Janskeet said: I haven't resorted to childish insults
Janskeet said: I thought you guys were smart?
Why bother with this one
ChainsawAsh said:
GhostAlpha26 said:
ChainsawAsh said:
I don't think I've read a single "Batman" comic where Batman *didn't* save the Joker when he was about to die. That's completely in character for Batman - it was Burton's version that was out of character for him.
Those were the two that jumped out at me, but it really seems to me like you really didn't want to like the movie to begin with and you're just trying to nitpick it to death.
In this movie, I feel it would have worked well though, especially since Ledger can no longer be cast.
Excuse me if I get a bit defensive, but I was absolutly amped for this movie to come out. I really enjoyed Batman Begins as I have stated before. I watched the trailers, and all the short clips, I scoured the net for the "The first 6 minutes," I watched the HBO special which I had not done for a movie in several years, I thought the movie was going to be amazing and I was there for the midnight showing. Then after not enjoying it I gave it another go and watched it a second time and came to the same conclusion. So to start going after me personally like that I find to be out of line. Really showed your character there, I didnt come on here and just say it sucked this movie blows, I attempted to explain why I didnt like it. But you just wanted to assume for yourself, do yourself a favor and think with your head next time you make a statement about someone.
I think you're a bit out of line here - I wasn't making a personal attack, I'm just trying to understand your complaints about the movie. If you didn't like it, that's fine, more power to you. But I just can't understand how the things you listed really hurt the movie that much for you, but they obviously did, so I'm sorry if I offended you. But to say I'm "showing my character" by "assuming" things for myself and not "thinking with my head" is much more out of line than me thinking you're being too nitpicky with the movie. Try not to take things so personally.
We were discussing a movie, not peoples personal motives, you were the one who took the discussion out of context, I didnt make anything personal before you made a personal statement about me. Its rather illogical to expect to understand someones personal feelings and reasoning as to why they liked or disliked something when you dont even know that person. And you did assume, you made an assumtion as to why I diskliked the movie without knowing what you were talking about. That is out of line to start making personal statements about why someone acted the way they did without having any background on it. If your statements were to hold up then anyone could make any statement based on no actual knowledge of what they are speaking about. If you cant understand that you made a unfavorbale personal statement towards me, then its starting to make sense how you can ignore so many holes in this movie. And Ive mired this thread enough with an argument with someone who can not see reasoning with anything logical.
Ady, Im sure Im late but I couldnt find the dissucussion about it, I just watched your 9min split screen preview, and is it your intention to remove all those scenes? i.e. the wampa scene and Han finding Luke?
ChainsawAsh said:
I don't think I've read a single "Batman" comic where Batman *didn't* save the Joker when he was about to die. That's completely in character for Batman - it was Burton's version that was out of character for him.
Those were the two that jumped out at me, but it really seems to me like you really didn't want to like the movie to begin with and you're just trying to nitpick it to death.
In this movie, I feel it would have worked well though, especially since Ledger can no longer be cast.
Excuse me if I get a bit defensive, but I was absolutly amped for this movie to come out. I really enjoyed Batman Begins as I have stated before. I watched the trailers, and all the short clips, I scoured the net for the "The first 6 minutes," I watched the HBO special which I had not done for a movie in several years, I thought the movie was going to be amazing and I was there for the midnight showing. Then after not enjoying it I gave it another go and watched it a second time and came to the same conclusion. So to start going after me personally like that I find to be out of line. Really showed your character there, I didnt come on here and just say it sucked this movie blows, I attempted to explain why I didnt like it. But you just wanted to assume for yourself, do yourself a favor and think with your head next time you make a statement about someone.
CO said:
GhostAlpha26 said:
CO said:
How does the Empire get the AT-AT's on the Hoth? What do they just drop them off from the Star Destroyers? I mean they just appear from broad daylight, ready to fight.
Sorry way off topic, but funny you should mention that. I found a link to this in adywans EpV thread.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Y-85_Titan_dropship
Isnt this site just awesome haha
GA26, that is from an EU source, which pretty much contradicts so many stuff in the SW movies. Heck Boba Fett came back to life after ROTJ, so then do we both have to say that the Sarlacc Pit doesn't kill people?
