Have to give props to SubaruWRXfan who provided 80% of the videos. Also pittsburghmovies
two final videos from Pittsburgh
"Keep walking"
The Dark Knight Rises Anticipation Station
- Thread starter JacksonArcher
- Start date
Have to give props to SubaruWRXfan who provided 80% of the videos. Also pittsburghmovies
two final videos from Pittsburgh
"Keep walking"
He was amazing. I feel bad that I didn't get to meet him in Pittsburgh, but what he was able to capture was just incredibly awesome.
Nowhere Man
Commodore
I don't know anything about the movie industry, so I wonder, is it illegal to film or take pictures of a movie bieng filmed? I mean it is public property and shouldn't the 1st amendment protect people? I don't understand how they have the authority to tell someone to put thier camera away. Doesn't the public have a right to be there and witness it if they want? I really don't know, please enlighten me.
I believe everything is game on an open set. We would not be getting the type of footage coverage we have been if this was a totally closed off set. Same with the "Avengers" and "Man of Steel" productions and to a lesser degree "Dark of The Moon" who had an open set for most of their location shooting.
Nowhere Man
Commodore
That sounds right, its just in those videos they are telling whoever to put the cameras away. I guess they are just wanting them to do it, but no real authority.
My buddies and I were talking about this film and I'm sorry that we cannot muster up the sheer enthusiasm for it that is presented in this thread. Sure, it should be good, and we will see it, but a certain ennui has set in.
First of all, let's go back to Batman Begins. It's a great reboot of the franchise and does right by actually analyzing Bruce Wayne as a character, something the other films didn't really do, and least not really.
And there are those people that like Batman Begins better than the Dark Knight, but not for the same reason most people like the original better than a sequel,, which is because sequels are usually disappointing. TDK can hardly be called by anyone as dissappointing - but most of those people that do like BB better is because they happen to still be more interested in Wayne as the main character, and the ideas of fear and all of that, whereas the sequel was more of a crime drama set against a complex three-tiered moral compass.
The fact is that BB set up the sequel in interesting ways, for one thing the Joker card and the other, the "escalation" discussion, and for the other, word before the film came out was that they were going to go with the notion that it "was going to get worse before it got better" (meaning crime and the state of Gotham) despite Batman's presence. Batman Begins made decent money to be sure, but they were compelled less to top that film than to just make a good film to follow it up, a film that would explore the themes it hinted at. It was only when the film's marketing, Ledger's casting, and, much later, his death, all happened that the hype machine took over, but the reason it worked is because when the film was made, they couldn't give in to all that hype because it really didn't exist until post production, and instead, they were just trying to make a kick-ass film. And they did. But let's not forget that even though it was a good film, it, like all of Nolan's recent output was seriously flawed. His quick editing often leaves even keen viewers behind. I challenge anyone to really know what was happening with the bullet tests the first time they watched the film with absolute clarity.
But now, the hyper machine for this new film began way early. No matter how many ways you cut it, the new villains they picked are just as interesting as the Joker. The Joker required daring casting, a performance, that while not showy, did have to take a few chances. It was the one almost-showey performance in the film that needed to be that way. Bane seems to be a phyiscal threat to Batman because, what?, he's strong.. but that is just not as interesting to me as someone like the Joker, whose very essence strikes a polar dynamic with Batman. I honestly hope two things:
1. Nolan doesn't try to make a better film that Dark Knight so much as he just tries to make a good film in general. Giving into the hype and the expectations now wouldn't be a good idea.
2. Rumor has been going around that the LoS story comes back to the fold in this film, and if it does, I believe that Bane and Selana would not be the main villains (at most they would be the main villain's pawns) and I guess I hope he goes in that direction because, on their own, neither character seems to be as interesting a villain as is necessary. Plus, Nolan's gotta wrap up his "trilogy".
Wait -- what? Trilogy. Why is this a trilogy. It's not like Lord of the Rings or Star Wars or even (the non-trilogy but still story ending) Harry Potter where a definite story end is eminent from all that proceeded it. Batman might begin, but his ending is less important than the various separate dillemmas that he encounters, all the challenges he would face. That's why Batman TAS was such a good show and obviously would work better than an animated series set in Middle Earth. Batman just is. and what he does in individual stories is more interesting than how or why he would ever stop being Batman. There was no quest, no specific destination in these three films of Nolan's Batman.
So here's where I differ from many people. I fear that this film is simply not going to have to have the depth or breadth of the other films - it will try to conclude a story that perhaps should have no conclusion, it will try to shoehorn in a manufactured end. And the trailer was unimpressive. The original teaser trailer for TDK showed us nothing but the bat symbol, but the dialogue you hear was chosen because because it got right to the core of what the themes of the film would be. If the dialogue of TDKR's teaser is comparable and gets to the core of what this film will be, than we are all in for a very shallow movie.
