Haterz be hating. Such a lazy way to brush off criticism. I wanted to love Christopher Nolan’s Batman franchise, I really did. And after Batman Begins, I thought I was going to. But as each film thereafter was released, I felt myself feeling more and more alienated.
Let me just explain my stance a little more. Growing up, I didn’t always have a clear role model. I’m not going to launch into a blow-by-blow account of my upbringing, but it wasn’t always roses; sometimes it wasn’t clear exactly who I could and should look up to.
Then I found Batman. Batman never changed his mind; he never let me down. If I opened a book, or flipped onto the Animated series, he was there, a symbol of what I could achieve if I dedicated myself to it. He was Batman and I could always count on him to give me something to aspire to. Of course I never knew that back then, I just knew that he was beyond awesome and I wanted to know everything I could about him.
I’ve always had a love/hate relationship with comic book movies, and with Batman adaptations in particular. On the one hand, the very fact that they exist at all validates how important he is to me – that someone is willing to invest that much money, time and effort into bringing the character to the greater masses. And for that I salute every single movie (even Batman and Robin believe it or not).
I’m not suggesting for a second that The Dark Knight franchise was awful. I didn’t hate it and it’s far from the worst set of Batman movies I’ve sat down to watch. It was entertaining. But that’s it. And when I read Batman comics, I’m more than entertained. I’m inspired; I’m motivated to push myself, to help others even if it means inconveniencing myself. I want to be a better man. I want to be more like Batman.
So without further rampant fanboyism from yours truly, allow me to discuss with you 20 of the reasons I just can’t back Nolan as the definitive Batman director.
You Might Also Like...
- 10 Films That Gave The Game Away Too Early
- 5 Great Characters That Deserve Another Chance In A Superhero Movie
- 6 Reasons DC’s Cinematic Universe Will Never Rival Marvel’s
Want to write about the stuff you're passionate about and have your work read by an audience of over 10 million a month? Click here to become a contributor.
46 Comments
This is more like…
‘Why I Didn’t Like How Nolan Altered Batman’s Tone’ – in no way are they ‘blunders’.
Some points are debatable no doubt. But when you start saying things like ‘you can’t remember ever seeing him reach for his utility belt throughout the series’ I start to lose interest in the validity of this article.
Sounds like you’re just annoyed that you didn’t appreciate Nolan’s trilogy and are throwing a hissy fit.
So much of the comics coming out of Marvel and DC (even after the relaunch) are crap. I didn’t grow out of comics, I feel like they’ve gotten more ridiculous. Every one of the new DC books I picked up when they relaunched was absolute garbage to me. None of it had any reality built into it, I felt nothing for the characters, and they are just making all the same mistakes again that they did before the relaunch.
I’m glad these films exist. I really think they were eye openers for the genre. They may not be the best representations of what everyone thinks the characters should be, or the most grounded in reality, or even the best mix of both, but they’re the best start we’ve ever had. I think a lot of super-movies are going to be compared to this franchise for a while to come, and in a good way.
This list is great. I think most people who are big fans of the comic and the Batman would agree. I did like the films, but they could’ve been made even better with attention to these details.
I think it’s pretty clear that people that have a problem with this list don’t really read the comics.
Youre absolutely right about there not being any one who reads the comics liking the movie. Ya know why they don’t read the comics? TGE COMICS ARE ALMOST COMPLETELY STUPID!!! There are like… How many earths? 9? Thousand? There is like 5 different robins. Which by the way, I really like John Blake as it. The only robins that we really know if your someone like me who doesn’t read comics, we only know Dick Grayson and John Blake. I like John. When you question the actors… Yes. You are nit-picking. I HATED the original movies compared to this. And Selena Kyle did play an important role. She over all convinced batman to leave the role and pass it on to a successor. While we’re on the subject, Bruce DID have a reason to pass the mantle Blake. They both came from the same situation. Being orphaned. I personally loved the Nolanverse and I hope there is a sequel. Maybe John turtletaub could direct if Nolan’s done. Heck! I would do it, given the opportunity.
some good points no doubt but overall I disagree. If they tried to make the franchise more like the comics we would have got something along the lines of the awful batman and robin film.
