I still remember coming home from the store after I'd gone out to buy my copy of The Dark Knight. After my compulsive ritual of unwrapping the DVD as neatly as humanly possible, I stuck it on my shelf and began what would become an unhealthy affirmation for the next few years to come; googling news on the sequel. Was Chris Nolan signed on for another? Would the Joker still appear as planned? If so, who would recast Heath? Who else in the rouges gallery would be reintroduced? Would they dig for more lesser known baddies? Was scarecrow still out there pestering the bat? I was even trying to find out what the color schemes would be, (Batman Begins eerily shimmering in deep oranges and browns, while The Dark Knight glowed with a twilight blue). No matter how unreasonable my demands for knowledge were, I let my inner-child turn me into the annoying fanboy I now loathe.
Well, post the following year's Inception hype, me and all of the other Bat-junkies finally began getting some answers, albeit your typical Chris Nolan answers. While these premeditated and carefully worded comments often left us both unsatisfied and even more anxious, knowing Chris we'd take what we could get. Nolan saying anything other than the variously phrased "wait and see" was always enough to shut us up for five minutes, (most of us, anyway).
After silencing those annoying rumors regarding Johnny Depp, Philip Seymour Hoffman, and Angelina Jolie, updates began trickling more steadily. From the film's title all the way to the start of shooting, we got our bits of news here and there. While those cameras were rolling however, tensions were at an all time high for people like me. Once or twice I even contemplated the risk of Michael Cain passing before he could finish his final scenes as the fatherly butler. With great anticipation came great irrationality, and when Chris called it a wrap, I felt the gust of relief like no other. It was finally done and in the bag. I almost couldn't believe it. From then on out we were only left with the waiting game, but that's all easy sailing.. isn't it?
Now some of you may have noticed I skipped the many bits of controversy in the midst of all that "news" period, but I felt that it all went without saying. While I personally loved the casting of Tom Hardy and trusted the addition of Hathaway, as well as the gang from Inception, (Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Marion Cotillard), I knew there would be negative talk regarding any new roles, and was prepared for the post-Ledger backlash. What did catch me off guard, however, was how far this talk would go, to what degree, and for how long.
Our generation had handed to us the internet; the most ridiculously convenient means of accessing information in the history of mankind. You may have heard of it, and if you're like most people it's a part of your daily life. But while this gift was a blessing, it's also been a curse. One could argue the pro's and con's all day, however it seems to have definitely become an outlet for our inner-child to relentlessly whine and demand. Countless set photos, "leaked" scene descriptions, and various cast implications are constantly distracting us from the fact that in reality, we still no nothing about this film in a cinematic sense, and/or how it's going to pan out on the big screen. I remember after all of the spoiler photos I mistakingly browsed pre-Dark Knight, I thought for sure I'd ruined the movie for myself. But when July of '08 rolled around, I was in the dark as much as anyone else in that theater. Seeing photos of what even appeared to be some key scenes, ended up serving little justice to what the movie would actually look like on film.
This frantic fanboy blogging does get out of hand however, when they slam the film in a sense of finality before it ever sees the light of day. So many criticisms surrounding this movie simply don't make sense considering the little that we've seen, while other attacks on what we have tend to be unfair. Way too many "fans" aren't giving Nolan and company the fighting chance to top the Caped Crusaders last outing. Listed below are 3 major complaints regarding the film, and a brief description of why I personally see them all as arbitrary.
1. The Title
I'll admit, at first I was taken aback. My assumptions post the iconically titled last film [the first to not include "Batman (Something)"] were that the studio would follow suit for the final chapter in the trilogy. They clearly did with their other DC film currently shooting, and so did other studios with their reboots [The Incredible Hulk (2008), The Amazing Spiderman (2012), Man of Steel (2013)]. These more old-fashioned titles just make for a cooler comic book feel, rather than the boring Hollywood stamps prior (Superman, Batman, Spiderman, X-Men, etc.). It's like calling a Bond film James Bond... you just don't. Yes, even these titles are just marketing the hero, but to many and myself, it adds a bit more charm.
So why does the title suck? Well, I'd say if you're like me, it just probably wasn't what you were expecting. Why should we leave it alone? First of all, there's a massive factor in Hollywood we need to get through our heads; CHRIS NOLAN DOES NOT HOLD ALL OF THE POWER. While the studio will give him even more money and freedom after giving them a blockbuster like Dark Knight, it's still hollywood and they need to secure a profit. Movies are funded in a business fashion, therefore execs are always going to give conditions, creative input, and call some shots if it's ever going to be marketed. Does this make them evil? No, it gives them insurance knowing the man they just handed 250 million dollars to will make that money back; a fair concern.
When you make a movie that surpasses a billion dollars the following year of it's release and you're paying for the sequel, you want people to know these movies are connected. Again, this is a pretty reasonable request, and while it may not be the coolest title, believe me, they could tamper in ways much worse. In contrast to a franchise like Harry Potter, the level of recognition is slightly trickier in terms of grabbing the average Joe; and while just about any other title would still remain obvious to most fans as to what it's a sequel to, most people aren't following. Even if the title had Batman, not everyone will assume this is more of that "Dark Night" movie with "Heath Ledges". Simply put; the studio has to assume Bob and Sally are dumb, and shove it in their face. Despite all of this, I still think Rises works. They could have went with something more generic, or even gone and named it The Dark Knight Returns (in fact, I'm pretty confident that title was probably suggested by Warner Bro's), but Chris went with something unique to the film. With Thomas Wayne's lingering question of "Why do we fall?", followed by a sequel where he continues to fall, it only makes sense that our hero finally learns to pick himself back up.
2. The Teaser Trailer
Of all of the complaints, I found this one to be the most mind-boggling. Yes, the teaser used old footage. Yes, the new footage was limited. Yes, the CGI wasn't great for the title sequence, but ladies and gentlemen, (ignoring the fact that this is a TEASE-r), lets wind the clocks back a year... OK, I can't get away with that reference, we actually have to wind them back 5, when the first Dark Knight teaser was released. What we saw was a black screen, cue in the now famous theme, followed by a voiceover dialogue between Bruce and Alfred, summarizing a boiled down synopsis of the film. Batman upped the ante, mob's gone too far, Joker's something worse, and people were going to die. The exposition was all about the theme, escalation! But hey, this trailer showed us absolutely NO footage, gave limited new details, and finished off with a poorly CGI'd logo sequence. But did we mind it then? No, not really. We were all hyped to finally hear The Joker's voice, and for many, this teaser alone cleared Ledger's name for all those who questioned him being casted.
So why did we mind the Rises teaser doing it's share of teasing? It wasn't any different, in fact it was sort of better. I mean, sit and really think about it. Why did we whine? It brought back iconic images from the first two films (appropriate for a full circle conclusion to a trilogy), it hinted Liam Neeson's shadow, and perhaps the tying of those lose ends, it actually revealed brand new footage of the film, and the dialogue did the same as The Dark Knight's teaser, giving us a brief summary and theme setter. Batman left, the city fell, Bane and his forces are rising, Gotham needs it's hero. Not only did this teaser use the same methods, but this one was longer, had more visible work put into it, and lastly, it showed us all what we were begging for... new footage; something he didn't add last time, yet we complained more than ever. As one of our heros was hospitalized and struggled to breathe, Batman was the hero we needed, but apparently not the one we deserved.
3. The Look and Sound of Bane.
This harkens back to a point I made earlier and ironically enough makes the most sense answered by Nolan's famous "wait and see" response, because really guys... just wait and see. Again, how the film/characters come off onscreen is never well-represented by leaked pictures, or even official releases. Am I the only one who remembers the first official photo of Heath as 'the clown prince of crime'? He looked more like Beetlejuice cos-playing as John Wayne Gacy. Even Heath's photo on Empire looked pretty silly, but when we saw him in action it was completely different. Not really a difference I can place, it's just the magic of cinema. They had a vision and it worked, and not because we wanted it to work. Plenty of angry fans were waiting for Heath to mess it all up, and maybe he did for some, but for many it worked. Changing a character isn't anything new, it's what this reboot and the whole franchise is all about; fresh interpretations. Movies aren't comic books, and how closely they tie is at the mercy of who's making the film. If you're willing to put up with Batman looking nothing like he does in the comics, than lets forgive them for doing the same with the bad guys (...like they always have).
In regards to Bane's voice, yes, I've seen the prologue, but lets not forget that executives have seen the whole film. Having said that, I will admit that as cool as I thought he sounded, there were certain words I didn't quite make out, and that it was certainly a challenge. You had to listen very carefully, and probably too carefully for it's own good. Luckily, the film was (and still is) in beta mood, and before the release of the first full trailer, they cleaned it up. But did it really need to be fixed even more? For any who didn't notice, not only was the distortion practically removed fully by the release of the final trailer, but his audio was amped up tremendously in the mix, almost too loud, all in response to those who kept complaining. Was it still hard for people to understand? In terms of complaints, apparently, but I don't have an answer. For the life of me I couldn't figure out how it was difficult to hear post-being fixed the first time, but I can't make any claims that people were just complaining to complain (however, that is exactly how I feel). Regardless of all of the mess, I'm still willing to wait and see how the finished product looks and sounds. I think when all is said and done, a happy medium will have been found. Again, the studios waged 250 million dollars on this production. If there were the slightest doubt it wasn't ready for theaters, they wouldn't release it. And please, don't try and convince me in the comments that "they wont care, people will see it anyway and they'll make their money", because it isn't true. The Dark Knight didn't make a billion dollars opening weekend, it took a year of viewer retention. You wont get that year of success from a bad blockbuster, and you wont get fan retention from an inaudible cast, and the studio knows that.
Closing Thoughts
While these are only 3 of the many complaints floating around, they were ones I felt casted the biggest shadows, while coincidentally making the least amount of sense. Tying this end up to my initial gripe, I feel our frantic info-frenzy is dooming us to an age of mass pre-judgement in the world of film. I believe we demand too much, I believe we get too much, and I believe we're ruining the cinematic experience for ourselves. My opinions on The Dark Knight aside, I think our expectations for the follow up are unmeetable, because the pedestal on which we've placed it's predecessor is artificially crafted from the insanity our own hype-crazed minds. I loved Batman Begins, and it remains my favorite Batman film to date, but I didn't walk into The Dark Knight as a jaded critic. When I went into the theater, I watched the movie as myself, just a fan wanting to see what was next. So what's different this time around? Was it the passing of Heath Ledger? Was it his mass praise by the media? Was it the academy's acknowledgement? Is it just the pressure of a threequel, or is it really Bane and Catwoman that are so terribly paining people? Is it all or none of these things? Again, I don't have an answer, but my theory remains the same. I think the problem is us, and I think we just need to chill out. Come July, it will be interesting to see not only how the film is, but where all of this griping goes from there. I guess whether we like Nolan's famous response or not, we'll just have to wait and see.