THE DARK KNIGHT RISES Trailer Remixed with BATMAN: THE ANIMATED SERIES Footage

by     Posted 3 years, 152 days ago

batman-animated-series-slice-01

If you told me I had to choose between Christopher Nolan’s Batman films and the 1990s Batman: The Animated Series, I would choose the latter every day of the week and twice on Sunday.  I don’t think Nolan’s films are bad, but their stubborn adherence to “reality” and severe distaste for anything comics-related makes them pale to the diversity of tone and imagination the Animated Series was able to accomplish.  Granted, Nolan has only three movie to tell his story while B:TAS had hours upon hours, but I think TAS has a better tone overall.

Now I guess I can have the best of both worlds as someone took the audio from recent The Dark Knight Rises teaser trailer and played it over similar footage from the animated series, Justice League Unlimited, and Under the Red Hood.  The editor was unable to find footage from the animated series of Batman destroying Gotham in order to make his logo.  Hit the jump to check out the remixed trailer.

Tom Hardy Bane THE DARK KNIGHT RISES image

the-dark-knight-rises-teaser-poster




Like Us


Comments:

FB Comments

  • Saabguy85

    I think someone has too much time on their hands but on the other hand job well done :)

    • OG

      You’re right. Hand job well done! :P

      • fravit

        Flameo, sir. Fla – me – o.

  • Jason

    I think the “grounded” thing is overblown by a lot of people. Nolan doesn’t really stray that far from the comics as people think. In fact, in many ways he is incredibly faithful to it. Although I hope that the Lazarus Pit is included in DKR with the fantastical element that the comic books have. I really hope Nolan doesn’t chicken out on that.

    The thing that bothers me the most about Nolan in general is his subpar directional skills. His screenwriting talents are amazing but he doesn’t really have a cinematic eye. This frustrates me for the Batman films, and also Inception, because the Batman comics (and most comics in general) have always been very visual and that’s one thing that Nolan just fails at. This is the one aspect that the Burton films excelled at that the Nolan films do not (that and also having a far better Batman suit). Also, Nolan is just lousy with action. Not horrible like Paul Greengrass and the shaky cam squad, but just not good enough.

    This is why I believe the Batman Animated series are just overall better because there is a balance with solid scripts and more cinematic visuals. In fact, I believe that The Mask Of The Phantom to be an overall better Batman origin film than Batman Begins. As a matter of fact, my favorite Batman film right is Under The Red Hood with The Dark Knight falling second.

    • Marc

      @ Jason. I don’t know how anyone could watch the lower 5th scene in The Dark Knight and then say Nolan is “lousy” with action. And Nolan’s visual flair? I immediately think of the black dancers in the Opera scene in Begins, the field of glowing light bulbs in The Prestiege, the spinning top in Inception.

      I respectfully disagree with you.

      • Jason

        The only thing I can say to you Marc is that my standard of action must be set higher than yours. I don’t know what you mean by “the lower 5th scene”. In any case, Nolan’s action scenes suffer from choreography that is barely there and the direction that is purely lackluster.

        And yes, Nolan has a real lack of visual flair. Almost all of his compositions are flat save for any big CG shot (e.g. Inception) or a big establishing shot of some location which is hardly impressive since with a big budget anyone can accomplish that.

        Black dancers in Begins?? If that’s the best you got for arguing Nolan as director with a cinematic eye then you are only helping me prove me point.

      • CharlesBronson

        Thank You Marc, well put. Christopher Nolan, is our generations Kubrick, Coppola, and Spielberg-all rolled into one.

        I will say one thing that really upset me was one of the beginning (sp?) scenes in Batman Begins, where his parents are murdered.

        Very poorly done. No emotion, corny dialogue, and to be honest no shock value. That one scene is the genesis of the ENTIRE Batman character. I was less than impressed.

        I too respectfully disagree with Jason.

      • Jason

        CharlesBronson,
        Do yourself a favor and stop ingesting rhetoric from clueless fanboys online and repeating them without thinking about it.

        Nolan is Kubrick, Coppola, and Spielberg rolled into one? I’ve heard that nonsense before it’s beyond ridiculous, even for fanboy nonsense.

        Just to sure that you don’t understand what I am saying… you know why Nolan doesn’t even approach such a comparison?

        Because Kubrick, Coppola, and Spielberg have something in common that Nolan does not. Those three understand shot composition, cinematic staging and have cinematic eyes. Nolan’s direction is about as basic as Film 101 gets.

        When you watch movies (and make sure you’ve seen more than what you have and not just whatever the Critieron company sells) actually “watch” them. Don’t just glaze over the visuals because that is how a director communicates.

      • Clay

        Jason, Marc’s “Lower 5th scene” references the chase sequence in The Dark Knight which ended up on street-level, downtown Chicago. I also respectfully disagree with your take. That scene was exhilaratingly staged and executed. I’m not even sure why you’re comparing animation and live-action. Each medium has its obvious limitations and advantages.

        “The only thing I can say to you Marc is that my standard of action must be set higher than yours.”

        The only thing I can say to you, Jason, is comments like that do your opinion no favors.

      • Jason

        Oh, the car chase? There’s nothing special about the way that scene was done directoral wise. In fact, some of the editing in that sequence was awkward. The only thing that was impressive was the truck flip but that has nothing to do film direction and more to do with practical effects and the stunt crew.

        I didn’t even make any specific comparisons to the Batman animations and Nolan’s films. I just said that I prefer the animated The Mask Of The Phantom over Batman Begins and that Under The Red Hood is in my opinion the best Batman feature film to date because it combines a solid script with dynamic visuals. So your comment of “each medium has its obvious limitations and advantages” is empty. It almost sounds as if you think that Nolan’s direction and lame use of the camera is the highest form of cinematic expression in live action film. If that is the case your bar is set low. Very, very low.

        “The only thing I can say to you, Jason, is comments like that do your opinion no favors.”

        Clay, here’s a tip:

        Taking the original sentence that someone wrote and repeating it back but only editing slightly so that you add in your comment isn’t a substitute for wit.

        And yes it does do me favors because it says where I come from. I’m not impressed by sub-par action.

