jobloffski
Posts: 1837
Joined: 30/9/2005 From: elsewhere
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rich It's a long podcast, are his questions anything new? Same old same old really. Why didn't Talia get Batman out of the way so she could destroy Gotham any time she felt like. Why the elaborate scheme.No reference to the film informing viewers that the slow wait for revenge (the slow knife thing, itself referencing the reason the Joker used knives, to savour the little moments, other methods are too quick) and wanting bruce to be able to witness his failure and be too crippled to help out. Essentially 'I didn't like the film so it makes no sense' rather than, as for people who like the film, just watching the specific, self contained story that is being told/paid off with a willingness to go with this is what it is, rather than 'it isn't this, it isn't that' wah!! WAH!!). Such questions as why does talia think having sex with Bruce is part of her revenge. No reference to the oft repeated thing in thefilm about giving people hope in order to take i away to make the despair hit harder (specifically here to let Bruce believe he could have a chance of happiness after Rachel in order to take that hope away when she dies in the explosion making Bruce once again think someone he loves has died and he has failed again,because if the plan had worked he would never even have known that Miranda wasn't her real name). Revenge is a dish best served cold and if the plan had worked and Talia and Bane both died in the explosion, Bruce would survive, as a cripple, having failed his father, his city, his friends, his new lover, everyone. And he could either live in that despair or end it (when Gotham is ashes you have my permission to die), because with the perpetrators dead, there is no chance of even uncovering justice or vengenance (and even that has echoes with the first film because he only ever became Batman because JoeChill was dead and he couldnt have vengeance, so Tali's plan was to leave Bruce as lost as he was before he met her father. Basically wanting to be ready to punk Bruce so hard he could only watch his life and dream destroyed before hisbvery eyes and doing it by getting ready to do it slowly so he didn't even see it coming (employing theatricality and deception) was OBVIOUSLY the reason for the plan being so elaborate and to criticise a superhero movie, or indeed any movie for such things as 'why doesn't he just shoot Bond in the head, why leave him with any chance to escape at all?' is a slight case of 'I'm getting older' or 'I'm getting too stupid to remember how watching a film works'. Yet again, (slightly flattered by the fact the opinions re expressed by Kevin Smith et al), the joking about how shit TDKR is, is borne of not liking the film and looking for shit to throw at it for 'failing them' in some way, rather than looking at how this interpretation plays out and avoiding infantile 'but Batman wouldn't do this' shit. The fucker used to use a gun, latterly he has a no killing rule. Nolan's trilogy tells a self contained story that owes some things to Batman lore but also, like many other reinventions of the character, looks at things its own way. Like it or hate it, it works according to the themes Nolan and Goyer laid out.Questions of why Talia didn't buy a bomb and use that because it would have been quicker or cheaper than developing one (itself part of the revenge, helping Bruce create the means to destroy his own city of course) are spectacularly dumb, and certainly dumber than TDKR, an imperfect, but certainly not inadequately logical film.
< Message edited by jobloffski -- 5/2/2013 12:06:35 PM >
_____________________________
Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.
|