The Dark Knight What can kill TDK as a movie? Overestimating?

[Keyser Sushi]

I like them too. Like I said "I liked Casino Royale"

It just didn't really change my life or anything. I was expecting a little more.

Bond movies are rarely life-altering, I think. Unless they're so bad it makes you reconsider breathing...

 

[L0ngsh0t]

Bond movies are rarely life-altering, I think. Unless they're so bad it makes you reconsider breathing...

I beg to differ, Ever since Live and Let Die I have wanted to be a white english man in Harlem

 

[Heretic]

Ever since Van Helsing I've wanted to be a white American man in Josie Maran

 

[Keyser Sushi]

Ok, so I think I could live with Gylls if it is under the circumstances described.

Really, Never say Never again? I think I may have to watch it again, it's been a while for that one, i don't remember it being that good.

It's "Thunderball," but this one actually resembles the book. And it was not an official Bond movie - meaning it was made without permission. LOL. Directed by Irvin Kirshner (The Empire Strikes Back) and introducing Kim Basinger.

OHMSS all the way I totally dig that one.

That surprises me, but it gives me some faith in you. OHMSS is one of the best Bonds ever.

 

[L0ngsh0t]

It's "Thunderball," but this one actually resembles the book. And it was not an official Bond movie - meaning it was made without permission. LOL. Directed by Irvin Kirshner (The Empire Strikes Back) and introducing Kim Basinger.



That surprises me, but it gives me some faith in you. OHMSS is one of the best Bonds ever.

Dude, lets be honest the one thing we see way differently is the duel of Pirates, and SR going on in the Official Anything Except Dent thread, located in the Official Harvey Dent casting thread, yes I may think Hulk sucks, but the last time I watched it I was a Junior in Highschool. The saying goes great minds think alike, but I like to say great minds think alike on somethings, and disagree on others.

 

[Cats]

The difference is that Superman Returns takes place in (at the very least) a world with a few fantastical elements.

It wasn't their take on fantasy that was the problem. They strived so hard to mimick Donner that they forgot Superman in the process, not to mention Clark Kent, as a person out of his alter ego, was almost non-existent. Lex Luthor stole the spotlight for half of the movie, Lois Lane and Richard White took another huge portion. So who is Superman? I think I forgot I was watching a movie about Superman halfway through. Superman Returns doesn't think it important to develop its key characters, while Batman Begins gave it the greatest emphasis, and that is where Nolan excelled.

 

[Ronny Shade]

You can poke as many wholes in Batman Begins plot as you can with Superman Returns. The difference is that Superman Returns takes place in (at the very least) a world with a few fantastical elements. Batman Begins strived for realism.

Which makes the holes that much more glaring

 

[Ronny Shade]

It wasn't their take on fantasy that was the problem. They strived so hard to mimick Donner that they forgot Superman in the process, not to mention Clark Kent, as a person out of his alter ego, was almost non-existent. Lex Luthor stole the spotlight for half of the movie, Lois Lane and Richard White took another huge portion. So who is Superman? I think I forgot I was watching a movie about Superman halfway through. Superman Returns doesn't think it important to develop its key characters, while Batman Begins gave it the greatest emphasis, and that is where Nolan excelled.

Those are some of the most valid points against SR I've heard. If you take it as existing only in the Donner universe (which it was) then they won't bother you. I mean, didn't you see the previews? I can't imagine anyone went into that movie still thinking they were going to get comic or TAS inspired superman. It was part of the Donner franchise, in that regard, it was a terrific film.

 

[L0ngsh0t]

It wasn't their take on fantasy that was the problem. They strived so hard to mimick Donner that they forgot Superman in the process, not to mention Clark Kent, as a person out of his alter ego, was almost non-existent. Lex Luthor stole the spotlight for half of the movie, Lois Lane and Richard White took another huge portion. So who is Superman? I think I forgot I was watching a movie about Superman halfway through. Superman Returns doesn't think it important to develop its key characters, while Batman Begins gave it the greatest emphasis, and that is where Nolan excelled.

Excellent, like I said before Kent becomes a one word wonder for most of the moive, making Luthor the main character in a movie titled Superman

 

[StorminNorman]

Which makes the holes that much more glaring

Exactly

 

[StorminNorman]

It wasn't their take on fantasy that was the problem. They strived so hard to mimick Donner that they forgot Superman in the process, not to mention Clark Kent, as a person out of his alter ego, was almost non-existent. Lex Luthor stole the spotlight for half of the movie, Lois Lane and Richard White took another huge portion. So who is Superman? I think I forgot I was watching a movie about Superman halfway through. Superman Returns doesn't think it important to develop its key characters, while Batman Begins gave it the greatest emphasis, and that is where Nolan excelled.