      • DVC

        Jason. Please Stop. You obviously don’t know what your talking about. Im guessing your a shitty college film student and your just starting to “understand” film, maybe your not, but seriously, thats how your acting. I don’t even necessarily disagree with your points (I just had a conversation the other day about how Nolan isn’t that great at action) but the logic behind your arguments are immature and ignorant.
        The main problem with your argument is that you are attacking Nolan’s visual style in an almost moralistic tone. Yes, throughout your argument you loosely attribute your attack to opinion. But your logic is backed up by ridiculous statements that manage to gloss over any critical attempt to why cinema should even be in a dialogue with the criteria that you place forth as common sense
        “Nolan’s direction is about as basic as Film 101 gets.”
        This statement I think you are dead wrong, but Im not gonna argue that, I am arguing why this is not even an important point in your ‘discussion’.
        Despite the amount of pompousness, ignorances, and arrogance wrapped within this statement it also underlines the main crux of your argument and showcases you inability to think of film as flexibly. Your ideal film is I am guessing, something that, as well as being well written, is something that is creatively shot and visually makes you think of images in a new and interesting way, helping progress the film narrative. “Visual Flair” as you call it.
        Thats cool, I like those films too.
        But your arrogance comes from the fact that you think a lack of visual flair makes for a bad or lesser film. Your constituting one creative approach to narrative cinema as the/a NECESSARY part to a great film.
        Perhaps (and I tend to think) that their is a place for “Film 101″ visual styles in the archives of great films. I think the cinematic flair needs to corporate with the script, the environment, the actors, etc and if Nolan did anything more with the visuals in his films they would undermine his scripts.
        Your logic would lead us to believe that “Breathless” is a bad film because it is shot and edited incredibly sloppily. Of course, the lack of direction and sloppyness was actually part of the film and their was a reason to why Godard shot it that way. And maybe you really hate “sloppy films” maybe you hate Lars Von Trier, Mumblecore, Harmony Koriene, Werner Herzog and that opinion is perfectly valid.
        The fallacy in your argument stems from the point that you off handedly attribute “Film 101″ style as bad and you refuse to argue why you believe it is a bad style for Nolan’s films. After you make this point clear than you can point out specific instances why Nolan is “sloppy” or “lacking in flair”.

      • Jason

        No DVC, you stop it. You’re terrible at debating. Absolutely terrible.

        “Im guessing your a shitty college film student and your just starting to “understand” film, maybe your not, but seriously, thats how your acting.”

        Good way to start off to prove how immature you are. It really contrasts well with the rest of your reply which is a contrived attempt to make it seem you are mature when you are not.

        “The main problem with your argument is that you are attacking Nolan’s visual style in an almost moralistic tone. Yes, throughout your argument you loosely attribute your attack to opinion. But your logic is backed up by ridiculous statements that manage to gloss over any critical attempt to why cinema should even be in a dialogue with the criteria that you place forth as common sense”

        You haven’t said anything here DVC. All you said here is something akin to, “I like Nolan’s style. You cannot say he isn’t good. If you say he isn’t good you are not allowing me to like it.”

        Also, what “ridiculous statements”? You haven’t pointed any of them out. And how am I glossing over “critical attempt to why cinema should even be in a dialogue”?

        You’re not saying anything. Just adjectives and saying what you think of what I wrote. Anyone can do that. Not many can actually argue well. You prove that.

        “Despite the amount of pompousness, ignorances, and arrogance wrapped within this statement it also underlines the main crux of your argument and showcases you inability to think of film as flexibly. Your ideal film is I am guessing, something that, as well as being well written, is something that is creatively shot and visually makes you think of images in a new and interesting way, helping progress the film narrative. “Visual Flair” as you call it.”

        There is no “pompousness, ignorances, and arrogance” wrapped around anything in that statement. The only thing I see is how contrived your reply is to sound intelligent. I’m flattered but you are only make yourself look bad. You’re trying as hard as you can to be verbose and I see that isn’t you since you make the most basic of grammar errors in your attempt to sound smart.

        Furthermore, I don’t know where you are getting off as to what my “ideal film” is. I only cited three of Nolan’s films here (the Batman films and Inception) as examples of his lackluster direction. His direction in Memento didn’t bother me because it was a small film and the direction worked fine in it. However, in movies like Batman and Inception, a high level of visual expression is demanded. He cannot deliver in that area.

        “But your arrogance comes from the fact that you think a lack of visual flair makes for a bad or lesser film. Your constituting one creative approach to narrative cinema as the/a NECESSARY part to a great film.”

        No, DVC. The issue here is that you are very much bothered with the fact that I am saying anything bad of Nolan as a director. You are really bothered because you are convinced he is a master director. You know how I know this? Because you write here, “Your constituting one creative approach to narrative cinema as the/a NECESSARY part to a great film” despite the fact that I wrote this about Nolan:

        “His screenwriting talents are amazing”

        And I wrote that The Dark Knight is my second favorite Batman film that has been released.

        Does that sound like to you that I am totally pissing on Nolan?

        No. It just makes it clear you aren’t reading anything I write aside from what you are inventing in your mind.

        Oh, and yes… direction is heavily important in a film and can even make or break a film. If you doubt this at all you know little about film. As far as me demanding a higher quality of film making, take it from the fact that when I see directors who have interesting compositions, stage shots well, place the camera in creative places, etc… I see a director really thinking about how to visually express the story, moment, characters, etc… That takes A LOT of work, time, effort, etc… Nolan does not have that ability.

        “if Nolan did anything more with the visuals in his films they would undermine his scripts.”

        No. They would enhance his scripts. Again, your words are amounting to no more than as if you wrote something like, “I like Nolan’s direction and can’t stand that someone else thinks differently”.

        Nolan is an unimpressive director. He is a very impressive writer.

        Can’t make it any more simple than that.

        “Your logic would lead us to believe that “Breathless” is a bad film because it is shot and edited incredibly sloppily.”

        No, not really.

        “And maybe you really hate “sloppy films” maybe you hate Lars Von Trier, Mumblecore, Harmony Koriene, Werner Herzog and that opinion is perfectly valid.”

        No, I don’t think that way because Von Trier and Herzog have a far better understanding of film direction than Nolan does.

        But thanks for displaying how little effort you take in trying to understand what other people are saying.

        And another thing: That’s funny DVC. I never wrote anything about “sloppy films” and or “sloppyness. Yet, you keep writing “sloppy films” and put it in quotes as if I ever wrote such a thing.

        Is that how you argue? Making up phrases someone didn’t and put that into quotes as if they did? It shows how little you have to go on to muster an argument so you make up one for the other person and claim they said it so you have something to attack them on.

        Like I said, you are terrible at arguing.

        “The fallacy in your argument stems from the point that you off handedly attribute “Film 101″ style as bad and you refuse to argue why you believe it is a bad style for Nolan’s films.”

        The only fallacy here is what you just wrote there, pal. I “refuse to argue why you believe it is a bad style for Nolan’s films”?? Really???

        How did you miss the comment of mine:

        “His screenwriting talents are amazing but he doesn’t really have a cinematic eye. This frustrates me for the Batman films, and also Inception, because the Batman comics (and most comics in general) have always been very visual and that’s one thing that Nolan just fails at.”

        Seriously, this is impressive. You write up a reply as if you are arguing my points but all you did was prove you didn’t actually read anything I wrote. You repeatedly misquoted me (e.g. “sloppy films”), you claim I never argued something when I actually did, you theorized that I don’t like Von Trier or Herzog, or the movie Breathless when that’s all untrue, you call me names at the start of your post which contradict your attempts at being mature later on which only highlights how your poise in the rest of your reply is purely shallow, etc…

        Again, all your post equals to is that you can’t stand that anyone is saying that Nolan is not a good director. Grow up. If you want to argue it, then argue it well. Don’t waste space and time with that crap you wrote.

    • Ryan

      OK…. I usually never leave any comments on here but I couldn’t resist. I actually stopped reading them because they were getting too ridiculous.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9EhvDAMjWc&feature=related

  • Elitist Prick

    Uh oh, Matt says something controversial!

