Reply to Topic
Small digression: I wonder what Batman Begins would have been like under Aronofsky's direction.
__________________
Nolan's Best
Nolans best work
13.64%
6 votes
27.27%
12 votes
0%
0 votes
4.55%
2 votes
43.18%
19 votes
11.36%
5 votes
0%
0 votes
44 votes. You may not vote on this poll
Maybe he learns in the sense that the Joker isn't some common criminal he can beat into submission, but even that doesn't show much intelligence on the part of Batman. I get that this is a continuing establishment of the character, as you say, but Batman is supposed to be cunning and brilliant and I have a hard time seeing him completely unprepared for an enemy with even half a brain. Believe me, I'm not advocating that Batman outwit and destroy everyone he encounters. But in Nolan's films, he just seems to have this single-dimensionality to him that sees him grow (or more accurately, act) in reaction to others, and in spite of himself. I would just think that by the time someone like the Joker comes along, Batman would have progressed further than a millionaire vigilante beating up thugs in the street.
The Batman isn't a person unto itself; It's an idea.
I always though Afred was the Joker.
Carry on.
Carry on.
__________________
"Loves them? They need them, like they need the air."
"Loves them? They need them, like they need the air."
I'd also like to put in my 2 cents about the film's Batman/Joker dynamic.
I think the important thing to remember during the film is how green Batman still is. This is a reboot of the series, and he hasn't dealt with such a diabolical monster before. Of course the Joker would school him. If Batman were able at that early point in their relationship to understand and deal with the Joker correctly, that would be antithetical to the whole frickin point of a series reboot.
So keep in mind that while he's smart, he's also supposed to be a crimefighting noob. A determined and resourceful noob, but still a noob.
I think the important thing to remember during the film is how green Batman still is. This is a reboot of the series, and he hasn't dealt with such a diabolical monster before. Of course the Joker would school him. If Batman were able at that early point in their relationship to understand and deal with the Joker correctly, that would be antithetical to the whole frickin point of a series reboot.
So keep in mind that while he's smart, he's also supposed to be a crimefighting noob. A determined and resourceful noob, but still a noob.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
X
User Lists
Kind of hard not to discuss Batman, given he made two of them and TDK is second place in the poll.
What I want to know is, where's the love for Batman Begins? It doesn't have the Joker but it was a pretty fantastic movie.
What I want to know is, where's the love for Batman Begins? It doesn't have the Joker but it was a pretty fantastic movie.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
If you want to achieve greatness, stop asking for permission
Kind of hard not to discuss Batman, given he made two of them and TDK is second place in the poll.
What I want to know is, where's the love for Batman Begins? It doesn't have the Joker but it was a pretty fantastic movie.
What I want to know is, where's the love for Batman Begins? It doesn't have the Joker but it was a pretty fantastic movie.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Well, I've never really bought into this approach anyway. Sure, Batman is about symbolism, but I think it's sort of high-falutin' and egotistical that Nolan has Bruce/Batman talk about it several times in both films. It's like he's focused on being a symbol rather than simply being something to fear, which I think would be the closer goal of Batman. (In other words, Batman wouldn't aspire to be the symbol. He aspires simply to be feared, and the persona he creates to serve that practical need becomes the symbol, even if he never intended it to be.) I get that they have to slam the "he's a symbol" point over the head for most audiences, hence the many dialogue references to it. But for me, it's too much telling.
I don't know enough about the comic books to know whether or not there's a meaningful distinction to Batman wanting to be feared and Batman wanting to be a symbol that people fear. If that's a tweak from the source, it's one I think is pretty sensible and subtle.
Also, I'm not sure I agree that he needs to be over-the-top. From the criminal perspective, he absolutely is. But when we're privvy to him kicking around a crime scene alone or testing theories in the Batcave, shouldn't he be... well, less of a growly stage performance?
Maybe he learns in the sense that the Joker isn't some common criminal he can beat into submission, but even that doesn't show much intelligence on the part of Batman. I get that this is a continuing establishment of the character, as you say, but Batman is supposed to be cunning and brilliant and I have a hard time seeing him completely unprepared for an enemy with even half a brain. Believe me, I'm not advocating that Batman outwit and destroy everyone he encounters. But in Nolan's films, he just seems to have this single-dimensionality to him that sees him grow (or more accurately, act) in reaction to others, and in spite of himself. I would just think that by the time someone like the Joker comes along, Batman would have progressed further than a millionaire vigilante beating up thugs in the street.
Anyway, why would Batman necessarily have progressed when he's had so little reason to? He's been fighting the mob most of the time.
WARNING: "The Dark Knight" spoilers below
...as much as I like the moral dilemma of the boat scene, I don't know if you can really say Batman does anything by believing the citizens won't blow each other up. The fact that they don't makes him right, but he wasn't in any position to prevent the disaster should he be wrong. He simply lucks out (and part of me believes the convicts would have turned that key).
Maybe outwit is the wrong word, but...
WARNING: "The Dark Knight" spoilers below
...going after the Joker instead of the boats is certainly a strategic decision, and it turns out to be the correct one.
As for outwitting the Joker by neutralizing Harvey, he only learns of it after he apprehends the Joker (again, by brute force). So I think that's one more example of Batman prevailing through reaction to events around him, when he really has the capability to outwit his enemies once in a while.[/spoilers]
WARNING: "The Dark Knight" spoilers below
He apprehends the Joker by brute force, but he FINDS him with the cell phones, which is pretty slick and shows a lot of forward-thinking initiative and ingenuity.
Beyond that, I have trouble conceiving of what a non-reactionary Batman would look like. Catching the Joker before he's set up any of his traps? I don't know how these criticisms could be addressed without turning Batman into the kind of unstoppable force we both agree he shouldn't be for the film to have any dramatic weight.
I honestly think 99% of this goes away if you treat the entire trilogy as one big origin story, so that he finishes becoming the Batman we know in the third film, and not before.
It's kinda like the difference between Brett Favre and Tom Brady, if you follow me. 
Brett Favre won most of his games through sheer will and luck, fighting for every down and throwing errant passes that somehow saved the day at many the eleventh hour. And that's how he played his entire career. Tom Brady, on the other hand, wins most of his games completely outhinking, outplaying and dismantling his opponents. Sure, he finds himself in the occasional nailbiter too, but he's a smarter player than most and his efficiency has grown and matured from preparation and the ability to anticipate.
All I'm saying is, Nolan's Batman could be a little less Brett Favre and a little more Tom Brady.
Brett Favre won most of his games through sheer will and luck, fighting for every down and throwing errant passes that somehow saved the day at many the eleventh hour. And that's how he played his entire career. Tom Brady, on the other hand, wins most of his games completely outhinking, outplaying and dismantling his opponents. Sure, he finds himself in the occasional nailbiter too, but he's a smarter player than most and his efficiency has grown and matured from preparation and the ability to anticipate. All I'm saying is, Nolan's Batman could be a little less Brett Favre and a little more Tom Brady.
I know it sounds like I'm nitpicking. I really take the most issue with Bale's goofy growling, but it does feel to me like Nolan has stymied Batman's intellectual ability because it's more theatrical to make him a burly fighter that has to overcome huge challenges rather than, on occasion, anticipate and neutralize them. That's totally fine. I just wish we'd get something more akin to, say, a mystery, where we see Batman putting things together and figuring things out more than simply punching bodies and swinging from rope lines.
This is not to say I wouldn't love a Batman mystery, by the way. But I'm also very satiated by the surprising ways various gadgets pop up. That's one thing Nolan's done to give the series a surprising feel even when we know who the bad guys are: by not quite telling us what the next gadget is, so that it gets sprung on us in the middle of an action sequence.
X
Favorite Movies
If it weren't for the boat scenes at the end of Dark Knight, I would vote for it all day. I found them to be rather unrealistic. Or Nolan's world view is a bit too cheery for me.
I have to say Memento. The precise technical aspect really pushes it to the top of the list. It has all of the Nolanesque devices in there with an absurd attention to detail and plot structure. You just don't see that everyday. Everybody wanted watch it back and find the plot holes, but there just aren't any. That was a real feat.
I have to say Memento. The precise technical aspect really pushes it to the top of the list. It has all of the Nolanesque devices in there with an absurd attention to detail and plot structure. You just don't see that everyday. Everybody wanted watch it back and find the plot holes, but there just aren't any. That was a real feat.
__________________
Obscure Movie Tees actually designed for REAL movie lovers. If you don't get it, don't get it.
www.theepiceffect.com
Obscure Movie Tees actually designed for REAL movie lovers. If you don't get it, don't get it.
www.theepiceffect.com
I think there might have been a plot hole in Memento, actually. Sort of. Specifically...
So, it's not a plot hole in the sense that it makes literally no sense. You just can't take what Leonard says as gospel if you want everything to line up. Which might make the film even better, to be honest.
WARNING: "Memento" spoilers below
...the idea that he can't make new memories means there's no way he should know that he can't make new memories. This indicates that he can, but it's just very difficult for him. Which means the problem is psychological, and not physical.
This can be reconciled only by interpreting the film in a fairly dramatic way: that Leonard's condition was psychological from the beginning, that he killed his own wife (he was actually Sammy Jankis, which I think is a common interpretation) as a result, and that the severity of this forced him to remember what he'd done. He can't bear this, so he rationalizes it away as someone else's story, thus creating an ironic example of just how unreliable memory can be, which he makes a point of ranting about. So he remembers the fake Jankis rationalization and the fact that he has a condition, but nothing else, because it's all in his mind and those two facts are all he needs to get by without losing his mind completely.
This can be reconciled only by interpreting the film in a fairly dramatic way: that Leonard's condition was psychological from the beginning, that he killed his own wife (he was actually Sammy Jankis, which I think is a common interpretation) as a result, and that the severity of this forced him to remember what he'd done. He can't bear this, so he rationalizes it away as someone else's story, thus creating an ironic example of just how unreliable memory can be, which he makes a point of ranting about. So he remembers the fake Jankis rationalization and the fact that he has a condition, but nothing else, because it's all in his mind and those two facts are all he needs to get by without losing his mind completely.
