#401  
Old 07-21-2012, 03:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemovies View Post
Oh, please. This isn't rottentomatoes or imdb, you know. I would like to know what you didn't like about the movie. It's not like there haven't been people who weren't disappointed. A few people have pointed out several things of what they didn't like about the movie.
I'm just going to bite my tongue for the most part until I've seen it again. I don't want to completely write it off until then. But let's just say I pretty much disliked everything about it.
Reply With Quote
  #402  
Old 07-21-2012, 04:06 PM

OKay please help a comic book noob out here. I'm a fan of Nolan's Batman universe but I'm completely ignorant to the DC comics' world. The ending where
Spoiler:
JGL is Robin. I've read up a little bit on wiki but am still confused. I keep seeing peoples' comments saying they want a Nightwing movie next. Is Robin and Nightwing the same person? Or are they different characters all together.
Reply With Quote
  #403  
Old 07-21-2012, 04:06 PM
Saw it last night on a regular screen (I already have my tickets for Imax on tuesday on a TRUE Imax screen, not an AMC fakey screen)

I really liked it, not as much as Dark Knight, it is just, as good as Bane was, I seriously dont think anyone playing a villain in any movie will ever compare to Heath Ledgers Joker.

I will say the Ending to this movie was pitch perfect... I really want to see Michael Cain nominated for an Oscar for his performance, that guy, every line he has brings moisture to my eyes

Spoiler:
Especially the end, when they are burying Bruce Wayne and he looks at the grave stones for The Wayne Parents and tells them he failed them through tears... my eyes were very full


As for Miranda Tate

Spoiler:
Unfortunately, I knew , as I think most of us did, tat she was really playing Talia Al Ghul... I thought maybe Bane was going to be her brother or something, but he was her protector, and I LOVED Hardy's performance when that is all revealed, because if you look at his right eye, as Talia is describing how Bane was her protector, a single tear falls from his eye.. it was just perfect)


As for banes voice, with the exception of maybe 2 or 3 lines, I had no problem understanding him.

As for JGL

Spoiler:
I know Nolan was very vehiminent about Robin not being in these movies, but I LOVED the fact that at the end of the day he was Robin, it was genius and I just loved it very much


Anne Hathaway has never looked hotter and that is saying a lot, cuz she is damn hot in pretty much all of her movies!

As for the very end:

Spoiler:
It seems, reading through some of these posts, some of you all dont like that Alfred saw Wayne at the Cafe.. I however loved it and am supremely happy he didnt do an Inception Ambiguous ending. Batman fixed the auto pilot function on the plane (Something that was set up from the first time Fox showed Wayne the plane and said he needed his help to fix the auto pilot) and that last scene was such a perfect conclusion to the trilogy, Bruce Wayne is finally at peace, he has created this martyr in batman, the statue is erected he even has someone who can take over as a idea of good in Gotham (Blake/ Robin)


Overall, I thought the movie was excellent, not the perfection of Dark Knight (Which I solely attribute to Heath Ledger, that is the 1 thing that lifts Dark Knight above Rises... although Hardy and everyone else were pretty much flawless, Ledgers Joker is the greatest screen villain of all time, and I dont think anyone will ever touch that)

Can not wait to see the Imax version, with over an Hours worth of Imax shot footage!!!
Reply With Quote
  #404  
Old 07-21-2012, 04:09 PM
Anyone else NOT seeing this? The hype and the insane Christopher Nolan fans have really ruined him for me, and the shooting just gives me another reason not to pay to see this.
Reply With Quote
  #405  
Old 07-21-2012, 04:14 PM
Did the end remind anyone else of this classic:




That said, 8/10
Reply With Quote
  #406  
Old 07-21-2012, 04:22 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonham View Post
Did the end remind anyone else of this classic:




That said, 8/10
lmao
If i could rep you I would
Reply With Quote
  #407  
Old 07-21-2012, 04:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
I have some general thoughts about the film, I'll put anything major in spoiler tags but there will be minor spoilers throughout the entire post:

Okay so I saw it twice in IMAX yesterday at the Franklin Institute in Philly. It's a dome theater and I got there pretty late for the first viewing so I had terrible seats. Dome IMAX can be great, but good seats are essential, so for the second viewing I got there an hour and a half early and got the most perfect seats at the very top row in the center. I'm so glad I had the foresight to buy tickets for two showings, my second viewing was much more enjoyable, I could see everything much more clearly and I wasn't craning my neck for 3 hours.

I think the fight scenes in this film were the best out of the trilogy. I'd still like to see a Batman movie with fight scenes as fast and intense as the fights in the Raid, but with the Nolan films there is so much more to offer than just fights.

I thought it was a very impressive conclusion to the trilogy, especially considering how high the bar had been set from The Dark Knight. I think the only flaw in this is that this film suffers the most from being heavily edited compared to the last two. At several points it's obvious that entire scenes had to be cut to keep the film moving forward:

Spoiler:
There are some awkward cuts in the opening scene at Wayne manor. Also when Batman returns to Gotham he magically goes from the bridge with Kyle, to the ice with Gordon, to tunnel with Blake. Kyle's relationship with Juno Temple obviously had some stuff cut out of it. With what little screen time Temple actually got, the entire character probably could have been cut. The montage with Bane releasing the inmates and the entire revolution seemed a bit rushed as well.


However that's not a deal breaker, because at 2 hours and 45 minutes the film really moves along at a brisk pace. I didn't feel like any parts of the film dragged, whereas I can understand some viewer complains about the final act of TDK. Like I said, I spent 6 hours watching this movie yesterday in rather uncomfortable seats(why does a premium IMAX theater have such rigid seats with very little arm and leg room??) but I never felt like the movie had to hurry up.

I agree with Postmaster that Kyle's Catwoman was a high light of the film. I knew she nailed the part from her opening scene with Wayne where she quickly goes from playing the innocent to going "Oops" then kicking his cane out from under him. While Batman was busy being brooding and tragic, Catwoman had the best one-liners of the film and was clearly enjoying being a vigilante. She was morally gray and you never knew which side she was on, true to the comics, but she had the best arc of the film and actually felt like a genuine, three-dimensional character. I also found her relationship with Batman to be kind of touching, especially at the end of the film. The kiss at the end really moved me, and Nolan has come a long way from the awkward, emotionless kiss at the end of Batman Begins.

The ending was very important for a film like this, that was the obvious end to a trilogy about a character who typically has no end. The final act was edge-of-your seat excitement. The final fight with Bane was thrilling and so much more satisfying than the final fight between Batman and Joker in TDK. Everything in the film built up to this moment, and it didn't disappoint. The fight was brutal and real, Bane's speed was impressive and I loved his fast punches leading to him breaking off pieces of the column behind Batman. There was a nice nod to the comics as Batman broke part of his mask, but I like that it didn't completely incapacitate him, but made him angrier and more reckless.

Everything from the final fight to the last shot of the film was just perfect, it was powerful, and emotional. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't teary-eyed for the final few minutes.

Spoiler:
Batman's final words to Gordon really hit me hard, along with his earlier fight with Alfred. There were some tough moments in this film. Talia's twisting the blade in Batman's side as Bane choked him with a rope and Bane's brutal pummeling in their first fight was especially hard to watch. I was struggling to keep my composure as Batman flew out over the sea, stunned to think that Nolan was actually going to kill off Batman. The final reveal of Bruce in Italy and Blake rising as Nightwing were equally as triumphant, as the preceding few minutes were desperate and tragic.


I don't think the ending is ambiguous as some other's may believe:

Spoiler:
I saw the film twice yesterday, and after the first viewing I thought the ending was ambiguous and was leaning towards Bruce being dead. In hindsight I think it was because I was overcome with emotion and because of that I missed a few key details. It wasn't until the second viewing that I picked up on a scene that eliminates all ambiguity and confirms that Bruce does survive. There's a scene where Fox is having some engineers work on the Bat, he's guilt-ridden and needs to know if there's anything he could have done to fix the autopilot. The engineers say that the auto pilot is actually working fine and that a patch was administered 6 months ago. It turns out Bruce fixed the auto pilot almost immediately. He only said he didn't because he knew he was going to fake his own death.

As bleak as this trilogy has been, I'm glad that Nolan allowed Bruce Wayne to find some peace and happiness after all of the tragedy he had suffered.


Is it as good as the Dark Knight? I'm not sure, I don't really think it's necessary. I think each film has some flaws and some strengths over the other film. TDK may have had a better villain, but TDKR unquestionably has the stronger final act. I think I'm just grateful that we have such a great trilogy about Batman, and whoever steps in for the reboot has very, very large shoes to fill.
Complelely agree with all of your points, I really that the ending was great, all through the trilogy we see Bruce trying to make Batman a symbol and he finally suceeds in this movie. And after all he suffered it was great that he was able to move on, but left the legend in place. Also, Tom Hardys preformance as Bane may not have been iconic as the Ledger as the Joker, but he did a great job of portraying and intense and terrifying character. One of the most impressive parts to me was the relationship between Bane and Talia, it made me a little more emotional invested in their characters and raised the intensity and depth of the movie.
Reply With Quote
  #408  
Old 07-21-2012, 04:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edo View Post
Anyone else NOT seeing this? The hype and the insane Christopher Nolan fans have really ruined him for me, and the shooting just gives me another reason not to pay to see this.
Definitely give the movie a shot. Its flawed/a bit too long but good.

