Qwerty Norris
Posts: 3156
Joined: 26/10/2005
From: Edinburgh
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: fiercehairdo
Not sure what you mean, can you give an example?
You implied Inception & The Dark Knight have character motivations that were unrealistic, yet the antagonist in Following & Teddy in Memento both do things that are very questionable in the specific circumstances that they're in.
In the context of the earlier movies their motivations don't intrude on the dynamic of the story in a way that breaks the illusion. In the later movies (TDK in particular) the motivations of Dent and Batman and of course the Joker are incoherent in the extreme and seem designed simply to get us to the next plot twist. There is good list of these here :http://lhote.blogspot.co.uk/2008/07/dark-knight-plot-hole-repository.html and a more detailed account here: http://therawness.com/why-i-hated-the-dark-knight/
My point is simply that Following and Memento hold together much better as movies - smart and sophisticated, low on indulgent cliches where as TDK or Inception feel bloated, cliche ridden and full of plot holes (TDK in particluar) and pretentious - trying to dress comic book nonsense up as art house sophistication.
Why? Because one's based on a comic book character and the other has explosions in them? Does having those things automatically diminish the intelligent aspects of both Inception & the Dark Knight? Does that mean that with their origins they have to be inherently stupid & dumb? With a statement like that, one would argue you're the one being pretentious.
Furthermore, what are these clichés you speak of? Wobbly writing in places yes, but clichés?
No. Not because one is based on comic books or has explosions. I have nothing against either of these. Heat has guns and explosions and is an intelligent thriller. A History of Violence was based on a graphic novel and is a great movie. Star Wars, SpiderMan, Avengers Assemble etc lots of examples of pop culture entertainment of a very high standard - all fine in my book since they don't pretend to be what they're not. They are openly fantasies. They are openly FUN. My point is that TDN pretends to be more than just comic book fun. It has aspirations to art-house or serious thriller genres. Yet when one applies the criteria one would normally judge those more serious films by to TDN it doesn't hold up. Too many plot holes. Too many impossible plot twists. How does the Joker rig the hospitals to blow so quick? How does the Joker set up the Ferry situation so quick? How could the Joker know that firing on Dent in the chase scene would lead to Dent surviving (so he could later kidnap him - how did he arrange that so efficiently??) and him being imprisoned as he'd wanted all along? Why not jut walk into the police station as in Seven? In a movie like Avengers one simply goes along with it because the tone of the movie is light, unpretentious and openly 'comic book'. It doesn't ask to be taken too seriously. TDN has serious themes and heavy duty ideas about morality and violence and terrorism and society... but on closer scrutiny none of it holds much water.
As for clichés; I'm not going to provide you with a list. But one that always gets me in action movies is the idea that cars are really soft bouncy safety cushions for falling on and if one lands on one from a great height it doesn't hurt. Batman and Rachel fall from the top of a very tall building and I know he uses his cape to slow that fall but it's still rubbish that the car cushions the landing. The Joker's unflinching walk from the exploding building. The courtroom scenes - prosecutors behaving in ways that would never be allowed but, hey, it looks good in movies. Henchmen - the Joker's henchmen are a complete movie cliché - unquestioningly loyal thugs who are anonymous and easily disposed of...etc, etc.
The Prestige was pretty good but the praise heaped upon TDK and Inception is far in excess of their actual merits. Really, a basic analysis of the plot and character motivations in the TDK does not stand much scrutiny (e.g. - the ludicrous plan to fake Gordon's death so as to arrest the Joker who all the time wanted to be arrested so he can get into custody where the security measures amount to one middle aged unarmed man in the cell with you!! All of which could never have been anticipated by any of the various characters.
It's not a breath-taking piece of writing, but it's a small cog in a big machine. It is also plausible given the fact the Joker had declared his intention to assassinate the major, so it's conceivable Gordon had a play in mind should an attempt on his life be made. I'll admit I had a slight problem with this plot device as well, but it's hardly fatal to the overall success of the story.
See the links above for more on the endless holes in the plot.
All the Jokers plans are by a man without a plan - an agent of chaos - yet clearly would have required MONTHS of planning to orchestrate and depend on events that would be impossible to foresee.
Remember his 3 "you know where I got these scars" stories? They're all different. He's a bullshitter. Nothing that comes out of his mouth can be trusted whatsoever. Surely you must have noticed that? Surely you're not taking his "I'm an agent of chaos" statement at face value? It seems like if you were an inhabitant of Gotham, the Joker would hoodwink you into deception as well. 
