Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(FilmComment)   "If you look at the three of them, Ra's Al Ghul is almost a religious figure, The Joker is the anti-religious figure, the anti-structure anarchist. And then Bane comes in as a military dictator." Christopher Nolan finally explains his Batman movies   ( filmcomment.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, batman movie, Joker, bane, Batman, David Goyer, military dictators, structure anarchist, Jonathan Nolan  
•       •       •

4237 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 29 Nov 2012 at 11:44 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



72 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2012-11-29 11:46:53 AM  
mojoimage.com
 
2012-11-29 11:47:09 AM  
so...does this mean Christian Bale can play Jesus and Nathan Fillinz can play Judas in BATMAN: JERUSALEM!

..i ask because I have a script i tell you

in before the lock...
 
2012-11-29 11:47:09 AM  
Maybe he can explain why the climaxes were so contrived
 
2012-11-29 11:47:50 AM  

moothemagiccow: Maybe he can explain why the climaxes were so contrived


you mean like 90% of the women we sleep with?
 
2012-11-29 11:50:02 AM  
I hope he shares the secret of the broken back heal punch. That could save lives!
 
2012-11-29 11:50:17 AM  
Tell me, does the top stop spinning? Yes, I know Leo isn't looking at it anymore, but that's not the point...yes, I know that is supposed to be the point, but come on.
 
2012-11-29 11:51:30 AM  

moothemagiccow: Maybe he can explain why the climaxes were so contrived


Oh, come on, killer steam is an awesome way to cap off a superhero romp!
 
2012-11-29 11:51:45 AM  
Ra's Al Ghul was the most interesting characters in Batman, and Nolan turned him into crap.
 
2012-11-29 11:52:04 AM  

Hoboclown: I hope he shares the secret of the broken back heal punch. That could save lives!


It's the slipped disk heal punch. Ask your chiropractor.
 
2012-11-29 11:52:24 AM  

bulldg4life: Tell me, does the top stop spinning? Yes, I know Leo isn't looking at it anymore, but that's not the point...yes, I know that is supposed to be the point, but come on.


no no , you're thinking of Escape from New York with Snooki and Kirk Cameron....
 
2012-11-29 11:53:27 AM  
24.media.tumblr.com

Hmmmmmm...
 
2012-11-29 11:54:20 AM  
The Dark Knight Rises = "So, I'm..I'm sorry. You are planning to have BATMAN, in your BATMAN film, yes? Hello?

Film should have kept the working title "Gotham City"
 
2012-11-29 11:54:39 AM  

Haliburton Cummings: no no , you're thinking of Escape from New York with Snooki and Kirk Cameron....


Look, it's not like I'm asking if Tony Soprano is killed at the end...I just want to know if the top falls
 
2012-11-29 11:59:04 AM  

theorellior: moothemagiccow: Maybe he can explain why the climaxes were so contrived

Oh, come on, killer steam is an awesome way to cap off a superhero romp!


Hmmm, each ending involved a bomb of some kind. Therefore with deep analysis we can surmise that either Nolan really likes bombs or lost interest before he finished each movie.
 
2012-11-29 12:00:05 PM  
jesus farking christ, am I the only one who liked the films? Not to mention how incredible TDK was. Appreciate the guy. Reading this is giving me depth on what he was trying to accomplish, so thank you subby.
 
2012-11-29 12:01:21 PM  

thecpt: jesus farking christ, am I the only one who liked the films?


$3b in total revenues means that Fark needs to go full-hipster "they are overdone" mode.
 
2012-11-29 12:01:26 PM  

Decillion: theorellior: moothemagiccow: Maybe he can explain why the climaxes were so contrived

Oh, come on, killer steam is an awesome way to cap off a superhero romp!

Hmmm, each ending involved a bomb of some kind. Therefore with deep analysis we can surmise that either Nolan really likes bombs or lost interest before he finished each movie.


Some movies you just can't get rid of a bomb.

nerdbastards.com
 
2012-11-29 12:02:16 PM  

thecpt: jesus farking christ, am I the only one who liked the films? Not to mention how incredible TDK was. Appreciate the guy. Reading this is giving me depth on what he was trying to accomplish, so thank you subby.


I'm right here with you. Really enjoyed the films and this interview. I'm surprised by the comments as well.
 
2012-11-29 12:07:36 PM  

This Looks Fun: thecpt: jesus farking christ, am I the only one who liked the films? Not to mention how incredible TDK was. Appreciate the guy. Reading this is giving me depth on what he was trying to accomplish, so thank you subby.

