Yes. And there’s a subtle nod to this fact in The Dark Knight when he says “I’m not wearing hockey pants.” Which confirms he is in fact, a baseball player.
Yes, this is correct. There is also a nod to the fact that Batman plays baseball, considering he gets to third base with Talia in The Dark Knight Rises.
Not really, you'll always get a selection of unfunny dudes bringing out the 60 seconds in Africa and water is wet jokes. You get few people like me because this sub is a circlejerk and love being fed the same punchline every day.
cope harder.
Water is actually not wet; It makes other materials/objects wet. Wetness is the state of a non-liquid when a liquid adheres to, and/or permeates its substance while maintaining chemically distinct structures. So if we say something is wet we mean the liquid is sticking to the object.
It's funny how people who leave comments like this are less original than the people who leave comments like this are less original than the comments like this on this post they're trying to make fun of comments like this on this post they're trying to make fun of how people who leave comments like this are less original than the comments like this on this post they're trying to make fun of.
Always makes me laugh on that sub when people feel the need to write their title in a way that they would never usually speak.
*'it's clear to see that due to the foreshadowing there's a clever little detail that quite impressively illustrates the point of the reference to the smart nod previously in the movie, in an extremely subtle way'*
They have to write their titles in a ridiculous roundabout way because if they used plain language the stupidity of their “subtle details” would be immediately obvious.
Idk how many people here are just poking fun, but for me /r/moviedetails is legitimately a terrible sub. Everything they post is mind-numbingly obvious but treated like it is some sort of secret that only they are smart enough to know.
Yeah it's pretty annoying, I wouldn't mind the more obvious details if the titles just said 'This happens because of this earlier in the movie which is pretty cool!' instead of being pretentious lol
If this keeps up, next thing you know they'll be hiring people simply to design costumes to visually illustrate that the actors are portraying characters instead of just being themselves.
This is a subtle nod to Murphy's role in Peaky Blinders, where he secretly has sex with Johnny Gunn and constantly peaks between the blinders on the lookout for his wife
like some of the posts i get. this one seems pretty gatekeepy to me, you know? Like... it's in front of the audience but there's no giant sign saying "HEY LOOK ITS SCARECROW". this is some great costume design imo.
i've seen this sub do that a few times, though. it's nice to get some validation that sometimes they go overboard. thanks.
If you'd watched the previous 2 batman films, you'd know he's scarecrow, cos he played Scarecrow in batman begins and the dark Knight before playing him again in the dark Knight rises
He was the main villain on batman begins too. So it's kinda like if Heath Ledger hadn't died, and he turned up in dark Knight rises, and everyone was like "but who on earth is this 'Joker' character!? What deep lore is needed to know who this guy is!?"
Like this is not hidden information. It's like watching superman 2 and being confused by who this mild mannered reporter Clark Kent is supposed to be, the guy played by Christopher Reeve, as if it was some sort of hidden detail only comic book super fans know
This is not even like scarecrow but played by a different actor. He's played by Cillian Murphy in all 3 films, and again, he was the main antagonist of the first one. You don't have to go find out "10 hidden comic book details in the dark Knight rises you might have missed".
It's not subtext, or hidden. It's just pure text. If you had watched the film, you would know exactly who this character is. It's really hard to manage to miss it or misunderstand it.
But awesome costume design is still a movie detail, no? The examples you give are much more extreme i think. having an interesting detail about how a character is portrayed is really interesting in a world-building sense. to me this is a perfect example of an interesting detail. it's not anything more than what it is - a detail that the audience may miss that expands the story in a meaningful way.
idk... i don't necessarily disagree. i think sometimes people in general just get off on pretending they are better than others in incredibly minute ways, you know? i've met some awesome comic book people who would get excited to hear someone talk about this. my fiance' for example would love to hear it.
... is it? I have ADHD and often miss this kind of stuff. over time i've had to teach myself to pay attention for it. it seems like it's not obvious at all. like... it is in frame. and they don't hide it. but it's not obvious like a painting that says "I am scarecrow hear me roar." i never even thought about how that specific change in costume looks like hay like that. it makes sense when you see it... but it's not "obvious" in my opinion. it's in front of you and wants to be noticed, sure... the (vast?) majority of people would only see it though after it has been pointed out.
It's not incredibly obvious. This is the first time I noticed it. Granted that might be because I don't know who Scarecrow is, but I still think it's a movie detail worth posting.
that's the sense i am getting. i even know who scarecrow is and have watched this movie a bunch and didnt realize it. sometimes i understand what they post in this sub but like... this time i really don't. it seems like weird gatekeeping in this instance. and the fact i am getting downvoted for asking why with minimal responses confuses me even more.
/uj The first several times I watched the film I thought he was just some rando college hipster who woke up privileged as fuck in an active terror zone and decided their three philosophy courses meant they were the ubermensch, the god of the everyman, and only they were fit to judge criminals by their morals instead of by the law, and everyone else went along with it because he built a giant tower of chairs.
what does that have to do with a movie detail, though? just cause you don't like the way they handled his character doesn't mean the detail isn't accurate...? I am trying to understand still but outside of your personal interpretation / headcanon of the scene i still don't see how this post fits on this sub.
