RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews



Message


Rob -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:01:41 PM)

I haven't seen The Dark Knight Rises yet so I won't comment but to call all billionaires self-serving is at best a sweeping generalisation. Buffett and Gates immediately spring to mind.

As for the Dark Knight though, and as Girv says, it's not an endorsement as much as it is a comment. It's also pretty balanced in my opinion. Fox states that the technology is wrong and is too powerful for one man and ultimately destroys it, when Dent talks about suspending civil liberties - Rachel brings him to task.

I think the films warrant discussion about their themes and message but I also think they are good enough and considered enough to stand up to accusations of endorsing "fascistic neo-con right wing politics".




bennyboy1971 -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:02:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

Then why use the context he does for the films? Why try to give any kind of 'real' grounding? Why include issues of import to the real world, such as some of the examples shown above?

If you think that's just superfluous decoration to a few loud bangs, I think you're doing a disservice to the filmmakers.



I dunno - he's probably got some brains and a moral conscience as well as aspirations to making great art, and when they offered him Batman he had to find a way to sleep at night on his giant pillow of money.




bennyboy1971 -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:03:27 PM)

double post




fiercehairdo -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:11:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Woger


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo

OK, I'm sure this post is gonna get the Nolan fanboy's foaming at the mouth but it has to be said...

Read this short article which sums up Nolan's Bat Franchise strong tendency to endorse very iffy Right-Wing politics: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2012/jul/17/dark-knight-rises-capitalist-superhero

I completely agree with this piece.

The truth is, The Dark Knight endorsed torture, Extraordinary Rendition, phone-tapping and mass invasion of privacy by the film's 'hero'. It endorsed suspending peoples rights in the cause of fighting terrorism. In other words it endorsed the fascistic neo-con right wing politics of Bush, Cheney et al.

The Dark Knight Rises portrays the Billionaire as the good guy, imposing his will on the anarchic masses (read Occupy movement) who are in fact in thrall to criminal thugs like Bane. Anyone watching the news lately cannot have failed to have notice that in reality the billionaires (Murdoch, Diamond etc) of the world rarely are operating for the wider good and the protesting masses (Occupy movement) very often have justice and moral good on their side. TDKR inverts this view to billionaires good, protesting masses bad.

In other words it just continues and emphasises the deeply retrograde, conservative, right wing politics of the previous film.

Yes they are very slick, quite exciting and stylish films. BUT if we are going to take them seriously as great movies please lets not ignore the wider message of the films: that human rights and laws can be suspended by the wealthy if they believe what they do is right; that vigilante action is justifiable; that torturers are heroes when operating with the right intentions; that capitalist wealth domination is a force for good and movements like Occupy need to be suppressed. A pretty depressing agenda in my view.

I know many are going to reply "it's just a fantasy; it's just a film about a man dressed as a bat - don't take it too seriously". But frankly those same people are often the ones comparing these films to The Godfather and Citizen Kane - are we taking them seriously or not??? Indeed Nolan and his collaborators seem to be taking it VERY seriously hence the portentous tone of the franchise. If it is a masterpiece as people claim it should be seriously examined, and if it is ultimately pushing a very conservative agenda on audiences under the disguise of stunning action and various bat-gadgets well that needs exposing. Especially since the mass love-in of Nolan has now got completely out of hand.

Bring on the attacks...


It doesn't endorse all of them.

Batman beats the Joker up and it amounts to nothing.
Batman uses the sonic technology but Fox stands up to him.

The movie isn't about endorsement  - it is about what are the limits people are willing to go to protect their society. Nolan tests the various ideas that underpinned the War on Terror. In some instances it works,  in most it doesn't. It is hardly an endorsement of the Bush culture but rather a mirror to it. Big difference.


Correct me if I'm wrong but in the 1989 Batman didn't he bomb an entire factory and do much similar stuff to these current films, only difference being the latest films tend to be set against more realistic contemporary backgrounds.
I wonder does fiercehairdo get worked up as much with Michael Moores films and their agenda?



