Originally posted by FrothByte
I think I understand now. You obviously have no idea what drywall is.For example, this is drywall:
Drywall doesn't look like that.
And you are forgetting of the "rag doll" column switch. So even if drywall did look like stone then you can't explain away the vast difference in appearance when Bane struck the column vs. any other time.
Originally posted by h1a8
Drywall doesn't look like that.And you are forgetting of the "rag doll" column switch. So even if drywall did look like stone then you can't explain away the vast difference in appearance when Bane struck the column vs. any other time.
That's actually drywall. What you don't seem to understand is that drywall can be made to look like different surfaces depending on how it's painted. It can be made to look like wood, concrete, marble, stone... so your whole ragdoll theory holds no water since the pillar looked exactly the same as it did.
Originally posted by InhumanThe rag doll effect is in many top movies after 2000. Matrix sequels had them. Spider-man had them, etc.
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.
Nolan specifically ordered Chris to stay away from CGI as much as possible and use natural effects.
Originally posted by FrothByte
That's actually drywall. What you don't seem to understand is that drywall can be made to look like different surfaces depending on how it's painted. It can be made to look like wood, concrete, marble, stone... so your whole ragdoll theory holds no water since the pillar looked exactly the same as it did.
Prove that it is drywall. You are just posting a picture of something that looks like concrete.
Again, you are ignoring the true argument. The column's appearance didn't remain the same. It appeared to be different in color and texture (as in other scenes) right before Bane struck it.
Originally posted by h1a8
Yes, because it was meant to be a steel ball. But I'm not just arguing the behavior of the column, but the appearance was changed (right before Bane struck it).
How would you know its meant to be a steel ball if there would be no indication or dialog insinuating this like the drywall pillar?
Originally posted by Inhuman
How would you know its meant to be a steel ball if there would be no indication or dialog insinuating this like the drywall pillar?
I thought it was implied that it was meant to be a steel ball. You are saying that we have no other evidence or clue to what the ball is made out of besides its appearance?
In that case (which will never happen), then I'll think it's not a steel ball as long as the appearance doesn't change when it bounces. If the appearance changes the moment it is put into action, then that is strong evidence that it was meant to be a steel ball.
Originally posted by FrothByte
http://www.ehow.com/how_10072177_make-drywall-look-like-stone.html
Again, you are ignoring the true argument. The column's appearance didn't remain the same. It appeared to be different in color and texture (as in other scenes) right before Bane struck it.
Originally posted by h1a8
Again, you are ignoring the true argument. The column's appearance didn't remain the same. It appeared to be different in color and texture (as in other scenes) right before Bane struck it.
And like I said before, it you want to involve real world movie magic into it then we know Bane never really broke a stone pillar because it was a prop. So he broke a prop. Is that really the kind of argument you want to make?
Also noticed how you resort to deflection after I proved that drywall can look like stone.
Originally posted by FrothByte
And like I said before, it you want to involve real world movie magic into it then we know Bane never really broke a stone pillar because it was a prop. So he broke a prop. Is that really the kind of argument you want to make?Also noticed how you resort to deflection after I proved that drywall can look like stone.
I have stated the argument about 10x times in every post. I refuse to let you ignore it. You act as if I'm just proposing the argument now. You never addressed it until now. Every post you made completely ignored it.
Again, you can't explain away why the column suddenly changed appearance when Bane turned to strike it. If they wanted the column to be made of drywall then all scenes would have had the columns appearing the same and never changing in appearance.
Originally posted by h1a8
Drywall doesn't look like that.And you are forgetting of the "rag doll" column switch. So even if drywall did look like stone then you can't explain away the vast difference in appearance when Bane struck the column vs. any other time.
Still waiting for your quote from the writer, the one stating that his intention was for Bane to punch through solid stone.
Originally posted by h1a8
I have stated the argument about 10x times in every post. I refuse to let you ignore it. You act as if I'm just proposing the argument now. You never addressed it until now. Every post you made completely ignored it.Again, you can't explain away why the column suddenly changed appearance when Bane turned to strike it. If they wanted the column to be made of drywall then all scenes would have had the columns appearing the same and never changing in appearance.
Because the pillar didn't change appearance. It only "changed" when it got hit and was crumbling, but appearances do tend to change when something is crumbling.
Originally posted by FrothByte
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.
No, assertions that "but they'd never accidentally let a bad special effect into a movie!" don't hold water when Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part 1 had the white marble tomb of Dumbledore be made out of ****ing styrofoam. 👇
That film had a similarly high budget. Even professionals with lots of funding make mistakes.
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.
No, we're not going to be retarded and assume that the giant column meant to support this massive building's weight was made of drywall, especially not when it didn't sound like drywall being broken at all. I've seen drywall be punched through with forklifts, and it doesn't sound quite so much like stone breaking, like what Bane did to the column.
For real though, why do all of you hate the Dark Knight series so much? What is it about Bane that gets all of your panties in a twist? Or Superman for that matter. I've never seen so many people autistically trying to discredit any feat they have. Inhuman's dumb self is still clinging to the idea that Bane is only "peak human" strength-wise, and I don't know why.
Originally posted by Silent MasterThere isn't a single person on this site that hates Man of Steel or Batman vs. Superman more than me. Not one. Anyone who thinks Man of Steel was a good movie is a retarded phaggot.
For Superman, it's that the new movies have sucked a$$
But I'm also not an autistic ********** who is going to ignore and downplay the characters in the films in versus threads. 👇
