The Dark Knight Rises (Nolan)

[Giantrobo]

Originally Posted by Guru Askew

That was one of the biggest of many flaws in the first movie and the way it was addressed in the sequel was such a cop-out that Nolan would have been better off just leaving it be.

There's no way in hell that that thing would exist without at least like 20 people devoting months of their lives getting it to the prototype stage. Just think of what it would have taken for the thing to be physically assembled and ask yourself if it's even remotely believable that only one person would remember it. I also know almost nothing about engineering but I do know that behind every single component is an engineer agonizing over every little detail. Next time you get in your car look at the cupholder and realize that some guy spent months of his life dealing with whether or not it had enough room for the handle of your coffee mug.

Oh, yeah, I forgot, it was painted a different color.

This one particular flaw is a perfect example of how Nolan's approach to the character is all wrong. You don't ask yourself where the Batmobile comes from in other movies but when you have Nolan forcing "THIS IS THE REALISTIC AND SERIOUS VERSION OF BATMAN!" down your throat asking those kinds of questions is an undesirable side-effect.

The super-seriousness is also why Christian Bale's performance in "TDK" was one of the comedy sensations of '08.

Uhm, that has been an "issue" since Bob Kane created Batman. It's one of those things you just let slide....

It's like, how come Clark Kent fools everyone by just putting on glasses....

Originally Posted by Boondock Saint

Interestingly enough, in the comics recently Bruce recently announced to the public that he's been funding Batman the whole time

A creative way to deal with this issue.

[Giantrobo]

Originally Posted by Michael Corvin

I don't get the issue here. Suppose Wayne Enterprises commissioned the design and build of a prototype "military" vehicle. Later, it comes out that it's Batman's vehicle of choice. So the 20-200 people that designed and built it assume Wayne Enterprises sold it to the highest bidder... Batman. It's not much of a stretch.

Interesting

[JTH182]

Originally Posted by DthRdrX

Now, given that Bruce has driven a different Lambo in both movies I tend to think the next Batmobile will be styled more like a fast sports car.

I actually thought this during TDK when he's speeding thru the city as Bruce to save Reese. It looked like the Lambo could be modded to be the next Batmobile. Kind of a Tumbler-Lambo hybrid.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Funny you guys that bring that. The Lambo I believe is a Murcielago....which is bat in spanish. Even has those flap things on the side too.

[fumanstan]

Originally Posted by Giantrobo

Uhm, that has been an "issue" since Bob Kane created Batman. It's one of those things you just let slide....

It's like, how come Clark Kent fools everyone by just putting on glasses....

This is the way I see it. Honestly, despite how Nolan tried to ground the series in the real world, it's still a comic book movie. I can still believe Two Face can walk around with a scarred face without crying that he would have died of an infection.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Originally Posted by Boondock Saint

Interestingly enough, in the comics recently Bruce recently announced to the public that he's been funding Batman the whole time

How's that working for Wayne's public life? If I was a bad guy going for Wayne would be my mission. Seems like a bad route to me unless it's well handled...

[Guru Askew]

Originally Posted by Giantrobo

Uhm, that has been an "issue" since Bob Kane created Batman. It's one of those things you just let slide....

You're missing my whole point. It's only when somebody like Nolan expects to ground something fundamentally unrealistic that the audience starts asking these questions. If you'd actually read my previous comments you'd see that I acknowledged that setting the character in an unrealistic setting provides the necessary suspension of disbelief required to believe the character. By trying to make Batman realistic Nolan has actually underlined how unrealistic the character actually is.

t's like, how come Clark Kent fools everyone by just putting on glasses....

No it would be like if someone made a Superman movie that spent the first hour attempting to explain Kryptonian genetics, biology, etc. in a way that was scientifically plausible (which, like Nolan's approach to Batman, would be absurd) and then expected you to believe that people didn't recognize Clark/Superman in that same "realistic" setting.

To force "this is Batman in the real world!" down your audience's throats only to throw your hands up in the air and say "it's a comic book movie!" when things don't work is a copout, pure and simple.