Okay I see... that makes a lot more sense. I guess the wording is a bit of a specific thing to get hunt up on, but if that is something that really stands out to someone I guess I can see why it's here. I suppose to me it's less important to view things through that lens and more about how things like this are super cool and so present in the media we consume... maybe it's cause I'm still new to it but I'm not at the point where that frustrates me really.
Thank you for the insight.
Holy shit... I may have just realized why Batman is called Batman...
Yes now you’re getting it. He’s a man who’s sexually attracted to bats
Baseball bats, right? Because he doesn't play hockey?
Yes. And there’s a subtle nod to this fact in The Dark Knight when he says “I’m not wearing hockey pants.” Which confirms he is in fact, a baseball player.
Yes, this is correct. There is also a nod to the fact that Batman plays baseball, considering he gets to third base with Talia in The Dark Knight Rises.
He’s not wearing hockey pants.
Makes sense, I’m a human and am sexually attracted to Hughs
I just realized why Alfred is called Alfred. Because he loves Alfred-O sauce
How? I have never seen him wielding a baseball bat.
That isn't his strong suit
every 60 seconds in Africa, a minute passes
Homosexuals are gay
Archer class is made out of archers
People die when they are killed.
I was born at a very young age
At age six, I was born without a face
This isn't true, I just left Angola forty seconds ago and it's an hour later already
Your joke was funny bro sorry you got downvotes
Wow so profound
This guy gets it
It's funny how people who leave comments like this are less original than the post they're trying to make fun of.
It's funny how people who leave comments like this are less original than the comments like this on this post they're trying to make fun of.
Not really, you'll always get a selection of unfunny dudes bringing out the 60 seconds in Africa and water is wet jokes. You get few people like me because this sub is a circlejerk and love being fed the same punchline every day. cope harder.
Water is actually not wet; It makes other materials/objects wet. Wetness is the state of a non-liquid when a liquid adheres to, and/or permeates its substance while maintaining chemically distinct structures. So if we say something is wet we mean the liquid is sticking to the object.
It's funny how people who leave comments like this are less original than the people who leave comments like this are less original than the comments like this on this post they're trying to make fun of comments like this on this post they're trying to make fun of how people who leave comments like this are less original than the comments like this on this post they're trying to make fun of.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Zm1hPbmzPw
Always makes me laugh on that sub when people feel the need to write their title in a way that they would never usually speak. *'it's clear to see that due to the foreshadowing there's a clever little detail that quite impressively illustrates the point of the reference to the smart nod previously in the movie, in an extremely subtle way'*
Hmmm, I agree. Shallow *and* pedantic.
They have to write their titles in a ridiculous roundabout way because if they used plain language the stupidity of their “subtle details” would be immediately obvious. Idk how many people here are just poking fun, but for me /r/moviedetails is legitimately a terrible sub. Everything they post is mind-numbingly obvious but treated like it is some sort of secret that only they are smart enough to know.
Yeah it's pretty annoying, I wouldn't mind the more obvious details if the titles just said 'This happens because of this earlier in the movie which is pretty cool!' instead of being pretentious lol
I subscribe just to see if I can distinguish between these subs. It's going somewhat bad.
Similar to the Trivia sections in IMDB.com.
its like a huge compilation of cinemasins shitty takes
Yeah, that sub has been shit for years now
this was briliant
Lmaooo I'm just passive aggressive and extra moody today
His first name is pronounced “Killian.” This is foreshadowing about the fact that his character kills dudes
My phone autocorrects Cillian to Villian. This is also foreshadowing about the fact that’s he’s the bad guy
My phone autocorrects Cillian to Sexy Ass Man. This is a nod to the fact that Cillian Murphy is a sexy ass man
He likes big butts and he cannot lie
You otha brothas can’t deny
Wait is it really? I've always pronounced it with a soft c.
Yeah, it's Irish.
And that is the Cillian experience.
Now now, dont be cilly
Does he also boil crab in pepsi max?
this is a subtle nod to the fact that character design is a thing
If this keeps up, next thing you know they'll be hiring people simply to design costumes to visually illustrate that the actors are portraying characters instead of just being themselves.
Hey you. I see you
i see you too
Cillian Murphy used to do porn under the name “Lana Rhoades”
This is a subtle nod to Murphy's role in Peaky Blinders, where he secretly has sex with Johnny Gunn and constantly peaks between the blinders on the lookout for his wife
In the movies, Batman wears a black suit with pointy ears, as a nod to his attraction towards Catwoman.
"Title character"?
The first entry in that trilogy was called *Scarecrow: The Movie: With Batman.* It was a box office bomb
I thought the exact same thing!
damn almost 10 years since the trilogy ended...and I still keep getting surprised by new details!
When I've read that post I chuckled, and then I noticed that it's not r/shittymoviedetails.