    Actually, I think the animated series captures the tone of the comics better than any movie has. It was able to cover an amazing array of stories and still keep an in-Universe feeling to everything, even improving on characters (Mr. Freeze) or creating ones (Harley Quinn). Plus, Christian Bale’s Batman voice is just as cartoony as anything on the animated series, maybe even more so.

  • sam

    i mean u really got to be kidding me…i think Matt needs to go check on a long vacation…he is probably tired and really has nothing to do right now and that’s the reason he is writing such lame articles. Matt you are one crazy mutha-loser!!! and you now why i call you that…you comparing a masterpiece to a funny cartoon…man i cant even laugh on your silly joke.

  • MegaMan3k

    I think it’s hilarious that this Jason kid is presenting himself exactly as the kind of person he is purporting to rally against.

    You know – the try hards that desperately want to come off as intellectual on comment trees and message boards. Sad he has to take controversial opinions to get any attention.

    • Jason

      Funny because the only thing that I see as hilarious is you writing that childish message because you have nothing to add but just want attention. You should make sure to sign up to where ever the short bus leads to for this upcoming school season in the fall.

      • MegaMan3k

        You literally had nothing to add but a glorified “No, you.” Go get off to faux-assertion of faux-expertise on some other site, and maybe there you will have some people who actually buy into your counter cultural opinions so ‘cutting edge’ that I’m sure your posts sound best when read to whatever the newest emo hipster band craze is.

      • Matt

        I like turtles.

    • Jason

      “You literally had nothing to add but a glorified “No, you.””

      This coming from a guy whose first comment here amounted to nothing more than, “This guy doesn’t agree with what I think is the popular opinion! So that he means he sucks!”

      But please, don’t let me stop you from being more childish like you were the first time. The whole message of “get out of this site” even though you don’t own this site and aren’t anything more than another viewer here just like me was a nice touch on proving how childlike you are.

  • Daveed

    BTAS is the greatest depiction of Batman…period! No films can touch them, even though I enjoy the Burton and Nolan films for different reasons. BTAS just knocked that entire universe out of the park…pitch perfect.

    • fravit

      ADAM WEST. THERE IS NONE OTHER.

  • SmartFilm

    Definitely a dumb thing to say. The animated series is a cartoon for children, Nolan’s films are dark gritty superhero films that redefine the line between drama and blockbuster. I guess I could see B:TAS being better for those who don’t understand film

    • Jason

      An impressive display of betraying your own screen name with that comment.

      • Collin V.

        Look, Jason, if you don’t like Nolan’s interpretations of Batman, then go complain about it to people that actually give a damn about what you have to say. I love both the Animated Series and Nolan’s films. Sure he hit a few snags, but we like his vision. We don’t care if you don’t.

      • Jason

        Collin V., when you get appointed as “Official Spokesperson For Everyone On the Planet” then maybe I’ll listen to you. Until then, save the wannabe tough guy talk when your playing some G.I. Joe character on Halloween.

        Oh, and I never said I didn’t like Nolan’s interpretation of Batman. In fact, I defended it on my first post here and even gave Nolan a high compliment of saying he “his screenwriting talents are amazing”. The jeer I have for him is his lackluster skills as a director.

        You would’ve known that had you actually read what I wrote. If you have problems reading and understanding something I made quite clear in that first post of mine here you might want to ask MegaMan3k to save you a seat on that short bus he’ll be taking this fall.

  • Clay

    Excellent job by the editor.

  • Errol

    That’s pretty awesome! It must’ve taken quite a bit of time to find footage that matched with the trailer audio. I agree with Saabguy85–someone does have a lot of free time lol, but it’s still pretty excellent! :-D

  • Rob

    “Oh, the car chase? There’s nothing special about the way that scene was done directoral wise.”

    The closest you will ever get to filming a scene like that…is complaining about it on Collider.

  • Jason

    Rob, if you just wrote:

    “I don’t watch a lot movies”

    It would’ve saved you a lot of time. :)

    • Giovanni

      You my friend are the definition of a ”Troll” go get laid or something.

      • Jason

        Giovanni,
        Just because you can’t make a good argument or desperately want to get the last word in, doesn’t make me a “Troll”.

      • marcus

        why is everyone so angry

      • Giovanni

        Me leaving this conversation instead of continuing a back and forth with you will prove my point. I made my comment. You are indeed a troll and i now have better things to do. Good day sir. BTW cheer up :)

  • Jason

    “Me leaving this conversation instead of continuing a back and forth with you will prove my point. ”

    LOL!

    Don’t you think you would’ve made this point better by simply not posting again instead of posting a comment that basically just amounts to, “And now I am leaving! Na na!”?

    “You are indeed a troll and i now have better things to do. ”

    Like calling someone else with solid points that you can’t argue against a “troll”. Gotcha.

    “BTW cheer up :)”

    I am happy. Thanks for the comedy. :)

  • twisted panties

    Nolan tells a good story with pretty standard visuals. He is old school and it shows. He has some wonderful shots here and there but overall his films aren’t that nice to look at.
    His Batman series are visually stock by todays standards and by that I mean it’s pretty much what I expect it to look like, there has never been a shot that’s made me go, wow, impressive.
    Not every director has every element nailed. Some directors are more visual, some are more story based. Nolan is in a position now to deliver both, but I don’t think he’s gonna give us something visually stunning, it’s not really his style, so I guess we’ll settle for the Rocky 3 remake, oh, I mean TDKR.

    • Jason

      “Nolan tells a good story with pretty standard visuals. He is old school and it shows. ”

      Then you don’t know what “old school” is. Case in point, Orson Welles. Look at the films he has directed. He was an amazing film director (as well as actor).

      Nolan’s film making would be considered sub-par even in 50s Hollywood.

  • Ron

    Jason… shut up.

  • to Jason

    yeah because creepy looking, or Gothic for the sake of being Gothic is the only thing that you can call visually stunning.

    but not films that are grounded on reality. Heat is bad cinematography, Mann can’t paint Los Angeles the same way that Ridley Scott paints Los Angeles in Blade Runner.

    and this thing about better looking visual as a sign of good direction? please Jason. you need to go to film school my friend.

    and Nolan is better at writing than directing? i would actually say that Nolan does alot of exposition, which is usually a sign of bad writing, but the direction of Inception was so good, you hardly notice that until like the 3rd or 4th viewing.

    • Jason

      “yeah because creepy looking, or Gothic for the sake of being Gothic is the only thing that you can call visually stunning.”

      I was never arguing “style over substance”.

      “but not films that are grounded on reality.”

      What does a film that is grounded in reality or not have anything to do with subpar film making? David Fincher’s Zodiac was pretty damn grounded in reality and yet that had solid film direction.

      “Heat is bad cinematography, Mann can’t paint Los Angeles the same way that Ridley Scott paints Los Angeles in Blade Runner. ”

      Yeah, that’s not analogous to my argument here at all.

      “and this thing about better looking visual as a sign of good direction? please Jason. you need to go to film school my friend.”

      What a meaningless and desperate insult.

      “and Nolan is better at writing than directing?”

      Yes.

