The Dark Knight Rises

  On 7/18/2012 at 4:51 AM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

  On 7/18/2012 at 3:18 AM, YO303 said:

Is this guy for real? (is he like a Alex Jones type of character?)

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Exm3gApFgPY&feature=player_embedded

 

"The Dark Knight Lights up"

 

That's Rush Limbaugh, who despite being a generally loathsome human being is also a genius propagandist.

And pretty much the unofficial leader of the GOP. And an oxy junkie.

This was fun to look at walking home the other day.

Ebert gave it 3/5.

He's been off the mark before, but from the sounds of it; TDKR suffers from too many new characters, a vaguely-motivated villain and not enough Batman.

TDK suffered in similar ways; I just couldn't get behind the Harvey Dent story and his sudden flip into a murderous rampage. Whilst, probably due to Ledger's performance and death (both are intertwined), Joker took over in terms of the star and the Batman scenes seemed a little fleeting.

But I guess it's been an intentional choice to show as few scenes of Batman as possible. If Nolan's going for deep metaphors, broad social commentaries and dense themes then showing a man running around in a rubber suit can't help but snap you back into a Hollywood blockbuster. He can rationalise the technology all he wants, but it's still too far-fetched for a 'crime-drama'.

Ebert called TDK "near-perfection" though, so God knows what he's been smoking through that stoma.

I'm sure the emotion and spectacle will put TDKR up there next to TDK for me. Seeing Batman being beaten up will be a thrill in itself and I like Hardy as an actor, but I wish his face wasn't so obscured by that mask. I still can't get a good feeling for Anne Hathaway as Catwoman, but I'll wait until I see it. Being so conspicuous might make her more believable. In terms of Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Marion Cotillard, and especially the former, they seem to have been added to embody themes as opposed to drive the storyline.

Don't click this spoiler.

I've always preferred Begins to TDK, and I don't think that's going to change. BB had a much murkier aesthetic. The smog and orange hues, tight ghettos and more horrific aspect of Batman's appearance are what it's all about for me. Everything became a bit too bright, techy and blue in TDK. The escalation in action made it a step-up in terms of spectacle, but it stopped being a Batman film and became a Chris Nolan film.

With a further increase in action, spectacle and emotional drive I think that I'll end up believing that BB>TDKR>TDK.

The biggest difference between BB and TDK and by the looks of it TDKR is how Gotham is depicted. It looks far more fantastical and claustrophobic in BB and in TDK it looks like any generic metropolitan US town. I'd like it if they had kept that aesthetic.

I can't measure how completely unexcited I am for this film.

i can - 0

http://m.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2012/jul/17/dark-knight-rises-capitalist-superhero?cat=film&type=article

  Quote

All superheroes are black sheep. But the Dark Knight has always been murkier than most. His superpowers are not an accident of birth, or of stumbling into the wrong lab at the wrong time. They're not powers at all, simply a simulation made possible by good fortune and the leisure that accompanies it. Bruce Wayne can splurge on the kit and cars to set himself up as a crime-fighting Christ substitute, plus power and glitter enough to hide his hobby. He's always been a curious idol: within aspiration because he's flesh and blood; beyond it because he's the lucky recipient of inherited wealth.

It's that aspect which makes what-looks-like the main plot of TDKR fall flat for me.

How are the audience supposed to rally for Batman when he's a billionaire fighting alongside the cops (literally) against a 'villain' who has dethroned Wall Street?

The more I think about it, the more the high themes of Nolan just don't work with a Batman film. I love BB, appreciate TDK and will probably really enjoy the spectacle of TDKR, but I hope they reboot the franchise in a way more fitting with the best comics. There's not going to be any more fun had in making it 'gritty' again. It's best to go visually dark with Batman, not just emotionally.

I think I posted a Spanish fan-made short for Arkham Asylum around here. If I could, I'd give that guy a few million to make it a reality.

because hes trying to prevent unlawful activity?

