The Dark Knight Rises Why I think Rises can top TDK

[KalMart]

There is loads of CMB flicks that had no good marketing campaigns that made a ton of money. Raimi's Spider-Man movies for starters.

Batman and Robin was gone and done 8 years ago. 2005 was in the height of the comic book movie craze. Batman Begins had no excuse not to make more money than it did. It didn't even have any stiff competition when it was released.

Few, if any 'CBM' franchises, though, had a recent dubious history like Batman did. I think part of the growing popularity of the genre was due to it being new characters/franchises (for movies) like Xmen and Spidey...not ones that pretty much everyone knew had already been done.

Also, it didn't seem like the marketing could really latch onto the louder, more colorful/bright aspects that they might in other action/adventure films...so BB was pretty much left to word=of-couth, where it really got its steam from. I don't think WB themselves were ready to deal with the concept of superhero movie as a sort of artsy gothic thriller, etc.

So in a lot of ways, the genre itself may not have been quite prepared to have this new approach to Batman...and CBNs altogether...really stand out. hence, a franchise name kinda' low in popularity was its initial calling card, and it really took seeing the movie to get what it was all about..

 

[Mysteryman]

There is loads of CMB flicks that had no good marketing campaigns that made a ton of money. Raimi's Spider-Man movies for starters.

Batman and Robin was gone and done 8 years ago. 2005 was in the height of the comic book movie craze. Batman Begins had no excuse not to make more money than it did. It didn't even have any stiff competition when it was released.

That doesnt change the fact that the public was reticent about a new Batman film after B&R.

 

[The Joker]

There is loads of CMB flicks that had no good marketing campaigns that made a ton of money. Raimi's Spider-Man movies for starters.

Batman and Robin was gone and done 8 years ago. 2005 was in the height of the comic book movie craze. Batman Begins had no excuse not to make more money than it did. It didn't even have any stiff competition when it was released.

Very true. Being a Batman movie should have been a big enough marketing machine as it was. The trailers alone should have convinced audiences this was not a Batman and Robin fiasco.

Then there's the word of mouth about how good it was after release. Many movies with no strong product name, or marketing legs, or even notable cast like Begins had made a mint from strong word of mouth. John Carpenter's Halloween is my favorite example.

It's a shame Begins didn't make more than it did.

 

[KalMart]

Very true. Being a Batman movie should have been a big enough marketing machine as it was. The trailers alone should have convinced audiences this was not a Batman and Robin fiasco.

Then there's the word of mouth about how good it was after release. Many movies with no strong product name, or marketing legs, or even notable cast like Begins had made a mint from strong word of mouth. John Carpenter's Halloween is my favorite example.

It's a shame Begins didn't make more than it did.

But at the same time, it may be one of the rare recent films that was actually respected outside of its numbers by both non-comic fans and fans alike for its quality as a film. What it didn't do i gross I feel is overweighed by how it's seen as the start of a pretty special era and franchise achievement. In a strange way it's almost better that it didn't do gangbusters, because there was more to pick up form the film itself than riding a wave, so to speak.

 

[Fudgie]

That doesnt change the fact that the public was reticent about a new Batman film after B&R.

How do you know they were? Was some sort of marketing survey done or something. Schumacher's garbage was gone nearly a decade ago. CBM movies were everywhere in 2005 and making tons of money.

Batman is one of the biggest CB names in history. He gets a brand new movie with a great cast and it does below average numbers. Blaming Schumacher for that doesn't cut it.

 

[\S/]

All this talk of BB vs. TDK reminds me that I enjoy BB much more.

TDK is great, but BB feels much more like a Batman story to me.

That's why I was elated when details began emerging that TDKR would be reaching back to BB thematically and otherwise.

It would prove very ironic if the movie that is overshadowed story-wise in the final analysis of this trilogy is TDK, at least from a narrative standpoint. It would seem that BB and TDK are heavily connected, whereas little of TDK followed the tone/narrative of BB.

\S/

 

[KalMart]

How do you know they were? Was some sort of marketing survey done or something. Schumacher's garbage was gone nearly a decade ago. CBM movies were everywhere in 2005 and making tons of money.