Fox stands up to the phone-tapping thing but it's a pretty empty gesture since he actively collaborated in the rendition of the guy from Hong Kong and most of Batman's other dodgy tactics. The film just wanted to have its cake and eat it - condemn it then indulge in it.

And the Rendition, torture of Maroney and phone-tapping/survellance is shown to work and the presentation of Batman as a hero for using these methods amounts to endorsement. Even his one moral code about not killing is undermined in the end by Batman killing Harvey Dent. Morally, the best that can be said about these films is they are very confused, and the worst that they amount to right-wing propaganda.

And yes of course lots of Hollywood produce is rightwing violent dumbness. But then that stuff isn't usually held up as a masterpiece of art that we should take seriously. I'm just applying the judgement criteria I'd apply to any great work of cinema - look at the deeper meanings and give them due consideration. The more one thinks about these films rather than just revelling in the stylish action, the more they become very questionable.




Woger -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:19:42 PM)

Whatever, if a tea party nut job came along and dissected somethign he saw as a commie sub plot he'd be laughed at.
I do look forward to an alternate version where batman and joker try to resolve their differences on the twiteerverse, #awesome




fiercehairdo -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:23:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

Then why use the context he does for the films? Why try to give any kind of 'real' grounding? Why include issues of import to the real world, such as some of the examples shown above?

If you think that's just superfluous decoration to a few loud bangs, I think you're doing a disservice to the filmmakers.



Completely agree. People constantly want it both ways- to take it seriously as high-art and meaningful deep stuff by a great cinematic genius - but then say in defence "it's just comic book fun, it's just a movie, don't take it too seriously"... If we're gonna treat it like Transformers - empty spectacle- then go ahead. But frankly all I hear from most is comparisons to the greatest films of all time. If that is the case it needs to stand up to scrutiny. And personally, the implicit very dodgy politics as well as the numerous plot holes means it doesn't stand up to scrutiny very well.




Rgirvan44 -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:38:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Woger


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo

OK, I'm sure this post is gonna get the Nolan fanboy's foaming at the mouth but it has to be said...

Read this short article which sums up Nolan's Bat Franchise strong tendency to endorse very iffy Right-Wing politics: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2012/jul/17/dark-knight-rises-capitalist-superhero

I completely agree with this piece.

The truth is, The Dark Knight endorsed torture, Extraordinary Rendition, phone-tapping and mass invasion of privacy by the film's 'hero'. It endorsed suspending peoples rights in the cause of fighting terrorism. In other words it endorsed the fascistic neo-con right wing politics of Bush, Cheney et al.

The Dark Knight Rises portrays the Billionaire as the good guy, imposing his will on the anarchic masses (read Occupy movement) who are in fact in thrall to criminal thugs like Bane. Anyone watching the news lately cannot have failed to have notice that in reality the billionaires (Murdoch, Diamond etc) of the world rarely are operating for the wider good and the protesting masses (Occupy movement) very often have justice and moral good on their side. TDKR inverts this view to billionaires good, protesting masses bad.

In other words it just continues and emphasises the deeply retrograde, conservative, right wing politics of the previous film.

Yes they are very slick, quite exciting and stylish films. BUT if we are going to take them seriously as great movies please lets not ignore the wider message of the films: that human rights and laws can be suspended by the wealthy if they believe what they do is right; that vigilante action is justifiable; that torturers are heroes when operating with the right intentions; that capitalist wealth domination is a force for good and movements like Occupy need to be suppressed. A pretty depressing agenda in my view.

I know many are going to reply "it's just a fantasy; it's just a film about a man dressed as a bat - don't take it too seriously". But frankly those same people are often the ones comparing these films to The Godfather and Citizen Kane - are we taking them seriously or not??? Indeed Nolan and his collaborators seem to be taking it VERY seriously hence the portentous tone of the franchise. If it is a masterpiece as people claim it should be seriously examined, and if it is ultimately pushing a very conservative agenda on audiences under the disguise of stunning action and various bat-gadgets well that needs exposing. Especially since the mass love-in of Nolan has now got completely out of hand.