No we wouldn’t have gotten something like Batman and Robin, because that wasn’t anything like the comics either, what we would have gotten is something amazing. Something along the lines of DC’s great animated films(Batman Under The Redhood, The Dark Knight Returns)
Yes, this is less a critique of the film and more a complaint about how it isn’t the comics Batman. And it’s not–it’s Nolan’s Batman.
Stuart I agree with you wholeheartedly. While the movies were some of the best action movies made in the last decade, I’m sorry they were not Batman movies. They just happened to involve a character that was like the Batman. All you asshats that say its better because it doesn’t follow frame by frame of a comic have a valid point. That said Nolan lost focus on what makes Batman, the Batman. TDK should have been called The Joker. I would have gone to that movie. Heath’s performance was one for the ages. TDKR was horrible as far as making sense, plot holes, unfleshed out characters, and as a comic book movie. Yes it was an awesome action movie. It will probably be one of the best this year, but if you take the fact that it was a Batman movie out of the equation, you Nolan sycophants would be in just as much as an up-roar. TDKR could be compared to when Hollywood remakes one those classic Asian films beloved by geeks and Americanize it because the “regular people” won’t get it or understand it. So all of you people bitching and saying that its the second coming of Christ movie, mean that you don’t care about characters or plots or almost a century of readership. That the lowest common denominator is what everything is about. As long as an decent name director puts out a decent name movie its okay, because you didn’t have to care about it in end.
Oh yeah and one more thing. There is no such thing as “Nolan’s Batman”. Last time I checked I’m pretty sure Bob Kane came up with the character not Nolan. Yes Nolan has his own take on it, but there it is nowhere near as good as “Burton’s Batman”.
Sorry for the repeat, but my first attempt at a reply comment hasn’t posted. There is such a thing as Nolan’s Batman. He starred in three films–by Nolan, not Kane and Finger. Nothing could replace the original, but filmmakers are responsible to bring their own vision to the screen, not an exact replica of the source material. That includes Burton (whose films are not as good as Nolan’s, IMO, and in his own way is no truer or falser to the comics than Nolan). Such reactionary attitudes will stifle the genre until it eventually goes the way of the western and the rom-com, if filmmakers were foolish enough to listen to them. That is not sycophancy, but wishing for the genre to continue to thrive–which it cannot do if it is beholden only to the needs of comics purists.
Yes there is. Nolan’s Batman is the star (more or less) of three films made by Nolan–just like Burton had his interpretation (mistaken by you as better, IMO) and Schumacher (shudder) his. Do they replace Kane and Finger’s creation–of course not. Nothing could do that. But these films are not intended to, only to bring a unique perspective on these characters. Attitudes like yours stifle films and would lead to less creativity in the genre than we must suffer already, if filmmakers were foolish enough to heed them. And if the genre is to continue to grow, reactionary “It’s not like the comic” catcalls must be balanced with the need to do things NOT done in the comics. Too many “rules” to the contrary will lead to the genre playing itself out, just like the western and the romantic comedy. That’s not Nolan sycophancy, but wanting the comic book film to move forward and thrive, not become only the property of purist comic book fans.
Agree with most of the points. BB also my favorite and I believe that in years to come, that will the most respected batman movie that came out of Nolan’s hand. I’m one of those people that started to feel alienated from Nolan’s work when he gave us “TDK”. Suddenly, he decided to shoot big storries in fast-paced fashion. It’s really hard to find in TDK, Inception and TDKR, moments when a character really feels, thinks and so on… There is merely a visual connection with a presented character, so it’s nothing weird that this are so called “ensemble pictures”. If you are unable to make one character interesting for the audience, you percipitate many of them, so viewers couldn’t notice obvious “lack of life” in the picture. Movies Nolan’s making now are artifficial at there core. The fast-paced, artifficial plot comes first, characters are pawns devoid of any kind of natural dilemma. Sometimes director gets lucky and his actor is able to inbreathe a life to the overstuffed plot, then a movie profits from that. Nolan latest movies are so much popular because they are exactly as our post-modern culture is – equally shallow. We are (in vast majority) fascinated by quantity not quality, as Nolan is in his filmmaking. There is no real intimacy there (The Prestige is the last convincing effort in this department), there’s just a show.
