Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>

Film Fanatics - Chat Thread II

Scroll to see replies

Watched five Gus Van Sant films (My Own Private Idaho, Good Will Hunting, Elephant, Last Days and Milk) over the past week. Interesting to see how he's fairly at home with either the mainstream stuff he makes or the more art-house films he's done. Maybe I've just hit a lucky selection and missed some of his worse ones. Last Days was forgettable though - give it a miss.

Reply 7781

Deshi

Just rewatched The Dark Knight Rises, find it hard to believe that some people think The Avengers was better.

Reply 7782

danny111

Original post by Deshi

Just rewatched The Dark Knight Rises, find it hard to believe that some people think The Avengers was better.

As a film or for enjoyment?

I do think the film itself was better, however, I absolutely loathed Bane's stupid long monologues. The Joker was a much better villain. Bane's speeches were long and tedious and I hated his voice. Whereas during The Avengers I thought, especially Ironman, there was more humour and the action scenes were quite good. So overall I enjoyed The Avengers more.

Reply 7783

Colonel.

Original post by Deshi

Just rewatched The Dark Knight Rises, find it hard to believe that some people think The Avengers was better.

I dunno, they're pretty equal in my eyes.

However, I don't consider them to be great films. Neither of them. Fun enough at times, but not great.

Reply 7784

Mess.

TDKR was missing something and Bane was pretty annoying, The Avengers was missing any discernible plot.

They were both still enjoyable films though, just nothing on TDK.

Reply 7785

PoGo HoPz

Original post by danny111

Totally agree with this. I mean, Heath Ledger's Joker was written and performed perfectly. There was both darkness and insanity there, but at the same time it was so realistic, which is what I loved about him. There was no comic-booky vibe to his character. Instead, there was a sense that this kinda guy could actually exist and do all that stuff. That's what Nolan's trilogy's all about, tbh.

Bane's essentially supposed to be a mindless juggernaut, yet the way Nolan wrote him just made no sense and didn't suit the character at all. It just felt like changing him for the sake of changing him, and it didn't work like it worked for the Joker, imo. :s-smilie:

Reply 7786

Mess.

Original post by PoGo HoPz

Bane isn't meant to be a mindless juggernaught :confused:

He is meant to be incredibly intelligent, a great leader, organiser and then has the strength, determination and fighting skills to be an equal of Batman.

Nolan used him incorrectly in Nolan's world because Bane should have been in-charge, not Talia. Bane shouldn't have been so ridiculous with the voice and weird plan as well.

Reply 7787

PoGo HoPz

Original post by Mess.

Bane isn't meant to be a mindless juggernaught :confused:

Ah, okay. Thank Batman: Arkham Asylum for making me think that. I've never read any comics about Bane, so I don't know all that much about him. :smile:

Reply 7788

British-Student

Consider the following - Tarantino. That is all.

Reply 7789

danny111

Original post by PoGo HoPz

Ah, okay. Thank Batman: Arkham Asylum for making me think that. I've never read any comics about Bane, so I don't know all that much about him. :smile:

Woah why neg this, Arkham was a quality game.

Reply 7790

pgreg1

Just watched Dazed and Confused, fun film to watch despite the lack of a plot xD.

Reply 7791

philistine

I just finished watching Les Tontons Flingueurs. I swear, Lino Ventura, in several scenes, looks like the doppelgänger of Robert de Niro. The likeness is uncanny. The film itself was good, although I did have a bone to pick with the subtitles. Being a speaker of the language myself, I noticed several inconsistencies- some more grave than others- which I couldn't help but think might have detracted from the overall experience.

7/10

I'm just now discovering the Mesrine duology. Vincent Cassel is one of my favourite actors, so I have good faith in this, despite the lackluster ratings. Will report back.

Original post by British-Student

Consider the following - Tarantino. That is all.

Are you suggesting Tarantino is the greatest director of all? If so, you clearly have- at the very least- a profound misunderstanding of the man's work, not to mention cult Japanese cinema, post-noir crime/gang cinema, and several other important matters. Tarantino, as I'm sure you don't already know, watched the entire filmography of the legendary Seijun Suzuki, and soon after ripped off all of his hallmarks, motifs, and signature style- completely; the smoking gun to this declaration being 東京流れ者.

Saying that, I'm not anti-Tarantino at all; merely a person who gives praise where it is due, and derision in very much the same way.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 7792

Colonel.

