The Dark Knight Where does most of TDK's critisism come from?

[DarKJediKnight]

And we're back to the 'realism in a comic book film' again, which again is tackled numerous times.

 

[JAK®]

Realism is only applicable when it's convenient.

 

[kedrell]

In superhero films and other scifi/fantasy, I tend to give some leeway to pseudo-science type things as I and 99% of the rest of the audience are not scientists or engineers so what's in actuality probably complete BS is still believable enough for the layman or completely uninformed. So to me THAT gets a pass, for the most part. Batman's cape in BB, and his other gadgets fit into this area IMO.

The bullet thing though comes close to the more familiar. I eventually went with it but it wasn't as easy as the earlier stuff from BB that I mentioned.

 

[Motown Marvel]

the thing for me that was most hard to buy was him magically turning every phone in gotham into a sonar device. the sheer impossibility of that was way too beyond my suspension of disbelief.

 

[kedrell]

That's another one that was pushing it.

 

[The Joker]

I can't believe the level of absurd nit picking here. You're criticizing comic book technology that doesn't exist. Comic book movies in general must be a chore for you to watch.

 

[kedrell]

I didn't say it ruined the movie for me(contrived writing/plot accomplished that all on it's own) but it was less thought out than the pseudo science stuff in BB and thus took more effort to swallow than the cape fabric or microwave emitter or tumbler from BB.

 

[The Joker]

I didn't say it ruined the movie for you either. I said you were nit picking, and making comic book science sound like a chore to watch because it wasn't believable to you. You can buy into ninjas living in the Himalayas plotting destruction of cities with fear toxin and microwave emitters, but applying sonar tech to cellular phones is the hard thing to swallow for you?

This is why I can never take half of these complaints seriously, and why the film makers never should either. They are the essence of nit picking, contradiction, and double standard, IMO. No offense.

Btw, sonar in cell phones is not as far fetched as you may think. Scientists are working on the concept: http://www.sizlopedia.com/2008/09/28/cell-phone-sonar-technology-coming-to-life/

 

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

If you can't take the Batmobile seriously, give up on Batman altogether.

 

[Wolverine1988]

Only real negative thing i have of this movie is that Batman was the weakest among the other characters, he was behind Joker,Harvey/Two Face and Gordon.

The Batman voice Bale is putting on ISN'T working , he needs to tone it down drastically because it was bad in this film.

Overall i have been a bit disapointed with Bales Batman, i remember back in the day thinking he was perfect for Batman , he was good in BB but not great, and in TDK he took a step backwards.

TDKR imo is going to be the film that decides whether Bales Batman becomes the true clear cut Batman portryal , or if the Micheal Keaton debate is still going to linger

 

[Motown Marvel]

fact of the matter is our suspension of belief is based on the constructed universe presented in the film. star wars presents us with a universe where we can accept the impossible science of a lightsaber. blade runner presents us with a universe where free thinking artificial intelligence working on off world colonies can exist. the dark knight presents us with a universe where a grief stricken rich boy can dress as a bat to wage a one man war on crime. but despite how outlandish that sounds, it does not present us with a universe where cell phones emit sonar and computers can pull fingerprints from a digital scan of a shattered bullet. so when these things happen, its hard not to react with a big "WTF?" instead it comes off as cheap and contrived.

 

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

The Batman voice Bale is putting on ISN'T working , he needs to tone it down drastically because it was bad in this film.

The TDK voice was computer enhanced.

 

[Travesty]

Overall i have been a bit disapointed with Bales Batman, i remember back in the day thinking he was perfect for Batman , he was good in BB but not great, and in TDK he took a step backwards.

TDKR imo is going to be the film that decides whether Bales Batman becomes the true clear cut Batman portryal , or if the Micheal Keaton debate is still going to linger

That's a good point, and I have to agree with you. I liked Bale as Batman in BB a lot more than in TDK. Hell, I thought he even took a step backwards in his portrayal of Bruce Wayne. I still think he was best as Bruce, but I loved his portrayal in BB more for both characters/sides.