For many years I’ve had a problem with an elemental understanding of his pictures, I was wondering if I’m so stupid or immature. Now, after watching TDKR I know what this problem came from. As you watch a movie you need to make a connection with characters so this simply could have a minimal sense. But Nolan doesn’t care about the characters, he cares about himself, about this what he has under full control – a plot. It’s really nothing weird that he writes or co-writes most (“Insomnia” is an exception) of his pictures, as it’s nothing weird he needs to incorporate into his storries some fancy plot devices or shocking “out of nowhere” plot points.
Sorry for the repeat (again) but my reply comments haven’t posted. @Aaron: There is such a thing as Nolan’s Batman. He starred in three films–by Nolan, not Kane and Finger. Nothing could replace the original, but filmmakers are responsible to bring their own vision to the screen, not an exact replica of the source material. That includes Burton (whose films are not as good as Nolan’s, IMO, and in his own way is no truer or falser to the comics than Nolan). Such reactionary attitudes will stifle the genre until it eventually goes the way of the western and the rom-com, if filmmakers were foolish enough to listen to them. That is not sycophancy, but wishing for the genre to continue to thrive–which it cannot do if it is beholden only to the needs of comics purists.
You’re just hunting for clicks’n hits with these titles.
What exactly is the purpose of this article? To prove that Nolan’s Batman interpretation is bad after all? Come on whatculture!
The purpose is that Stu doesn’t enjoy Nolan’s take on Batman, specifically in the last two movies. His points are really well made and I can see where he is coming from on all of them. I don’t necessarily agree but all the comments are valid. I thought it was a great article.
Yeah! What he said!
someone please give the blogger a box set of ‘American Pie’. this retarded guy doesn’t deserve to watch Nolan Epics. Punk up royally !!!
For a guy who seems to love comics more than he loves the film quickly forgets the idea of re-interpretation. Try comparing Frank Miller’s take vs Bob Kane’s original take on Batman and try to find the differences, and let me give you a hint, you will. But if someone decides to re-imagine the character for the big screen god forbid he doesn’t get every single little detail, such as the Bruce’s jawbone into the film. “Less, Less emotional connection” really, is that you’re best “blunder” I mean let’s just forget that the one woman he truly loved was killed during the movie, let’s just forget that ever happened, let’s forget that Alfred decides to keep a secret from him and then leave him. As for not revisiting Bruce’s parents death, if you ask me, the constant, “my parents are dead” would be sore and lazy characterization and empathy for the character. Why did James Gordon keep it a secret well if you had watched TDK you would’ve known that Dent was suppose to be the White Knight for Gotham and if his image were to fall from grace the city would implode with crime, that’s why he kept it a secret, was it against his moral code of being a good cop, yes of course it was, but that’s what you call a three dimensional character don’t watch The Wire or Breaking Bad you’ll probably go “why did they do that, isn’t it against their moral code” every season. Alfred’s and Bruce’s relationship begins to crumble underneath from the ground as soon as Alfred decided to keep a secret from Bruce. And no foreshadowing for Talia-Al-Ghul, please, that is the worst and most moronic thing you’re stated in this list, other than “Selina Kyle who gets some of the quickest, clumsiest exposition”
Again, sorry for the repeat.
SOME of the points are made well. Most of the points are sloppily made, and come across as whiny. Not saying it’s a bad article necessarily, but these aren’t really blunders. Title is misleading, and that’s ten minutes of reading I won’t have back.
I don´t need to add anything else sir…you said it all
I love how the majority of these comments pick on him about his affection for comics (which he justifies and elaborates upon) rather than the clumsy incoherence fully on display in Nolan’s films.
But whatever. “TDK has *THEMES* man, you just don’t *GET* it!” If “getting it” requires me to lose a bunch of brain cells, I’ll wallow in “ignorance” then, thanks.
Ive never commented on any website like this before but this article is so ridiculous that I had to. You honestly make one or two interesting points but 90% of this is just preposterous. How is this guy even on this website? This really makes me question if I should even continue coming to this website. Its ok not to like TDKR or any of the other films. Honestly im fine with that. But most of your point just make no sense. And more importantly you made me waste time commenting on your stupid article.