I'm right here with you. Really enjoyed the films and this interview. I'm surprised by the comments as well.


Some people just want to watch the world burn.
 
2012-11-29 12:11:42 PM  
Actually, this explanation makes a lot of sense if you look at Batman, ironically, as the force of reason and science. This is an allegory for the development of Christianity.

The crime families before Batman appears: the decaying Roman Empire, a great city turned into chaos and poverty through complacence and corruption.

Ra's al Ghuul: Jesus and the early christian cults. Hidden in the shadows, oppressed, feared, tried to make big changes with the system.

Joker: The Gauls, Saxons, Celts, Franks, and other barbaric, warring tribes with no real binding ethos.

Bane: The Dark Ages and the early Catholic Church. Rigid, devoted to the ideals of the early Christian cults but mutating them to serve their own interests. Pulls enough barbarism of the tribes to bring everyone together and get the power the cults couldn't.

Batman's "death" is the Renaissance, with the elements of the three stages swept away and the city ready to move on to something beyond chaos and faith.
 
2012-11-29 12:17:59 PM  

thecpt: jesus farking christ, am I the only one who liked the films? Not to mention how incredible TDK was. Appreciate the guy. Reading this is giving me depth on what he was trying to accomplish, so thank you subby.


Loved the films, but now that they are over, we can pick them apart and explain how WE would have done such a better job. You know, because we are successful writers and directors. We are brilliant.
 
2012-11-29 12:18:51 PM  

thecpt: Not to mention how incredible TDK was.


YMMV, but I thought TDK was an exercise in sophomoric philosophical conundrums that lasted far too long.
 
2012-11-29 12:19:38 PM  

Decillion: Therefore with deep analysis we can surmise that either Nolan really likes bombs or lost interest before he finished each movie.


I'm saying that coincided with the studio check clearing.
 
2012-11-29 12:19:47 PM  

This Looks Fun: thecpt: jesus farking christ, am I the only one who liked the films? Not to mention how incredible TDK was. Appreciate the guy. Reading this is giving me depth on what he was trying to accomplish, so thank you subby.

I'm right here with you. Really enjoyed the films and this interview. I'm surprised by the comments as well.


Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. The movies are good, but he's no Schumaker. I read a very similar interview with Schumaker and his interpretation of the script, settings, characters, and his methodologies of putting them to film. And, to Schumaker's credit, in his mind there was no other way to capture and potray the souls, the very being of his characters, other than to include nipples and protruding codpieces. Most profound, if you ask me.
 
2012-11-29 12:19:55 PM  

Bloody William: Joker: The Gauls, Saxons, Celts, Franks, and other barbaric, warring tribes with no real binding ethos.


I don't know about that. They did have binding ethos. What drove Rome to the Gauls was simple: gold. They loved it. They hoarded it. Caeser was able to convince people to invade based off of it. That kind of works more with Nolan's idea for the third that the dictator would be manipulative in order to get what they want.

You can compare a lot of things to religion though.

I have fun watching the movie with the idea that each one is about a different aspect of the batman universe (such as first one is about making batman, second was about gotham, third was about seperating the bat from everything), but I always try to think of the anarchist joker as the equalizer. Nolan mentions class warfare, but I thought that was more of a central element for Rises than TDK.
 
2012-11-29 12:20:08 PM  

Decillion: theorellior: moothemagiccow: Maybe he can explain why the climaxes were so contrived

Oh, come on, killer steam is an awesome way to cap off a superhero romp!

Hmmm, each ending involved a bomb of some kind. Therefore with deep analysis we can surmise that either Nolan really likes bombs or lost interest before he finished each movie.


It's a reference to this, you philistine:

www.csicon.org
 
2012-11-29 12:23:29 PM  

MagSeven: Loved the films, but now that they are over, we can pick them apart and explain how WE would have done such a better job. You know, because we are successful writers and directors. We are brilliant.


Whatever. Look, you can slob Nolan's knob all you want, but I find just about all of his movies to be cold, bloodless and full of ideas that sound intriguing at first but turn out to have the depth of a paper bag. Glad you liked his Batman films, I can't wait until a couple years passes and another director gets the nod for a reboot.
 
2012-11-29 12:24:34 PM  

thecpt: Bloody William: Joker: The Gauls, Saxons, Celts, Franks, and other barbaric, warring tribes with no real binding ethos.