After TDKR comes out, I'll decide on how good he was overall, cause right now, I think he was best in BB by a long shot. Now, will he be "better" than Keaton? Well, that's all subjective to everybody's taste.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

As I said, to me it's not so much the 'realism' stuff I have a problem with, it's how Nolan will overly convolute a plot, when a simpler way would suffice. My best example is Gordon 'dying' and then returning. While it's a twist is highly unnecessary and doesn't advance the plot in anyway except to show how important Gordon is - something everyone already knew. It's completely forgotten and never addressed again for the whole film.

 

[The Joker]

fact of the matter is our suspension of belief is based on the constructed universe presented in the film. star wars presents us with a universe where we can accept the impossible science of a lightsaber. blade runner presents us with a universe where free thinking artificial intelligence working on off world colonies can exist. the dark knight presents us with a universe where a grief stricken rich boy can dress as a bat to wage a one man war on crime. but despite how outlandish that sounds, it does not present us with a universe where cell phones emit sonar and computers can pull fingerprints from a digital scan of a shattered bullet.

Why does it not present you with a universe where that can happen? You acknowledge we're in a universe with a guy dressed as a giant bat, driving around in a big black tank. Not to mention outlandish technology has been present since Begins. Why is it suddenly taboo to be used in TDK as well?

As I said, to me it's not so much the 'realism' stuff I have a problem with, it's how Nolan will overly convolute a plot, when a simpler way would suffice. My best example is Gordon 'dying' and then returning. While it's a twist is highly unnecessary and doesn't advance the plot in anyway except to show how important Gordon is - something everyone already knew. It's completely forgotten and never addressed again for the whole film.

Two things:

1. Gordon's "death" provided some great moments. The little Cop family on the roof of Police HQ trying to contact Batman. Barbara Gordon's breakdown, and blaming Batman for bringing the craziness of the Joker on Gotham. The sense of urgency that literally nobody and nowhere is safe in Gotham.

Dent: "Rachel, you're not safe there"
Rachel: "This is Gordon's unit. He vouched for these men"
Dent: "And he's gone"

2. Aside from Gordon saying why he did it, and the scenes where he's reunited with his wife and son, what more did you want from it? Apart from anything else, I also loved how it showed how dedicated and smart Gordon was, taking matters into his own hands. Protecting his family, and helping smoke out the Joker. Plus I don't care what anyone says, that moment where he is revealed to be alive by pulling a gun on Joker and saving Batman at the same time, "We got you, you son of a *****", was sheer awesome sauce.

 

[kedrell]

I think it has to do with bullets & finger prints & cellphones being more common things that we interact with and are more familiar with, so they're harder to buy when they're doing things we KNOW can't happen. Very few of us are base jumpers or engineers of military grade weapons like the tumbler or microwave emitter. So there it was easier. That's my take on it anyway.

 

[The Joker]

I think it has to do with bullets & finger prints & cellphones being more common things that we interact with and are more familiar with, so they're harder to buy when they're doing things we KNOW can't happen. Very few of us are base jumpers or engineers of military grade weapons like the tumbler or microwave emitter. So there it was easier. That's my take on it anyway.

So basically your saying your ignorance about certain items like that is what makes it easier for you to accept the outlandish? Not the fact that the outlandish is done in a comic book movie?

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

Two things:

1. Gordon's "death" provided some great moments. The little Cop family on the roof of Police HQ trying to contact Batman. Barbara Gordon's breakdown, and blaming Batman for bringing the craziness of the Joker on Gotham. The sense of urgency that literally nobody and nowhere is safe in Gotham.

Dent: "Rachel, you're not safe there"
Rachel: "This is Gordon's unit. He vouched for these men"
Dent: "And he's gone"

2. Aside from Gordon saying why he did it, and the scenes where he's reunited with his wife and son, what more did you want from it? Apart from anything else, I also loved how it showed how dedicated and smart Gordon was, taking matters into his own hands. Protecting his family, and helping smoke out the Joker. Plus I don't care what anyone says, that moment where he is revealed to be alive by pulling a gun on Joker and saving Batman at the same time, "We got you, you son of a *****", was sheer awesome sauce.

So what? Just because it provided something awesome doesn't justify it. I can think of a really great scene involving Optimus Prime and Megatron doesn't mean I have to shoehorn it into a plot when it doesn't belong. The whole scene was really unnecessary, and didn't really factor into the rest of the film. You could've have a lot of scenes like the ones you described without it. It've been one thing is Gordon had come back in the third act and the ripple effects of the scene had perminated the whole film, but it seemed like a flimsey set-up for the tension in the car chase scene - which, as I say, could've been done much simpler.

This, again, was kind of the spoof we got on South Park when they did their Inception episode. Basically making the point that just because something didn't have to be really convoluted to be cool. Frankly I think it and Memento are Nolan's best films -- but they kind of cater to his style of storytelling. Both are intentionally confusing. Batman is not. It's a rather straightforward story. One of the things I'll say for Burton's credit is that he boiled down the characters to their essence, and I think while it neutered a lot of the ancillary characters like Gordon and Dent he told a simpler story.

Nolan, on the other hand, does tend to overcomplicate his plots.

 

[The Joker]

So what? Just because it provided something awesome doesn't justify it.

It doesn't? So we shouldn't have minor plot points that provide awesome moments then?

I can think of a really great scene involving Optimus Prime and Megatron doesn't mean I have to shoehorn it into a plot when it doesn't belong. The whole scene was really unnecessary, and didn't really factor into the rest of the film.

But it did factor into the movie. Aside from the greatness I mentioned above, it showed the extreme lengths the Joker was driving the good guys to. Batman was contemplating turning himself in. Gordon was faking his death. Harvey was abducting suspects in ambulances and terrorizing them with a gun.

It wasn't a major plot point either. It lasted all of about 15 minutes. I think your reaction is pure hyperbole.

This, again, was kind of the spoof we got on South Park when they did their Inception episode. Basically making the point that just because something didn't have to be really convoluted to be cool.

There isn't much that South Park has not mocked in some form over the years. I don't hold that in any kind of high esteem, even though I love the show.

 

[kedrell]

So basically your saying your ignorance about certain items like that is what makes it easier for you to accept the outlandish? Not the fact that the outlandish is done in a comic book movie?

Yes. Especially in a film that's trying to be hyper-realistic(Nolan's words, not mine). Now if a film is going for a more live action cartoon vibe then things get even easier to accept. That's what Burton & Schumakers films were.

 

[The Joker]

Yes. Especially in a film that's trying to be hyper-realistic(Nolan's words, not mine). Now if a film is going for a more live action cartoon vibe then things get even easier to accept. That's what Burton & Schumakers films were.

That's fair enough. I don't agree with you, but at least I can understand where you're coming from.

 

[kedrell]

I just expect a film(any film) to abide by the rules it sets up for itself. When it violates that, I'm gonna call BS on it.

 

[The Joker]

But Nolan's movies don't set up any rules. That's my whole entire point. Where is it specified anywhere in either movie that outrageous tech is a no no? Most of the tech used in both movies is unrealistic. The schemes of the villains are unrealistic. Batman's whole set up is unrealistic. Ninjas living in the Himalayas is unrealistic. Harvey Dent's facial scarring is unrealistic. The movies are filled with the fantastical.

I'm still utterly confused where these rules are supposedly set in the actual movies.

 

[Fudgie]

I think it has to do with bullets & finger prints & cellphones being more common things that we interact with and are more familiar with, so they're harder to buy when they're doing things we KNOW can't happen. Very few of us are base jumpers or engineers of military grade weapons like the tumbler or microwave emitter. So there it was easier. That's my take on it anyway.

Dont buy that. The tumbler is just a fancy version of a vehicle. You see cars and other vehicles every day dont you. You don't have to be a mechanic to know the batmobile or tumbler or whatever ya wanna call it is ott.

 

[Travesty]

See, for me, it's a bit strange, I guess. I can buy the whole sonar-cellphone plot, but I have a hard time swallowing the fingerprint on the bullet. It may be because of the setup of the plot line, but either way, it is what it is......