GA26, I have to ask you what you think of the Burton & Schumacher Batman Films? Like em, love em, hate em? Just wondering.
I know about the EU not being cannon, it was a joke. So much for having an imagination. However it still gives you an idea of how the Empire did land them.
I havent seen those movies in years, and I barely remember them. Id have to watch them again.
CO said:
How does the Empire get the AT-AT's on the Hoth? What do they just drop them off from the Star Destroyers? I mean they just appear from broad daylight, ready to fight.
Sorry way off topic, but funny you should mention that. I found a link to this in adywans EpV thread.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Y-85_Titan_dropship
Isnt this site just awesome haha
lordjedi said:
Actually, I could care less how he survived. He's the hero, the main guy, the star. He's suppose to survive. If he had broken all his bones and been taken to the hospital, it would've made the movie really funny.
What other holes does it have? So far, the biggest problem seems to be the 20 story drop. What other things "brought you out of the movie"? The only scene I remember thinking looked funny was when he rode the batcycle into a wall, went up the wall, turned, and came back down facing the other direction. Something about it looked forced and funny, but that's the only one that really stuck out.
Who said he had to break all his bones, have him show some sort of discomfort after falling that far
Ok well Ill get the ones we’ve discussed out of the way first
The SWAT member riding shotgun making terrible comments throughout that entire chase scene
Batman falls 20 stories and is fine. Falls 5 (with the same armor) is not fine.
Fox having a problem helping Batman locate Joker, using the technology he created and when his morals have been at best questionable with what else he has done for Batman.
A yellow school bus driving out of a bank covered in rubble and everyone acting like that was a normal thing.
The whole scene recreating the fingerprint from a fragmented bullet was completely and absolutely absurd.
Making the convict out to be a “good” person by having him throw out the remote. I guess their trying to show not everyone is as messed up as the Joker, sorry the guys already in an orange jumpsuit…failure.
Batman not being Batman. Not attempting to stop Rachel and himself from falling. Not attempting to get the drop on The Joker in the building when he knew his exact location. Batman walking straight up to Two-Face when he had a gun to the kids head. Batman just walks around in broad daylight, so much for his secretive nature.Batman basically getting his butt kicked by The Joker and only accidently beating him.
Batman saving The Joker.
The Joker making a deal with the mob to get their money when he cares about nothing.
Batmans longest and most physical fight was with the SWAT team. He couldnt have incapacitated the first group, grabbed one of their comms and informed the entire team? Nah it was better for him to have fought all of them, that made more sense. I mean don’t have him fight the criminals/enemy for the last big fight scene.
The Jokers convincing of Harvey into becoming a cold blooded murder.
The Joker blowing up the hospital. (I have my reasons for that, I don’t wish to explain)
The Police knowing The Jokers location and completely calling off the “hit” at his location. Understandably a bigger problem arose but the terror wont stop with the Joker still running around.
Rerouting the SWAT convoy to take the lower street levels ( cant get anymore predictable).
Putting The Mayor out in an area impossible to control and extremely visible after a hits been placed on his life.
That’s all I can think of right now. Those scenes either made me think BS or that was done really poorly. I expect almost no one to agree with my reasons, but those are my reasons but Im sure youll have all kinds of circumventing you can come up with to “disprove” my reasons, but it would be mute, their what I felt made the movie poor.
CO said:
GhostAlpha26 said:
The movie prides itself on being true and gritty and "realistic" yet has so many holes. I realize that other movies have the same issue but if you want to make a critically realistic movie I think it should be looked at critically. If they are going to step away from the comic book style and walk into a whole new arena, thats great but do it right, and I don’t feel they have. Take the scene when they are transporting Dent, the SWAT guy riding shotgun delivered so many terrible lines that took away so much of the seriousness of that scene. Hes making these casual nonchalant remarks about horrendous destruction thats going on. Wheres the gritty, seriousness in that? And tagging it as a good time to lighten the tension with humor is just a terrible idea.