The shooting is a buzzkill for sure though. I hope nothing like that happens again.
Reply With Quote
  #409  
Old 07-21-2012, 04:37 PM
And here we go

I have so many problems with this movie it makes me sick. It had so much potential and it was so disappointing. This movie was filled with plot holes and problems and here are just a dozen or so that I had a problem with (some may be repeats of what has already been said so sorry about that)

Spoiler:

1.No one cares about Harvey Dent anymore. Gordon types up a statement telling everyone the truth about Harvey Dent and when he doesn't read it at the ceremony, he just decides to keep it in his jacket pocket at all times in case the leader of the underground revolution happens to kidnap him. Oh, and Bane's big announcement about Dent's true colors comes after he's blown the stadium to hell and taken control of the city aka who cares? He doesn't need to convince anyone else that he's in charge. Does he really need a moral reason to let the prisoners out? No, he didn't. The Dent story in this film was so unnecessary. Also, the ONLY backlash that Gordon faces after being exposed as a lying cop who covered up a dozen murders is a soft spoken lecture from John Blake about filthy hands. Twenty minutes later Gordon is leading the other cops into battle and they have no problem with it. Please.

2. The love stories in this movie are a joke and an insult to the Nolan franchise. At least the audience connected with Rachel in the first two films - enough for us to care about her death and understand its impact on Wayne / Batman / Dent. Let's review the love interests for this movie A) Wayne ignores the business partnership with Tate, goes broke, allows her to take over his family's company (including the WMD he has in his basement), shares a rainy Saturday with her, looks at a picture of his dead girlfriend and then they have sex. You're right, I'm totally supposed to have an emotional, "how could you!" moment when Talia stabs Batman later. He didn't even know her real name until after the knife is in his side but that's the love interest that he was going to try and save? B) Catwoman steals Wayne's mother's pearls, threatens him, steals his car, tricks him (Batman - Bane identifies Batman as Wayne immediately and Catwoman is watching so we know that she knows who he is) into getting beaten near to death by Bane, realizes that she's been a stupid selfish twat the whole time and then teams up with him later and we're supposed to believe that they run off to Italy and live happily ever after after that? Spare me

3. How does Bane get the broken Bruce Wayne to the prison in the well? He just booked a flight on American Airlines to the Gothan desert right out the city limits. It's desert conditions outside of the well and then cuts to snowy winter of Gotham so don't even dare try to say that the prison is just outside the city limits. Also, since it's pretty clear that it's not exactly next to Gotham, does Wayne just make a cross country trip by foot back into Gotham? Also, if they're not letting anyone in or out of the city (as the bridge scene with JGL clearly hammered home), how does Wayne get back in? Also, I'm sure Batman wasn't too concerned with the whole "24 hours til the bomb goes off" scenario because he clearly had time to make an over-the-top-I-just-finished-watching-Zorro flaming bat symbol on the bridge instead of taking care of business like he should have.

4. Bane clearly kicks the living daylights out of Batman in the sewers, breaking his back and everything. So it makes perfect sense then that Bane would leave Wayne in a prison with some water, saltine crackers, some pseudo-philosophical medicine men, and a pull-up bar and in just a few short months, Wayne is powerful enough to return to Gotham and totally beat Bane to a pulp. Right. Perfect sense.

5. There is absolutely no emotion in this film. Just because Alfred is crying or getting tears in his eyes does not mean that the scene is powerful. Gordon is shot and almost drowns but doesn't. Alfred throws in the necessary plot detail that Rachel wasn't that into Bruce who then throws a tantrum and throws Alfred out of the MOVIE, not just the house. Fox is held at gunpoint and nothing happens. All Nolan did was give the audience emotional blue balls the entire movie, acting that the idea that someone could have died is the same thing as someone really dying. If they weren't going to use Alfred during the last 90 minutes, they should have had Bane kill Alfred to break Batman's spirit because THAT would have been incredibly gut wrenching

6. The action of this movie is awful. The first fight scene was great because we saw just how much Batman could not do against Bane but upon return to Gotham, Batman punches Bane and breaks his mask (which totally makes sense since not once did Batman punch Bane in the face during their first fight). But their final fight is overshadowed by the force-fed reveal of Talia and then we finish with Batman flying around shooting the tumblers and . . . yep, that's it. The action highlight of the first hour is when Batman jumps a tow truck and escapes the cop which is what Nicolas Cage does in the finale of Gone in 60 Seconds. Way to go Nolan.

7. The entire plot of the mercenary, his baby momma, the kid, the protector, etc, etc, etc. sucks. Who cares? We get it. The League of Shadows hates Gotham but you don't have to contrive some intricate back story to explain why Bane is the monster that he is and why Talia has to avenge whoever she has to avenge and how Bane and Talia are working together. Batman Begins explained Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul's relationship with one sentence and that was all we needed. It was so unnecessary and worthless and if it weren't in the movie, it would not have made the movie any worse. I was so bored with this by the time the credits rolled.

8. Bane's army, equipped with semi-automatic weapons, decides that instead of using those weapons against a group of cops that just spent months underground sharing rations of food and water, they'll just get into a giant fist fight. Right . . .

9. John Blake was the greatest mystery going into this film. Who is he really? The next villain? The next Batman? Nobody? Rather than use this to his advantage, Nolan immediately removes all doubt in Blake and Wayne's first interaction. You remember the conversation, "Hey I just met you. And this is crazy. But you've got that look in your eye, you're Batman maybe? Seriously though, a ten year old orphan sees a certain look in the eye of an eccentric billionaire and just says, "that must be the Batman" By saying that he knows who the Batman is, we know that he's on Batman's side and that he's not a villain so that was great to get that out of the way in the first 30 minutes and it totally made his INCREDIBLY shocking reveal at the end totally blow my mind because I never would have seen that coming.

10. Alfred pretty much tells the audience the ending when he's trying to explain to Bruce what the PERFECT ENDING TO HIS STORY would be. I surprised he didn't turn to the camera and wink after saying, "that's what I want for you"


Perhaps my greatest disappointment comes from Nolan's lack of original storytelling and plot devices in this movie

Spoiler:

1. That fact that he so adamantly stated that his story would come full circle was nothing more than a spoiler that Al Ghul would return meaning a)someone was going to try and destroy Gotham and b)Cotillard was Al Ghul all along. Every forum on Earth figured that out the day that Cotillard was cast in the movie and when everybody knows, that's not original or cool. Then, Nolan had the balls to act like his reveal was a shock to anyone just because he added a high pitched note to the music.

2. In all 3 films, we've been exposed to a main, primary villain for 90 percent of the movie only to have them be replaced by a secondary villain to end the movie. Batman Begins gives us the Scarecrow and his toxin for most of the film until Ra's Al Ghul returns and gets his 15 minutes of screen time villainy in before the credits roll. Even The Dark Knight's iconic Joker didn't get the last laugh as Harvey Dent had to have some rant on justice and equality for everyone! Then Bane (as if he wasn't underused to begin with) is knocked over by Catwoman only to be replaced by Talia who couldn't even steer the truck or kill Morgan Freeman. It's the same ending in every single movie!

3. Ticking time bomb scenario. Give me a freaking break! Nolan should have been better than to use this cop out to finish his trilogy. It's nothing more than a contrived lot device to keep the audience on the edge of their seats for the finale.

4. The whole, "hero sacrifices himself for everyone only to 1)fake his own death or 2)escape miraculously (because EVERY ACTION MOVIE ever doesn't do that). It's all been done before, over and over and over again and I expected more from Nolan especially since the whole, "fake your own death" thing was already done by Gordon in TDK. Just saying.

5. The DARK Knight trilogy has a Nickelodeon, happily ever after ending. The DARK, GRITTY, DEPRESSING superhero trilogy has a happy, everyone wins and nobody dies, ending. Nolan should take notes from Whedon.

6. Deus ex Machina. Oh my freaking gosh Catwoman this almost made me walk out.

7. Speaking of taking notes from Whedon, Nolan totally did. Avengers also featured the main plot device to be an energy source that turned into a weapon of mass destruction, had a not so powerful character (Blake/Capt. America) inspire the eccentric billionaire to become the true hero that he was meant to be, featured a broken hero(es) rising up, hammered home some Deus ex Machina (Catwoman/Hulk)and made us all believe the hero that we love so much was willing to die so the rest of us could live.

I'm not saying that he stole their script, my argument is just that Avengers was good for what is was but I expected so much more from Nolan and this film. It should have been so much better than what it was. It seemed to be scared to take any risks!


This is just my opinion. Don't bite my head off. If you liked it, I respect your opinion and I don't think any less of you. Just sharing my thoughts

5/10
Reply With Quote
  #410  
Old 07-21-2012, 05:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyNet View Post
Anne Hathaway has never looked hotter and that is saying a lot, cuz she is damn hot in pretty much all of her movies!
Have you seen Havoc?

I don't care about the so-so reviews i'm still pumped to see this film.
Reply With Quote
  #411  
Old 07-21-2012, 05:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post
I have so many problems with this movie it makes me sick. It had so much potential and it was so disappointing. This movie was filled with plot holes and problems and here are just a dozen or so that I had a problem with (some may be repeats of what has already been said so sorry about that)

Spoiler:

1.No one cares about Harvey Dent anymore. Gordon types up a statement telling everyone the truth about Harvey Dent and when he doesn't read it at the ceremony, he just decides to keep it in his jacket pocket at all times in case the leader of the underground revolution happens to kidnap him. Oh, and Bane's big announcement about Dent's true colors comes after he's blown the stadium to hell and taken control of the city aka who cares? He doesn't need to convince anyone else that he's in charge. Does he really need a moral reason to let the prisoners out? No, he didn't. The Dent story in this film was so unnecessary. Also, the ONLY backlash that Gordon faces after being exposed as a lying cop who covered up a dozen murders is a soft spoken lecture from John Blake about filthy hands. Twenty minutes later Gordon is leading the other cops into battle and they have no problem with it. Please.

