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.

(Comic Book)   Apparently , there is still a small group of people in the world who think everything in the movies is true   (comicbook.com) divider line 49
    More: Stupid, TDKR, hydrogen bombs, Gotham City, Popular Science, science magazine  
•       •       •

5076 clicks; posted to Geek » on 29 Dec 2012 at 8:26 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



49 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-12-29 08:30:55 AM
There's been a lot of TDKR hate lately. I still like that movie a lot. At least they didn't have Batman hide from the bomb in a fridge.
 
2012-12-29 08:31:10 AM
TFA makes a point to call it a sloppy science-fiction movie. At what point do any comic book movies purport to be science-fiction in the first place? I've never been under the impression any superhero/comic books movies are even trying to be science-fiction.
 
2012-12-29 08:35:24 AM

taurusowner: TFA makes a point to call it a sloppy science-fiction movie. At what point do any comic book movies purport to be science-fiction in the first place? I've never been under the impression any superhero/comic books movies are even trying to be science-fiction.


And what the hell is with calling out the science in science fiction? It's fiction, dammit.
 
2012-12-29 08:35:38 AM

taurusowner: TFA makes a point to call it a sloppy science-fiction movie. At what point do any comic book movies purport to be science-fiction in the first place? I've never been under the impression any superhero/comic books movies are even trying to be science-fiction.


I don't know... I suppose they could be tossed into the Sci-fi category to some extent.
 
2012-12-29 08:51:36 AM
I think the key here is sloppy. As in due to laziness or incompetence. The Avengers carrier is part of the storyline with the idea of 'a flying carrier would be really cool'. The ending of the Dark Knight was simply "we're too lazy to make this scene make sense". I don't care so much how fiction doesn't follow the rules of science, but I expect my fiction to at least be consistent with itself. Maybe I'm asking too much.
 
2012-12-29 08:51:59 AM

Vodka Zombie: taurusowner: TFA makes a point to call it a sloppy science-fiction movie. At what point do any comic book movies purport to be science-fiction in the first place? I've never been under the impression any superhero/comic books movies are even trying to be science-fiction.

I don't know... I suppose they could be tossed into the Sci-fi category to some extent.


I'm thinking any genre that relies heavily on radioactive spider bites, Gamma radiation, Cosmic Radiation, Heroes and villains from other planets and dimensions, high-tech suits of armor, laser weaponry, orbital space stations, teleportation, cloning, boy scientists, sentient robots, cyborgs, pocket dimensions, planet-eating monsters and time travel can be classified as Sci-Fi.
But that's just me.
 
2012-12-29 08:52:24 AM
So, the billionaire playboy with a secret double life of fighting crime in a cape and rubber bat suit is a-ok...but damnit, there's no way that flying bat plane thing can go faster than 290mph.
 
2012-12-29 08:57:10 AM
The goddamn Batman can violate science if he damn well pleases.
 
2012-12-29 09:03:11 AM

Oysterman: There's been a lot of TDKR hate lately. I still like that movie a lot. At least they didn't have Batman hide from the bomb in a fridge.


I actually enjoyed TDKR more than TDK -- just me?

Yes, TDKR has some glaring plot holes, and a couple of the set pieces are laughably over-theatrical and over-literal, and some of the dialogue is clunkingly bad, but as a narrative and a character arc it's enjoyable. No, the fusion bomb doesn't make any sense, but it's pure McGuffin as far as the plot is concerned.

The only part that's really silly IMO is when the prisoners in the pit are chanting "rise" -- my son and I invariably start doing the "sharkbait!" chant from Finding Nemo at that point. (Yes, watching a movie at my house is like listening to a third-rate RiffTrax wannabe.)

Incidentally, it looks like PopSci is repeating the same mistake I've seen in other reviews in assuming that when Bane broke Batman's back his spinal cord was damaged (maybe people are inferring that because that's what happens in the Knightfall comic book arc?). My understanding was that Wayne had a dislocated vertebra (the prison doctor knees him in the back because, he says, the vertebra is protruding) and possibly other muscle, ligament and bone damage including perhaps cracked vertebrae, which would certainly be agonizingly painful, but is a long way from the kind of potentially-paralyzing catastrophic spinal cord injury a lot of people seem to be assuming.
 
2012-12-29 09:04:57 AM
Well, if it's "in" the movies, there's a good chance it's not real. But if it's "in in" the movies, well, that changes everything! How could something that is "in in" the movies not be factual?
 
