The Dark Knight Rises ***USE SPOILER TAGS***

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hey, TDK blew off using Bats as back up as seen in BB, I wonder if they'll make a return in TDKR. :lol

Sonar Batman doesn't count :nono
 
Last edited:
The Hines Ward figure is actually kind of clever and cool. I won't get it, but it's a neat and unique idea. But the quotes from McFarlane confirm he's a hack. Makes me sad because Spawn is my favorite comic hero after Batman...
 
:lecture:lecture:lecture Arrogant bastard. :exactly:

Is it arrogance if it's an objective fact? :dunno If you just take the scene that they filmed on Wall Street

where the newly freed GCPD cops clash with Bane's mercs--a continuation/expansion of the scene they first shot in Pittsburgh

--they used more than 1,100 extras, more extras than in the history of filming in New York City. Definitely not the record for movies, but the point is, most "modern" directors overly rely on cgi and other tricks for things like immense crowds and other things that would look more realistic if they were really filmed. That is not to say he doesn't use cgi at all, because of course, some things are too impractical to do in reality, like blowing up bridges.
 
Is it arrogance if it's an objective fact? :dunno If you just take the scene that they filmed on Wall Street

where the newly freed GCPD cops clash with Bane's mercs--a continuation/expansion of the scene they first shot in Pittsburgh

--they used more than 1,100 extras, more extras than in the history of filming in New York City. Definitely not the record for movies, but the point is, most "modern" directors overly rely on cgi and other tricks for things like immense crowds and other things that would look more realistic if they were really filmed. That is not to say he doesn't use cgi at all, because of course, some things are too impractical to do in reality, like blowing up bridges.

"Objective fact" is oxymoronic. It's just puffery, which by it's very definition, is arrogant and egotistical bull____. :lol
 
tumblr_m4mjtvmOJY1rn9rlko1_1280.jpg


:rotfl :rotfl :rotfl

:lol:lol:lol:lol
 
"Objective fact" is oxymoronic. It's just puffery, which by it's very definition, is arrogant and egotistical bull____. :lol

No fact is fact.

Clearly Nolan knows his film history, so he's making a factual assessment of the scale of his production relative to films since the silent era. That's pretty much all there is to it.

Douchery and arrogance has nothing to do with it :lol
 
The phrase "objective fact" may be redundant, but it's not oxymoronic, unless the definition of "objective" and "fact" changed since the last time I checked. :dunno

"Objective fact" is redundant, not oxymoronic.

SnakeDoc

Redundant means "meaningless." Oxymoronic refers to a phrase that cancels itself out. "objective" and "fact" are antonyms, and therefore when used together are oxymoronic. :wink1:
 
What was the hard dose of reality ? A 4 year old movie against the flavor of the month, and TDK wasn't all that far behind in the poll, considering....

:exactly::goodpost:

Not to mention that Avengers does have problems. I'm not saying that TDK doesn't, but Avengers has more.
 
Considering The Avengers is the greatest blockbuster of the last 10 years, I can say the problems are moot.
 
Redundant means "meaningless." Oxymoronic refers to a phrase that cancels itself out. "objective" and "fact" are antonyms, and therefore when used together are oxymoronic. :wink1:

Actually, redundant doesn't mean meaningless. It means you could omit a word without losing the meaning. So let's try that.

DarkMagic said:
Is it arrogance if it's a fact?

Makes sense to me. Not at all a meaningless question :dunno

You're skirting past the issue and wrongly arguing about DarkMagic's choice of words. It is an observation of the trend in Hollywood certainly. It's not mumbo jumbo fluff. I haven't read the article, but out of context I thought it meant the Heinz Field sequence is the first scene of it's kind since the silent era. That's not arrogance. That is indeed a fact.

Void says he's talking about the whole movie? Well, then we must be in for a treat if they took the time to use so many extras and practical shots throughout the whole epic run-time of this!

Speaking of epic run-time, has that been confirmed yet? I feel the "Lawrence of Arabia" comments all along have been pointing to a longer run-time than usual.

EDIT: Could we seriously stop dragging the Avengers into this??? Take it to the Avengers vs TDK thread please.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top