Original post by pgreg1

Just watched Dazed and Confused, fun film to watch despite the lack of a plot xD.

I hated that film. No idea why. Didn't enjoy it.

Reply 7793

SillyRodent

I've finally seen the Dark Knight Rises, it was good but I was expecting so much more.
Just in case...

Spoiler

Reply 7794

PoGo HoPz

Original post by philistine

I didn't know this. I'm glad he did it, though, because his work has made for some truly outstanding cinema. :yep:

Reply 7795

Isambard Kingdom Brunel

Best male acting performance ever was from F. Murray Abraham as Salieiri in Amadeus (1984).

Discuss.

Reply 7796

ahq

Original post by PoGo HoPz

Did you really think so? I thought Ledger's Joker was an enjoyable enough character, but I don't really think I could see him in that form (or played to that extent - in a plausible way) outside of something similar to the Batman universe. :p:

Bane's essentially supposed to be a mindless juggernaut, yet the way Nolan wrote him just made no sense and didn't suit the character at all. It just felt like changing him for the sake of changing him, and it didn't work like it worked for the Joker, imo. :s-smilie:

This is just a common misconception, as Mess. has already pointed out. :yep:

If anything, Bane still isn't intelligent/resourceful enough.

Spoiler

Original post by Isambard Kingdom Brunel

Best male acting performance ever was from F. Murray Abraham as Salieiri in Amadeus (1984).

Discuss.

Still need to get round to watching Amaedus. :sigh:

Partly been putting it off because I would quite like to read Shaffer's play first.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 7797

Dukeofwembley

layer cake vs skyfall?

skyfall wasnt that good

Reply 7798

Mess.

Original post by Abiraleft

This is just a common misconception, as Mess. has already pointed out. :yep:

If anything, Bane still isn't intelligent/resourceful enough.

Spoiler

Still need to get round to watching Amaedus. :sigh:

Partly been putting it off because I would quite like to read Shaffer's play first.

I think Nolans universe was meant to be exaggerated reality and in that context I think that the Joker was utterly believable and really helped to enhance the world. Scarecrow was similar even if he is a pretty annoying character who I've never liked in any version of Batman.

Bane, to me, was just over the top in almost every sense. He brought nothing to the world that another generic character couldn't have done and due to how 'comic book' he was, it took me completely out of the world crafted in the first two films.

Also, does anybody think that if Ledger hadn't died that the Joker would still have been the main villain in the 3rd film? To me it would have been insane not to use him again but I imagine they would have tried to use both him and another character which would have taken it way too far into the comic book realm.

This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Reply 7799

Ape Gone Insane

Bane may or may not be an effective villain (or certainly up to the standard set by Ledger and the Joker in the previous film), but I liked how he kept within the theme of the trilogy. I think as Nolan mentioned once, the trilogy is about the inner evil, willingness to do evil or corruption in Gotham citizens - this is what Ras was about, destroying Gotham because there was no redemption for its citizens. And there is a move to show these in different ways in each film. In the first film we have Scarecrow who manifests these inner condition through the use of the fear gas (and thus Gotham destroys itself that way). In the second film, we have the Joker who manifests this inner condition through anarchy. And in the final film, we have Bane who manifests this inner condition through the destruction of order.

Scarecrow believed the inner evil was, well, inside you and it could be released through fear. The Joker believed that the inner evil was induced by the societal order and "rules" as a result of conditioning and it could be released by breaking the rules, like he did with Harvey and attempted to do with the boat scene. Bane believed this inner evil had embedded itself within the social institutions (courts, prisons, businesses and banks) and that it could be released by destroying these institutions.

The problem is two fold, this theme isn't played strongly enough in the films (with the Joker's story the only one approaching perfection) and Bane's story becomes unnecessarily convoluted by concerning itself with the physical threat (a bomb) rather than playing up the overarching themes of what Bane is trying to achieve. I mean, let's face it, having a bomb with a countdown and making Gotham 'suffer' meanwhile isn't a good enough excuse to get a 'message' across, and reeks of the bad cliché present in every James Bond film ever. Bane should have also have been more of a villain in his own right, not just aligned with another villain seeking revenge. He breaks a few inconsequential necks and then defeats Batman once. But after that, it's downhill for him and there is no merit in his character walking around delivering monologues.