The Dark Knight & blood

[NARMAK]

I know they had to cut this to hit the 12a but how do you feel the inclusion would have added to it

Personally think a slight inclusion would have highly increased it's impact & immersion, a scene just begging for some was the bank manager sprayed with bullets in the opening, theres actually not a lot of scenes to add blood to but it would have been a subtle thing that completed full immersion

[Blu Man]

Originally Posted by NARMAK

I know they had to cut this to hit the 12a but how do you feel the inclusion would have added to it

Personally think a slight inclusion would have highly increased it's impact & immersion, a scene just begging for some was the bank manager sprayed with bullets in the opening, theres actually not a lot of scenes to add blood to but it would have been a subtle thing that completed full immersion

Ohh, 12a is a rating. I was trying to figure out what you where talking about in The Watchmen thread. So 12a equals PG-13. And then 15a equals R, correct? If that is so I don't think they should have added blood. I mean it's Batman, 6 year olds want to see this. And they wouldn't be able to make toys for this film because it is R. I think that PG-13 is a perfect rating for a Batman film.

[NARMAK]

Originally Posted by Spartan54

Ohh, 12a is a rating. I was trying to figure out what you where talking about in The Watchmen thread. So 12a equals PG-13. And then 15a equals R, correct? If that is so I don't think they should have added blood. I mean it's Batman, 6 year olds want to see this. And they wouldn't be able to make toys for this film because it is R. I think that PG-13 is a perfect rating for a Batman film.

You have to understand, here in the UK, there is a multi age rating system by our MPAA equivalent the BBFC

U - universal
PG - parental guidance
12A - Any children under 12 must be accompanies by a parent or legal guardian
15 - nobody under 15
18 - nobody under 18

So here it would have got a 15 but i guess it sounds like the MPAA only has two

[Blu Man]

Originally Posted by NARMAK

You have to understand, here in the UK, there is a multi age rating system by our MPAA equivalent the BBFC

U - universal
PG - parental guidance
12A - Any children under 12 must be accompanies by a parent or legal guardian
15 - nobody under 15
18 - nobody under 18

So here it would have got a 15 but i guess it sounds like the MPAA only has two

We have: G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17.

[demoni]

Originally Posted by Spartan54

We have: G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17.

And we need more NC-17 movies!!!!!

[Red Hood]

The movie is good, seeing something red isn't going to make the story or the visuals anymore better.

[Blu Man]

Originally Posted by demoni

And we need more NC-17 movies!!!!!

You need more NC-17 movies.

[NARMAK]

Originally Posted by Pyre

The movie is good, seeing something red isn't going to make the story or the visuals anymore better.

So, i suppose by that logic, you think it gives the same impact without, i disagree, a realistic take on batman like Nolan's would have benefitted from slight blood to ground it even more realistically

[Red Hood]

To be honest I think the guy in the bank was so bad ass he didn't have time to bleed.

[Blu Man]

Originally Posted by Pyre

To be honest I think the guy in the bank was so bad ass he didn't have time to bleed.

Nice. And their shouldn't be blood in this film.

[NARMAK]

Originally Posted by Spartan54

Nice. And their shouldn't be blood in this film.

Personally, this is all hypothetical & asks how you personally would have liked it

I understand the whole need to draw the whole box office audience as a company but feel it would have been nice to have some blood included

[Blu Jacket]

A great movie is a great movie whether or not it has blood and gore in it.

[Blu Man]

Originally Posted by Blu Jacket

A great movie is a great movie whether or not it has blood and gore in it.

Well said.

[NARMAK]

Originally Posted by Blu Jacket

A great movie is a great movie whether or not it has blood and gore in it.

Not if the movie needed the blood to help excel it there in the first place

Godfather wouldn't have been as great without, or scarface

[Moefiz]

NC-17...do they still use that Rating now...seem that they trim the movie to get a PG13 rating and when its release on DVD you get the Unrated Edition or something like "too raw for theaters"

Back on topic...TDK..had to be PG13...too many kids wanted to see this movie and with a R rating would have cut there audience in half.

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by Spartan54

Ohh, 12a is a rating. I was trying to figure out what you where talking about in The Watchmen thread. So 12a equals PG-13. And then 15a equals R, correct? If that is so I don't think they should have added blood. I mean it's Batman, 6 year olds want to see this. And they wouldn't be able to make toys for this film because it is R. I think that PG-13 is a perfect rating for a Batman film.

Haven't you ever seen Punisher action figures? You think he's good subject matter for children? A lot of people who buy those things aren't even children. Oh and by the way, there are action figures of Thomas Jane as The Punisher from the 2004 film (which was rated R). I don't care to hunt for them right now, but I'd wager they already have action figures for the new Punisher movie, which is also rated R.

I figured what they were gonna do would be an unrated release on home video. That way they can have a little more violence or whatever without the stigma attached of "no one will see this if it's rated R". I guess when they inevitably double dip it in a few years or whatever, they might do that I suppose.

And really, Batman is not good subject material for children, ESPECIALLY this incarnation of Batman. If any visual medium adaptation of Batman is not for children, it's this one. If the kiddies want their Batman, they needn't look to the Nolan films; they should stick to that Bold and the Brave cartoon or maybe have a look at the '90s animated series or the Burton films at best. Seriously, pick up a Batman comic some time and tell me that's something for little kids.

They're definitely taking it darker and harder though. Maybe for the next one they'll be willing to take the artistic plunge and do an R rated adaptation. I mean, second highest grossing film of all time here, if there's an interest in Nolan to push the limit, after TDK would be the best place to try for it. Personally, I think it's silly to tailor your film around the rating system. I can see why it's needed for theatrical release, but they can do unrated releases on home video so easily.

Originally Posted by Pyre

The movie is good, seeing something red isn't going to make the story or the visuals anymore better.

Some of the terribleness of the violence is dulled by lack of blood. When the violent act appears right there on screen, it makes sense to see blood, such as the opening sequence at the bank. In cases like the Joker's magic pencil or the "why so serious" scene, the blood would be largely or entirely offscreen, so not seeing it actually adds to the tension. If they used an alternate angle on those scenes with violence offcamera, it would just be gratuitous though. If they do put together an R or unrated release, I hope they just take what they've already got and add blood and maybe change the sound effects if it works better with a more violent sound.

[NARMAK]

Thanks for the points afrobean, all well made & true

I don't think theres need for extreme amounts of blood but really obvious scenes like a man getting shot in full view without blood personally detracted somewhat from the realism & immersion

Some scenes afrobean mentioned are such that blood wouldn't be necessary like the 'why so serious' bit as it is obscure rather than obvious

Also as mentioned, the subject material is inherently dark & not child friendly