THE DARK KNIGHT RISES Pre-Release Thread - Page 54

I think it's a pretty awful photo - but I'm guessing the source image isn't from an EW shoot, but a WB-supplied promo shot. EW likely 'shopped the empty background in, and decided to use a photo that wasn't high res enough to not blur (I have the print edition, and Batman's head is far less than sharply focused).

The spoilery little news about Joey King's quote regarding her character is kind of funny, it amounts to: "I can't tell anyone about the secret I just told everyone." Not that it's much of a secret to fanboys and whatnot.

an art project

Fuckin' fans.

That is monstrously lame. What an extraordinary waste of time. I hope that guy doesn't get work from that, but knowing how many people are idiots, he probably will.

Who's assembling those articles?  Kevin Spacey?

I was just thinking to myself, "Wouldn't it be awesome if the credits to THE DARK KNIGHT RISES were done in the style of SE7EN and every serial  killer movie of the 90's that came after SE7EN? Yes, it would take a true visionary to realize such a sequence."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freeman 

Who's assembling those articles?  Kevin Spacey?

And why was he pushing around pieces of ice? The Dark Knight Ices?
 

That video merely confirms that avoiding the "Riddler as a SEVEN-style serial killer" is proof of Nolan's genius. 

Competently made but misses the tone of Nolan's films to an almost painful degree.

Oh, how I can't wait to not see TH3 DARK KN1GHT R1S3S.

So is Mr. Freeze the bonus villain in TDKR?

Yes, but as a serial killer who like totally stuffs his victims in freezers.

Seriously the amount of villains re-imagined as serial killers is a perfect look at how horrible so many fans are.

Has this been here yet?

Oh my god that's wicked cool.

This one's pretty cool too:

http://9gag.com/gag/2334112

Quote:

Originally Posted by TzuDohNihm 

Has this been here yet?

 

Finally, Spawn comes to Gotham.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather 

Finally, Spawn comes to Gotham.

 

I knew it was slightly off somehow but couldn't place it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrknudsen 

This one's pretty cool too:

 

http://9gag.com/gag/2334112

"Penguin has a boner"
 

Newest poster!

It looks like WB hired the genius team of craftsmen who were behind those early X-Men: First Class posters.

Minimalist style is so 2011.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

Cue the hate-talk about the Batsuit!

 

So this magazine is sitting in my kitchen (Mom sent it to me, cause she knows I like Batsy). Just wondering why the bat symbol has to be hidden in a big black shape. Why can't it stand out like it's supposed to be? It's been taunting me all week on my kitchen counter. Plus, he looks like he just vurped a little in his mouth.
 

I'd prefer ditching the chest symbol altogether; it's not going to be easy to clearly see when the suit's in motion, anyway, and I don't think this iteration of the character needs it. Having a big yellow symbol on his chest seems to work against his stealth/pseudo-invisibility training, doesn't it?

It's not a good picture, though, because 1) the facial expression and 2) the print version makes it clear the top of the cowl isn't in focus (or they inexplicably didn't give EW a version that was high res enough for the front cover - which would be doubly weird, considering WB owns EW).

The actual reason Batman has a symbol on his chest is b/c it makes him easier to trademark by having a logo to associate with the property. The creative justification, i.e., excuse w/in the reality of the universe as developed by Frank Miller, is that it's meant to draw targeting attention away from his face.

I believe I mentioned earlier that I think that Nolan and his team know they've basically got to have it there, but they've no desire to have it stand out as it serves no practical function in the movie universe.

It'd look less weird if there weren't three layers to it.  There's the greyish pec armor, the black strip across that, then the raised black bat symbol on top of that.  It's busy, and the black strip does is jarring in the way it breaks up the grey.

Wally Pfister doesn't light EW covers.

If he did, I'd masturbate to it.

...TMI?

Saw the prologue in front of M:I-4 the other night. And -- not so surprisingly -- it blew away the shitty cam version. All the logical gaps are still there, but the sheer momentum and spectacle of it pushes through and just overwhelms you. Plus, Bane is cool as hell.

The Joker heist is still better, because conceptually it's a marvel while this is pretty generic... but it did its job of psyching me up for the film. Especially the sizzle reel at the end -- I want to see every movie in IMAX now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMulder 

 

The Joker heist is still better, because conceptually it's a marvel while this is pretty generic... but it did its job of psyching me up for the film. Especially the sizzle reel at the end -- I want to see every movie in IMAX now.

I also prefer the Joker heist and agree that this feels a bit more generic - but I also think they both do what Nolan wanted: presenting a snapshot view of the villains, their methods and ethos. The Joker cared nothing for his pawns and was perfectly willing to waste anyone for a whim. Bane's very much about cultivating a devoted following, and about promoting the cause in as dramatic a way as needed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

I'd prefer ditching the chest symbol altogether; it's not going to be easy to clearly see when the suit's in motion, anyway, and I don't think this iteration of the character needs it. Having a big yellow symbol on his chest seems to work against his stealth/pseudo-invisibility training, doesn't it?

I'm not suggesting yellow be added at all. Just not black on black there. He's already got a lighter shade of grey there on the suit. That would suffice just fine behind the edgier symbol.

I also kinda hoped that by 3 films in, we'd progress beyond the "looks like armor" with some kind of hi-tech explanation. Or have some kinda of comic-style layer  on top to negate the busy-ness. Nerdy nit-picking, I know. But there's no new footage to complain about Bane-audio, so...

I've been saying for at least three years that liquid kevlar, which is quite real and in use, would give Nolan a solid grounding in reality to move to a more fabric-like suit. 

But I like the TDK/TDKR suit, so no complaints from me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAIRUS 


Thing is, if you walked into a set he lit...

He was the DP for late night cable flicks like...

Took a sec, but I got it (due to the dimensions and color scheme). And chuckled.

I don't get it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freeman 

I don't get it.

Think about today's date.

God damn it haha.  Cute.

Argh I don't get it! I feel as lunk-headed as Schumacher's Bane.

EDIT: Thanks Freeman!

The Onion:

"Moviegoers Not Interested In Hearing What Is, Isn't Possible, Demand Heath Ledger Dark Knight Rises Appearance."

I'm looking forward to this film, but cannot help but feel like it will be the worst of the trilogy. I also am VERY sceptical of Ann Hathaway as Catwoman. She doesn't fit the look at all, and I wasn't fond of her costume either. I will see this at midnight, and it will probably be really good. In the end though I will go to the film feeling it won't be as good as the first two and I will probably be right. :P

Uh-huh...

It's rare that people have a feeling predict something and then predict they'll be wrong. It's weird how that works.

I don't know sometimes I'm surprised by movies. But generally threequels are never as good as the first or second. :P

It's one thing to have concerns about TDKR's ability to successfully follow and close up the first two. And yeah, a lot of film trilogies suffer from really lackluster third acts. 

But it's another to decide, a priori, that you're going to be disappointed and dig your heels in. Why even bother seeing it? 

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

It's one thing to have concerns about TDKR's ability to successfully follow and close up the first two. And yeah, a lot of film trilogies suffer from really lackluster third acts. 

 

But it's another to decide, a priori, that you're going to be disappointed and dig your heels in. Why even bother seeing it? 

When did I say that? I said I was disappointed by Anne Hathaway and that the movie probably won't be as good as the first two. I never said that I was going to be disappointed by the movie.

I'm the Batman!

That..is why...the internet was invented.