GA, we can do this for every movie, and it seems to me you are looking for holes in the movie. I mean if you want to rip our beloved OOT movies, I really don't think you want to go down that road. How does the Empire get the AT-AT's on the Hoth? What do they just drop them off from the Star Destroyers? I mean they just appear from broad daylight, ready to fight. But do I really care after how great the movie is? It is a fantasy movie that tries to give a dose of reality. Sure there are some things you question, it is like that in every movie in this genre, but I think if you are looking for plot holes in these movies, you are going to find them. Geez, I would tell you not watch the Original Superman, cause he is going to turn back time after Lois gets killed, and makes you wonder, "Anytime something goes bad, why doesn't he turn back the earth?" As I said GA26, I really don't have any problem with you not liking the movie, and I am not trying to convince you otherwise, but it just seems like you are guys are looking for anything wrong in this movie, when I can honestly say I enjoyed iy, and I'll let the little stuff slip.
Ok thats great. Star Wars is set in a different galaxy. You mean go down the road where I join a community of fans unpleased with the original versions of Star Wars who edit the movies to have more contunity and less "flaws." Yeah I think I might be close to that road. The "flaws" in TDK just really stood out to me and really took me "out of the movie," I found it difficult to hold the suspension of disbelief with TDK casue I contuinally felt I was getting knocked out of it. It went back and forth between realisim and fairy tale too much for me to believe it. There was too much inconsistancy. Im not saying every movie I like is flawless and doesnt have its issue but this movies issues really stuck out like a sore thumb to me and I could not enjoy it for that reason.
lordjedi said:
People in parachutes aren't usually wearing armor either ;) And I'm pretty sure he was somewhat faking not being able to get up after falling 5 stories at the end. Why get up when the bad guy is just going to keep knocking you down? Better to wait for him to come over and get him when he doesn't expect it (similar to Batman getting "shot" in the first movie). Either way, it doesn't bother me that he fell that far and survived. I can think of plenty of other movies that have a lot more problems than one minor scene.
What I was referring to with the Mythbusters thing is the gagdets that look real. Like the wire he uses to lift himself up or go across rooms with. Some of those things at least seemed plausible. Unfortunately, there's nothing commercially available in that size of a package. The best one Mythbusters tested was the cable to turn the car around tight corners. Even with the strongest cable they could find, they only made it about halfway through the turn before the pole (the anchor) got pulled up.
If you want to create your own reasonings thats fine Im just going off what I actually saw not what my mind can come up with. And I guess no Airborne Infantry solider specially equipped for parachuting has ever been injured by a fall :p. And lets not forget in Batman Begins after he jumps off the building after speaking with Gordon he lands hard against the railing and at least shows signs of injury by a 1 1/2 story fall. If your going to make him more human in the movie then at least show a 20+ story fall caused a bit of an inconvenience especially since he did nothing to slow their descent. But Im sure there will be another loop hole I must be missing that was neither implied are articulated in the movie, he was cape less and his cape didnt catch cosmic bat winds that drop him as light as a leaf to the ground below. OR his armor was not updated to the newest beta 2.0 which has a special hidden impact feature that senses imminent impact and deploys a special batgel within the suit to let him withstand falls from 5000 feet, how could we forget the batgel.
The movie prides itself on being true and gritty and "realistic" yet has so many holes. I realize that other movies have the same issue but if you want to make a critically realistic movie I think it should be looked at critically. If they are going to step away from the comic book style and walk into a whole new arena, thats great but do it right, and I don’t feel they have. Take the scene when they are transporting Dent, the SWAT guy riding shotgun delivered so many terrible lines that took away so much of the seriousness of that scene. Hes making these casual nonchalant remarks about horrendous destruction thats going on. Wheres the gritty, seriousness in that? And tagging it as a good time to lighten the tension with humor is just a terrible idea.
lordjedi said:
GhostAlpha26 said:
lordjedi said:
I'll agree that two face was taken out a bit to quick, but I think the point of keeping Joker alive was to have him for the next movie (not gonna work out unfortunately unless they go with a different actor).