      “i would actually say that Nolan does alot of exposition, which is usually a sign of bad writing, but the direction of Inception was so good, you hardly notice that until like the 3rd or 4th viewing.”

      Sounds like you need to take your own advice and go to film school. You cannot tell a story like Inception without constantly exposing information to the audience. In fact, the screenplay design of Inception shows how well it is written because Nolan keeps in mind how the audience needs to adapt to the playing field in that movie at all times. Everything from introducing the concept, to laying out the rules, to making sure that the changes in the field are understood well. Inception is a fantastic display of how Nolan is a great writer. It is also a display of how subpar he is at film direction.

  • Matt

    Man, this Jason guy is becoming everyone’s enemy. I loved B:TAS and basically grew up on it, while learning about the Batman universe. However, I love the tone and style that Nolan has taken with his Batman films. I prefer the more realistic approach to a comic book, and/or superhero film anyway. I think has done a great job with Begin, and TDK. Oh and Jason, you entitled to your opinion sir. I have no problem with what you were saying about the action sequences in TDK. I get what you going for.

    • Matt

      Excuse my terrible grammar. Been a long night at work.

  • Ash

    You can shoot a scene a million different ways and everybody will have an opinion.. imho

    so what does having visually stunning shot compositions have anything to do with being a great director? Zach Snyder anyone? I believe great directors are storytellers with the ability to tug at your heartstrings.. I don’t know about you guys but Nolans batman movies have been incredibly emotional for me.. maybe im not as jaded as some of you..

    the fact that everybody is debating on technique and execution comes across pretty pointless.. I for one don’t believe you need to have creative transitions or stunning shot compositions to convey a message or an idea across.. The fact that Nolan as a filmmaker is so polarizing is testament to the impact his movies have had.. good or bad. It doesn’t matter.. we’re debating relevance on a forum which is an interesting enough observation

    Also on another note, i feel too many ppl put way too much regard on directors.. there’s so many other components that although might not be as glamorous are equally important.. props to directors that write their own projects.. its such a rare thing these days.

    I prefer to listen/watch to any kind of artiste write/sing their own material.

    Just my 2 cents. Hope ive not offended anyone. Everybody’s so sensitive these days

    • Jason

      “so what does having visually stunning shot compositions have anything to do with being a great director? Zach Snyder anyone?”

      The fact that you mention Synder that way as if it is some sort of universal accepted fact that he is bad shows how out of touch you are. His Watchmen was great I thought and many others (like Roger Ebert) have thought so.

      If you doubt that film direction has little to nothing to do with being a great director then you don’t understand much about film. Really, that is at least more than half of the director’s job.

      “the fact that everybody is debating on technique and execution comes across pretty pointless..”

      Why? That’s essentially discussing film.

      “I for one don’t believe you need to have creative transitions or stunning shot compositions to convey a message or an idea across..”

      My point is far more substantial than just transitions.

      “The fact that Nolan as a filmmaker is so polarizing is testament to the impact his movies have had.. good or bad.”

      Kinda like Synder’s Watchmen? :)

      Anyway, that’s a bad thought process to argue with. Uwe Boll is also polarizing. Seriously, the guy has a fandom that argues he is a good film maker. That isn’t proof of anything though.

      • DarthDan

        @ Jason – You’re a fool and a waste of space. I hope you take the time to respond to this comment and tell me how dumb I am.

  • Big Mike

    To quote Kubrick: “One man writes a novel. One man writes a symphony. It is essential that one man make a film.”

    I’m not interested in DC’s/ WB’s version of Batman. I’m interested in Miller’s, Morrison’s, Timm’s, or Burton’s.

    Nolan has a voice and a unique vision for this character. We should be thankful that someone with real film making talent takes this comic book nonsense as seriously as we do. He’s trying to take a 60 (70?) year old character and do something different with him, heaven forbid.

    To not like something because it’s not something else is always a silly arguement. Is the the LOTR trilogy bad because it’s not the same as books? Of course not. Is the Walking Dead show bad because it’s different than the comic? No, it’s bad because it’s crappy at telling a story, its dialogue, it’s pacing, etc. (or maybe it’s lack of vision).

    If every version of Batman were all like the animated series, than what would be the point? I look forward to this last chapter of Nolans trilogy, and welcome the next artist to tackle Batman.

    Double Cool.

  • Billy

    Christopher Nolan’s work is not visually interesting, and if anything, it’s completely standard. So yes, I agree with Jason, Nolan is an excellent writer, but his visual flare is non-existent.

    I found CharlesBronsan’s comment “Christopher Nolan, is our generations Kubrick, Coppola, and Spielberg-all rolled into one.” to be both laughable and sad. Currently there is no ‘mainstream’ director who I believe to be interesting ploughing the box office.

  • Oliver

    I agree with DVC that we shouldn’t turn our noses up at ‘Film 101′. Sure it might be straight forward, but it is still effective. I’d rather see someone execute a great movie from solid, classical direction than try a load of fancy shit that doesn’t add up to anything. At the same time I agree that Nolan’s talent is first and foremost for screenwriting; and that the way he shoots action is fairly pedestrian. In the case of TDK though, it seems appropriate because it’s a crime movie – not an ‘action’ film. I certainly wouldn’t want to see Nolan’s version of The Matrix or Kill Bill – it’d put you to sleep. People clearly don’t go and see Batman for the action set pieces like they do for other super hero movies, and that’s fine.

    For me a truly great director, is one that can make a fantastic film from a mediocre screenplay. I don’t think that’s the case with Nolan – his films are exactly as good as his screenplays; often brilliant but no better or worse for his direction.

    • Jason

      “I’d rather see someone execute a great movie from solid, classical direction than try a load of fancy shit that doesn’t add up to anything.”

      You actually just proved you don’t know what “classical direction” is. As I wrote to twisted panties, Nolan’s film direction would be considered subpar even in 50s Hollywood.

      “In the case of TDK though, it seems appropriate because it’s a crime movie – not an ‘action’ film. ”

      You deciding to place TDK in a genre that isn’t “action” isn’t an excuse for lame action film making. David Cronenberg’s A History Of Violence and Eastern Promises certainly weren’t action films (in fact the latter was a “crime film” also) and yet both films had solid action film making when the time came to have a fight/action scene.

      • Oliver

        “You actually just proved you don’t know what “classical direction” is”

        Jason, the amount of times you’ve quoted people on this board and then told them ‘what they actually just proved’ is ridiculous.

        Just to clarify: I proved I don’t know what classical direction is because YOU think he’s sub-par for 50′s hollywood? Riiiiiiight.

        PS. Not everyone who posts on this board is looking for a discussion. We just want to say our bit. And read everyone else’s bit. You’ve said your piece – what’s with the crusade to undo everyone else’s arguments? We’re quite capable or reading your previous posts if we want your opinion. Thanks

      • Oliver

        I really didn’t want to get drawn into feverish posting but can I also just expand my point about TDK being a crime film. No, I agree it’s not an ‘excuse’ for poor action sequences as such, but arguably the action is simply not where he’s putting his attention, therefore it’s unfair to ridicule his directing style based on those sequences. Case in point: The action sequences in ‘The Departed’ aren’t particularly good either…

        But it’s not an action film! And I’m sure no one thinks Scorsese is a hack director because of it. Similarly, I wouldn’t expect the romantic scene’s in ‘The Departed’ to be up there with Romeo and Juliet… because it’s not a romance! I sure the comedy in it isn’t as good as the comedy in Anchorman but that’s hardly a valid criticism is it!