2012-12-29 09:06:36 AM

Candygram for Mongo: The goddamn Batman can violate science if he damn well pleases.


Well, we knew that...

25.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-12-29 09:13:29 AM
Bad Astronomy use to do this before he handed the title over. Now its just articles on astronomy. Not sure why they're bad.
 
2012-12-29 09:39:35 AM

potierrh: I think the key here is sloppy. As in due to laziness or incompetence.


Which isn't to say that Avengers wasn't sloppy in its own ways. Much like TDKR, it was overlong and padded with unnecessary elements. But in the case of TDKR, none of the character arcs really make much sense. It's amazing that you instantly know that Miranda Tate is a bad guy from the instant she walks into the frame, yet when she's revealed as the bad guy, it still feels like it's out of nowhere. Much like Bruce's decision to put on the cape again- he's heard some vague rumors about Bane, and decides that he's got to do something about this vague and ill-defined threat.
 
2012-12-29 09:43:13 AM
Fantasy, not SF.
 
2012-12-29 09:55:42 AM

t3knomanser: It's amazing that you instantly know that Miranda Tate is a bad guy from the instant she walks into the frame, yet when she's revealed as the bad guy, it still feels like it's out of nowhere.


Exactly right. By the time she came out for who she was I'd forgotten she was telegraphed as a villain. And then I felt silly for not guessing who she was earlier.
 
2012-12-29 10:11:22 AM
"They're not ALL 'historical documents.' Surely, you don't think Gilligan's Island is a... "
[Moans of despair]
" Those poor people. "
 
2012-12-29 10:50:24 AM
I've got my own little 'movie mistakes' to nit-pick.

Movie Goofs: Nuclear weapons cannot be activated by a handheld garage door remote.

Plot Uh Ohs: The entire Gotham Police Department, including apparently helicopter pilots and dispatchers, enter the sewer sytem and are trapped by Bane. In actuality, no police department responds to a crisis with 100% deployment.

Plot Puzzlers: The entire Gotham Police Department returns to duty after being kept underground by Bane. In actuality, most if not all would require extensive hospitalization and tens of thousands of stretchers.

Character Gaffes: Bane takes over Gotham, turns the populace into a violent, anti-capitalist mob and holds back the U.S. military by threatening to destroy the corrupted city. In actuality, American citizens would overwhelming approve of letting Bane detonate his own warhead.

Costume Mishaps: When the Gotham Police Department emerges from the sewers and charges in a straight line at Bane's mob, also standing in a straight line, both factions are wearing modern attire and holding guns. In actuality, they should have been wearing chain mail costumes and wielding swords.

Script Screw-Ups: The movie ends with arch-villain Bane exposed as a sidekick and the evil mastermind being a minor cameo character of three scenes. In actuality, this twist and the final 15 pages of script came from an unproduced M. Night Shyamalan story and should have been recognized as unfit for filming.

...but, y'know, as long as you ignore the parts where the movie insults your intelligence and becomes a drab, quipless sequel to 'Batman & Robin' it's a great blah blah blah.
 
2012-12-29 10:54:12 AM

Unobtanium: "They're not ALL 'historical documents.' Surely, you don't think Gilligan's Island is a... "
[Moans of despair]
" Those poor people. "


Leaving satisfied.
 
2012-12-29 11:05:00 AM

2wolves: Fantasy, not SF.


This
 
2012-12-29 11:05:56 AM
I learned physics from watching the Roadrunner.
 
2012-12-29 11:14:13 AM

Darth Macho: I've got my own little 'movie mistakes' to nit-pick.

Movie Goofs: Nuclear weapons cannot be activated by a handheld garage door remote.

Plot Uh Ohs: The entire Gotham Police Department, including apparently helicopter pilots and dispatchers, enter the sewer sytem and are trapped by Bane. In actuality, no police department responds to a crisis with 100% deployment.

Plot Puzzlers: The entire Gotham Police Department returns to duty after being kept underground by Bane. In actuality, most if not all would require extensive hospitalization and tens of thousands of stretchers.

Character Gaffes: Bane takes over Gotham, turns the populace into a violent, anti-capitalist mob and holds back the U.S. military by threatening to destroy the corrupted city. In actuality, American citizens would overwhelming approve of letting Bane detonate his own warhead.

Costume Mishaps: When the Gotham Police Department emerges from the sewers and charges in a straight line at Bane's mob, also standing in a straight line, both factions are wearing modern attire and holding guns. In actuality, they should have been wearing chain mail costumes and wielding swords.

Script Screw-Ups: The movie ends with arch-villain Bane exposed as a sidekick and the evil mastermind being a minor cameo character of three scenes. In actuality, this twist and the final 15 pages of script came from an unproduced M. Night Shyamalan story and should have been recognized as unfit for filming.

...but, y'know, as long as you ignore the parts where the movie insults your intelligence and becomes a drab, quipless sequel to 'Batman & Robin' it's a great blah blah blah.


You must be fun at parties.
It's a comic book movie, who gives a fark?
 
2012-12-29 11:15:46 AM
Space Nutters?
 
2012-12-29 11:16:00 AM

Vodka Zombie: taurusowner: TFA makes a point to call it a sloppy science-fiction movie. At what point do any comic book movies purport to be science-fiction in the first place? I've never been under the impression any superhero/comic books movies are even trying to be science-fiction.

I don't know... I suppose they could be tossed into the Sci-fi category to some extent.


The same way idiot journalists lump Lord of the Rings in with Sci-fi
 
2012-12-29 11:16:38 AM
Pfft, there are way worse violators of physics than batman.
 
2012-12-29 12:08:10 PM
If you're getting your science from Popular Science, you're not smart enough to know legitimate science-based criticism from illegitimate science-based criticism.

(Unless you're ten. In which case Popular Science is awesome and you should read it a lot while you're at the right age for it)
 
2012-12-29 12:08:47 PM

legendary: You must be fun at parties.


This a few times. Jesus fark you people can't just sit back and enjoy something..
 
2012-12-29 12:12:40 PM

OtherLittleGuy: Unobtanium: "They're not ALL 'historical documents.' Surely, you don't think Gilligan's Island is a... "
[Moans of despair]
" Those poor people. "

Leaving satisfied.


www.alicia-logic.com

Satisfied, indeed.
 
2012-12-29 12:29:41 PM

Nemo's Brother: Vodka Zombie: taurusowner: TFA makes a point to call it a sloppy science-fiction movie. At what point do any comic book movies purport to be science-fiction in the first place? I've never been under the impression any superhero/comic books movies are even trying to be science-fiction.

I don't know... I suppose they could be tossed into the Sci-fi category to some extent.

The same way idiot journalists lump Lord of the Rings in with Sci-fi


Lotr has more science than Star Trek, and it explores the ramifications of technology to boot.
/god I love the purist definition of sci-fi
 
2012-12-29 12:30:50 PM

Quantum Apostrophe: Space Nutters?


You must be worn out from the back to back space/3d printing threads
 
2012-12-29 12:57:28 PM
Even funnier is when dingbat liberal's think the Disney portrayal of wild animals being our best friend is real life. Video Here
 
2012-12-29 01:01:44 PM
I saw TDKR a couple weeks ago on Xfinity. The beginning was confusing and left me feeling like I'd walked into the middle of the movie. Lazy writing throughout and a plot that sucked. The end with the dirty bomb explosion off the coast left me with a feeling of "WTF? What's going to keep the winds from blowing back inland and irradiating Gotham?"

I know what some of you will say, "Why can't you just sit back and enjoy the movie?" Suspension of disbelief, etc. I can do that, but in this instance TDKR was an insult to the previous Dark Knight film. I could easily believe Heath Ledger's "Joker" was a real person. The writers for TDKR should be ashamed of themselves for their lack of imagination.
 
2012-12-29 01:19:26 PM
You know, they are going to have real issues next year with the new Star Trek movie. "Group calls out Star Trek for science violations, you can't take apart atoms without them blowing up, each transporter scene should have ended with an atomic explosion."
 
2012-12-29 01:51:30 PM
Christians? Many of them are scared to death of Harry Potter.
 
2012-12-29 03:01:11 PM

Quantum Apostrophe: Space Nutters?


From Nabisco!
 
2012-12-29 04:55:23 PM
www.lazydork.com

They're all documentaries
 
2012-12-29 05:41:20 PM
The thing that broke my suspension of disbelief is that the fusion core (an untested piece of technology) knew precisely when it was going to explode from the very moment it was removed from the rest of the reactor. Seriously, who builds a countdown to "everybody's farked" into something that you don't design to explode in the first place? Why was it built in such a way that it could be removed to begin with?
 
2012-12-29 09:33:07 PM

Arumat: The thing that broke my suspension of disbelief is that the fusion core (an untested piece of technology) knew precisely when it was going to explode from the very moment it was removed from the rest of the reactor. Seriously, who builds a countdown to "everybody's farked" into something that you don't design to explode in the first place? Why was it built in such a way that it could be removed to begin with?