[Supermallet]

Fine. It's an action movie, then. Happy? I don't think Nolan's ever said his goal was to make Batman 100% realistic down to the last detail. Every movie requires a suspension of disbelief, so why not Nolan's Batman films? Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

[bluetoast]

The Superman thing.... Say your grocery store clerk vaguely resembles Tom Cruise and wears glasses or whatever random thing to change his appearance slightly. Are you going to assume that this guy working a job like that is actually Tom Cruise? That is assuming that you even look/care enough to notice that they look similar.

[Apple Gooncha]

Originally Posted by Guru Askew

To force "this is Batman in the real world!" down your audience's throats only to throw your hands up in the air and say "it's a comic book movie!" when things don't work is a copout, pure and simple.

In all fairness, these quotes are more commonly said by fans and not Nolan himself.

[Solid Snake PAC]

Did Nolan ever say that? I know for sure I've said this a "realistic Batman" realistic...w/ the understanding of disbelief.

[fumanstan]

I don't think "Batman in the real world" was really shoved down the audience throats just because he gave plausible explanations for how he does what he does. There's plenty of stuff in both movies that are still a stretch for the real world, and to be honest I would say most of the audience generally understands that at the end of the day, it's still Batman, a comic book character.

[Artman]

I've never got the impression Nolan's goal was absolute "this is happening" realism. Sure the tone is serious, some comic aspects downplayed, and shooting is largely on locations...but it's still Batman, still a movie. Honestly never gave a second thought to the tumbler or any of these extraneous scenarios, I was too busy enjoying the films.

[gmanca]

Originally Posted by bluetoast

The Superman thing.... Say your grocery store clerk vaguely resembles Tom Cruise and wears glasses or whatever random thing to change his appearance slightly. Are you going to assume that this guy working a job like that is actually Tom Cruise? That is assuming that you even look/care enough to notice that they look similar.

If that grocery clerk had a propensity to jump on couches or wanted me to take some special tests, I might think so.

[RocShemp]

Originally Posted by Guru Askew

No it would be like if someone made a Superman movie that spent the first hour attempting to explain Kryptonian genetics, biology, etc. in a way that was scientifically plausible (which, like Nolan's approach to Batman, would be absurd) and then expected you to believe that people didn't recognize Clark/Superman in that same "realistic" setting.

The John Byrne era must have been hell for you.

Originally Posted by bluetoast

The Superman thing.... Say your grocery store clerk vaguely resembles Tom Cruise and wears glasses or whatever random thing to change his appearance slightly. Are you going to assume that this guy working a job like that is actually Tom Cruise? That is assuming that you even look/care enough to notice that they look similar.

In the comics, Lex Luthor once had a crack team of analysts try to assertain where Superman might be hiding when he's not flying around and saving the day. They all came to the conclusion that Superman was none other than Clark Kent. They based their reasoning on when both men arrived in Metropolis, Clark's age, and his physical traits (among other factors).

Luthor fired the entire team because he refused to believe that Superman would masquerade as a mere mortal.

Likewise, who would believe a drunken douchebag like Bruce Wayne, who's constantly partying (or so the public believes) and burned down his own mansion during a bender would actually be a badass vigilante like Batman?

[Solid Snake PAC]

Yeah but the Superman thing was always...everyone else is stupid cuz it's just teh freaking glasses to hide behind.

Wayne has a Mask and douche personality to hide behind. Kent...has....glasses and a goofy personality (which I'm glad they stopped doing that in what was the norm)

[RocShemp]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake PAC

Yeah but the Superman thing was always...everyone else is stupid cuz it's just teh freaking glasses to hide behind.

Wayne has a Mask and douche personality to hide behind. Kent...has....glasses and a goofy personality (which I'm glad they stopped doing that in what was the norm)

During the Byrne era they began addressing exactly how Clark created his deception. The things that remained are that he speaks in a tenor as Clark and a baritone as Superman. His posture and mannerisms are more commanding as Superman and he's more reserved and slouches a bit as Clark. He maintains himself as a public figure as Clark (Pulizer Prize winning reporter, award winning author, and former editor-in-chief of both The Daily Planet and Newstime) which would make him a rather unlikely candidate for Superman's alterego, as one would assume he'd try to remain anonymous. The glasses make his eyes look grey. And they explain away Clark's physique by the weight set he'd keep in his apartment.