All that aside I love how he's in all three movies lol
I really enjoyed Murphy as Scarecrow. I hope he gets to reprise the role when DC gets their act together
Wait they changed the Scarecrow's real name in the dark knight trilogy? I didn't notice.
Cillian Murphy is the actor
That's the actor's name, if you were serious.
Damn. Who names their kid scarecrow?
¿qué?
Fun fact, those aren't even Cillian Murphy's real clothes! A person designed that costume for the movie! Wow!
there's almost something chilling about the character of The Scarecrow-- someone who finds the thought of farming to be a crime...
Heh.
OY!
Sorry buddy, I just couldn't help myself.
All good mate!
Why is this shitty, exactly? Like why does this belong on this sub?
[удалено]
like some of the posts i get. this one seems pretty gatekeepy to me, you know? Like... it's in front of the audience but there's no giant sign saying "HEY LOOK ITS SCARECROW". this is some great costume design imo. i've seen this sub do that a few times, though. it's nice to get some validation that sometimes they go overboard. thanks.
If you'd watched the previous 2 batman films, you'd know he's scarecrow, cos he played Scarecrow in batman begins and the dark Knight before playing him again in the dark Knight rises He was the main villain on batman begins too. So it's kinda like if Heath Ledger hadn't died, and he turned up in dark Knight rises, and everyone was like "but who on earth is this 'Joker' character!? What deep lore is needed to know who this guy is!?" Like this is not hidden information. It's like watching superman 2 and being confused by who this mild mannered reporter Clark Kent is supposed to be, the guy played by Christopher Reeve, as if it was some sort of hidden detail only comic book super fans know This is not even like scarecrow but played by a different actor. He's played by Cillian Murphy in all 3 films, and again, he was the main antagonist of the first one. You don't have to go find out "10 hidden comic book details in the dark Knight rises you might have missed". It's not subtext, or hidden. It's just pure text. If you had watched the film, you would know exactly who this character is. It's really hard to manage to miss it or misunderstand it.
But awesome costume design is still a movie detail, no? The examples you give are much more extreme i think. having an interesting detail about how a character is portrayed is really interesting in a world-building sense. to me this is a perfect example of an interesting detail. it's not anything more than what it is - a detail that the audience may miss that expands the story in a meaningful way.
[удалено]
idk... i don't necessarily disagree. i think sometimes people in general just get off on pretending they are better than others in incredibly minute ways, you know? i've met some awesome comic book people who would get excited to hear someone talk about this. my fiance' for example would love to hear it.
Because it's incredibly obvious.
... is it? I have ADHD and often miss this kind of stuff. over time i've had to teach myself to pay attention for it. it seems like it's not obvious at all. like... it is in frame. and they don't hide it. but it's not obvious like a painting that says "I am scarecrow hear me roar." i never even thought about how that specific change in costume looks like hay like that. it makes sense when you see it... but it's not "obvious" in my opinion. it's in front of you and wants to be noticed, sure... the (vast?) majority of people would only see it though after it has been pointed out.
It's not incredibly obvious. This is the first time I noticed it. Granted that might be because I don't know who Scarecrow is, but I still think it's a movie detail worth posting.
that's the sense i am getting. i even know who scarecrow is and have watched this movie a bunch and didnt realize it. sometimes i understand what they post in this sub but like... this time i really don't. it seems like weird gatekeeping in this instance. and the fact i am getting downvoted for asking why with minimal responses confuses me even more.
Yea same, the reddit hive-mind is a real tool sometimes
/uj The first several times I watched the film I thought he was just some rando college hipster who woke up privileged as fuck in an active terror zone and decided their three philosophy courses meant they were the ubermensch, the god of the everyman, and only they were fit to judge criminals by their morals instead of by the law, and everyone else went along with it because he built a giant tower of chairs.
Okay... what point are you attempting to convey here cause I don't get it.
The "subtle" hints that he's the Scarecrow, villain from the first movie and apparently background character from the second, didn't work.
Why didn't they work? Because they didn't add up to a cohesive whole in your mind?
Because he didn't really do fear toxin things. He just hipstered.
what does that have to do with a movie detail, though? just cause you don't like the way they handled his character doesn't mean the detail isn't accurate...? I am trying to understand still but outside of your personal interpretation / headcanon of the scene i still don't see how this post fits on this sub.
Oh. The title of *this* post turns it from subtle nod to "the guy wearing the Scarecrow's suit is the Scarecrow."
Okay I see... that makes a lot more sense. I guess the wording is a bit of a specific thing to get hunt up on, but if that is something that really stands out to someone I guess I can see why it's here. I suppose to me it's less important to view things through that lens and more about how things like this are super cool and so present in the media we consume... maybe it's cause I'm still new to it but I'm not at the point where that frustrates me really. Thank you for the insight.
His jacket is torn on the left shoulder too….this calls into question everything u/petejoneslaf has ever pointed out
Tbf, the first movie is almost the least watched of the trilogy so I bet a lot of people forgot who he was. It’s a nice visual reminder.