2. The love stories in this movie are a joke and an insult to the Nolan franchise. At least the audience connected with Rachel in the first two films - enough for us to care about her death and understand its impact on Wayne / Batman / Dent. Let's review the love interests for this movie A) Wayne ignores the business partnership with Tate, goes broke, allows her to take over his family's company (including the WMD he has in his basement), shares a rainy Saturday with her, looks at a picture of his dead girlfriend and then they have sex. You're right, I'm totally supposed to have an emotional, "how could you!" moment when Talia stabs Batman later. He didn't even know her real name until after the knife is in his side but that's the love interest that he was going to try and save? B) Catwoman steals Wayne's mother's pearls, threatens him, steals his car, tricks him (Batman - Bane identifies Batman as Wayne immediately and Catwoman is watching so we know that she knows who he is) into getting beaten near to death by Bane, realizes that she's been a stupid selfish twat the whole time and then teams up with him later and we're supposed to believe that they run off to Italy and live happily ever after after that? Spare me

3. How does Bane get the broken Bruce Wayne to the prison in the well? He just booked a flight on American Airlines to the Gothan desert right out the city limits. It's desert conditions outside of the well and then cuts to snowy winter of Gotham so don't even dare try to say that the prison is just outside the city limits. Also, since it's pretty clear that it's not exactly next to Gotham, does Wayne just make a cross country trip by foot back into Gotham? Also, if they're not letting anyone in or out of the city (as the bridge scene with JGL clearly hammered home), how does Wayne get back in? Also, I'm sure Batman wasn't too concerned with the whole "24 hours til the bomb goes off" scenario because he clearly had time to make an over-the-top-I-just-finished-watching-Zorro flaming bat symbol on the bridge instead of taking care of business like he should have.

4. Bane clearly kicks the living daylights out of Batman in the sewers, breaking his back and everything. So it makes perfect sense then that Bane would leave Wayne in a prison with some water, saltine crackers, some pseudo-philosophical medicine men, and a pull-up bar and in just a few short months, Wayne is powerful enough to return to Gotham and totally beat Bane to a pulp. Right. Perfect sense.

5. There is absolutely no emotion in this film. Just because Alfred is crying or getting tears in his eyes does not mean that the scene is powerful. Gordon is shot and almost drowns but doesn't. Alfred throws in the necessary plot detail that Rachel wasn't that into Bruce who then throws a tantrum and throws Alfred out of the MOVIE, not just the house. Fox is held at gunpoint and nothing happens. All Nolan did was give the audience emotional blue balls the entire movie, acting that the idea that someone could have died is the same thing as someone really dying. If they weren't going to use Alfred during the last 90 minutes, they should have had Bane kill Alfred to break Batman's spirit because THAT would have been incredibly gut wrenching

6. The action of this movie is awful. The first fight scene was great because we saw just how much Batman could not do against Bane but upon return to Gotham, Batman punches Bane and breaks his mask (which totally makes sense since not once did Batman punch Bane in the face during their first fight). But their final fight is overshadowed by the force-fed reveal of Talia and then we finish with Batman flying around shooting the tumblers and . . . yep, that's it. The action highlight of the first hour is when Batman jumps a tow truck and escapes the cop which is what Nicolas Cage does in the finale of Gone in 60 Seconds. Way to go Nolan.

7. The entire plot of the mercenary, his baby momma, the kid, the protector, etc, etc, etc. sucks. Who cares? We get it. The League of Shadows hates Gotham but you don't have to contrive some intricate back story to explain why Bane is the monster that he is and why Talia has to avenge whoever she has to avenge and how Bane and Talia are working together. Batman Begins explained Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul's relationship with one sentence and that was all we needed. It was so unnecessary and worthless and if it weren't in the movie, it would not have made the movie any worse. I was so bored with this by the time the credits rolled.

8. Bane's army, equipped with semi-automatic weapons, decides that instead of using those weapons against a group of cops that just spent months underground sharing rations of food and water, they'll just get into a giant fist fight. Right . . .

9. John Blake was the greatest mystery going into this film. Who is he really? The next villain? The next Batman? Nobody? Rather than use this to his advantage, Nolan immediately removes all doubt in Blake and Wayne's first interaction. You remember the conversation, "Hey I just met you. And this is crazy. But you've got that look in your eye, you're Batman maybe? Seriously though, a ten year old orphan sees a certain look in the eye of an eccentric billionaire and just says, "that must be the Batman" By saying that he knows who the Batman is, we know that he's on Batman's side and that he's not a villain so that was great to get that out of the way in the first 30 minutes and it totally made his INCREDIBLY shocking reveal at the end totally blow my mind because I never would have seen that coming.

10. Alfred pretty much tells the audience the ending when he's trying to explain to Bruce what the PERFECT ENDING TO HIS STORY would be. I surprised he didn't turn to the camera and wink after saying, "that's what I want for you"


Perhaps my greatest disappointment comes from Nolan's lack of original storytelling and plot devices in this movie

Spoiler:

1. That fact that he so adamantly stated that his story would come full circle was nothing more than a spoiler that Al Ghul would return meaning a)someone was going to try and destroy Gotham and b)Cotillard was Al Ghul all along. Every forum on Earth figured that out the day that Cotillard was cast in the movie and when everybody knows, that's not original or cool. Then, Nolan had the balls to act like his reveal was a shock to anyone just because he added a high pitched note to the music.

2. In all 3 films, we've been exposed to a main, primary villain for 90 percent of the movie only to have them be replaced by a secondary villain to end the movie. Batman Begins gives us the Scarecrow and his toxin for most of the film until Ra's Al Ghul returns and gets his 15 minutes of screen time villainy in before the credits roll. Even The Dark Knight's iconic Joker didn't get the last laugh as Harvey Dent had to have some rant on justice and equality for everyone! Then Bane (as if he wasn't underused to begin with) is knocked over by Catwoman only to be replaced by Talia who couldn't even steer the truck or kill Morgan Freeman. It's the same ending in every single movie!

3. Ticking time bomb scenario. Give me a freaking break! Nolan should have been better than to use this cop out to finish his trilogy. It's nothing more than a contrived lot device to keep the audience on the edge of their seats for the finale.

4. The whole, "hero sacrifices himself for everyone only to 1)fake his own death or 2)escape miraculously (because EVERY ACTION MOVIE ever doesn't do that). It's all been done before, over and over and over again and I expected more from Nolan especially since the whole, "fake your own death" thing was already done by Gordon in TDK. Just saying.

5. The DARK Knight trilogy has a Nickelodeon, happily ever after ending. The DARK, GRITTY, DEPRESSING superhero trilogy has a happy, everyone wins and nobody dies, ending. Nolan should take notes from Whedon.

6. Deus ex Machina. Oh my freaking gosh Catwoman this almost made me walk out.

7. Speaking of taking notes from Whedon, Nolan totally did. Avengers also featured the main plot device to be an energy source that turned into a weapon of mass destruction, had a not so powerful character (Blake/Capt. America) inspire the eccentric billionaire to become the true hero that he was meant to be, featured a broken hero(es) rising up, hammered home some Deus ex Machina (Catwoman/Hulk)and made us all believe the hero that we love so much was willing to die so the rest of us could live.

I'm not saying that he stole their script, my argument is just that Avengers was good for what is was but I expected so much more from Nolan and this film. It should have been so much better than what it was. It seemed to be scared to take any risks!


This is just my opinion. Don't bite my head off. If you liked it, I respect your opinion and I don't think any less of you. Just sharing my thoughts

5/10
I agree completely with everything you said.
Reply With Quote
  #412  
Old 07-21-2012, 05:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post

Spoiler:

3. How does Bane get the broken Bruce Wayne to the prison in the well? He just booked a flight on American Airlines to the Gothan desert right out the city limits. It's desert conditions outside of the well and then cuts to snowy winter of Gotham so don't even dare try to say that the prison is just outside the city limits. Also, since it's pretty clear that it's not exactly next to Gotham, does Wayne just make a cross country trip by foot back into Gotham? Also, if they're not letting anyone in or out of the city (as the bridge scene with JGL clearly hammered home), how does Wayne get back in? Also, I'm sure Batman wasn't too concerned with the whole "24 hours til the bomb goes off" scenario because he clearly had time to make an over-the-top-I-just-finished-watching-Zorro flaming bat symbol on the bridge instead of taking care of business like he should have.
^ Wow, this. And on that point:
Spoiler:

"Light it up" - with this randomly placed flare on ICE which was literally shown to be a death trap, which I'm also standing on, so I can show off a Bat symbol which most people probably can't even see except Bane because I some how know he's looking at the bridge right now.

And speaking of not being concerned with the time-atom-bomb. Batman's got a minute or so to get the nuke out to sea, plenty of time to kiss Catwoman, and share a flash-back with Commissioner Gordon. It's only a nuke. Even Morgan Freeman was hustling!