We didn't see much of Public Clark - we didn't need to. You can only see Clark stumble through Metropolis so many times. What we did see was the "True Clark" - he was simply in the suit. Clark is not such a superficial character that he is present only when the glasses are on.

When Superman was watching Lois, and her family - that was Clark. It was tearing him up that Richard was living his life. When Superman talks to Lois on top of the Planet - that is Clark. When Superman is passing down his words from his father - that is Clark.

When Superman is fighting Lex, saving kittens, stopping falling planes (and discussing the safety of flying) - THAT is "Superman".

Much of the film was spent on Lois, however just about everything involving Lois - tied back into Clark. You could make a case that Lex got too much time, but he is Kevin Spacey and he was brilliant.

This was not an origin story, so you did not need the huge character development of the main character as you did with Begins.

 

[Cats]

What we did see was the "True Clark" - he was simply in the suit. Clark is not such a superficial character that he is present only when the glasses are on.

Quite the opposite Stormin... Clark is superficial that's why the only description you can give me about him is as 'stumbling through Metropolis'. Singer has made it that Clark is only himself when he's Superman. Clark Kent is nothing more than a placeholder in society till he can put on the suit again.

When Superman was watching Lois, and her family - that was Clark. It was tearing him up that Richard was living his life. When Superman talks to Lois on top of the Planet - that is Clark. When Superman is passing down his words from his father - that is Clark.

What I see from Superman here is an irresponsible boyfriend who leaves the supposed 'woman of his dreams' for some vain exploit with no consideration of her feelings, nor the people he's responsible for. When she finally decides to move on, he returns and behaves like he expected her to wait the five years, even though he left her with a child to raise on her own. I don't think that's what Superman from the comics would've done, I don't think that's what Superman from the animated would've done, and I don't think that's what Donner's Superman would've done either! So where in the world did Singer get the idea from?

This was not an origin story, so you did not need the huge character development of the main character as you did with Begins.

You don't need an origin story to explore a character who's as well loved as Superman. Mask of Zorro was if anything, an ending story for the original Zorro, and yet Anthony Hopkin's character was portrayed so well and so deeply that you would've felt you'd lost your own father at the end of the movie.

 

[Eros]

We didn't see much of Public Clark - we didn't need to. You can only see Clark stumble through Metropolis so many times. What we did see was the "True Clark" - he was simply in the suit. Clark is not such a superficial character that he is present only when the glasses are on.

When Superman was watching Lois, and her family - that was Clark. It was tearing him up that Richard was living his life. When Superman talks to Lois on top of the Planet - that is Clark. When Superman is passing down his words from his father - that is Clark.

When Superman is fighting Lex, saving kittens, stopping falling planes (and discussing the safety of flying) - THAT is "Superman"..

No one was expecting Dean Cain's Clark Kent in superman returns, but they were expecting Clark Kent to have more to do.

 

[Babs Gordon]

Can we excise this thread of the SR discussion? There's a seperate forum for this people. Much as I enjoyed superman returns and would love to nitpick the nitpickers, this is a thread/forum about TDK.

 

[Eros]

I agree babs

 

[L0ngsh0t]

Can we excise this thread of the SR discussion? There's a seperate forum for this people. Much as I enjoyed superman returns and would love to nitpick the nitpickers, this is a thread/forum about TDK.

If there was anything to talk about I normally would agree with you, but the simple fact that this is 100 percent opinion, and unverfied speculation, without anything, not even really a thread of fact, outside of a BOF report that said Dent was going to be 'unconventional'. There is a whole thread titled Joaquin Pheonix...he must be the one, and that is someones opinion based off of nothing really, I don't think I have read one report, or Nolan Interview, or anything that has ever once said Pheonix is in the running for the job, but yet we still have a thread dedicated to disscussion on what Pheonix will be like as Dent, which seems kind of silly to me. Now would you please, let Norman rebutle Cats, or you could do it, or Keyser could do it, Cats brings some good points, and shouldn't be ignored because this isn't a Superman thread.

 

[The Game]

The simple fact is if this movie does not top BB it will be seen as a disappointment . Cinemon is right about people oversetimating this film, I mean after the furore surrounding Superman Returns and the subsequent result, you would think people would be more realistic (you know who you are).

 

[Cinemaman]

^^^

 

[L0ngsh0t]

The simple fact is if this movie does not top BB it will be seen as a disappointment . Cinemon is right about people oversetimating this film, I mean after the furore surrounding Superman Returns and the subsequent result, you would think people would be more realistic (you know who you are).

