User blog comment:Mr. Xemnas/2 seperate marevl cinematic universe's?????/@comment-1895174-20130201050316/@comment-3317214-20130205001258

1) Dude, do you watch Stan's Rants or not? I asked this because of your use of the word "comicbook". Anyway, "It's way too realistic to be a faithful comicbook movie"- this statement is just plain wrong. When translating stories from page to screen, you need to tread the line between the realistic and the fantastic. But it's a wide line, and there's a lot of scope for interpretation.

I feel that the Avengers sits right in the middle - it looks realistic enough while having a Norse God, a big green guy, a guy that's been frozen for 70 years, and a man wearing a robot suit come together to stop another Norse God bringing an alien invasion. Right?

The Dark Knight trilogy sits on the realistic side, finding the fantastic within the realism. And it's a great approach. Any argument you make against that in saying that TDKR was bad, is directly applicable to TDK. Are saying TDK was bad?

2) Haha, yes, but this was most certainly a conclusion. Not just an end. It was structured that way. I think you need to accept the question marks as a part of life... Have you read The Series of Unfortunate Events?

3) Except that he is actually, human. And will only ever be. He can be the guardian, the protector, the dectetive, the hero, the symbol. Bruce wayne may be the mask, but underneath that is something entirely human. He feels emotion, pain, struggle, etc. And Nolan's trilogy does that, in particular TDKR.

4) You seem to be contradicting your previous point here. Weren't you saying that in TDKR, Bruce spends practically no time as Batman, but now you're saying everything is about him erradicating crime. You complained about seeing Bruce Wayne for the first chunk of the movie, and now you're saying you can't see how they treat Batman as "the human behind the mask"? All three films follow this theme, of Batman being a symbol, and the humanity of Bruce in his endeavours to be that symbol.

5) If you didn't go into the movie knowing that Marion Cotillard was playing Talia al Ghul, then it's an excellent twist. I, as a comicbook fan, heard that she was playing that role and then forgot just before seeing the movie, and so I was totally surprised by the twist. And if you truly think that the twist was indeed obvious, then you would have expected someone to be behind Bane's strategy all along, and you wouldn't be complaining about how he "was in control of the situation, until he was turned into a tool".

And the Thanos "twist" isn't really a twist. It's just revealing who the guy behind the Chitauri forces was. It was just an awesome thing to tack on to the end to prepare you for the future.

Also, by "moment of just trying not to get squahsed", I did mean that that could mean a whole storyline.

How was that not a victory? He saved Gotham. Sometimes the victories when the hero dies are the best victories in stories. That they died trying, but they did it. It's a bittersweet thing. But let's keep in mind here that he didn't die. I think it was to do with the autopilot...

7) Dude, it wasn't far worse.

8) Really? If you watch the first video that LoveWaffle posted, he was saying something along the lines of having ridiculously high expectations for Nolan's movies, which is why he felt a little disappointed by TDKR. He compared it to Pixar, who have such a ridiculously high standard of movie as well. And then he went on to say, that it's not really fair to expect that much of a film. It's still a great film. Also, you seem to be saying that there are a lot of people who are fanatical about the film. You know there were some threats of violence made against critics who gave negative reviews.

I think I should also tell you that I have a friend who feels that TDKR is better, because TDK was so dark and gritty, and ended on a tense kind of note. Whereas TDKR is the perfect conclusion to that, and it says it in the title. He rises.

9) Yeah, some people. SM3 is probably one of the most notoriously hated Superhero movies (behind Superman IV, and Batman & Robin, of course).

10) But not really. The things that happened, happened for plot, and I don't think that they were really plot holes. And even if they were, by that logic, the Lord of the Rings trilogy would be the worst films ever, simply because they could've avoided the whole story by taking the eagles like in that HISHE.