Hmmm… A few of the points here are actually worthy of consideration. And as much as I am a Nolan fan (I would emphasize here on Memento, Prestige, and Inception), I too like Batman Begins better. Not Dark Night. Yes, as most of us say, it should’ve been called “The Joker Begins”. Though what people like, I think, is the evolution of the stories and characters they grew up with. I guess the audience evolves with the passage of time. When we were kids, we had these, near-perfect childhood heroes. Now as we grow, we want to see something different. As we can see, gritty and dark stuff has been in lately. That’s why they’ve made the Marvel characters grittier (X-Men First Class, The Amazing Spiderman etc.). People dont like the cute clean bright red suit Spiderman no more. And so, he’s all torn up, turns darker by the year. And that is to say about other franchises. And there is the deviation of how we knew them before, and what they’ve become now. I guess most of audience likes unconventional and experimental takes on these [rather aging] heroes. So, does it live up to the legacy and originality? No. Does it make good money, give people newer perspective and food for thought, and make buzz and what and what not? Yes. So there.
Only thing I agree with was the two face part. Would have loved him again in the dark knight rises. But on the whole this article is awful
I hate these types of articles. Why can’t people enjoy both the comics and the movies and treat them as seperate entities? I like both but realize that comic book Batman is different from the 2012 version just like the Tim Burton movies are different from the Adam West Batman. What purpose does nit-picking Batman not having the right “jawline”? I mean seriously this is why people make fun of comic book fans – there are more important things out there to be concerned about. At least your favorite comic character got a movie!
“Batman is reactive” – you say this is a flaw, but this is critical to Nolan’s story. From the very beginning, Batman has been trying to control the evil in the world, to bring order to a senseless world of crime and corruption. But each movie challenges this goal, turns it upside down, and lights it on fire. In Batman Begins we see that Ra’s al Ghul has taken this concept to the ultimate extreme: the world is too corrupt, and must be destroyed so it can be rebuilt. Batman has to learn the limits of what he can do. TDK goes even farther, the Joker tries to show him that the line between civilization and chaos is extremely thin and fragile. So when Batman tries to go outside social structures of justice, he may just be inviting more pain (this was brought to a point where he does the “special interrogation” of the Joker and it doesn’t achieve squat). And finally in TDKR he realizes (while in the prison, especially) that hope is the key to fighting evil, so he returns to Gotham to give true hope to its people, and that’s why he feels his work is done at the end.
Batman’s just reacting in all of the movies because, try as he might, he cannot control what he has set in motion. This lends a feeling of panic to all the movies which I think really heightens the drama and makes them amazing to watch.
I agree with some of these points but above all TDKR was enjoyable but had loads of plot holes in it.
I agree with some points and I disagree with some points, however Im with you that Batman Begins was the better all-round Batman movie, TDK was great but for Joker & Two Face adding layers rather then developing Batman, whilst TDKR was just a sloppy mess with way too much going on.
I believe the Bane story could have been a trilogy on its own (I thought Tom Hardy was brillant, and really the only reason to watch the film), and chucking Talia in with no character development was just wrong on so many levels, sloppy work!
Well, There is only one reason I read through this whole article, and that is because I truly didn’t believe that you would find 20 “blunders” in TDKR, and to be honest, you just confirmed that. Yes, yes, you said 20 things, and put numbers by them, but so many of them were so trivial or subjective that they hold no proper relevance or substance.
That said, there are a couple of points I do agree with. The “Less and Less Emotional Connection” to Batman is a very good point, and I do actually agree with you on that part. Batman Begins builds it very well, TDK loses its meaning partly, but is forgiven due to its intense and action packed storyline that make you feel like you’ve been on a journey with Batman even if your only attachment to him is an iconic one, rather than an emotional sympathetic connection. Don’t take anything away from the film, TDK is a brilliant film, and I wouldn’t have even noticed the change of course away from Batmans Origin had TDKR not followed the same tracks.
