Best Batman Film in The Dark Knight Trilogy

Mecha wrote:

@Dam_Noir

But it wasn't canon in the original continuity though. The New 52 didn't came out until way after The Dark Knight, so The Joker falling into a chemical vat has nothing to do between him and Batman. Even Alan Moore himself didn't like how his origin of The Joker became somewhat canon. If he knew DC was going to make it canon, he would have wrote it differently. Whether the chemical vat origin is canon or not, its still not the official origin. Because you're always going to have various writers have different interpretations of Joker's origin. Which is exactly what Chris Nolan did.

As I already said about Tim Burton's Batman, its not all that faithful to the comics anyway. Batman trying to kill the Joker is debatable, because Batman did the same thing in The Dark Knight by throwing Joker off on top of the building, yet Batman still saved The Joker.

Also lol, no. If Batman went against his moral code then The Joker would have won. If Batman killed Joker in the comics than The Joker wouldn't be as popular as he is today. You don't really get the relationship between Batman and Joker, the two basically can't live without each other. They even state this in The Dark Knight as well, so there is no reason to even believe Batman was going to kill The Joker just because you think he should have.

Are you honestly inferring that Nolan's films are true to the comics?

In that case remind me when Ra's al Ghul, Two-Face, Bane and Talia al Ghul died in the comics? Because whether a villian lives or not makes something more true to the comics then surely Adam West's Batman and Batman & Robin are more credible than the Nolan trilogy...

I completely get the relationship between the Joker and Batman in the comic books but the last I checked the comics were never as gritty and realistic as Nolan's Batman movies so why do you make out like his movies are a true representation of the comics?

@Dam_Noir

lolwtf!?

The comics are a lot more grittier than any of the Batman films. Maybe not as realistic as Nolan's, but definitely grittier.

Also Ra's al Ghul, Talia al Ghul, and Bane do die in the comics. But they always get resurrected by the Lazarus Pit later on.

Nolan's Batman films are not great comic book adaptations, but its not THAT unfaithful either.

Comics aren't as realistic, BUT MILES GRITTIER AND GORIER! I think you've proven that you have very little knowledge of the comics and probably haven't read any comics past the 80s. jk... Or am I?
Anyways realism doesnt always equate to good story telling, it can really hamper down the experience and puts certain boundaries that you can't cross for story telling and really limits the creativity.

I agree, realism does dumb down the story. Because instead of Ra's al Ghul coming from the dead like in the comics, you only get a small dream sequence of him in the film instead. That's weak. Imagine how epic it would have been if Batman and Ra's al Ghul fought in Arabia in The Dark Knight Rises. Alalalalalala!

That would be the dumbest piece of shit fight. Ever.

Plus, making them realistic doesn't mean they're "Dumbed down" It means they're more relatable and have some similarities with the real world apects.

You guys also seem to forget that they're MOVIES, not COMIC BOOKS. Just because something is different from the comics, doesn't mean it's necessarily a bad thing. It's some times for the better as well.

It would be a better fight than the one in Batman Begins that's for sure.

These characters aren't suppose to be relatable. These are characters with a mental illnesses, that's the point of the Batman lore.

Also we never said being different was a bad thing. But rather, being realistic doesn't really improve the characters.

Yes because a mentally ill billionaire dressing up like a bat to fight crime is fucking relatable.

Not to mention the fact that Batman has spend many years perfecting his mind and body.

@Mecha: But being unrealistic and super over-the-top is so much better. Amirite?

Either way, I think you guys are being kind of silly right now.

@Tahm: Yes, yes he IS a relatable character. He's not a guy with superpowers who can fly and jump off rooftops. He's a normal human-being who can get hurt and break down. Just like every other person in this world.

RamboOnRedBull wrote:

@Mecha: But being unrealistic and super over-the-top is so much better. Amirite?

Either way, I think you guys are being kind of silly right now.

@Tahm: Yes, yes he IS a relatable character. He's not a guy with superpowers who can fly and jump off rooftops. He's a normal human-being who can get hurt and break down. Just like every other person in this world.

How do you relate to batman? Because I sure as hell fucking can't.

RamboOnRedBull wrote:

@Mecha: But being unrealistic and super over-the-top is so much better. Amirite?

You're right. Nolan's Ra's al Ghul was so much better. Realism FTW!

@Tahm: You can't relate to a guy who's parents were killed? You can't relate to a guy who's fighting to save people, but ends up having his love life blown to death? You can't relate to a guy who wants to stop being a "Hero" and just wants to live a normal life like everyone else?


@Mecha: Yeah, because such a scene would translate perfectly into a film. And would TOTALLY not be cheesy and corny.

RamboOnRedBull wrote:

@Tahm: You can't relate to a guy who's parents were killed? You can't relate to a guy who's fighting to save people, but ends up having his love life blown to death? You can't relate to a guy who wants to stop being a "Hero" and just wants to live a normal life like everyone else?


@Mecha: Yeah, because such a scene would translate perfectly into a film. And would TOTALLY not be cheesy and corny.

