What's new
By:

The Dark Knight Rises

DutchJazzer said:
Log i'm wondering. what women would you rather have in those nolan movies? name a couple to replace kattie holmes or maggie for example.
jsut some examples
Click to expand...

First, I wish he had stuck with one actress. I know there were issues around bringing Holmes back but at least there would have been consistency. But in the first place, Holmes is not a good actress. I always have a very hard time believing her characters. Gyllenhall is a better actress, but something about her is just off-putting for me, and has been in every movie I have seen her in. I would liked to have seen them cast Theron in this role. She has the acting chops to make Rachel a stronger, deeper character, but can stay soft enough to bring out the emotion in the relationship. Then again maybe he wanted Rachel to be a weaker character. I don't know. I just know that neither Gyllenhall nor Holmes did the character justice, imo. But of the 2 Gyllenhall's performance was better. Also because Holmes has all the acting ability of a cardboard cutout.
 
The Dark Knight was probably one of the most overrated/overhyped movies in history. It's supposed to be a comic book movie...maybe there should be more than two fight scenes. Or maybe they should last longer than 10 seconds each. Or maybe Batman should actually be on the screen for more than 5 minutes of the entire film.

If it didn't have Heath Ledger's character in it, the movie would have failed super hard. Iron Man which came out around the same time was way better.
 
Marty McFly said:
The Dark Knight was probably one of the most overrated/overhyped movies in history. It's supposed to be a comic book movie...maybe there should be more than two fight scenes. Or maybe they should last longer than 10 seconds each. Or maybe Batman should actually be on the screen for more than 5 minutes of the entire film.

If it didn't have Heath Ledger's character in it, the movie would have failed super hard. Iron Man which came out around the same time was way better.
Click to expand...

I remember more fights than 2.
1.Opening scene with the citizens dressing like Batman. Batman shows up and drives through the wall and fights the bad guys.
2.There was Hong Kong scene where he comes through the window and beats up Lau's guys and kidnaps his via the airplane.
3.There was the fight with the Joker in his Penthouse when the Joker throws Rachel out the window.
4.There was the scene where Batman is beating Marconi's men in the night club.
5.There was the end of the movie where he fights the Joker again and leaving him hanging.

Just off the top of my head.

All those scenes added up to more than five minutes of Batman I would imagine.

But there was also the scene when they are transported Harvey and Batman chases on the Bat-motorcycle thing. No real hand to hand fighting but plenty of action.


You need to watch the movie again. You don't remember it very well.
 
Chad, you also forgot to mention the car chase scene. The batmobile is destroyed in that... the motorcycle is used for the rest of the movie...
 
Just because it's a comic book movie doesn't mean it needs a bunch of fighting. The best part of comic books is the back story, they mythology, not the violence.

The menacing nature of the joker and the complexity of being a super hero who protects the people and is at the same time feared by the people, all while being the biggest celebrity of the city in both aspects of his life are far more interesting than seeing who can kick whose ***.

If you want to watch guys wearing masks just trying to beat each other up, watch the wwe.
 
Marty McFly said:
The Dark Knight was probably one of the most overrated/overhyped movies in history. It's supposed to be a comic book movie...maybe there should be more than two fight scenes. Or maybe they should last longer than 10 seconds each. Or maybe Batman should actually be on the screen for more than 5 minutes of the entire film.

If it didn't have Heath Ledger's character in it, the movie would have failed super hard. Iron Man which came out around the same time was way better.
Click to expand...

You're wrong. "It's supposed to be a comic book movie". Christopher Nolan, the director, has said he has treated none of his Batman movies like a comic book movie and decided to direct the Batman movies based on the tragic character of Bruce Wayne and the chaos of Gotham City. He's taken the comic book character and soaked him in realism. Now you can like that or not, that's your choice, but you need to understand none of these Batman films have been made as comic book movies. The movie isn't just about Batman. It's about Bruce Wayne and all of the obstacles around him that he has to overcome and contribute to his Batman persona. If you just want action and a lot of screen time for the "heroes" go watch Transformers. Comic movie or not, Nolan's movies have had more of a story arch than any movie based off the comics.
 
And I think Hathaway will surprise a lot of people just as Ledger did. Hathaway is a great actress, and her most recent movies as of late have taken her away from the cute-colege-age-awkward girl she played in a lot of her early movies. And the reason Holmes didn't come back to do TDK was because she declined and wanted to take care her little girl.
 