In a way, TDKR takes a step back from what should have been the climax to the greatest Superhero movie series ever. It dissociates itself from any connection or relevance to previous films, running alone in a more simplistic, and epic finale, but yet still detached from any of its predeccesors. Despite its fast-paced footage, and action and excitement throughout, TDKR felt more clumsy, pedestrian and predictable than its predeccesors. It was a good film, but it lacked emotional attachment. The only thing I felt was a strong attraction to Anne Hathaway, and that says alot. I did not fear Batman’s potential death. I did not sympathise with Alfred crying or quitting. I did not feel sorry for Bane, or any other character. It was as if they had a script written for a 5 hour film, and had to condense it into 2 and a half, leaving a gaping hole of character backgrounds, or development or the relationships or motives, leaving the bare bones of the plot to take you from one far-fetched step to the next, without pausing for reflection inbetween.
These are, in my opinion, the only justifiable complaints of Nolan’s Batman, which, if perhaps left me sitting slightly further back in my seat than I had been at the beginning, was still, by all accounts, the greatest super hero movies series of all time. So maybe our expectations were a little high to begin with.
I agree with Al, this just plain bad.
“Ive never commented on any website like this before but this article is so ridiculous that I had to. You honestly make one or two interesting points but 90% of this is just preposterous. How is this guy even on this website? This really makes me question if I should even continue coming to this website. Its ok not to like TDKR or any of the other films. Honestly im fine with that. But most of your point just make no sense. And more importantly you made me waste time commenting on your stupid article.”
We all know that comic books will always be better than the movies or tv shows that try to emulate them. We all know that The Godfather (the novel) will always be better and deeper than The Godfather (the movie) Right? granted, no argument there…the difference is that the Godfather (for example) Movie is still a succesfull achievement, wheras TDKR isn’t.
Perhaps 20 blunders is an overstatement, but the fact remains that TDKR is by far the worst Batman movie ever made. Unless you don’t mind hearing the SAME PERCUSSION SCORE for every single fight scene,Bane’s wimpy ass voice,an hour and a half (easy) of pointless talking(the movie could have lasted half of what it does and be a great movie) the gigantic plot holes (clean slate anyone?) but what encompasses even more the tremendous failure of this film is Nolan’s desire to make it realistic, when it doesn’t have to be. Nolan wants to make the story of an ORPHAN BILLIONAIRE WHO FIGHTS CRIME WEARING A BLACK SUIT AND CAPE into American Beauty, or Dogville…what for? I for one believe movies should be for the purpose of entertainment. But what is entertaining in TDKR?? Batman is even IN the movie for 45 minutes tops.the rest he’s just locked away in some stupid ass prison or groping in his mansion about how sad his life is. Superhero movies should be SUPER: massive fight scenes, explosions, big ass cars, hot chicks in leather suits,etc. Here we just see how sorry little Brucey is that he has to get back in the game (the most tried and cliched plot turn as well) and spend half the movie waiting for everything we saw in the trailers. Selina Kyle (never ONCE reffered to as Catwoman)COULD have been such a huge character, instead, she randomly appears whenever the screenwriters remembered she was there… Oh, and let’s not forget that few of his villians know his true identity, or having been trying to learn it for decades…but some nobody cop in the first half hour of the movie has Wayne figured out?!and then he’s Robin? Mr.Dan, you clearly have no idea what you’re talking about by defending this film.
Cesar, there is so much wrong with your comment I don’t even know where to start. I want to believe you are joking but in case you’re not…
The worst Batman movie ever made? Are you serious? Have you seen Batman & Robin?
The score is outstanding and it plays during the majority of Batman fight scenes because THAT IS BATMAN’S THEME. If you notice Deshi Basara played during most of Bane’s scenes too.
Bane’s voice is subjective I guess because I found it quite intimidating and interesting. There are some plot-holes like in most movies but I wouldn’t point out the clean slate as one of the major ones. Name one talking scenes that didn’t provide information/move the characters and story along. If you just want mind-numbing action go watch Transformers or something.
That was the WHOLE POINT of Chistopher Nolans trilogy; to take a larger than life hero and make it more realistic for viewers. If you want the larger than life hero read the comics or watch the campy takes on Batman.
What is entertaining in TDKR? Watching Bruce struggle with the fact that he is no longer in his prime and so how the hell can he defend his city? Watching him go from everything to nothing and then building himself back up into the hero Gotham needs, watching everyone deal with the repercussions of lying about Harvey Dent, Bane and his plan, the epic last 20 minutes etc.