Last edited by Lenbo; 07-21-2012 at 05:32 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #413  
Old 07-21-2012, 05:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edo View Post
Anyone else NOT seeing this? The hype and the insane Christopher Nolan fans have really ruined him for me, and the shooting just gives me another reason not to pay to see this.
I won't bother checking it out til it hits DVD/Blu-Ray. Same with Amazing Spider-Man and The Avengers. All 3 movies I wanna see, but yeah. Not really a fan of going to the theatre (and this was before the whole shooting/tragedy)!
Reply With Quote
  #414  
Old 07-21-2012, 05:38 PM
Seems odd... I don't remember the same nitpicking for The Avengers. And there was plenty to nitpick. I chose to enjoy the movie instead.
Reply With Quote
  #415  
Old 07-21-2012, 05:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkface View Post
Seems odd... I don't remember the same nitpicking for The Avengers. And there was plenty to nitpick. I chose to enjoy the movie instead.
You know people just have to find things to bitch about if a lot of people enjoyed something.
Reply With Quote
  #416  
Old 07-21-2012, 05:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jig Saw 123 View Post
What do you guys think of the ending, specifically....

Spoiler:
Alfred seeing Bruce in Italy.
I liked it. Like others had said…

Spoiler:
It felt happy, maybe even too happy. My problem with it being happy, though, is from another angle.

The entire movie, sans Catwoman's dynamic, was so damn serious. All of the movies were overly serious and that was what we want from Nolan, but this one upped the ante. It lacked the playfulness that did persist throughout the earlier 2. Don't get me wrong, it had moments where I smiled, but it felt seriously darker to me than the previous too -- If not dark, more heavy on the drama, I guess. You had Fox's crack about it coming in black, for instance - Even the appearance of Scarecrow brought a big grin to my face. But this movie really felt darker and I can't place my finger on it. Even the ending that was happy for Gotham was dark. Oh look, kids! Batman! KA-BOOM! Sad Batman statue. "Our Christ Figure, In Memoriam, 2004-2012 RIP"

So when the ending rolls up, it's like fucking daffodils. I mean, literally it's like watching someone fucking a flower. Personally, I picture Tiny Tim in his prime doing this. But you get the idea. It's this huge goofy smile for like the last several minutes.

My problem wasn't with the ending, but that it felt tonally out of context for the rest of the movie. Unlike others though, I don't wish it had been less tragic, I with the rest of the movie had just lightened up a little bit. Yeah, I get these are serious films, "Growl" but this one just seemed over-the-top serious to me - unnecessarily serious. I think it was just Nolan and Hans Zimmer trying to drill it into us how fatal things were, which is fine, but don't switch it up so drastically for the sake of character resolve. Begins you had Batman-Ra's/Batman-Alfred/Batman-Fox/Scarecrow-Everyone; TDK, Gordon cracked wise, The Joker, all the previous dynamics, then here it was Catwoman mainly, then a few funny-serious lines from Bane, and then the side characters, as has been mentioned, were reduced. There was just a lot less playfulness. All of the playfulness in this movie filled the time of just Wayne, and then Gordon's, scenes with the tumbler in the first movie.


Again, it didn't make me dislike the movie, or not appreciate it. It was just something I felt while leaving the theater. I would have rather those moments been spread throughout the entire film, in terms of tone.


Quote:
Originally Posted by venom718 View Post
Spoiler:
I think it was a nice touch. It gave Alfred the image he always wanted. Alfred was a surrogate father even though they don't mention that strait up in the film. All parents just want to see their children happy and safe and seeing Bruce continue this crusade must have been killing him because he wanted whats best for Bruce. He wanted Bruce to live a regular life and be happy. Like every (or most) parents want for their children. I liked it.


The area I would like to discuss mainly is...

Spoiler:
John Blake becoming Knightwing/Robin/Batman?
I felt the ending was AMAZING. It really left me in shock but amazingly happy. My only thing i that it kinda gave you a glimpse of what was going to happen but it didnt feel like a end to batman to me. It felt like the movie was ending Bruce Wayne's story but not Batman. I actually feel like their still is a story to tell, especially with that ending. I feel like Bruce can't escape Batman. In the comics he has made some attempts to NOT be Batman. He even was removed from being Batman due to injury or other reasons but he can never escape the cape and cowl. But that may be just a fan holding on to the series.lol
Personally,

Spoiler:
When Batman tells him he needs a mask, I wish he'd become a masked sidekick at that point on. I liked the idea of introducing a Robin, but Nolan has this thing he does where it feels like he takes multiple Batman characters and fuses them into one. Here, it felt like Catwoman was doing a lot of Robin's work. I think Bane's final demise would have been so much better had it been Blake using Wayne technology to do it. Complete with some face covering helmet type thing.


One thing about Catwoman, since I've said so much about how I liked her, one thing I didn't like…

Spoiler:
I had trouble buying that she could so easily operate Batman's vehicles. For some reason I don't think driving that… well, frankly it's the Batcycle… I don't think it's as simple as riding a bicycle, which is how they made it seem. There was a chance with that whole thing to add more lighthearted moments but instead it was a grin and back to the darkness.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Kenshin View Post
Spoiler:
I didn't know beforehand. I figured it out before the reveal. I know Nolan stuck relatively close to the source material, so when they mentioned Bane as Ra's Al Ghoul's child, I knew Nolan wouldn't alter the universe THAT much. The only child Ra's had in the comics that I know of was Talia, so when they started talking about the kid, I put 2 and 2 together.
It's funny the more I remember back…

Spoiler:
I was thinking about her being Talia, and maybe even expected the reveal more than I initially remembered. In fact, I remember thinking when she took over the board was going to be the reveal, but that didn't happen. It wasn't a shock to me, or even a surprise, I think I just had gotten it out of my head at some point and maybe just went with it a little bit more than others did. I hadn't even heard about the cast/Nolan dismissing that it was actually her.

The backstory though, I wasn't as familiar with as you are, as I hadn't read any of her arcs. I think I knew her most from DC Who's Who issues from mid-80s. So, I guess it just wasn't as fresh in my head as it was for others.

Ultimately though, I don't think any of it would have bothered me seeing them hookup. I think Nolan, overall, isn't as faithful as he's given credit for, just the most faithful live-aciton guy at this point. The sex wouldn't have mattered to me, because I just feel, while harkening the voice of Bruce Campbell's Ash, after all he's a man, and she's a woman.


Did they ever explain her scar though?


Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post
I have so many problems with this movie it makes me sick. It had so much potential and it was so disappointing. This movie was filled with plot holes and problems and here are just a dozen or so that I had a problem with (some may be repeats of what has already been said so sorry about that)

Spoiler:

1.No one cares about Harvey Dent anymore. Gordon types up a statement telling everyone the truth about Harvey Dent and when he doesn't read it at the ceremony, he just decides to keep it in his jacket pocket at all times in case the leader of the underground revolution happens to kidnap him. Oh, and Bane's big announcement about Dent's true colors comes after he's blown the stadium to hell and taken control of the city aka who cares? He doesn't need to convince anyone else that he's in charge. Does he really need a moral reason to let the prisoners out? No, he didn't. The Dent story in this film was so unnecessary. Also, the ONLY backlash that Gordon faces after being exposed as a lying cop who covered up a dozen murders is a soft spoken lecture from John Blake about filthy hands. Twenty minutes later Gordon is leading the other cops into battle and they have no problem with it. Please.

2. The love stories in this movie are a joke and an insult to the Nolan franchise. At least the audience connected with Rachel in the first two films - enough for us to care about her death and understand its impact on Wayne / Batman / Dent. Let's review the love interests for this movie A) Wayne ignores the business partnership with Tate, goes broke, allows her to take over his family's company (including the WMD he has in his basement), shares a rainy Saturday with her, looks at a picture of his dead girlfriend and then they have sex. You're right, I'm totally supposed to have an emotional, "how could you!" moment when Talia stabs Batman later. He didn't even know her real name until after the knife is in his side but that's the love interest that he was going to try and save? B) Catwoman steals Wayne's mother's pearls, threatens him, steals his car, tricks him (Batman - Bane identifies Batman as Wayne immediately and Catwoman is watching so we know that she knows who he is) into getting beaten near to death by Bane, realizes that she's been a stupid selfish twat the whole time and then teams up with him later and we're supposed to believe that they run off to Italy and live happily ever after after that? Spare me

3. How does Bane get the broken Bruce Wayne to the prison in the well? He just booked a flight on American Airlines to the Gothan desert right out the city limits. It's desert conditions outside of the well and then cuts to snowy winter of Gotham so don't even dare try to say that the prison is just outside the city limits. Also, since it's pretty clear that it's not exactly next to Gotham, does Wayne just make a cross country trip by foot back into Gotham? Also, if they're not letting anyone in or out of the city (as the bridge scene with JGL clearly hammered home), how does Wayne get back in? Also, I'm sure Batman wasn't too concerned with the whole "24 hours til the bomb goes off" scenario because he clearly had time to make an over-the-top-I-just-finished-watching-Zorro flaming bat symbol on the bridge instead of taking care of business like he should have.

4. Bane clearly kicks the living daylights out of Batman in the sewers, breaking his back and everything. So it makes perfect sense then that Bane would leave Wayne in a prison with some water, saltine crackers, some pseudo-philosophical medicine men, and a pull-up bar and in just a few short months, Wayne is powerful enough to return to Gotham and totally beat Bane to a pulp. Right. Perfect sense.

