Originally posted by h1a8
That has no bearing on anything.You are still ignoring the fact that The column material was switched between the two scenes. It's like the "rag doll" example I gave.
So now you're claiming that a writer's intention has no bearing on writer's intentions.
Do you ever listen to yourself?
Originally posted by NemeBro
So you believe that because the prop they had Hardy punch wasn't made of stone (which is really only obviously visible in slow motion), the columns themselves, rather than being made out of stone like a column that size would actually be made out of, is made out of, of all things, hollow drywall, which seems to be what most of you claim?Don't be retarded. 👇
They were obviously made of stone considering all the solid bits of debris that fell out after Bane cratered it. Broken drywall doesn't look like that.
That's exactly what I'm claiming. You know why? because TDKR had enough of a budget that had they wanted that pillar to look like stone or concrete then they would have made it look and react like stone/concrete upon being punched. But it didn't look like concrete, didn't react like stone, so therefore we judge it on what it looked like: Which is some kind of plaster or drywall.
Originally posted by h1a8
The prop was at the real location. 😕The column was real right before the scene Bane punched it. You clearly see the column change dramatically within a split second. This is the "rag doll " effect.
It's just a lack of special effects (like thousands of movies have).
Writer's intention shows that they wanted to show that pillar as being hollow when Bane punched it. You don't like it then come up with some other proof.
Originally posted by FrothByte
Writer's intention shows that they wanted to show that pillar as being hollow when Bane punched it. You don't like it then come up with some other proof.
Look up, he just told me that the actual writer's intention has no bearing on determining writer's intention.
What he actually means is, he wants to use what he thinks a writer's intention is.
Originally posted by FrothByteBut it was real stone in the scene before. The movie makers probably didn't know how to show real stone being busted.
Writer's intention shows that they wanted to show that pillar as being hollow when Bane punched it. You don't like it then come up with some other proof.
Originally posted by Silent Master
So now you're claiming that a writer's intention has no bearing on writer's intentions.Do you ever listen to yourself?
The writer liking the way it looks has no bearing to him wanting it to be made of a different material. The fact that he used the real column in the scene before Bane struck it proves his intentions.
Originally posted by h1a8
The writer liking the way it looks has no bearing to him wanting it to be made of a different material. The fact that he used the real column in the scene before Bane struck it proves his intentions.
Post the quote from the writer that states his intention for that scene was that Bane could punch through solid stone.
Originally posted by h1a8
But it was real stone in the scene before. The movie makers probably didn't know how to show real stone being busted.
This is the resume of the guy who supervised TDKR SFX:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Corbould
Just to clarify....
Are you saying that guy plus a 250 Million dollar budget didn't know how to show SFX of something to break like real rock?
Originally posted by Nibedicus
This is the resume of the guy who supervised TDKR SFX:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Corbould
Just to clarify....
Are you saying that guy plus a 250 Million dollar budget didn't know how to show SFX of something to break like real rock?
Just to clarify: Most people didn't notice the change in the column in real time watching it for the first time. Only those, who are bias, here who are trying to discredit the feat.
Originally posted by h1a8
Yes or they went a cheaper route on purpose. Otherwise, you can't explain away the column switch (from real to fake) in the scene right before Bane struck the column to the next cut scene where Bane struck the column. The two columns look drastically different. It's the "rag doll" effect. One scene is the human and in the next scene is a poorly displayed fake "rag doll".Just to clarify: Most people didn't notice the change in the column in real time watching it for the first time. Only those, who are bias, here who are trying to discredit the feat.
If you want to make such claims you actually need to provide some proof. Proof that they decided to be cheap on purpose. Otherwise you're just throwing opinions in the air.
In case you didn't know, drywall and plaster can be made to look like rock or concrete. Heck, even wallpaper can be made to look like concrete. This is common sense. Just because it looks like stone doesn't mean it's actual stone.
Originally posted by FrothByteSo you going to troll and ignore my post?
If you want to make such claims you actually need to provide some proof. Proof that they decided to be cheap on purpose. Otherwise you're just throwing opinions in the air.In case you didn't know, drywall and plaster can be made to look like rock or concrete. Heck, even wallpaper can be made to look like concrete. This is common sense. Just because it looks like stone doesn't mean it's actual stone.
Originally posted by h1a8
So you going to troll and ignore my post?
I proved it with the column switch. The column was real and then switched to a fake one. The two columns look drastically different. The "rag doll" effect.
