1/6 Hot Toys-MMS 236-TDK Armory (with Batman, Alfred, and Bruce Wayne Figures)

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Well of course it's Nolan and the writers, but as far as the story's world is concerned, Bruce had it planned from the beginning. That's why his "sacrifice" doesn't work on repeat viewings, it only works when you see it for the first time. Once you get the context afterwards (with the the rip off Dark Knight fast forward montage ending), Bruce manipulated everyone into thinking "our beloved hero sacrificed himself and his batlobster!" when in reality, he's chillin' at some cafe every day waiting for his butler to see him.

As for the statue, I just think it's corny, really corny. The batsignal is as far as that should go. I looked like Gordon when I saw that in theaters, all slouched in my seat and angry while everyone else was crying and dumbstruck. :lol

To me, it's disgustingly sappy, and Batman just isn't that to me. People crack jokes about how goofy West Batman was as a deputized crime fighter or at Clooney Batman attending public events with a bat credit card, I crack jokes at forced martyrdom, Batman statues and "drinkin' branca". It's just so ****ing strange. Batman doesn't eat nachos, or get public praise. He's best when he's an urban legend, a vigilante, an outlaw that resides in the shadows. Making fire bat symbol graffiti, swooping down to fight with an army of cops, and trolling his buddies doesn't seem like something Batman would do.

But the statue wasn't even his idea, it's what officials do when they want to honor someone for taking them off the hook, for doing their job for them, for bailing them out. I doubt he would be interested in relishing in his martyrdom anyway considering he's halfway around the world laying the pipe with Anne Hathaway.

Remember Joker's speech about people's true nature and remember when John Q. Public was clamoring for Batman to reveal his true identity after he had cleaned up the streets? Nolan is saying people are stupid and petty and dishonest and ungrateful and still, someone, despite the odds, is willing to risk his life to protect them.

The bat logo extravaganza is silly on its face, but it was done to both warn Bane that his hours were numbered and to give a besieged city a semblance of hope.
 
Thanks



Well of course it's Nolan and the writers, but as far as the story's world is concerned, Bruce had it planned from the beginning. That's why his "sacrifice" doesn't work on repeat viewings, it only works when you see it for the first time. Once you get the context afterwards (with the the rip off Dark Knight fast forward montage ending), Bruce manipulated everyone into thinking "our beloved hero sacrificed himself and his batlobster!" when in reality, he's chillin' at some cafe every day waiting for his butler to see him.

As for the statue, I just think it's corny, really corny. The batsignal is as far as that should go. I looked like Gordon when I saw that in theaters, all slouched in my seat and angry while everyone else was crying and dumbstruck. :lol

To me, it's disgustingly sappy, and Batman just isn't that to me. People crack jokes about how goofy West Batman was as a deputized crime fighter or at Clooney Batman attending public events with a bat credit card, I crack jokes at forced martyrdom, Batman statues and "drinkin' branca". It's just so ****ing strange. Batman doesn't eat nachos, or get public praise. He's best when he's an urban legend, a vigilante, an outlaw that resides in the shadows. Making fire bat symbol graffiti, swooping down to fight with an army of cops, and trolling his buddies doesn't seem like something Batman would do.

This is Nolan's Version of Batman and not your Batman, so making these statements about this Batman acting out of character makes little sense if any at all.
 
This is Nolan's Version of Batman and not your Batman, so making these statements about this Batman acting out of character makes little sense if any at all.

So what, doesn't mean we can't criticize it as a viewer.

Nolan could have made Batman a transvestite for "his vision", doesn't mean people can't criticize it or say it's not "Batman-y". Look at George Lucas' vision for Star Wars, I don't see anything but spite towards his decisions. Nobody says, "well, these criticisms don't make sense, they're his movies". Once that film hits theaters, it's the audiences. They own it. They can love it or hate it.
 
Nah, I just saw it again for the first time in years. I didn't like it as much as TDK on first viewing, but after seeing it again, I now think it's a really good film.

I took a 4 hour lunch the week it opened so I could watch it. Totally worth it.
 
I love Difabio, but his hate for TDKR is quite strong, we need to band together before he influences everyone that TDKR sucks :lol

I know your just kidding, but this reminds me of the backlash received by movie critics who gave negative reviews for TDKR when it first came out. Fans were sending death threats and threatening to crash their websites. Not implying that this is the case here at all, but I can assure all of you that Difabio's opinions of TDKR are shared by others including myself, maybe for different reasons, but overall I just did'nt like it. I actually thought it was one of Nolan's worst films. At the end of the day it's just a movie some people don't like it or even hate it. I guess some people take TDKR not being universally praised like TDK as an insult.