The fusion core is pure MacGuffin. It's made of phlebotinum, implements a Broken Aesop, is operated by a Big Red Button, has a Magic Countdown with Ludicrous Precision, and in fact probably touches just about every nuclear- or bomb-related entry at TV Tropes. (Also, if flooding the reactor made it safe, why not just drop the core in the bay to have the same effect?).

The only way to enjoy the movie is to accept that the core arbitrarily has the specified characteristics -- there is a remote control for it, there is also a timer on it, only one person can disarm it and he's dead, and it will destroy the city if exploded unless the hero can heroically save everyone with his heroic self-sacrifice. Nothing about it's actual implementation makes sense, so don't even try.

The bigger problem with it is in plot terms. For example, unless I missed something (quite possible), Miranda invests in the fusion reactor long before anybody knew it could be used as a weapon. And yet, if she really wanted a weapon with the specified characteristics there are much more practical and realistic options (say, a dirty nuke). It has to be the fusion core, though, so that Nolan can riff on the irony of Wayne's investment in making the world better (cheap energy) being subverted, Miranda's deceit and betrayal contrasted with Selina's deceit and redemption, Bane's "only crime" being that he loved Talia, and so on. Unfortunately, most of that gets lost because the movie doesn't explicitly reveal Talia until very late, so most of that complexity -- including the entirety of Talia's motivation for her absurdly complicated supervillainess plot -- gets crammed into two clunky expository monologues.

Ultimately, Nolan ends up tripping himself up with his desire to make a gritty and credible movie, but not being able to carry it through.

And yet despite that, I enjoyed the ride.
 
2012-12-29 10:43:41 PM

bulldg4life: So, the billionaire playboy with a secret double life of fighting crime in a cape and rubber bat suit is a-ok...but damnit, there's no way that flying bat plane thing can go faster than 290mph.


Oh is that what the article is about? I didn't read it, but I totally agree that that part of the movie was dumb. It ruined the suspense, they give so many numbers in the dialog that if you're playing along at home you know that he should have blowed up right along with the bomb, so the fun you get as a viewer of watching him get away by the skin of his teeth is completely stolen away. It's dumb because there's no reason for it. They easily could have written in some different numbers that add up a little better.

Compare it with the Avengers where the only important thing is when the bomb will explode, and you can totally buy in to that even if you're playing along with the movie. Iron Man then takes the bomb through a dimensional explosion where it blows up in space and Iron Man falls through the closing portal just in time. All this is very suspenseful because you're not given a reason to disbelieve it. You aren't told how far away the alien spaceships are, and you aren't told much about the Tesseract's portal except that it's frikkin magic, so it's fine.
 
2012-12-30 01:47:34 AM

IlGreven: Candygram for Mongo: The goddamn Batman can violate science if he damn well pleases.

Well, we knew that...

[25.media.tumblr.com image 492x240]


Looks like the goddamn other guy can violate science too if he damn well pleases, unless I'm missing something.
 
2012-12-30 01:52:08 AM

Candygram for Mongo: IlGreven: Candygram for Mongo: The goddamn Batman can violate science if he damn well pleases.

Well, we knew that...

[25.media.tumblr.com image 492x240]

Looks like the goddamn other guy can violate science too if he damn well pleases, unless I'm missing something.


Now that I look closer the other guy appears to be Superman so I guess he can do what he wants too.
 
2012-12-30 02:20:21 AM
I've had gripes with the same things mentioned in TFA but it only annoys me because Nolan was trying to make a realistic Batman trilogy, and then threw it out the window in pt 3. To be fair I probably wouldnt be as annoyed in Avengers did the same stuff only because they never claimed to be realistic.
 
2012-12-30 09:31:39 AM

ODDwhun: I've had gripes with the same things mentioned in TFA but it only annoys me because Nolan was trying to make a realistic Batman trilogy, and then threw it out the window in pt 3. To be fair I probably wouldnt be as annoyed in Avengers did the same stuff only because they never claimed to be realistic.


Yes, I've said the same thing. There are lots of things in TDK that are logistically implausible but nothing AFAIK completely physically impossible (even Batman's Skyhook escape is based on a real CIA research program).