  On 7/18/2012 at 3:35 PM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

because hes trying to prevent unlawful activity?

Well yeah, but what about all the damage he's caused by crashing his tank around the city for a decade? And there's probably some law preventing him from spending all the WayneEnterprises money on a personal weaponised helicopter and motorbike. I don't know, as a superhero, he's appointed and allowed a certain amount of lee-way. But going with a style as realistic as possible, Bruce probably deserves to be taken down a peg.

Here's the awesome Arkham short.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36-G8fFFJJk&hd=1

  On 7/17/2012 at 7:43 AM, Awepittance said:

i usually don't love Funny or Die but today was an exception

 

http://www.funnyordi...s-ending-leaked

Holy fucking lol. I'm liking Funny or Die more and more.

I'm another who preferred BB to TDK. I couldn't really understand why TDK got so much more love, I guess it was down to the more explosive action scenes and everything that surrounded Heath Ledger.

The bright, cold, blue look of the film mentioned above I'm sure also helped as most people lap that up these days as it is so prevalent (and in recent Christopher Nolan films especially) and makes the action pop out more I guess.

Not only did BB have more atmosphere and character in its look, I also thought it had much better character development and just a better told story.

Dark Knight Rises seems to continue things in a similar vein to Dark Knight. Not entirely a bad thing, TDK still a good film, don't get me wrong. Just not as good imo.

I like the "generic looking metropolitan US city" look that Gotham has in TDK. That's to me what makes Nolan's batman films so much more interesting than other superhero movies. It's just feels kind of realistic.

Personally I thought BB was too cartoony and even a little silly at parts. Ra's al Ghul and the Scarecrow wasn't really that great villians in the movie (in my opinion, of course). And Heath Ledger really is what makes the TDK so amazing. It's overall just a much more dark movie.

TDK is fantastic and super entertaining. Only problem I have with the movie, is towards the end it just kind of feels apart. The last third of the movie isn't on the same level as the rest of the movie.

  On 7/18/2012 at 6:26 PM, Roksen Creek said:

I'm another who preferred BB to TDK. I couldn't really understand why TDK got so much more love, I guess it was down to the more explosive action scenes and everything that surrounded Heath Ledger.

The bright, cold, blue look of the film mentioned above I'm sure also helped as most people lap that up these days as it is so prevalent (and in recent Christopher Nolan films especially) and makes the action pop out more I guess.

 

Not only did BB have more atmosphere and character in its look, I also thought it had much better character development and just a better told story.

 

Dark Knight Rises seems to continue things in a similar vein to Dark Knight. Not entirely a bad thing, TDK still a good film, don't get me wrong. Just not as good imo.

Oh, no doubt TDK was a weaker film, but it had Ledger's amazing performance in it, which pretty much sealed the deal for most people. personally I loved the movie, but the hasty addition of TwoFace and his character's resolution by the end was a pretty huge flaw.

  On 7/18/2012 at 3:42 PM, Gary C said:

  On 7/18/2012 at 3:35 PM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

because hes trying to prevent unlawful activity?

 

Well yeah, but what about all the damage he's caused by crashing his tank around the city for a decade? And there's probably some law preventing him from spending all the WayneEnterprises money on a personal weaponised helicopter and motorbike. I don't know, as a superhero, he's appointed and allowed a certain amount of lee-way. But going with a style as realistic as possible, Bruce probably deserves to be taken down a peg.

 

 

Here's the awesome Arkham short.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36-G8fFFJJk&hd=1

yeah, good points. But I figure that will probably be brought up in the movie somehow? I mean, TDK already touched on the fact that the Joker was such a dick to Gotham was because he loved fucking with the Batman so much. Yin to the Yang...so you wonder how things would have been different otherwise.

Maybe Bane's crew will have some sort of social pull (anger of the disenfranchised vs. the rich, etc.) to create this illusion that he represents the storming of the bastille/revolution type thing, where in reality hes basically just itching for an excuse to destroy the city. I could be completely wrong about this though.

