The Dark Knight The Realism Debate thread

Making Gotham not have the GOTHIC look, the gargoyles, The Batmobile without a Bat-motif, Joker not fall in a tank of acid and have permanent white skin and green hair,etc. These are IMPORTANT part of the characters to me.

But did/ will they make you feel like dumb?
 
I was talking about them explaining where every pieace of fabric of the Batman costume and his weapons.

OK, I get the point. It is a military thing and it protects Batman. Lets move on with it.

Now...oh..the ears are only there to put microphones, etc etc etc...bla bla...

Who cares? Batman is fantastical character and uses gadgets to help him in his fight on crime. I just thought they went overboard with this realistic thing...
 
Well most people I know loved the explanations, they thought it was something they hadn't seen before and were satisfied with them. And, I should add other people around the world from varius forums who feel the same way (of course you'll know people who feel the same as you do). When a movie demands less suspension of diselief doesn't make you look dumb, IMO, it makes you more a part of the movie itself.
 
But sure took away the fun of watching a Batman movie...The Batman i love stands on gargoyles, his city is GRITTY and scary....

Fun is one thing (and I really understand you), but insulting your intelligence is another.
 
Wait...i love the explanations too. It made sense. But they stil exagerated, IMO.

But because of this realistic approach, do they have to sacrifice every fanstastical element that actually works like the look of Gotham, for example??? I even thought the movie didnt have a lot of shadows or wasnt dark enough...
 
I disagree, but I can accept that worry of yours.
As for the explanations, the only part that went too far was Al Ghul's plan. That part was overexplained, and in the middle of the battle, too. But the way he assembles the costume? That's one of the things that stayed in people's heads from BB. Exaggeration of that part would have been if they had told us how they got the paint for the Nomex suit.
 
I disagree, but I can accept that worry of yours.
As for the explanations, the only part that went too far was Al Ghul's plan. That part was overexplained, and in the middle of the battle, too. But the way he assembles the costume? That's one of the things that stayed in people's heads from BB. Exaggeration of that part would have been if they had told us how they got the paint for the Nome suit.

For real, the explanation was fantastic. As much as I love the realism aspect, I can say I'll be really pissed off if The Joker isn't perma-white. And I also wouldn't mind seeing a few gargoyles here and there, but not to go overboard, as IMO, Burton did.
 
You`re right. It didnt bother me as much as seeing Batmobile without the Bat-motif and Gotham without the gothic elements...

Its just that to me the perfect Gotham and the perfect Batmobile are the Burton ones so I just felt that something was missing.

BB would`ve been the perfect Batman movie if they had the story and cast of BB with the production design of B89...Thats how i feel.
 
For real, the explanation was fantastic. As much as I love the realism aspect, I can say I'll be really pissed off if The Joker isn't perma-white. And I also wouldn't mind seeing a few gargoyles here and there, but not to go overboard, as IMO, Burton did.

IMO, if Burton overdid it somewhere, it was in BR. But that's a big IF.
 
You`re right. It didnt bother me as much as seeing Batmobile without the Bat-motif and Gotham without the gothic elements...

Its just that to me the perfect Gotham and the perfect Batmobile are the Burton ones so I just felt that something was missing.

BB would`ve been the perfect Batman movie if they had the story and cast of BB with the production design of B89...Thats how i feel.

I certainly know where you come from. I don't agree, but I respect that.
 
Nolan's brand of realism is beginning to become ridiculous, simply because the whole idea of Batman is almost as unrealistic as Spider-man or Superman (though it may not appear so on the surface). Surrealism is the way to go (like Batman, but maybe not as much as Returns).
 
Nolan's brand of realism is beginning to become ridiculous, simply because the whole idea of Batman is almost as unrealistic as Spider-man or Superman (though it may not appear so on the surface). Surrealism is the way to go (like Batman, but maybe not as much as Returns).

Are you talking about Nolan himself or some fans who don't really know make him look bad by misinterpreting his vision?
 
First I'd like to say that I don't think he made a mistake with the audiences. Regular viewers seem to like the film just fine.

Second, your suggestion about a 300 style is an interesting one, but I think 300 or Sin City did so well because it was about comic book characters, who however didn't wear masks or costumes. Batman, as a superhero might be considered as childish by many.
It is my opinion that a 300-level of stylization (a very high level if you ask me) would bring the opposite result for Batman, while keeping the character real (and I don't mean it the Nolan way, I also mean what Burton did, with an appropriate level of seriousness and stylization) is what makes people interested in Batman.
A direct Frank Miler-style Batfilm would be an interesting but VERY dangerous experiment, which imo would not work well on screen AND it would fail financially. I have my reasons for believing this (and 1-2 examples of what it looks like), I don't claim to know the exact result, but I've seen things that come very close and I honestly didn't like what I saw.

I think the key to a true Batman on film is maintaing the fantasy within limits. I think that's one of the reason's Burton's films worked so well and Schumachers didn't. The other thing is the level of stylization. Again, Schumacher went to far.

Now I believe it could be done 300/Sin city style, but the key would be to have a strong script and presentation, so that the visuals and the story become a whole, rather than the visual style jar the viewer out of the film or be a distraction as someone earlier put it. Even still, you could only take the fantasy so far, without resorting to the overuse of CGI or having Batman do things that go far beyond mortal men; i.e., Batman I would imagine is perhaps a level or two above an olympic level athlete, he isn't Spider-man, so he shouldn't be jumping ridiculous distances, etc., etc.

Following along the lines of the story being key, Batman the detective--not five seconds of spying on someone, etc., etc. A real Batman detective story--yet this is where the question, "Who are we targeting with such a film will", have to be answered. Because as I've read a few times on this board and others, not everyone will be thrilled with a "detective story" Batman. Will such a movie make alot of money?

while I do think it can be done, there would have to be limitations to prevent the film from crossing into the absurd. The presentation is the key.
 
If they did it as a faux 1930's film noir like Sin City, it could be interesting, but it wouldn't have the depth that Nolan was trying to incorporate.

Even if given a better story and the tone was serious?
 
I think the key to a true Batman on film is maintaing the fantasy within limits. I think that's one of the reason's Burton's films worked so well and Schumachers didn't. The other thing is the level of stylization. Again, Schumacher went to far.

Now I believe it could be done 300/Sin city style, but the key would be to have a strong script and presentation, so that the visuals and the story become a whole, rather than the visual style jar the viewer out of the film or be a distraction as someone earlier put it. Even still, you could only take the fantasy so far, without resorting to the overuse of CGI or having Batman do things that go far beyond mortal men; i.e., Batman I would imagine is perhaps a level or two above an olympic level athlete, he isn't Spider-man, so he shouldn't be jumping ridiculous distances, etc., etc.

Following along the lines of the story being key, Batman the detective--not five seconds of spying on someone, etc., etc. A real Batman detective story--yet this is where the question, "Who are we targeting with such a film will", have to be answered. Because as I've read a few times on this board and others, not everyone will be thrilled with a "detective story" Batman. Will such a movie make alot of money?

while I do think it can be done, there would have to be limitations to prevent the film from crossing into the absurd. The presentation is the key.

I disagree with this suggestion of this being the key to a true Batman film. Like I said before, the suggestion, especially now that you expresed it better, is very dangerous. One has to find the line where fantasy ends and the Millerisms begin.
 
Nolan's brand of realism is beginning to become ridiculous, simply because the whole idea of Batman is almost as unrealistic as Spider-man or Superman (though it may not appear so on the surface). Surrealism is the way to go (like Batman, but maybe not as much as Returns).


So, being an intelligent millionaire with a penchant for costumes & justice is as realistic as an alien superhero who flies around in his underwear or a man who gets bit by a spider and can suddenly climb walls and swing around town with webs??
 
No, it's the little things, such as surviving decades as a superhero simply because he's a well trained, intelligent millionaire with a "penchant for costumes & justice". Spider-Man is not as unbelievable because, hey, he's got powers. Once you get over the whole thing about the Spider abilities, he rarely does anything that's utterly unbelievable. Batman does.
 
No, it's the little things, such as surviving decades as a superhero simply because he's a well trained, intelligent millionaire with a "penchant for costumes & justice". Spider-Man is not as unbelievable because, hey, he's got powers. Once you get over the whole thing about the Spider abilities, he rarely does anything that's utterly unbelievable. Batman does.


Do you want the chance to read what you wrote there again, before I decide to comment on it??
 
basically,if you love the fantastical and gothic side of batman-you already got your movie with Batman 89,i along with many others absolutely LOVED Nolans take and found it much more precise relatable because of its more realistic setting.

Plus it was done with a clear respect to the source material
 
Burton's world was in the visual realm of Arkham Asylum. Nolan's world is in the visual realm of The Long Halloween.

There are several interpretations of Batman, this is just one of them. Enjoy it for what it is, stop hoping it becomes a complete fantasy film. That may happen one day, but for now, that's not how Batman on film is. Nolan's placed him in a gritty realistic version of Gotham and this is his vision. I think it's going great, just sitting back and enjoying the ride. Once Nolan's trilogy is over, we will get a different take, and after that, another.
 
Burton's world was in the visual realm of Arkham Asylum. Nolan's world is in the visual realm of The Long Halloween.

I thought the world of The Long Halloween was more Tim Burton-Gothic Art-deco than anything. Nolan's world is Year One.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"