Amph Waiting For Superman: Gunnverse DCU/Elseworlds

That's a hell of a cast; I hope they also let Regina King direct an episode too, as she's turned into quite an adept TV director (someone should not be that talented!)....

 

I liked the way they envisioned Catwoman's ears. That was clever and looked really cool. But the "Blank Slate" thing is the most ridiculous McGuffin imaginable. There's a way to make a compelling character arc out of someone attempting to erase their past. Positing that complete spiritual, psychological and emotional freedom can be found on a USB drive is a kind of new twist on that character arc. But the ears are cool.

 

Great post about TDKR @Sith_Sensei_Prime!

Your analysis of Catwoman is spot on. The character is nuanced and subtle, while also being sophisticated and ruthless. And conflicted, as it were.

And Tom Hardy as Bane is one of the greatest villains in the genre, imo. His derisive, mocking tone, coupled with his fearsome appearance and no holds barred brutality gives the film a tone that crosses over into horror at times. And the look of regret and/or fear on Catwoman's face after she lures Batman into Bane's lair is priceless. So many subtle details like that.

And the ensuing fistfight between Bats and Bane is epic. The dialogue intensifies every attack. The homage to the Knightfall comic series and the breaking of the bat is so intense every single time. I'm so appreciative of Nolan and his team for taking such care throughout the trilogy to acknowledge and reference the comics.

The Dark Knight Trilogy is the gold standard in that film genre. And it ranks right up there with Lucas's two Star Wars trilogies and The Lord of the Rings trilogy, imo.

 

I didn’t realise people disliked The Dark Knight Rises. I’ve literally never heard anyone I know say it was anything less than amazing. It’s definitely my favourite in the trilogy.

 

@Jordan1Kenobi

Agreed, I'd not heard of people disliking TDKR until I started reading posts on social media. Everyone I know irl thought it was great.

Same goes for Return of the Jedi. Never knew there were so many people that have issues with that third installment in the OT until reading online comments. I've always considered ROTJ a masterpiece.

 

I really can't argue with the "Black Slate" McGuffin in terms of seeing it through the lens of "in real life," but as I noted earlier in this thread, the film earned a great level of "suspension of disbelief." And, I don't think it's that hard to imagine such a thing to exist today, with numerous reports of databases being breached and identities being stolen. I'm sure some hacker could create a virus to seek out and destroy profiles in databases.

Here's a great video regarding Tom Hardy's performance as Bane, which includes the scene were Bane just puts his hand on Dagget's shoulder to demonstrate the omnimous stature of Bane.

Sometimes I wonder if people dislike The Dark Knights Rises because of the success of The Dark Knight. I mean, The Dark Knight is widely considered a masterpiece, and therefore in comparison, Rises is a failure. Additionally, there's the backlash of the success and praise The Dark Knight received, and thus Rises received the brunt of that backlash.

That being said, I do have my issues with Rises, but I rank it higher than Begins.

Anyway, you might want to check out this video of the top moments of The Dark Knight Trilogy as the list includes a lot of scenes from The Dark Knight Rises.

 

Meme re **** Batman from the Titans trailer.

Spoiler: NSFW - Language

 

The Dark Knight Rises is an okay movie made up of mostly good to great material that never quite gels, and is occasionally bogged down by a small handful of some truly bad stuff, the inclusion of which I can only justify by assuming Nolan's waning interest in the material. The inspired casting of Hathaway as Catwoman, Hardy's performance as Bane (I think the character himself is neutered by being revealed as Talia's lacky at the end, but whatever), the fight between Batman and Bane, all of that is golden. But the decision to have Bruce go into retirement for eight year immediately following TDK feels more like one made to put some narrative distance between this film and the presence of Ledger's Joker, and less because it made sense with where Bruce/Batman's character was at the end of the second film; it feels completely inconsistent with where that movie left off. There are also a few too many hand-waved leaps in logic, the verisimilitude Nolan established in the first two films starts to bend and nearly breaks, and Talia's death remains one of the worst acted/directed scenes I've seen from an otherwise fantastic director.

That said, it's leaps and bounds better than Spider-Man 3 (which I don't think is that bad) which leaves TDKT as the most consistent superhero trilogy put to film, and given the fact that Nolan gave Batman his definitive onscreen origin story and immediately followed it up with what ten years later is still the high watermark of the superhero movie genre, I can easily forgive Rises for any of its shortcomings or missed potential. Matt Reeves has a lot to live up to.

 

It's been a long time since I got to do one of these. I don't quite remember this movie with the clarity I'd like. Anyway, though, my sleeves are officially rolled up. Some of the issues I had with TDKR:

1. Bruce Wayne Is A Horny Weirdo- The film asserts, ridiculously, that he has not left his mansion at all in several years. Apparently, this is connected to sadness about Katie Holmes. I understand loss and survivor's guilt can be devastating. But even people with certifiably crippling mental disorders don't often react this way. But certainly, none of them magically rehabilitate themselves in a few hours time after a flirty encounter with a thief. This doesn't make him seen human or grieving so much as oddly sexually obsessed to the point of implausibility. It's one of the things that lends credence to the notion that the "retirement" was indeed introduced to give more space after Ledger's death, but even if so this is not well thought out and certainly doesn't help the story in this case.

2. It's Just A Hole- When this film came out, the news of CIA black sites was still pretty recent, as I recall. Or if it came out earlier, there was Abu Ghraib. Even now, John McCain's death brings to mind the "Hanoi Hilton." Even as the general public, with little notion of how awful things can truly be, we have some vague idea of the awfulness of imprisonment. Strange, then, to try and build up a mythical, extraordinary awfulness around this one prison, and then actually show us that place. Especially when the place turned out to be quite spacious in comparison to actual prisons, have cable TV, and mostly just be a hole in the ground. Especially as it was supposed to be the origin of Bane and Talia both, it really undermined their characters to have such a torpid, unthreatening experience.

3. Forced Callbacks- I love the Ras Al Ghul stories and the Lazarus Pit. I remember them fondly from the Timm/Dini collaborations. I appreciate the attempt to do a shout out. But what was this? Did bringing back Alucard for a hallucination really serve any purpose in this story? Beyond this wink at the audience, was anything actually better for it?

And I think it's pretty clear thigs were worse. Batman Begins lays out the philosophy of the League of Shadows quite clearly. Their job is to topple evil. Their specific concern is criminality, and Bruce's original falling out with the group is over whether or not criminal's deserve due process. Yet somehow, we're supposed to believe that after Gotham has seen a massive reduction in crime--indeed, the near total elimination in organized/mafia activity--they are not only still targeting the city, but in fact their big fixation is that the law which allowed such results was unfair? Really? For the group that explicitly complained that "criminals mock societies laws" they are now getting high and mighty about the insider baseball of legislative tactics used for a municipal bill's passage? That's the hill they choose to die on?

3b. What does all this garbage about taking away hope have to do with anything? What does that have to do with ridding the world of evil of evil or criminality? Again, wasn't the whole point of the League that criminals are bad for doing this, and that therefore a just society requires someone who is willing to unflinchingly destroy such evildoers? The deliberate attempt to disillusion people--which as I recall was some sort of plot device for why it took months to detonate the bomb?--doesn't at all fit with the motives or tactics of this group as presented at any point prior to this plot-convenient juncture of the narrative.

3c. Going further still, the adoption of trendy "Occupy Wall Street" rhetoric was a bad attempt at relevance. In the first film, we are told that a huge part of Bruce's appeal was his wealth and affluence in the city. His position was "Gotham's favored son" would be an asset to the League's plans, and one they saw no problem with exploiting. There was never a suggestion that he was wrong to be so wealthy or that the structure of capitalism was inherently corrupt. So why is there suddenly such a focus on issues like income inequality, and the phoniness of charitable efforts? And circling back to why this probably wasn't done in the first place, how does this connect to how the audience is supposed to view Wayne, given that his entire capacity to operate beyond the law comes from him being an ultra-wealthy person of unlimited time (to train, to sleep in after a night of crime-fighting) and resources (for his suit, the cave, the investigations, the equipment, the cover stories)?

I could keep going. But I think I'll relent for the moment, as you see the thrust of my arguments. As Rogue1.5 encapsulated nicely with his treatment of Bane on the airplane, this film never builds towards anything coherently. Not thematically, and not narratively. It makes a lot of vague and cumulatively confused gestures towards things that could be quite intriguing. It has small flashes of brilliance in a costume design or some other insignificant detail. Then it does exactly nothing with it, and ambles on pointlessly towards its conclusion. It's really surprising, in fact, that it manages to rescue itself into mediocrity with as many outrights flaws as are on display here.

 

I still think that Marion Cotillard was napping on set and talking in her sleep, so Nolan and friends decided to film it for Talia's death scene.

 

I thought The Dark Knight Rises picked up rather well after the events of The Dark Knight; especially with everything that unfolded.

To recap the events of The Dark Knight:

• Bruce saw that Harvey Dent was Gotham's White Knight and his mission to give Gotham a symbol has been accomplished.
• With Dent's war on crime showing results, Bruce felt like he could leave Batman behind and start a life with Rachel (Kathy Holmes/Maggie Gyllenhaal).
  • 

• When Dent was kidnapped by the Joker, it exposed the corrupt cops in the Gotham City Police Department.
• Harvey Dent's death resulted in the passing of the "Dent Act" and wiping away organized crime in Gotham.
• Batman was identified by Gordon to be the killer of Harvey Dent, and thus Batman was a wanted criminal.

​

So, with organized crime gone with the passing of the Dent Act and Batman hunted by the police as the killer of Harvey Dent, Batman simply disappeared. And with death of Rachel Dawes, Bruce couldn't find a way to move on and thus becoming a recluse. There's an exchange between Bruce and Alfred that provides this information within The Dark Knight Rises:

The pain that Bruce was experiencing kind of parallels Ras Al Ghul.

​

The film reiterates that Bruce planned a life with Rachel once he hung up the cowl: Bruce "Rachel died believing that we would be together; that was my life beyond the cape. I can't just move on. She didn't, she couldn't."

The prison in Rises was more than just merely a hole, it was a metaphor for false hope and despair. It's Bruce's personal hell. Bane tells Bruce in the film:

The prisoners on Alcatraz found it torture to look at the city of San Francisco though the barred windows of the prison as they saw hope and freedom.

Since the first film, Batman Begins, hope was one of the underlying themes of Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy. Bruce came back to Gotham to be a symbol of hope.

​

So Bruce's ascent out of the prison hole was a metaphor for him rising above his despair and personal hell, as well as restoring hope within. Additionally, it provides the confidence for Bruce to confront Bane, as now he feels he's on the same level.

​

Bane's plan was for Gotham to get a sense of hope, and poison them with it while Bruce watched from his prison.

Talia's and Bane's plan to terrorize and blow up Gotham was two fold: (1) complete Ras' mission from Begins and (2) revenge her father's death as noted by this quote by Talia:

​

Yes, the League of Shadows picked Bruce Wayne to combat the corruption within the powers that be in Gotham as stated by Ra's Al Ghul, "As Gotham's favored son you will be ideally placed to strike at the heart of criminality." It was the League of Shadow's further attempt to try a more civil solution within the power structure to avoid bloodshed and the destruction of Gotham, as stated by Ra's Al Ghul in Batman Begins:

So, the call back/hallucination of Ras Al Ghul did serve a purpose, not only the before mention of Talia's and Bane's motives, but to also show the failure of Batman/Bruce in this quote:

And thus, despite organized crime being wiped out, Gotham still as a problem of poverty and hunger, to the inevitable return of crime as the rich do nothing. This notion was captured by Selina Kyle's line of, "You and your friends better batten down the hatches, because when it hits, you're all gonna wonder how you ever thought you could live so large and leave so little for the rest of us." And therefore, the "Occupy Wall Street" imagery was just to reemphasize Ras Al Ghul's line Begins where he talks about "Create enough hunger and everyone becomes a criminal."

The Dark Knight Rises is the return of Batman being the symbol of hope in Gotham.

 

rewatched Justice League again. Ezra Miller's Flash still remains a highlight in my 2nd viewing. Why can they fast-track 3 Joker movies but they can't get the Flash movie going?

Anyway, as for Dark Knight Rises, anyone notice that when they show a picture of Rachel at Bruce's house it's the Maggie Gynellhall version and not Katie Holmes?

 

https://www.google.co.jp/amp/s/screenrant.com/dc-movies-2020-overtake-marvel/amp/

 

Bruce decides to do something because Selina makes a point of telling him that **** is about to go down in Gotham and he realizes that he needs to get back in the game. This also coincides with Jim Gordon being shot and found near the sewers. As to Bruce's staying in solitary confinement, that's typical of his character. In "Batman Beyond", he rarely left Wayne Manor and only to honor his parents death. He even quit working at Wayne Enterprises and let it be taken over by Derek Powers.

The point in the pit was that there was no escape. They can see the only way out, but it is an impossible one. Not to mention that the prisoners tend to be quite vicious and brutal before Ra's killed the majority of them after Talia escaped.

The point was that Ra's told Bruce that Gotham was going to die and that he couldn't stop it, but he did. Now, in his moment of weakness, has lost to the heir apparent of Ra's al Ghul and once again, he cannot do anything to stop Gotham's demise. It is just as important for him to see this, as it is to remember Thomas rescuing him and asking "Why do we fall?"

Bane is not Ra's. His methods were different. His point was to use what Jim and Bruce feared, which was to expose the lie of Harvey Dent's final moments and use it to show how corrupt the elite and city hall had become. That is why he kept Jim's speech about Harvey and used it to create that sense of panic and fear, that Ra's would have used with the fear toxin.

It was about torturing people. Again, Bane is not Ra's. He has his own methods.

The point made in BB, was that the city had become divided into two groups. And while people were willing to look to Bruce Wayne and his family as shining examples of hope, they also looked to men like Jim Gordon and Harvey Dent to be honest and shining examples of what Gotham citizens could be. But in exposing the corruption of Jim and Harvey, Bane ignites a spark of hatred that allows the criminals out on the street and to take over. This in turn restores Gotham back to its criminal state and thus sets the stage for blowing it up. It's more of a roundabout way of recreating Gotham as it was, in order to fulfill the League's original goal.

 

I love the TDK Trilogy, including TDKR. However, I prefer Katie over Maggie. I couldn’t believe some critics didn’t see chemistry between her and Bale. And Nolan replaces her. I love TDK, maybe my favorite superhero film. But Maggie was horrible in it. And her trying to console Harvey because she’d survive. Sorority witch. Glad she died. And I rarely am happy to see someone die in a movie. Heck, Palpatine has a wicked smile and laugh. Everyone’s got something good about them—except her.

Nolan is a great director or actors. Yet, when Maggie says to Bruce, “What are you doing?” at the party the Joker crashed, that was cringeworthy.

 

I wouldn't go so far for an either/or thing but I do like Katie Holmes as Rachel more. Her speech when she's driving around Gotham with Bruce in Batman Begins kind of nails the character for me. I forget if Holmes was angling for a raise / had another movie lined up / playing hardball and they just replaced her. Don't think it was critical bashing, though.

 

Good. Filmmakers shouldn’t let critics and fans dictate to them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Katie Holmes was six thousand times better than Maggie Gyllenhaal.

 

https://www.google.co.jp/amp/s/www....n-lantern-dc-films-deadpool-blake-lively/amp/

 

https://www.google.co.jp/amp/s/amp....y-katie-holmes-left-the-batman-movies-2016-12

 

Batfleck may be finally defeated by the most insidious evil of all - Insurance!!!

https://www.thewrap.com/ben-affleck-batman-insurance-costs/

Ben Affleck’s future playing Batman on the big screen may be over — in part because the cost of insuring him may have gotten too steep, multiple industry insiders told TheWrap.

The actor, a recovering alcoholic who checked himself into rehab last week for the third time in the last two decades and the second time in just over a year, may have priced himself out of a pricey tentpole studio movie like Warner Bros.’ upcoming “The Batman.”

“More than likely the studio will replace him because the insurance costs are going to go through the roof,” a representative for a completion bond company told TheWrap.

 

Hopefully Ben Affleck is doing ok. That type of addiction is very serious and usually doesn't end well if the person suffering from the disease is unable to recover.