[ SECRET POST #3180 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3180 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09. [WARNING for rape]



__________________________________________________



10. [WARNING for rape]




__________________________________________________



11. [WARNING for domestic violence/abuse]

[The Musketeers]


__________________________________________________



12. [WARNING for rape]



__________________________________________________



13. [WARNING for rape]

[Babylon 5]









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #454.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

02. http://i57.tinypic.com/6nzbwl.jpg

[(Anonymous)]

reminder that there's no such thing as DC movies

[(Anonymous)]

You're becoming what you hate.

[(Anonymous)]

LMAO

[(Anonymous)]

hi dethtoll

[(Anonymous)]

oh you

[kaijinscendre]

Yeah, I admit I ignore the flaws because of how much I like the movie. But I enjoy a dark movie every now and again.

I very much agree with you.

[(Anonymous)]

Right down to the Batman (1989) and Superman (1978) and Superman II (1981) (though I did like parts of Batman Returns, even if it was way overblown and had two many villains). I'm not much of a fan of grimdark, but they can also go wrong the other way too, with over the top silliness.

[(Anonymous)]

I agree with the distaste for dark = edgy = "deeper" = quality. I feel the same way about Game of Thrones. Darker doesn't mean better.

But as far as film quality goes, The Dark Knight was okay, I thought, though it's been along time since I've seen it. But it was the third movie (whatever that was called) that was a horrible, nonsensical mess. I left the theater seriously amazed at how such a mess of a movie managed to get by.

[(Anonymous)]

I enjoy that movie, but I do agree about the plot being convoluted. And it's WAY over-stuffed, like someone tried to fit two movies in a one-movie bag. Since it was made around the same time as Iron Man and before the huge boom of superhero movies, I've always wondered if there were internal conversations between the studio/Nolan about the possibility of there not being a third movie and Nolan decided to go for broke and make it a two-villain movie.

[(Anonymous)]

Well, the Joker was played out by the end of that movie but Two-Face's plot was ridiculous. Everything after his injuries should have been saved for another movie. It added nothing to the plot, rushed what could have been an interesting character development, and make Dent look like an asshole. (Let's not even talk about the Joker's recruiting mentally ill people to do complex tasks - I have a mental illness and if I was sick enough to go along with extreme suggestions, I'm way too sick to follow instructions or even remember what I'm doing.)

[forgottenjester]

You know, out of the three films in that trilogy the first one is the only one I never saw. However, if my legendary hatred for the third and general disinterest in the second is any indication, I wouldn't have liked it.

[(Anonymous)]

I only saw the second so I'm one up on you!

Especially since I'm pretty sure I'd have completely hated the third as well. So, woooo

[philstar22]

I personally thought the first was the best. It was also the simplest and while dark it wasn't overly so. It wasn't the overblown depression creator that I feel Dark Knight is.

[kitelovesyou]

I only saw the first one. Specifically the first half, as I fell asleep halfway through. Unrelenting grimdark just isn't the genre tone for me, especially not when it's about a man in a fucking batsuit.

[(Anonymous)]

I can handwave the plot holes because Batman's a lot about tone. And I thought The Dark Knight worked really well with it. (TDKR is another matter)

But I dislike that they're trying to put the same dark tone into every DC movie. Because the Superman story isn't like the Batman story. And the tone of Superman is just as important to his story. I just wish the writers would look more at what makes each character special than trying to apply the same formula.

[elaminator]

TDK was by far my favorite of the batfilms, but I don't think it's perfect.

I do however, think it is a really, really solid film. (And one of my favorite superhero films.) The acting might have a lot to do with that (I'll openly admit that I'll forgive a lot if the acting is on point, and I felt it was here), but either way I loved it.

Anything that gets the amount of hype that TDK did is probably going to be considered overrated at some point though, and while that's a perfectly valid way to feel I'm not sure I agree.

Then again I actually liked TDKR so apparently that makes my taste shit. *shrugs*

[(Anonymous)]

The Dark Knight was a great movie.

However, The Dark Knight was a shitty batman adaptation.

Nolan straight up doesn't understand batman and I believe Greg Rucka said it best when he said the Nolan trilogy is ashamed about the fact that he's called Batman, dresses up as a giant bat and tries to ignore the inherit campiness with it. Burton's movies had it right, Batman and capes are inherently camp but that doesn't mean it still can't be serious.

[(Anonymous)]

Well, I don't really think movies that rely solely on witty one-liners and explosions instead of character development/a decent plot are all that better than dark/"edgy" movies? IMO both types of films can be entertaining, but they've both got a lot of flaws too.

[(Anonymous)]

Batman Begins is the only Nolan Bat-film I find tolerable. The only good thing about TDK is Heath Ledger's character, who I refuse to call the Joker. As an action movie villains he's great, but he is not the Joker.

Similarly, the only good thing about TDKR is Anne Hathaway's Catwoman (who unlike Ledger's "Joker", is somehow remarkably a decent adaptation of the character from the comics and animated series).

[(Anonymous)]

I will say this, TDK had me on the edge of my seat the whole time. A Marvel movie hasn't done that for me yet.

[dethtoll]

I actually agree with most of this.

[(Anonymous)]

TDK is the only "superhero/comics" film I actually liked enough to watch more than once. I think the dark and gritty theme they used works well with Batman because Gotham is supposed to be a dark and seedy place but I agree that it doesn't suit other films or characters, like Superman.

The thing I disagreed with most about TDK is that they made Barbara Jim Gordon's wife instead of his daughter. I don't understand why they couldn't have just given him a daughter instead of a son and named her Barbara. But I supposed Nolan's version of Batman was always supposed to be different and separate from the comics.

[fishnchips]

I just can't take these "oh so dark and edgy" Batman movies seriously because come on, it's a grown man in a bat costume.

[(Anonymous)]

I agree completely. I could have written this secret. This film was a mess, without the Joker's performance it doesn't hold up. It's like two films put into one. Nolan has a comic misunderstanding of Batman and this grimdark setting is only tainting the DC properties and making boring films. The only reason they hold up is name recognition.