Spider Man 2

[Wallcrawler]

Originally Posted by Ragged Robin

Also from that "love interest" comment it sounds like you don't actually know what you're talking about. Talia has been the greatest batman villian in the last decade in the comics. NOT just a 'love interest.'

And she was handled so well in DKR. Weird.

Bats had no idea who she was.

[Ragged Robin]

Originally Posted by Wallcrawler

And she was handled so well in DKR. Weird.

Bats had no idea who she was.

Because, as I said, Nolan shits all over the source material.

[Wallcrawler]

Originally Posted by Ragged Robin

Because, as I said, Nolan shits all over the source material.

And yet you claim that its not a big deal to disregard it.

Strange.

[Ragged Robin]

Originally Posted by Wallcrawler

And yet you claim that its not a big deal to disregard it.

Strange.

Yeah it's not a big deal apparently because The Dark Knight is the highest grossing film ever. Nolan's films were the complete character and source assassination and yet you're discreditting the Spiderman franchise due to such a small and pointless source material change like web-wrists versus web-shooters. That's like me saying Nolan's films are shit because he makes Batman expose his eyes and wear makeup instead of wearing high tech lenses like he's supposed to . Virtually everything about Nolan's films goes against source material down to how the character flat out responds and you hardly hear a peep about it.

[Wallcrawler]

Originally Posted by Ragged Robin

Yeah it's not a big deal apparently because The Dark Knight is the highest grossing film ever.

Talia wasn't in The Dark Knight. She was in The Dark Knight Rises.

Nolan's films were the complete character and source assassination and yet you're discreditting the Spiderman franchise due to such a small and pointless source material change like web-wrists versus web-shooters.

If I discredited the Spiderman films, it certainly wasn't over the webbing. I wish that were the problem I had. You could start with the Mighty Morphin Power Ranger dumpster dive that produced the Green Goblin costume in movie one, on to the challenge of how many times will Peter remove his mask and reveal his identity, to Otto Octavius being a genuinely good dude that was corrupted by "evil smart arms that control him" and then killed by sacrificing himself at the end of the second film (after Peter once again inexplicably takes his mask off for no reason in front of the most dangerous man he's ever faced to this point), to the humorous side note of Harry's butler waiting until he's taken a grenade to the face and become horribly disfigured to go ahead and tell him that his father died by his own hand, on to the biggest goat **** of them all being the destruction of the idea of With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility by making the thief that Peter chose not to stop turn out not to be Ben's killer after all. Sorry Pete, even if you had stopped him, Uncle Ben would still be dead. You've become Spider-Man and destroyed your social life for nothing.


That's like me saying Nolan's films are shit because he makes Batman expose his eyes and wear makeup instead of wearing high tech lenses like he's supposed to.

Not quite.

Virtually everything about Nolan's films goes against source material down to how the character flat out responds and you hardly hear a peep about it.

It isn't for me to say that its impossible to make a good movie using comic book characters without staying true to the source material. Nolan's take, while not in line with the books, sat well with fans in Batman Begins, and The Dark Knight.

Dark Knight Rises however, in my opinion, was complete garbage.


You can argue it to the end of time. Some like Kubrick's "The Shining", and others hate it because its nothing like the book its based off of.

Changing the source material is a lie. Youre making a film directed at the fans of this material. Its their money you want. Instead of making the film true to the source material, you take their money and say "Look at all this shit I changed! You like it?"

In some instances it works out. In other cases you get Ben Kingsley as the Mandarin, and doing an awesome job for a few minutes and then a giant middle finger in the middle of the film as he's revealed to be nothing more than a patsy., and the Mandarin you read about in the comics isn't going to be represented in the film at all.

.

[Easy 6]

Dark Knight Rises WAS a letdown, Tom Hardy aside.

[Wallcrawler]

Originally Posted by scott free

Dark Knight Rises WAS a letdown, Tom Hardy aside.

It was too much of a departure from the characters.

This Nolanverse Batman started off strong, but the idea that Bruce would just stop being Batman for eight years is way out of left field, and then the whole "Peace, Im out" at the end when he fakes his own death and retires with the bitch that set him up to be killed was another WTF moment.

Batman fans know that Bruce IS Batman. He is that guy. The billionaire playboy is the façade. No way he just stops being that pissed off rage fuelled vigilante.

If Nolan didn't want to do CGI, he shouldn't have done Bane. No venom present whatsoever. The mask he wears is supposed to be a painkiller?

Odd that the "World's Greatest Detective" never once targeted that mask in their first fight. It should've been flashing like the vulnerable area of a boss in an arcade game.

In the books Batman broke Bane because he was utterly exhausted when they finally clashed. Bane released everyone and his brother from Arkham and after Bats wore himself down for weeks on end bringing them all back, then Bane attacked and wiped the floor with him.

In Nolan's film, Bats is apparently not smart enough to target the mask, and too old and washed up to fight him one on one. But hey, get thrown in a hole with a displaced vertebrae, get a nice crunches and pullups montage, and Bats is able to come back and own Bane in a beautiful homage to Rocky 3.