I just want to know what the mouth plates look like on the DX12.:dunno

(if they fit)

I'de like to see a pic of the new mouth pieces on the DX12 head too, if anyone with both in-hand could oblige us.
 
I know your just kidding, but this reminds me of the backlash received by movie critics who gave negative reviews for TDKR when it first came out. Fans were sending death threats and threatening to crash their websites. Not implying that this is the case here at all, but I can assure all of you that Difabio's opinions of TDKR are shared by others including myself, maybe for different reasons, but overall I just did'nt like it. I actually thought it was one of Nolan's worst films. At the end of the day it's just a movie some people don't like it or even hate it. I guess some people take TDKR not being universally praised like TDK as an insult.

Nope, that would be Inception for me. Such a self-important, preening, steaming pile of crap that was universally adored.
 
Yeah, you are. :lol

Nah, I just saw it again for the first time in years. I didn't like it as much as TDK on first viewing, but after seeing it again, I now think it's a really good film.

To me it just tells the best story and has the most logic of the trilogy when you consider how Nolan wanted the films grounded in 'reality.' Plus Gotham didn't look like Chicago or Pittsburgh which showed more effort.
 
To me it just tells the best story and has the most logic of the trilogy when you consider how Nolan wanted the films grounded in 'reality.' Plus Gotham didn't look like Chicago or Pittsburgh which showed more effort.

I wonder if Nolan was trying to make a statement, that Gotham wasn't some ethereal, mythical city, but that it was rather ordinary, accessible, relatable even.

It's kind of discombobulating in TDKR when he inserts a rather obvious shot of lower Manhattan, especially when the bridges blow.
 
The bat logo extravaganza is silly on its face, but it was done to both warn Bane that his hours were numbered and to give a besieged city a semblance of hope.[/QUOTE]

EXACTLY

TDKR is a fine film and good closure....to the Nolan trilogy. It being a totally unexpected "take" on Batman doesn't lessen it's quality or effect on the two previous films. I can see why some don't like it....it does depart from the expected. Boy here we go again on TDKR and it's merits or lack of..it creeps every now and then in EVERY HT Batman thread!
 
I know your just kidding, but this reminds me of the backlash received by movie critics who gave negative reviews for TDKR when it first came out. Fans were sending death threats and threatening to crash their websites. Not implying that this is the case here at all, but I can assure all of you that Difabio's opinions of TDKR are shared by others including myself, maybe for different reasons, but overall I just did'nt like it. I actually thought it was one of Nolan's worst films. At the end of the day it's just a movie some people don't like it or even hate it. I guess some people take TDKR not being universally praised like TDK as an insult.

Yea, I’m obviously joking, but here on SSC, things work a little bit different, the cool/popular thing to do is hate and bash almost everything popular. So, while my statement was nothing more then a joke, there is some truth behind it, I see a few pretenders that like to stay in these threads to do their Difabio act to boost their notoriety on here.
 
TDKR is a fine film and good closure....to the Nolan trilogy. It being a totally unexpected "take" on Batman doesn't lessen it's quality or effect on the two previous films. I can see why some don't like it....it does depart from the expected. Boy here we go again on TDKR and it's merits or lack of..it creeps every now and then in EVERY HT Batman thread!

The biggest problem I had with that scene was how the hell did Batman cross the frozen river without falling in? Did he climb down from the bridge like a monkey and find a thick patch of ice?
 
Has anyone tried putting the armory into a standard detolf. I think I mite be kidding myself if I think I can fit all of this in my current batman display.

010.JPG




To me it just tells the best story and has the most logic of the trilogy when you consider how Nolan wanted the films grounded in 'reality.' Plus Gotham didn't look like Chicago or Pittsburgh which showed more effort.

I've started to lean toward BB > TDK myself for the same reasons. BB just flows better especially toward the end, TDK's ending is really dark and depressing and even a bit unhinged; However TDK just has to many things going for it overall. I doubt I'll ever put another batman film before it, except maybe 89 batman.
 
I wonder if Nolan was trying to make a statement, that Gotham wasn't some ethereal, mythical city, but that it was rather ordinary, accessible, relatable even.

It's kind of discombobulating in TDKR when he inserts a rather obvious shot of lower Manhattan, especially when the bridges blow.

Yea I have no doubt that was what Nolan was going for in TDK and TDKR but in begins the city/Arkham/Narrows clearly have a more comic (CGI) look. It just felt more like Nolan changed course and said nah i don't care about the comics, let's just see what it would look like on a bright sunny day in a regular major metropolitan city. Batman will melt in the daylight.
 
Back
Top