I don't know about that. They did have binding ethos. What drove Rome to the Gauls was simple: gold. They loved it. They hoarded it. Caeser was able to convince people to invade based off of it. That kind of works more with Nolan's idea for the third that the dictator would be manipulative in order to get what they want.


I don't think that was really an ethos. Chaos, sacking, domination, disparate tribes warring and trying to take the big power down because the power's presence offends them, I think it fits.
 
2012-11-29 12:26:11 PM  

Brakefornobody: This Looks Fun: thecpt: jesus farking christ, am I the only one who liked the films? Not to mention how incredible TDK was. Appreciate the guy. Reading this is giving me depth on what he was trying to accomplish, so thank you subby.

I'm right here with you. Really enjoyed the films and this interview. I'm surprised by the comments as well.

Some people just want to watch the world burn.


I think there's this differential wave event occurring where you have people who seek meaning out of films, music, books or other forms of artificial expression that aren't self-generated encountering a different wave of people who are eschewing "artistic" expression in favor of hands in the dirt, experience driven meaning that are very much self-generated by their endeavors.

I don't think this is a new phenomenon, I think it has occurred with every generation. Now, however, I think the conflict is so much more evident because of the nature of connectivity and instant, expansive communication that we have now.
 
2012-11-29 12:30:11 PM  
Is it true that you don't use a second unit director, in effect shooting every frame yourself?

Yeah, I've never used a second unit director. Occasionally, we'd hire a splinter unit for a day or something and splinter off a couple of shots, but I went into Batman Begins saying to the studio, "Look, I don't understand how to peel things away from my script and say these aren't important enough for me to shoot them. Because to me, if they're not important enough for me to shoot them, they shouldn't be in the film in the first place."


I farking love this guy's philosophy.
 
2012-11-29 12:30:27 PM  

theorellior: MagSeven: Loved the films, but now that they are over, we can pick them apart and explain how WE would have done such a better job. You know, because we are successful writers and directors. We are brilliant.

Whatever. Look, you can slob Nolan's knob all you want, but I find just about all of his movies to be cold, bloodless and full of ideas that sound intriguing at first but turn out to have the depth of a paper bag. Glad you liked his Batman films, I can't wait until a couple years passes and another director gets the nod for a reboot.


Be careful what you wish for. Most movies are made for kids. The interview itself hints around at Warner Bros. wanting more/bigger. That Nolan had the spine to maintain his scale is a testament to him and a warning to the next group that takes on these kinds of action films.
 
2012-11-29 12:36:25 PM  

Nana's Vibrator: Be careful what you wish for. Most movies are made for kids. The interview itself hints around at Warner Bros. wanting more/bigger. That Nolan had the spine to maintain his scale is a testament to him and a warning to the next group that takes on these kinds of action films.


Batman *is* a kid's movie, basically live-action of the wish-fulfillment that gets teenage boys through their crappy days. There's nothing wrong with that, and it can be very enjoyable. But dressing these things up in gritty dark Philosophy 101 retreads is dumb and annoying.
 
2012-11-29 12:37:25 PM  
So, Fark has hit Peak Batman and started hating it now?
 
2012-11-29 12:38:41 PM  

Decillion: theorellior: moothemagiccow: Maybe he can explain why the climaxes were so contrived

Oh, come on, killer steam is an awesome way to cap off a superhero romp!

Hmmm, each ending involved a bomb of some kind. Therefore with deep analysis we can surmise that either Nolan really likes bombs or lost interest before he finished each movie.


The first one I didn't really have any qualms with. The climax had been built from the beginning and made sense, except for letting Ra's die. Batman could've easily done the same to the Joker. Also he straight up murdered two-face.

The second one was great but the fact that the Joker got the prisoners and the citizens on separate ferries made no sense. Maybe that was just an added bonus that Gordon provided with zero justification.

The last one's ending went just a little too far. Bane's got a nuke and is holding Gotham hostage, and there's only one dude who can rally people into fighting back?
 
2012-11-29 12:44:43 PM  

moothemagiccow: The second one was great but the fact that the Joker got the prisoners and the citizens on separate ferries made no sense.


That particular scene was when I'd finally had enough of TDK. A freaking Prisoner's Dilemma? Seriously? And have a Magical Negro resolve it? Bull farking shiat.
 
