I - do not - understand - what - sassy Mister plastic face - is - trying to say - to me. 

Well, they are super hero films after all. :P 

TDK is _THE_ Batman film, unlikely to be topped, and it finally did justice to the source material. 1 and 3 are good, 3 was a bit of a letdown but still good, just like Inception was a bit of a letdown, but still good.

Nolan focuses so much on having a fast-moving script with twists and turns, that if you think about it afterwards there are inconsistencies at best (or plot holes at worst), a tendency there since Memento. Despite the realistic veneer his movies aren't at all about plausibility but instead about obsession scheming and double-crossing. I hope he stops increasing the scale and goes back to something a calmer, but I haven't disliked any of his films. 

Exactly. WTF do you expect from BATMAN?? The basic premise is ludicruous, as is the comic-book background - that Nolan managed to make the idea impressively credible is one of the many triumphs of the trilogy. 

I expected some well designed plot.

I thought all the characters were pretty much normal humans, not like Superman, Spiderman etc. Almost all the things they do are possible except for the technological stuff. For example Batman can not fly, he uses some wing suit. So I guess I expected at least the human decisions to be remotely logical. But they aren't.

I mean, if Batman was crushed by Bane earlier why does he go up against him in the same way (fist fight) again later, after his imprisonment in the pit? Why didn't he use his bat sign shaped tranquiliser thingies? Or knives on his fists like he had in the previous movie.

The movies give such a sense of importance and drama(ticality?) that I felt like they meant serious business. 

normal humans go around as masked vigilantes and have amped up not even the army has this tech at their disposal?

The decisions are remotely logical in the world they are in, which is not the same as this world.

And yes thematically they are pretty serious, but that doesnt have to translate into reality. Its like games, you can go be immersive and serious without having to forces realism down your throat.

Also, why is almost everything you dont like automatically "pompous" or "pretentious"? 

Waling Dead Season 2 - the internet seems to hate it but I thought this was a pretty great season, better than the first and the last 2-3 episodes were seriously good tv. 

Didn't like the second season too much on account of the annoying wife and deputy. But yeah, it got better towards the end. 3rd season is awesome so far, however it's a completely different show than the 1st season. But that's fine as the changes are believable and they result in a better show IMO. 

Was the second season the one based on the farm that whole time? That just about put me off the series, I couldn't understand all the hype, I thought it failed at being horror-zombie and was just a farm drama. Dr Quinn fucking Medicine Woman. Boring as hell. Now that they've ventured out it's actually turned into an adventure/horror again and is interesting, and has action and gore! I think we're up to the 3rd episode of S3, in the prison so far, in my country. You guys are probably a bit further ahead. 

 

Spirit: it doesn't sound like blockbusters are for you, and especially superhero ones. Did you like the avengers? That was way more unrealistic.

Nolan hasn't done a bad movie, they're all good imo. Seems he can do no wrong. Can't wait for the new Superman with Zack Snyders cool visuals (except no more fucking slow mo action sequences please) with Nolan and Goyer's story/screenplay. Should be awesome. 

But as I said, it's not the same show anymore. You can really tell that Darabont was forced to leave after season 1. 

https://twitter.com/brettgelman/status/246338388007981056 

I get the impression that neither John Hillcoat nor Nick Cave had as much control over this as would have been helpful. The Proposition and The Road are beautiful pieces, some of my favourite modern films, especially The Proposition, and what makes them so good is the bleak idea of mere survival, none of this young love/American dream stuff that's clearly meant to draw in a wider audience. The script is predictable (good try I guess, Cave) and also, at the same time, somewhat nonsensical. Gary Oldman's turn is predictable (just like his role in Book of Eli, I thought), Shia is not much of an actor, Mia has talent but isn't given much to work with. Tom Hardy is great in this, and I didn't see much in his (or Oldman's) performances in Tinker Tailor etc, so that does mean something. Also, Guy Pearce... what the fuck. I wish the movie had at least hinted at what was wrong with his character, but anyway, his acting was effective!

Excellent cinematography, but overall not half as good as the the director's previous two films. 

Sweet film. Black black humour. 

excellent, go watch it. Except Spirit. 

I can't unsee it now. 

Looper

is pretty damn awesome all around. Thankfully it WAS different from the trailer (which I foolishly watched). Highly recommended! Watch it with a good sound system, you need bass. 

I agree with you completely. 

I consider Looper "pompous with no substance and so full of plot holes and stupid/impossible things."

although I'm definitely joking, I actually don't see how that _doesn't_ apply. heh. maybe in that Looper (which I enjoyed) was less serious - your movie can only be so serious with Bruce Willis in it! 

Then tell me about glaring plotholes and stupidity in it.

Things that come to mind are Joe's killing place being fairly close to civilisation (by the looks of it), the shots would probably have been heard. And that he did not just start by breaking his index finger in the end. Apart from that it seemed quite believable to me.

It felt much more serious than any of the Batman movies for me. Only very few low jokes, no witty oneliners all the time. 

I think they just went flat out and admitted that the time travel thing made no sense. Bruce Willis' argument with straws was a good example of that - plus, Bruce Willis is nowhere near as serious an actor as anyone Nolan's ever hired. Anyway, I exempt any time-travel-related plotholes because it admitted time travel doesn't really make sense. But Looper is definitely full of stupid/impossible things (and Willis getting back to the present is a huge one).
I'll give you that most of the jokes the the Nolan trilogy were dumb and unnecessary. 

If you out-rule time travel right away, then it makes no sense to discuss a science-fiction/fantasy movie that is based on it. If in that reality it is possible, then it is possible. The movie was not set in our present world nor time. To me, that makes unrealistic things realistic in the scope of the movie. There were no common real-world cellphones suddenly sonar-emitting (and receiving!) for example.

You still did not list any plothole, exempting time travel.

Bruce Willis is a serious actor in my experience. There was nothing funny about his character here. Also 6th Sense and 12 Monkeys come to mind. 

What about the very selective an inconsistent use of the latent feeling between present and future Looper? Supposedly Bruce Willis could feel and see whatever JGL did right after he did it, except that seemed to be pretty much redundant in the second half even after he witnesses the incident with the kid at the farm. And also JGL's final actions.

Also, I still don't understand why batman is considered to be set in this world?

And Bruce Willis serious actor, lol.