The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

[happydood]

Originally Posted by Arch Stanton

I thought so too, but you can tell Nolan doesn't lend himself well to visual storytelling.

Interstellar was better because Wally Pfister wasn't involved. Very mid-tier DP, imo.

I kinda don't know what to make of this. You might not like the way it looked, but to say he's not a visual storyteller is a bit extreme. It's kinda like saying Faulkner or Cormac McCarthy aren't really novelists or Bob Dylan isn't really a songwriter when if fact they're just trying to push the bounds of what those respective thing can do but are still working in those mediums. You may not like Dylan's voice or Faulkners run-on paragraphs or McCarthy's refusal to use quotation marks, but these are entirely different stylistic things. Sorry, I don't mean to be pedantic about it, but I compare all of these because Nolan is someone who clearly knows how the medium works even if you don't like what he does with it...

[StingingVelvet]

It's typical internet exaggeration. Instead of saying "I'm not a big fan of Nolan's style" people say things like "Nolan can't make a good film to save his life, he knows nothing about filmmaking, what a total waste of space."

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by Arch Stanton

I thought so too, but you can tell Nolan doesn't lend himself well to visual storytelling.

Interstellar was better because Wally Pfister wasn't involved. Very mid-tier DP, imo.

I'd put him above average, his stuff on Inception and before was all pretty good. IIRC he also did Moneyball and that looked fine. Just TDKR kinda sucked.

[Arch Stanton]

Originally Posted by happydood

I kinda don't know what to make of this. You might not like the way it looked, but to say he's not a visual storyteller is a bit extreme. It's kinda like saying Faulkner or Cormac McCarthy aren't really novelists or Bob Dylan isn't really a songwriter when if fact they're just trying to push the bounds of what those respective thing can do but are still working in those mediums. You may not like Dylan's voice or Faulkners run-on paragraphs or McCarthy's refusal to use quotation marks, but these are entirely different stylistic things. Sorry, I don't mean to be pedantic about it, but I compare all of these because Nolan is someone who clearly knows how the medium works even if you don't like what he does with it...

Yeah, I'm not quite sure how this applies to my post.

Nolan's films are not based heavily around imagery imo but more so concept and screenplay. That's why I say it doesn't lend itself as well to visuals. It's not even a criticism as so much an observation.

Just a case in point here: Inception. I like it, but I can't say it's a very visual film or has many standout images. It revolves very much around characters and quick plot-points instead. Under a different director I think it would have been a very different affair (let's say Cronenberg makes Inception).

Was Velvet's directed at me too? Because I said nothing of the sort and it would be helpful if you just took what I actually said instead of projecting generalised criticisms that OTHERS have made about Nolan.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Arch Stanton

Just a case in point here: Inception. I like it, but I can't say it's a very visual film or has many standout images.

[Pieter V]

4K Blu-ray:

https://www.amazon.de/dp/B075FPYDMD?...11&keywords=4k

[OI8T12]

Batman vs Bane.

Mumbles vs Mumble.

A good ending to the trilogy.

My favorite of the three movies.

Anne Hathaway = very lovely.

4/5

[Canada]

I am watching The Dark Knight Rises on TV, I realize something, Dolby Digital sucks.

[stvn1974]

Originally Posted by Canada

I am watching The Dark Knight Rises on TV, I realize something, Dolby Digital sucks.

So does the Dark Knight Rises.

[redxrebellion]

Originally Posted by stvn1974

So does the Dark Knight Rises.

Lol beat me too it

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by stvn1974

So does the Dark Knight Rises.

67th highest rated movie of all time on IMDB, but yeah it "sucks." Sure.

[stvn1974]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

67th highest rated movie of all time on IMDB, but yeah it "sucks." Sure.

The Dark Knight is number 4 and it also sucks.

[StingingVelvet]

Sure, why not!

[Mr. Chaverria]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

67th highest rated movie of all time on IMDB, but yeah it "sucks." Sure.

TDK is 3 now.