LogGrad98 said:
First, I wish he had stuck with one actress. I know there were issues around bringing Holmes back but at least there would have been consistency. But in the first place, Holmes is not a good actress. I always have a very hard time believing her characters. Gyllenhall is a better actress, but something about her is just off-putting for me, and has been in every movie I have seen her in. I would liked to have seen them cast Theron in this role. She has the acting chops to make Rachel a stronger, deeper character, but can stay soft enough to bring out the emotion in the relationship. Then again maybe he wanted Rachel to be a weaker character. I don't know. I just know that neither Gyllenhall nor Holmes did the character justice, imo. But of the 2 Gyllenhall's performance was better. Also because Holmes has all the acting ability of a cardboard cutout.
Click to expand...


cant balme the recasting on really on nolan i guess. i would have prefered the same actress to. but hey dont think we should put that solely on nolan
 
Marty McFly said:
The Dark Knight was probably one of the most overrated/overhyped movies in history. It's supposed to be a comic book movie...maybe there should be more than two fight scenes. Or maybe they should last longer than 10 seconds each. Or maybe Batman should actually be on the screen for more than 5 minutes of the entire film.

If it didn't have Heath Ledger's character in it, the movie would have failed super hard. Iron Man which came out around the same time was way better.
Click to expand...

dis you ever read the comics? the real batman comics.

so shut you mouth.
 
If you want goofiness, you have a good 10 batman films featuring that crappy lakers fan and jim carey and george clooney.

If you want good movies, you'll stick with Nolan. He's arguably the best director in the business right now.
 
The Thriller said:
If you want goofiness, you have a good 10 batman films featuring that crappy lakers fan and jim carey and george clooney.

If you want good movies, you'll stick with Nolan. He's arguably the best director in the business right now.
Click to expand...

Definitely best director in the business, arguably the best EVER.

2 of the top 10 films of all time, 3 of the top 30... and he directed and wrote them.

Not to mention fan favorites like The Prestige (in my top 10 definitely)
 
BW3II.jpg
 
The-Joker said:
Definitely best director in the business, arguably the best EVER.

2 of the top 10 films of all time, 3 of the top 30... and he directed and wrote them.

Not to mention fan favorites like The Prestige (in my top 10 definitely)
Click to expand...

Not_Sure_if_Serious-(n1292338719834).jpg


Pun intended. He doesn't have a single top 20 movie of all time. He's been one of the best of the past 10 years, but certainly not a shoe-in best of the decade.
 
IMO, arguing about the best all time is like arguing the best bb or fb player ever.

Hitchcock, Spelberg, and Cameron all come to mind as great directors. There were obviously some incredible ones before too.

I would go as far to say the Robert Zemekis is a very good one too. Back to the future was incredible!

"So why don't you make like a tree... And get outta here!"

CLASSIC!
 
jazzmeister said:
You're wrong. "It's supposed to be a comic book movie". Christopher Nolan, the director, has said he has treated none of his Batman movies like a comic book movie and decided to direct the Batman movies based on the tragic character of Bruce Wayne and the chaos of Gotham City. He's taken the comic book character and soaked him in realism. Now you can like that or not, that's your choice, but you need to understand none of these Batman films have been made as comic book movies. The movie isn't just about Batman. It's about Bruce Wayne and all of the obstacles around him that he has to overcome and contribute to his Batman persona. If you just want action and a lot of screen time for the "heroes" go watch Transformers. Comic movie or not, Nolan's movies have had more of a story arch than any movie based off the comics.
Click to expand...

To a point, but the idea is correct. I think the original Batman is more of a comic book movie and is still really good. Different visions.
 
Someone mentioned Ironman...

Dark Knight, with its acting and dark storyline was a better movie.

However, I would by far call Iron Man more enjoyable. After watching Dark Knight a few times, you're good.

But Iron Man is something you can pop in on any weekend night and have fun. Robert D. Jr. is one of the best personalities in Hollywood. He flies around kicking Osama's butt. Destroys cars that we all wish we had. Has a sweet house. And has hot women all over the place.
 
The Thriller said:
IMO, arguing about the best all time is like arguing the best bb or fb player ever.

Hitchcock, Spelberg, and Cameron all come to mind as great directors. There were obviously some incredible ones before too.

I would go as far to say the Robert Zemekis is a very good one too. Back to the future was incredible!

"So why don't you make like a tree... And get outta here!"

CLASSIC!
Click to expand...
sdpielberg recentlyu sucks sure he has/had some good movies.. but that guy has liost is and is retarded butchering his movies eg replacing guns with walkie talkies in et remastered. so spielberg isnt a top director ANYMORE. not even top 5 this decade
 
DutchJazzer said:
sdpielberg recentlyu sucks sure he has/had some good movies.. but that guy has liost is and is retarded butchering his movies eg replacing guns with walkie talkies in et remastered. so spielberg isnt a top director ANYMORE. not even top 5 this decade
Click to expand...

He's since moved to producing. He's helped produce some of the best WW II shows I've ever seen.

I would think that if he wanted to direct pictures, he still could, with the best of them.
 
bat said:
Not_Sure_if_Serious-(n1292338719834).jpg


Pun intended. He doesn't have a single top 20 movie of all time. He's been one of the best of the past 10 years, but certainly not a shoe-in best of the decade.
Click to expand...

It's okay, I understand you're not very smart... Nolan's movies have a 90 and up IQ requirement...

I feel bad, because you're really missing out.

Thinking is hard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top