Anyone else think the ending of the Dark Knight would have been better if Batman took off his mask to show Two Face he was Bruce while trying to talk him down to show he wasn’t kidding when he was saying it wasn’t just Harvey who lost everything
Would also make Gordon’s complicity and silence over knowing who Batman was more emotional in TDKR. And telling him he has to come back.
It’s not like Gordon’s wife or kids would squeal. They moved away after anyway
Other urls found in this thread:
Also him taking off his mask, not for all the jokers demands ultimately but to try and bring Harvey back from the brink, also plays into the whole two face thing
Bump
I still can't get over how excessive the damage to his face was.
>refuses to kill the joker
>kills Harvey anyway
The Joker won
I read a long time ago an interview with Nolan about how originally he had more realistic burn injuries, but it was TOO GRUESOME. And put people off watching. So they amped it up to a kind of unrealistic level where he looked bad but so bad it wasn’t like something we could easily get grossed out by.
Pic related is what I imagine. Freddy Krueger in the reboot was designed to look like a “realistic burn victim” and was universally hated so he probably made the right call.
Especially since most Dent stories we read have his face SCARRED not as a fresh wound like the movie demands
>big bellied, cargo-short wearing, big t-shirt graphic tees bedecked millennials thought this movie was better than the Godfather
>A Nightmare on Elm Street 2010
Aaah, my first horror movie (I watched Freddy vs Jason first but I didnt watch it alone) Freddy looked weird af, specially with the CGI but what completely ruined that character was his attempt at being serious, the story doesnt help since it has an unnecesary
double-twist while being exactly like the original but with a couple more of victims.
It was 2008. It was a different time…
I know what you’re talking about
In the original. Freddy is an unambiguous monster. A boogey man. The parents killed him because he gets off after killing a bunch of kids on a technicality. And his sheer evil somehow resurrects his spirits to torment them.
Then they make it a “was he falsely accused of being a pedo???” In the remake. Which is first of all very gross. He was originally written as a pedo in the original movie but they wisely cut it out since a large part of these movies is enjoying his character. You can’t really enjoy a pedophile character killing in crazy ways.
The double twist of “hes haunting us because they killed him for being a pedo killer…. But he was innocent!” Into “nah, turns out he was really a pedo but he gets magic dream powers anyway lol” was pointless really. And made his character way too gross
Freddy always had a kind of sexual energy to him in the originals regardless I’d note. It’s just less gross because they’re late teens by then usually (“I’m your boyfriend now Nancy”, the homosexual undertones of Nightmare 2m etc)
Kind of an irrelevant rant so here’s a Freddy Krueger comic
T-thop rith there Harveth *snnnnrk* I'm gun hath to ath you *snOOOrrrt* to leth the boy go! *snnnnnrk* DOTH do thith! *wheeze*
He takes off the mask and then what happens? Harvey goes back to being a good guy? He's too pissed at Gordon for focusing on the mob instead of dealing with the corruption in the police first. Bat taking his mask off doesn't change that.
>Harvey died a hero
>doesn't know Bats killed him
Joker won but he doesn't know it and neither does Gotham, which was the point of the ending.
This movie shits on the Godfather. The Godfather is boring.
The Joker also won because Batman retired after killing Harvey. He broke him
t.big bellied, cargo-short wearing, big t-shirt graphic tees bedecked millennial
But the city was cleaned up so not really. Batman had fullfilled his purpose. It's perfect when you think about it.
>Italians in suits.
>Son becomes dad.
>The best movie ever.
Retard
Yeah, I guess the whole focus/retcon of Freddy being a pedo was because
>muh dark tone
And the whole double-twist was to make him an innocent man with "justifiable" motives to kill but it ends up being utterly useless in the end, just a way to hide that the plot is literally the same from the original Nightmare on Elm Street.
I still appreciate some stuff because of the nostalgy this movie gives me like how the deaths at the prison cell and Nancy's mom were done better, Freddy as a guest on Mortal Kombat but looking at it objectively it's just a bad ripoff.
(Still not as bad as Wes Craven's New Nightmare)
>But the city was cleaned up so not really. Batman had fullfilled his purpose
This what happens when you make Gotham realistic instead of the hell on earth it´s suppose to be
So a good choice by Nolan then. Maybe that's the reason Gotham was different in Begins vs The Dark Knight. Batman cleans it up. And it stays clean in TDKR until Bane makes it dirty and so Bat has to come back.
>POP
>Batman goes cross-eyed, buckles over and slips on his way down
Actually made me cackle, what the hell were they thinking?
The city looked different in Begins because they tried to make it look closer to the comics. It looked far better aesthetically than in TDK
Yeah, I thought that was missing too. Bruce should've revealed himself to Harvey
How, realistically is a Clown's nonsensical terrorist attacks being sabotaged by a millionaire in fetishwear; going to clean up all the crime in a major metropolitan city that's been suffering from social inequity and economic misery for the last 3 decades?
Gotta disagree with you there buddy, Wes Cravens New Nightmare was peal meta horror IMO
Maybe rewatch it with an open mind. I loved how they integrated the real actors with their characters they played and how some lovecraftian evil took Freddy’s form because it was popular.
Seeing Robert England as himself painting Freddy and Nancy’s actress scared and confused about who she was was really cool. You can see where scream came from
Kind of disappointing. In Batman begins Gotham looks like a gothic city with exaggerated architecture. A mix of Batman 1989 and modern buildings
The Narrows, the poor section of Gotham being the foremost example
Presumably it got massively fucked up in Batman begins which is why Gotham looks just like Chicago or New York or whatever in the sequels
Bump
Nolan had more creative control in the sequels
Ya...idk. All they did was lock up people in the mob. It's pretty silly.
Unfortunate I guess. Total creative control isn’t always good
Listen, there were only two MCU films out at the time. Of course TDK was seen as sophisticated.
WB tends to allow more creative control in the Batman sequels if they´re successful. Returns was 100% Burton and TDK and TDKR were 100% Nolan.
>shoots Batman once with a pistol
>he falls down
>Harvey thinks he’s done
Is Harvey brain damaged from the burning? He knew he faced multiple armed guys
LMFAO
Nolans movies dont have emotion. Only pure logic.
>Only pure logic.
And even then...
Obviously Harvey is too far gone to end things peacefully. But a talk between Bruce and Harvey about how he tried and Harvey doing his “decent men, in an indecent time” talk would still work perfectly
>Is Harvey brain damaged from the burning?
I mean... Probably? Realistically speaking
Plus, Batman typically isn’t getting shot at all in the Nolan movies unlike the new one. He just avoids it. So him falling after a shot seems feasible
He actually got the job done, the tacticool suit was Batman biggest weakness. It´s incredible that Nolan was so lazy that didn´t thought in changing the suit for TDKR
>supposed to be a grounded Batman
>tanks shots and explosions
How nu-Freddy looked wasn't exactly why he was hated.
Jumpscares and a lackluster characterization are more of an issue.
Yes... It logically doesnt hold up. Were supposed to suspend our logic and disbelieve for more logic that couldnt logically be logical.
Nah.
I like that dramatic irony when Harvey is like "I'm the only one who lost everything!" and he has no idea that Batman also lost his love.
It's got ANOTHER layer of dramatic irony on top, because Batman thinks that Rachel would have chose him, because Alfred burned the letter.
Yeah, that's the point.
Batman is determined to prove that his way works, and that the Joker is wrong. The Joker keeps pushing and pushing, causing Batman to beat him down, break Maroni's legs, even spy on the entire city… but he's determined not to cross the final line. He makes a point of saving the Joker.
And for all that, he's forced to kill Harvey, anyway. He's forced to kill the person who represented his hopes of Gotham City having a legitimate authority instead of an outlaw. His hopes of being able to have a normal life.
Because he's forced to break his rule, he becomes this fallen character. He can't be the hero. But he believes Gotham deserves a hero. So, he lets Harvey Dent be that hero. Batman instead is condemned to being this sacrificial lamb who, like Socrates in "The Apology," accepts his fate for the good of the city.
I recently rewatched TDK after eons of my first viewing, and it's a lot worse than I remember.
The very grim and serious "this movie is about serious important things" tone and the realistic, boring Chicago Gotham clashes badly with the ridiculous plot where Joker can put bombs anywhere he wants at any point and Harvey Dent is walking around with half his face missing like there is no problem. Very very strange tonal clashes in this movie.
And the ending with Batman deciding to have Harvey Dent's actions pinned on him makes no sense given what we know of Batman's character.
I'm pretty sure it's an open secret that nobody would care about this film if it weren't for Ledger's performance, which to its credit is still fantastic after all this time. It elevates what is otherwise a rather dull and nonsensical movie.
>joker lost to two boats of criminals
Ledger also stands out because, crazy or not, he sounds like an actual person with emotions and not a robot delivering Nolan's "clever" dialogue with the intonation of Microsoft Sam and a facial expression to match.
>MCU films
>More sophisticated
My man I would agree most MCU films succeed at what they're trying to be than Nolan's bat movies, or more enjoyable even, but more sophisticated?
No
>s. It´s incredible that Nolan was so lazy that didn´t thought in changing the suit for TDKR
Because effectively the new suit works under the same logic as the comic Batman; he trades pure defense for better mobility. Batman should be able to move like a ninja to avoid gunfire int he first place.
Based
>what is reading comprehension?
>big bellied, cargo-short wearing, big t-shirt graphic tees bedecked millennials thought this movie was better than the Godfather
As much as people overrated TDK, I've never seen them ever go that far, I don't think anyone is that delusional.
>I've never seen them ever go that far, I don't think anyone is that delusional.
NTA but lucky you.
I noticed that as well, yeah. Dialogue is either so corny it sounds straight out of CSI, or just plain wooden.
Kino
And yet for all that it's still better than any of Nolan's movies. It's kind of funny how The Batman manages to get across Batman as a symbol of terror AND a symbol of hope in one movie, when it took Nolan three.
This
No
That explains why the first Batman movie is the best of each series then.
Shit taste
>retards still shilling this shit
Funny, the same thing can be said about Nolanfags