      • Jason

        “Just to clarify: I proved I don’t know what classical direction is because YOU think he’s sub-par for 50′s hollywood? Riiiiiiight.”

        Yes. That’s exactly what you did. David Lean, John Ford, Orson Welles, Alfred Hitchcock, etc… all of those kinds of film makers came from that era. All of them understand film direction and knew how to use the camera. Nolan does not.

        That is why I said that even in the Hollywood 50s Nolan’s film direction would be seen as subpar.

        “You’ve said your piece – what’s with the crusade to undo everyone else’s arguments? ”

        Because people keep replying to me Oliver. So I reply back. If people don’t want a discussion, then don’t start one with someone.

        “No, I agree it’s not an ‘excuse’ for poor action sequences as such, but arguably the action is simply not where he’s putting his attention”

        Like I said before, this is a moot point. I repeat: David Cronenberg’s A History Of Violence and Eastern Promises certainly weren’t action films (in fact the latter was a “crime film” also) and yet both films had solid action film making when the time came to have a fight/action scene.

        “Case in point: The action sequences in ‘The Departed’ aren’t particularly good either…”

        Actually, there’s very little action in it. What action there is more interesting than anything in Nolan’s films though.

        “Similarly, I wouldn’t expect the romantic scene’s in ‘The Departed’ to be up there with Romeo and Juliet… because it’s not a romance! ”

        Apparently you think “The Departed” is a good film. It isn’t. It’s a racist remake of the Hong Kong film “Infernal Affairs” that has one of the worst scripts in a major Hollywood film in years. It adds plot holes that weren’t there in Infernal Affairs and is up and down lousy.

        As far as its “romantic scenes”, yeah they were shitty in The Departed but not because it wasn’t a romance film. It was due to shitty writing.

    • Ash

      To Jason:

      “The fact that you mention Synder that way as if it is some sort of universal accepted fact that he is bad shows how out of touch you are. His Watchmen was great I thought and many others (like Roger Ebert) have thought so”

      Firstly i never proposed Snyder was universally accepted as a bad filmaker.. you’ve definitely got the flair for melodrama Jason. And I liked how you name dropped Roger Ebert to validate your ’2 thumbs up’ for Watchmen.. . which imho was visually stunning, yes.. but mostly felt cold and lifeless .. the re-writing of the ending completely missed the whole point the graphic novels was trying to make.. and don’t even start with the horribly miscastings 2 of the leads (Silk spectr and ozymandias). But its cool if you like those filmaking decisions.. to each his own. :)

      “If you doubt that film direction has little to nothing to do with being a great director then you don’t understand much about film. Really, that is at least more than half of the director’s job.”

      Again with the quoting out of context.. i wonder Jason if you have the capacity to have a normal conversation with another human being without constantly twisting every word to suit your point. If you don’t agree with that..well, hmm.. thing is everybody else on this board probably already considers you slightly delusional.

      “My point is far more substantial than just transitions.”

      I like how you didnt decide to add the ‘stunning shot compositions’ from the rest of my point when you were emphasizing yours.. even though you clearly were talking about Nolan’s lack of a ‘cinematic eye’ from your first post. Convenient but then again this coming from someone who considers a batman cartoon to be a superior product than a movie with a 94% Rottentomatoes rating.. oops.. see what i did.. i used a metacritic site to validated my point. I’m sure u won’t mind.

      Seriously? There are ppl out there who consider Uwe Boll a good film maker? Thats just plain wrong mate.. did you actually google search ‘Uwe Boll Good Filmaker’, found a forum with a bunch of other delusional ppl and trolled there too? Seriously mate.. i’d rather you just troll here. You’re actually a pretty fun read.

      • Jason

        “Firstly i never proposed Snyder was universally accepted as a bad filmaker.. you’ve definitely got the flair for melodrama Jason.”

        But you did, Ash. You did. It isn’t melodrama. It’s being able to understand what someone else writes. You wrote before:

        “so what does having visually stunning shot compositions have anything to do with being a great director? Zach Snyder anyone?”

        You asking “Zack Snyder anyone?” is proposing a supposed fact that should be obvious to anyone. It isn’t complicated to understand. If that is not what you meant then you need to learn to express yourself better but as is what you wrote there means that Synder being a bad film making is some sort of universal fact.

        “And I liked how you name dropped Roger Ebert to validate your ’2 thumbs up’ for Watchmen”

        Now who’s being dramatic Ash? I only mentioned Ebert’s 4 star review of Watchmen to disprove that it isn’t a universally accepted that Synder is a bad film maker like you implied before.

        “hich imho was visually stunning, yes.. but mostly felt cold and lifeless .. the re-writing of the ending completely missed the whole point the graphic novels was trying to make.. and don’t even start with the horribly miscastings 2 of the leads (Silk spectr and ozymandias). But its cool if you like those filmaking decisions.. to each his own. :)”

        So you go from melodramatic to condescending. Pretty mature of you, Ash. I find it funny to that you are call me a “troll” later on in your reply yet you conduct yourself in childish behavior like this.

        “Again with the quoting out of context.. ”

        I didn’t quote anything out of context. You are just deciding to be insulting to make up for your lack of being able to properly discuss ideas. Really, nothing in your reply here even discusses any points I raised. You just make shallow comments that negatively describes what I wrote but you don’t actually address any of the actual content of my post.

        A comment like this:

        “If you don’t agree with that..well, hmm.. thing is everybody else on this board probably already considers you slightly delusional. ”

        Is nothing but pure ad hominem, Ash. Childish stuff. Either admit you were wrong, cannot debate me or just stop replying to me. Based on this last post of yours it is clear you just cannot actually discuss anything so you think if you reply with pseudo-high and mighty comments it will make it seem you have made a point. Except the only point you have made is that you have lost here.

        “I like how you didnt decide to add the ‘stunning shot compositions’ from the rest of my point when you were emphasizing yours.. even though you clearly were talking about Nolan’s lack of a ‘cinematic eye’ from your first post.”

        Realize, Ash, that adding that comment or not in my sentence doesn’t change the message. I simply didn’t write “stunning shot compositions” because I didn’t feel like writing it. I already quoted it in my reply so I didn’t feel it was necessary. I mean really, are you trying to imply I was being deceptive? How so if I quoted your own words in my very reply that included the phrase “stunning shot compositions”?

        You see, you cannot argue as proven by this horrible attempt of yours. And for what? It doesn’t even address the issue that I was raising which is pretty much the theme for the rest of your reply.

        “Seriously? There are ppl out there who consider Uwe Boll a good film maker? Thats just plain wrong mate.. did you actually google search ‘Uwe Boll Good Filmaker’, found a forum with a bunch of other delusional ppl and trolled there too? ”

        I didn’t have to google anything. They exist believe it or not.

