. However, Nolan gives (relatively) plausible explanations for all of the fantasy elements, such as the Batsuit is a nomex-survival suit developed by Wayne Enterprises, the Tumbler is an army prototype, etc.

 

[the_scream]

I personally think Batman can work in both realistic and more comic book styles. For instance, the animated series has Batman doing things that just wouldn't be possible in the real world. He's more like Spiderman in TNA with all the swinging across rooftops etc.

However, I also like both the more realistic interpretations by Burton and Nolan. In Burton's world, Batman was still an ordinary guy in a suit. He just lived in a world that was more pulpy and silly.

In Nolan's world, Batman is more realistic but he still does things that are totally unbelievable (disappearing and taking out a small army of ninjas). But Nolan tries to offer some explanation for these things, making them more believable.

I guess the main issue is whether characters like the Joker and Two-Face would work in a realistic world. First, I think Scarecrow was the best interpretation of a Batman villain we have ever had. I would have hated it if Cillian pranced about in a full scarecrow suit. It just would have looked silly in the context of the film. If a similar thing can be pulled off with the Joker and Two-Face, I'll be happy.

I have no doubt that we will be getting a more real-world Joker and I just hope he comes across as well as the Scarecrow. The only thing that really needs to be changed is his scarring and makeup. If that is toned down, the actual psychotic nature of the Joker is totally believable.

As for Two-Face, who knows what direction they will take. I personally thought making Harvey deal with his own multiple personality disorder (like in TNA) was a good idea. It made his transition very believable. I'm not a big fan of normal guys going up the wall crazy after accidents as per the last 4 Batman films. That would be unrealistic and dumb.

 

[Shoemeister]

Two words:
Verisimilitude.






Hoo-rah.

 

[Maniacal]

In my opinion Nolan's vision of his Batman trilogy was to build and show the audience the evolution of how Batman becomes the way he does, the World's Greatest Detective, The Dark Knight etc. and how Gotham City became over run with "freaks" etc. He is building a world and a character over 3 movies, he isn't just throwing it out there like Gotham has always been this weird ass place, the city is evolving and by the end of the 3rd film we will see a city over run by freaks and looked over by the Batman. Nolan is just trying to rationalise things not water it down.

 

[Batman jr.]

It will never a realistic film, but it has more realistic APPROACH. Much of his apparel in BB comes from actual military technology I believe. And the tumbler REALLY can do kickass things!!!

But I want to see more of Gotham, some different parts of the city!

It could be possible: this movie wil be filmed 90% in Chicago, I don't even know if they actually use Leavsden Studios!

 

[raybia]

Now...the first thread...degenerated into a ridiculous mess, went off topic, and all that other crap.

The second thread was stickied, but certain posters felt that select opinions being stickied up was unfair. Ok. Fair enough.

The topic of Nolans realism is something that should be discussed, because...well...IMO, i dont think most people actually understand what nolans going for. Some people think otherwise. People interperet Nolans work in different ways, and this thread is a place where you can discuss these interpretations, and whether or not you think this vision is right for the character of Batman. Keep in mind two very important things, however:

1. Those who do support Nolans vision are not simply those who want to see Batman as a documentary set in very real world standards, who dont care about the comics whatsoever.

2. By that same token, those who want to see the comics DO NOT...i repeat....DO NOT want to see Adam West return as batman or Batman and Robin, and quite frankly, its assinine to assume that.

The first two threads, I admit, did not consider the ideas of others. Hopefully, this thread changes that...unless people want to be immature again and start bashing others....

Like I said before, what Nolan is doing is "Heighten realism."

He wants to make it easier for the audience to "suspend their disbelief" by giving plausable (or seemingly plausable) explainations for the fantastical elements of "world of Batman".