5. There is absolutely no emotion in this film. Just because Alfred is crying or getting tears in his eyes does not mean that the scene is powerful. Gordon is shot and almost drowns but doesn't. Alfred throws in the necessary plot detail that Rachel wasn't that into Bruce who then throws a tantrum and throws Alfred out of the MOVIE, not just the house. Fox is held at gunpoint and nothing happens. All Nolan did was give the audience emotional blue balls the entire movie, acting that the idea that someone could have died is the same thing as someone really dying. If they weren't going to use Alfred during the last 90 minutes, they should have had Bane kill Alfred to break Batman's spirit because THAT would have been incredibly gut wrenching

6. The action of this movie is awful. The first fight scene was great because we saw just how much Batman could not do against Bane but upon return to Gotham, Batman punches Bane and breaks his mask (which totally makes sense since not once did Batman punch Bane in the face during their first fight). But their final fight is overshadowed by the force-fed reveal of Talia and then we finish with Batman flying around shooting the tumblers and . . . yep, that's it. The action highlight of the first hour is when Batman jumps a tow truck and escapes the cop which is what Nicolas Cage does in the finale of Gone in 60 Seconds. Way to go Nolan.

7. The entire plot of the mercenary, his baby momma, the kid, the protector, etc, etc, etc. sucks. Who cares? We get it. The League of Shadows hates Gotham but you don't have to contrive some intricate back story to explain why Bane is the monster that he is and why Talia has to avenge whoever she has to avenge and how Bane and Talia are working together. Batman Begins explained Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul's relationship with one sentence and that was all we needed. It was so unnecessary and worthless and if it weren't in the movie, it would not have made the movie any worse. I was so bored with this by the time the credits rolled.

8. Bane's army, equipped with semi-automatic weapons, decides that instead of using those weapons against a group of cops that just spent months underground sharing rations of food and water, they'll just get into a giant fist fight. Right . . .

9. John Blake was the greatest mystery going into this film. Who is he really? The next villain? The next Batman? Nobody? Rather than use this to his advantage, Nolan immediately removes all doubt in Blake and Wayne's first interaction. You remember the conversation, "Hey I just met you. And this is crazy. But you've got that look in your eye, you're Batman maybe? Seriously though, a ten year old orphan sees a certain look in the eye of an eccentric billionaire and just says, "that must be the Batman" By saying that he knows who the Batman is, we know that he's on Batman's side and that he's not a villain so that was great to get that out of the way in the first 30 minutes and it totally made his INCREDIBLY shocking reveal at the end totally blow my mind because I never would have seen that coming.

10. Alfred pretty much tells the audience the ending when he's trying to explain to Bruce what the PERFECT ENDING TO HIS STORY would be. I surprised he didn't turn to the camera and wink after saying, "that's what I want for you"


Perhaps my greatest disappointment comes from Nolan's lack of original storytelling and plot devices in this movie

Spoiler:

1. That fact that he so adamantly stated that his story would come full circle was nothing more than a spoiler that Al Ghul would return meaning a)someone was going to try and destroy Gotham and b)Cotillard was Al Ghul all along. Every forum on Earth figured that out the day that Cotillard was cast in the movie and when everybody knows, that's not original or cool. Then, Nolan had the balls to act like his reveal was a shock to anyone just because he added a high pitched note to the music.

2. In all 3 films, we've been exposed to a main, primary villain for 90 percent of the movie only to have them be replaced by a secondary villain to end the movie. Batman Begins gives us the Scarecrow and his toxin for most of the film until Ra's Al Ghul returns and gets his 15 minutes of screen time villainy in before the credits roll. Even The Dark Knight's iconic Joker didn't get the last laugh as Harvey Dent had to have some rant on justice and equality for everyone! Then Bane (as if he wasn't underused to begin with) is knocked over by Catwoman only to be replaced by Talia who couldn't even steer the truck or kill Morgan Freeman. It's the same ending in every single movie!

3. Ticking time bomb scenario. Give me a freaking break! Nolan should have been better than to use this cop out to finish his trilogy. It's nothing more than a contrived lot device to keep the audience on the edge of their seats for the finale.

4. The whole, "hero sacrifices himself for everyone only to 1)fake his own death or 2)escape miraculously (because EVERY ACTION MOVIE ever doesn't do that). It's all been done before, over and over and over again and I expected more from Nolan especially since the whole, "fake your own death" thing was already done by Gordon in TDK. Just saying.

5. The DARK Knight trilogy has a Nickelodeon, happily ever after ending. The DARK, GRITTY, DEPRESSING superhero trilogy has a happy, everyone wins and nobody dies, ending. Nolan should take notes from Whedon.

6. Deus ex Machina. Oh my freaking gosh Catwoman this almost made me walk out.

7. Speaking of taking notes from Whedon, Nolan totally did. Avengers also featured the main plot device to be an energy source that turned into a weapon of mass destruction, had a not so powerful character (Blake/Capt. America) inspire the eccentric billionaire to become the true hero that he was meant to be, featured a broken hero(es) rising up, hammered home some Deus ex Machina (Catwoman/Hulk)and made us all believe the hero that we love so much was willing to die so the rest of us could live.

I'm not saying that he stole their script, my argument is just that Avengers was good for what is was but I expected so much more from Nolan and this film. It should have been so much better than what it was. It seemed to be scared to take any risks!


This is just my opinion. Don't bite my head off. If you liked it, I respect your opinion and I don't think any less of you. Just sharing my thoughts

5/10
You're wrong on so many levels, man. No, just kidding. Those were actually some pretty spot-on observations you added to overall complaints/nitpicks/persnickety criticisms/comic observations.

I was wrong about the spoof script website I mentioned earlier. It's actually called:

http://www.the-editing-room.com/

I'm really looking forward to their mockup of this one.

I just stand on the different side as a lot of other people. To me, I disliked The Dark Knight less after repeated viewings. As it stands, I actually think I like Rises more than the last one. There was more spectacle to take in for me and I liked the dramatic arc better. I think both aren't as good as Begins in terms of a standalone movie but both are nice to fill out a trilogy. There was so much that happened in Begins that made me feel these movie versions were separate mediums from the comics and graphic novels. By the time that TDK rolled around I learned to just "go with it" and appreciate them more as action-hero movies than classic cinema.

That's not to say I don't think the trilogy won't go down as classic cinema, just that I don't take them as seriously as their tone seems to dictate. Hence, my overall complaint is that I just wish they were a bit lighter. Even Michael Mann's Heat has "Because she has a great ass." Fuck, Nolan would have had Wayne standing over Gotham contemplating that line.

One thing I wish, that my prediction of…

Spoiler:
The Joker returning a la a imitator in Arkham, via The Killing Joke, would have happened at some point. I think it was kind of a cop out to just have mention of his character disappear from the trilogy. We get it, Ledger died and no one can out-Joker-Joker him, but I just thought it was kind of breaking away from a neat structure he'd established with the second movie.

In fact, I'm wagering a bet that had Ledger not met his fate, The Joker would have been playing the judge character during the trials.


And speaking of that judge…

Spoiler:
So Scarecrow pretty much just disappeared from the movie, right?

Last edited by The Postmaster General; 07-21-2012 at 05:48 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #417  
Old 07-21-2012, 05:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by echo_bravo View Post
OKay please help a comic book noob out here. I'm a fan of Nolan's Batman universe but I'm completely ignorant to the DC comics' world. The ending where
Spoiler:
JGL is Robin. I've read up a little bit on wiki but am still confused. I keep seeing peoples' comments saying they want a Nightwing movie next. Is Robin and Nightwing the same person? Or are they different characters all together.
Spoiler:
One Robin, Dick Grayson, grows up and becomes Nightwing, leaving Gotham City and doing his own thing. There have been other Robins since then (Jason Todd, Tim Drake, and Bruce's son)

However, none of them have a real name of "Robin," so I'm not clear which one JGL is supposed to be. He might be a new Robin to the Nolan universe, in which case he wouldn't be Nightwing. If he is Nightwing, they changed the origin story, as Dick's parents were killed in a circus accident (they were acrobats).

I think people call for "Nightwing" because of the age. All the Robins became Batman's sidekicks when they were kids.



Quote:
Originally Posted by The Postmaster General View Post
I was wrong about the spoof script website I mentioned earlier. It's actually called:

http://www.the-editing-room.com/

I'm really looking forward to their mockup of this one.
That used to be one of my favorite sites, but now there are too many writers. I hope Rod Hilton is smart enough to take this script on his own and not let one of the lesser (albeit still talented, just not as funny as Rod) writers handle it.

Last edited by Darth Kenshin; 07-21-2012 at 05:55 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #418  
Old 07-21-2012, 06:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Kenshin View Post
Spoiler:
One Robin, Dick Grayson, grows up and becomes Nightwing, leaving Gotham City and doing his own thing. There have been other Robins since then (Jason Todd, Tim Drake, and Bruce's son)

However, none of them have a real name of "Robin," so I'm not clear which one JGL is supposed to be. He might be a new Robin to the Nolan universe, in which case he wouldn't be Nightwing. If he is Nightwing, they changed the origin story, as Dick's parents were killed in a circus accident (they were acrobats).

I think people call for "Nightwing" because of the age. All the Robins became Batman's sidekicks when they were kids.


