The Avengers vs The Dark Knight Rises

[Dragon Lee]

no-brainer for me: Batman & Robin

[johnchatzo]

Originally Posted by bluearth

Let me count the likeable characters in The Avengers

Hulk
Iron Man
Nick Fury
Black Widow
Captain America
Thor
Hawkeye
Agent Phil Coulson

Even Loki had Charisma

Let me count the likeable characters in Rises

0

So, its not better in ever aspect, unless of course, you are willing to elaborate

Since when are more likeable characters better than the ones that are better written and acted? and Loki was the best thing in the Avengers for me...and Batman has better characters.

Anyway i just think TDKR is by far better ( i enjoyed Avengers aswell but it was more of an event/fun movie)..

[bluearth]

Originally Posted by johnchatzo

Since when are more likeable characters better than the ones that are better written and acted? and Loki was the best thing in the Avengers for me...and Batman has better characters.

Anyway i just think TDKR is by far better ( i enjoyed Avengers aswell but it was more of an event/fun movie)..

A difference of opinion, but I'm curious, when did being a "fun" movie become a bad thing? Do you want every movie to be dark and depressing?

[johnchatzo]

Originally Posted by bluearth

A difference of opinion, but I'm curious, when did being a "fun" movie become a bad thing? Do you want every movie to be dark and depressing?

I had a terrific time watching Avengers and i love watching all kinds of movies.I'm not a snob that only likes serious movies.I gave Avengers 8.You think that's bad? I'm just saying that i felt TDKR was superior.

[NARMAK]

Originally Posted by bluearth

Steven Spielberg has been making movies for 40 years and he has 1 movie in the top 25 on IMDB. This is the same guy who made ET, Close Encounters, Jurassic Park, Indiana Jones, the list just goes on and on.

Nolan has been directing for 10 years and he already has 3 top 25 IMDB movies?

Making movies that entertain people and movies that people who compile these lists are two completely seperate things. It all depends on what that particular institute is looking to include. Nolan in his 10 years has done much better than probably any other director out there. Spielberg on the other hand has been involved in quite a few flops. If you watch a Nolan film, you can guarantee you'll have to engage your brain at some point or most of it to understand complex plot mechanics. Spielberg mostly panders to the audience and simplifies everything and there is something to be said for that being successfull in movies that you listed where it's appropriate but critics are by their natures people that crave something that can intellectually challenge them while entertaining them. Nolan is a critics director very much so than almost any other director before him.

I think Nolan movies on the whole have been brilliant while Spielberg has missed quite a few beats. Same with Lucas. Scorcese is probably one of my other favourite directors out there and there are some other notable mentions but i'm sure i won't like everything or the majority from everybody, just an exceptional view and possibly, Spielberg would be on that list alongside Nolan and Scorcese.

[Clark Kent]

Nolan's scripts are really working on a different level than the current dreck the rest of Hollywood is churning out for its blockbusters. They are far more focused and polished, with much tighter plotting than your average movie.

[Yoku]

Originally Posted by bluearth

The Avengers has Rises covered by 6 points on RT right now as well

Avengers was unlike any super hero movie before it.

Bascailly Avengers is Fantastic Four or Transformers with a excellent script, far better director, and a good cast to back-it up. In the former movies, we did not have solo movies for individual chracters. So I don't believe Avengers was 'unlike' before.

Rises felt like a tired retread of "The Dark Knight".

Some might just feel the same about after Avengers 2 or Avengers 3 and with the line of other Marvel movies for god-knows-how-long.

It gets a pass though because Nolan's fans thinks he takes comic book/hero movies to the next level with "realism" (yeah right) and more realistic characters, all of which aren't needed in hero/comic book movies.

The reason 'The Dark Knight' became iconic is because of the same reason you mentioned (also because of a formidable villain). People accepted that movie, so 'realism' not required for a comic book movie is no more valid.

FYI, I voted 'Like Them Both Equally'. I cannot decide which movie i like more and each time i compare these 2 i get lost . If the poll was 'Avengers' vs "The Dark Knight', i would have selected TDK for sure.
Somewhere down the line, there will be better movies than Avengers (Avengers 2 or Iron Man 3), but it will be difficult for comic book movies to emulate the kind of success TDK had.

[AndyD]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

Nolan's scripts are really working on a different level than the current dreck the rest of Hollywood is churning out for its blockbusters. They are far more focused and polished, with much tighter plotting than your average movie.

I don't think that applies to TDKR. Aside from the actual plot holes themselves, the script/story wasn't in any way complex. In fact, it falls in line with a lot of Hollywood movies. Just my opinion.

[bootsy]

Originally Posted by andydlp

I don't think that applies to TDKR. Aside from the actual plot holes themselves, the script/story wasn't in any way complex. In fact, it falls in line with a lot of Hollywood movies. Just my opinion.

I definitely disagree with this. You say it falls in line with a lot of Hollywood movies. I'd like to know that list of movies that are like TDKR. TDKR's storyline was very complex or else you wouldn't have the critics like you who keep bringing up plot holes all the time.

[tob]

Originally Posted by bootsy

I definitely disagree with this. You say it falls in line with a lot of Hollywood movies. I'd like to know that list of movies that are like TDKR. TDKR's storyline was very complex or else you wouldn't have the critics like you who keep bringing up plot holes all the time.

I agree

[Dragon Lee]

For me, I left TDKR feeling mildly underwhelmed while I left Avengers so pumped up I had to watch it again the next night so for me, Avengers bests TDKR easily.

[beadelf]

Originally Posted by bluearth

Let me count the likeable characters in The Avengers

Hulk
Iron Man
Nick Fury
Black Widow
Captain America
Thor
Hawkeye
Agent Phil Coulson

Even Loki had Charisma

Let me count the likeable characters in Rises

0

So, its not better in ever aspect, unless of course, you are willing to elaborate

opinions stated as fact

I find iron man a complete tool, not likeable in any form
black widow and hawkeye bland in the film. nothing to like or dislike
Hulk the only stand out character in the film.

I enjoyed the film but lets face it the movie is one jumped-up firework display of a toy advert!

[bluearth]

Originally Posted by beadelf

I enjoyed the film but lets face it the movie is one jumped-up firework display of a toy advert!

[khan1670]

Hmm.... let's think about this, Hathaways Catwoman is an obviously skilled thief who is also clearly trained at fighting (very much like in the comics).

She also doesn't quite outsmart everyone as she gets caught trying to leave Gotham.

Pfeiffers Catwoman was a freaking timid secretary with zero training who got dropped out of a building and suddenly started running around in a cat outfit.
Small wonder she'd get hurt........

Originally Posted by bluearth

I had no problem with the "catwoman" costume in Rises. I just disliked how the character was a "invincible karate master that cant be touched and outsmarts everyone" cliche. Quite the difference from Pfeiffer's Catwoman which got hurt badly several times in Batman Returns

[Col. Zombie]

I loved TDKR, but I enjoyed The Avengers more, so I had to pick The Avengers.

[Tony208]

You guys do realize TDKR had a James Bond plot where the villain leaves the hero alive right? Please stop saying realistic or complex.

[Yoku]

Originally Posted by Tony208

You guys do realize TDKR had a James Bond plot where the villain leaves the hero alive right? Please stop saying realistic or complex.

You do realize that Avengers is basically Transformers with superheroes. TDKR is more complex compared to Avengers.

[42041]

I voted TDKR earlier but I'm starting to rethink it. I can't say I'm a huge fan of either film...

Avengers has sharper writing and much better pacing, and I think a more appropriate take on superhero material versus the ponderous angst of TDKR. "Realism" and a man wearing bat ears and fighting crime are just fundamentally incompatible in my mind. Every one of Nolan's movies has had that bit of dissonance. But while Avengers is fun, there's just not much there. Everything is very by-the-book, low-risk, no surprises, no compelling antagonist, the whole third act was basically straight out of Transformers 3, low-stakes CGI brawling in a city.

TDKR just feels better made and more original to me; it has some very effective sequences, and I like that it doesn't rely on corny CGI critters. But it's also unfocused, has serious structural problems and lots of flab: scenes that seem to go nowhere, dull characters, whole sideplots that could be excised without losing anything important. Bruce Wayne's whole angsty inner conflict that eats up half the first act is completely uninteresting to me as a viewer. It also drops the ball towards the end,

[Show spoiler]briefly introducing and killing off a completely unnecessary villain

and then tying things up in a very trite, unimaginative way.

[CZAR]

Originally Posted by Yoku

You do realize that Avengers is basically Transformers with superheroes. TDKR is more complex compared to Avengers.

I disagree with this, however Transformers is a great film so thats not an insult anyway if thats what u were trying to do. I was actually sorta blown away when I saw the first Transformers. I do admit the sequels werent nearly as good but the first film ranks very high with me. Got Em!!

[bluearth]

Originally Posted by khan1670

... she gets caught trying to leave Gotham.

I'm surprised she didn't want to get caught, seeing how that's the very unrealistic theme of Nolan's "realistic" villains

A mercenary living in the sewers with a Darth Vader mask hijacks an entire city with his rag tag group of thugs? Maybe Nolan's genius is getting people to believe it's all possible. For that I applaud him.

Nolan's trilogy only eclipses most previous comic book movies in scale. Burton's Penguin wants to become mayor, Nolan's Bayne wants to nuke a city. One story is not more complex then the other, both have back stories and side plots. People see Burton's stylized world and characters tend to believe Nolan's trilogy is more realistic subconsciously because they see his characters in a contemporary looking Gotham that could pass for New York City.

Simply, Nolan puts a few blinders on top of his comic book movies that most cannot or dont want to see through.

Many applaud Nolan for that. I don't. His Batman movies would have been much better if he just accepted them for what they are, instead of trying to mold them into something that pleases movie critics. I've been watching Batman The Animated Adventures lately and marveled over the unique and oddball villains that would never be possible in the Nolanverse. The Ventriloquist is one villain that could never exist in Nolan's Batman movies, highlighting how far he's veered from the comics.

Come to think of it, Superman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, all would not be possible in Nolan's universe so that just highlights how flawed it is IMO.