|
Post by thisguy4000 on Dec 22, 2017 20:16:15 GMT
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice of course has a reputation for being relentlessly dark, despite the fact that it co-stars Superman, and its tone is often cited as one of the reasons why it didn’t click with people, but how dark is it in comparison to TDK?
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Dec 22, 2017 23:24:16 GMT
Definitely. Watch TDK again, and I think most people would be surprised how funny some parts are. BvS never had anything like that.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Dec 23, 2017 0:45:57 GMT
I will not say darker but definitely bleaker. Though they are both equally dark, TDK is allowed to breath whereas BvS just continuously hammers you with dreary darkness so much that it's nearly suffocating.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Dec 23, 2017 1:20:53 GMT
I will not say darker but definitely bleaker. Though they are both equally dark, TDK is allowed to breath whereas BvS just continuously hammers you with dreary darkness so much that it's nearly suffocating. Yeah, I'd say this about right.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Dec 23, 2017 1:34:58 GMT
Yes. Very much so.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Dec 23, 2017 17:07:22 GMT
Yeah. Put it this way: TDK is about hopeful people that are trying to be brought down by a jaded cynic. BvS is about jaded cynics being jaded cynics, including The Man of Tomorrow by a certain point. If that boat scene occured in BvS, the passengers would have blown the s*** out of each other while Batman relentlessly machine gunned Joker's goons into paste.
Plus, TDK had some steady comic relief from characters like Fox and Alfred (and Joker, of course). And it doesn't have those ugly grey/brown filters.
|
|
|
Post by RedDeadFallout on Dec 23, 2017 21:00:07 GMT
Does it matter? The question is, is the darkness in BvS executed well? The answer is usually no.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Dec 23, 2017 22:32:39 GMT
Does it matter? The question is, is the darkness in BvS executed well? The answer is usually no. Never said it mattered. I just wanted to know what people think on the matter.
|
|
|
Post by James on Dec 28, 2017 16:22:51 GMT
I actually thought this said 'Is BvS better than TDK?' which is a no-brainer right over there
Ehhhh....Tough to say since TDK is more like a crime film than BVS, but even then, TDK is still more fun to watch. BVS honestly wasn't meant to be dark, so my vote goes to that.
|
|
|
Post by James on Dec 28, 2017 16:24:42 GMT
If that boat scene occured in BvS, the passengers would have blown the s*** out of each other while Batman relentlessly machine gunned Joker's goons into paste. Yup, pretty much.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Jan 11, 2018 3:08:17 GMT
I finally—finally!—got around to seeing Batman v Superman just last night after a year of hearing it was the worst thing ever made. And… Well, um, how do I put this?
I was blown away. In a good way. This is a remarkably good movie.
I’m more than a little surprised by that assessment myself. I was completely prepared to write it off as a moody, dark mess, brooding in sophomoric existentialism—à la its predecessor, the gloomy, humorless Man of Steel. Now, to be sure, I told weireraptor that this movie couldn’t be as relentlessly bad as the critics made it out to be, and I believe I was right in that judgment—but I wasn’t expecting it to be good.
First things first—the bad. The last twenty minutes or so are the kind of relentless and, in fact, rather dull fights and explosions we’ve grown to expect of superhero movies; the entire Doomsday subplot is rather superfluous, especially when we could have spent more time in character examination. As much as I adore Gal Gadot, giving her a tiny role, scarcely more than a cameo, in a movie entitled Batman v Superman hardly does justice to either of the titular heroes or to her delightful Wonder Woman. Ditto is the utterly unnecessary Justice League build-up; I can’t stand shared universes, and here is a prime example of why. Connected, here, is the fact that the great Batman v Superman fight, to which the whole movie has been building up, is dropped surprisingly and unfortunately quickly. Even here, wallowing in the clichés of superherodom, director Zack Snyder delivers some brilliant imagery—Superman’s sacrifice and its effects are marvellously shot (the juxtaposition between the funerals is stirring and simply magnificent)—but I would have preferred if the great “big bad” were never added.
And now on to the good. This is film-as-opera, closely recalling, of all things, Francis Ford Coppola’s Bram Stoker’s Dracula (by which one sequence in particular—Bruce Wayne’s vision of the bat emerging from his mother’s tomb—is inspired, acknowledging its debt). This is a picture of many climaxes, of classical music, of showing the human inside the apparently larger-than-life character—of leitmotifs from Greek or even Biblical tragedy (by way of Nietzsche), of majesty—and, in fact, of sheer reverence for the character of Superman.
That is, after all, what this film does: it dares to take superheroes seriously, and it succeeds. It doesn’t wallow in gloom, it shows what the superhero would be like in this age of political polarization and terrorism. Sometimes, of course, that is disappointing and even miserable—but sometimes it is positive, even hopeful. Such is this movie, and such is life: it acknowledges darkness but believes, at its core, in light. It does not believe, in the end, that we are all dull and damned as well as damned dull: Snyder and his writers believe in humanity. To wit, they care.
Mr. Snyder directs something here that is truly great: not a superhero movie, to be honest, but a Wagnerian opera using superhero characters, anchored by moving and captivating performances from Ben Affleck (one of the best Batmen I’ve seen), Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, and Jesse Eisenberg. There’s an early montage, inspired by Citizen Kane, that ranks as one of the most visually intriguing things I’ve ever seen in a superhero movie. There are sequences in which Synder’s camera, his imagery, is incredible—this is a personal work. This is one of the best such pictures I’ve seen in the genre—and, in fact, I’m as surprised as anyone to say that. I enjoyed nearly all of it. What an opera, and what a movie.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jan 11, 2018 5:35:40 GMT
No and I'll tell you why, because there is no dramatic impact on the viewer.
If it wasn't for Harvey Dent's character arc I would say BvS, but the meaning of his arc (how much a person can take before they snap) is far darker than anything in BvS.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2018 20:47:02 GMT
Depends on what you're talking about.
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Jan 11, 2018 22:38:20 GMT
TDK was darker.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jan 15, 2018 18:52:05 GMT
I finally—finally!—got around to seeing Batman v Superman just last night after a year of hearing it was the worst thing ever made. And… Well, um, how do I put this? I was blown away. In a good way. This is a remarkably good movie. I’m more than a little surprised by that assessment myself. I was completely prepared to write it off as a moody, dark mess, brooding in sophomoric existentialism—à la its predecessor, the gloomy, humorless Man of Steel. Now, to be sure, I told weireraptor that this movie couldn’t be as relentlessly bad as the critics made it out to be, and I believe I was right in that judgment—but I wasn’t expecting it to be good. First things first—the bad. The last twenty minutes or so are the kind of relentless and, in fact, rather dull fights and explosions we’ve grown to expect of superhero movies; the entire Doomsday subplot is rather superfluous, especially when we could have spent more time in character examination. As much as I adore Gal Gadot, giving her a tiny role, scarcely more than a cameo, in a movie entitled Batman v Superman hardly does justice to either of the titular heroes or to her delightful Wonder Woman. Ditto is the utterly unnecessary Justice League build-up; I can’t stand shared universes, and here is a prime example of why. Connected, here, is the fact that the great Batman v Superman fight, to which the whole movie has been building up, is dropped surprisingly and unfortunately quickly. Even here, wallowing in the clichés of superherodom, director Zack Snyder delivers some brilliant imagery—Superman’s sacrifice and its effects are marvellously shot (the juxtaposition between the funerals is stirring and simply magnificent)—but I would have preferred if the great “big bad” were never added. And now on to the good. This is film-as-opera, closely recalling, of all things, Francis Ford Coppola’s Bram Stoker’s Dracula (by which one sequence in particular—Bruce Wayne’s vision of the bat emerging from his mother’s tomb—is inspired, acknowledging its debt). This is a picture of many climaxes, of classical music, of showing the human inside the apparently larger-than-life character—of leitmotifs from Greek or even Biblical tragedy (by way of Nietzsche), of majesty—and, in fact, of sheer reverence for the character of Superman. That is, after all, what this film does: it dares to take superheroes seriously, and it succeeds. It doesn’t wallow in gloom, it shows what the superhero would be like in this age of political polarization and terrorism. Sometimes, of course, that is disappointing and even miserable—but sometimes it is positive, even hopeful. Such is this movie, and such is life: it acknowledges darkness but believes, at its core, in light. It does not believe, in the end, that we are all dull and damned as well as damned dull: Snyder and his writers believe in humanity. To wit, they care. Mr. Snyder directs something here that is truly great: not a superhero movie, to be honest, but a Wagnerian opera using superhero characters, anchored by moving and captivating performances from Ben Affleck (one of the best Batmen I’ve seen), Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, and Jesse Eisenberg. There’s an early montage, inspired by Citizen Kane, that ranks as one of the most visually intriguing things I’ve ever seen in a superhero movie. There are sequences in which Synder’s camera, his imagery, is incredible—this is a personal work. This is one of the best such pictures I’ve seen in the genre—and, in fact, I’m as surprised as anyone to say that. I enjoyed nearly all of it. What an opera, and what a movie. Saw your other post linking this. Great read.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Jan 16, 2018 0:08:31 GMT
Saw your other post linking this. Great read. Thanks; I had fun writing it! I was trying to think of exactly what to say, as I was surprised at how much I was enjoying it. I think I got to the Senate committee, and I thought, Dear God, am I actually going to like this movie? And—well!—you know the rest. I was intrigued by how the movie tried even pre-emptorily to deal with the criticisms: “Martha,” in particular, and its connection with that lovely Kane-esque opening montage. I’m rather surprised that, as the OP wrote, it has been criticized as “relentlessly dark”; I found it much less darker, and more thought-provoking, than The Dark Knight or Man of Steel.