Spoiler:
He's not any pre-existing Robin. He's just a new sidekick that parallels and combines elements of other Robins, similar to Ras Al Ghul and Ducard in Begins. He's Robin John Blake. Or Robin Blake. I don't think he's going to be Nightwing, but instead, the new Dark Knight. Throughout the movie he's speaking with Wayne about how anybody could be Batman. He could make a new costume or something, but I think the point is that he's going to continue the Batman legend to continue to inspire hope in the people of Gotham.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post
I have so many problems with this movie it makes me sick. It had so much potential and it was so disappointing. This movie was filled with plot holes and problems and here are just a dozen or so that I had a problem with (some may be repeats of what has already been said so sorry about that)
I totally respect your opinion, but did it really make you sick? That seems like an overreaction or hyperbole, or an indication that your expectations were too high.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post
Spoiler:

1.No one cares about Harvey Dent anymore. Gordon types up a statement telling everyone the truth about Harvey Dent and when he doesn't read it at the ceremony, he just decides to keep it in his jacket pocket at all times in case the leader of the underground revolution happens to kidnap him. Oh, and Bane's big announcement about Dent's true colors comes after he's blown the stadium to hell and taken control of the city aka who cares? He doesn't need to convince anyone else that he's in charge. Does he really need a moral reason to let the prisoners out? No, he didn't. The Dent story in this film was so unnecessary. Also, the ONLY backlash that Gordon faces after being exposed as a lying cop who covered up a dozen murders is a soft spoken lecture from John Blake about filthy hands. Twenty minutes later Gordon is leading the other cops into battle and they have no problem with it. Please.
He didn't keep in his pocket at all times. The events of the fundraiser, and the shootout at the club happen fairly close together. Probably no more than 24 hours had passed. Also he didn't lead the cops into battle, Foley did. We don't know what backlash Gordon faced, because the movie ended before any logical backlash could occur. The entire city needs to be rebuilt, the mayor is dead, the infrastructure is in shambles, but it's likely that Gordon won't be commissioner after the events of this film. After all he was ready to resign at the beginning of the film.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post
Spoiler:
2. The love stories in this movie are a joke and an insult to the Nolan franchise. At least the audience connected with Rachel in the first two films - enough for us to care about her death and understand its impact on Wayne / Batman / Dent. Let's review the love interests for this movie A) Wayne ignores the business partnership with Tate, goes broke, allows her to take over his family's company (including the WMD he has in his basement), shares a rainy Saturday with her, looks at a picture of his dead girlfriend and then they have sex. You're right, I'm totally supposed to have an emotional, "how could you!" moment when Talia stabs Batman later. He didn't even know her real name until after the knife is in his side but that's the love interest that he was going to try and save? B) Catwoman steals Wayne's mother's pearls, threatens him, steals his car, tricks him (Batman - Bane identifies Batman as Wayne immediately and Catwoman is watching so we know that she knows who he is) into getting beaten near to death by Bane, realizes that she's been a stupid selfish twat the whole time and then teams up with him later and we're supposed to believe that they run off to Italy and live happily ever after after that? Spare me


I don't think Miranda and Bruce were supposed to be in love. They simply have sex. Even Miranda implies that Bruce only trusts her because he has no choice. When they shag, it's when Bruce is at his most vulnerable. Bruce and Miranda aren't experiencing a blossoming romance, Miranda is taking advantage of Bruce and manipulating him at his darkest hour.

The Catwoman romance completely works for me. It starts with their first scene together, they have a mutual respect for their intelligence, and Alfred implies that they should compare notes because Kyle is up to the same type of sneakiness and detective work that Bruce does as Batman. She has one of the clearest arcs of the film, going from being completely invested in self-preservation to putting her life in danger to help Bruce. Whether it's pity or respect she feels, it's hard to say, but it worked for me. She does realize she's been selfish, Juno Temple insists that this is what Catwoman wants but she feels empty inside, she's not happy. And in what universe are you living in that the Rachel romance worked in either previous movie? That's one of the most commonly cited flaws of the first two films. The Catwoman romance was much better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post
Spoiler:
3. How does Bane get the broken Bruce Wayne to the prison in the well? He just booked a flight on American Airlines to the Gothan desert right out the city limits. It's desert conditions outside of the well and then cuts to snowy winter of Gotham so don't even dare try to say that the prison is just outside the city limits. Also, since it's pretty clear that it's not exactly next to Gotham, does Wayne just make a cross country trip by foot back into Gotham? Also, if they're not letting anyone in or out of the city (as the bridge scene with JGL clearly hammered home), how does Wayne get back in? Also, I'm sure Batman wasn't too concerned with the whole "24 hours til the bomb goes off" scenario because he clearly had time to make an over-the-top-I-just-finished-watching-Zorro flaming bat symbol on the bridge instead of taking care of business like he should have.


This goes into what I was saying about it being obvious that a lot had been cut from the film. The original cut of the film ran just under 4 hours and I think there are several moments like this. Nolan is pretty meticulous but he had to decide between explaining every detail or keeping the pace of the film. I think he made the right decision because I don't need everything spelled out for me. Bane got Wayne transported by employing some of his many resources. The League of Shadows is a powerful organization, 'nuff said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post
Spoiler:
5. There is absolutely no emotion in this film. Just because Alfred is crying or getting tears in his eyes does not mean that the scene is powerful. Gordon is shot and almost drowns but doesn't. Alfred throws in the necessary plot detail that Rachel wasn't that into Bruce who then throws a tantrum and throws Alfred out of the MOVIE, not just the house. Fox is held at gunpoint and nothing happens. All Nolan did was give the audience emotional blue balls the entire movie, acting that the idea that someone could have died is the same thing as someone really dying. If they weren't going to use Alfred during the last 90 minutes, they should have had Bane kill Alfred to break Batman's spirit because THAT would have been incredibly gut wrenching


Speak for yourself, I was in tears at several points of the movie.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post
Spoiler:
Batman Begins explained Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul's relationship with one sentence and that was all we needed. It was so unnecessary and worthless and if it weren't in the movie, it would not have made the movie any worse. I was so bored with this by the time the credits rolled.


This seems inconsistent, some of your other nitpicks are about how other aspects weren't spelled out for the audience at the expense of the pacing of the film.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post
Spoiler:
8. Bane's army, equipped with semi-automatic weapons, decides that instead of using those weapons against a group of cops that just spent months underground sharing rations of food and water, they'll just get into a giant fist fight. Right . . .


Bane's army did use their guns, and they took out a lot of cops with them. They show numerous cops falling down at long range due to the gunfire.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post
Spoiler:
4. The whole, "hero sacrifices himself for everyone only to 1)fake his own death or 2)escape miraculously (because EVERY ACTION MOVIE ever doesn't do that). It's all been done before, over and over and over again and I expected more from Nolan especially since the whole, "fake your own death" thing was already done by Gordon in TDK. Just saying.


It's also an homage to The Dark Knight Returns, one of the most influential Batman comics of all time. Nolan had to end his story somehow and this seems like a perfectly satisfactory way to do it. It beats another cliche ending of Batman gliding through the air, standing on a skyscraper, or riding off into the night with no actual closure for the character.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post
Spoiler:
5. The DARK Knight trilogy has a Nickelodeon, happily ever after ending. The DARK, GRITTY, DEPRESSING superhero trilogy has a happy, everyone wins and nobody dies, ending. Nolan should take notes from Whedon.


Jesus Christ, and I thought I was cynical. I already explained how Bruce Wayne's death would have completely undermined his character's arc for this movie, and the entire trilogy. You tell Nolan he should take notes from Whedon, while criticizing him for taking notes from Whedon a few points later, which is impossible since the films were in production at the same time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post
Spoiler:
6. Deus ex Machina. Oh my freaking gosh Catwoman this almost made me walk out.


This is completely consistent with the character of the comics, and makes total logical sense for the closure of Catwoman's character arc in the film.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post
Spoiler:
This is just my opinion. Don't bite my head off. If you liked it, I respect your opinion and I don't think any less of you. Just sharing my thoughts


No problem man, thanks for sharing your thoughts. Please don't bite my head off for disagreeing with some of them, or finding them nit-picky. I'm just trying to get some back-and-forth discussion going, but, I honestly could have used a little less comments like "please" "spare me" and other eyeball rolling sentiments. A lot of us have listed flaws and issues we have with the movie without resorting to that type of talk, which could be a little insulting for those who did enjoy those aspects of the movie. Let's try to keep the discussion mature.

Last edited by DaveyJoeG; 07-21-2012 at 09:12 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #419  
Old 07-21-2012, 06:27 PM
Okay, this is getting tedious since everything is in spoilers and it hardly counts as one anyways, but they explained why Blake figured out Bruce is Batman. It's not that hard to believe, I don't know why everyone is so obsessed with nitpicking that to death. Hell, it's just a character trait of Tim Drake (who was also able to deduce that Wayne was Batman in a way), and it shows his natural detective skills that Bruce also has.
Reply With Quote
  #420  
Old 07-21-2012, 06:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by brodeurnumber1 View Post
Okay, this is getting tedious since everything is in spoilers and it hardly counts as one anyways, but they explained why Blake figured out Bruce is Batman. It's not that hard to believe, I don't know why everyone is so obsessed with nitpicking that to death. Hell, it's just a character trait of Tim Drake (who was also able to deduce that Wayne was Batman in a way), and it shows his natural detective skills that Bruce also has.
Spoiler:
I agree.
Reply With Quote
  #421  
Old 07-21-2012, 06:54 PM
I also agree. I mean he's one of the only people that has the resources to be Batman in the entire world, it's not that hard to put two and two together, and he's not even the first person to do it in this franchise.
Reply With Quote
  #422  
Old 07-21-2012, 07:28 PM
DaveyJoe, why does your post (4 above this one) have so many quotes from me that I never made? Glitch in the system? I'm confused...
Reply With Quote
  #423  
Old 07-21-2012, 07:31 PM
I agree that a lot of the criticisms that I and a lot of other people are making about the movie are on the nitpicky side, but I think the reason they're being made is simply due to the sheer number of things wide open for us to nitpick. I think people would have been more or less forgiving had there only been two or three instances of minor plot holes or gaps of logic, but as DorkisFig and others have pointed out, there are quite a lot of them, and I think a lot of people have come to hold these movies to a higher standard than that.