So, it's not a plot hole in the sense that it makes literally no sense. You just can't take what Leonard says as gospel if you want everything to line up. Which might make the film even better, to be honest.
X
Favorite Movies
I want to change my ratings.
1. The Dark Knight (2008)
2. The Prestige (2006)
3. Memento (2000)
4. Inception (2010)
5. Batman Begins (2005)
6. Insomnia (2002)
The Dark Knight still takes the top spot. It's Nolan's most intriguing and mature film to date. I feel that the label of superhero film doesn't do the film justice. It's more of a crime film, studying the human psyche and other adult themes. It's also action-packed, very exciting and features some of the very finest performances I've ever seen. In a word, epic.
The Prestige I just love watching. It's a film that challenges the audience with it's theatrical atmosphere and it's multilayered characters. It's a film open to rewatches and the ending is showstopping. It also features another great performance from one of the finest actors of this decade.
Memento I've only watched once, but it's a film that caught me on the first viewing. It's clearly Nolan's finest hour in technical terms. Inception I still like, but I don't think it holds up well to rewatches. Still, it's a film I rate very highly for it's creativity, originality and mind boggling scenarios.
The other two I haven't watched for years, but I still love them, especially Insomnia for it's wonderful against type performances Nolan elicits from Al Pacino and Robin Williams. I haven't seen Following yet, but I will get onto it.
1. The Dark Knight (2008)
2. The Prestige (2006)
3. Memento (2000)
4. Inception (2010)
5. Batman Begins (2005)
6. Insomnia (2002)
The Dark Knight still takes the top spot. It's Nolan's most intriguing and mature film to date. I feel that the label of superhero film doesn't do the film justice. It's more of a crime film, studying the human psyche and other adult themes. It's also action-packed, very exciting and features some of the very finest performances I've ever seen. In a word, epic.
The Prestige I just love watching. It's a film that challenges the audience with it's theatrical atmosphere and it's multilayered characters. It's a film open to rewatches and the ending is showstopping. It also features another great performance from one of the finest actors of this decade.
Memento I've only watched once, but it's a film that caught me on the first viewing. It's clearly Nolan's finest hour in technical terms. Inception I still like, but I don't think it holds up well to rewatches. Still, it's a film I rate very highly for it's creativity, originality and mind boggling scenarios.
The other two I haven't watched for years, but I still love them, especially Insomnia for it's wonderful against type performances Nolan elicits from Al Pacino and Robin Williams. I haven't seen Following yet, but I will get onto it.
__________________
"George, this is a little too much for me. Escaped convicts, fugitive sex... I've got a cockfight to focus on."
"George, this is a little too much for me. Escaped convicts, fugitive sex... I've got a cockfight to focus on."
X
Favorite Movies
If you want to achieve greatness, stop asking for permission
The Prestige I just love watching. It's a film that challenges the audience with it's theatrical atmosphere and it's multilayered characters. It's a film open to rewatches and the ending is showstopping. It also features another great performance from one of the finest actors of this decade.
__________________
"If we choose, we can live in a world of comforting illusion."
- Christopher Nolan
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
My Rates
1. Following
Memento
2. The Dark Knight Batman Begins
3. Insomnia The Prestige
x. Inception
1. Following
Memento2. The Dark Knight
Batman Begins3. Insomnia
The Prestigex. Inception
The Prestige It's a film open to rewatches and the ending is showstopping.
The ending was weak and an audience jerk off because the film BROKE IT'S OWN RULES. Either the top falls or it doesn't fall. To have it wobble slightly and then continue to spin is an attempt to screw with the audience so they ask themselves "Maybe they were all in a dream to begin with" - ala Wizard of Oz? I hate this type of thing. It doesn't fit, it doesn't flow, and it doesn't work with the rules the film already created. It's a contradiction and wrong on many levels of filmaking. The top falls or it spins. PICK ONE. And don't pretend that your film is somehow cerebral and brilliant because you have people in the audience arguing about it means between trips to The Buckle and Abercrombie and Fitch at their local mall. Again, audiencing manipulation. I HATE IT! I HATE IT! I HATE IT! It's not just bad filmmaking it's cheap and above all else IT INSULTS ME AS A VIEWER.
OK. I'm done, but do think about that for a second.
__________________
"A candy colored clown!"
Member since Fall 2002
Top 100 Films, clicky below
http://www.movieforums.com/community...ad.php?t=26201
"A candy colored clown!"
Member since Fall 2002
Top 100 Films, clicky below
http://www.movieforums.com/community...ad.php?t=26201
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Just realized you said Prestige not Insheeption. They all mix up in my mind. The Prestige I haven't seen as recently but I do recall the twin brother thing being another lame Nolan cop out. If it would have focused more on the battle between the two magicians or have stayed in that tone it would have been better.
X
Favorite Movies
X