2012-11-29 12:44:59 PM  

thecpt: jesus farking christ, am I the only one who liked the films? Not to mention how incredible TDK was. Appreciate the guy. Reading this is giving me depth on what he was trying to accomplish, so thank you subby.


Yes. This is Fark. Every neckbeard with failed dreams has at least six better screenplays, right over there, under the cheesey poofs.
 
2012-11-29 12:45:03 PM  

un4gvn666: Is it true that you don't use a second unit director, in effect shooting every frame yourself?

Yeah, I've never used a second unit director. Occasionally, we'd hire a splinter unit for a day or something and splinter off a couple of shots, but I went into Batman Begins saying to the studio, "Look, I don't understand how to peel things away from my script and say these aren't important enough for me to shoot them. Because to me, if they're not important enough for me to shoot them, they shouldn't be in the film in the first place."

I farking love this guy's philosophy.


Yeah, I was impressed by that too.

I don't always agree with Nolan's choices (letting Bale do the Bat Voice was dumb), but I really can't say there's much in terms of wasted screen time in his movies. And that's despite being pretty farking long movies.
 
2012-11-29 12:45:10 PM  

ElusiveWookiee: So, Fark has hit Peak Batman and started hating it now?


Where've you been? Also, Christopher Nolan is an overrated hack.

/keep up
 
2012-11-29 12:45:56 PM  

MagSeven: thecpt: jesus farking christ, am I the only one who liked the films? Not to mention how incredible TDK was. Appreciate the guy. Reading this is giving me depth on what he was trying to accomplish, so thank you subby.

Loved the films, but now that they are over, we can pick them apart and explain how WE would have done such a better job. You know, because we are successful writers and directors. We are brilliant.


You seem to not understand the purpose of discussion forums. They are here so we can kill time during work and be advertised to.

If someone can do better than Nolan, that's good. Art is not a progression towards an ideal followed by mass suicide because no one can ever improve it.

//your favorite thing sucks
 
2012-11-29 12:45:58 PM  

moothemagiccow: Also he straight up murdered two-face.


That actually happens in the dark knight returns funny enough. Also the ferries made sense enough to me. They thought it was important to get those ones out and there was a free ferry for anyone else.

moothemagiccow: The last one's ending went just a little too far. Bane's got a nuke and is holding Gotham hostage, and there's only one dude who can rally people into fighting back?


CIA tried and failed, but yeah I need to see that one again. I forget what the citizens knew about their intentions. Were they told sit tight and you'll live kind of things?
 
2012-11-29 12:54:39 PM  

blackminded: ElusiveWookiee: So, Fark has hit Peak Batman and started hating it now?

Where've you been? Also, Christopher Nolan is an overrated hack.

/keep up


However, by the end of this thread, the films will be lauded as masterpieces again, like Catwoman's hiney.
 
2012-11-29 01:10:17 PM  
After reading the interview and this thread, I like the films more now than I did before.

Decillion: It's the slipped disk heal punch. Ask your chiropractor.


I'll buy this explanation. His broken back magically healing bugged me, but I'll accept a slipped disk.


Pontious Pilates: Yes. This is Fark. Every neckbeard with failed dreams has at least six better screenplays, right over there, under the cheesey poofs.



Bravo. These films elevated comic book movies tremendously. Even recent ones, like Fantastic Four and that era, were pretty decent for their time, but look not so great compared to the Nolan films and the improvements he competitively-forced on Marvel Studios.
 
2012-11-29 01:14:57 PM  
My only problem with TDKR is that the city was on total lockdown, but when Batman escaped from the prison, they showed him walking back into the city via a bridge. The only bridge was barricaded by the national guard IIRC.
 
2012-11-29 01:31:44 PM  

Detinwolf: My only problem with TDKR is that the city was on total lockdown, but when Batman escaped from the prison, they showed him walking back into the city via a bridge. The only bridge was barricaded by the national guard IIRC.


Well... he IS the goddamn Batman
 
2012-11-29 01:53:01 PM  

thecpt: jesus farking christ, am I the only one who liked the films? Not to mention how incredible TDK was. Appreciate the guy. Reading this is giving me depth on what he was trying to accomplish, so thank you subby.


No kidding. I enjoyed all 3 movies. TDK the most, but all 3 are re-watchable.
 
2012-11-29 02:05:25 PM  

moothemagiccow: MagSeven: thecpt: jesus farking christ, am I the only one who liked the films? Not to mention how incredible TDK was. Appreciate the guy. Reading this is giving me depth on what he was trying to accomplish, so thank you subby.