Yes because Dark Knight Rises wasn't corny as fuck already

TDKR was corny. Not going to deny that.

But I'm talking about the entire trilogy. Not just the last installment. Taking TDKR and trying to justify for that is just reaching for straws

@RamboOnRedBull

Not as cheesy and corny like the fights in the Nolan films.

At least Batman in the comics isn't relying on using his gadgets in a fight. Instead he's fighting to the death with Ra's al Ghul in desert. How is that unrealistic? The only thing unrealistic about it is Ra's al Ghul coming back from the dead. That's it.

I think the attempt at relatability comes in the form of the fact that everyone has felt a strong desire to stand up for their morals at one point in their life and fight for their belief. Only difference is that most of us have to choke down that urge while Bruce Wayne can do whatever he wants. So I think the story loses us there.

Even worse is is choreography for the fight scenes, they couldn't even be bothered to use real martial arts, instead theybitched out and used keysi fighting.
Also you can get that relation from the comic as well, except in the comics there's a message to never give up or abandon your ideals, unlike rises.

It's funny to me, because a lot of the criticisms people have with Nolan Batman films, have a lot to do with changing comics. Especially The Dark Knight Rises, Yet when we point it out there, all of a sudden we're comic book elitist. Nolan doesn't make things realistic because the comics are silly (which is NOT). He makes things realistic just for the sake of realism. Even if that means dumbing down the characters and story.

@Keysi is a real martial arts style though. Also just because it's more of a defensive type of fighting, it doesn't mean it can't be dangerous. Also Batman gave up in Returns for a decade, what happen to the never give up/abandon ideals message?

@Mecha He isn't making Superman realitsic, relatable, but not realistic.

lolwut? Never said he was?

It seemed implied. :poker2:

Quote :

He makes things realistic just for the sake of realism.

tahmidk wrote:

Even worse is is choreography for the fight scenes, they couldn't even be bothered to use real martial arts, instead theybitched out and used keysi fighting.
Also you can get that relation from the comic as well, except in the comics there's a message to never give up or abandon your ideals, unlike rises.

The hand-to-hand choreography in the film looks very much like it's choreographed. Maybe I've been spoiled by the sublime The Raid: Redemption, but in that film, the fights looked raw. With Nolan's trilogy, the fights don't seem raw or genuine at all. Still fun, but it reminds me of how the lightsaber fights went down in the Star Wars prequels. Though I did love Batman's fight with Bane in The Dark Knight Rises. That was brutal.

yonny616 wrote:

Also Batman gave up in Returns for a decade, what happen to the never give up/abandon ideals message?

I haven't read that graphic novel, but I'm assuming he comes back given the name of the story and the fact that you said, "for a decade." Your point kinda folds back on you. In that novel, Batman realizes that he needs to go back into the fold and that he shouldn't have given up. With The Dark Knight Rises you never get that because poor Batman runs away to Italy to fuck Anne Hathaway and the movie ends there. Such sacrifices he's made.

yonny616 wrote:

@Keysi is a real martial arts style though. Also just because it's more of a defensive type of fighting, it doesn't mean it can't be dangerous. Also Batman gave up in Returns for a decade, what happen to the never give up/abandon ideals message?

@Mecha He isn't making Superman realitsic, relatable, but not realistic.

my friend does keysi and.I fucking beat him, and.I.don't even do any martial arts and have only ever been.in.two fights. Not sure what belt, if they even do that, he was though, he's been going twice a week for a few months though. He was acting like a fucking clown prancing around like when you're pretend fighting.

TheCinemaJack wrote:

I haven't read that graphic novel, but I'm assuming he comes back given the name of the story and the fact that you said, "for a decade." Your point kinda folds back on you. In that novel, Batman realizes that he needs to go back into the fold and that he shouldn't have given up. With The Dark Knight Rises you never get that because poor Batman runs away to Italy to fuck Anne Hathaway and the movie ends there. Such sacrifices he's made.

Well yeah, but he still gives up. According to Tahmidk, Batman has the never give up attitude, when he has given up before. Yeah he leaves, but it means he has moved on, well that's how I see it anyways.

yonny616 wrote:

TheCinemaJack wrote:

I haven't read that graphic novel, but I'm assuming he comes back given the name of the story and the fact that you said, "for a decade." Your point kinda folds back on you. In that novel, Batman realizes that he needs to go back into the fold and that he shouldn't have given up. With The Dark Knight Rises you never get that because poor Batman runs away to Italy to fuck Anne Hathaway and the movie ends there. Such sacrifices he's made.

Well yeah, but he still gives up. According to Tahmidk, Batman has the never give up attitude, when he has given up before. Yeah he leaves, but it means he has moved on, well that's how I see it anyways.

Tdrk was THE graphic novel, however Miller's batman is much more different than the main canon one. Miller's batman forced robin to eat rat's and he ended up cutting off dick graysons head and throwing him into a volcano without showing any remorse.