I'm not Talli although I sympathize with him/her already. I've posted previously in the Inception forum and came back to see if things might have improved. But the quality of discussion here is very poor. Worse than it was back then. And the posters with the highest number of posts are the worst offenders. They mock what they don't understand. Because it makes them feel good?
It is sad that such a good director has such an unweeded garden. And that there are people here with literally thousands of posts about films they don't understand and will probably never understand. Here we have a director who admits to symbolic manipulation, who cribs visuals from classic films with related themes and who explicitly bases a script off a literary masterpiece. And it is supposed to be a huge stretch to even imagine there might be symbolism in the film?
I find it interesting that at least a few of the same symbols I came here to discuss about Inception are visible in this one as well, and the number of regulars who seem to have spotted them looks to be zero. Water symbolism? Check. Children in the garden? Check. And this stuff isn't even subtle. FAIL.
trevelyan wrote:I'm not Talli although I sympathize with him/her already. I've posted previously in the Inception forum and came back to see if things might have improved. But the quality of discussion here is very poor. Worse than it was back then. And the posters with the highest number of posts are the worst offenders. They mock what they don't understand. Because it makes them feel good?
It is sad that such a good director has such an unweeded garden. And that there are people here with literally thousands of posts about films they don't understand and will probably never understand. Here we have a director who admits to symbolic manipulation, who cribs visuals from classic films with related themes and who explicitly bases a script off a literary masterpiece. And it is supposed to be a huge stretch to even imagine there might be symbolism in the film?
I find it interesting that at least a few of the same symbols I came here to discuss about Inception are visible in this one as well, and the number of regulars who seem to have spotted them looks to be zero. Water symbolism? Check. Children in the garden? Check. And this stuff isn't even subtle. FAIL.
no one said theres no symbolism u dingus ur example of the football teams colors was just silly
What's wrong with all of you? I've noticed a severe lack of in-depth analysis of the film/particular scenes in this forum. The place I found people, with whom I can easily discuss the movie, was (to my and probably your surprise) IMDB.
Having read http://popupchinese.com/the-dark-knight-rises.html already, I cannot help, but agree to some extend with trevelyan.
Dissing on him, because he reminds you of Talli; because he is eager to discuss the symbolism of the film?
C'mon, you are better than that.
Ha ha ha. Yes Nelson, because God forbid football could ever be used as a metaphor for social conflict. Or that Nolan might have picked the sport over baseball, basketball, hockey or the countless other options which would have been logistically easier to shoot because the visuals would feed into a broader point. Maybe the logistics of the Heinz field shoot was a factor in picking Pittsburgh over Chicago, or perhaps he just got lucky and decided to work the colors into the overarching color scheme of his script by making the other team blue one he had something in the yellow-orange gradient.
You seriously think Christopher Nolan is a less sophisticated director than Kevin Costner? You're an idiot.
Frankly, if you had half the wit and the brains to engage in this debate (which was actually a search for NON-VISUAL evidence which might support or contradict the question before you charged in with your 4th grade reading comprehension), you'd be pointing out inconsistencies in any of the various interpretations suggested by citing evidence from the film rather than claiming things don't exist until they suddenly become so obvious they must be upgraded in your limited self-awareness to coincidences. The former is how real analysis and interpretation is done and it is what separates actual film discussion from the retrograde slop that passes for anything on this forum.
I've put my beliefs out there, and it doesn't bother me in the slightest that you think they are dumb -- I'll take that as a compliment. Because as far as I can see it, not only do you NOT understand The Dark Knight Rises (and by extension the last two Batman films). But you don't have a clue about Inception and probably not the Prestige either. And that makes you a figure of pity.
Last edited by trevelyan on September 2nd, 2012, 12:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
Frankly, if you had half the wit and the brains to engage in this debate (which was actually a search for NON-VISUAL evidence which might support or contradict the claim before you charged in with your 4th grade reading comprehension), become so obvious they must be upgraded in your limited self-awareness to coincidences. The former is how real analysis and interpretation is done and it is what separates actual film discussion from the retrograde slop that passes for anything on this forum.
I've put my beliefs out there, and it doesn't bother me in the slightest that you think they are dumb -- I'll take that as a compliment. And that makes you a figure of pity.
Do you get paid the big bucks to be so smart or do you just do it for fun?
trevelyan wrote:Ha ha ha. Yes Nelson, because God forbid football could ever be used as a metaphor for social conflict. Or that Nolan might have picked the sport over baseball, basketball, hockey or the countless other options which would have been logistically easier to shoot because the visuals would feed into a broader point. Maybe the logistics of the Heinz field shoot was a factor in picking Pittsburgh over Chicago, or perhaps he just got lucky and decided to work the colors into the overarching color scheme of his script by making the other team blue one he had something in the yellow-orange gradient.
You seriously think Christopher Nolan is a less sophisticated director than Kevin Costner? You're an idiot.
Frankly, if you had half the wit and the brains to engage in this debate (which was actually a search for NON-VISUAL evidence which might support or contradict the claim before you charged in with your 4th grade reading comprehension), you'd be pointing out inconsistencies in any of the various interpretations suggested by citing evidence from the film rather than claiming things don't exist until they suddenly become so obvious they must be upgraded in your limited self-awareness to coincidences. The former is how real analysis and interpretation is done and it is what separates actual film discussion from the retrograde slop that passes for anything on this forum.
I've put my beliefs out there, and it doesn't bother me in the slightest that you think they are dumb -- I'll take that as a compliment. Because as far as I can see it, not only do you NOT understand The Dark Knight Rises (and by extension the last two Batman films). But you don't have a clue about Inception and probably not the Prestige either. And that makes you a figure of pity.
