The Dark Knight The Realism Debate thread

[Doc Samson]

i think this new series of films is good, but i still wish nolan would get off his high horse of realism and start adding in more fantastical elements. i mean like REAL iconic moments, something you would see in spiderman films or in either of the tim burton batman films. useing the bat motif alot. i just wish nolans batman had an iconic look. but it seems like nolan cares more about the story then he does the action, which isnt a BAD thing, but cmon when it all comes down to it, its a comic book movie and ppl want to see some awsome action and great visuals, with the story just helping to support the action.

for me, burton struck the right balance of realism and fantasy. something which nolan should maybe try to do in the new films. he can still have his "vision" for the character, but strike the right balance.

I always thought TDK might bring some of those elements back. That, to me, was the best part of Burton's Batman. He was more mystical, just appearing and disappearing with no emotion, like a machine. Combine that with Keaton's eyes and that'd be enough to scare the hell out of anybody. While I feel Nolan's film was better, part of the result of showing everything leading up to Batman's appearance was the anticlimatic feel of it all. When he showed up you never quite got that feeling you did when Keaton's Batman would appear. Now that the origin and everything is out the way we'll hopefully get some of that mystique and aura back...

 

[Tempest19]

its a comic book movie and ppl want to see some awsome action and great visuals, with the story just helping to support the action.

For me, it's the exact opposite. The action and visuals should be guided to support the story. Many of the great comic book films have taken this approach. BB, imo, took it one step further and that's why it's my favorite superhero film by far. If you have a story only there to support the action, the action isn't going to be good or mean a heck of alot it would just be action that dies out. If you have a great story, there is an established connection to the characters and thus the action carries weight.

But, if you can have more than just action, if you can devote yourself to a story then you have something else entirely. You have perfect action sequences, Mr. Googleme.

 

[Warhammer]

My opinion on Realism vs. Fantasy:

Realism vs. Fantasy is a petty argument. The former (from a critical P.O.V.) is a fanboy complaint, while the latter is merely justification to rank Tim Burton's films over Nolan's.

 

[dude stannis]

My opinion on Realism vs. Fantasy:

Realism vs. Fantasy is a petty argument. The former (from a critical P.O.V.) is a fanboy complaint, while the latter is merely justification to rank Tim Burton's films over Nolan's.

Nothing petty about you posted.

People go to watch movies about a guy who dresses up as a bat and fights an evil clown to escape from reality for a couple of hours and just be entertained. This can't happen when you spend so much time explaining every little gadget to make it believable. Especially when the audience never really cared.

And there's plenty enough reasons to rank Burton's material higher as it is.

 

[Spade]

I agree with Warhammer. He may have been a tad harsh, but I have never heard a single complaint in real life by anyone I know about how obsessed over realism Nolan is or how fantasy shouldn't be so present in a Batman story. All I've heard is from people who are fans and want to see a good Batman movie. For me, that's where the argument ends. But the moment I get into this forum you'd think this was a heated debate on every street corner worthy of national attention with breaking news coverage.

 

[Warhammer]

Nothing petty about you posted.

People go to watch movies about a guy who dresses up as a bat and fights an evil clown to escape from reality for a couple of hours and just be entertained. This can't happen when you spend so much time explaining every little gadget to make it believable. Especially when the audience never really cared.

And there's plenty enough reasons to rank Burton's material higher as it is.

This proves my point right here.
You were obviously in fanboy mode when you said that.
Look at it as if you were a casual movie-goer, not a Batman fan.

I agree with Warhammer. He may have been a tad harsh, but I have never heard a single complaint in real life by anyone I know about how obsessed over realism Nolan is or how fantasy shouldn't be so present in a Batman story. All I've heard is from people who are fans and want to see a good Batman movie. For me, that's where the argument ends. But the moment I get into this forum you'd think this was a heated debate on every street corner worthy of national attention with breaking news coverage.

Word.

I guess I was a bit harsh.

 

[dark_b]

people should watch the new leaked pics. you can see batman jumping on a car. hes cape look 2 times bigger. why is that? beacause its a movie and it looks cool.

so the ones who are always saying that everything is realistic. its not. nolan uses some explanation so that we can buy easier in those movies. but they are not realistic.

joker can still have perma white skin and it would fit in nolans bat universe

 

[Jerry!]