Loved the films, but now that they are over, we can pick them apart and explain how WE would have done such a better job. You know, because we are successful writers and directors. We are brilliant.

You seem to not understand the purpose of discussion forums. They are here so we can kill time during work and be advertised to.

If someone can do better than Nolan, that's good. Art is not a progression towards an ideal followed by mass suicide because no one can ever improve it.

//your favorite thing sucks


I understand forums. Just at many of the forums I've been at (actually not this one, I didn't get into too many Batman Begins/DK threads here), people thought this man could do no wrong, then a year after it's been out have completely 180'd their positions on each film. It amuses me. Like I said, I like the movies. Yeah there's a plot-hole or two, but I enjoyed myself. They're just movies, right?
 
2012-11-29 02:20:56 PM  

Detinwolf: My only problem with TDKR is that the city was on total lockdown, but when Batman escaped from the prison, they showed him walking back into the city via a bridge. The only bridge was barricaded by the national guard IIRC.


Can't remember, as I only saw it the one time, but don't we first see Batman back in the city near the "ice walk"?
 
2012-11-29 02:21:06 PM  

Strategeryz0r: Detinwolf: My only problem with TDKR is that the city was on total lockdown, but when Batman escaped from the prison, they showed him walking back into the city via a bridge. The only bridge was barricaded by the national guard IIRC.

Well... he IS the goddamn Batman


Yep. Guy's a ninja billionaire who thrives on misdirection and wears two personas in public.

"But he was broke!" Wrong. He had plenty of secret cash stashed away (every billionaire does), which is what he used to take over Wayne Enterprises in Begins, and that was after being declared dead (which is not easy to come back from on paper).

"But how did he get from the prison to Gotham?" Maybe the same way he got from Gotham to Hong Kong in the prior movie? By maybe tapping secret stashes of money and resources?

"But Gotham was sealed!" Bane's a member of the League of Shadows, which teaches misdirection and theatrics. Was Gotham locked down, or did Bane just say it was? Even if it was, there are multiple ways into and out of a major city that aren't highways or bridges, especially if, you know, you're a ninja billionaire.

"But everyone will know he survived because he was in the cafe!"

You're telling me he hasn't the resources to change his identity? Or that he's recognized by everyone in a foreign country? That the company he owned, that ousted him and thinks he's dead and is likely being run by a whole new bunch of people because all the other board members are likely dead, is going looking for him instead of rebuilding Gotham? That he couldn't simply tell someone who thinks he's Wayne, "Yeah, I get that a lot"?

(CSB: I saw a guy in college that looked exactly like Freddie Mercury -- not "could be his brother"; I mean, someone plucked him out of the early 80s with a time machine and deposited him in Memphis -- two years after he died.)
 
2012-11-29 02:22:55 PM  
I think the thing is that directors, being humans and all, make mistakes, and they usually makes similar mistakes multiple times. Spielberg's bad films always end 30-45 minutes after they should, Scorsese's bad films always double down on a quirky camera gag or cram too much Rolling Stones where it doesn't belong, etc. Nolan has his style, and it works almost all of the time. But Rises definitely showcased his weaknesses more than his talents. In Dark Knight, he stuck to his strengths and minimized his weaknesses, just like any director's great films. But Rises he tried to do too much, and I think he stretched himself thin. He still can't write/direct actresses worth a damn. Ann Hathaway should win an Oscar for making the first interesting female character in a Nolan film since Insomnia.
 
2012-11-29 02:24:56 PM  

thecpt: jesus farking christ, am I the only one who liked the films? Not to mention how incredible TDK was. Appreciate the guy. Reading this is giving me depth on what he was trying to accomplish, so thank you subby.


Yeah, I've made jokes about hating the Entertainment tab and this is why. I enjoy it on the whole, but there's a very loud contingent of retards who hate everything mainstream.

Read the threads when Skyfall first came out. They hated that too.
 
2012-11-29 02:28:09 PM  

skepticultist: un4gvn666: Is it true that you don't use a second unit director, in effect shooting every frame yourself?

Yeah, I've never used a second unit director. Occasionally, we'd hire a splinter unit for a day or something and splinter off a couple of shots, but I went into Batman Begins saying to the studio, "Look, I don't understand how to peel things away from my script and say these aren't important enough for me to shoot them. Because to me, if they're not important enough for me to shoot them, they shouldn't be in the film in the first place."