Bring on the attacks...


It doesn't endorse all of them.

Batman beats the Joker up and it amounts to nothing.
Batman uses the sonic technology but Fox stands up to him.

The movie isn't about endorsement  - it is about what are the limits people are willing to go to protect their society. Nolan tests the various ideas that underpinned the War on Terror. In some instances it works,  in most it doesn't. It is hardly an endorsement of the Bush culture but rather a mirror to it. Big difference.


Correct me if I'm wrong but in the 1989 Batman didn't he bomb an entire factory and do much similar stuff to these current films, only difference being the latest films tend to be set against more realistic contemporary backgrounds.
I wonder does fiercehairdo get worked up as much with Michael Moores films and their agenda?



Fox stands up to the phone-tapping thing but it's a pretty empty gesture since he actively collaborated in the rendition of the guy from Hong Kong and most of Batman's other dodgy tactics. The film just wanted to have its cake and eat it - condemn it then indulge in it.

And the Rendition, torture of Maroney and phone-tapping/survellance is shown to work and the presentation of Batman as a hero for using these methods amounts to endorsement. Even his one moral code about not killing is undermined in the end by Batman killing Harvey Dent. Morally, the best that can be said about these films is they are very confused, and the worst that they amount to right-wing propaganda.

And yes of course lots of Hollywood produce is rightwing violent dumbness. But then that stuff isn't usually held up as a masterpiece of art that we should take seriously. I'm just applying the judgement criteria I'd apply to any great work of cinema - look at the deeper meanings and give them due consideration. The more one thinks about these films rather than just revelling in the stylish action, the more they become very questionable.


The film time and again questions the motivations of Batman - "You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain" does't just apply to Dent.

The challenges you to consider the War on Terror - and just because it suggests that some of the immoral actions can lead to results doesn't make it an endorsement. Look what happens to our hereos - Batman loses the woman he loves; Dent also loses her and becomes disformed and Gordon has his family kidanpped and threatened. Hardly a great victory for them.

Time and again there actions prove to be ineffective against the Joker. It is through the people of Gotham showing their goodness, does the Jokers plan unravel.

As for Batman killing Dent. Is is really murder to stop someone from killing another? Batman threw him over-  but I doubt he anticpated the fall and so on. I think there is a code...but it has limits. The life of an innocent kid, or the life of Dent - that was the dice he was dealt with.

You are also wanting to have your cake and eat it. You want to explore the themes, but only with the angle of it being a right wing fantasy, when it is far more complex than that. Unless you are suggesting blockbusters shouldn't look at these issues, and balance them up, and challenge audiences?

And by the by - when did films with a right wing slant become bad full stop? Are left leaning films somehow better? It is about how the issues are explored and what measures are used. In the Dark Knight the Bush stuff is in there, but to focus soley on that is to ignore the other side of the coin.




Spaldron -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:41:19 PM)

Yay its gotten political now. [:D]




Rgirvan44 -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:42:14 PM)

Actually you said all this stuff years ago on Empire.

Look - here is the thread you started about it - http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=1969465




fiercehairdo -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:47:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Woger


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo

OK, I'm sure this post is gonna get the Nolan fanboy's foaming at the mouth but it has to be said...

Read this short article which sums up Nolan's Bat Franchise strong tendency to endorse very iffy Right-Wing politics: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2012/jul/17/dark-knight-rises-capitalist-superhero

I completely agree with this piece.

The truth is, The Dark Knight endorsed torture, Extraordinary Rendition, phone-tapping and mass invasion of privacy by the film's 'hero'. It endorsed suspending peoples rights in the cause of fighting terrorism. In other words it endorsed the fascistic neo-con right wing politics of Bush, Cheney et al.