I agree with Warhammer. He may have been a tad harsh, but I have never heard a single complaint in real life by anyone I know about how obsessed over realism Nolan is or how fantasy shouldn't be so present in a Batman story. All I've heard is from people who are fans and want to see a good Batman movie. For me, that's where the argument ends. But the moment I get into this forum you'd think this was a heated debate on every street corner worthy of national attention with breaking news coverage.

Thumbs up.

 

[CaptainClown]

yup people are crazy

 

[Mr. Socko]

You can't have iconic; you can't have epic in complete realism nor the illusion of such. To hell with the dark, gritty realism. The way I see it, if something from the comics can't be adapted or put into the film, then they're going about it the wrong way.

 

[Monster]

I'd love to see "Mr Freeze" looking realistic in Mr Nolan's films.

I say we cast Mike Myers as the Riddler.

Have that for realism.

LOL

 

[Darknightnomis]

I think this whole series of Batman movies are proposly being made to be a contrast to how they the others were made in the sense that BAtman was a part of an already surealistic world.

The first 2 movies Gothan was extremely Gothic and Dark, and then the last two it was a neon paradise. So Batman was already part of a non-realistic world.

I think Nolan and Golan sold there version to WB on how they wanted Batman to be preceived in that Batman himself would be the only sensational thing in a very realistic world.

 

[Warhammer]

You can't have iconic; you can't have epic in complete realism nor the illusion of such.

Why exactly can't you have iconic/epic (what was that even supposed to mean)? What does the term "iconic" or "epic" mean to you? a special effects extravaganza?

Does that mean The Godfather is not iconic or epic because it felt realistic? Comparing past Batman films to Batman Begins, what was so iconic/epic about the former that made them stand out from the latter? Please elaborate for me.

To hell with the dark, gritty realism. The way I see it, if something from the comics can't be adapted or put into the film, then they're going about it the wrong way.

What is your honest opinion about how Bats is supposed to be translated then? How are they going about it the wrong way?

I'd love to see "Mr Freeze" looking realistic in Mr Nolan's films.

Who said that Mr. Freeze couldn't be in Nolan's world?
Why can't he look realistic?

I say we cast Mike Myers as the Riddler.

Have that for realism.

LOL

What does a casting decision have to do with anything?
Your logic is flawed with this one.

 

[Monster]

Who said that Mr. Freeze couldn't be in Nolan's world?
Why can't he look realistic?





What does a casting decision have to do with anything?
Your logic is flawed with this one.

Haha, are you making fun of me?

 

[fcrowelle06]

For me, it's the exact opposite. The action and visuals should be guided to support the story. Many of the great comic book films have taken this approach. BB, imo, took it one step further and that's why it's my favorite superhero film by far. If you have a story only there to support the action, the action isn't going to be good or mean a heck of alot it would just be action that dies out. If you have a great story, there is an established connection to the characters and thus the action carries weight.

But, if you can have more than just action, if you can devote yourself to a story then you have something else entirely. You have perfect action sequences, Mr. Googleme.

Exactly, and because of that way of story-telliing it's becoming a little too predictable, I mean the same technique was used for Spider-man 3, except no one liked the story, I did though....but I still Venom should have gotten away...might make Peter live with that guilt

 

[fcrowelle06]

Look, I think the problem here is this: WHen Batman 89 came people loved it immensely, because it was a serious interpretation not over-top it was basically like the world jumped off the pages but there was gripping about the story, because 1.Batman doesn't kill and he had a death count (wtf?) and 2. Joker never killed Batman's parents, now we have Batman Begins which got his origin down to a T, but the realism is too much set in our world and our Fantastical Iconic images that we see in our heads and the comic, cartoons are fair and far between...Nolan needs to give us balance

 

[Warhammer]

Haha, are you making fun of me?

My sarcasm sense is tingling.

 

[Mr. Socko]

Does that mean The Godfather is not iconic or epic because it felt realistic?

You present a good point when you raise up Godfather. It's certainly iconic, but I don't think it's epic. To me, epic is simply breath-taking, something you rarely see, something special.

Comparing past Batman films to Batman Begins, what was so iconic/epic about the former that made them stand out from the latter? Please elaborate for me.

Nothing, Schumacher's films were trash, Burton's were average. What? Were you thinking I preferred them over Nolan's?

What is your honest opinion about how Bats is supposed to be translated then? How are they going about it the wrong way?

I never said they were going about it the wrong way, now did I? To repeat, "if something from the comics can't be adapted or put into the film, then they're going about it the wrong way." Now tell me where I said Nolan was going about it the wrong way...nowhere did I say such I thing. I was speaking in general about how it should be adapted. It's almost as if it raises flags, as soon as I said "I don't care for dark gritty realism," everyone jumps up and assume I mean Christopher Nolan. I am stating that comment for all adaptations of Batman in general. If there's something in the comics that can't be adapted or put into the film, then they're doing something wrong.