I farking love this guy's philosophy.

Yeah, I was impressed by that too.

I don't always agree with Nolan's choices (letting Bale do the Bat Voice was dumb), but I really can't say there's much in terms of wasted screen time in his movies. And that's despite being pretty farking long movies.


I've actually changed my opinion on the Bat voice. At first, I thought it was goofy and wanted something closer to Kevin Conroy. It grew on me though, and I love it. I can't explain why, but it gets me pumped.

Also, I'll echo the sentiment on Nolan's screen time. Each of those movies is around 2 1/2 hours and yet I never felt bored in any of them.
 
2012-11-29 02:30:14 PM  

Wayne 985: Read the threads when Skyfall first came out. They hated that too.


All I saw was outright jizzing over Skyfall. When I finally saw it, I was ready for the ultimate Bond film. Instead I got a paint by numbers plot, and bizarre third act that ground the film to a screeching halt.
 
2012-11-29 02:31:55 PM  

theorellior: Nana's Vibrator: Be careful what you wish for. Most movies are made for kids. The interview itself hints around at Warner Bros. wanting more/bigger. That Nolan had the spine to maintain his scale is a testament to him and a warning to the next group that takes on these kinds of action films.

Batman *is* a kid's movie, basically live-action of the wish-fulfillment that gets teenage boys through their crappy days. There's nothing wrong with that, and it can be very enjoyable. But dressing these things up in gritty dark Philosophy 101 retreads is dumb and annoying.


I'll somewhat disagree: Yes, you can make a Batman kids movie and make it enjoyable. But there's also a big market (in Batman, other 'comic book hero' movies, and Star Wars, for example), for people who watched those kids movies years ago and actually do like to add a little more depth in the plot, characters, scenes, etc...and to a certain extent, maybe even a more realistic depiction of conflict/violence and more realistic consequences that stem from that.
 
2012-11-29 02:42:26 PM  

Hebalo: All I saw was outright jizzing over Skyfall. When I finally saw it, I was ready for the ultimate Bond film. Instead I got a paint by numbers plot, and bizarre third act that ground the film to a screeching halt.


The problem there was that the ultimate fans (I think they call themselves afficionados or something) loved all of the call backs as subtle or apparent as they were. If you satisfy those who love the material then they'll scream from mountain tops how great it is, which elevates expectations for those who casually enjoy bond. I'm in that category and I saw it before hype so I was pretty damn happy with it. I can see your point of view though.
 
2012-11-29 02:57:37 PM  

Brakefornobody: This Looks Fun: thecpt: jesus farking christ, am I the only one who liked the films? Not to mention how incredible TDK was. Appreciate the guy. Reading this is giving me depth on what he was trying to accomplish, so thank you subby.

I'm right here with you. Really enjoyed the films and this interview. I'm surprised by the comments as well.

Some people just want to watch the world burn.


Or, the internet equivalent, be hipster trolls.
 
2012-11-29 03:08:31 PM  
I enjoyed the movies, but all of the villains were the same, no matter how Nolan tries to dress it up. They're ruthless, methodical, and very organized. I never followed how Joker was supposed to be an agent of chaos -- his bank robbery, prison escape, exploding hospital, and nearly-exploded ferries were incredibly ornate plans.

I enjoyed them all, though I felt the last one was weakest. I hated the reveal, though.
 
2012-11-29 03:13:40 PM  

theorellior: Nana's Vibrator: Be careful what you wish for. Most movies are made for kids. The interview itself hints around at Warner Bros. wanting more/bigger. That Nolan had the spine to maintain his scale is a testament to him and a warning to the next group that takes on these kinds of action films.

Batman *is* a kid's movie, basically live-action of the wish-fulfillment that gets teenage boys through their crappy days. There's nothing wrong with that, and it can be very enjoyable. But dressing these things up in gritty dark Philosophy 101 retreads is dumb and annoying.


Stop. If there's one superhero movie that should be dark and gritty it's farking Batman. Don't blame Nolan for other filmmakers wanting to do the same thing with other characters.
 
2012-11-29 03:24:21 PM  

Nana's Vibrator: But there's also a big market (in Batman, other 'comic book hero' movies, and Star Wars, for example), for people who watched those kids movies years ago and actually do like to add a little more depth in the plot, characters, scenes, etc...and to a certain extent, maybe even a more realistic depiction of conflict/violence and more realistic consequences that stem from that.


For me, Nolan is the exact director who can't do those things--flesh the characters out, make them human. His films are an intellectual enterprise that revolve around the act of filmmaking, and the characters are secondary. His most successful film, Memento, basically worked because he was focused almost entirely on the gimmick and didn't bother to try to humanize the characters. Noland doesn't do characters. They're cutouts that inhabit his dioramas and set pieces.

browntimmy: Stop. If there's one superhero movie that should be dark and gritty it's farking Batman. Don't blame Nolan for other filmmakers wanting to do the same thing with other characters.


Nolan's idea of dark and gritty is sepia filters and a growly voice. His vision, IMHO, sucks.
 
2012-11-29 03:33:33 PM  

Nana's Vibrator: Be careful what you wish for. Most movies are made for kids.


So? A lot of the things 'For Kids' are damn good. And sometimes are better than the things made 'For Adults'.

(see: Batman: The Animated Series.)
 
2012-11-29 03:36:16 PM  

theorellior: Noland doesn't do characters. They're cutouts that inhabit his dioramas and set pieces.


See, now that's just dumb and untrue. Of course he "does characters". BRuce Wayne has emotions, drives, needs that affect his behaviour. Alfred was a great character, we empathize with him and his situation. The Joker is a mystery to us, but he's true to the rules of the character.
 
2012-11-29 03:42:23 PM  
FTFA: I've never liked films that go part of the way there and then take an improbable leap.

You mean like Bruce Wayne's leap without a rope?
 
2012-11-29 03:42:51 PM  
I can explain them to, they start out with a mediocre action flick, a second movie that deteriorates badly with the single worst depiction of the Joker ever, and end up with a final movie that makes you wonder why you wasted $12.

/Not a troll it is an honest opinion
//Yes I think Heath Ledgers Joker sucked dead donkey balls and I have expressed this opinion for many several years now.
///Let us hope the next reboot is better, maybe done in the style of Batman the Brave and the Bold.
 
2012-11-29 03:47:44 PM  
In many threads I get the feeling that I'm not a big enough nerd for this site.
 
2012-11-29 04:01:03 PM  
I actually think that the Batman trilogy is much smarter than it's given credit for. The major themes of the movies all tend to revolve around post-9/11 issues in America. They all involve acts of terrorism and the response to a new, more connected world. The first dealt with shadow organizations and the resistance toward extremism. The second was about contending with an enemy whose philosophy is incomprehensible but whose methods are ruthless and unpredictable. There was also a commentary on surveillance and the limits to which a society is willing to go to in order to try to stamp out a violent ideology that will ultimately prevail, even as we continue to fight it. The third film seemed to be about the ways that wealth has settled down following a catastrophic event (the Joker's violent acts) and the fact that no matter what, "civil society," will always be vulnerable.

I'd love to write an essay or book, or something about the post-9/11 themes that run throughout the movies, as I'm sure there's more. I do think Nolan deserves some credit for these stories. Yes, on the one hand they are dumb action entertainment for the masses, but they have a strong core that consists of real dilemmas that we face in the Twenty-First Century. And they're not bad as a character study of one man who tries to influence the tides of change that have occurred. The problems of violence and terrorism are nothing new, but they've taken on different dimensions in our present moment. I think Nolan was wise to take on such topics and that he handled them considerably well.

/*shrug* Just my two pennies.
//I also enjoyed the films as straightforward action, so count me among the masses to whom the studio sought to sell tickets. I saw all three in theaters and had a blast.
 
2012-11-29 04:13:19 PM  
In TDKR, after about 10 mins of listening to Bane talk all I could picture was Sean Connery speaking through a traffic cone. It took me a couple of times through the movie before I could get over it.
 
2012-11-29 04:18:39 PM  

Springy23: I actually think that the Batman trilogy is much smarter than it's given credit for. The major themes of the movies all tend to revolve around post-9/11 issues in America. They all involve acts of terrorism and the response to a new, more connected world. The first dealt with shadow organizations and the resistance toward extremism. The second was about contending with an enemy whose philosophy is incomprehensible but whose methods are ruthless and unpredictable. There was also a commentary on surveillance and the limits to which a society is willing to go to in order to try to stamp out a violent ideology that will ultimately prevail, even as we continue to fight it. The third film seemed to be about the ways that wealth has settled down following a catastrophic event (the Joker's violent acts) and the fact that no matter what, "civil society," will always be vulnerable.