Batman is one of the biggest CB names in history. He gets a brand new movie with a great cast and it does below average numbers. Blaming Schumacher for that doesn't cut it.

Again, the genre was still growing, and unlike a Ghost Rider or Gl of recent years, B&R was seen as a lone flagship failure that took down the entire genre with it. That is a stigma that was still palpable, and on that no other franchise was dealing with. It didn't sink BB, but it was enough of a hindrance for a soft opening until people started seeing and talking about it more.

 

[Fudgie]

It would seem that BB and TDK are heavily connected, whereas little of TDK followed the tone/narrative of BB.

\S/

That's probably why TDK was more successful. It's not a long drawn out origin story with lots of fear talk, shaky cameras, and two boring under used villains.

 

[The Batman]

.....let me understand this....is the current argument basically saying that Batman cant carry his own movies to BO success without an over the top colorful villain?

 

[KalMart]

.....let me understand this....is the current argument basically saying that Batman cant carry his own movies to BO success without an over the top colorful villain?

I dunno....has he?

 

[The Joker]

.....let me understand this....is the current argument basically saying that Batman cant carry his own movies to BO success without an over the top colorful villain?

I don't believe that for a minute. But Batman Begins is the only Batman movie that's considered good which didn't overly impress at the box office.

Batman Returns could be considered another one, but that had a reason. It got a parental backlash for being too dark and violent for children. Hence why WB went camp with Batman Forever.

 

[The Batman]

I dunno....has he?

I don't think he's been given the chance.

Honestly, as much as I like Bale and Keaton's portrayals, the character is often not used to his full potential onscreen. On (comic) paper, Batman is a mysterious badass with Sherlock Holmes' brain, Bruce Lee's fighting skills, and Clint Eastwood's ability to make people **** their pants. Seven movies in, and we've only seen a fraction of how badass Batman can be, IMO.

It dosen't help that he's often purposely pushed aside (for lack of a better term) while the villains get to chew scenery.

It's just sad that the Batman movie where he got to show off his skills the most...was the one no one really saw.

 

[The Batman]

I don't believe that for a minute. But Batman Begins is the only Batman movie that's considered good which didn't overly impress at the box office.

Batman Returns could be considered another one, but that had a reason. It got a parental backlash for being too dark and violent for children. Hence why WB went camp with Batman Forever.

I agree with you, like I said, I don't think Batman's actually been given the chance to prove how much he can draw without a joker or catwoman "stealing the show", which is why its annoying when people claim his villains are more interesting than he is.

It dosen't help that Burton admittedly pushed Batman to the background more, and in BR, it shows. It dosen't help when Nolan admitedly makes Dent the "Backbone" of TDK and gives Joker some great material, not that Batman was lacking by comparison, but by the same token, I understand why people feel he was sort of a nonfactor in TDK

 

[Sikri06]

How do you know they were? Was some sort of marketing survey done or something. Schumacher's garbage was gone nearly a decade ago. CBM movies were everywhere in 2005 and making tons of money.

Batman is one of the biggest CB names in history. He gets a brand new movie with a great cast and it does below average numbers. Blaming Schumacher for that doesn't cut it.

I never saw BB in theaters. The first time I saw it was in 2007 on DVD, because the hype for TDK had started. I had stopped paying attention to the Bat-universe after B&R and I didn't like the whole concept of a reboot. It was Batman '89 that made me a fan. To go back and tell that story again felt redundant at the time.

After seeing BB I planned to see TDK in theaters, but it was the excellent reviews that convinced me to go to the midnight premiere.

 

[Brother Jack]

It dosen't help that Burton admittedly pushed Batman to the background more, and in BR, it shows. It dosen't help when Nolan admitedly makes Dent the "Backbone" of TDK and gives Joker some great material, not that Batman was lacking by comparison, but by the same token, I understand why people feel he was sort of a nonfactor in TDK

I don't see how one could think that if they've seen Begins. The entirety of TDK is because of Batman; some characters exist solely because of him, others live and die because of him. I suppose people get caught up on flashy, weighty performances and characters and an arc for Bruce that is more inward and implicit.