As far as the two falls go, I swear I heard Batman activate something (his wing thing maybe?) during his fall with Rachel that at least slowed them down. That's why he was able to get under her and provide some cushion when they hit. Otherwise I'd agree with you.
Sorry but when I watched it again, I watched and listened intently to that scene and he does nothing, so... still ridiculous
His cape flares out just before they hit. I'm not sure if that's enough to slow them down or not. He's also wearing the new suit, so that may have helped a bit. I'm willing to suspend some belief, especially since Mythbusters showed that just about every gadget Batman has is a little on the "fantastic" side.
It does not canopy or do anything significant to slow them and even if there was a slight flare just before they hit that would do absolutlty nothing. Even when a parachute opens and slows a person down if there is a failure and their is partial canopy in which to slow the person the force at which they hit is often devastating. And falling onto a car is no help, falling into water from ~ 100 feet is like hitting concrete. And I think most people, including kids, realized that everything about Batman is on the "fantastic" side. However, the point is still that he does not act like Batman in this movie and the movie does a poor job of injecting "reality" into the Batman world. The fact still stands, he falls from 20+ stories in his suit and is fine, he falls ~5 stories in his suit and can barely get up.
CO said:
GhostAlpha26Thats your take on the movie, which is fine and Id respect it if it was executed better, it was poorly done. Having the end show the symbolism doesnt make up for the fact that 2 Hours and 20 mintues of the movie was out of wack.
And this is not the first movie in the genre to have "Choice" as a theme , Spiderman 2
GA26, I agree that every comic book movie in its sequel has gone the route of choice, as actually Superman II from 1981 was the first to do this where Superman actually becomes human.
But TDK is the first comic book movie where it delves into all the people in the movie, not just the hero. It delves into Commission Gordon, where he decides to fake his death and to the point where he has to dupe his own family. Could any of us ever fathom doing that, making our loved ones think we are dead! I could go on and on about each character, but I think my previous posts have pretty much summed up each characters dillema.
Listen, I dont' think this is THE greatest comic book movie ever, as I believe you dont start putting those labels on a movie til a couple year down the road when you see it on DVD a dozen times, and the movie either holds up or doesn't, as I still think Superman:The Movie is the greatest Comic Book movie ever cause that movie has the magic that Star Wars has, but again, just my opinion.
I told a friend the other day, I could see myself seeing TDK again, and thinking it isn't as great as how I initially felt after I saw it two weeks ago, as my love for this movie could be simply that Nolan is trying to do what I wanted with a summer blockbuster for about 15 years now. So as I said, no matter how much I love or like this movie 5 years from now, I respect the hell out of Nolan for what he has done with the 2 Batman movies, as he has tried to put out an interesting story, tried to get into the depths of the characters, and tried to tell it in an adult way that doesn't scream CGI or merchandising right in your face like those PT movies did from 99-05. It is the same way I feel about Lord of the Rings, I respect the hell out of those movies, even though I don't really love them, nor do I really watch them much.
I feel that Spiderman 2 did that though. Peter had to make a choice as well as Mary Jane and Doc Oc. It just doesnt feel that ground breaking or that it stands out as something so much better than other similar movies.
Heres a piece of a review that really gets to what is problematic with the movie in my opinion
"Nolan and his co-writer brother Jonathan evidently think Batman is a figure whose tragic qualities have Shakespearean depth.
But he isn't - mainly because his problems aren't universal enough.
How many of us face the problem of having a split personality, or unlimited wealth, or the responsibility of being solely able to fight the worst kinds of crime?
You can take a character out of a comic-strip, but you can't take the comic-strip out of the character.
Batman is not a tragic hero at all, but an adolescent action-figure with the kind of problems most of us can only dream of having."
The movie over stepped it bounds as far as I'm concerned. It glorified a terrorist and effectively reduced a great superhero into a mess.
CO said:
GhostAlpha26 said:
#10. I agree with that, especially with the ending, it was done poor. Dispatching Two-Face so quickly and not allowly the chance to further develope his chracter in the next movie was a complete failure. Saving the Joker and not wrapping up his story was terrible.