        “eriously mate.. i’d rather you just troll here. You’re actually a pretty fun read.
        Reply ”

        Some words of advice, Ash. Calling someone a “troll” just because you disagree with them and the fact that you have a serious lack of ability to discuss or even just admit you are wrong doesn’t make that other person a “troll”.

        And writing a reply with a tone of “high and mighty” isn’t compensation for actually responding to what the other person was writing.

        So if anything, you have been provided me with entertainment. It’s been fun watching someone like you (as well as some others here) write replies that shift the discussion over to something else so that they can distract from the fact that for whatever reason they can’t properly debate the issue. Or they just can’t admit that they were wrong.

        So thank you. :)

  • wildcatz

    What If Tim Burton was directing Nolan’s scripts? Not that Tim is any better with action, but the guy had a fantastic sense of cinematic vision. What would TDK have looked like in Burton’s eyes?

    I wouldn’t compare Nolan to the greats just yet. Sure they all had their limitations, but TDK is no Apocalypse Now or Clockwork Orange or Raiders of the Lost Ark. Those movies were thrilling to watch! Now, I’ve been a huge Bat-fan all my life and I love Memento, but I find Nolan’s work a struggle to watch. Too dense and deliberate for my liking.

    The way that Spider-man II was the best Spidey flick which no one will top, the best Batman movie has yet to be made. And from the looks of the trailer, it will take years before someone really gets it right.

    • Jason

      Actually wildcatz, Burton can be surprisingly good at action and is certainly better than Nolan. Watch the fight scene right at the end of the first Batman film where Batman is fighting one of Joker’s goons while Joker is dancing with Vicky Vale. It’s a well directed fight with clear shots, good angles and nicely edited.

      As far as considering Burton directing Nolan’s Batman scripts… that’s a very interesting thought. I bet it would produce an overall more satisfying cinematic experience.

  • Puscifer

    Hey MATT, from which Animated series/episode/film is this clip taken? the one with Bane…???

    I assume that the Dark Knight Rises will go the LOTR 3rd part way, i.e 3 hours plus….. any rumors regarding its length ? I heard somewhere that it was a LONG script………

    • DarthDan

      The episode, “Bane” is in the 75th episode of Batman: The Animated Series which aired in 1994.

  • the RiDdlEr??

    The dark knight rises will not over take the dark knight. I predict disapointment from several fanboys but yet they will still wipe nolans a$$. I love watching fanboys get overworked by a simple comment haha.

  • Pingback: The Dark Knight Rises – Teaser Trailers » Might&Wonder

  • Kai

    No Jason, you are a troll. If you approached any critic or filmmaker in the world and told them that Christopher Nolan has subpar directorial skills, they would laugh at you for hours on end. I’m not saying this as a fanboy. I’m saying this a person with common film sense.

    Nolan isn’t the definite filmmaker of our generation because of his ‘subpar directorial skills’. He didn’t create one of the most memorable fight scenes (the hallway fight in Inception) in recent cinema memory because his directing skills are lacking.

    So please, take your comments elsewhere. I respect opinions, but not ignorance.

    • Jason

      Kai,
      You have no film sense and yes… you are writing your comment as a “fanboy”. Wanna know how I know?

      You see your desperate reply there to make me look stupid? The one about, “If you approached any critic or filmmaker in the world and told them that Christopher Nolan has subpar directorial skills, they would laugh at you for hours on end”.

      I don’t particularly care for critics but since you pulled this card out without even thinking about anything I’ll play this game.

      Do you know who A.O. Scott is? He’s a pretty well known and well respected film critic for the New York Times. He writes in his Inception review:

      “But though there is a lot to see in “Inception,” there is nothing that counts as genuine vision. Mr. Nolan’s idea of the mind is too literal, too logical, too rule-bound to allow the full measure of madness — the risk of real confusion, of delirium, of ineffable ambiguity — that this subject requires. ”

      David Denby of the New Yorker wrote this about The Dark Knight’s action scenes:

      “Christian Bale, who plays Bruce Wayne (and Batman), spent months training under the masters of the ferocious and delicate K.F.M. Unfortunately, I can’t tell you a thing about it, because the combat is photographed close up, in semidarkness, and cut at the speed of a fifteen-second commercial. ”

      So if your ace was to make it seem as if I am some crazy person that no “professional critic” agrees with in regards to what I say about Nolan, you are wrong. Very wrong.

      “He didn’t create one of the most memorable fight scenes (the hallway fight in Inception) in recent cinema memory because his directing skills are lacking. ”

      If you think that fight scene is “one of the most memorable fight scenes in recent cinema memory” it is clear you know little about cinema. It says you know next to nothing about Hong Kong action cinema and the most you know about action scenes are largely limited to Hollywood fare like Indiana Jones and Die Hard. In other words, you are exposed to little which is why you are so easily impressed.

      The hallway fight is only interesting because the actual set was revolving. That isn’t film direction, that’s set design. The actual choreography of the fight itself is close to non-existent and Nolan doesn’t do anything interesting in terms of the direction with it. It’s just impressive only in that they created a set that spins around. The fight itself is unimpressive.

      “So please, take your comments elsewhere. I respect opinions, but not ignorance.”

      No, you’re acting like a child. You only like “opinions” when you agree with them.

      I respect people that act mature. Not people that act like children.

  • calvin

    jason = number 1 troll. i don’t think he’s said one funny or insightful thing yet

  • Luke Collichio

    Wow… I can’t believe I read this entire page. Its been fun. First off, this Jason character that wont go away, you’re dead wrong. Nolan is an incredible director. I don’t see his argument against his visuals. I find his films pleasing to the eyes. I found TDK to be an exhilarating experience, both visually and emotionally. Are is films the same as Burton’s? No. He takes a more realistic approach to his films. I don’t think he necessarily wants the visuals to distract from the story. But that does not mean his films are visually inferior. It’s just his style. To say his directing is subpar is ludicrous. I’m not exactly sure what Jason thinks great directing is. From reading his comments I think he doesn’t understand what great directing is. He threw out a few directors with “Cinematic Flair”, like Orson Welles, and I agree that Welles had a very unique eye, but direction is far more then just visuals. A film director interprets the screenplay and passes on his vision to the actors, cinematographer, art director etc… Its a collaborative process. Take a look at Billy Wilder. Is Wilder known for visually stunning films, no, but he is regarded as one of the finest directors from the fifties. There are many great directors whose style is does not depend on visual flair, for example, Wilder, Brooks, Capra etc… The list goes on.
    Also I have to say that when Jason said that Burton is better at directing action scenes then Nolan, I laughed so hard I almost fell out of my chair. I like Burton well enough, I’ve always thought his visuals distract from the story. I liked his Batman films, and his vision was unique, but the action in them was terrible. The chase in the first film was a train wreck. The scene on the tower that Jason describes, was ok (Did anyone else get confused about how the thugs get up to the tower. If the helicopter dropped them off then why isn’t it up there when the Joker and Vicky Vale get up there. If it didn’t then how and gods name are they up there?), Batman Returns had no good action scene either. The only action scene in the Nolan films that I felt was poorly shot was the prison fight scene. The camera was too close and it felt clunky, other then that I’ll name the good action scenes: Wayne’s fight with the league of shadows, the chase from Begins, the climax from Begins, the bank heist, capturing Lao, the chase scene from TDK, the tower fight in TDK. Those were all great action scenes. My count: Nolan 7, Burton 1/2( tower scene was ok, but the fact that it does not make logical sense hurts it).
    Jason sounds to me like a first or second year film student. I’m a film student and I know what they sound like. The first and second year you like to rag on big name directors, and then after that you realize that, wait, these guys are good after all. You compare them to greats like Welles. I think its great that he likes to argue about film, but does he have nothing better to do? All this Nolan talk makes me want to watch Inception again ( by the way I know this has been mentioned before, but the hallway fight scene was fantastic)

  • Billy

    What a load of fanboy nonsense. Get over yourselves.