 

[surgeonviper]

I hear a lot of people saying Nolan cant top TDK, "It was just too great of a movie. Would be surprising if he can make a better movie" People have said. I think Nolan can easily make this film the best out of the series.

I think this movie has great potential, of course its going to be good but im talking Nolan really out doing himself. The story sounds like it could really be promising, with the talks about rises coming full circle and it connecting with begins. Nolan looks like he really created an interesting character with Bane, I have a feeling he could end up as one of the most iconic villains in today's comic book films.

oh absolutely. I mean lets face it. i knew AVENGERS was going to make some money. As a matter of fact i predicted 620. Even though it came up short. i knew it was going to challenge DK.

Now... i have a feelign that RISES is going to be far greater.

Just take for instance the fact that it is written by one of the best in the business. And the fact that it is directed by again the best in the business.

You've got oscar winners strewn through the cast. You have virtually no weak links here.

the selection of a villain who nolan suggests is the essence of "military power" is a fitting adversary. this is the ultimate endgame villain.

The music Heard last night on the mtv preview it is powerful.provocative. it just screams POWER of emotions.

The special effects especially the morphing of 4-5 different cities into one giant metropolis is unreal.

The idea to film the bat cave not on a set but in a giant cave in Iceland.

Filming in India to set up the films back story.

This movie is major in it's scope. It just looks BIG.it feels impressive. i mean when it was first stated that this is "the epic conclusion" i shied away and kind of felt like it was bad luck to call your movie an epic without it being first called that by a reviewer. but i have to admit. This may be the first time in cinema history where the perfect synergy of components met to create the perfect cinematic experience.

Remember when i said that avenger would make 620 million domestically. Well guess what i predicted in the same estimation for dark knight rises...

755 million domestically.
RISES reclaims it's title by staying on top for 2 consecutive months and bests titanic all time score.

 

[DKDetective]

Uummm, all reports we have suggest that the Batcave was filmed on a soundstage if I didn't miss something? Even that allegedly spy photo from the set way back seems extremely similar to the shots we have gotten in footage and such.

Where did the cave in Iceland thing come from?

 

[KalMart]

I don't think he's been given the chance.

Honestly, as much as I like Bale and Keaton's portrayals, the character is often not used to his full potential onscreen. On (comic) paper, Batman is a mysterious badass with Sherlock Holmes' brain, Bruce Lee's fighting skills, and Clint Eastwood's ability to make people **** their pants. Seven movies in, and we've only seen a fraction of how badass Batman can be, IMO.

It dosen't help that he's often purposely pushed aside (for lack of a better term) while the villains get to chew scenery.

It's just sad that the Batman movie where he got to show off his skills the most...was the one no one really saw.

Hmm....I think the real question is....why would we NOT want an amazing villain for a Batman film? Or is the concern that i he public eye, he's taking too much of a back seat as a 'vehicle' for what ends up feeling more like cool villain stories rather than Batman stories? Kind of a nice problem to have, in some ways....unless we feel it's just the Joker that Batman depends on too much.

 

[joker1524]

so let me ask some of u guys this? if u had to make any changes to tdk to make it feel like a more "batman" film...what would u do? what would u change?

 

[KalMart]

so let me ask some of u guys this? if u had to make any changes to tdk to make it feel like a more "batman" film...what would u do? what would u change?

Don't include the Joker in the story?

 

[joker1524]

Don't include the Joker in the story?

lmaooo

 

[cobrastatus]

Tdk joker was amazing and made that movie but in contrast the avengers did pretty well without the need for a villain of that scope cause the heroes came first [center of the story]

 

[DorneyDave]

Don't include the Joker in the story?

 

[KalMart]

Please offer a better idea if you have one.

 

[The Joker]

Tdk joker was amazing and made that movie but in contrast the avengers did pretty well without the need for a villain of that scope cause the heroes came first [center of the story]

What a great comparison. Six heroes vs one villain in the story