Raybia

 

[Cristo]

BB was a drama...plain and simple. It was a superhero movie but it was also a drama about the violent life of Bruce Wayne. And that's what worked. Some people try to say that makes BB realistic. Make no mistake, by movie's end, a billionaire dressed as a bat was fighting his old ninja teacher with a false identity trying to stop him from using a microvave emitter to put "fear gas" taken from a blue flower into the water main so that an entire city would tear itself apart while a police officer blew apart train tracks in an army tank and a man dressed like a scarecrow came in on a horse (who knows where he got it?) before getting tasered in the face in the midst of a whole city of drugged-up people...

Now, that's not realistic AT ALL. But it was cool and it was intense. And we liked it. It was far more grounded than most superhero films so we liked it. Plus, it was about the drama of "The Man who Falls" Bruce Wayne, from his parents' tragic death to his legendary rise as a costumed vigilante. It felt epic, as if ANYTHING could happen in this Batman universe that Nolan had created. At least, that's how it felt to some people. The Joker is a guy who fell into acid and got green hair and white skin. Is it realistic? Hell no. But is it something that would fit into Nolan's films? Hell yes.

 

[Rezzo]

Some people still don´t get the ¨realism¨ and explain it wrong, the story of Batman being a billionaire playboy and dressing like a bat to fight crime is not real we get that, BB simply told the story of Batman in a realistic fashion

 

[Mysterio]

Now...the first thread...degenerated into a ridiculous mess, went off topic, and all that other crap.

The second thread was stickied, but certain posters felt that select opinions being stickied up was unfair. Ok. Fair enough.

The topic of Nolans realism is something that should be discussed, because...well...IMO, i dont think most people actually understand what nolans going for. Some people think otherwise. People interperet Nolans work in different ways, and this thread is a place where you can discuss these interpretations, and whether or not you think this vision is right for the character of Batman. Keep in mind two very important things, however:

1. Those who do support Nolans vision are not simply those who want to see Batman as a documentary set in very real world standards, who dont care about the comics whatsoever.

2. By that same token, those who want to see the comics DO NOT...i repeat....DO NOT want to see Adam West return as batman or Batman and Robin, and quite frankly, its assinine to assume that.

The first two threads, I admit, did not consider the ideas of others. Hopefully, this thread changes that...unless people want to be immature again and start bashing others....

this thread is just as pointless as the other one, and your arrogance and delusions of self importance have once again demanded to be heard

 

[JStorm]

this thread is just as pointless as the other one, and your arrogance and delusions of self importance have once again demanded to be heard

Put your claws away, kitten.

All are entitled to his or her own opinion.

 

[Tempest19]

I think Nolan has it just right.

You know I find it so funny that so many people think that if it is a comic, or comic based, it has to be as fantasy based as possible. Just because something is drawn to help tell the story such as a comic book, does not mean it needs to be campy and fantasy based. Who the hell decides this? Batman was one of the few super heros that had no super powers what so ever, he was a man flesh and blood, so Nolan created a real world for a technicaly real person.

With all the other comics you usually have some sort of person that is geneticaly different or altered, and with that you can have a more campy/fantasy based movie.

But with Batman I think thats why in my opinion Burton and Joel really screwed up with Batman, even a lot of the comic writers did, brining Batman into a realm of reality just fit properly, and worked for many people. If you want more fantasy based elements, go watch Spider-Man, Superman, X-Men. It is nice to have one super hero based more in the 'real world' but with great adventures.

I think too many people think comics, they think automaticaly it cannot mimic the real world. I think Nolan's translation is a powerful one, that still keeps the core of Batman but brining it to a way different/better enviornment.

And I think Nolan is one of the few that will not listen to comic book fans, I think he sees what happens to movies such as Spidey 3 when comic fans complain about certian things. I think Nolan is a genius film maker, and he will do what he feel is necessary. And what I mean by that he won't listen to little small complaints that us comic book fans make big deals out of.

Excellant post dude. Excellant post.

Might I add to that, Nolan's world REALLY reminds me alot of the Jeph Loeb Batman comics that I like alot.