 

[Monster]

My sarcasm sense is tingling.

Haha, I like you. You've made my day at a boring office.

 

[Warhammer]

You present a good point when you raise up Godfather. It's certainly iconic, but I don't think it's epic. To me, epic is simply breath-taking, something you rarely see, something special.

I thought that The Godfather was both, because it was breath-taking, (etc.) at the time of it's release. Whatever floats your boat.

Nothing, Schumacher's films were trash, Burton's were average. What? Were you thinking I preferred them over Nolan's?

Actually, I did.

Sorry, Socko.
I was on thrasher mode, because I thought you were going to bring up how so and so Batman film was better than so and so Batman film without a good explanation.

I never said they were going about it the wrong way, now did I? To repeat, "if something from the comics can't be adapted or put into the film, then they're going about it the wrong way." Now tell me where I said Nolan was going about it the wrong way...nowhere did I say such I thing. I was speaking in general about how it should be adapted. It's almost as if it raises flags, as soon as I said "I don't care for dark gritty realism," everyone jumps up and assume I mean Christopher Nolan. I am stating that comment for all adaptations of Batman in general. If there's something in the comics that can't be adapted or put into the film, then they're doing something wrong.

The way you started your post, as well as realism being the key word associated with Christopher Nolan around here, I was only assuming that you dogging on Nolan and Batman Begins without a plausable reason (like I see alot of people do. When I debate with any poster on the Hype about anything, I want people to fully express/elaborate their opinion/view or else, they shouldn't pass judgment).

My bad for assuming.

Haha, I like you. You've made my day at a boring office.

I'm glad to be of service.

 

[terry78]

The only thing is that you can't really have some of the more bizzare elements in Nolan's world, like Bat-robots, Clayface, Killer Moth, guys like that. Now what I do want to see in a future Nolan movie is Hugo Strange, as he belongs in this universe.

 

[Monster]

The only thing is that you can't really have some of the more bizzare elements in Nolan's world, like Bat-robots, Clayface, Killer Moth, guys like that. Now what I do want to see in a future Nolan movie is Hugo Strange, as he belongs in this universe.

Who the hell is Hugo Strange?

 

[Warhammer]

^http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Strange

The only thing is that you can't really have some of the more bizzare elements in Nolan's world, like Bat-robots, Clayface, Killer Moth, guys like that. Now what I do want to see in a future Nolan movie is Hugo Strange, as he belongs in this universe.

Definitely on Hugo Strange.

As for Clayface, I like him, but I never really considered him an 1st-tier villain. Killer Moth is a benchwarmer, along with Copperhead, etc.

 

[terry78]

Who the hell is Hugo Strange?

I hope you were being sarcastic or you just aren't a real hardcore Batman fan.

 

[Mr. Socko]

I thought that The Godfather was both, because it was breath-taking, (etc.) at the time of it's release. Whatever floats your boat.



Actually, I did.

Sorry, Socko.
I was on thrasher mode, because I thought you were going to bring up how so and so Batman film was better than so and so Batman film without a good explanation.



The way you started your post, as well as realism being the key word associated with Christopher Nolan around here, I was only assuming that you dogging on Nolan and Batman Begins without a plausable reason (like I see alot of people do. When I debate with any poster on the Hype about anything, I want people to fully express/elaborate their opinion/view or else, they shouldn't pass judgment).

My bad for assuming.

No problem. I personally don't buy the "Nolan's realism" thing. It's just something a bunch of people on the internet have started. Chris Nolan's only comment about realism is that he wants to create heightened realism and there's a big difference. I believe he means if anything "bizarre" happens in the bat-world, he wants to give it an explanation, and make it seem at least plausible. Then people come along and screw his words all up. One side started it to completely bash his films and another side started it to justify any changes they'd like to see. It's all on the fence.

The only thing is that you can't really have some of the more bizzare elements in Nolan's world, like Bat-robots, Clayface, Killer Moth, guys like that. Now what I do want to see in a future Nolan movie is Hugo Strange, as he belongs in this universe.

I must disagree. Bat-robots(?) Clayface, Killer Moth, etc can all fit into Nolan's Bat-world, he will just give them a plausible reason for being there. No where has Nolan ever said he is against such things, people just made this bull up to keep him down.