bootsy

Not sure how you came to that conclusion. I guess you didn't read where I said

Plenty of people did love it but they didn't go overboard with it from what I have seen. And if they did then they are just as bad. But there continues to be people like you hammering the point that you weren't impressed with the trailer as if that should be some defining moment for this movie. Like you had some huge expectation before the trailer came out. The thing is a little over two minutes of giving you a tiny bit of info about the movie. What were you expecting to give away the entire movie. I loved the trailer but that's all it is: a trailer. As for people saying TDKR will dominate the box office what exactly is wrong with saying that? It's not like they are saying something outrageous.

Draven

I did read this:

All I'm saying is that not everyone agrees that the trailer was "fine". I thought it was a little boring, actually.

What's wrong with saying it won't? At least not at TDK levels, which is a real possibility. How often is part 3 of a trilogy the best entry?

Nick Martin

The response to this seems to be the same every time: "Nolan fanboys" because it's a cheap shot that requires no effort whatsoever. Guaranteed that will be how at least a couple of people respond to what you've said. It's funny how with certain subjects you have to either love it totally and be a "fanboy" or hate it outright. No middle ground. I don't even know if I've seen all of his films. I'd have to check his list on IMDB or something to know.

I've seen what, maybe 6 or 7 minutes of this film through these trailers and a bootleg of that Prologue and I have no idea at all as to what this film will ultimately be, and I consider that to be a good thing. It preserves the surprise, it preserves the story for being revealed in a theater as it should be. For that I consider these to be very good trailers in addition to the level of anxiety they generate because they look so bleak.

It's not remotely outrageous to say the film will dominate the box office. It's following one of the biggest movies out there and closing out a trilogy so it's not saying much of anything to make the assumption but personally, I don't I care. I don't make the movies, so why should I care about how much they make and for that matter why does anyone who doesn't have some personal financial stake care anyway? Pure popularity contest? That is something I've wondered about for the longest time. Threads after threads on many forums dedicated to box office but really, does that decide whether or not the individual viewer sees it? I certainly hope not.

B5Erik

Oh, I didn't LOVE TDK or Inception, so I MUST be threadcrapping.

Come on. I said that I thought Inception was OK, and that TDK was good but flawed and somehow that's a threadcrap? Really?

I honestly thought that the trailer for TDKR was pretty lackluster and didn't make the movie look all that good. A lot of people agree with me. If you don't then that's just too damned bad for you.

I'm sure TDKR will at least be a decent movie, and could be really good. The trailer doesn't make it look like anything other than just a fair movie, though. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

Apple Gooncha

I really liked the new trailer quite a bit. I have actually enjoyed all of the trailers so far. Personally, I was underwhelmed with the trailers for Batman Begins way back when, but I enjoy the Hell out of that movie. And considering my appreciation for Nolan's filmography as a whole and the fact that I've been a Batman fan for the last 21 years, I would pretty much have to be dead to not see this opening night.

Preterite

Saw the new trailer before The Avengers last Thursday. I thought it was a bit unfocused, more like scenes cut at random than a trailer put together to give you a sense of the plot or even the mood of the film. But that might have just been me, as I was distracted by the football stadium scene (seems like a step backwards to the silliness of the dehydration monorail after the realism of the second film) and by how damn stupid Bane's muzzle was. The Nolanverse did a great job redesigning the Joker and the Scarecrow, but for Bane that managed to come up with something that actually looks sillier than a luchador mask.

For the record, I thought Batman Begins was just okay and The Dark Knight was excellent. I haven't seen Inception.

Solid Snake

...really? I think the mask is better than what we had in B&R.

kgrogers1979

Nothing is sillier than a luchador mask. Though Nolan's Bane mask looks too much like a facehugger. Every time I see it I wonder if an Alien is about to pop out of Bane's stomach.

Then we could have an epic Batman vs Alien crossover.

Burgundy LaRue

There are those among us who thought the trailer was fine, and we will also stick to our opinions.

This talk of not knowing what the movie is about tickles me. I think it's been made pretty clear: Gotham still believes in Harvey Dent as a hero. Batman is hated. The city experiences a period of calm, which lulls the people into thinking all is well. Bane comes in and creates chaos. Batman faces Bane, and finds himself recovering from Bane's attack. John Blake and Catwoman are looking for Batman, as they realize he's the only one who can save Gotham. Batman finds strength and rises to battle Bane once again. The basic structure has been revealed and now it's up to the audience to decide if they want to see the rest of the story.

If someone doesn't like Nolan's work, that's fine. That's a honest opinion to have. But for some, it's clearly some badge of anti-fanboy honor. By disliking something that's popular, it makes them hip. Keep being hip like that and you're likely to break one.

Nick Martin

It may seem like it's obvious what the story is but look at the differences between Selina Kyle in the first trailer, and Catwoman in the second trailer. Both are a misdirection because Kyle seemed to come off as a villain, while Catwoman an ally. Elements like that are why I think it's hard to have a sense of what it's all about, which I see as nothing but a good thing. I'm glad it's a teaser and two trailers of disconnected information and not a basic plot summary. Keeps us asking questions.

You know what badges have?

Pricks.

DaveyJoe

I brought this up a while ago:

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/11098872-post3655.html

Dr. DVD

FWIW, none of the trailers for TDK really rocked my world. The movie on the other hand...

Preterite

Unpossible! You just have to know how to rock it.

Why So Blu?

exactly.

reubs82

How often has part 3 involved the same creative team with little studio interference and been released so close together?

X3 was a wreck because of the director; Spider-Man 3 had too much studio interference; Godfather 3 came so long after the originals; and the original Star Wars trilogy had a different director for each film.

TDKR is a different beast from other "part 3" films in that so much has remained constant from the beginning; I don't think a little optimism that it will be really good is uncalled for.

Mr. Cinema

Transformers: Dark of the Moon

RocShemp

Actually, Ratner wasn't X3's problem. He simply inherited a production rife with studio interference that had its original director bail on it (under the excuse that he missed his family). Ratner was a hired gun at best.

kefrank

The best example I can think of is The Return of the King, which was a cinematic triumph.

kefrank

True, but all three sucked.

RocShemp

The actual production of all three films simultaneously? Yeah.

But ROTK was the weakest of the three.

RichC2

ROTK was much, much stronger than the fillerific Two Towers.

kefrank

I disagree wholeheartedly. And for what it's worth, IMDB and rottentomatoes ratings support my position.

TheMovieman

Agreed. Although I prefer Two Towers, I'd hardly say ROTK was the weakest...

Shannon Nutt

I thought it was the weakest of the three, easily.

kefrank

I did not intend for this thread to get hijacked by a nitpicking discussion about which LOTR film was the weakest. The point is that it's a recent example of creative continuity with little studio interference resulting in a third film that is really good. Regardless of what any individuals here think about its relative merits, the consensus among mass audiences and professional critics is that ROTK is at or near the high-quality level of the first two films.