The Dark Knight Rises Why doesnt Nolan give more nods/easter eggs to the fans?

[The Guard]

Why give Easter Eggs when you can simply reinvent potential easter eggs into pointless side characters? I.E, Montoya becomes Ramirez.

 

[Bat-Mite]

Because fans would just LOVE to see a beloved character like Montoya become crooked. I'm glad they made her into a different character completely. If they'd turned Montoya from a bold, respectable character into a cowardly, crooked cop, I would have been pissed.

 

[The Guard]

Here's an idea. Don't create a pointless side character...use one that already exists in the context that she exists as in the comics.

No, that would be too hard. You've got to have that incredibly powerful revelation that she's corrupt that's given away oh, halfway through the movie with that "subtle" camera shot.

 

[Laderlappen]

I think you're really overreacting Guard. She's what the 11th or 12th character in the movie. I dont see whats so much "pointless" about her compared to other movies' 11th or 12th character.

 

[deathfromabove]

Why give Easter Eggs when you can simply reinvent potential easter eggs into pointless side characters? I.E, Montoya becomes Ramirez.

just because she is hispanic? montoya wasnt corrupt in the books and had a completely different personality. if he called ramirez montoya you would just ***** that he changed the character.

and if you think her character was pointless you should pack up that typewriter and find yourself a new profession/hobby

 

[deathfromabove]

The irony here is that he asks for easter eggs yet is completely oblvious to the fact that using james jr at the end as a focus in itself is an easter egg to the climax of Batman: Year One

i was going to say that.

There were plenty of Easter Eggs

Bruce's scarred back - Nod to War on Criime

Courtroom scene to Harvey Dent - Nod to Two-Face's comicbook origin

Heck, the Joker's plan to corrupt Harvey Dent is a giant Easter Egg to the Killing Joke.

yeah there a plenty of nods to the books if you are well versed enough in bat lore to notice them. besides, obvious nods can be hokey and distracting imo.

 

[The Guard]

If I was typing in all caps, I suppose that would be overreacting. She's a poorly executed supporting character who exists at the expense of characters from the actual mythology. I don't think it's overreacting to prefer one over the other.

I love how people seem to think that if one thing changed, another thing would not. Obviously I am not advocating a corrupt character named "Montoya". I would have thought that would be obvious.

She existed to be a plot device with no deeper meaning. "Oh, my mother's in the hospital, I'm such a deep character". Seems pretty pointless to me, but hey, there are still those who believe that just because you put some random item in a story three or four times over the course of a movie and tie it loosely to the plot in some fashion that you have some amazing knowledge of structure and storytelling.

 

[Anita18]

She existed to be a plot device with no deeper meaning. "Oh, my mother's in the hospital, I'm such a deep character". Seems pretty pointless to me, but hey, there are still those who believe that just because you put some random item in a story three or four times over the course of a movie and tie it loosely to the plot in some fashion that you have some amazing knowledge of structure and storytelling.

All the characters exist to further the story, you know.

And she shows how deep the corruption is in the MCU. Wuertz immediately came off like a dirtbag, so it wasn't at all surprising that he was one of Maroni's sources. Ramirez was desperate - she's not a bad person like Wuertz is, but she got suckered into the mob nonetheless. That's why it's more shocking when Maroni outs her as the other traitor.

 

[The Guard]

The problem is that it's not shocking. Because halfway through the movie, they give it away with a single camera shot.

 

[deathfromabove]

as well there are some who seem to think because they write they a have a good knowledge of the same.

just off the top of my head ramirez served two purposes. to show that even gordon is capable of making mistakes and is prone to poor judgement and that sometimes those who fall prey to corruption arent just greedy or evil people. one of the major themes of the movie is that anyone can fall from grace and every major character in the movie (well except mr j maybe) engages in some pretty murky moral behaviour that goes against their own beliefs.

 

[Anita18]

The problem is that it's not shocking. Because halfway through the movie, they give it away with a single camera shot.

I didn't catch it until my second viewing, and I treat as one of those "second viewing" goodies, like a lot of what happens in The Prestige or Memento. I don't think it's outrageously obvious. The camera just moves to her looking rather melancholy - it doesn't cut to a dramatic close-up of her face.