Yeah they switched it to a fake column, obviously they didn't want to wreck the real column yah? But that doesn't change the fact that they made sure that the fake column looked and reacted like dry wall, not stone and not concrete. So writer's and director's intent still means they wanted us to see Bane wrecking plaster or dry wall, not stone and concrete. You can't get away from this fact.
Originally posted by FrothByteBut if they wanted the column to look and react like dry wall then they would have ALWAYS made them look that way. Why wait, when Bane strikes the column, to change it? If Bane would have never struck the column (it wasn't part of the story) then the column's would have always remained the same. The column specifically changed only when Bane struck it, not at any other time. This proves they changed it in order for Bane to appear to bust it up.
Yeah they switched it to a fake column, obviously they didn't want to wreck the real column yah? But that doesn't change the fact that they made sure that the fake column looked and reacted like dry wall, not stone and not concrete. So writer's and director's intent still means they wanted us to see Bane wrecking plaster or dry wall, not stone and concrete. You can't get away from this fact.
Originally posted by h1a8
The "rag doll" effect.
Its funny you are trying to us the "Rag-Doll effect" as an excuse to serve your argument.
After like the year 2000, the rag doll effect and similar very low budget movie techniques are only used now a days on the lowest of the low straight to DVD movies. IF that. You can even argue that you only see that in the lowest budget foreign films. Even TV special effects dont use effect of this low quality.
You are basically arguing that a big budget film like TDKR used specials effects found only on movies now a days made with pocket change in Cambodia.
If in the next Avengers movie Captain America lifts and throws a giant steel ball across the room and the ball behaves like its made out of rubber, would you think its a giant steel ball? Lets say the ball looks EXACTLY like steel, but bounces around like rubber.
Originally posted by h1a8
But if they wanted the column to look and react like dry wall then they would have ALWAYS made them look that way. Why wait, when Bane strikes the column, to change it? If Bane would have never struck the column (it wasn't part of the story) then the column's would have always remained the same. The column specifically changed only when Bane struck it, not at any other time. This proves they changed it in order for Bane to appear to bust it up.
Drywall does look like concrete you dumbass, at least from a distance. You'd need to get really close before you can tell it's drywall, sometimes not even then and you'd knock on it to make sure. Or just break it. Bottom line is that pillar's outer layer looked like it was plaster or drywall so that's what it is unless proven otherwise.
Originally posted by h1a8
Yes or they went a cheaper route on purpose. Otherwise, you can't explain away the column switch (from real to fake) in the scene right before Bane struck the column to the next cut scene where Bane struck the column. The two columns look drastically different. It's the "rag doll" effect. One scene is the human and in the next scene is a poorly displayed fake "rag doll".Just to clarify: Most people didn't notice the change in the column in real time watching it for the first time. Only those, who are bias, here who are trying to discredit the feat.
So award-winning SFX guy either didn't know how stone looks like when it breaks or went cheap and used antiquated/B-movie techniques during the climactic final battle between the hero and the main villain?
That's your argument?
Originally posted by Nibedicus
So award-winning SFX guy either didn't know how stone looks like when it breaks or went cheap and used antiquated/B-movie techniques during the climactic final battle between the hero and the main villain?That's your argument?
I just read an article. It appears that Chris said he had a tough challenge since Nolan told him to stay away from CGI as much as possible and focus on SFX with props.
Originally posted by FrothByte
Drywall does look like concrete you dumbass, at least from a distance. You'd need to get really close before you can tell it's drywall, sometimes not even then and you'd knock on it to make sure. Or just break it. Bottom line is that pillar's outer layer looked like it was plaster or drywall so that's what it is unless proven otherwise.
Drywall doesn't look anything like stone. Otherwise, why do we clearly see the "rag doll" effect? The column was stone before Bane struck it and then changed to prop material (different texture and color) for the scene where he struck it.
Originally posted by h1a8
Drywall doesn't look anything like stone. Otherwise, why do we clearly see the "rag doll" effect? The column was stone before Bane struck it and then changed to prop material (different texture and color) for the scene where he struck it.
Can you answer this and not dodge it like you do most posts that destroy your arguments?
Originally posted by Inhuman
If in the next Avengers movie Captain America lifts and throws a giant steel ball across the room and the ball behaves like its made out of rubber, would you think its a giant steel ball? Lets say the ball looks EXACTLY like steel, but bounces around like rubber.
Originally posted by h1a8
Drywall doesn't look anything like stone. Otherwise, why do we clearly see the "rag doll" effect? The column was stone before Bane struck it and then changed to prop material (different texture and color) for the scene where he struck it.
I think I understand now. You obviously have no idea what drywall is.
For example, this is drywall:
