Best Batman Film in The Dark Knight Trilogy

Oh DKSA. Also that's when Miller started losing his shit.

yonny616 wrote:

It seemed implied. :poker2:

Quote :

He makes things realistic just for the sake of realism.

Except that Nolan isn't directing Man of Steel and admitted that it won't be realistic at all.

EDIT: lol Jack may not read the comics, but he knows his Batman alright.

Many hours later I see this place has degenerated into the differences between the comics and the Nolan movies, but that pretty much reinforces my original point.

The differences between the movies and the comics is huge as many people have pointed out so I don't know why my original opionion that The Joker's death was written out of The Dark Knight due to Heath Ledger's is so unbelievable?

I'll be honest, I don't know fuck all about the comics. However a close mate of mine has read them, the graphic novels, the lot. Even he says despite appreciating Nolan's Joker he doesn't feel it was a true portrayal of the character he knows from the comics. Therefore why would the same rules have to apply to the said character in a movie which is clearly proven to have huge differences to the source material already? Much like the orginal Burton Batman movie for example.

I wouldn't say Heath Ledger's Joker wasn't all that faithful. The core of the character is still there (unlike the rest of the characters.)

The only real big difference is, Heath Ledger's Joker doesn't have the permanent clown appearance. Also comic book Joker is slightly more insane and violent, but I don't think we'll ever see Joker's 100% full nature on film without it being for mature audiences only.

Mecha wrote:

EDIT: lol Jack may not read the comics, but he knows his Batman alright.

Not really, lol. I just implied that The Dark Knight Returns shows Batman's retirement as a mistake, whereas The Dark Knight Rises ends on that note and portrays it in a more positive light even though logic dictates that Bruce Wayne just basically ran away from Gotham most hastily.

Even so, you know it's out of character.

Well yeah, it's not something I'd have expected Batman to do. I mean I've been fairly open here about my feelings towards the ending on The Dark Knight Rises. Funny enough, when my friend and I left the midnight showing, he looked to the sky and yelled, "BATMAN DOESN'T FUCKING QUIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT!" Many lulz were had.

Mecha wrote:

I wouldn't say Heath Ledger's Joker wasn't all that faithful. The core of the character is still there (unlike the rest of the characters.)

How? Ra's is still Ra's, only that they changed his way of "immortality". Scarecrow is still there, they just made him realistic. Bane is probably the only one where they took big liberties with, but it's still Bane. Catwoman in TDKR is the Catwoman we all love from the comics. Harvey/Two-face they also took liberties with but they made sense.

His immortality was just way too important to the character. Ra's al Ghul was born 700 years ago in an Arabia desert. When he discovered the Lazarus Pit and went in it, he became insane. Not that he wasn't really bad before, but he became so determine to destroy cities because he believed advanced civilisations is destroying our natural way of the world. Which makes sense because he grew up without being around advanced civilisation.

As unrealistic as it may sound, it makes a lot more sense at what he does than in the film version. And I didn't even went though the whole origin either.

They didn't even mention his Arab backgrounds in the film. But I guess Nolan didn't want to offend the Arab community since Ra's al Ghul is a terrorist and all.

But there's more to Ra's than immortality. Which I think Nolan did well to show, and I think showing that the name Ra's is a legend in-itself. Which practically emphasizes the theme of symbols in Batman Begins.

Lol Yeah I think that too, and a Arab terrorist attacking a US city is a bit cliche.

Of course there is more to Ra's al Ghul than just immortality, but not as much as the comic book version. Removing his immortality took away too many things from Ra's al Ghul history.

An Arab terrorist may sound cliche, but Ra's al Ghul from the comics doesn't come off as racist at all.

Mecha wrote:

Of course there is more to Ra's al Ghul than just immortality, but not as much as the comic book version. Removing his immortality took away too many things from Ra's al Ghul history.

An Arab terrorist may sound cliche, but Ra's al Ghul from the comics doesn't come off as racist at all.

Not really. In the film it says that it was them that sacked Rome, spread the plague, and caused the depression. So the history is there, sort of.

Of course he isn't, but the general american public might not see it like that.

I feel like Batman Begins had a better story out of the three, and people only like The Dark Knight better because of The Joker.

@Mecha Why have you gone hipster? And No. Batman Begins is awesome and Iove it, but TDK has a better story.

Also does anybody else notice how different each film of the trilogy is?

Batman Begins is more of a CBM than the other two.

The Dark Knight is more of a crime thriller than the other two.

The Dark Knight Rises is moe of a suspense film than the other two.

They're the same; but yet again, different.

Hopefully, people will forget about the whole "anybody can be Batman" bullshit once they see Ben Affleck as Batman.

Anyone can be Batman = A hero can be anybody. Anyone could have been under the mask. He doesn't literally mean you or me can be THE Batman.

But how is John Blake a good replacement for Bruce Wayne? John doesn't even come close to Batman's intelligence, physical shape, fighting skills, and wealth. At least Batman was there to train all the Robins in the comics, but Nolan's Batman was just so anxious to retire. That's what made it out of character. Yes, Batman retired in the comics as well, but it was done a lot better.

The Nolan films all kinda sucked, Mecha. I don't see why you expected Batman's retirement, or his replacement, to be any different.

I didn't. I kinda already accepted the fact that Nolan's Batman wasn't as strong or as intelligent as his comic book counterpart. But by the third film, I realized how much I missed Batman being an actual badass. You know, the Batman that can take on aliens, gods, the Justice League, and even have sex for justice.

Fuck realism! Batman better kick Superman's ass in Man of Steel 2.