Darkness, Grittiness and Realism: Are they the same thing?

Darkness, Grittiness and Realism: Are they the same thing?

Recently there has been a general association with these three terms. Gritty and realistic, usually said together as if the two are one and the same. Is that the case though? Does “realism” inherently mean heroes and villains alike must lose their eccentricities in favor of a more “realistic” approach?

Editorial Opinion
By huckfinnisher - Oct 27, 2015 02:10 PM EST
Filed Under: Batman vs. Superman

When one watches The Man of Steel, Snyder's latest effort, one can't help but notice the entire tone matches Nolan's films. This is a no brainer because WB make crap tons of money on Nolan's films, so now they think they have a formula for success on their hands. Take what once had a joyful exubrence and trade it in for more “realistic” takes on characters. Does this though make the movies feel more real? I would argue that what is really happening is WB is has had the wool over thier eyes with pseudo realism. Meaning that they present the world not in the stylized form that comics do, but in a exaggeratedly realistic manner.

 

Take Nolan's film Begins, for all of its struggles for realism it actually included ridiculous pseudo science with what was in effect a giant microwave making all of Gotham's water turn to vapor. This is one of the dumbest plots I have heard and everyone ate it up. Why is it that Nolan refused to include to use powers etc because they were unrealistic but when it served his whim he just made up a machine to serve as a plot device?

Image result for microwave batman begins

Why doesn't this just vaporize every person in Gotham?


Nolan was not producing a “realistic” take on Batman, he was producing his idea of what Batman should be. This is why is is a terrible idea to base the entirety of DCEU on the tone of those films. Ledger's Joker, while impressive, does not represent the Joker from the comics as much as what Nolan thought would be cool. Hence the dirtiness and the scars. Up until that point Joker had always had a bit of class, but it wasn't “realistic” enough for Joker to be the wildcard kiss you or murder you kind. Now he is just a murderer who wants the world to burn, even though in the comics Joker is more of a kill you on a whim kinda guy Nolan made Ledger a straight up murderer with nothing else on his mind but to kill people or convince others how fun killing people is. The Joker in the comics is almost like two face in his decision making, going this way or that based on his insanity and multiple personality. Ledger had a clear endgame goal and never once shifted from his intention, in effect leaving behind the idea that Joker is insane and making him more of a zealot who just has different views of the world.

 

This is not the Joker, the Joker has no end game in mind and no set theology. Everything is a whim for Joker in the comics but when Nolan was crafting his Joker he took away that aspect (theoretically) because it didn't fit the story he was trying to tell. Oh but he did it in the killing joke storyline? You know what is funny about that is that actually proves my point. He had never had that intention, to prove anyone could be as insane as him, up until that point. It was just a whim he had and then he moved on. Joker's every intention is not to prove the evil of man. He is self serving in the comics, not a zealot for some poetic cause. Which brings me to my next point.

 

When doing a “realistic” version of a story, the characters always fall to the wayside for plot. Notice the lack of Robin, or Penguin, and lots of other characters in TDK trilogy. The new films seem to be embracing the comics more but are still using the same tone. Therefore they are forced to change the characters to suit the tone instead of changing the tone to suit the character. Hence Kal Drogo Aquaman and tattoed metal teeth wearing Leto Joker.

 

These aren't the definitive takes on the characters, and before everyone whines about different takes on characters hear me out. There is a “definitive” for each character out there. A version of the character (usually in main continuity or was main continuity before some kind of reboot) that manages to adequately capture the essence of the character and is iconic for the character in both look and attitude.

 

Take Christopher Reeve as Superman, there was no violation of the character from the comics, no one had to explain that this was a “realistic” take on the character because it was just an honest portrayal.

 

Every DCEU choice so far has been bogged down by the explanation that this is a realistic darker portrayal of the characters from the comics. Why though? Are there people out there who hated the idea of a light, fun Flash movie? Or is DC changing the inherent feel of their characters because they learned from the box office success of TDK trilogy that is the cool thing to do? Where does this leave the more absurd characters like Shazaam? Are we going to get a dark, gritty, blood soaked art piece about a kid who gets powers from a wizard and uses those powers to kill people? Imagine how out of character it would be to see that from an icon like Spiderman.