I mean, most superheroes, or the very concept of the superhero is inherently fascistic in certain ways, thus why audiences are more willing to give the superhero leeway in wanton destruction...because he is in the unquestionable guise of the "good" side. However, this movie picks up from the ending of TDK, which made Batman Public Enemy No. 1.

oh yeah, another fanboy fantasy of mine that apparently never materialized....you know how the main theme in the Nolan trilogy is that two note swell? (i think you know what I mean) it materializes in all of the film scores.

I was soooo hoping that as the trilogy ended full circle, the two note swell expanded to incorporate those few extra notes that would make the Burton/animated cartoon theme play out in its full glory....I always wanted that but figured it would never happen because of copyright.

but the two note swell is so obviously a minimalist Burton theme.

this is the swell i mean, at about 4:03 or so

[youtubehd]KipH9GLuiiI[/youtubehd]

only a few more notes and it would sound exactly like the Burton theme.

edit: this is after watching that fan trailer Gary C posted...awesome stuff!

US cable channel The Hub remade TDKR trailer using clips from the Animated Series:

The voices are excellent.

  On 7/18/2012 at 2:44 PM, lumpenprol said:

I can't measure how completely unexcited I am for this film.

It's a good feeling isn't?

I'm still going to give it a chance.

  On 7/18/2012 at 3:41 AM, The Overlook said:

Enjoyment and criticism aren't mutually exclusive.

yep, and it seems like that increasingly so a lot of people don't understand that they aren't. I feel like it's very common that if you like or love something, it's almost sacrilegious to criticize it. Or certain people cannot comprehend that just because you find fault in something doesn't necessarily mean you cant also find it highly enjoyable.

  On 7/18/2012 at 1:14 PM, Gary C said:

 

I've always preferred Begins to TDK, and I don't think that's going to change. BB had a much murkier aesthetic. The smog and orange hues, tight ghettos and more horrific aspect of Batman's appearance are what it's all about for me. Everything became a bit too bright, techy and blue in TDK. The escalation in action made it a step-up in terms of spectacle, but it stopped being a Batman film and became a Chris Nolan film.

 

i was always wondering to myself why Nolan decided to make Gotham look so utterly bland and realistic in everything that followed BB. It's almost as if he wanted to veer even more away from Burton since he's still dependent on the Burton batman suit design, and voice.

People (and Nolan) are taking this movie way too seriously. I mean the guy is wearing a bat suit talking in a ridiculous voice.

Thats why i prefer Avenger/Thor/Iron Man over The Dark Knight, those movies don't take themselves too seriously, they have fun with it and its fun to watch. Nolan thinks The Dark Knight is like a serious opera (i don't think superheroes movies should be dramas)

a man,

  On 7/19/2012 at 12:00 AM, Awepittance said:

  On 7/18/2012 at 3:41 AM, The Overlook said:

Enjoyment and criticism aren't mutually exclusive.

 

yep, and it seems like that increasingly so a lot of people don't understand that they aren't. I feel like it's very common that if you like or love something, it's almost sacrilegious to criticize it. Or certain people cannot comprehend that just because you find fault in something doesn't necessarily mean you cant also find it highly enjoyable.

im in complete agreement of this statement, what pisses me off is people that state this and then immediately follow it up with "...because its going to be shit but stupid mainstream idiots are going to lap it up anyway."

and i think what pisses me off about it is that all the truly legitimate criticism is easily overlooked by these rabid fanboys because of this elitist imdb.com style of just saying you hated it, its a garbage movie, everyone that likes it is an idiot/ BURTON FTW etc.

im starting to think that because the Nolan movies are getting so much hatred from certain circles is because hes successful in contributing a unique-enough successor to the Burton movies, love it or hate it.

Maybe. I actually think the first Batman movie by Burton is so fucking bad. I can't be the only one.