The Dark Knight Rises - 1/6th scale Batman Armory with Bruce Wayne Collectible Set

bk9196 said:

It goes the same way. Just because u guys don’t like the movie or the scene, it doesn’t become irrelevant. The Alfred scene and pit scene are iconic and is remembered by everyone.

“Iconic would be something widely regarded as the high bar and symbolic of excellence and recognizability“

Yes this sentence is exactly why those 2 scenes are iconic.

The costume might not be remembered. But when you ask general audience, they will remember those 2 scenes.

All this hate for the film is coming from so called elite people who went with over expectations. The general people loved this movie.

And I am not the only one. Check YouTube to see thousands and thousands of people’s opinions about this iconic scene to confirm the recognizability.

And just like you guys don’t accept my opinion which is fine for me, try to understand I don’t accept your opinions which you guys should be fine with.

Click to expand...

I don’t know who these elite people are you’re referencing. I’m just a regular shmo who likes Batman. I get it, that scene meant a lot to you. But again, you liking it doesn’t make it iconic, just personally memorable. I’m not debating your opinion that you liked it. But the bar for iconography is to be widely agreed upon by all. And honestly, TDKR doesn’t meet that threshold. Even Nolan would concede that. Oppenheimer it is not. Personally I liked a lot about the film, and it was certainly intelligent and well made. Just didn’t have that lightning in a bottle that TDK had (meaning a performance like Ledger’s). Now that Joker is an ICON. Creed knew it! Even Dwight knew it! lol.

rory said:

I don’t know who these elite people are you’re referencing. I’m just a regular shmo who likes Batman. I get it, that scene meant a lot to you. But again, you liking it doesn’t make it iconic, just personally memorable. I’m not debating your opinion that you liked it. But the bar for iconography is to be widely agreed upon by all. And honestly, TDKR doesn’t meet that threshold. Even Nolan would concede that. Oppenheimer it is not. Personally I liked a lot about the film, and it was certainly intelligent and well made. Just didn’t have that lightning in a bottle that TDK had (meaning a performance like Ledger’s). Now that Joker is an ICON. Creed knew it! Even Dwight knew it! lol.

Click to expand...

I mentioned that it’s widely liked by many people. That’s why i put that YouTube comment. Yeah anyways to each their own.

All i am worried now is the slimy texture about this figure . Hope they fix it

bk9196 said:

I mentioned that it’s widely liked by many people. That’s why i put that YouTube comment. Yeah anyways to each their own.

Click to expand...

I just can’t permit this misuse of language to stand as a ‘let’s agree to disagree.’ It’s a slippery slope and part of why we can’t define what a woman is anymore.

Here’s an explanation I’ve copied about what the word actually means to save me having to try to explain it again.

As the result of careless misuse, the word “iconic” no longer means very much.

Originally and literally, an “icon” is a sacred image, perhaps a portrait of Jesus or a saint, that has religious significance for some individuals. By extension, the word “icon” became a figure of speech for any sort of image that has widely understood symbolic meaning or that visually represents a place or even an idea.
The images of Big Ben and the Eiffel Tower are, figuratively, “icons” of London and Paris; that’s a legitimate use of the word. Because so many people admired Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, we spoke of her as an “icon” of the women’s rights movement; that’s stretching things a little, because Justice Ginsburg was a person and not a picture, but pictures of her have come to represent many good things.

Here’s the problem: “Iconic” works as a figure of speech as long as we’re talking about something that can be visualized. A song can’t be an “icon.” The pilgrim’s route to Santiago de Compostela can’t be an “icon.” The fact that the French have 246 varities of cheese isn’t “iconic”; a half wheel of Roquefort might be an “icon” for French culture but the number 246 is not. “Here we are at the Coachella Valley Festival, an iconic celebration of music and art.” Sorry, no; the word “iconic” does not mean “famous” or “enjoyed by many people.” If you’re going to use a figure of speech, you need to stick with whatever physical reality is behind its literal meaning. You can’t “ignite a downpour.”

We’re going off on a tangent here, lol. But yeah originally an icon meant something very specific. But we’re discussing two different words really. An Icon, as literally defined, is a symbol. So we’re talking about a noun, object, image, etc. The pyramids, the photo of Marilyn Monroe holding her skirt down over an air vent, yadda yadda. But “iconic” as an adjective can be used to describe anything from an image, person, or even a sentence i.e. Armstong’s moon landing speech “one small step…” is agreed by most to be an “iconic” sentence recognized and venerated by all. Then it was appropriated into a word simply meaning popular to many. Now it’s being used to describe a brief moment in a largely forgotten film. Even a score of YouTubers liking that scene, doesn’t at all confirm it’s iconic. But this is also the nature of language really. Use and definition are constantly evolving. Especially when a word is co-opted by the wild and unruly category of slang. So maybe something can be iconic personally while not being iconic broadly? I dunno.

Chopper Face said:

I just can’t permit this misuse of language to stand as a ‘let’s agree to disagree.’ It’s a slippery slope and part of why we can’t define what a woman is anymore.

Here’s an explanation I’ve copied about what the word actually means to save me having to try to explain it again.

As the result of careless misuse, the word “iconic” no longer means very much.

Originally and literally, an “icon” is a sacred image, perhaps a portrait of Jesus or a saint, that has religious significance for some individuals. By extension, the word “icon” became a figure of speech for any sort of image that has widely understood symbolic meaning or that visually represents a place or even an idea.
The images of Big Ben and the Eiffel Tower are, figuratively, “icons” of London and Paris; that’s a legitimate use of the word. Because so many people admired Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, we spoke of her as an “icon” of the women’s rights movement; that’s stretching things a little, because Justice Ginsburg was a person and not a picture, but pictures of her have come to represent many good things.

Here’s the problem: “Iconic” works as a figure of speech as long as we’re talking about something that can be visualized. A song can’t be an “icon.” The pilgrim’s route to Santiago de Compostela can’t be an “icon.” The fact that the French have 246 varities of cheese isn’t “iconic”; a half wheel of Roquefort might be an “icon” for French culture but the number 246 is not. “Here we are at the Coachella Valley Festival, an iconic celebration of music and art.” Sorry, no; the word “iconic” does not mean “famous” or “enjoyed by many people.” If you’re going to use a figure of speech, you need to stick with whatever physical reality is behind its literal meaning. You can’t “ignite a downpour.”

Click to expand...

Ok man

The last couple of pages of this thread are iconic.

*Iconic

bk9196 said:

View attachment 696799

Click to expand...

Well Netflix’s season six of Love is blind is very popular by “particular opinions”. I’m not sure I’d call it “iconic”. Likewise, just because someone is famous on YouTube, doesn’t make them an “icon”. I think you get that point even if you can’t say it. So just calling something popular or famous doesn’t an icon make. Like tight rolling your jeans in the early 90’s was very popular, lol, but hardly iconic. The point is Hot Toys likely won’t mass produce a figure of Christian Bale in nondescript prison robes with a sling because by your own definition of iconic, it is not “instantly recognizable” or “famous”.

Let me put it this way….

Michael Jordan = icon
Michael B. Jordan = famous

lol. Big difference.

rory said:

Well Netflix’s season six of Love is blind is very popular by “particular opinions”. I’m not sure I’d call it “iconic”. Likewise, just because someone is famous on YouTube, doesn’t make them an “icon”. I think you get that point even if you can’t say it. So just calling something popular or famous doesn’t an icon make. Like tight rolling your jeans in the early 90’s was very popular, lol, but hardly iconic. The point is Hot Toys likely won’t mass produce a figure of Christian Bale in nondescript prison robes with a sling because by your own definition of iconic, it is not “instantly recognizable” or “famous”.

View attachment 696809

Click to expand...

It's ok if they dont make it mate. When they can make a costume that was for a normal conversation with Alfred, there is nothing wrong in hoping for the pit one.

Akiratang said:

Strangely enough I've watched Rises the most and find it the most rewatchable to me. Funny how everyone opinion differences.

Click to expand...

Yea, I agree. My best friend and I just rewatched Rises this week and she likes that one the most as well. I think I find it more rewatchable than TDK, but I think TDK is the better movie if that makes sense?

Gipetto0812 said:

Yea, I agree. My best friend and I just rewatched Rises this week and she likes that one the most as well. I think I find it more rewatchable than TDK, but I think TDK is the better movie if that makes sense?

Click to expand...

I feel the same way. I think TDK is better than Rises, but I have seen Rises way more. Neither come close to the amount of times I've watched Begins though.

i_amjam said:

I feel the same way. I think TDK is better than Rises, but I have seen Rises way more. Neither come close to the amount of times I've watched Begins though.

Click to expand...

I’m TDK all the way. Too much daytime Batman in Rises. The suit looks goofy in daylight. Honestly the whole idea of Batman in daylight falls apart for me. As a concept it only works in the shadows. Just looks like a too intense cosplayer by day.

rory said:

I’m TDK all the way. Too much daytime Batman in Rises. The suit looks goofy in daylight. Honestly the whole idea of Batman in daylight falls apart for me. As a concept it only works in the shadows. Just looks like a too intense cosplayer by day.

Click to expand...

I really wish the rematch with Bane had been at night. Even better had he returned in the Begins suit with his other suit and the Batcave destroyed. Everything would have come full circle then.

sj2106 said:

Even better had he returned in the Begins suit with his other suit and the Batcave destroyed. Everything would have come full circle then.

Click to expand...

Dude that would have been EPIC, the BB suit was so much more bad-ss than the military-style outfit.

Madness I'm sure but I prefer watching TDKR myself. I agree though that Batman in daylight is silly, especially when it's the goofy looking TDK suit. Great suggestion by sj2106, if only the Begins suit could have made a comeback. So much cooler.

Best film in the trilogy is Begins, but yeah, I've actually probably seen Rises the most.

a-dev said:

Madness I'm sure but I prefer watching TDKR myself. I agree though that Batman in daylight is silly, especially when it's the goofy looking TDK suit. Great suggestion by sj2106, if only the Begins suit could have made a comeback. So much cooler.

Best film in the trilogy is Begins, but yeah, I've actually probably seen Rises the most.

Click to expand...

For me I've seen TDK the most, Begins second, and Rises least. TDK was a great action flick. Begins was probably the most Batman-esque film in the trilogy. Rises was neither. But that’s just me.

Cap'n Cook said:

Rises is my favourite of the three. Fight me.

Click to expand...

rory said:

For me I've seen TDK the most, Begins second, and Rises least. TDK was a great action flick. Begins was probably the most Batman-esque film in the trilogy. Rises was neither. But that’s just me.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. I like the expanded scope and higher stakes of Rises. An ''escalated'' story but not too ridiculously for this world. Tom Hardy was great as midget Bane, I mean they managed to sell me that he wasn't actually a midget. Best music score in the trilogy IMO.

Don't get me wrong there are things that disappoint me about the film on every viewing - the 2nd fight with Bane immediately comes to mind - just really underwhelming - it doesn't seem like Batman's strategy has changed, he still gets his ass kicked for most of the fight so there's very little catharsis. He wins in the end only because he's supposed to and the same strikes to the face that he's been laying on Bane the whole time (including the first fight) suddenly work. And Bale's batvoice becomes comically bad in their final exchange.