PT The Blockbuster Double Standard

The first film stressed that Thomas Wayne was perfectly happy to build a "cheap" monorail and then leave the running of his company to "more interested men", while he intermittently spent time as a physician, buying his wife expensive jewelery, patronizing his son after traumatic events and going to operas.

A board member loyal to Thomas Wayne, or the old ways, objects to "heavy arms manufacture" under Thomas Wayne's successor, but that doesn't account for items like the tumbler, or the survival suit, or the small bombs, all of which Lucius Fox seems quite proud of and/or sad that they're just sitting around, as a constant reminder that some projects never found favour with the military for budgetary reasons after Wayne Enterprises spent all that time and money developing them. The early prison/flashback scenes with Bruce Wayne also make it clear that Wayne Enterprises is international in scope, farming labour and manufacturing costs to China. A further detail that comes to light, at the end of this big act, from the lips of Alfred Pennyworth, is that Thomas Wayne "nearly bankrupted" Wayne Enterprises, which would have cost a lot of jobs and damaged financial support schemes (e.g., pensions) and the like. Enlightened aristocrats?

Even leaving that argument aside, Batman does more than brutalize gangsters -- he also attacks copy-cat vigilantes with an alarming lack of subtlety or finesse, and he endangers the lives of cops and ordinary citizens with his insane driving and casual rocket-firing when controlling the tumbler and batpod (purchased separately!). In "Begins", he also hands the tumbler over to Gordon, a low-level cop, who proceeds to drive it very clumsily, then willfully shoots down the support structures of the monorail, creating explosions in a built-up area and sending girders into surrounding buildings (also triggering a fatal train crash). In TDK, Batman also performs extraordinary rendition and spies on millions of people (he also has access to confidential police and medical records). There doesn't appear to be any commentary or subversive presentation of any of this by Nolan. On the contrary, the notion that Batman has "one rule", in TDK, is emphasized, and key decisions are presented with sappy piano music or sad strings. I dunno. All a bit "rich" for me (pun intended).

I prefer quoting Bale's on-set rant from "Terminator Salvation", now and again. "**** sake, man, you am-a-chugh!"

 

Ladies and gents: If you're gonna get owned, make sure it's by the best.

"I will diminish, and go into the West and remain drg4."

 

Well, I don't know about that, but thank you!

 

@ Cryogenic and drg4

 

That suspiciously fails to answer the question, but let's pretend that we've identified the pro-criminal viewpoint as "vile". Let's look at what we have so far. It's wrong to insist that nothing be done about criminals, but apparently much more wrong to try to get them off the streets. So what's left? Stern admonishment? The lateral waving of an index finger, perhaps?

Burton's film doesn't smirk at the very idea of justice.

Nolan explores the same topics, possibly even by following Burton's lead. The word "Burton" can be replaced by "Nolan" in the above without substantially diminishing the accuracy of the statement.

 

I'll take Jar Jar over Christian Bale grunting any day!

 

YAY!

 

He's the hero the Internet needs, but not the one it deserves right now. So we'll hate him because he can take it. Because he's not our hero. He's a bumbling frog, a clumsy Nabooian. A Jedi Knight.

 

My secret fantasy is when (hopefully) Star Wars: Underworld sees the light of day we are introduced to this badass Gungan soldier for hire; he's covered in scars (maybe even missing an eyestalk) and wields some nasty Gungan weaponry. He eventually becomes a key figure, and hero of the early Rebel Alliance killing Stormtroopers and bounty hunters and leading the fight against the Empire...

Eventually his identity is revealed..... General Jar Jar Binks!

The Bashers would go apoplectic....


I can dream!



Yancy

 

FROM COMINGSOON.NET:Fox and Lucasfilm's Star Wars: Episode I The Phantom Menace 3D came in at number four with $23 million from 2,655 theaters. The re-release added another $20.5 million internationally for a global debut of $43.5 million.

Read more: Record Weekend: The Vow Tops with $41.7M, Safe House Takes $39.3M - ComingSoon.net http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=86977#ixzz1mDfOBStl

 

I agree with you about Elle Fanning (not sure why everyone raves about her) but Joel Courtney acted circles around Lloyd and pretty much any other child actor in the prequels. Amazing, considering it was his first professional acting role of any kind.

But back on topic, it always amazes me when people dismiss the very real achievements of the prequels (special effects, score, world building, action, multi-layered storytelling) because of problems with the acting and dialogue, while simultaneously praising equally flawed movies that are far less impressive.

Avatar is a good example. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed it. But why were people able to overlook that film's flaws (an overly-familiar story, terrible dialogue, no humour, a charisma-free lead) because of its visuals and action, but couldn't do the same with the prequels? Everyone raved about how amazing the world of Pandora was. Well, Lucas and his team created over a dozen new planets that were just as impressive. Yet the prequels don't have a single Oscar to show for it. BS.