Bruce isn’t doing nothing in that prison he is learning more of Bane’s backstory (and eventually Talia’s) which is essential to know why Talia and Bane are doing what they’re doing.
Everything you just described about Superhero movies is so superficial with no depth whatsoever. Heroes should have to deal with right and wrong, why they do what they do, self-sacrifice etc.
Selina Kyle was huge in this movie and done very well. I honestly don’t even know what you’re talking about.
Maybe John Blake finding about was a bit weird but again, it’s the story behind how he found out that was important as it reflected Bruce’s story and gave you insight into Bruce’s character that he would never reveal. Blake isn’t stated to be Robin at the end, he is is set up to be the new Batman or Nightwing. It is stated by Bruce that Batman can be anyone, not just Bruce Wayne.
Ok, well I actually agree with almost every point in this article…
ESPECIALLY the gadget issue…. I enjoyed this article….You’re accusing the author of being too protective of his precious Batman comics, but Nolan fans are way too protective of their precious Batman movies.
I think the Nolanverse has worked very well. It has taken a character and rooted it as much into our world as a masked vigilante could be (he is frequently called this in the movies)
I think some complaints about the movies are sounds. The best plot is perhaps the first, the most dramatic is the second, the most jam-packed it the third. I’m not sure why Nolan did not choose to devote a whole movie to Two-Face, that would have been interesting, but still, that wasn’t the tale he wanted to tell. The death of Harvey was as important as the life of Harvey – and so what is the Joker outshined batman? I mean, come on, the bad guy is always more fun than the good guy – I have thought that since I was a kid.
Plot-holes in this movie? Perhaps a few, my biggest problem is that the backstory for the third movie for Bane seemed to be a bit complicated for the time they had to tell it – he could have simplified it a bit… I dunno
A very badly written article.I was expecting to find some “blunders” in the series.All I found was how the writer doesn’t like Nolan’s version of Batman.Change the title to “Why I don’t like Chris Nolan’s Batman”.From what I have understood you are badmouthing the film because it’s not what you expect from a Batman movie.That’s your problem,not mine.So deal with it more gracefully instead of writing childish articles.
Ok, where do I start?
1) While this list stopped being a “blunder” list at about #16 and devolved into a Superboy-Prime “Everything was Better on My Earth” list, I do have to admit that you have a few good points. Not many, but a few. The emotional attachment for the main character, the situation-stumble rather than the detective work or “lack of the hunt” as you phrase it…those really were lacking (just a bit, mind you) and therefore are legitimate gripes.
That being said…
I believe that the main problem people are having with TDKR is simply this: everyone seems to forget its a trilogy. Several times (in your articles and in the comments section below) the phrases “back in Batman Begins” or “in The Dark Knight” litters the prose. Nolan built up Bruce in Batman Begins simply to say “Look, here is the protagonist everyone.” You take that as your Rosetta Stone and you can enjoy the other two simply because you know where the character is coming from and what his philosophy and motivations are. Even in TDKR. Was Nolan supposed to go back and spoonfeed everything back to you in 4 minutes of exposition?
Frankly, that is not realistic. Just like your complaint on Alfred not being utilized “properly” (whatever that means), you can’t simply show every side of every angle of every equation in a two hour movie. Hell, not even in a two and half our movie. To draw a comparison to the Avengers, the reason that movie worked was because you have like 4 movies of exposition build up to the point where when Cap, Iron Man, Thor et al finally form the team, it seems natural because you know the world and you know the personalities already. This is why the villains get so much more build up in the sequels…because they are new characters and they need it more so than the protagonist (I’m pretty sure that is film school 101 knowledge).
If you want to explore every facet of these fictional characters lives, motivations, relationships, etc. you have three options: 1) comics, 2) novels and 3) a 24 episode TV show…preferably with multiple seasons. TV shows can afford to go into that much detail because (gasp) they have more time to play with.
Not knocking Nolan, Burton or the games…they all bring something to the table and they all hit or miss on a few things. Its the idea of the Batman (The Soul of the Source that you mentioned) that allows these things to happen. Just because something doesn’t conform to your reality (or fantasy) doesn’t make it bad.
Just my two cents
Wow this guy missed a lot. It’s like he wrote the article before he saw the movies and tried to twist them to fit his thesis. So many inaccuracies and really weak arguments.