Two Face is a plot point, not a main point, and I think people are missing that angle. This isn't your typical comic book movie, where the bad guy IS the bad guy, this is about a city that has gone to hell, and there a bad guys all over the place, some aligned, some not. The Joker is not the main villain, he is just a bad guy, the mob is a bad guy, Two Face becomes a symbol of the whole movie: Choice. Everyone in the movie, including even the Butler Alfred has to make a choice and they each must face the ramifications of their decisions. Alfred decides to never show Bruce Wayne the letter from Rachel that she really wasn't going to stay with him before she died, but Alfred decides that it is a better that Bruce goes to his grave thinking she thought he was the one. Two face is a symbol of how a man, a good man, goes bad because of a tragic event. Think of yourself, a successful DA, a pretty girl friend, all gone to hell after she dies and your face is burned off? Sounds like what Lucas was trying to accomplish in ROTS, and the whole PT, and Nolan did it in the course of half the movie.
I can honestly say that Batman Begins is a better movie now, the same way TPM should have been a better movie after AOTC & ROTS. I thought Batman Begins was a good, but not great movie in 2005, but after seeing TDK, it is a perfect setup movie for the sequel, and Nolan has done his job for me. BB is about development and growth and finding yourself, TDK is about choice and how it affects your life, what the third movie will be about in terms of symbolism, I am not sure, but I really can't wait.
As I have said before, if you don't like this movie, that's cool with me cause everyone's opinion is their own, but you have to atleast respect that Nolan was trying to do something totally different in this genre, the same way Lucas did with ESB back in 1980.
Thats your take on the movie, which is fine and Id respect it if it was executed better, it was poorly done. Having the end show the symbolism doesnt make up for the fact that 2 Hours and 20 mintues of the movie was out of wack.
And this is not the first movie in the genre to have "Choice" as a theme , Spiderman 2
lordjedi said:
I'll agree that two face was taken out a bit to quick, but I think the point of keeping Joker alive was to have him for the next movie (not gonna work out unfortunately unless they go with a different actor).
As far as the two falls go, I swear I heard Batman activate something (his wing thing maybe?) during his fall with Rachel that at least slowed them down. That's why he was able to get under her and provide some cushion when they hit. Otherwise I'd agree with you.
Sorry but when I watched it again, I watched and listened intently to that scene and he does nothing, so... still ridiculous
skyjedi2005 said:
SPOILERS AHEAD!
list of complaints i have heard from people who have seen the film:
1. Movie too cerebral, aka comic book takes itself too serioulsy and acts all hitchcock.
2. Too long
3. Utterly Humorless and boring
4. Pathos of the characters makes no sense aka the batman saves joker.
5. destroyed the batmobile again
6. The batman character has no motivation in the film, no save the girl or get revenge on the man who murdered his parents like in the 89 movie.
7. costume design epic fail like watchmen, batcycle uncessary and stupid only in film to sell toys.
8. The movie is so dark in tone that it is batshit crazy and runs off the reels. Unlike begins which was middle of the road.
9. the joker performance advertised as chilling to the bone comes off as accidentaly laugh out loud funny, there were people in the theater laughing their asses off.
10. Movie is dissjointed, there is no real beginning, middle and end. The movie fails thematically and their is no resolution to the plot at the end of the film, neither is there any hint at a cliffhanger the movie just ends like it is a story only half finished.
I think # 1,4 & 6 are very important points. The movie took an iconic character and totally rewrite him, unnecessarily. It was not the batman I know and they did not do a good job in "evolving" or changing how he is in my opinin.
#10. I agree with that, especially with the ending, it was done poor. Dispatching Two-Face so quickly and not allowly the chance to further develope his chracter in the next movie was a complete failure. Saving the Joker and not wrapping up his story was terrible.
The movie didnt seem "grounded," it was flmisy and all over the place. Batman falls about 20+ stories with Rachel, doesnt use any gadgets to save them and they are completely uninjuried. Batman falls ~5 stories at the end and has trouble getting up.
People talk like they have watched this amazingly well done movie and its full of scenes and situations that are really poorly done that youd have to be blind not to see. I dont know what people saw.
