The Dark Knight Rises 3rd trailer

[Wrathborne]

@Dracarays

You'll have to forgive me for using movie logic on a movie because I was a film major in college. Most things are open to interpretation but in this case I have an extra grain of salt on you, In this case the plot device was a person and inadvertently made into the main character.

The thing about the Burton Joker and Batman with Vale the plot device, she only gets Bruce to talk about stuff he wouldn't talk about normally, while that is needed for the audience, the Joker talks about nothing with her.

The characters are supposed to clash, but in this case clashing over a woman..A WOMAN!..They must be insane, heh heh.

The real problem is that seeing characters like this in the eyes of a regular person doesn't work because the regular person has no interesting qualities, shes a photographer and she likes bats.

Look at HellBoy(first film), you have a similar idea, with the exception of the regular person and HellBoy both romantically interested in Liz.
There are 2 differences, 1 the regular person has a bit more personality and is a little more interesting to watch, the second thing is that even though the regular person is a big part of the film...he isn't the focus of it.

You're seeing whats happening with him, not through his eyes and the focus is always HellBoy.

In the Burton Batman...you see it mainly through Vales eyes, and a few times through Batmans eyes. But the film pushes Batman aside to see through Vales eyes, because shes pushed into center stage.

The Narrative is a little jumpy at this, and once again the problem is that Vale is about as interesting as a sparking dog turd.
She has a +1 scream, and a -3 personality, she fills the plot device well as shes there to get Bruce to open up to the audience, but considering shes pushed into the main stage of this film, this is ultimately the problem of her being the main character.

She is the focus of the film, How many scenes does Vicki Vale take the lead? Shes the first one to notice the smilex gas at the parade, the one to get Bruce to talk about his past, the one to confront Bruce about being Batman, The one to save Batman from being un masked, the one to distract the Joker with a faux BJ, the one who is given the smilex combination info, the one who spearheads the catch Batman on camera project with Alexander Knox, the one who has tickets to Bruce Waynes charity ball etc.

The entire film revolves around her to the point where Batman and the Joker are pushed into the background just so you can see her reaction to what they're doing, instead of seeing them do it.

This makes her the main character because its 90% through her eyes. Feel free to count how many scenes Vicki Vale has in contract to the Joker or Batman/Bruce Wayne.

If my words dont convince you, maybe the math will.

[Dracarys]

You've gone back to number of scenes again, I already said it is content of scenes and her scenes are largely expanding other characters while she herself gets very little, most of the 'examples' you listed are examples of that. Feel free to re-read this thread and continue in circles.

[Wrathborne]

Hey Dracarys,what happens when you have a 1 hr and 45min film made up of 19 scenes and of the 19 scenes a character is in 14 of them and is in 84 out of 105 minutes? (This is just for an example)

What about when the character is in the most important scenes and ends up being the main plot device?

What about when the character ends up being the focus of the film even though the character isnt the main character?

The character is accidentally the main character. Which is what I've been saying the entire time and is the problem with the film.

Its called 'Batman', but Batman ends up being a secondary character to the Joker, who also ends up being a secondary character, to Vicki Vale, who is a secondary character who ends up being the primary character.

That's just how it is, I now blow my extra grain of salt at you.

[Rombie]

Ignoring the film school lecturing (no offense), I _used_ to be in the Burton over Nolan camp because I felt Burton's two films held true to the Batman comics I remember when I was young (that were starting a darker and more gothic edge to move away from the campy-tv show and the follow on that had for over a decade). But I've come to realise to say one over the other is silly because you can't compare them because neither are trying to be the same thing other than they have the idea of Batman as a character.

A year or so back I purchased Burton's Batman on BD and having not seen it for well over a decade, clearly nostelgic memories clouded the numerous issues the film that it has. It's still a good film with some amazingly iconic scenes, great Joker events thanks to Jack, and a clear sense of dark humor, but it also gets bogged down in some useless scenes and details and the pacing is horrid.

I can't complain about the story or dialogue in Nolan's work either, but I think it's obvious he has issues with fight sequences and shooting action when it comes to the edits. My main issues with Nolan's films however was more the inconsistancy of theme to source. I loved the gritty real brown look in Begins that Gotham had, and the seperation into the different areas which are key into the more modern comics while retaining the feel of the earlier ones too... but it felt like this look and idea was entirely lost for TDK and doesn't seem to have changed looking at it's sequel as well. It was as if they realised they needed to have a modern and realistic approach after the first because otherwise they're somehow retreading other peoples work or something.

This problem however is where I realised you just can't compare them. If Burton's movie was the response to the 'comics' of the early 80's (the Batman script and movie had a long gestiation period that ran almost the entire decade until the 89 release of Burton's work), then Nolan's is entirely affixed more on the 'graphic novel' concepts that tried to make the characters more realistic and believable. And it is in this that you are no longer using apples and apples, but apples and pineapples. ;p

[Wrathborne]

Rombie slightly agrees with me, ha ha, I win, tis law now. Spread the word....spread it!*shakes fist*

[Stu]

But Nolan can't direct or edit actions scenes to save his life. Not to mention his abysmal dialogue and the lack of good performances in his films.

MWUHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

[Wrathborne]

I dont normally agree with Stu, but damned if he isnt right.

[Branden_Lucero]

hope this turns out to be good, even if its not on par with the previous film.

[Canas Renvall]

I just saw this trailer today in IMAX when I saw The Avengers, and... damn, I got some chills.

Anne Hathaway looks awesome as Selina Kyle. And Bane looks legitimately freaky.

I'm so ready for this. So, so very ready.

[Pikminister]

Anne Hathaway looks awesome as Selina Kyle.

No you see, she doesn't. It's the only thing in the new Bats movie that rubs me the wrong way. She doesn't even act like the character. But I'm saying this based on the trailers... maybe after watching her performance in the whole thing I'll change my mind.

[Wrathborne]

Nolan looks to be sticking more with the 'Cat Burgler' side of the character than the cat-like themes of her.

[Pikminister]

Nolan looks to be sticking more with the 'Cat Burgler' side of the character than the cat-like themes of her.

Yep. Nolan likes to give the characters a more realistic spin. Well see how it turns out.

[Wrathborne]

Spencer is already hating the movie I hear

[Pikminister]

And yet he'll be first in line to see it.

[Dracarys]

Nolan looks to be sticking more with the 'Cat Burgler' side of the character than the cat-like themes of her.

This is what I dislike about these films. No longer is she catwoman, she is just another thief.