View Single Post
  #557  
Old 07-25-2012, 05:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shinigami View Post
Fair warning for the uninitiated - after this weekend I will probably be too lazy to continue spoiler tagging... Anything. The thread has done an awesome job getting this far with relatively minimal leakage.

Spoiler:

Cop No. 633^

Your scenario with Gordon would have been great. I think Gordon was supposed to survive, so the criminals couldn't have killed him, and I think Gordon should have remained in Bane's captivity so Bane didn't go through the repetition of snatching the guy twice, but that would have added an extra punch to the climactic act. Batman could have been fighting his way through the crowds to rescue Gordon as much as confront Bane, giving him even more to do.

But I thought they handled robin's rise well. The trouble with developing blake into robin in the third act is the leap between the officer he begins as and the presumed transformation he starts at the end. I don't think they had the runtime to make that leap. They showed blake as a cop, then a detective, then someone at odds with the system, but that was a quicker segue to punch up with his backstory than something monumental like showing him becoming batman. The Dark Knight had batman copycats, but they were oafs. From a storytelling point of view, I don't know how feasible it would be to not only build up another batman, but then initiate that batman into play by the third act. The writers might have needed to introduce blake already in training at the start of the movie and then pack his backstory with both motivation and abbreviated instances leading him to the decision he didn't otherwise reach until the end of Rises.
Spoiler:
I think he could've had enough time to explore John Blake's subplot if he had chopped down the first hour and a half. I felt a lot of that time was wasted on setting up story lines with Dagget and Bane. If Nolan had introduced Bane into Gotham a lot sooner, I think it would've given him more time to explore the second half of the story which was more interesting than the first half. Like I said, we never got to see Gotham in shambles. That would have been the perfect opportunity for John Blake to step in since Batman was MIA for 3 months. It also would've given more suspense to his scenes because it puts him in greater danger. Also, if they had the foresight to kill Gordon off (who basically wasn't really needed in the rest of the film), it could've been the catalyst that made Blake put on a mask.

I think if Nolan had done another rewrite, he could have made it work without having John Blake's arc to be hokey. Saving for the very end just felt lazy to me. Sort of like how Nolan had to explain the moment between Alfred and Bruce at the restaurant in Italy. Dramatically, I think it would've been stronger if Nolan had cut out Alfred's explanation an hour beforehand. It took away from what could've been a great moment by whispering in our ears, "Hey, this is that great moment I told you about earlier!" There was just a lack of emotional punches in this film for me.



Quote:
Originally Posted by The Postmaster General View Post
Spoiler:
I mentioned it earlier, but I think Bane's demise, even happening nearly the same, would have been way better had it been Blake, in mask, using Wayne technology. It was set-up to happen so perfectly, and would have been an amazing character reveal instead of the second coming-ish hint we were left with. The ending could have even happened the same, with Robin, not Blake, oh-BTW-he's-also-legally-named-Robin-now, discovering the Batcave.
Spoiler:
Don't even get me started on his "legal name." I did not like that moment one bit. Also, you're totally right that it could've been a cool reveal instead of Catwoman. Ball dropped, Mr. Nolan, ball dropped.

Last edited by Cop No. 633; 07-25-2012 at 05:35 PM..
Reply With Quote