Furthermore is darkness and grittiness even realistic? In a movie where people can shoot lasers from their eyes and fly there is inherent silliness. One of my favorite scenes of the Raimi Spiderman films is when Spidey has to ride the lift and there is another guy in there and it is super awkward. This is a funny light REALISTIC scene. It doesn't take a serial murderer to be realistic, it doesn't have to be darkness gloom and seriousness to be real. There is levity in reality, there are eccentric people in reality, not every villain has to have some crazy ideology.

 

Hit the comments and tell me what you guys think.

James Gunn Reveals His Title For A (Hypothetical) BATMAN And SUPERMAN Team-Up Movie
Related:

James Gunn Reveals His Title For A (Hypothetical) BATMAN And SUPERMAN Team-Up Movie

BATMAN: Ben Affleck's DCEU Appearances Ranked From Worst To Best According To Rotten Tomatoes
Recommended For You:

BATMAN: Ben Affleck's DCEU Appearances Ranked From Worst To Best According To Rotten Tomatoes

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

EricBorder
EricBorder - 10/27/2015, 4:54 PM
Your assessment about the Joker is totally wrong, just saying

Have you read "The Killing Joke"? Joker's "One Bad Day" ideology is represented and interpreted perfectly in TDK, it's one of the main reasons Ledger's version is amazing
EricBorder
EricBorder - 10/27/2015, 4:55 PM
Reeve Superman is not Comic Book Superman either
EricBorder
EricBorder - 10/27/2015, 5:01 PM
@WakandasSoul

The movies are taking influence from Death in the Family, Killing Joke, TDKReturns, Suicide Squad, etc, these aren't exactly light hearted comic books

And, Superman hasn't always been a boy scout in the comics, there are references to the comics and the character all over the film

Personally, I love the tone, and there are some jokes in MOS, they just don't take the forefront like the Marvel films

I'm happy that we're getting both, I like variety, and DC is planning a Blue Beetle-Booster Gold movie, and I'm sure Shazam isn't going to be as dark as B v S or Suicide Squad
Kyos
Kyos - 10/27/2015, 5:20 PM
there are some jokes in MOS, they just don't take the forefront like the Marvel films

Which is a good thing, because almost none of the few jokes they had in the movie worked.
DerekLake
DerekLake - 10/27/2015, 5:23 PM
I'm just gonna restate what I said elsewhere:

Nolan might have used "grounded" and "realistic" to mean that there would be no super powers or magic, but that sort of naturalism is not what Snyder and Ayer mean by them. Instead, they use the term to describe their approach to characters and environments: the Suicide Squad are criminals, as criminals actually look and act. "Grounded" means approaching the Joker as if he were a real-life figure, or Clark's childhood as if he actually had unexplained, dangerous powers. In this context, both terms ask the question, "What if this happened in our world? How would we react?" In other words, it doesn't take super powers for granted.

To give an example, Iron Man 1: Tony Stark builds a functioning mech suit that is superior to the most advanced U.S. fighter jet. Yet in subsequent films, Stark is merely treated as a super hero with technology desired by the military. A more "grounded" approach might have had a more forceful response from the U.S. and other governments, who would view the Iron Man technology as a major security threat, one that, in the hands of a lone citizen, might spark a new arms race and World War 3. Ironically, with The Winter Soldier and Civil War, Marvel is becoming more grounded in its approach.

Grounded does not mean no super powers (realism vs. realistic), it simply means that there is a palpable real-world (i.e., messy and complex) context to these films.


As to the DC EU, "dark" is hardly an apt description. TDK's Joker was dark. Suicide Squad is dark. Neither Man of Steel not Batman v Superman are dark. Serious and melancholy for MOS, grim and melodramatic for BvS, but neither gritty nor dark. Daredevil is gritty and dark, not the DC EU. And there is no reason to think that films like Shazam and Flash will be equally grim or melancholy. What they will share, however, is the approach outlined above.