Plus there seems to be an over-reliance on silly gadgets and vehicles and set pieces, and those things are not what made those films good.
I might butt heads with JacksonArcher, (just on this issue.. he seems like an awesome guy and I'd love to chat with him) but while Nolan is one of the best and most thoughtful filmmakers of popular entertainment today, he still needs to improve a lot before he can be considered a master filmmaker. Inception is a film I love, but I can only love it when I've been able to accept it's many conceits and just enjoy it. I think Ellen Page's entire character was a cop-out and was there (perhaps by the demand of the studio) to serve as a vehicle for exposition - left to his own devices her character would never had been made an Nolan would have us try to p[iece together what was going on. But, of course that still would not explain how dream boxes could work in the dream exactly like their real counterparts, or myriad of other problems I had with that film ("Fischer's injured, he won't make it, even though this is only a dream. I let's move him down another layer, and then bring him back to this layer! That will work!")
If Nolan was truly the master filmmaker that everyone seems to think he is, I wouldn't be so worried about the Dark Knight Rises, but I don't think he is as good as the hype machine would have you believe.
And again, JA, I'm not dissuading you from having your heroes, as a writer I do myself, but look to their flaws, and you might actually learn more. Concentrate on your own style, become your own film making hero, let your own personal style be unleashed instead of talking about how cool it is to be within ten feet of other filmmakers. I don't mean this as insulting or to be flaming but instead just as advice.
First of all, let's go back to Batman Begins. It's a great reboot of the franchise and does right by actually analyzing Bruce Wayne as a character, something the other films didn't really do, and least not really.
And there are those people that like Batman Begins better than the Dark Knight, but not for the same reason most people like the original better than a sequel,, which is because sequels are usually disappointing. TDK can hardly be called by anyone as dissappointing - but most of those people that do like BB better is because they happen to still be more interested in Wayne as the main character, and the ideas of fear and all of that, whereas the sequel was more of a crime drama set against a complex three-tiered moral compass.
The fact is that BB set up the sequel in interesting ways, for one thing the Joker card and the other, the "escalation" discussion, and for the other, word before the film came out was that they were going to go with the notion that it "was going to get worse before it got better" (meaning crime and the state of Gotham) despite Batman's presence. Batman Begins made decent money to be sure, but they were compelled less to top that film than to just make a good film to follow it up, a film that would explore the themes it hinted at. It was only when the film's marketing, Ledger's casting, and, much later, his death, all happened that the hype machine took over, but the reason it worked is because when the film was made, they couldn't give in to all that hype because it really didn't exist until post production, and instead, they were just trying to make a kick-ass film. And they did. But let's not forget that even though it was a good film, it, like all of Nolan's recent output was seriously flawed. His quick editing often leaves even keen viewers behind. I challenge anyone to really know what was happening with the bullet tests the first time they watched the film with absolute clarity.
But now, the hyper machine for this new film began way early. No matter how many ways you cut it, the new villains they picked are just as interesting as the Joker. The Joker required daring casting, a performance, that while not showy, did have to take a few chances. It was the one almost-showey performance in the film that needed to be that way. Bane seems to be a phyiscal threat to Batman because, what?, he's strong.. but that is just not as interesting to me as someone like the Joker, whose very essence strikes a polar dynamic with Batman. I honestly hope two things:
1. Nolan doesn't try to make a better film that Dark Knight so much as he just tries to make a good film in general. Giving into the hype and the expectations now wouldn't be a good idea.
2. Rumor has been going around that the LoS story comes back to the fold in this film, and if it does, I believe that Bane and Selana would not be the main villains (at most they would be the main villain's pawns) and I guess I hope he goes in that direction because, on their own, neither character seems to be as interesting a villain as is necessary. Plus, Nolan's gotta wrap up his "trilogy".
Wait -- what? Trilogy. Why is this a trilogy. It's not like Lord of the Rings or Star Wars or even (the non-trilogy but still story ending) Harry Potter where a definite story end is eminent from all that proceeded it. Batman might begin, but his ending is less important than the various separate dillemmas that he encounters, all the challenges he would face. That's why Batman TAS was such a good show and obviously would work better than an animated series set in Middle Earth. Batman just is. and what he does in individual stories is more interesting than how or why he would ever stop being Batman. There was no quest, no specific destination in these three films of Nolan's Batman.
So here's where I differ from many people. I fear that this film is simply not going to have to have the depth or breadth of the other films - it will try to conclude a story that perhaps should have no conclusion, it will try to shoehorn in a manufactured end. And the trailer was unimpressive. The original teaser trailer for TDK showed us nothing but the bat symbol, but the dialogue you hear was chosen because because it got right to the core of what the themes of the film would be. If the dialogue of TDKR's teaser is comparable and gets to the core of what this film will be, than we are all in for a very shallow movie.