Yeah, I noticed he's a bit trixy that Joker... It doesnt change a thing I said. To repeat: All the Joker's plans would have required MONTHS of planning to orchestrate and depend on events that would be impossible to foresee.
All Joker's goons are unquestioningly loyal even when he consistently betrays them;
We never really see an example of this unquestionable loyalty that you speak of. He prays on weak minds & those motivated solely by money. That is pretty much executed to a tee.
Come now. All the Joker's plans necessarily require outside help as they would be impossible to enact by himself, indeed some of them take place while he is in custody! So, implicit throughout, is the obvious need for goons to help him; to rig the hospital, kidnap Dent/Rachel rob the banks, drive trucks, reload bazookas, do various dirty work etc, etc.... Not one of them wakes up to the obvious fact that he keeps screwing them over and burning money in front of them!
Fox has moral qualms about phone hacking for Batman's Sonar thingy but is fine to supply him with a Tank Batmobile... etc, etc... A quick google search will summarise them better than I can here)
One is an intrusion of social liberties, the other is supplying him with a big 'fuck off' vehicle. How are they relatable whatsoever?
The point is that the moralising is totally confused! Fox takes a strong moral stance on issues of privacy but supplying armoured vehicles, weapons and other tech to vigilantes - that's OK?? You can't see how his ethics are a little inconsistent here?? It makes his stance at the end of TDN look somewhat ridiculous and empty. For a supposed moral character like Fox the dangers of heavily armoured vehicles etc in the hands of a vigilante is surely higher than phone hacking. It makes no sense. It renders his character incoherent in his beliefs and is obviously there to facilitate another ridiculous lazy plot turn.
Finally problems with TDK are all rather nicely summed up here and to music!!: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbgLapRAloQ&feature=player_embedded
I can't really be bothered going through your points one by one. Because to be honest, you're nitpicking & by the sounds of it, will refuse to be swayed on your point of view which I conclude is predominantly unreasonable.
The Joker is a criminal mastermind. Every comic book, cartoon, television episode or film he's been involved in has demonstrated that. Because of your frustrations, we would have to have an extra hour (maybe even two hours) of how he rigged up a hospital to explode & determine how all his plans would be mapped out. Is that really necessary? Had Nolan gone for the same tone as Joel Schmacher, would you be demanding the same answers? If the joker could fly & turn his adverseries to dust by going "shazaam", would you be so bothered by it? Your logic seems to be that because it's "grounded in reality" everything has to be justified & mapped out on camera. That's just silly. You're confusing plot holes with exposition that occurs off camera, yet is held back for dramatic effect.
Furthermore, the burning money in front of them happens once, and that happens towards the end of the film. Why do the goons not rise up against them? Perhaps they're weak-minded. Perhaps they've been given incentives to tow a specific line. Perhaps they're just fucking terrified of what he's capable of & see him as their best chance of being able to live another day. It could be a number of things, but again, your argument is nitpicking.
As for Fox, he's not giving tech just to any vigilante. He's giving it to Bruce Wayne/Batman because he believes in his cause & his character. In his eyes, the phone hacking aspect is going too far. Seriously, why is this so problematic? Again, this is nitpicking.
As for landing on a car bonnet, well, Bats has a cape that softens the blow of impact, if you recall?
To sum up, your entire complaint of TDK is because it chooses to ground itself in a more reality-based world, yet still falls into trappings of the fantastical. I've got news for you pal, this a film about a man dressed in a bat suit & fights crime! It's not Ken Loach social commentary. Just because there's a tone and a set of themes that resonate with a more grounded world like our own, that doesn't necessarily mean that it must abide by complete & total realism. You either accept that or you don't. Clearly you don't, yet I feel your criticisms of this circumstance are largely unfair & based on issues that could be attributed to every single vigilante / superhero etc film that has ever been released.
< Message edited by Qwerty Norris -- 9/5/2012 4:22:29 PM >
_____________________________
Qwerty's Top 10 of 2013 (so far)
1. Zero Dark Thirty
2. No
3. A Hijacking
4. In The Fog
5. Good Vibrations
6. McCullin
7. Beyond the Hills
8. The Place Beyond the Pines
9. Wreck-it Ralph
10. Shell
|
Printable Version
RE: A New Batman - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread