The Dark Knight The Realism Debate thread

[360sculptguy]

Yes, but that doesn't mean it strays from Nolan's visual aesthetic. Nolan's visual aesthetic doesn't mean that no images can be close to the comic, just that they have to fit a certain tonality. And the Joker's design in THE DARK KNIGHT certainly fits.


Sure.


Depends on which comic you're talking about.


Eh, I don't agree. It would if his outfit was cartoony, like many comic book elements. In that way, it wouldn't fit with the tactile sense of Nolan's universe. But it doesn't.

I gotta hit the hay tonight but I'll probably pick this back up tomorrow. I disagree with some of your disagreements. :P Later.

 

[dark_b]

Yes, but that doesn't mean it strays from Nolan's visual aesthetic. Nolan's visual aesthetic doesn't mean that no images can be close to the comic, just that they have to fit a certain tonality. And the Joker's design in THE DARK KNIGHT certainly fits.


Sure.


Depends on which comic you're talking about.


Eh, I don't agree. It would if his outfit was cartoony, like many comic book elements. In that way, it wouldn't fit with the tactile sense of Nolan's universe. But it doesn't.

IMO it doesnt.
have you in BB seen a guy in bight colors? now you havent.
have you seen the same in superman returns?
nope.
so yes in a way purple clothes doesnt fit .

but lets not forget that nolan said himself: that he wants acomplete new movie with TDK. this guy doesnt want to reapeat himself. and he will make everthing sure that he will not.

 

[Mr. Socko]

That's whats so great about it. No one in Begins wore anything outlandish, they all dressed very normal. The same will go for TDK, all except one clown who dresses in purple. He will stand out from the masses in Nolan's world.

 

[dark_b]

That's whats so great about it. No one in Begins wore anything outlandish, they all dressed very normal. The same will go for TDK, all except one clown who dresses in purple. He will stand out from the masses in Nolan's world.

if its like that potrayed then ok.

i sitll have a big problem with a joker who has mental problems and needs paint to get the attention

ohhhhh sorry its realistic

 

[Mr. Socko]

if its like that potrayed then ok.

i sitll have a big problem with a joker who has mental problems and needs paint to get the attention

ohhhhh sorry its realistic

I'm pro-perma-pasty Joker as well. But we've got to look to what's been proven thus far.

 

[TheDarkKnight_NL]

Having the film being realistic is good IMO, trust me I'd love to see a "perma" white Joker as much as the next guy, but it all depends on how they bring it in the film for me to make a final judgement (if he really does apply make-up).
And who knows maybe the flesh color is the make-up (I hope)

 

[thegameq]

All I'm saying is: somewhere out there, there's a Batman fan -- a REAL Batman fan -- that is also an excellent filmmaker. Somewhere out there, is the guy who would make THE Batman movie. Will we ever see his take? No. Probably not.

I kinda feel the same way...I honestly thought that after close to a 20 year hiatus, someone would have the guts to do a true Batman movie and not another variant.

It's so simple...make a Batman movie with all the iconic style and noir fans have come to expect from Batman and his world.

I'm telling you, I get the same vibe from WB with Batman that I got from Fox with Doom. WB won't do a true Batman movie because they don't want a true Batman movie. For whatever reason, they probably believe it would be to big a risk or that it would limit Batman's appeal to general audiences.

Would a Batman movie done with all the iconic style and noir we've come to expect from Batman and his world be so bad?

Also, I keep hearing how Nolan said TDK will be different from BB. Has he given any clues as to what he means? More fantasy perhaps?

 

[Gianakin_]

You must like Sandy Collora's short films then. They're as true to the comics and as iconic as it gets.
They are also, IMO, garbage.

 

[thegameq]

You must like Sandy Collora's short films then. They're as true to the comics and as iconic as it gets.
They are also, IMO, garbage.

As you said, it's your opinion.

 

[Gianakin_]

Naturally.

 

[Mercurius]

"Realistic" concerning comic book movies is an out of key word.

There is nothing realistic about a man who dresses himself in a black cape, full armour and a mask with sharp bat's ears and thus wanders the streets to, ah-ham, fight the crime.

Come on.

 

[rpenguin]

"Realistic" concerning comic book movies is an out of key word.

There is nothing realistic about a man who dresses himself in a black cape, full armour and a mask with sharp bat's ears and thus wanders the streets to, ah-ham, fight the crime.

Come on.

It's relativistically speaking more realistic than magic rings, super speed, mutants, radioactivity, manipulating the elements, amazons, etc.

Come on.

 

[NateGray]

It's relativistically speaking more realistic than magic rings, super speed, mutants, radioactivity, manipulating the elements, amazons, etc.

Come on.

Nope really its the same, the day we have someone fighting crime dressed as a bat then I can just as easily believe some guy found a magic ring or a mutation was born giving someone fantastic powers.

You can try to separate them because Batman is only human but his villains are not and many of them fall into the very same type of groups you say are un-realistic.

Come on they are all comic book characters and unless you delve back to the early early Batman he is not grounded in any reality I can imagine.

Hence my other worries with Nolan using Joker a villain not grounded in reality in any way shape or form.

 

[Gianakin_]

But the most well-known Bat-villains are just weirdo "gangsters" if you think about it. 2-Face, Joker, Penguin, Cat-Woman, Riddler. They are definately more realistic than Vader, Magneto, Deacon Frost, Mandarin etc.
And this from a guy who doesn't justify anything Nolan does by saying it's realistic. I think fanboys have misinterpreted his words to a certain extent.

 

[Warhammer]

[Lumberg] Eeeeyeah. I'm gonna have to go ahead and... kind of disagree with ya there. [Lumberg]

I loved Batman 89 but it had a completely different angle than Begins. Way more kitsch, way more fantasy. Its kind of a weird comparison because you're comparing different storylines and different characters. On the spectrum of existing Batman movies it comes the closest to Begins but it's still in a different ballpark.

Joker's look is pretty comic in Batman
I'll get his obvious things out of the way. They made no attempts to look human. There was no trauma at all in his look. It was like the old coloring of a comic book. The white was one white everywhere and the green was one green everywhere. Thats fine. At least they were bold about it. Skin can be bleached by half a dozen chemicals and acids used in low concentrations but high ones will kill you. Too much chlorine can turn hair green although not permanently. If it were too strong it would literally burn it off and blister your scalp (a chemical burn more in keeping with what supposedly happens to two face). I suppose any chemicals could irritate the delicate skin of the lips and make them look red, if the skin were pink to begin with. Shy of tattooing I don't think anything can make giant permanent red lips. No chemical would alter the size of your smile but 89 incorporated the cut smile as well so they get some slack there. No chemical does all of these things.

Other things:
-Jokers joybuzzer and the instantaneous charcoal result. It wasn't even just electrocution, which could be made plausible in certain ways. The dude he shook hands with turned into a half mummified lump of charcoal instantaneously.
-Joker's six foot six shooter. Jokers punching glove gun. Both are in character but this is about the contrast with Nolan and his style in Begins. Scarecrow was distilled down to a mask and the fear toxin. I expect to maybe see Joker's acid flower. He could have the other gags if they were just the real, harmless ones. I don't see it happening though.
-the whole musical number, parade scene, joker venom balloons, and the Batwing that pulled them away. Cue the batwing in front of the moon scene.
-no reason for any of Batman's toys. Not necessarily a bad thing for that film. Not everything has to be explained, but the contrast with how Begins handled it is great.
-Batmobiles magical "shields". This was 89, right?
-The apparent lack of any real cops in Gotham (hello museum scene). Was there an explanation why they were all able to just hang out there for forever? Was it just a 'we cut the security lines so no one will bother us' explanation? or no explanation at all? It's been awhile.
-Gotham's look was very stylized. As in Burton's style. Most apparent in the final cathedral scenes. The building was a caricature of architecture. The cartoonish spotlights they used and in particular, that one scene where I think Joker looks down to the ground from the edge of the cathedral and it looks like its bad animation with the crap spotlights spinning around. I think they must have run out of money there.