@ ChainsawAsh
I know about Two Faces’ character and I understand it. I felt just as you stated, the Two Face character was not able to really “get going,” it was too rushed. My thought was that he would have been introduced as Two Face later into the movie and would have taken The Jokers spot so to speak, espically since it would make a whole lot of sense since he could be cast in the next movie.
@ Johnny Ringo
My take is that was intentional, I mean he doesn't want people to know that he's Bruce wayne under there, He forces that voice to help hide his identity as well as to scare his enemies and give him an edge.
You didn’t understand what I meant. I know he speaks differntly when hes Batman, and I kow its intentional. When he spoke as “Batman” in the first movie it felt real and emtional, in The Dark Knight there were times when he spoke as Batman that sounded phony.
And I liked that he was in over his head, Not simply a case of batman strolls in and saves the day.
And that’s your opinion, but how is it then you state we saw “different movies” when your agreeing that batman was all over the place?
You have your opinion and i wont argue it, but it alomost seems like we saw two different movies.
I do know what I saw cause Ive gone and watched it again.
Spoilers
I thought it was overrated. The plot didn't grab me, one word for it, frustrating. The Joker/Ledger was pretty good, but I really don't see this spectacular performance that many are talking about (morbid curiosity if you ask me). Harvey Dent/Two-Face/Eckhart's character and transformation was poor. Dent's transformation into Two-Face felt rushed and seeing him as a mushy loving boyfriend didn't make him a menacing villain an hour later in the movie. Rachel/Gyllenhaal, number one was ugly as hell and she acted about as poor as Holmes. Batman/Bale did alright but his voice acting as batman seemed phony at times.
Batman seemed to be running around like a chicken with his head cut off for the entire movie. Batman's character didn't seem "strong" or intelligent as he's most always been. Batman saving the joker was ridiculous, then to leave that wide open after the actor who played him no longer can is even more ridiculous. Fox stating he had serious issues assisting Batman find a raving manic who was killing people left and right was outlandish. Batman didn't ask him to spy on people just help him find The Joker and after Fox helped funnel millions of dollars into a phony asset of the company to help Batman before, he somehow just grew a conscious and felt morally wrong with helping him catch Joker, horrendous. The plot kept frustrating me in those ways throughout the movie, I really enjoyed Batman Begins but I just felt like this lost its direction and was all over the place. Really didn't like it.
Oh and Batman's escape from Hong Kong, been there done that, Bond Thunderball (1965)
I think I may have nailed the Emperor/Vader exchange
http://rapidshare.com/files/128889792/Star_Wars_Rap.mp3.html
Ady, I looked for a model of the generator on Hoth but couldnt find anything that good. All I could find was a lego model of the generator. I found some cross sections of Echo base and the Ion canon, maybe someone has the actual book and knows if theres a cross section of the generator?
Also, if I remember correctly you use Adobe After Effects to correct light sabers. Im not sure if you ever heard of this plugin from Videocopolit (another forum member recommended it to me) so I messed around with it and I thought it may be useful, I just thought it may help out. (If you would like to try it I think you just click on "Project" and it automatically downloads the plugin)
http://www.videocopilot.net/tutorials.html?id=40
sean wookie said:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=0u6lCBnRoHQ
This fits in well with the topic. He makes a very good point in my opinion.
I think he contradicts himself in that scene. He says voting is meaningless and then goes on to say that people who vote have no right to compain becase they voted the people in.
Man ya say one thing and everyone gets there panties in a knot (well at least a few who take an internet forum way too seriously), bunch of thin skinned people around here.
Anyhow, thats amazing work Ady on the Emperor hologram I didnt realize you incorporated the Emperors hood from ROTJ into the ESB hologram, impressive most impressive hahaha.
Ady, maybe I missed your explination but is that the same Emperor from the 2004 DVD's in your hologram?
Ady, I listned to your mp3 test of the new Emperor hologram scene and I think it was perfect. Sounded nearly identical to the original, great job.
I just watched the GoodMusician and I didnt think it was that good
Thats really awesome what youve done so far. Its nice to see a different type of edit on the boards. Great work so far bud