I disagree, I do not think Spiderman 2, in anyway compares with Spiderman 1, I have even thought sometimes Spiderman 2's only purpose is to bridge the gap between 1 and 3. In saying that, I still really like Spiderman 2 as a movie, I do not see it as a dissapointment, but I do not consider it a better movie then its predessecor.

Now, on SR, it's clearly not half the movie its predessecors where, but in saying that, it didn't have to be for me to like it, it just had to pass the minimun bar, that is it had to entertain me for X amount of time (among other things but that is the minimum I expect from a movie). Now, I am 100 percent behind expecting TDK to be superior to its sequel, much in the same respects Empire is a better movie (imo), or Two Towers is a better movie (imo), or Aliens is a better movie, it is completely fair to think that. If by chance it isn't a better movie, but sill entertains me, and is a good movie, I will not be dissapointed, I will just view it like I view Spiderman 2, a good movie, just not as good as its original.

 

[Boom]

BATMAN FORUM.

DISCUSSION OF BATMAN.

Thanks .

 

[Anguissette1979]

The only standard I've set for TDK is BB. I don't bother comparing it to other franchises. It is what it is and I can only imagine that that's how Nolan wanted it - set apart from the rest... something to break the mold - even if it's just the "movie series go downhill after the first one" mold.

I'm going to read stuff on here but I'm not going to debate some miniscule point ad nauseum as I did two years ago. I plan on letting myself enjoy TDK wholly for what it is... a kick ass action movie. It's not a life altering experience... it's a fracking movie

That being said, if Nolan suddenly decided to emulate the style of B&R or something, I'd be rip**** but I don't know that it's getting undeserved hype. If it were already all over ET or other industry media outlets this far in advance that would be a little strange but nobody else out there (other than us Hypesters of course) is paying attention to this yet.

 

[L0ngsh0t]

BATMAN FORUM.

DISCUSSION OF BATMAN.

Thanks .

Well we are talking about Batman, through comparisons to other movies that are like TDK, like Superman Returns, or Spiderman 2. This thread is about what can kill the sequel, so we are using other sequels as reference to our view on the subject. Now, In the Harvey Dent Thread, it is out of hand, and I do apologize about that, but here, this is just disscussion related to Batman TDK.

 

[Ronny Shade]

y'all are party poopers.


Yes you, Boom.


And Babs

 

[StorminNorman]

Quite the opposite Stormin... Clark is superficial that's why the only description you can give me about him is as 'stumbling through Metropolis'. Singer has made it that Clark is only himself when he's Superman. Clark Kent is nothing more than a placeholder in society till he can put on the suit again.

No - Clark Kent is a very deep character, however Clark PRESENTS himself as the guy who is awkward and stumbles through metropolis.

What I see from Superman here is an irresponsible boyfriend who leaves the supposed 'woman of his dreams' for some vain exploit with no consideration of her feelings, nor the people he's responsible for. When she finally decides to move on, he returns and behaves like he expected her to wait the five years, even though he left her with a child to raise on her own. I don't think that's what Superman from the comics would've done, I don't think that's what Superman from the animated would've done, and I don't think that's what Donner's Superman would've done either! So where in the world did Singer get the idea from?

Some vain exploit? Trying to find out more about your people, a once great and mighty civilization of which you are the only one. Superman did underestimate his importance in the life of Lois and Metropolis, and he sees that when he returns. It clearly upsets him. I don't see Superman as upset AT Lois for moving up. Sure, he is disapointed and it hurts him - but he does not ***** to her about it, he accepts it - even when he learns the child is his. He did not know about the child - so he didn't "leave her to raise the child on her own", now that he knows, I am sure we will see Superman take a more active role in Jason's life.

You don't need an origin story to explore a character who's as well loved as Superman. Mask of Zorro was if anything, an ending story for the original Zorro, and yet Anthony Hopkin's character was portrayed so well and so deeply that you would've felt you'd lost your own father at the end of the movie.

The character is explored in Superman Returns - just not to the extent of Batman Begins.

 

[StorminNorman]

No one was expecting Dean Cain's Clark Kent in superman returns, but they were expecting Clark Kent to have more to do.

I guess it depends on how you see Superman. Is Clark Kent the real person and Superman his alter ego? Or is Clark Kent just a facade? I see Clark Kent being the real person, which means that Clark Kent isn't created by Supes putting on a pair of glasses. The Clark Kent that Superman presents (the awkward, underwhelming guy) is an act. The true Clark Kent can be seen whenever Superman is either alone, or with the ones he trusts - whether he is wearing glasses, on a farm, on in cape.