I suspect that the problems with TDKR in part are because Nolan is trying to bridge two Big Themes in one movie, namely the idea of the city cut off and under criminal rule from the Cataclysm/No Man's Land arc, and of course the broken bat theme from the Knightfall arc. Once he decides to incorporate the latter he somehow needs to conjure up a timeline that gives Wayne time to recuperate and return -- so OK, we get a MacGuffin that will explode in about five months. But now he needs a reason for the military to not intervene in the meantime -- so OK, there's also a trigger to explode the MacGuffin now. But in that case why doesn't the bad guy just blow it up before Batman can stop it? So he has to add more guff on top of all that... and it ends up a mess.

There are so many better ways it could have been done -- Bane has hostages all over the city to prevent the military from intervening; Talia is revealed mid-movie rather than so close to the end; Talia and Bane know Batman will return, and hold off destroying the city because they want him to be present when it happens; etc.

And yet, none of these bothered me nearly as much as the over-literal theatricality of the Pit of Despair and the Climb of Redemption and the Sunlight of Hope (and seriously, it's the worst prison in the world but they have a rule that if you can get out then fair enough, off you go and try not to be a naughty boy again?). Or the magical precision timing of the explosions that disrupt the football game at exactly the right moment to trap the police underground. Really, Nolan needs to ease up on the anvilicious symbolism.

And still, I enjoyed it more than TDK.
 
2012-12-30 10:12:10 AM

offmymeds: I saw TDKR a couple weeks ago on Xfinity. The beginning was confusing and left me feeling like I'd walked into the middle of the movie. Lazy writing throughout and a plot that sucked. The end with the dirty bomb explosion off the coast left me with a feeling of "WTF? What's going to keep the winds from blowing back inland and irradiating Gotham?"

I know what some of you will say, "Why can't you just sit back and enjoy the movie?" Suspension of disbelief, etc. I can do that, but in this instance TDKR was an insult to the previous Dark Knight film. I could easily believe Heath Ledger's "Joker" was a real person. The writers for TDKR should be ashamed of themselves for their lack of imagination.


Thank you. TDKR could have never beeb made and the world would be a better place.
 
2012-12-30 10:14:38 AM

caleb4god: offmymeds: I saw TDKR a couple weeks ago on Xfinity. The beginning was confusing and left me feeling like I'd walked into the middle of the movie. Lazy writing throughout and a plot that sucked. The end with the dirty bomb explosion off the coast left me with a feeling of "WTF? What's going to keep the winds from blowing back inland and irradiating Gotham?"

I know what some of you will say, "Why can't you just sit back and enjoy the movie?" Suspension of disbelief, etc. I can do that, but in this instance TDKR was an insult to the previous Dark Knight film. I could easily believe Heath Ledger's "Joker" was a real person. The writers for TDKR should be ashamed of themselves for their lack of imagination.

Thank you. TDKR could have never beeb made and the world would be a better place.


Been* too :)
 
2012-12-30 10:56:05 AM

nicoffeine: And what the hell is with calling out the science in science fiction? It's fiction, dammit.


No, it's SCIENCE fiction. If you just want fiction, go to something that's just fiction. Like when you want romance in your comedy, you go for a romantic comedy and not just a comedy. I think people would be a little miffed if every movie with at least one kiss and one joke in it were called a romantic comedy.

Die Hard, my favorite romcom!
 
2012-12-30 11:31:03 AM

Yotto: Die Hard, my favorite romcom!


A down-on-his-luck cop hopes to get back with his ex before Christmas... until they find themselves caught in the middle of a high-tech heist in this delightful "Home Alone for adults" rom-com! Hilarity ensues.
 
2012-12-30 01:02:17 PM

czetie: Yotto: Die Hard, my favorite romcom!

A down-on-his-luck cop hopes to get back with his ex before Christmas... until they find themselves caught in the middle of a high-tech heist in this delightful "Home Alone for adults" rom-com! Hilarity ensues.


Yippee ki-yay to all. Yippee ki-yay everyone!
 
2012-12-31 12:16:01 PM

Yotto: nicoffeine: And what the hell is with calling out the science in science fiction? It's fiction, dammit.

No, it's SCIENCE fiction. If you just want fiction, go to something that's just fiction. Like when you want romance in your comedy, you go for a romantic comedy and not just a comedy. I think people would be a little miffed if every movie with at least one kiss and one joke in it were called a romantic comedy.

Die Hard, my favorite romcom!


okay.jpg
 
2012-12-31 07:25:28 PM

Unobtanium: "They're not ALL 'historical documents.' Surely, you don't think Gilligan's Island is a... "
[Moans of despair]
" Those poor people. "


+1.

/farking love that movie
 
Displayed 49 of 49 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report