The Dark Knight Rises You Have My Permission To Lounge - Part 6

Status
Not open for further replies.
The city being cut off from the rest of the world was fine with me, but the bomb was a little silly. It reminded me of the bomb Two-Face used in Batman Forever.
 
I"ve actually never read No Man's Land. I know in most of the movies or books, Gotham is under some sort of siege by a master criminal, but I'm used to it being a bit more 'contained'. When they went with the neutron bomb and the president getting involved, they completely lost me. It felt more like Superman territory to me. I might have even been able to overlook the Blake revelation (which also took me out of the film) had the "threat' been a bit better.
 
I think you're over exaggerating the involvement of the President. He had like a 10 second clip on a TV screen. The rest of it was a Gotham contained situation.
 
Imagine if Trump was the president in the movie.

"This Bane guy, I love him. I love this guy. He is a great guy. Believe me. He is gonna make Gotham great again. I read about him on the internet. He destroyed League of Shadows. Trust me folks"
 
And his tweet:

'The corrupt media claims that Gotham is under siege. Bane would never do that. Sad"
 
For me its not really an exaggeration. I just prefer to see whatever crisis that is facing gotham to be dealt with batman and or the gcpd. I just usually associate matters that involve the president, even if its 10 seconds, to show that the scale of the threat is one of national interest. Its just not my thing.
 
Imagine if Trump was the president in the movie.

"This Bane guy, I love him. I love this guy. He is a great guy. Believe me. He is gonna make Gotham great again. I read about him on the internet. He destroyed League of Shadows. Trust me folks"
Haha..ok...now that I would like to have seen..
 
In the aftermath, Trump tweets:

"See. Told you Bane was not the bad guy. It was a woman. Shame she never got to meet me. At least a 8/10. SAD"
 
Imagine if Trump was the president in the movie.

"This Bane guy, I love him. I love this guy. He is a great guy. Believe me. He is gonna make Gotham great again. I read about him on the internet. He destroyed League of Shadows. Trust me folks"

LOL

"A lot of people are saying he was too extreme for the League of Shadows. I like people who are too extreme. There's something going on with the League of Shadows, and we have to be more extreme. We have to. We have to."
 
He wouldn't miss the chance to get in an anecdote about how the people of Gotham love him and are thankful to him for not intervening and for allowing Bane to do what he wants. He would then say that he thinks Bane is doing a "Tremendous job. Tremendous. Believe me, believe me. Tremendous. We have to get tough, we have to get tough".
 
Imagine if Trump was the president in the movie.

"This Bane guy, I love him. I love this guy. He is a great guy. Believe me. He is gonna make Gotham great again. I read about him on the internet. He destroyed League of Shadows. Trust me folks"
Reminds me of that guy from Batman: No Man's Land who turned from DJ to senator.
 
I completely agree ultimately. That's why I think it should probably be left alone. Not too many of the major trilogies have remained 'just' trilogies at this point. Not Star Wars, not Lord of the Rings. Soon Toy Story will have a fourth installment. I guess there will always be Back to the Future. Although even had that had an animated series. Honestly, I feel like animation would be the best possible way to play in that sandbox again without watering down the impact of the trilogy. Especially since there's already a bit a precedent for "semi-canon, but not really" with animation in that universe via Gotham Knight.

Ditto on Westworld for me, I thoroughly enjoyed the first season and have high hopes for the rest of the series. I actually fell off Person of Interest somewhere in the middle of season 2. I do enjoy the show and want to finish it eventually, but seeing Jonah's talents unleashed with a full blown HBO sci-fi is admittedly more appealing to me than somewhat of a network procedural (albeit a very clever one with a bigger story). I'm sure being the showrunner on PoI helped prepare him for the even more ambitious undertaking of something like WW though. I'll get around to finishing it at some point.

Some sort of animated series to fill some of the 'gaps' in TDKT would probably be the 'best' way to go about things, I agree. Just keep a consistent animation style, as opposed to Gotham Knight. Maybe bring in Roger Craig Smith (aka Chris Redfield from the Resident Evil games) as Bruce/Batman, given that he seemed to get the balance between Bale's growl/rasp and Conroy's effortless badassery just right in Arkham Origins.

Anyway, I digress.

I fell off PoI myself by the end of S3, but have just restarted watching because I want to see it through and am almost done with S4. I'd say it does a very good job of making you care for its leads, namely Harold and Reese, although the characters they add to the crew as the show progresses are kind of hit and miss for me. I like the manner in which it times its moments of levity, given the fact there's some bleak implications with its subject matter. And I admire the way it balanced the latter with its 'procedural' nature and its mainstream network.

But yeah, it's great to see Jonah go full-blown sci-fi with WW, it kind of seems like the logical next step after PoI. Curious to see what they've got in store next and hope the creative team take their time with the material, much like they did with S1.

Btw, anyone else seen Nerdwriter's video on Interstellar? I usually agree with the dude's analysis, but there's some points in there which I'm iffy about. One interesting one he brings up, though, is Nolan losing some semblance of control and focus in his recent efforts, such as TDKR and Interstellar, as opposed to his earlier, smaller scale productions. It's an aspect I agree with to an extent, curious to see what others think.
 
I usually really like Nerdwriter's videos, but I think he kind of makes a half-baked argument about Interstellar. Like, sure the Dylan Thomas poem gets repeated. Nearly all Nolan's films repeat key lines of dialogue, we know this. Matt Damon has a cameo. Okay?? Brand's speech on love, I will say is pretty on the nose and uncomfortable. But I think that is kind of the point of that scene, she's putting some of her deepest intuitions out there and Cooper kind of shrugs it off. Also you have to consider the context of the fact that they're alone in space, on a mission where mysterious beings have led them to this point and even intervened to get Cooper on the mission. It's not totally out of left field as something "other" has been at play the whole time. I also disagree with his notion that Nolan's editing encourages passivity. To me it's the exact opposite.

Personally, I think while you can't argue that Nolan has been splitting the audience a bit more with his latest efforts, I don't feel like he's lost control so much as he's been changing as a filmmaker. I still respect Nerdwriter's opinion, but I ultimately had a hard time deciphering what he was trying to say about Nolan and his ambition. He seemed to be celebrating it and lamenting it at once. I'd be curious to see what he thinks of Dunkirk, since it does seem to be pretty deliberately more straight forward and less heady than the likes of Interstellar and Inception, but will undoubtedly bring the visceral visual spectacle we've come to expect from Nolan.
 
Last edited:
I usually really like Nerdwriter's videos, but I think he kind of makes a half-baked argument about Interstellar. Like, sure the Dylan Thomas poem gets repeated. Nearly all Nolan's films repeat key lines of dialogue, we know this. Matt Damon has a cameo. Okay?? Brand's speech on love, I will say is pretty on the nose and uncomfortable. But I think that is kind of the point of that scene, she's putting some of her deepest intuitions out there and Cooper kind of shrugs it off. Also you have to consider the context of the fact that they're alone in space, on a mission where mysterious beings have led them to this point and even intervened to get Cooper on the mission. It's not totally out of left field as something "other" has been at play the whole time. I also disagree with his notion that Nolan's editing encourages passivity. To me it's the exact opposite.

Personally, I think while you can't argue that Nolan has been splitting the audience a bit more with his latest efforts, I don't feel like he's lost control so much as he's been changing as a filmmaker. I still respect Nerdwriter's opinion, but I ultimately had a hard time deciphering what he was trying to say about Nolan and his ambition. He seemed to be celebrating it and lamenting it at once. I'd be curious to see what he thinks of Dunkirk, since it does seem to be pretty deliberately more straight forward and less heady than the likes of Interstellar and Inception, but will undoubtedly bring the visceral visual spectacle we've come to expect from Nolan.

Can't help but agree with what you say here - his overall argument comes across as muddled due to his often ambivalent take on the aspects he focuses on. I will agree that the Dylan Thomas poem's repetition is a bit too on the nose, but the Hathaway scene does require you keep account of its context.

Very intrigued to see how Dunkirk turns out myself. When's it coming out again?
 
Saying crap is vulgar and bad language? It's amazing half the forum has not been banned!
 
I like how Flint Marko brought up him using the word to describe movies he isn't a fan of.
 
The movie had plenty of Peters' requests from the Superman Lives days.

-The polar bear.
-A giant "spider".
-Superman having eyes "like a f***ing killer".
-Jimmy wasn't gay, but he got a sex change.

:o
 
I laughed harder on Jenny just being there than I did on the bullet to Jimmy's head.
:oldrazz:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"