For instance, here's one that nobody has mentioned yet that seems to be a rather glaring continuity error, unless I'm mistaken in my timing:

Spoiler:
A lot of people have already complained about John Blake being able to figure out Batman's identity when he was a kid, but the events of this movie take place 8 years after The Dark Knight, and presumably that movie only took place a few months after Batman Begins. I don't think the time between the first two movies was ever explicitly stated, although it can be assumed that it wasn't a long time given that the Joker is still a new force in Gotham in TDK despite starting his spree at the very end of BB, not to mention that Batman himself still seems to be something of a new phenomenon in Gotham. So in terms of a timeline here, we're looking at maybe 9 or 10 years since Batman showed up in Gotham. If Blake had met him as a 10-year-old boy, that would make him only 20 now, at the oldest. I know Joseph Gordon-Levitt can pass for being younger than he is in real life, but I totally don't buy that his character--an officer who gets promoted to detective--is only 19 or 20 years old.


Now, regarding Marion Cotillard's character:

Spoiler:
She frankly shouldn't have even been in the movie, and I say that as someone who really likes the character of Talia. It just seemed like the only reason they included here was to give fans a geek-out moment when her identity was revealed, except I don't think it worked because it was pretty obvious right from the get-go that she Talia. It's kind of a self-defeating inclusion, because the only people who are going to care about Talia being in the movie are the Batman geeks, yet they're the ones who would be able to figure it out very early on. In fact, I suspect most of them (myself included) had their suspicions before even seeing the movie. If he wanted to work in Talia, I think the reveal should have occurred much sooner into the movie so that her character could actually serve a purpose rather than just be used as a plot twist and then killed off in a ridiculous way 10 minutes later.


About the ending:

Spoiler:
I've seen a lot of different opinions about what the ending indicates as far as a potential sequel/spin-off goes, with some suggesting that this IS the end, and that Nolan merely wanted to let the audience know that someone is still around to protect Gotham. I really don't buy that at all, because Bruce Wayne's goal from the beginning (which is explicitly stated by Rachel at the end of Batman Begins) has been to see a Gotham that doesn't need a Batman. If this were the true conclusion, there would have been no need to set up Robin. Besides, with the way the very last scene is shot, I have to believe the intent is to create anticipation for what comes next. Remember, the last image seen in the movie is not Bruce and Selina at the cafe, but rather John Blake discovering the Batcave. That's the image this trilogy ends on, and that has to say something.

I actually don't have a problem with Blake being Robin, but I do have a problem with what this might mean for the future of the series. For the life of me, I cannot imagine a captivating story being made of Robin fighting crime solo in Gotham City, yet if they do decide to bring Batman back, it totally defeats the purpose of this movie. Really, a Robin spin-off movie would just be an excuse to use more of the villains from the Batman comics. It could be an entertaining spin-off, but I was under the impression that that's not what Nolan intended this series to be.

Or, of course, we could find out next year that the Nolan-produced Man of Steel ends with some sort of Robin cameo, thus setting up a Justice League with Robin as a compromise for not including Batman.

Last edited by Tkeyjw; 07-21-2012 at 07:34 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #424  
Old 07-21-2012, 08:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tkeyjw View Post
I agree that a lot of the criticisms that I and a lot of other people are making about the movie are on the nitpicky side, but I think the reason they're being made is simply due to the sheer number of things wide open for us to nitpick. I think people would have been more or less forgiving had there only been two or three instances of minor plot holes or gaps of logic, but as DorkisFig and others have pointed out, there are quite a lot of them, and I think a lot of people have come to hold these movies to a higher standard than that.

For instance, here's one that nobody has mentioned yet that seems to be a rather glaring continuity error, unless I'm mistaken in my timing:

Spoiler:
A lot of people have already complained about John Blake being able to figure out Batman's identity when he was a kid, but the events of this movie take place 8 years after The Dark Knight, and presumably that movie only took place a few months after Batman Begins. I don't think the time between the first two movies was ever explicitly stated, although it can be assumed that it wasn't a long time given that the Joker is still a new force in Gotham in TDK despite starting his spree at the very end of BB, not to mention that Batman himself still seems to be something of a new phenomenon in Gotham. So in terms of a timeline here, we're looking at maybe 9 or 10 years since Batman showed up in Gotham. If Blake had met him as a 10-year-old boy, that would make him only 20 now, at the oldest. I know Joseph Gordon-Levitt can pass for being younger than he is in real life, but I totally don't buy that his character--an officer who gets promoted to detective--is only 19 or 20 years old.


Now, regarding Marion Cotillard's character:

Spoiler:
She frankly shouldn't have even been in the movie, and I say that as someone who really likes the character of Talia. It just seemed like the only reason they included here was to give fans a geek-out moment when her identity was revealed, except I don't think it worked because it was pretty obvious right from the get-go that she Talia. It's kind of a self-defeating inclusion, because the only people who are going to care about Talia being in the movie are the Batman geeks, yet they're the ones who would be able to figure it out very early on. In fact, I suspect most of them (myself included) had their suspicions before even seeing the movie. If he wanted to work in Talia, I think the reveal should have occurred much sooner into the movie so that her character could actually serve a purpose rather than just be used as a plot twist and then killed off in a ridiculous way 10 minutes later.


About the ending:

Spoiler:
I've seen a lot of different opinions about what the ending indicates as far as a potential sequel/spin-off goes, with some suggesting that this IS the end, and that Nolan merely wanted to let the audience know that someone is still around to protect Gotham. I really don't buy that at all, because Bruce Wayne's goal from the beginning (which is explicitly stated by Rachel at the end of Batman Begins) has been to see a Gotham that doesn't need a Batman. If this were the true conclusion, there would have been no need to set up Robin. Besides, with the way the very last scene is shot, I have to believe the intent is to create anticipation for what comes next. Remember, the last image seen in the movie is not Bruce and Selina at the cafe, but rather John Blake discovering the Batcave. That's the image this trilogy ends on, and that has to say something.

I actually don't have a problem with Blake being Robin, but I do have a problem with what this might mean for the future of the series. For the life of me, I cannot imagine a captivating story being made of Robin fighting crime solo in Gotham City, yet if they do decide to bring Batman back, it totally defeats the purpose of this movie. Really, a Robin spin-off movie would just be an excuse to use more of the villains from the Batman comics. It could be an entertaining spin-off, but I was under the impression that that's not what Nolan intended this series to be.

Or, of course, we could find out next year that the Nolan-produced Man of Steel ends with some sort of Robin cameo, thus setting up a Justice League with Robin as a compromise for not including Batman.


Regarding your first complaint...
Spoiler:
Your assumption that TDK takes place a few months after BB is incorrect. TDK takes place one year after BB and yes, it is explicitly stated by the joker himself in TDK. Secondly, I'm not sure if I remeber John Blake referring to his memories of being 10 years old when Batman first appeared. I thought he was talking about seeing Bruce in public and seeing the smile and facade he prepared for the public to disguise his pain. Need to see the movie a second time to confirm this.

Regarding Batman's ultimate goal...What Rachel said at the end of BB was meant to communicate her hope for Bruce and the legend he created. However, if you follow all three movies, it becomes clear that there is no going back after Batman, and a world in which Gotham has no future protector is clearly impossible. Batman was meant to be a symbol, something everlasting and incorruptible. Anyone can be Batman, he is not a man, he is a legend, an idea. With the constant themes of escalation and opposing ideals in Nolan's trilogy, it's pretty clear that Gotham will always need someone to watch over it and establish the presence of the legend Bruce created.
Reply With Quote
  #425  
Old 07-21-2012, 08:27 PM
Something about the love scene that I didn't realize until my sister just pointed it out:

Spoiler:
The point of it was apparently to reveal Miranda as Talia right there, if you're astute enough. My sister realized it. Her scar (which she called a "mistake from her childhood" or something) was a removed League of Shadows tattoo. Can't believe I missed that.


Also, regarding Blake:

Spoiler:


He's obviously not a pre-existing Robin, but he could be a hybrid of Robin and Azrael, who took over for Batman temporarily when Batman injured his back. A lot of characters in these recent comic book movies seem to be hybrids.



As for the ending:

Spoiler:


Enough about it not being "dark" enough. This trilogy had more than enough dark moments to go around. Bruce's past, losing Rachel, being completely spiritually broken, destroying his relationship with Alfred, being responsible for hundreds, if not thousands, of lives lost because of his arrogance (it was his arsenal that Bane was using, after all)... come on. The guy deserves some happiness when all of this is said and done.