As to Man of Steel's approach: yes, a melancholy tale of a socially-outcast and overly-sheltered boy who discovers he is an alien orphan with powerful, unexplained, and dangerous abilities that could upend human society if exposed, is a big departure from the way in which the Superman story has been told. But it fits with the above approach and is a much better story conceptually. Yes, the execution failed to tell the story as effectively as it should have (largely due to the narrative structure and too much focus on Lois and the Daily Planet), but it is a much, much better story that does something interesting with the character. And it is not without precedent in the comics.
huckfinnisher
huckfinnisher - 10/27/2015, 5:42 PM
@EricBorder, "Have you read "The Killing Joke"? Joker's "One Bad Day" ideology is represented and interpreted perfectly in TDK, it's one of the main reasons Ledger's version is amazing"

Yeah I read it and I thought the story was cool but as I said in the article the story is about one time Joker tried to get that point across, it is not representative of Joker's character as a whole, if you look at all of his appearences plot etc. the only one that Joker has that motivation for is the killing joke. Nolan took one story of Joker's and made it all Joker is about. A zealot is somebody who fights for a specific cause, like Joker in Nolan's movies trying to prove that anybody could be as insane as him. Joker as a whole cares little to nothing about making that point except in that one instance in the killing joke.

"Your assessment about the Joker is totally wrong, just saying"
Your insinuation that the whole of the Joker character can be found in that one story is wrong. In every other Joker story he is just an insane person who does whatever he thinks would be fun at the time. He doesn't constantly scheme about how to make people understand his state of mind.

EricBorder
EricBorder - 10/27/2015, 6:11 PM
@WakandasSoul

Haha, cool, right on, maybe I misread it
EricBorder
EricBorder - 10/27/2015, 6:30 PM
@huckfinnisher

"In every other Joker story he is just an insane person who does whatever he thinks would be fun at the time. He doesn't constantly scheme about how to make people understand his state of mind."

^ Sorry man, your so wrong here though, the basis of Joker's relation to Batman is his obsession with Batman and trying to prove to him that they are from the same cloth, that they are both freaks

This is done in way more than one story in the comics that focuses on The Joker and his motives

TDK also took inspiration from The Long Halloween and many, many other DC Comics from over the years, this list below could literally go on, and on, and on, .....





Secondary Batcave



Harvey Dent, Gordon, and Batman





http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-VKo6FBtt3CY/TkXLlSlKkZI/AAAAAAAAB1g/QqGKi-4fj6w/s1600/pepetto.JPG



From 2001's Gotham Noir "Squealer"



Joker leaving his card behind



Joker telling multiple stories of the past, his origin is "Multiple Choice" (Killing Joke)



Leaving notes after he captures criminals

http://www.heroesmovies.pl/images/batmangrafiki/tdk/komiks/18a.JPG



Joker announces his next move on Tv



Joker Dressed as a Cop







http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-LK3QfcRC83E/TjtaTqrDn5I/AAAAAAAABvE/EAhQOJq0MuQ/s1600/whereishetkj.JPG



So, no, again, you are completely wrong about your assessment on the Joker in TDK related to the comics, this list could keep going
EricBorder
EricBorder - 10/27/2015, 6:31 PM
Some of the links didn't work but if you click on the it'll make sense

Anyway, TDK took so much inspiration from the comics, especially for The Joker
DrKinsolving
DrKinsolving - 10/27/2015, 6:37 PM
@EricBorder

Right on man! I couldn't agree more

The main difference between the Nolan trilogy and the DCEU will be the freedom that the DCEU has, Superman, Flash, Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Enchantress, etc, etc, etc, exist in the world

The lazarus pit could even exist, they won't run into the same blocks that Nolan had to deal with for TDK Trilogy
EricBorder
EricBorder - 10/27/2015, 6:39 PM
@DrKinsolving

Exactly, haha and finally!! There will be no holds barred, they can use whoever they want because it will make sense within the Universe
huckfinnisher
huckfinnisher - 10/27/2015, 6:55 PM
@EricBorder, Wait so what are you trying to say? That Joker dressed up as a cop in the movie and did so in the comic? There have been thousands of comics featuring Joker, any story you could make up would have similarities with some one of the thousands already written. You really think that Joker is striving toward the goal of making Batman understand that they are one in the same at all points in time? Your understanding of the character is very oblique, meaning that Joker has tried to make that point before but it is not the main point of the character.

"^ Sorry man, your so wrong here though, the basis of Joker's relation to Batman is his obsession with Batman and trying to prove to him that they are from the same cloth, that they are both freaks"

Oh really? Lets go to the people that created the character to end your buffonery. This is an exerpt on the creation of the Joker, speaking about Jerry Robinson, one of the creators of the Joker. "Robinson said he wanted a supreme arch-villain who could test Batman, but not a typical crime lord or gangster designed to be easily disposed. He wanted an exotic, enduring character as an ongoing source of conflict for Batman (similar to the relationship between Sherlock Holmes and Professor Moriarty), designing a diabolically sinister-but-clownish villain.[10][11][12] Robinson was intrigued by villains; his studies at Columbia University taught him that some characters are made up of contradictions, leading to the Joker's sense of humor. He said that the name came first, followed by an image of a playing card from a deck he often had at hand: "I wanted somebody visually exciting. I wanted somebody that would make an indelible impression, would be bizarre, would be memorable like the Hunchback of Notre Dame or any other villains that had unique physical characters."[13][14] He told Finger about his concept by telephone, later providing sketches of the character and images of what would become his iconic Joker playing-card design. Finger thought the concept was incomplete, providing the image of Veidt with a ghastly, permanent rictus grin.[10]"

Wow thats weird, nowhere in that was anything about him wanting to convince Bruce that they are similar. Why? Because that was added by later writers in thier interpretations of the character. This doesn't make them wrong, but we know at the conception of the Joker what Robinson was going for, and it is not what you believe the Joker is about. Has that been a story point since then? Sure, is that the main point of Joker? NO.

"So, no, again, you are completely wrong about your assessment on the Joker in TDK related to the comics, this list could keep going."

Your list is asinine as I pointed out earlier, so no, again you are incredibly wrong about the basis of the Joker character. What he is supposed to represent instead of how he has been represented. There is a difference. Nolan did do things that happened in the comics, he just didn't accurately represent a single character in the entire movie except maybe Alfred. Don't blindly love Nolan for no reason despite him pooping on Batman.
EricBorder
EricBorder - 10/27/2015, 7:02 PM
@huckfinnisher

"Robinson said he wanted a supreme arch-villain who could test Batman, but not a typical crime lord or gangster designed to be easily disposed. He wanted an exotic, enduring character as an ongoing source of conflict for Batman (similar to the relationship between Sherlock Holmes and Professor Moriarty)"

^ This describes the Joker. You think the Joker was a typical crime lord in TDK?

Robinson was intrigued by villains; his studies at Columbia University taught him that some characters are made up of contradictions, leading to the Joker's sense of humor. He said that the name came first, followed by an image of a playing card from a deck he often had at hand: "I wanted somebody visually exciting. I wanted somebody that would make an indelible impression, would be bizarre, would be memorable like the Hunchback of Notre Dame or any other villains that had unique physical characters."[13][14] He told Finger about his concept by telephone, later providing sketches of the character and images of what would become his iconic Joker playing-card design. Finger thought the concept was incomplete, providing the image of Veidt with a ghastly, permanent rictus grin.[10]"

^ So does this but this goes on to talk about his visual portrayal not his characterization

I'm not blindly loving Nolan, wtf? I'm talking about the inspiration the comics had on the trilogy

You think The Killing Joke is the only comic that had the Joker planning and plotting?

Your not making sense man
EricBorder
EricBorder - 10/27/2015, 7:05 PM
And no movie is a perfect translation from comic book to film

Every film takes some liberties

The Killing Joke also inspired countless comic books featuring The Joker after it was published

TDKReturns is another comic, that is extremely popular in which the Joker isn't just some "insane person who does whatever he thinks would be fun at the time." like your saying
EricBorder
EricBorder - 10/27/2015, 7:16 PM
That's mainly what I'm talking about, in all of these stories and more, The Joker isn't just some

"insane person who does whatever he thinks would be fun at the time." like your saying

He's much more than that, and it shows in comics like,

The Killing Joke

A Death In The Family

TDKReturns

The Joker's Five-Way Revenge

The Laughing Fish

The Clown At Midnight

The Man Who Laughs
huckfinnisher
huckfinnisher - 10/27/2015, 7:29 PM
Him doing whatever he thinks is fun at the time includes these little schemes he occasionally makes up. He never follows through to fruition though, sometimes even going out of his way to make sure Batman stops him. The whole list of comics you just mentioned shows how varied his approach was. And a crime lord in TDK? He actively refuses money and power for his ideals, that is not a crime lord.
huckfinnisher
huckfinnisher - 10/27/2015, 7:34 PM
@EricBorder The fact that he has a million schemes over the course of these comics proves my point. He has no one goal in mind. Do you really see the Joker, someone who is supposed to be as insane as a human can get, having one clear goal in mind? That just doesn't make sense.

Oh and someone who places ideals above all else is not a crime lord, he is a zealot or a martyr. If that is how you see Joker all I can do is be sad for you.
EricBorder
EricBorder - 10/27/2015, 7:37 PM
@huckfinnisher

The quote you posted says a "typical crime lord" not just a crime lord, my question was, do you think he was a "typical crime lord" in TDK? And, your pretty much disagreeing with the quote that you just posted by saying that he isn't a crime lord at all.

"Do you really see the Joker, someone who is supposed to be as insane as a human can get, having one clear goal in mind? That just doesn't make sense."

That's why they are comics and fictional stories, and that's what makes the Joker so interesting

EricBorder
EricBorder - 10/27/2015, 7:38 PM
Oh shit, I remember you from a while back talking about DC, hahahahaha

We will never be on the same page

It's cool man, keep ranting and doing your thing
huckfinnisher
huckfinnisher - 10/27/2015, 7:39 PM
Its just odd to me that you think that him doing whatever he thinks is fun at the time somehow means he couldn't form a plan. If he is so straight forward, what is with his fluctuating attitudes toward Harley? On a whim he is either nice or mean, he could kiss her or try to kill her. If the Joker was as you suggest he would recognize Harley's loyalty is an asset and use her to help achieve his goals. Sometimes it seems like this is the case, till he suddenly flips on her for no reason. Joker does whatever he likes at the time in the comics. He is not a man with a straightforward agenda like in TDK which is why I don't like the way Nolan handled the character, Ledger's Joker was amazing though. Wasn't his fault Nolan didn't know Joker.
Ghostpointzero
Ghostpointzero - 10/27/2015, 7:40 PM
The Reeve Superman films are very dated, also Superman was invincible in those films thus making me not give a shit about Superman since ya know he could do anything.

Man Of Steel was no darker than your average Justice league Unlimited episode or anything the DC animated movies have put out.


I don't want the DCEU being the what MCU is.
huckfinnisher
huckfinnisher - 10/27/2015, 7:51 PM
@EricBorder, I answered your question. You asked if I thought he was a typical crime lord, and I said he wasn't any kind of crime lord he was a zealot.
Odin
Odin - 10/28/2015, 1:35 AM
Bravo
One example I like to use is TASM. That movie was made after TDK, time when film makers seem to think that dark, gritty and realistic was now suddenly the only way to make superhero films. TASM tries to be like that, but when a guy turns into 9 feet humanoid lizard, the realisim kinda of collapses on itself (IMO the whole film feels like a Spiderman film that wants to be a Batman film). When they made a sequel, the tone change was obvious from the start (not that it would've saved that movie).
DerekLake
DerekLake - 10/28/2015, 4:16 PM
@Odin TASM never tried to be dark, gritty or realistic. It tried to do a "modern" take on Spider-Man, complete with a troubled orphan and hipster-skater Peter Parker, and then it tried to do a conspiracy theory with a faux-emo Harry Osborn and a mentally-ill Electro. It didn't work because it was poorly conceived and poorly written.
View Recorder