Of course things that were ditched from that era were that he would vibrate whenever a picture was taken (in order to appear out of focus) and the whole hypnosis ability.

So it hasn't been just the glasses and a goofy persona for quite some time.

[kefrank]

Originally Posted by Guru Askew

You're missing my whole point. It's only when somebody like Nolan expects to ground something fundamentally unrealistic that the audience starts asking these questions. If you'd actually read my previous comments you'd see that I acknowledged that setting the character in an unrealistic setting provides the necessary suspension of disbelief required to believe the character. By trying to make Batman realistic Nolan has actually underlined how unrealistic the character actually is.

To quote myself from another thread: I've never understood the "hyper-realistic" assessment of Nolan's Batman movies. Yes, they're more grounded in reality and less visually-stylized than past Batman film incarnations, but they still require a massive amount of suspension of disbelief and have straight comic book politics, scenarios, and action. They're as grounded in reality as say, a James Bond movie. There's nothing supernatural or abstract going on, but it's obviously a sense of reality significantly heightened from "the real world."

Your assessment of what you think Nolan was trying to do is, to put it simply, off base.

[MLBFan24]

watching Get Smart on TBS, and I have changed my mind about Anne Hathaway.

Yes please!

[Li]

Originally Posted by kefrank

To quote myself from another thread: I've never understood the "hyper-realistic" assessment of Nolan's Batman movies. Yes, they're more grounded in reality and less visually-stylized than past Batman film incarnations, but they still require a massive amount of suspension of disbelief and have straight comic book politics, scenarios, and action. They're as grounded in reality as say, a James Bond movie. There's nothing supernatural or abstract going on, but it's obviously a sense of reality significantly heightened from "the real world."

Your assessment of what you think Nolan was trying to do is, to put it simply, off base.

I agree with you. Nothing the Joker did in TDK was realistic. No one could actually do the shit he did. Set an entire hospital to explode with no one noticing? I don't think so. It's still set in a world where people can do things they could never do in real life.

[Josh-da-man]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake PAC

Wayne has a Mask and douche personality to hide behind. Kent...has....glasses and a goofy personality (which I'm glad they stopped doing that in what was the norm)

I would assume that Clark Kent/Superman is just hiding in plain sight. Would the average person think that Superman has a civilian identity and a day job? Granted that's a trope of superhero fiction, but if Superman did indeed exist, I wouldn't necessarily think that he had some kind of job somewhere.

Though I can imagine a lot of conspiracy websites springing up claiming "Is _____ ________ really Superman?" with Clark Kent being one of the leading suspects.

[mikehunt]

Originally Posted by PopcornTreeCt

Well, I would think Bruce Wayne, who is a billionaire, would have at least a back up batmobile or tumbler.

but did he really have time to go get it even if he had had one?
I don't think much time went by between the destruction of the tumbler and the end of the movie

[PopcornTreeCt]

Originally Posted by mikehunt

but did he really have time to go get it even if he had had one?
I don't think much time went by between the destruction of the tumbler and the end of the movie

Between Dent getting burned and in the hospital through to the end of the movie was a few days... I think.

[DGibFen]

[sarcasm]Surprise![/sarcasm]

EXCLUSIVE: Joseph Gordon-Levitt is in talks to reunite with his Inception director Christopher Nolan in The Dark Knight Rises for Warner Bros. I'm not sure what role he'll play, but I'm told that he will be in the movie when Nolan starts production this spring. Gordon-Levitt will be done shooting the Rian Johnson-directed Looper with Bruce Willis and Emily Blunt by then.

http://www.deadline.com/2011/02/jose...-knight-rises/

[gmanca]

So is he a villain or a superhero? I would think superhero because of Bane and what the means for Batman.