Still.... it's IMDB.

One can only take IMDB so serious.

------


Warrior is in the top 100 along w/ some others. Jeez.

off topic, I feel like Warrior had a chance to really be something cuz of the actors but except plays it to generic safety standard by the end.

[GuruAskew]

Originally Posted by happydood

I kinda don't know what to make of this. You might not like the way it looked, but to say he's not a visual storyteller is a bit extreme. It's kinda like saying Faulkner or Cormac McCarthy aren't really novelists or Bob Dylan isn't really a songwriter when if fact they're just trying to push the bounds of what those respective thing can do but are still working in those mediums. You may not like Dylan's voice or Faulkners run-on paragraphs or McCarthy's refusal to use quotation marks, but these are entirely different stylistic things. Sorry, I don't mean to be pedantic about it, but I compare all of these because Nolan is someone who clearly knows how the medium works even if you don't like what he does with it...

Nolan isn’t worthy of being compared to those authors or Dylan. It would be more appropriate to compare him to someone like Dean Koontz or Dan Brown. He’s also more Bob Seger than Bob Dylan.

[stvn1974]

Originally Posted by GuruAskew

Nolan isn’t worthy of being compared to those authors or Dylan. It would be more appropriate to compare him to someone like Dean Koontz or Dan Brown. He’s also more Bob Seger than Bob Dylan.

Wait a minute, someone compared Nolan to Bob Dylan and I missed it for all this time?

Are we going to compare The Last Jedi to Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band next?

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Mr. Chaverria

TDK is 3 now.

Still.... it's IMDB.

One can only take IMDB so serious.

It's a great way to see what popular film enthusiast opinion is on something. Most of their ratings make sense to me. I don't agree with them all of course, but when 1.3 million people vote on a movie and the average is in the top 70 of all time I think that means something.

Obviously tastes differ, but this crusade to label Dark Knight Rises as some kind of massive disappointment just bugs me. It's completely inaccurate.

[Jay Mammoth]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

It's a great way to see what popular film enthusiast opinion is on something. Most of their ratings make sense to me. I don't agree with them all of course, but when 1.3 million people vote on a movie and the average is in the top 70 of all time I think that means something.

Obviously tastes differ, but this crusade to label Dark Knight Rises as some kind of massive disappointment just bugs me. It's completely inaccurate.

Can’t take anyone who hates it or TDK seriously.
And I do hate Bales Batman voice, the movies themselves are great though.

[SuperFlyHighGuy]

Watched this last night, I realized I hadn't seen it since the blu-ray was released. I typically just rewatch Batman Begins out of these, occasionally Dark Knight.

I actually enjoyed it much more than the first time I saw it, I felt like I got more out of it at least. But I still feel like it's "missing something" that the first two films had, I just don't know what that is.

Maybe it never feels like it really "takes off", like there's too much exposition littered throughout, especially into the second half. I just don't like the pacing, and it's not the length I mind but I think they could've cut 15 minutes out and tightened it up. I understand why - there's four new major characters they have to get us up to speed on - but the film seems to crawl in spots.

But I like the story, the acting, the music is great at times...Catwoman is incredibly desirable without being campy. The reveal at the end is fun.

The other major issue I have though is the location - because so many scenes happen in daytime hours, it really feels like a Batman film set in New York City. That took me out of the movie quite a few times. I don't know how they could've done it differently I guess, but it's a major flaw imo. The Dark Knight also suffers from this somewhat, whereas Begins truly feels like it takes place in a fictional "Goham City".

Just another reason why Batman Begins is the best of the Nolan films, by far, to me. I'd rank them in the order of their release, but "Rises" might grow on me even more.

[koberulz]

I don't know why, but Begins has never done anything for me.

Dark Knight drags once Joker is captured.

So TDKR is my favourite of the trilogy, to be honest. Love the scene of Batman's return. I like "random guy is introduced firsthand to badass being badass" scenes in general; the rookie cop in that scene, the journalist at the station in Bourne Ultimatum, etc.