The Dark Knight Rises (Batman 3) - No Riddler

Status
Not open for further replies.
apana said:
The problem is Nolan's whole idea behind ninja skills and deception is never properly explained. We don't see Batman really learning deception tactics, Ra's Al Ghul just throws some exploding powder on the ground and a ninja appears out of the shadows. We don't have a good idea of what Batman can or cannot do. This is further complicated by the fact that those kinds of ninja disappearing acts don't actually work in complicated real life situations. It's mostly just an excuse for Batman appearing and disappearing whenever Nolan wants. You can never prove it one way or another what Batman should have done because someone can always come up with an explanation depending on how they want to interpret that scene and assumptions they want to make.
Click to expand...
They're freaking ninjas dude. What the fuck kind of detailed explanation you want?
 
a question to all you fans out here...

lets pretend for a moment this movie turns out to unanimously decided as a bad movie by critics, fans, everyone. How will this affect Nolan's legacy in regards to his Batman trilogy? Something similar to Sam Raimi in regards to Spiderman? Or do you think because of how well BB and TDK were, it wouldn't have as much of an effect?
 
WaxHustleNHos said:
a question to all you fans out here...

lets pretend for a moment this movie turns out to unanimously decided as a bad movie by critics, fans, everyone. How will this affect Nolan's legacy in regards to his Batman trilogy? Something similar to Sam Raimi in regards to Spiderman? Or do you think because of how well BB and TDK were, it wouldn't have as much of an effect?
Click to expand...

I'd love it regardless of what critics, fans or anyone else will say. Nolan's movies appeal to me even when people don't like it. I also love Batman and have seen some of the worse shit ever to have been released on television with Bruce Wayne's name on it, yet I will enjoy the shit outta it.

With that said, fuck Batman and Robin. TDKR can't be worse than B&R!
 
WaxHustleNHos said:
a question to all you fans out here...

lets pretend for a moment this movie turns out to unanimously decided as a bad movie by critics, fans, everyone. How will this affect Nolan's legacy in regards to his Batman trilogy? Something similar to Sam Raimi in regards to Spiderman? Or do you think because of how well BB and TDK were, it wouldn't have as much of an effect?
Click to expand...

Well lets just hope Nolan isn't like Schumacher, and be publicly apologizing for what he has(will) do.
 
WaxHustleNHos said:
a question to all you fans out here...

lets pretend for a moment this movie turns out to unanimously decided as a bad movie by critics, fans, everyone. How will this affect Nolan's legacy in regards to his Batman trilogy? Something similar to Sam Raimi in regards to Spiderman? Or do you think because of how well BB and TDK were, it wouldn't have as much of an effect?
Click to expand...
Nolan's track record would still awesome.
 
On the internet, you're only as good as you're last movie, unfortunately. I think if this sucks, BB and TDK will get re-evaluated by a vocal portion of the web, just like the Spiderman trilogy was.
 
Tookay said:
On the internet, you're only as good as you're last movie, unfortunately. I think if this sucks, BB and TDK will get re-evaluated by a vocal portion of the web, just like the Spiderman trilogy was.
Click to expand...
They already have been. I dont think there ever will be a director who has no detractors.
 
artist said:
They already have been. I dont think there ever will be a director who has no detractors.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm not talking about those kinds of detractors. Contrarians always exist, as well as people with legitimate grievances. Additionally, time isn't always kind to film, because rewatches and advances in film-making tend to highlight flaws in previously well-regarded films.

I'm more talking about the people who are "on the fence" in regards to this series (and other critically-acclaimed series). They realize the critical consensus is one way, though, so they keep their mouths shut because they don't want to rock the boat. However, if they sense a momentum shift, they'll pile on when they get the chance.
 
Hans Zimmer on Nolan's secrecy

“There’s always this thing [that people say], ‘Oh, Chris is so secretive.’ Well, I think that there are two elements to this. One is, I think, to be able to do really good work, you have to have the chance to fail in privacy. And if everybody’s watching you on the Internet, I think it stifles creativity. And I think ‘Dark Knight’ is the perfect example of this idea. Everybody knew we were making a Batman movie. But until it came out they didn’t know it was going to be that sort of a Batman movie.”
Click to expand...
 
WaxHustleNHos said:
a question to all you fans out here...

lets pretend for a moment this movie turns out to unanimously decided as a bad movie by critics, fans, everyone. How will this affect Nolan's legacy in regards to his Batman trilogy? Something similar to Sam Raimi in regards to Spiderman? Or do you think because of how well BB and TDK were, it wouldn't have as much of an effect?
Click to expand...

didn't Raimi have to shoehorn crap into the movie due to studio pressure, so he half-assed the things he didn't have his heart in, i.e. Venom?

Raimi just seemed disinterested in Spidey by the time 3 hit.

Nolan has been locked on a 'trilogy' since very early on... and Warner is getting out of his way. That will be the difference, I think.

If TDKR is a legitimately shitty film, Nolan won't be able to use the same excuses Raimi did... but I still think the guy has a massive career ahead of him.
 
RustyNails said:
They're freaking ninjas dude. What the fuck kind of detailed explanation you want?
Click to expand...

I don't want an explanation, I'm just pointing out why it is difficult to judge what Batman can and cannot do in regards to a specific situation within the Nolan universe.

TheJollyCorner said:
didn't Raimi have to shoehorn crap into the movie due to studio pressure, so he half-assed the things he didn't have his heart in, i.e. Venom?

Raimi just seemed disinterested in Spidey by the time 3 hit.

Nolan has been locked on a 'trilogy' since very early on... and Warner is getting out of his way. That will be the difference, I think.

If TDKR is a legitimately shitty film, Nolan won't be able to use the same excuses Raimi did... but I still think the guy has a massive career ahead of him.
Click to expand...

Nolan only came back to Batman when he felt like he had a story worth telling, a proper ending. They didn't force anything, this story came naturally and there is about zero chance that this will be a bad film. Interestingly while they were having writers block on the Batman story they came up with an idea for Superman and that is the story Zack Snyder will be bringing to life on screen.
 
TheJollyCorner said:
didn't Raimi have to shoehorn crap into the movie due to studio pressure, so he half-assed the things he didn't have his heart in, i.e. Venom?

Raimi just seemed disinterested in Spidey by the time 3 hit.
Click to expand...

No, this is just the rationalization that a lot of people came up with (though it is true that Venom wasn't his idea).

Also, Nolan has said many times that he never envisioned a trilogy and has always just made up the stories one at a time.
 
Blader5489 said:
No, this is just the rationalization that a lot of people came up with (though it is true that Venom wasn't his idea).

Also, Nolan has said many times that he never envisioned a trilogy and has always just made up the stories one at a time.
Click to expand...

I wonder how much of that is true and how much of it is him trying to convince himself.

Lets be honest the core cast had signed on for three movies. Nolan obviously knew this and he ended BB with a great lead in for a sequel. In fact the end of BB would have forced any other director to do a Joker movie even if they didn't want to.

Personally I think Nolan knew he wanted to do the sequel (not sure about a trilogy where there is a story spanning all three movies) but he also wanted the freedom on not being signed on from the beginning in case he changed his mind, studio interfered, or another more promising project came up. Luckily for the fans it all worked out since BB forced WB to give Nolan complete control over the franchise.
 
TheJollyCorner said:
didn't Raimi have to shoehorn crap into the movie due to studio pressure, so he half-assed the things he didn't have his heart in, i.e. Venom?

Raimi just seemed disinterested in Spidey by the time 3 hit.
Click to expand...
I like Raimi so I hope he didn't half-ass a $250 million movie. That would be horribly unprofessional and a lot of SM3's problems weren't Venom related anyway. Sandman started off well but the retcon and flying sand cloud stuff were terrible.

Really half-assing it by straight ripping the Venom origin and story from the cartoon would have been better.
 
Zimmer talks about the score for TDKR

“You have to see [a sequel] as an autonomous movie,” the Berlin native said. “Otherwise you will end up with all the things that are the worst thing about a sequel. Before I even set off on ‘Sherlock,’ and before Chris [Nolan] started shooting, I had an idea. I went to the Warner [Bros.'] music department and I said, ‘Have I earned the right yet to book the biggest, craziest orchestra for two days, and try this experiment for ‘”Dark Knight?”‘ And if it goes wrong, if I don’t like it or if Chris doesn’t like it, we can just pretend these two days never happened.’”

Zimmer said the experiment took him to some new and distant edges of his own craft.

“I had an idea of a different way of writing music, or a different way of getting an orchestra to perform music as well,” Zimmer said. “And basically it worked out, and snippets of it are starting to appear in the trailer. And really I have 25 minutes of very, very radical, very different stuff. There were two great parts. One was Chris came to the [recording] sessions and really embraced what I was doing and really liked what I was doing. But, in a peculiar way, the greater part was that the musicians had never worked in this way before, and really loved it. And months later, when I was doing the ‘Sherlock’ sessions, the musicians were still talking about those two days, even though they’d done all this other stuff in the meantime. So I know I’m onto something. Really my enemy right now is time, because I have so many ideas.”
Click to expand...
 
with the money TDK made it there was no doubt Nolan would make a third. Not to mention the several hints throughout the first movie that he was planning for a third. Batman Begins was made with the intention of making more movies... I don't necessarily believe the one story at a time thing... nevertheless i don't know much about this franchise as most of you do, but it just seems to me that it will be a little more dissapointing for the public if this movie sucks. This isn't just your regular super-hero movie. the part where "Robin" was running across the field was one of the dumbest things I've seen in a long time. I have huge expectations.
 
Scullibundo said:
Should have axed any idea to make a third film when Ledger died. But it will be entertaining.
Click to expand...

Thank god you have no creative input with studios. I can only imagine the movie you would love. Probably something about blue smurfs going back in time to save the titanic from being sunk, all with candy coated visuals starring Emile Hirsch.
 
Mr. Serious Business said:
Why's that? The Joker was out of the picture for the third film anyways. Save for a cameo of a couple minutes or so (like that of the Scarecrow at the beginning of TDK), he wouldn't add much to the film.
Click to expand...

As far as I can remember, Nolan became extremely hesitant about another film once Ledger died. I'm pretty sure Jonah Nolan had said that it impacted their decisions of where a sequel would go.
 
Scullibundo said:
As far as I can remember, Nolan became extremely hesitant about another film once Ledger died. I'm pretty sure Jonah Nolan had said that it impacted their decisions of where a sequel would go.
Click to expand...

If that is actually true, neither one of them has ever admitted it. iirc the only thing that comes close is when Goyer had said they initially conceived ending TDK with Dent's turn, then making Two-Face the main villain of a third movie with Joker in Hannibal Lecter-type role. But they obviously didn't stick to that since TDK was written before Ledger had died.
 
Blader5489 said:
If that is actually true, neither one of them has ever admitted it. iirc the only thing that comes close is when Goyer had said they initially conceived ending TDK with Dent's turn, then making Two-Face the main villain of a third movie with Joker in Hannibal Lecter-type role. But they obviously didn't stick to that since TDK was written before Ledger had died.
Click to expand...

Yes, that is what I'm thinking of. Thank you.
 
Joker doesn't matter. You can perfectly have him locked in a corner nobody sees, and in later movies bring him out again.

There are so many villains in the Batman universe, and many of them have great potential.
 
WrikaWrek said:
Joker doesn't matter. You can perfectly have him locked in a corner nobody sees, and in later movies bring him out again.

There are so many villains in the Batman universe, and many of them have great potential.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think TDK wrapped up everything quite nicely with the Joker. I don't mind any future antics of his not being seen; it's a story we already know quite well(both from other sources of fiction, and as implied in his final speech in the film).
 
Another film with the Joker as the focus would have been redundant. Everything about him and his rivalry with Batman had been already been said in TDK.
 
Tookay said:
Another film with the Joker as the focus would have been redundant. Everything about him and his rivalry with Batman had been already been said in TDK.
Click to expand...
Probably, but I'm sure he would have had a decently sized role in the sequel based on the reception by audiences.
 
Yeah, fuck anything more with Joker. Him telling Batman they were destined to fight forever is all I need to get a raging nerd-on every time.

IamMattFox said:
Probably, but I'm sure he would have had a decently sized role in the sequel based on the reception by audiences.
Click to expand...

Nolan does not strike me as the type to throw in a main character just because people loved him. Joker would have had a cameo at best. As stated earlier, the idea of him being a third leg to a Two-Face focused sequel died before the Dark Knight script was finished.
 
Zimmer talks more about the score:

You have to see [a sequel] as an autonomous movie. Otherwise you will end up with all the things that are the worst thing about a sequel. Before I even set off on ‘Sherlock,’ and before Chris [Nolan] started shooting, I had an idea. I went to the Warner [Bros.'] music department and I said, ‘Have I earned the right yet to book the biggest, craziest orchestra for two days, and try this experiment for ‘”Dark Knight?”‘ And if it goes wrong, if I don’t like it or if Chris doesn’t like it, we can just pretend these two days never happened.’
Click to expand...

I had an idea of a different way of writing music, or a different way of getting an orchestra to perform music as well. And basically it worked out, and snippets of it are starting to appear in the trailer. And really I have 25 minutes of very, very radical, very different stuff.
Click to expand...
 
Scullibundo said:
Should have axed any idea to make a third film when Ledger died. But it will be entertaining.
Click to expand...

Wrong! I think Joker wouldn't have worked a second time. They waited, figured out what they wanted to do, and will now deliver something amazing. Seriously if this is as good as the first two films I think it deserves an Oscar. Not for the film itself, but in order to honor the trilogy like they did with Return of the King.
 
2O85vl.jpg

"Who is this Bane douchebag?"


UPCbA.jpg

"Some asshole who did us all a favor and threw Joker in a meat grinder last week."
 
apana said:
Wrong! I think Joker wouldn't have worked a second time. They waited, figured out what they wanted to do, and will now deliver something amazing. Seriously if this is as good as the first two films I think it deserves an Oscar. Not for the film itself, but in order to honor the trilogy like they did with Return of the King.
Click to expand...

The difference is that the LotR movies were snubbed the years before where Fellowship should have won an Oscar straight away. TDK was not Oscar worthy. TDKR will not be getting an Oscar. Spielberg is going to bend Nolan over his knee.
 
Scullibundo said:
The difference is that the LotR movies were snubbed the years before where Fellowship should have won an Oscar straight away. TDK was not Oscar worthy. TDKR will not be getting an Oscar. Spielberg is going to bend Nolan over his knee.
Click to expand...

TDK is better than everything Spielberg has done in the last ten years
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms trailer (Game of Thrones spinoff)
25
166
kpopSuperstar replied
  • Poll
Aztec Batman Trailer (Because only Batman gets to have all of the fun adaptations)
8
388
Toots replied
In the Dark Knight Franchise: Does Bruce have any defense against embezzlement (spoilers for the Dark Knight series)
17
2K
Raven117 replied
Game of Thrones getting a new spinoff: A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms. Premieres January.
2
90
432
kruis replied
Dark Angel TV Show... Opinions
14
345
SirKicksalot replied
Top Bottom