  • Jason

    Luke Collichio,
    Don’t flatter yourself by saying something as moronic as, “Jason sounds to me like a first or second year film student. I’m a film student and I know what they sound like.”

    Not only are you wrong but you anyone can argue like that. Just watch:

    “Luke Collichio is a failed writer. Failed writers usually spend their time arguing that they don’t agree with someone simply because they are unhappy with their careers”.

    You see that? See how easy it was? It didn’t take any effort to do that and it sounded as if I made an observation when I didn’t at all. Just a general label and a vague description to go along with it.

    As far as arguing goes, you make the same mistakes as DVC. You don’t argue what I wrote but what you are inventing. For example:

    “Are is films the same as Burton’s? No. He takes a more realistic approach to his films. ”

    Did I make any claim that Nolan’s films should be like Burton? No. So why do you write that?

    Also, and I wrote this before already but it bears repeating. What does a film that is grounded in reality or not have anything to do with subpar film making? David Fincher’s Zodiac was pretty damn grounded in reality and yet that had solid film direction.

    “From reading his comments I think he doesn’t understand what great directing is. ”

    No, I actually do.

    “A film director interprets the screenplay and passes on his vision to the actors, cinematographer, art director etc…”

    How does this go against anything that I wrote? You are just describing what a director does. This doesn’t disprove anything I was saying. In other words, you don’t understand what I am arguing.

    “Take a look at Billy Wilder. Is Wilder known for visually stunning films, no, but he is regarded as one of the finest directors from the fifties. There are many great directors whose style is does not depend on visual flair, for example, Wilder, Brooks, Capra etc… The list goes on.”

    And you prove you don’t know what film direction is. Wilder and Capra understood film direction and cinematic staging. That’s what you don’t understand AT ALL. You think I mean you need to have some expensive $100 million 20 minute one shot take of something. That is not what I am talking about.

    “(Did anyone else get confused about how the thugs get up to the tower. If the helicopter dropped them off then why isn’t it up there when the Joker and Vicky Vale get up there. If it didn’t then how and gods name are they up there?), ”

    I don’t know the scene off hand so I can’t answer your question directly but what does that question have anything to do with my point about the action direction of the fight itself?

    You see, you aren’t arguing the action film making. It’s something else that isn’t related to the fight itself.

    “I’ll name the good action scenes: Wayne’s fight with the league of shadows”

    Hilarious. Since that “fight” syncs up perfectly with the description you gave of the prison fight that you said was “poorly shot” (“The camera was too close and it felt clunky”).

    “the chase from Begins”

    Completely standard. Nothing special or noteworthy about it.

    “the climax from Begins”

    Another fight scene that perfectly syncs up with your description of the prison fight (“The camera was too close and it felt clunky”). The irony.

    Did you even watch these movies?

    “the bank heist”

    That’s hardly an action scene.

    “capturing Lao”

    Ignoring the fact it was really short, it was shot too dark and there was no interesting choreography or action direction in that scene.

    “the chase scene from TDK”

    I’ll agree that this was probably the best action scene in TDK but that doesn’t mean it was anything great. Only the truck flip makes it noteworthy but that was due to the effects crew, not film direction.

    “the tower fight in TDK”

    Like the “capture of Lao” it also, “was shot too dark and there was no interesting choreography or action direction in that scene.”

    “My count: Nolan 7, Burton 1/2( tower scene was ok, but the fact that it does not make logical sense hurts it).”

    Your math might need help. Also, your “logical sense” doesn’t make any sense because you didn’t actually argue the fight scene itself. You asked a question about how Joker’s thugs got there. That has nothing to do with the fight scene itself.

  • Moose

    hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha wow…Jason is kinda an idiot…wow….i mean….I hate Nolans directing style, I like his writing. Hell I pretty much agree with Jason’s original thesis….but seriously….what? Why is he such a like piece of shit…. god…oh well… (also Jason, I know this is not a rel argument, and there is no objective basis to what I am saying and Its immature. You can save yourself the trouble of deconstructing my “argument”)

    • Oliver

      He has taken it upon himself to police this forum. And although we try to think for ourselves, what we don’t realize is that we are totally wrong. Luckily Jason is hear to explain our failings to us through the use of our own quotes.

      • Jason

        That’s right, Oliver. Don’t actually reply to my response to you. That would mean you would have to actual discuss things and that takes effort.

        Instead, reply to some troll who is childishly insulting me (most likely someone posting under a different name who is butthurt from an earlier exchange with me here) so that you can join some bandwagon and fool yourself into thinking I’m wrong that way.

        That sure helps your case.

      • Oliver

        I can’t be bothered to respond to you on my previous post Jason – you’d only write me a massive essay to read. Besides, I made the points I wanted to make.

      • Jason

        You “can’t be bothered” to reply to me because you know you cannot debate me. I am write.

        That whole business about TDK being a “crime film” and therefore okay for it to have subpar action was debunked when I mentioned Cronenberg. It was this reply of mine here you know you can’t argue against:

        David Cronenberg’s A History Of Violence and Eastern Promises certainly weren’t action films (in fact the latter was a “crime film” also) and yet both films had solid action film making when the time came to have a fight/action scene.

        Instead of just being mature and admit you are wrong and learn from this exchange you decided to act like a child and unite with trolls to make yourself feel better. You are the one that looks bad at the end of this Oliver. Not me.

      • Jason

        Correction to the first line: You “can’t be bothered” to reply to me because you know you cannot debate me. I am right.

  • DarthDan

    IN OTHER NEWS

    The video was awesome

  • JASON

    I’m a film student and you all are idiots! Nolan is terrible, and Batman and Robin is the BEST of all the movies EVER!

    PS – I live with my mom

    • Jason

      Nothing funnier than someone who was butthurt from earlier posting under a different name to make pure troll fodder because they can’t debate with me.

      “JASON”, say hi mother for me! :)

      • JASON

        I get the last word, not you

      • Jason

        No, “JASON”. You’re just plenty butthurt. :)

  • broski

    Great article Matt, agreed…in my opinion, in terms of best Batman portrayals outside of the comics I would rank them in this order: the Arkham Asylum and Arkham City games > Batman: TAS > Batman Begins > Tim Burton’s Batman > TDK (that’s right fanboys, I ranked it lowest, the main reason being that Batman was too overshadowed by the Joker and the movie felt more like a crime drama with Batman in it than a Batman movie. Also Gotham looked too much like Metropolis.)