You bash Nolan for giving Batman a tank because he should BE the tank then talk about how unrealistic his movie is in the next paragraph as if Batman being a tank and messing everybody up just because he is batman is realistic. Then you knock on the batsuit because spider-man didnt need the tech of the batsuit even though spider-man has superpowers and you still dont realize how really unrealistic it would be for a man begin his vigilante adventures in gotham (one of the most corrupted/dangerous cities in the world) with only a gray spandex suit as protection. There are so many flaws and fallacies in your assertions that i really couldn’t read the whole article.
Also, Nolan dont give a fu about comic iconography. He’s creating his own iconography. He didn’t make the movies because of the world’s thirst for more comic movies. He made the movies because he had a vision for Batman that he wanted to share with the world
Sorry but this article is plain and simple ranting on all the things 1 person found wrong with the movies. We live in a world where you can have the movies or the comics OR BOTH!, just pick one and leave it at that. Don’t come on here and scribble your opinion down on a website just because the movie is not exactly 100% like the comics. Boo hoo. Yeah there are 1 or 2 things in the movies that I gripe about, but what movie is not without its gripes?
“Where’s the trigga!” for example, which I actually found quite hilarious, but apart from that I don’t let a stupid thing like that ruin a movie for me until I get home and fuel my ego by furiously badmouthing why the movies are not the way I wanted them to be. This article is full of “IT SHOULD BE LIKE THIS, WHY IS THAT NOT IN IT!”. As for your reference to the tumbler, you’re not a car person I can tell. I would sell my soul to buy the tumbler if I could. Although I have read about 1 batman comic when I was younger, the Nolan films are really my introduction and foundation on who and what the character of batman is and means to me. This will always be my favorite version now and always. If I read the comics when I was younger, the role might be reversed and they may have been my favorite but who cares at the end of the day. I love every character in the movie, even the new ones in TDKR, well Bane anyway, and although the Dark knight will be my fav out of the trilogy, I enjoy all of them in their own way. I know people are sadly allowed to express their opinion…which can turn into hate propaganda but it is still called their ‘opinion’, but please keep this nonsense to yourself next time you need to fuel your own desire and see what other comic fanboys agree with you in their Nolan witch hunt.
So, if you have issue with Nolan films for not being Batman, then I have to ask two questions that both contradict your point? 1) Who is Batman, of the many carnations we’ve been blessed to experience? 2) Who is yours? See, by default, “Batman” as a non-fluid, concrete, sole interpretation entity must date to the original, which is Bob Kane’s. Do you know that man carried around a gun? Also, as the darkness of Kane’s stories gave way to camp (you know, adjusting for the times, just like Nolan did), the character inherently changed. So, is your Batman camp-Bats or gun-Bats? If neither, then guess what? Your Batman IS A REINTERPRETATION!!!!! So many people say the “Animated Series” Batman as their definitive model, and I whole-heartedly agree, but I’m not naive enough to think that because another artist has a slightly different, albeit still honorable to the core values of the character, version that they’re wrong. That’s ludicrous!! Remember when Frank Miller reenvisioned the character? Bruce Timm? Or, if we’re sticking with comics, how about Denny O’Neill, often considered the greatest Bat-editor, ushering in the mature modern vision for the character. It’s called open-mindedness. Or, at the very least, it’s a matter of realizing that disliking something and objectively seeing fault with it can be far different.
Your Alfred point is SO FAR OFF, sir. First, he has some wise quips throughout the series. Also… I’ve always hated the unrealistic comic tone of the character, the “yessir” Alfred. If you’re brought up with the responsibility of raising Bruce as your own, thus protecting him, it makes all the sense in the world that you would eventually stop, like the circumstances in TDKR dictate, and say, “NO MORE. THIS CAN’T BE ALLOWED TO HAPPEN. I CANNOT CONDONE THIS ANYMORE.”
I am just disappointed in the ending. It should have ended with Batman taking Robin in as his sidekick, not giving up the mantle. I mean it doesn’t even have to follow the comic books to know that the way the third film ended was absolutely out of character in every way possible.
I agree with everything here. I absolutely loved batman begins but didn’t really think the last two films were very good.