 

[Laderlappen]

I think you're overreacting because you're complaining about a very small character in the movie wasn't deeper. It IS a small character and her role isnt less deep or more pointless than other character's that size. Why of all characters should they focus on Ramirez, and what do you suggest they should have done instead?

 

[The Guard]

You misunderstand. I'm not complaining that she wasn't deeper. I'm complaining that she existed at the expense of existing characters being portrayed.

If you like the use of the character, you like it. I don't. I found her character forced, unimportant, uninteresting, and generally just poorly executed and acted.

 

[the GRIN Reaper]

How can she be poorly acted? She had like a whopping maybe 6 minutes worth of screen time. And that's being generous. Not every character in a film is going to have a story arc, or overwhelmind depths. LOL ...

You didn't like her fine. But it's a pointless complaint.

 

[EagleVision]

I think a nod or two wouldn't hurt but that is clearly not the man's style. He's about two things- telling a good congruent story and realism being a must. Really everything else with Nolan goes to the wayside. After all look what he did to Two-Face!! The villain I'd have to say is easily THE BEST PHYSICALLY LOOKING VILLAIN to the comics that Nolan has done so far and could have easily been expounded. Granted there's a method to Nolan's madness and yes he does satisfy us the Batfan because no one has ever done it on this level before. But easter eggs isn't this man's style. We can't get everything we want.

On a side note and completely different trail, I do hope that if Nolan should stop making these films after 3 that his brother Jonathan will continue where he left off. People should note that he was a big part of this film and I believe can carry the vision of the Bat once C. Nolan puts down the mantle. It's Nolan or bust!

 

[Jorriss]

I don't understand why you think Ramirez was made at the expense of Montoya. They needed a character to do what Ramirez did, so they designed her. It's not as if, if Ramirez was left out, they would of had Montoya.

 

[the_scream]

There are Easter Eggs but filling the film with obvious ones is gimmicky.

For instance, the courtroom scene where Maroni's goon pulls a gun on Dent was supposed to be a nod to fans expecting him to get splashed with acid. People who are unfamiliar with Two-Face wouldn't get that.

 

[BubbaGump]

I don't know if any of you guys read comics, but there was a LOT of nods and easter eggs in the movie. No Man's Land, Gotham Central Soft Targets, etc.

But leave the "fanboy" nods to Marvel...and on superhero forums. Nolan is a top class filmmaker, not Zack Snyder.

 

[deathfromabove]

I don't know if any of you guys read comics, but there was a LOT of nods and easter eggs in the movie. No Man's Land, Gotham Central Soft Targets, etc.

But leave the "fanboy" nods to Marvel...and on superhero forums. Nolan is a top class filmmaker, not Zack Snyder.

now we are are talking!



like i said anyone well versed in the source material will find plenty of homage and nods.

 

[Laderlappen]

You misunderstand. I'm not complaining that she wasn't deeper. I'm complaining that she existed at the expense of existing characters being portrayed.

If you like the use of the character, you like it. I don't. I found her character forced, unimportant, uninteresting, and generally just poorly executed and acted.

So you're complaining that her name is Ramirez and not Montoya?

 

[The Guard]

Christ, some of you are dense. How much clearer can I make my point?

 

[the_scream]

You misunderstand. I'm not complaining that she wasn't deeper. I'm complaining that she existed at the expense of existing characters being portrayed.

If you like the use of the character, you like it. I don't. I found her character forced, unimportant, uninteresting, and generally just poorly executed and acted.

I disagree. I think Nolan did a good job with a small character. She could have just been a nobody in the background but Nolan at least fleshed out her character a bit more. She wasn't supposed to be a major character. Just someone in the background who was given some more purpose than a throwaway character.

Sorry, but this is the absolute dumbest complaint I have heard for this film. It just goes to show that no matter how much effort is made, there will always be someone to find fault.

 

[stlblues84]

Why doesnt Nolan give more nods/easter eggs to the fans?

He was busy making the best superhero movie of all time.

 

[Laderlappen]

Christ, some of you are dense. How much clearer can I make my point?

Dont be a dick. If its neither Montoya or the character not being deep enough, when you point isnt very clear because thats all you have been talking about.

 

[Steyin]

Ramirez is given away in her first scene; the way her eyes wander while she says the mom in the hospital line is obvious somethings up, even more so upon a second viewing.