[SpectralJulianIsNotDead]

Originally Posted by Murmer99

Nolan has never made a movie better than Videodrome, Dead Zone, Dead Ringers... and I'll stop there.

Personally, I think Nolan has no choice but to include certain things in his films that will help his films sell. But I think he manages to incorporate elements from his previous, more "artsy" films with his Dark Knight Trilogy. Yes it's still Batman, but I'm not sure why someone can't admit that he has indeed elevated it to another level. It takes a lot of the "comic booky" approach out of it, and portrays the subject matter with a more human point of view. It isn't a blockbuster summer film filled with cartoonish characters and batman flying around and fighting every 5 minutes. There's a more serious tone and more character development. To say that this is separated from A History of Violence just because the guy is wearing a cape is pretty shortsighted. It's fine to not enjoy the movies, but to say they can't be taken seriously is dumb. Nolan indeed took chances to some degree with these films, and I'm not sure how people can't see that... regardless of whether they enjoyed it or not.

In fact, to insinuate that a movie is "boring" because it isn't an art film is dumb as well. If a movie is entertaining and pulls off what it sets out to do, who cares? Also, for what it's worth, I still like Burton's films more.

If Nolan has elevated Batman to another level than why is Tim Burton's Batman movie far superior?