The Dark Knight Rises portrays the Billionaire as the good guy, imposing his will on the anarchic masses (read Occupy movement) who are in fact in thrall to criminal thugs like Bane. Anyone watching the news lately cannot have failed to have notice that in reality the billionaires (Murdoch, Diamond etc) of the world rarely are operating for the wider good and the protesting masses (Occupy movement) very often have justice and moral good on their side. TDKR inverts this view to billionaires good, protesting masses bad.

In other words it just continues and emphasises the deeply retrograde, conservative, right wing politics of the previous film.

Yes they are very slick, quite exciting and stylish films. BUT if we are going to take them seriously as great movies please lets not ignore the wider message of the films: that human rights and laws can be suspended by the wealthy if they believe what they do is right; that vigilante action is justifiable; that torturers are heroes when operating with the right intentions; that capitalist wealth domination is a force for good and movements like Occupy need to be suppressed. A pretty depressing agenda in my view.

I know many are going to reply "it's just a fantasy; it's just a film about a man dressed as a bat - don't take it too seriously". But frankly those same people are often the ones comparing these films to The Godfather and Citizen Kane - are we taking them seriously or not??? Indeed Nolan and his collaborators seem to be taking it VERY seriously hence the portentous tone of the franchise. If it is a masterpiece as people claim it should be seriously examined, and if it is ultimately pushing a very conservative agenda on audiences under the disguise of stunning action and various bat-gadgets well that needs exposing. Especially since the mass love-in of Nolan has now got completely out of hand.

Bring on the attacks...


It doesn't endorse all of them.

Batman beats the Joker up and it amounts to nothing.
Batman uses the sonic technology but Fox stands up to him.

The movie isn't about endorsement  - it is about what are the limits people are willing to go to protect their society. Nolan tests the various ideas that underpinned the War on Terror. In some instances it works,  in most it doesn't. It is hardly an endorsement of the Bush culture but rather a mirror to it. Big difference.


Correct me if I'm wrong but in the 1989 Batman didn't he bomb an entire factory and do much similar stuff to these current films, only difference being the latest films tend to be set against more realistic contemporary backgrounds.
I wonder does fiercehairdo get worked up as much with Michael Moores films and their agenda?



Fox stands up to the phone-tapping thing but it's a pretty empty gesture since he actively collaborated in the rendition of the guy from Hong Kong and most of Batman's other dodgy tactics. The film just wanted to have its cake and eat it - condemn it then indulge in it.

And the Rendition, torture of Maroney and phone-tapping/survellance is shown to work and the presentation of Batman as a hero for using these methods amounts to endorsement. Even his one moral code about not killing is undermined in the end by Batman killing Harvey Dent. Morally, the best that can be said about these films is they are very confused, and the worst that they amount to right-wing propaganda.

And yes of course lots of Hollywood produce is rightwing violent dumbness. But then that stuff isn't usually held up as a masterpiece of art that we should take seriously. I'm just applying the judgement criteria I'd apply to any great work of cinema - look at the deeper meanings and give them due consideration. The more one thinks about these films rather than just revelling in the stylish action, the more they become very questionable.


The film time and again questions the motivations of Batman - "You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain" does't just apply to Dent.

The challenges you to consider the War on Terror - and just because it suggests that some of the immoral actions can lead to results doesn't make it an endorsement. Look what happens to our hereos - Batman loses the woman he loves; Dent also loses her and becomes disformed and Gordon has his family kidanpped and threatened. Hardly a great victory for them.

Time and again there actions prove to be ineffective against the Joker. It is through the people of Gotham showing their goodness, does the Jokers plan unravel.

As for Batman killing Dent. Is is really murder to stop someone from killing another? Batman threw him over-  but I doubt he anticpated the fall and so on. I think there is a code...but it has limits. The life of an innocent kid, or the life of Dent - that was the dice he was dealt with.

You are also wanting to have your cake and eat it. You want to explore the themes, but only with the angle of it being a right wing fantasy, when it is far more complex than that. Unless you are suggesting blockbusters shouldn't look at these issues, and balance them up, and challenge audiences?