Thats enough. Before anyone rips my head off I loved 89. In many respects better than Begins. The 89 "Who are you?" "I'm Batman" will be forever burned into my brain as one of the coolest moments in film. Really ushered in the wave of modern comic films, unless you consider He-man from a couple years earlier. :P Most everything in 89 worked within that film. Everything in TDK really has to work within the world of two films and eventually three. The shields thing and that crappy moment with the spotlight animation are two sore points from 89.

Nolan established a certain aesthetic in Begins and I hope he doesn't stray much further than he apparently already has. In my opinion Joker's clothes already seem to be disproportionately closer to a comic than any quality found in Begins. For 'TDK Joker' to look outlandish, which is a character trait, he did not need to look exactly like the comic. The world around him doesn't look like the comic. So in comparison to everything around him the near identical comic clothing looks fan made and out of place. Compared to some I couldn't care less about how he gets white skin. He has it and everything important that the chemical storyline contributed to the character in the comic either looks to be there or is still in the realm of possibility.

I can't say that I disagree about that.
You're right on the dot with alot of that.
When I said "fantasy" in the post that you replied to, I forgot all about the negative of "fantasy."
I was merely taking about the things that people throw against Nolan. All in all, Batman did have ALOT of goofy stuff about it.

Good post.

 

[Watson]

[Lumberg] Eeeeyeah. I'm gonna have to go ahead and... kind of disagree with ya there. [Lumberg]

Nolan established a certain aesthetic in Begins and I hope he doesn't stray much further than he apparently already has. In my opinion Joker's clothes already seem to be disproportionately closer to a comic than any quality found in Begins. For 'TDK Joker' to look outlandish, which is a character trait, he did not need to look exactly like the comic. The world around him doesn't look like the comic. So in comparison to everything around him the near identical comic clothing looks fan made and out of place. Compared to some I couldn't care less about how he gets white skin. He has it and everything important that the chemical storyline contributed to the character in the comic either looks to be there or is still in the realm of possibility.

Co-Sign. He looks outlandish within the parameters of the world that Nolan has created. Any more and you risk the disbelief of the audience.

 

[gwynplaine]

For a realistic take on the Batman, just watch "deathwish" with Charles Bronson.
As for the Joker anything on John Wayne Gacy aka Pogo the clown will do.

 

[CaptainClown]

warhammer I always laugh when I look at your avvy

 

[etrigan69]

Realism and Batman are a joke. If I can buy that a man with great big batwings can jump off a 40 story building and zoom around the city (Which ironically was where I went "Come on! Gimme a break!" in Batman Returns)then a guy can survive a chemical bath or a very vain man can get a split personality fram having half of his face scarred.

He is taking a more realistic approach but it is still far from realistic.

 

[Agentsands77]

have you in BB seen a guy in bight colors? now you havent.

No, but that's because none of the characters were the kind of people to wear bright, flashy colors. The Joker is that kind of guy, and he's supposed to be really unusual and extraordinary anyway.

but lets not forget that nolan said himself: that he wants acomplete new movie with TDK.

He never said anything about completely new in his approach. He just said that he wanted to do things differently this time around, but I think that's going to be more like the difference between STAR WARS and THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, as opposed to feeling like this is a whole new franchise.

 

[gwynplaine]

If BB and TDK were realistic the batsuit would be hairy and have a snout like a real bat.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I can't say that I disagree about that.
You're right on the dot with alot of that.
When I said "fantasy" in the post that you replied to, I forgot all about the negative of "fantasy."
I was merely taking about the things that people throw against Nolan. All in all, Batman did have ALOT of goofy stuff about it.

Good post.

Warhammer, that huge post you just quoted gave me a seizure. But then your Avy brought me back.

 

[360sculptguy]

Yes, but that doesn't mean it strays from Nolan's visual aesthetic. Nolan's visual aesthetic doesn't mean that no images can be close to the comic, just that they have to fit a certain tonality. And the Joker's design in THE DARK KNIGHT certainly fits.