|
|
|
Post by kleinreturns on Jan 19, 2018 0:27:56 GMT
Interesting Thread, but i would say TDK is darker not just because of Harvey Dent's descent into madness and the final confrontation between Two-Face, Gordon and Batman, but Batman's final determination at the end to take the heat for Dent's murders and become an outlaw.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Jan 21, 2018 3:08:41 GMT
So I’m watching Batman Returns again for the first time in ages, and a few thoughts come to mind...
1. God, this movie’s dark—freaky, to be precise.
2. This is a genuinely good movie.
3. This is the Batman I like, the chthonic Batman who harkens back to mythology—an unrepentant vigilante who sees the war against crime as his tragic but necessary duty.
4. With its weird creepiness, amazing and ironic how inspired it is by the Adam West TV show.
5. Affleck had to base his performance on Keaton. Had to. The Affleck Bats could very well be an older and more world-wearied Keaton Bats.
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Jan 21, 2018 13:14:36 GMT
I finally—finally!—got around to seeing Batman v Superman just last night after a year of hearing it was the worst thing ever made. And… Well, um, how do I put this? I was blown away. In a good way. This is a remarkably good movie. I’m more than a little surprised by that assessment myself. I was completely prepared to write it off as a moody, dark mess, brooding in sophomoric existentialism—à la its predecessor, the gloomy, humorless Man of Steel. Now, to be sure, I told weireraptor that this movie couldn’t be as relentlessly bad as the critics made it out to be, and I believe I was right in that judgment—but I wasn’t expecting it to be good. First things first—the bad. The last twenty minutes or so are the kind of relentless and, in fact, rather dull fights and explosions we’ve grown to expect of superhero movies; the entire Doomsday subplot is rather superfluous, especially when we could have spent more time in character examination. As much as I adore Gal Gadot, giving her a tiny role, scarcely more than a cameo, in a movie entitled Batman v Superman hardly does justice to either of the titular heroes or to her delightful Wonder Woman. Ditto is the utterly unnecessary Justice League build-up; I can’t stand shared universes, and here is a prime example of why. Connected, here, is the fact that the great Batman v Superman fight, to which the whole movie has been building up, is dropped surprisingly and unfortunately quickly. Even here, wallowing in the clichés of superherodom, director Zack Snyder delivers some brilliant imagery—Superman’s sacrifice and its effects are marvellously shot (the juxtaposition between the funerals is stirring and simply magnificent)—but I would have preferred if the great “big bad” were never added. And now on to the good. This is film-as-opera, closely recalling, of all things, Francis Ford Coppola’s Bram Stoker’s Dracula (by which one sequence in particular—Bruce Wayne’s vision of the bat emerging from his mother’s tomb—is inspired, acknowledging its debt). This is a picture of many climaxes, of classical music, of showing the human inside the apparently larger-than-life character—of leitmotifs from Greek or even Biblical tragedy (by way of Nietzsche), of majesty—and, in fact, of sheer reverence for the character of Superman. That is, after all, what this film does: it dares to take superheroes seriously, and it succeeds. It doesn’t wallow in gloom, it shows what the superhero would be like in this age of political polarization and terrorism. Sometimes, of course, that is disappointing and even miserable—but sometimes it is positive, even hopeful. Such is this movie, and such is life: it acknowledges darkness but believes, at its core, in light. It does not believe, in the end, that we are all dull and damned as well as damned dull: Snyder and his writers believe in humanity. To wit, they care. Mr. Snyder directs something here that is truly great: not a superhero movie, to be honest, but a Wagnerian opera using superhero characters, anchored by moving and captivating performances from Ben Affleck (one of the best Batmen I’ve seen), Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, and Jesse Eisenberg. There’s an early montage, inspired by Citizen Kane, that ranks as one of the most visually intriguing things I’ve ever seen in a superhero movie. There are sequences in which Synder’s camera, his imagery, is incredible—this is a personal work. This is one of the best such pictures I’ve seen in the genre—and, in fact, I’m as surprised as anyone to say that. I enjoyed nearly all of it. What an opera, and what a movie. Did you watch the R-rated extended cut? Because that version apparently made a lot of improvenements when compared to the original version.
|
|
|
Post by hobowar on Jan 21, 2018 13:29:10 GMT
Batman v Superman was about as dark as Spider-Man Homecoming. The only real difference is that Homecoming wasn't written or directed by retards.
|
|