And by the by - when did films with a right wing slant become bad full stop? Are left leaning films somehow better? It is about how the issues are explored and what measures are used. In the Dark Knight the Bush stuff is in there, but to focus soley on that is to ignore the other side of the coin.


I take your point on a lot of this. But ultimately I do think the film does come down on the Bush/Cheney side of things - something I personally find hard to swallow. Furthermore, right-wing biased films aren't necessarily bad full stop, but I would say films endorsing torture are promoting a very bad idea. Full stop. No question, that is a very dodgy message in any film, but in a comic book based film aimed at young people and children - very, very iffy in my opinion. But feel free to defend torture endorsing movies 'cause they're exciting - thousands do unfortunately.




Spaldron -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:49:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Actually you said all this stuff years ago on Empire.

Look - here is the thread you started about it - http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=1969465


Actually all I said back then was that I'd never really paid attention to the whole War on Terror subtext to that extent. Which is different to what I just said upthread. I'm just enjoying that its getting political already even though no-ones seen it yet.

So there.




Rgirvan44 -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:50:50 PM)

Ok you clearly didn't read the bit where I said the torture was shown not to work. Please point to the bit where I said torture was exciting.

Please.




Rgirvan44 -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:51:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Actually you said all this stuff years ago on Empire.

Look - here is the thread you started about it - http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=1969465


Actually all I said back then was that I'd never really paid attention to the whole War on Terror subtext to that extent. Which is different to what I just said upthread. I'm just enjoying that its getting political already even though no-ones seen it yet.

So there.


Did you start the thread?




fiercehairdo -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:51:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Actually you said all this stuff years ago on Empire.

Look - here is the thread you started about it - http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=1969465


Yes, I noted a lot of it at the time. But I was hoping the new movie would somehow cleverly undermine or re-address the positions set out in the second film - perhaps showing Batman re-address the issues as wrong on the light of Fox's (rather late) discovery of a moral compass. By all accounts, apparently not. Just continues the same agenda. I just feel it doesn't get pointed out enough amidst all the fawning Nolan love.




elab49 -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:53:20 PM)

If Spaldron is Fierce Hairdo I think we might be having a few other words about things [:D]




Spaldron -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:53:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Actually you said all this stuff years ago on Empire.

Look - here is the thread you started about it - http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=1969465


Actually all I said back then was that I'd never really paid attention to the whole War on Terror subtext to that extent. Which is different to what I just said upthread. I'm just enjoying that its getting political already even though no-ones seen it yet.

So there.


Did you start the thread?


Ah ok, I thought you were talking to me.


Carry on.




Rgirvan44 -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:54:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Actually you said all this stuff years ago on Empire.

Look - here is the thread you started about it - http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=1969465


Yes, I noted a lot of it at the time. But I was hoping the new movie would somehow cleverly undermine or re-address the positions set out in the second film - perhaps showing Batman re-address the issues as wrong on the light of Fox's (rather late) discovery of a moral compass. By all accounts, apparently not. Just continues the same agenda. I just feel it doesn't get pointed out enough amidst all the fawning Nolan love.


You can't help but insult people who actually are having a constructive discussion with you, can you?

And I think you would have to be blind as a bat (ahem) to not see the War on Terror connections with these films.




fiercehairdo -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:54:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Ok you clearly didn't read the bit where I said the torture was shown not to work. Please point to the bit where I said torture was exciting.

Please.


I'm not saying you said that. I am saying that many defend the films purely 'cause they are exciting and ignore the wider implications of what they are watching, that is all. I didn't mean you personally.




MonsterCat -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:56:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo

Yes, I noted a lot of it at the time. But I was hoping the new movie would somehow cleverly undermine or re-address the positions set out in the second film - perhaps showing Batman re-address the issues as wrong on the light of Fox's (rather late) discovery of a moral compass. By all accounts, apparently not. Just continues the same agenda. I just feel it doesn't get pointed out enough amidst all the fawning Nolan love.



