Hey martin...check out Phase Dance by Pat Metheny...fits the theme too! I am me, said the stranger, and I work for the ones who pay my fee...and that's not you." - The Side Street Chonicles by C.W. Badie
--- On Thu, 7/24/08, Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [scifinoir2] Do We Need a Christopher Nolan Batman Trilogy? To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, July 24, 2008, 6:57 AM (standing ovation) "My father said, 'When in doubt, castle."- Kurt Vonnegut http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQUxw9aUVik --- On Wed, 7/23/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [scifinoir2] Do We Need a Christopher Nolan Batman Trilogy? To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, July 23, 2008, 10:54 PM But that's my point, make the third film "smaller" in terms of not being as broad in scope, action, characters as the second. That would take it back to being more like the first, which was basically Batman against Ra's and, to a lesser extent, Scarecrow. The second film is amazing--phenomenal, even, but it's a bigger picture and I think they should back down a bit and do a really good film that traces Batman dealing with the woes left over from the second pic. My point is that people always starting saying "how can you top that?" which I think is a mistake. Just tell the best story possible, and long as it maintains the quality standards set, whether it makes more money or not than the second really shouldn't be the goal or the concern. -------------- Original message -------------- From: "Tracey de Morsella" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I agree, it does not have to top the second, but I think it has to be as good as the first, which was pretty awesome. Batman/Bruce Wayne as a character is kind of dry, sarcastic and low key when not provoked. I thought Bale gave a very nuanced performance. I think the Nolans are up to it -----Original Message----- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 12:13 PM To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] Do We Need a Christopher Nolan Batman Trilogy? That's my point don't try to top this film. Just make a good third film that logically continues the threads left over from the second film. Don't try to outdo the second in any way, just tell a good story. And for that, I think Ra's, Talia, and maybe even Two Face might work I disagree about Bale. I think he was good, and for some reason Batman himself seemed to be more accessible, more real this time around too. I thought Bale did a great job, as did the entire cast. What annoyed you about Christian? -------------- Original message -------------- From: "Mike Street" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I don't think it would top what was done in this film. The center > piece was the Joker and without a major center piece like that I don't > think it will see the same success. > > If I where him I would go with the Ridder as the next villain and have > be be a serial killer putting secret messages all around gothem trying > to get at batman. But the Joker is batman's greatest villain and can't > easily be out done. They will have to think and think and think long > before they even go into production on a 3rd film. And as we all have > seen 3rd films are cool but just not as good as the original or the > master piece that was The DArk Joker..cause really Christan Bale was > annoying to me in this movie. It was all about Heath. > > > On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:24 PM, wrote: > > I've been talking to people about this for a few weeks. Think we discussed > this here a while back. Back then I stated that I think Ra's Al Ghul's return > would be a great idea. I still think that would work. One, Ra's is immortal (or > at least long-lived) so he could return. If Nolan doesn't want to go with the > Lazarus Pit thing, it's always possible to craft a way for Ra's to have survived > the tram crash. Ra's is a master manipulator, so we could return to a battle > that's less focused on powers or physical prowess, and one that more has Bats > trying to take on Ra's machinations and his organization, a battle of wits. > Also, I think bringing ni Talia as a love interest for Bruce/Batman would be > great. Find a sultry, intelligent, dangerous, tough, raven-haired actress who > could be a femme fatale, assassin, and daddy's girl all at once, and make her > the potential dagger into Bruce's heart. Perhaps even make her worm her way into > Bruce's life unknown to him, with Ra's only revealed as he > > r father later. Maybe Talia could even be introduced as someone helping Batman > from his current problems (can't say more here). Perhaps Ra's could bring in > another villain, or another villain could be brought in, but with him, Talia, > and a good treatment of Batman's current plight (can't say more) that would > suffice. > > > > I think the biggest mistake most directors make is trying to make the third > film *more*: bigger, louder, more CGI-filled, more FX, more fights, more > villains. Thats when you get a muddled, overblown, crowded mess like Spider-Man > 3 or X-Men 3. Studios of course want to do more, more more! But that's not > really Nolan's thing. He wants to make good films, not just *big* films. > > > > So I think the third flick should be in a way "smaller" than the second, > backed down a bit in tone and tempo, and allow Bats to work on his problems > (can't say more) and battle wits with Ra's. I return to that, a battle of wills > and one of image and symbols, would be a fitting end to the trilogy. Fitting > also because Ra's was there at Bruce's genesis, so why not bring him back for > the last film? > > > > I think a third film is warranted, even mandated by the way the second ended > (can't say more) and Nolan *has* to return! > > > > > > -------------- Original message -------------- > > From: "Tracey de Morsella" > > Do We Need a Christopher Nolan Batman Trilogy? > > > > Was 'The Dark Knight' good enough? Should we leave it at that? > > > > Congratulations Christopher > > Nolan. You just > > delivered the best comic-book film ever. And creeping hell, it happens to be > > one of the all-time great sequels too. And did I mention it just shattered > > box-office records like a sledgehammer on a potato chip? What are you doing > > next after going to Disney World of course? Oh yes, you might just attempt > > to break the dreaded comic-book film trilogy curse. Good luck mate, > > succeeding with that will make your accomplishments on > > The Dark Knight seem > > down-right pathetic. > > > > After witnessing the cholesterol reducing* genius of The Dark Knight this > > weekend, a weird thought struck me. Do we need a third entry in Nolan's > > Batman trilogy? Don't get me wrong, we all want to see one. But should Nolan > > (who's technically not signed on for a third film, but I'd be shocked if he > > passed) risk soiling all he has rebuilt from the ashes of Joel Schumacher's > > napalm raid with another foray into bat country? Can we not just leave > > Batman Begins and The > > Dark Knight as one of the great one-two punches in cinematic history? Of > > course not, The Dark Knight was too damn good and made too much cash not to > > green-light The Caped Crusader.** > > > > I don't think I need to remind you that a fully satisfying third film in a > > comic-book trilogy currently exists in the same realm of the Tooth Fairy and > > a talented Paul W.S. Anderson's. Superman III. Sucks. Batman Forever. Three > > words: Tommy Lee Jones. Blade: Trinity. I don't like vampires in my iPod > > commercials. X-Men: The Last Stand. Seriously, was that fucking Prince with > > the sonic hand-clap superpower? In my opinion the closest film to make a > > dent in a the curse is Spider-Man 3 - deeply flawed and lazy, but full of > > great action. Yet, not many are willing to even give it that much credit. > > After all, it's hip to hate on Spidey these days. Only when a third > > installment of a comic-book franchise gains an overwhelming consensus that > > it's worth a damn will I admit the curse is broken. > > > > It's no coincidence that the suckitude of comic-bock film number three is > > inversely proportional to the ass-kickery of movie number two. With no > > origin story and a bigger budget, the first sequel allows the filmmakers to > > essentially blow their loads in both action and character exploration. Hell, > > Nolan admitted as much during an interview > > > > dark_knight_to_life/> RopeofSilicon ran last week: "We certainly didn't > > want to hamper ourselves by saving anything for future films." And it's > > pretty hard to disagree with that statement considering how epic The Dark > > Knight is. > > > > Nolan and company played it smart by waiting to break out the franchise's > > best villain until the second film - something most comic-book films don't > > do. Yet, part of me almost wishes they'd save The Joker for the third film. > > After the emotional meat grinder The Joker throws Batman, Commissioner > > Gordon, and Harvey Dent into, how can you top that? It'll be nearly > > impossible to raise the stakes that high again. And let's face it, we'll > > probably never see another Joker story in this franchise since no actor is > > stupid enough to jump in the gigantic clown shoes Heath Ledger left behind. > > > > If a film is only as good as its villain, how can you beat Ledger's Joker? > > Like most people - SPOILER AHEAD - I thought The Dark Knight was setting up > > a Two-Face story for the next film - perhaps the only villain that could > > follow-up The Joker. Oh how we underestimated Nolan's ambition. Who knew > > he'd wrap the entire Two-Face arc into The Joker's story and succeed wildly > > at it? > > > > So now we don't have too many choices left. The Riddler is like a nerdier, > > less menacing version of The Joker. Mr. Freeze: great tragic villain, but > > too sci-fi > > > > trilogy> for Nolan's world. And so is Killer Croc and Clayface for that > > matter. Catwoman would be interesting, yet Tim Burton covered the subtext of > > her relationship to Batman pretty well. Poison Ivy: nah. And Bane is pretty > > much a beefed up version of The Gimp from Pulp Fiction - although a leather > > daddy super villain would definitely be a first for a mainstream film. The > > Penguin, perhaps, but I'm only interested if they could guarantee Phillip > > Seymour Hoffman in the role. And then there's the Mad Hatter. Quite simply, > > fuck the Mad Hatter. > > > > Perhaps the best path for the third film lies within Frank Miller's "The > > Dark Knight Returns." It's a radical idea, but just maybe Nolan should jump > > 30 years in the future and do a loose adaptation of Miller's masterwork. > > Several of the ideas found in Nolan's films would dovetail seamlessly into > > Miller's story (Batman gangs, Batman's one rule, Batman as an outlaw). And > > yes, I just said no actor would be stupid enough to follow-up Ledger's work, > > but The Joker in "The Dark Knight Returns" is 30 years older and that opens > > up new avenues for exploration. So recast the role with an older actor, and > > maybe you'll hit some sparks. Who knows? > > > > Yet, that'll never happen. Not unless fanboys rise from their mother's > > basements and stage a coup at Warner Bros. However, with all of that said > > about the odds being against the third film, I have complete and utter faith > > in Nolan (with the exception of his debut film, Following¸ the man has never > > made a movie that didn't end up on my top-ten list). If anyone can pull it > > off, he can. The Dark Knight alone should win anyone's trust. Although if > > confirmation comes that Robin will cartwheel into the next film, be afraid, > > very afraid because Nolan has lost his mind. > > > > * Not scientifically proven yet. > > > > ** The rumors begin here on the third film's title. I'd love The Dark Knight > > Returns, but it carries too much baggage between Frank Miller's hailed > > graphic novel of the same name and Batman Returns. Although, I'm back to > > that in a second. > > > > http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/article/do_we_need_a_christopher_nolan_batman_t > > rilogy > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Founder of : > The Greasy Guide > http://greasyguide.com > Your Online Destination for Urban Information > > Call us at 917-267-2761 and leave us some feedback or a tip on some good gossip. > > Senior Director of Social Media Marketing > Zezza Networks > > Visit my latest campaign for Jim Beam at http://www.theStuffInside.com > Celebrating true character featuring: Mark Murrman, Crown City > Rockers, Russ Abbott, Robby Gordon, Montgomery Gentry, and Operation > Homefront. > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