Plus there seems to be an over-reliance on silly gadgets and vehicles and set pieces, and those things are not what made those films good.
I might butt heads with JacksonArcher, (just on this issue.. he seems like an awesome guy and I'd love to chat with him) but while Nolan is one of the best and most thoughtful filmmakers of popular entertainment today, he still needs to improve a lot before he can be considered a master filmmaker. Inception is a film I love, but I can only love it when I've been able to accept it's many conceits and just enjoy it. I think Ellen Page's entire character was a cop-out and was there (perhaps by the demand of the studio) to serve as a vehicle for exposition - left to his own devices her character would never had been made an Nolan would have us try to p[iece together what was going on. But, of course that still would not explain how dream boxes could work in the dream exactly like their real counterparts, or myriad of other problems I had with that film ("Fischer's injured, he won't make it, even though this is only a dream. I let's move him down another layer, and then bring him back to this layer! That will work!")
If Nolan was truly the master filmmaker that everyone seems to think he is, I wouldn't be so worried about the Dark Knight Rises, but I don't think he is as good as the hype machine would have you believe.
And again, JA, I'm not dissuading you from having your heroes, as a writer I do myself, but look to their flaws, and you might actually learn more. Concentrate on your own style, become your own film making hero, let your own personal style be unleashed instead of talking about how cool it is to be within ten feet of other filmmakers. I don't mean this as insulting or to be flaming but instead just as advice.
I've never bought into the idea that TDKR has to wrap up Batman's quest. It could simply be Batman overcomes incredible odds in a good story and ends on the note of Batman finally embraced as Gotham's genuine guardian angel.
I suspect that every little tidbit of information and every pic coming to light is being over analyzed to death and that what we finally get as a whole onscreen will be quite different. Letting certain things slip out can be just as misleading as keeping a super tight lid on everything.
I enjoy the occasional photo coming to light, but I try not to get to over analytical about it.
I suspect that every little tidbit of information and every pic coming to light is being over analyzed to death and that what we finally get as a whole onscreen will be quite different. Letting certain things slip out can be just as misleading as keeping a super tight lid on everything.
I enjoy the occasional photo coming to light, but I try not to get to over analytical about it.
There's not many options anyway. He dies, he stops or his identity is revealed. Or he goes on as Batman forever.
So why is there so much hype for this film? The reason the last film had hype was because the story was looking more and more interesting, not because there was a Batpod, or new armor, or whatever. But all we've seen about this film are devices, gimmicks, and what look to be bland, uninteresting characters...
I'm curious about how Catwoman will be done in this film because Anne Hathaway doesn't strike me as an obvious choice for the character. Yes, I'm interested in some of the glimpsed hardware, but I really want to see how Batman will be evolved and whether and how society's perception of him will change.
It's pretty clear to me that they will be using "Batman: Year One" "The Long Halloween" and "Dark Victory" as part of Selina's back story. It will be interesting to see to what extent. These three stories among others have been one of their main sources for material since "Batman Begins".
The success of BB, the death of Ledger and let's not forget that a Batman movie always will generate good buzz simply because it's Batman may have a roll in that too.
As for the hype for TDKR, could it be that people really liked the previous movies and looking forward to this?
Last edited:
I knew nothing about the story of TDK when I went to the cinema. All I knew was that the Joker and Two Face were in it. But I knew all about the Batpod, the new suit, the sonar, etc...
So I don't see big differences in marketing.
There is so much hype for this film because it's Christopher Nolan's final film in the trilogy and fans are anticipating and are eager to see how he will complete his story. Simple as that. Not to mention how he uses the characters in the film as well.
All of that and, addressing Warped9's concern, Nolan has a great track record of utilizing actors in ways you don't expect. I, for one, was not happy about the casting of Heath Ledger as The Joker but we've all seen how magnificent he turned out to be.
^ Exactly. Part of my excitement is to see how he uses Tom Hardy as Bane and Anne Hathaway as Catwoman.
Nowhere Man
Commodore
I mean, it should be a no brainerwhy there is anticipation for this movie. Even if you didn't like the fist two, it's the last one in this universe and it's Nolan, what else do you need?
Usually it's the other way around - the trailers and other early stuff makes a film look awesome, but then it disappoints. This could be much better than the early seems to be showing - at least I can only hope it is.
Indeed of all the films I've seen this year, the only "film" that hasn't disappointed at all (and technically it released on the last day of 2010 but I'm still counting it) is Plinkett's 110-minute review of Episode 3. yes it's not a movie, but it was fantastic and certainly not disappointing
Indeed of all the films I've seen this year, the only "film" that hasn't disappointed at all (and technically it released on the last day of 2010 but I'm still counting it) is Plinkett's 110-minute review of Episode 3. yes it's not a movie, but it was fantastic and certainly not disappointing
I beg to differ. It was his best