I'd love to write an essay or book, or something about the post-9/11 themes that run throughout the movies, as I'm sure there's more. I do think Nolan deserves some credit for these stories. Yes, on the one hand they are dumb action entertainment for the masses, but they have a strong core that consists of real dilemmas that we face in the Twenty-First Century. And they're not bad as a character study of one man who tries to influence the tides of change that have occurred. The problems of violence and terrorism are nothing new, but they've taken on different dimensions in our present moment. I think Nolan was wise to take on such topics and that he handled them considerably well.

/*shrug* Just my two pennies.
//I also enjoyed the films as straightforward action, so count me among the masses to whom the studio sought to sell tickets. I saw all three in theaters and had a blast.


This is one of the ways I watch the series. I've had people laugh in my face about it, but there was a good cracked article that summarized common points of view for this theory. Scroll down to #2

A lot of people try not to apply thought or interpret different than how they're supposed to. A nice thing about this movie is you can be entertained if you do, and entertained if you don't.
 
2012-11-29 06:21:07 PM  

Trocadero: I think the thing is that directors, being humans and all, make mistakes, and they usually makes similar mistakes multiple times. Spielberg's bad films always end 30-45 minutes after they should, Scorsese's bad films always double down on a quirky camera gag or cram too much Rolling Stones where it doesn't belong, etc. Nolan has his style, and it works almost all of the time. But Rises definitely showcased his weaknesses more than his talents. In Dark Knight, he stuck to his strengths and minimized his weaknesses, just like any director's great films. But Rises he tried to do too much, and I think he stretched himself thin. He still can't write/direct actresses worth a damn. Ann Hathaway should win an Oscar for making the first interesting female character in a Nolan film since Insomnia.


ha! My favorite part of Dark Knight was when Rachel died
 
2012-11-29 06:34:14 PM  
I wish someone would ask him

"Ledger doesn't die, what film do you make?"

Because it was horribly obvious that he wanted to use Joker in the third. I liked DKR, even though it had it's flaws. But I find myself wondering what the movie he had planned to make was.
 
2012-11-29 07:05:32 PM  

Fonaibung: I enjoyed the movies, but all of the villains were the same, no matter how Nolan tries to dress it up. They're ruthless, methodical, and very organized. I never followed how Joker was supposed to be an agent of chaos -- his bank robbery, prison escape, exploding hospital, and nearly-exploded ferries were incredibly ornate plans.


I wasn't sure if that speech was intended to be honest or if it was part of the Joker's bigger plan to corrupt Harvey and return Gotham to pre-Batman days
 
2012-11-29 07:29:45 PM  
Did he ever explain why he allowed Bale to use that stupid voice? Thats the one reason I cant watch DKR, Bale killed it. Ledger did rock as The Joker, though. But Bale just sucked to the point of killing the movies for me
 
2012-11-29 09:04:57 PM  

moothemagiccow: Trocadero: I think the thing is that directors, being humans and all, make mistakes, and they usually makes similar mistakes multiple times. Spielberg's bad films always end 30-45 minutes after they should, Scorsese's bad films always double down on a quirky camera gag or cram too much Rolling Stones where it doesn't belong, etc. Nolan has his style, and it works almost all of the time. But Rises definitely showcased his weaknesses more than his talents. In Dark Knight, he stuck to his strengths and minimized his weaknesses, just like any director's great films. But Rises he tried to do too much, and I think he stretched himself thin. He still can't write/direct actresses worth a damn. Ann Hathaway should win an Oscar for making the first interesting female character in a Nolan film since Insomnia.

ha! My favorite part of Dark Knight was when Rachel died


It's a shame Katie Holmes didn't play Rachel again. Whatserface was just terrible.
 
2012-11-29 11:50:06 PM  

Fonaibung: I enjoyed the movies, but all of the villains were the same, no matter how Nolan tries to dress it up. They're ruthless, methodical, and very organized. I never followed how Joker was supposed to be an agent of chaos -- his bank robbery, prison escape, exploding hospital, and nearly-exploded ferries were incredibly ornate plans.

I enjoyed them all, though I felt the last one was weakest. I hated the reveal, though.


The goal was chaos, to turn the city up-side down. You don't just wake up and be random and expect a change like that, it takes a plan, a solid plan, probably several with contingencies. You get some nutter that doesn't have a plan, and you don't have much of a villain.
 
Displayed 72 of 72 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report