    *puts on flame shield*

  • Luke

    HAHAHAHAHA! This is so much fun. I didn’t even say that much and it pisses little Jason off. What else can we all say guys?
    Litte Jason, I don’t mind you stating your opinion, but you have defended it beyond its need, and by defending it so many times you’ve hurt your overall argument. You say things like composing a scene and staging a scene, but you never say what that is. Instead you bad mouth Nolan because he isn’t visually interesting. Then you belittle people who don’t agree with you and spout film school terms and blah blah blah. Take some advice and stop posting. (of course I know you wont, but thats ok I like to laugh, and the crap you write sure makes me)
    Also, because this is annoying the crap out of me, when I made a comment about the tower fight scene in Burton’s Batman, it was in parentheses and it was not meant as a direct attack against you. I was hoping to garner another discussion with some other posters. Since you obviously misinterpreted it, among other things, I should say that when you talk about a movie scene and reference it in an argument you better be damn sure you know every thing about it. You used that scene as evidence for Burton’s ability to direct action, yet you do not recall the scene well enough to agree or disagree with my claim that the whole set up makes no sense. Once againdefending your original post too much has hurt your point.

    • JASON

      Luke, I just want you to know that I disagree with everything you said…. I hate you

      • Luke

        Jason, you do not hate me. That’s fine that you disagree with most of what I said, because I disagree with most of what you said. This has been fun. I love arguing pointlessly about films.

    • Jason

      “I didn’t even say that much and it pisses little Jason off. What else can we all say guys?”

      I know that in your little world you’d like to think you’ve achieved something, but you haven’t. :) You haven’t argued with one point against anything I’ve said. You just wrote, “HAHAHAHAHA!” and declared victory.

      You just made yourself look pathetic.

      “Litte Jason, I don’t mind you stating your opinion, but you have defended it beyond its need, and by defending it so many times you’ve hurt your overall argument. ”

      You’re not making any sense, Luke.

      “You say things like composing a scene and staging a scene, but you never say what that is. ”

      You don’t know what composing and staging scenes are in movies? What’s the matter, Like? I thought you claimed you were a film student?

      “Instead you bad mouth Nolan because he isn’t visually interesting.”

      What I wrote was: “Nolan is an unimpressive director. He is a very impressive writer.”

      “Then you belittle people who don’t agree with you and spout film school terms and blah blah blah.”

      It isn’t my fault that those who act childish and disrespectful get what they get. If they can’t reply like a mature individual it isn’t my fault for showing them for what they are. Kinda like you with your pathetic, “HAHAHAHAHA!”

      You’ve shown your true, childish colors.

      And “film school terms”? Don’t blame me because I know what I am talking about and you don’t.

      “Take some advice and stop posting. ”

      Why don’t you take your own advice?

      “(of course I know you wont, but thats ok I like to laugh, and the crap you write sure makes me)”

      Actually, it doesn’t make you laugh. You are writing that it makes you laugh because you need to pretend you achieved something when you haven’t. Note that you aren’t replying to anything I wrote. Why not, Luke? Surely if you were right and I was wrong you can easily argue against what I said. But you didn’t. After I replied, you acted like a grade school brat because you cannot debate me. You don’t know much about film.

      “Also, because this is annoying the crap out of me”

      What are you talking about, Luke? I thought you were having fun? :)

      “when I made a comment about the tower fight scene in Burton’s Batman, it was in parentheses and it was not meant as a direct attack against you. Since you obviously misinterpreted it”

      I misinterpreted it huh? So it was just a coincidence that you reference a section of the movie that I also did? Please. It was clearly meant as an (bad) argument against I wrote since you later on in your post reference that same parentheses by writing, “tower scene was ok, but the fact that it does not make logical sense hurts it”.

      “I should say that when you talk about a movie scene and reference it in an argument you better be damn sure you know every thing about it. You used that scene as evidence for Burton’s ability to direct action, yet you do not recall the scene well enough to agree or disagree with my claim that the whole set up makes no sense. Once againdefending your original post too much has hurt your point.”

      Wrong. I already commented on this and it’s telling that you completely missed the point that makes YOU look bad. I do remember the scene I was talking about. I was talking about the fight scene itself. You were not. You were talking about something else that wasn’t the fight scene. I’ll repeat my comment again:

      What does that question have anything to do with my point about the action direction of the fight itself?

      You see, you aren’t arguing the action film making. It’s something else that isn’t related to the fight itself.

      And also:

      Also, your “logical sense” doesn’t make any sense because you didn’t actually argue the fight scene itself. You asked a question about how Joker’s thugs got there. That has nothing to do with the fight scene itself.

      You see? Not only was your first response to me awful your second reply was even worse as you had even less to say. Just childish comments and claims of victory that you didn’t achieve. I feel sorry for you.

  • wildcatz

    I think the Burton vs Nolan argument is a good one to have, and yes, Nolan “grounded” the Batman after “Shoemaker” took him off the rails. But you have to put Burton in context. It was 1989! The first Batman movie since Adam West sprang out the shark-repellent. From this perspective, Burton was very realistic and highly original. The prized TAS series was even based on his vision (the roof-top opening sequence and the futuristic 1940′s look). In fact, Nolan is much more derivative (Ridley Scott, Frank Miller, Tony Scott, etc). Is there a good idea he hasn’t stolen?

    The definitive Batman has yet to be canned. I hope someone gets it right in my lifetime.

    Okay Nolan fanboys… bring it on!

  • wildcatz

    Moreover, if Burton had the sense to use an actor that was taller than 5’7″, someone big enough to physically cast a menacing shadow (instead of Michael “Peewee Herman” Keaton); and if the stinky Penguin nonsense was scrapped in his follow-up; then we wouldn’t be having this argument.

  • What is best way to look younger ?

    Thanks for the auspicious writeup. It if truth be told used to be a amusement account it. Glance complicated to far introduced agreeable from you! By the way, how can we keep in touch?

  • grimm online

    I am no longer positive the place you are getting your information, however great topic. I needs to spend a while studying much more or working out more. Thank you for great info I used to be on the lookout for this information for my mission.

  • facebook fan

    Hello, Neat post. There’s an issue along with your site in internet explorer, could check this? IE nonetheless is the market leader and a good section of other folks will leave out your excellent writing because of this problem.

  • abiti da sposa roma italia

    CON LA COLLEZIONE DI ABITI DA SPOSA ROMANTICI 2012 HO VOLUTO REGALARE ALLE MIE SPOSE UN TOCCO DI PARTICOLARE LEGGEREZZA E CLASSE

  • BetaGiveaways

    I am no longer sure where you are getting your information, however good topic. I must spend some time finding out more or understanding more. Thanks for excellent info I was looking for this information for my mission.

  • website hosting

    I used to be recommended this website by way of my cousin. I’m no longer sure whether this post is written by way of him as nobody else understand such unique about my trouble. You’re incredible! Thanks!

Click Here