Eh, I don't agree. It would if his outfit was cartoony, like many comic book elements. In that way, it wouldn't fit with the tactile sense of Nolan's universe. But it doesn't.

I have to claim to not entirely understand how you are differentiating "visual aesthetic" and "tonality". I understand tonality to be about the relationship between each element and every other. The general tone of something. My possible misunderstanding is that I define "visual aesthetic" in pretty much the same way.

Nolan is within his right to change gears but I don't think his words being referenced are being understood as he intended. It would be a mistake he is far too smart to encounter. The story is meant to have continuity and that relies on much more than just having Bale return as Batman every time.

I say again that the tone of Joker's look is unlike anything previously established in Begins. Scarecrow in the comics is drawn every bit as different from normal people as the Joker. Neither look even remotely normal. If a comic character, who's look was just as unique as the joker, was distilled down to his mask in Begins then why would we expect the comic joker to not be equally distilled? Both having equally unique appearances in the comic, getting drastically different translations to film. I think he or the studio is pandering, and it looks weak.

Visually, BB was a very well crafted piece of film that balanced iconic comic snapshots with moving bits of reality. Batman standing on the corner spire of the high rise with an impossibly long cape. A cape seemingly used only that once for that scene to accomplish that smooth transition from building to spire to Dark Knight, one silhouette, topped with the stern profile that everyone knows. The gargoyle watching over his city. Keeping the evil at bay. The music builds as the chopper cam comes around him showing first the city lights behind him and then the great art deco architecture behind him. Its non specific to a comic yet instantly recognizable as essentially Batman.

Along with these great comic-like snapshots the human interaction of film allows for much subtler demonstrations of character than can be displayed in drawings. So much more information is offered in just a brief few seconds of film. The characterization in Nolan's universe relies on the performances of the actors and less on the frozen visual elements comics use to hold the excitement on the page. Scarecrow didn't need a scary weapon, or a floppy pointed hat, or a dynamically torn shirt, or strategically patched pants, or some crow perched on his shoulder. They look great on the page or in a poster. I welcome them there. Within that frame we want to see something to fuel the mind, what the artists can lead us to imagine. The scarecrow as shown by Nolan is a warped Psychologist who tells us in measured tones how he enjoys the power of the mind over the body. He is never any great visual threat. The mask, reminiscent of a scarecrow, is his "jungian archetype" of choice, upon which his victims project their own crippling fears.

Film, just by its nature is based in reality. It is a document of a sort of existence. We see the actor and if everyone does their job well we interact with the performance the same as we would with any person on the street. We suspend disbelief and accept it as reality. In BB, all the visual information the comic uses to keep that media exciting is distilled in favor of the performance, utilizing the art of this media. Trying to shoehorn in the tools of an altogether different form of visual communication now creates problems.

My fear is that with this aesthetic of the essentials so well established in Begins the Joker's off the page look will take me out of a performance that by all indications already exhibits the entirely unique nature of his character.

ETA: specifics of what looks cartoony:

-Narrow pants left short. The short pant legsbeing an old vaudeville tool used to make the clown look more comic. Cosmo Kramer used the same technique. :P
-the socks. while objectively hilarious, they are artistically problematic
-the elongated "poor man's" shoes
-purple gloves
-the green vest
-the ridiculously patterned shirt
-THAT purple coat. Some purple I think was necessary. Everything purple, no. That is out of place. That coat, in that purple, combined with the other items, looks like it could have come from Cesar Romero's reject pile.
-I'm waiting for the pic that shows an orangeish tie. (sarcasm)

Honestly, when they showed the forcibly altered smile with rumors of it being caused by Batman I thought they were 80% there. So much potential.

I have no idea how you guys post such short responses.

 

[360sculptguy]

Warhammer, that huge post you just quoted gave me a seizure. But then your Avy brought me back.

Sorry about that. I just posted another one. I think its a mental impossibility for me to be brief. (hands over the medication)

 

[Warhammer]

warhammer I always laugh when I look at your avvy

Warhammer, that huge post you just quoted gave me a seizure. But then your Avy brought me back.

Haha.
Maria = :heart: