The Avengers VS The Dark Knight

[thenammagazine]

You guys are so silly. Films aren't meant to be 100% realistic. 'Specially not superhero films. I didn't question the plausibility of two face's existence or of cryogenic freezing in the '40's when watching either film. I just enjoyed them for what they were.

My point all along.

I respectfully disagree.

They are definitely NOT set in the same type of reality IMO - for reasons that have been rehashed over and over in this thread and in others.

If they were, then Batman would not be rebooted to make way for a JLA compatible version.

If Ra's Al Ghul shows up in TDKR having been resurrected from a Lazarus Pit - then I will concede the argument fair and square . But I simply don't see something like that happening.

Actually, that's not true. Nolan's Batman would fit perfectly if Superman and Green Lantern happen post the events of TDKR.

 

[Khev]

Actually, he did fail to give props to Richard Donner,

Especially since Raimi (who he did give props to) repeatedly was quoted as saying he tried to emulate Donner's formula with Spider-Man 1 and 2.

 

[intothevoid]

Actually, that's not true. Nolan's Batman would fit perfectly if Superman and Green Lantern happen post the events of TDKR.

Key there being 'post'.

It wouldn't work otherwise. The fantasy element would have to be turned up a few notches in the post TDKR universe for that to work

 

[IrishJedi]

Here's the aspect that most of the people chiming "Nolan's films are based in realism" seem to either miss or ignore:

One of the most unrealistic elements is the character of Bruce Wayne/Batman himself. There is really no way he could exist in the real world, even as portrayed in the Nolan films. The dude would have to be a pure sociopath, if not an outright psychopath.

Incidentally, I can see RDJ's Tony Stark being an actual person long before Bale's Bruce Wayne.

That's certainly not to say I think Iron Man or The Avengers are realistic. Of course not. I'm just pointing out that the notion of a "realistic" Batman movie is fundamentally flawed... because the very character itself is far-fetched.

Yes, Nolan goes to great pains to achieve his "heightened reality" and toes that line much more closely than other superhero movies. But it's a fallacy to call the films realistic.

 

[SixMillionDollarMan Guy]

lol you guys are going to get this thread closed with your sexual abuse jokes

Nah, don't worry. Shropt hasn't arrived yet.

 

[jye4ever]

Here's the aspect that most of the people chiming "Nolan's films are based in realism" seem to either miss or ignore:

One of the most unrealistic elements is the character of Bruce Wayne/Batman himself. There is really no way he could exist in the real world, even as portrayed in the Nolan films. The dude would have to be a pure sociopath, if not an outright psychopath.

Incidentally, I can see RDJ's Tony Stark being an actual person long before Bale's Bruce Wayne.

That's certainly not to say I think Iron Man or The Avengers are realistic. Of course not. I'm just pointing out that the notion of a "realistic" Batman movie is fundamentally flawed... because the very character itself is far-fetched.

Yes, Nolan goes to great pains to achieve his "heightened reality" and toes that line much more closely than other superhero movies. But it's a fallacy to call the films realistic.

Yes to this. /\

Just don't tell voidcat I agreed

Wait.

 

[Khev]

When I think of "realism" with regard to superhero films I think of the world *around* the heroes, not the heroes or villains themselves. How close is the superhero's world to ours? Do people react to the superhero in a seemingly realistic way?

For its time I actually consider Donner's first Superman to be every bit as realistic, perhaps even moreso than the Nolan Batfilms. At least we get that Superman is acknowledged on a national, possibly even global level.

If there was a guy driving tanks around a city and saving thousands of people's lives it'd be on the news every day in every state and in multiple countries. I don't really get the impression that that's the case in the Nolanverse which is definitely far from realistic.

As zany as the Avengers are I think Whedon did a better job of showcasing how they might exist in today's world and how people might really respond to them.

 

[Alex Logan]

Here's the aspect that most of the people chiming "Nolan's films are based in realism" seem to either miss or ignore:

One of the most unrealistic elements is the character of Bruce Wayne/Batman himself. There is really no way he could exist in the real world, even as portrayed in the Nolan films. The dude would have to be a pure sociopath, if not an outright psychopath.

Incidentally, I can see RDJ's Tony Stark being an actual person long before Bale's Bruce Wayne.

That's certainly not to say I think Iron Man or The Avengers are realistic. Of course not. I'm just pointing out that the notion of a "realistic" Batman movie is fundamentally flawed... because the very character itself is far-fetched.

Yes, Nolan goes to great pains to achieve his "heightened reality" and toes that line much more closely than other superhero movies. But it's a fallacy to call the films realistic.

I have to question the idea that he would have to be a pure sociopath, if not an outright psychopath. Do you say that because you believe that a person would have to be crazy to do what Batman does? Running around in a Batman suit beating up criminals?

If anything Bruce Wayne/Batman is the definition of sanity. Without it he be no different then the villains. Instead of locking them up, he would just kill them. This has been discussed many times in the comics, cartoons and movies.

Take a person like Sam Childers. Many people would say the guy is nuts and maybe he is, but he does what he does because he believes in something greater then himself. A perfect example of a real person who's actions are some what similar to Bruce Wayne/Batman.

If anything Batman is not realistic/could not exist because of financial reasons and because one man couldn't do what Batman does.

 

[Khev]

Driving tanks and motorcycles at 100+ miles per hour down freeways with bad guys shooting at you just isn't something that you can do very long without hitting a pole/car/pedestrian. NASCAR racers aren't that precise and they devote their LIVES to that very focused profession.

 

[IrishJedi]

I have to question the idea that he would have to be a pure sociopath, if not an outright psychopath. Do you say that because you believe that a person would have to be crazy to do what Batman does? Running around in a Batman suit beating up criminals?.

Uh, yeah, pretty much. But that's not the only thing.

If anything Bruce Wayne/Batman is the definition of sanity. Without it he be no different then the villains. Instead of locking them up, he would just kill them. This has been discussed many times in the comics, cartoons and movies.

And that's why the character is fictional, and not realistic. A lot of real people have lost their parents at a young age or been through other terrible tragedies. How many of them have taken to dressing up as an animal-themed vigilante? That's right, none, because you'd have to be pretty damned bonkers... no matter how much money and resources you had.

And that's just on a surface level. For a person to be as fundamentally driven and focused as Batman is on fighting crime they would absolutely be sociopathic and unable to function in other areas of their lives. If Batman were realistic, he'd be more like Rorschach... a loner who is so driven by his quest for justice he might be losing touch with reality. He'd be completely anti-social, probably wouldn't even bathe, etc. To be as absolutely dedicated to a single purpose as Batman is a real person would lose touch with pretty much everything else.

And then there is the trauma of seeing and enduring the stuff Batman deals with on a daily basis. That alone would send an actual person straight to the loony bin. At best, they'd have severe Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, which would almost surely lead to many other conditions. He would completely snap. And pretty quickly.

So, yeah... no, Batman is not the least bit realistic even on a personal level.

And that's fine. I love the character. Absolutely one of my favorites. But I know it's fantasy, even in its very notion.

 

[intothevoid]

No point arguing this over and over again - we all have our entrenched opinions.

There's no way I'm going to concede that a 9 ft green monster that transforms to and from human form + a couple of demi-gods + a super soldier + a whole host of evil aliens, is equally unrealistic as a man running around in a batsuit with super high tech gadgets fighting crime + a guy with a half burnt face managing to survive half a day

Yeah, not happening

 

[Niltusk]

If anything Bruce Wayne/Batman is the definition of sanity. Without it he be no different then the villains.

No. This is a central theme about Batman and him being the flipside of the Joker. Each has their mental disorders and each manifests differently.

Its like the old adage of the hero and the coward. Both feel the exact same way in battle, one runs one way one runs the other.

If you've had much experience with the batman character and this doesn't sink in, you're probably never going to get it and should just enjoy hime being "AWESOME". Biff! Pow! Wow his teeth are nice!

 

[IrishJedi]

No point arguing this over and over again - we all have our entrenched opinions.

There's no way I'm going to concede that a 9 ft green monster that transforms to and from human form + a couple of demi-gods + a super soldier + a whole host of evil aliens, is equally unrealistic as a man running around in a batsuit with super high tech gadgets fighting crime + a guy with a half burnt face managing to survive half a day

Yeah, not happening

I don't think anyone was arguing that. Certainly there are varying degrees of realism/non-realism. The point is simply that the Nolan Batman films aren't actually realistic, either. The rest is semantics or debating minutiae like "9 foot green monsters vs people running around with severe 3rd degree burns". Who cares? It's all fake.

 

[Niltusk]

I don't think anyone was arguing that. Certainly there are varying degrees of realism/non-realism. The point is simply that the Nolan Batman films aren't actually realistic, either. The rest is semantics or debating minutiae like "9 foot green monsters vs people running around with severe 3rd degree burns". Who cares? It's all fake.

This. Debating within genres can be cool, but if it gets to the point where it becomes so trivial that you start sounding like "those guys" arguing over whether Star Wars technology or Star trek technology is more real, just step away.

 

[K07]

I don't think anyone was arguing that.

No, nam was arguing that.

Certainly there are varying degrees of realism/non-realism.

Die Hard movies are not realistic. James Bond movies are not realistic. Would it make sense for an alien invasion to swoop down and attack the world in those movies? Or would the audience be confused and likely outraged at such a stupid thing happening? I would argue despite all the laws of physics being broken, Nolan's Batman world doesn't contain gamma radiation powered heroes or creatures from alternate dimensions. To argue the 4th degree burn thing or the drop from a building as proof it could work is ridiculous.

 

[thenammagazine]

And that's just on a surface level. For a person to be as fundamentally driven and focused as Batman is on fighting crime they would absolutely be sociopathic and unable to function in other areas of their lives. If Batman were realistic, he'd be more like Rorschach... a loner who is so driven by his quest for justice he might be losing touch with reality. He'd be completely anti-social, probably wouldn't even bathe, etc. To be as absolutely dedicated to a single purpose as Batman is a real person would lose touch with pretty much everything else.

That's an extremely valid point.

No point arguing this over and over again - we all have our entrenched opinions.

There's no way I'm going to concede that a 9 ft green monster that transforms to and from human form + a couple of demi-gods + a super soldier + a whole host of evil aliens, is equally unrealistic as a man running around in a batsuit with super high tech gadgets fighting crime + a guy with a half burnt face managing to survive half a day

Yeah, not happening

I believe the "unbelievability" comparison I was making was between Hulk and the very functionality behind 2-face's look. Thanks for playing though.

 

[Niltusk]

No, nam was arguing that.





To argue the 4th degree burn thing or the drop from a building as proof it could work is ridiculous.

Call Mythbusters!!!

 

[intothevoid]

I don't think anyone was arguing that. Certainly there are varying degrees of realism/non-realism. The point is simply that the Nolan Batman films aren't actually realistic, either. The rest is semantics or debating minutiae like "9 foot green monsters vs people running around with severe 3rd degree burns". Who cares? It's all fake.

I never said the Nolan films are realistic either
Just that they are much closer to realistic than Avengers or most other superhero movies, for example.

Nam was arguing that they are equally unrealistic.

Definitely agree there are varying degrees of realism.

 

[The Josh]

I'm with khev when I say realism in these films. Are the worlds around them like ours. Both series have done that and so that's why I think both films are equal. Because everything else the heroes are or are doing isn't really that "real".

 

[thenammagazine]

Just that they are much closer to realistic than Avengers or most other superhero movies, for example.

Nam was arguing that they are equally unrealistic.

Definitely agree there are varying degrees of realism.

So you're being obstinate today.

Perhaps then, you can explain how Nolan's 2-Face would be able to function in the real world.