Stop being disingenuous to the people who like his flicks. Jesus.




fiercehairdo -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:57:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Actually you said all this stuff years ago on Empire.

Look - here is the thread you started about it - http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=1969465


Yes, I noted a lot of it at the time. But I was hoping the new movie would somehow cleverly undermine or re-address the positions set out in the second film - perhaps showing Batman re-address the issues as wrong on the light of Fox's (rather late) discovery of a moral compass. By all accounts, apparently not. Just continues the same agenda. I just feel it doesn't get pointed out enough amidst all the fawning Nolan love.


You can't help but insult people who actually are having a constructive discussion with you, can you?

And I think you would have to be blind as a bat (ahem) to not see the War on Terror connections with these films.



How am I insulting anyone? I certainly didn't intend to. I am trying to have a constructive discussion also.
I do see the War on Terror connections. I see a film endorsing the War on Terror tactics in a way I find suspiciously right wing. As you can see I'm not a Bush fan. But I don't mean to insult anyone In what way am I insulting people?




Rgirvan44 -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:58:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Ok you clearly didn't read the bit where I said the torture was shown not to work. Please point to the bit where I said torture was exciting.

Please.


I'm not saying you said that. I am saying that many defend the films purely 'cause they are exciting and ignore the wider implications of what they are watching, that is all. I didn't mean you personally.


"But feel free to defend torture endorsing movies 'cause they're exciting - thousands do unfortunately." certainly sounds like you meant to direct it at me. But lets put it down to miscommunication.

Lets look at the torture - Batman hits the Joker numerous times, out of blind rage. It doesn't do a thing. The Joker wants him to that mad. The Joker wants to scare the city into evacuating. He is a Terror in human form. Batman doesn't do a thing to stop any of these events. Torture did nothing. In the harsh light, with the laughter, no one would be excited by what Batman does.

And hey at the end, Batman basically is fighting a guy trying to set off a bomb and....saves him? How does that line up with the right wing fantasy claim?





Rgirvan44 -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 5:59:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Actually you said all this stuff years ago on Empire.

Look - here is the thread you started about it - http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=1969465


Yes, I noted a lot of it at the time. But I was hoping the new movie would somehow cleverly undermine or re-address the positions set out in the second film - perhaps showing Batman re-address the issues as wrong on the light of Fox's (rather late) discovery of a moral compass. By all accounts, apparently not. Just continues the same agenda. I just feel it doesn't get pointed out enough amidst all the fawning Nolan love.


You can't help but insult people who actually are having a constructive discussion with you, can you?

And I think you would have to be blind as a bat (ahem) to not see the War on Terror connections with these films.



How am I insulting anyone? I certainly didn't intend to. I am trying to have a constructive discussion also.
I do see the War on Terror connections. I see a film endorsing the War on Terror tactics in a way I find suspiciously right wing. As you can see I'm not a Bush fan. But I don't mean to insult anyone In what way am I insulting people?



Fawning Nolan fans? As if people who enjoy these films a lot don't see this stuff due to some blind love for the director.




fiercehairdo -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 6:00:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat


quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo

Yes, I noted a lot of it at the time. But I was hoping the new movie would somehow cleverly undermine or re-address the positions set out in the second film - perhaps showing Batman re-address the issues as wrong on the light of Fox's (rather late) discovery of a moral compass. By all accounts, apparently not. Just continues the same agenda. I just feel it doesn't get pointed out enough amidst all the fawning Nolan love.



Stop being disingenuous to the people who like his flicks. Jesus.


I'm not being disingenuous to anyone. I know lots of people really love Nolan. I like many of his films myself! I just feel the most popular ones - TDK and Inception in particular - are less satisfying and I feel the adoration of him as a genius is overblown. just my opinion. But I know, thousands wouldn't see it that way.




elab49 -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 6:01:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Actually you said all this stuff years ago on Empire.

Look - here is the thread you started about it - http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=1969465


Yes, I noted a lot of it at the time. But I was hoping the new movie would somehow cleverly undermine or re-address the positions set out in the second film - perhaps showing Batman re-address the issues as wrong on the light of Fox's (rather late) discovery of a moral compass. By all accounts, apparently not. Just continues the same agenda. I just feel it doesn't get pointed out enough amidst all the fawning Nolan love.


You can't help but insult people who actually are having a constructive discussion with you, can you?

And I think you would have to be blind as a bat (ahem) to not see the War on Terror connections with these films.



How am I insulting anyone? I certainly didn't intend to. I am trying to have a constructive discussion also.
I do see the War on Terror connections. I see a film endorsing the War on Terror tactics in a way I find suspiciously right wing. As you can see I'm not a Bush fan. But I don't mean to insult anyone In what way am I insulting people?



Fawning Nolan fans? As if people who enjoy these films a lot don't see this stuff due to some blind love for the director.


A straw man argument is not a constructive argument - dismissing those who don't agree with you as 'fawning Nolan fans' is not constructive and would understandably not sit well with those on the other side of the argument.




fiercehairdo -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 6:05:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Actually you said all this stuff years ago on Empire.

Look - here is the thread you started about it - http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=1969465


Yes, I noted a lot of it at the time. But I was hoping the new movie would somehow cleverly undermine or re-address the positions set out in the second film - perhaps showing Batman re-address the issues as wrong on the light of Fox's (rather late) discovery of a moral compass. By all accounts, apparently not. Just continues the same agenda. I just feel it doesn't get pointed out enough amidst all the fawning Nolan love.


You can't help but insult people who actually are having a constructive discussion with you, can you?

And I think you would have to be blind as a bat (ahem) to not see the War on Terror connections with these films.



How am I insulting anyone? I certainly didn't intend to. I am trying to have a constructive discussion also.
I do see the War on Terror connections. I see a film endorsing the War on Terror tactics in a way I find suspiciously right wing. As you can see I'm not a Bush fan. But I don't mean to insult anyone In what way am I insulting people?



Fawning Nolan fans? As if people who enjoy these films a lot don't see this stuff due to some blind love for the director.



Apologies if that offended. I didn't intend it. I think it is a fair point to say that with any popular phenomenon, you will get a certain proportion of the fan base who won't accept any criticism. Nolan's fan base isn't exempt from that. Not ALL Nolan fans are like that. But I have found a lot of resistance to criticism of TDK and Inception - not on the basis of reasoned argument but more on the basis of blind adoration. Again, I don't mean you, or many on this site who are open to discussion. But I have encountered many a fan boy who will simply not tolerate dissent. You must have come across this yourself on the forums. Jeez, they're are still Lucas fanboys defending the prequels...




Spaldron -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 6:06:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Actually you said all this stuff years ago on Empire.

Look - here is the thread you started about it - http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=1969465


Yes, I noted a lot of it at the time. But I was hoping the new movie would somehow cleverly undermine or re-address the positions set out in the second film - perhaps showing Batman re-address the issues as wrong on the light of Fox's (rather late) discovery of a moral compass. By all accounts, apparently not. Just continues the same agenda. I just feel it doesn't get pointed out enough amidst all the fawning Nolan love.


You can't help but insult people who actually are having a constructive discussion with you, can you?

And I think you would have to be blind as a bat (ahem) to not see the War on Terror connections with these films.



How am I insulting anyone? I certainly didn't intend to. I am trying to have a constructive discussion also.
I do see the War on Terror connections. I see a film endorsing the War on Terror tactics in a way I find suspiciously right wing. As you can see I'm not a Bush fan. But I don't mean to insult anyone In what way am I insulting people?



Fawning Nolan fans? As if people who enjoy these films a lot don't see this stuff due to some blind love for the director.



Apologies if that offended. I didn't intend it. I think it is a fair point to say that with any popular phenomenon, you will get a certain proportion of the fan base who won't accept any criticism. Nolan's fan base isn't exempt from that. Not ALL Nolan fans are like that. But I have found a lot of resistance to criticism of TDK and Inception - not on the basis of reasoned argument but more on the basis of blind adoration. Again, I don't mean you, or many on this site who are open to discussion. But I have encountered many a fan boy who will simply not tolerate dissent. You must have come across this yourself on the forums. Jeez, they're are still Lucas fanboys defending the prequels...


Tell me about it.




elab49 -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 6:06:59 PM)

Of course, but it's still important not to generalise as you undermine your own argument.

Me - TDK and Inception were OK. Neither made my top 20 of the year.




fiercehairdo -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 6:10:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Actually you said all this stuff years ago on Empire.

Look - here is the thread you started about it - http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=1969465


Yes, I noted a lot of it at the time. But I was hoping the new movie would somehow cleverly undermine or re-address the positions set out in the second film - perhaps showing Batman re-address the issues as wrong on the light of Fox's (rather late) discovery of a moral compass. By all accounts, apparently not. Just continues the same agenda. I just feel it doesn't get pointed out enough amidst all the fawning Nolan love.


You can't help but insult people who actually are having a constructive discussion with you, can you?

And I think you would have to be blind as a bat (ahem) to not see the War on Terror connections with these films.



How am I insulting anyone? I certainly didn't intend to. I am trying to have a constructive discussion also.
I do see the War on Terror connections. I see a film endorsing the War on Terror tactics in a way I find suspiciously right wing. As you can see I'm not a Bush fan. But I don't mean to insult anyone In what way am I insulting people?



Fawning Nolan fans? As if people who enjoy these films a lot don't see this stuff due to some blind love for the director.


A straw man argument is not a constructive argument - dismissing those who don't agree with you as 'fawning Nolan fans' is not constructive and would understandably not sit well with those on the other side of the argument.



Again, apologies if you found the "fawning fanboys" comment offensive. But please read my posts above where I spell out some clear criticisms of TDK. I'm bot at all just setting up a strawman. On the contrary. And I'm certainly not just dismissing all Nolan fans. Just the more blindly adoring ones - they do exist.




MonsterCat -> RE: The Dark Knight Rises (17/7/2012 6:13:39 PM)

I didn't find the comments to be really offensive. I just find sweeping generalisations and the dismissal of fans of a certain director or genre to be more annoying than anything else. No harm done, really.




fiercehairdo -> RE: More Right Wing Bat Politics (17/7/2012 6:21:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Ok you clearly didn't read the bit where I said the torture was shown not to work. Please point to the bit where I said torture was exciting.

Please.


I'm not saying you said that. I am saying that many defend the films purely 'cause they are exciting and ignore the wider implications of what they are watching, that is all. I didn't mean you personally.


"But feel free to defend torture endorsing movies 'cause they're exciting - thousands do unfortunately." certainly sounds like you meant to direct it at me. But lets put it down to miscommunication.

Lets look at the torture - Batman hits the Joker numerous times, out of blind rage. It doesn't do a thing. The Joker wants him to that mad. The Joker wants to scare the city into evacuating. He is a Terror in human form. Batman doesn't do a thing to stop any of these events. Torture did nothing. In the harsh light, with the laughter, no one would be excited by what Batman does.

And hey at the end, Batman basically is fighting a guy trying to set off a bomb and....saves him? How does that line up with the right wing fantasy claim?




I was thinking more of Batman deliberately breaking Maroney's legs. That got the desired result. And Batman didn't even ask a question first. He asked after. That seemed to endorse torture as a tactic. It's OK to break legs to get info if you know that guy is a wrong'n... In real life torture doesn't work and is morally wrong in every way. My personal view, but I think one shared by Amnesty, Liberty etc...
But I don't want to get off onto a TDK discussion here - It is a TDKR thread after all. My initial post was simply to express disappointment that TDKR seems to be more of the same. The Guardian article articulates it quite well I think.




Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.109375