Last edited by Darth Kenshin; 07-21-2012 at 08:30 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #426  
Old 07-21-2012, 08:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycheoutsteve View Post
Regarding your first complaint...
Spoiler:
Your assumption that TDK takes place a few months after BB is incorrect. TDK takes place one year after BB and yes, it is explicitly stated by the joker himself in TDK.

Actually its about 6 months.

The Joker's reference to "a year ago" was just in comparison to the mob's peak foothold in Gotham then, before Batman's arrival. In less than a year, they're hiding in fear.
Reply With Quote
  #427  
Old 07-21-2012, 08:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn-o View Post
Harry Fucking Knowles gave this film a negative review...

I know its Harry Knowles but I just wanted to share the hilarity of his review...its spoileriffic so don't read the whole thing, but boy do I get a kick outta this guy and his douchebagery!

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/57109

I'm not worried though, this guy hated Inception because the dreamers only dreamed up firearms...instead of lightsabers and minotaurs.
Fuck this fat ass...looking back at his reviews , he has given every Marvel movie a high score ..including shitfest like Captain America and Iron Man 2.
Reply With Quote
  #428  
Old 07-21-2012, 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Kenshin View Post
DaveyJoe, why does your post (4 above this one) have so many quotes from me that I never made? Glitch in the system? I'm confused...
That was my bad, I seriously messed up when copying and pasting the quote code. I have edited my post to correct that.
Reply With Quote
  #429  
Old 07-21-2012, 09:12 PM
Got to go see it this afternoon and I loved it. I can not think of any major complaints, maybe a few minor ones but not worth mentioning. It falls in right below The Dark Knight which was a 10/10 for me.

My only real complaint was with the theater. For one thing they had a speaker that was blown and during certain scenes it was highly annoying. Secondly I was not nervous about going to see the movie after the Aurora shooting however it did make me nervous to have cops come in 3 times and scan around the audience as if they were expecting something. I have been watching movies at that theater for years and never had policemen come in. I can understand the reasoning but I could tell it was making several people nervous.
Reply With Quote
  #430  
Old 07-21-2012, 09:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by electriclite View Post
Actually its about 6 months.

The Joker's reference to "a year ago" was just in comparison to the mob's peak foothold in Gotham then, before Batman's arrival. In less than a year, they're hiding in fear.
where did you get 6 months from? Was there an extra on a dvd that i missed?
Reply With Quote
  #431  
Old 07-21-2012, 09:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tkeyjw View Post
Spoiler:
A lot of people have already complained about John Blake being able to figure out Batman's identity when he was a kid, but the events of this movie take place 8 years after The Dark Knight, and presumably that movie only took place a few months after Batman Begins. I don't think the time between the first two movies was ever explicitly stated, although it can be assumed that it wasn't a long time given that the Joker is still a new force in Gotham in TDK despite starting his spree at the very end of BB, not to mention that Batman himself still seems to be something of a new phenomenon in Gotham. So in terms of a timeline here, we're looking at maybe 9 or 10 years since Batman showed up in Gotham. If Blake had met him as a 10-year-old boy, that would make him only 20 now, at the oldest. I know Joseph Gordon-Levitt can pass for being younger than he is in real life, but I totally don't buy that his character--an officer who gets promoted to detective--is only 19 or 20 years old.
He could be 20, both Foley and Gordon give him condescending remarks about being a rookie. Gordon promotes him because times are desperate and he sees both initiative and intelligence in his character. I don't get all of the complaints about Blake deducing that Bruce is Batman. I thought the speech about anger was really well done, and provided good insight into both characters. Like I pointed out earlier, Blake is not the first character to deduce Batman's identity in this franchise.

Wayne has the resources, and he always disappears when Batman is absent. Batman comes with Wayne's return after the 7 years in Batman Begins, and Batman disappears when he Bruce goes into hiding for the 8 years after The Dark Knight. If anything, it's unrealistic that more people aren't guessing that it's Wayne.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tkeyjw View Post
Now, regarding Marion Cotillard's character:

Spoiler:
She frankly shouldn't have even been in the movie, and I say that as someone who really likes the character of Talia. It just seemed like the only reason they included here was to give fans a geek-out moment when her identity was revealed, except I don't think it worked because it was pretty obvious right from the get-go that she Talia. It's kind of a self-defeating inclusion, because the only people who are going to care about Talia being in the movie are the Batman geeks, yet they're the ones who would be able to figure it out very early on. In fact, I suspect most of them (myself included) had their suspicions before even seeing the movie. If he wanted to work in Talia, I think the reveal should have occurred much sooner into the movie so that her character could actually serve a purpose rather than just be used as a plot twist and then killed off in a ridiculous way 10 minutes later.
The only reason anybody guessed Marion was Talia was because of set pictures taking during filming. Nobody knew unless they were already following the production of the film. There is absolutely no evidence that Marion is Talia while watching the film. She seems to be on the straight and narrow for the entire duration until the reveal at the end.

However, I don't disagree that things might have been more interesting if her reveal came earlier in the film, but Nolan does love his plot twists, and I stand by my claim that the scene of her stabbing Bruce while Bane chokes him with the rope is extremely effective and hard to watch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tkeyjw View Post
About the ending:

Spoiler:
I've seen a lot of different opinions about what the ending indicates as far as a potential sequel/spin-off goes, with some suggesting that this IS the end, and that Nolan merely wanted to let the audience know that someone is still around to protect Gotham. I really don't buy that at all, because Bruce Wayne's goal from the beginning (which is explicitly stated by Rachel at the end of Batman Begins) has been to see a Gotham that doesn't need a Batman. If this were the true conclusion, there would have been no need to set up Robin. Besides, with the way the very last scene is shot, I have to believe the intent is to create anticipation for what comes next. Remember, the last image seen in the movie is not Bruce and Selina at the cafe, but rather John Blake discovering the Batcave. That's the image this trilogy ends on, and that has to say something.

I actually don't have a problem with Blake being Robin, but I do have a problem with what this might mean for the future of the series. For the life of me, I cannot imagine a captivating story being made of Robin fighting crime solo in Gotham City, yet if they do decide to bring Batman back, it totally defeats the purpose of this movie. Really, a Robin spin-off movie would just be an excuse to use more of the villains from the Batman comics. It could be an entertaining spin-off, but I was under the impression that that's not what Nolan intended this series to be.

Or, of course, we could find out next year that the Nolan-produced Man of Steel ends with some sort of Robin cameo, thus setting up a Justice League with Robin as a compromise for not including Batman.
Nolan and crew are completely done with this franchise, it's been said multiple times. There won't be a Batman 4 or a Robin spin-off. Nolan gave Bruce Wayne closure while allowing for the Dark Knight to live on and inspire hope in the people of Gotham. This theme has been present since the opening scene of Batman Begins when Ras tells him the he must elevate his status into being more than just a man, but a legend. Bruce Wayne only wanted to give up Batman because he wanted to be with Rachel and she admits in TDK that he can never do that. That's why she chose Harvey over Bruce.

It wasn't until the events of TDKR that Bruce learned to move on and let himself have a happy life. And he couldn't have done that without Blake being willing to take up the mantle. It was pretty well done as Blake had his own arc about learning the futility of fighting corruption within the confines of a corrupt system.
Reply With Quote
  #432  
Old 07-21-2012, 09:36 PM
The folks at my theater actually cheered when
Spoiler:
Alfred sees Bruce in Italy. I kinda dug it too. Somebody called this ending ball-less and a copout by Nolan but I strenuously disagree. There's been speculation going on every since this was announced as a "conclusion" that Batman would die at the end, EVERYBODY was saying that was a strong possibility. Cracked.com did a whole article on it, countless bloggers listed reasons they thought it was inevitable, hell even my mom said "he's probably gonna die at the end." So when Batman flew the Batplane out over the ocean it worked for me but I saw it coming before I even walked into the theater. Everyone else did too. The one thing that no one expected, that NO ONE saw coming, was a sweet, almost heartwarming happy ending. Sure it was goofy-grin time (I ain't gonna lie, I had one), but I see nothing wrong with that. As for it being tonally incongruous, I disagree with that as well. Batman is a dark character and these have been some mostly dark movies, but the underlying theme of them all has been hope or something similarly cheeseball. BB had the "why do we fall?" scenes and TDK had the Joker-disproving ferry moment, and all throughout there's been a feeling that there has to be hope or Batman is just pointless and has no reason to exist. This being the END, there's absolutely nothing wrong with seeing that hope fully realized, and in fact I think it fits better with what the movies are trying to say than Batman just blowing up over the ocean. I have some complaints about the movie, but that ending is definitely not one of them.


Damn, I kinda went off on a ramble there. Anyway, as far as Blake:
Spoiler:
I honestly don't understand how some of you accept the explanation of his knowing so easily. If it's not that hard to put two and two together, then why haven't a hundred other people? Is Blake really THAT special that all it takes is a look in the eye for him to figure out one of the most important secrets in that reality? That's bordering on psychic ability right there. After talking about the look, I just think they should've thrown in an extra line or two about how he went through painstaking efforts and used resources and methods that "I can't tell you about" (he could've said that with a sly little smile on his face). I would've been satisfied with just that, and in fact it would've made him seem even more clever and endearing. But basically what the movie said was "I saw a look on your face and that was it." It was jarring to me, and sorta took me out of the moment. After he reveals that he knows who Bruce is, I was intrigued and thought this should be interesting. Then he starts talking, and I'm waiting for the explanation, and waiting, and the scene finishes and I realize holy shit, that was it? THAT was the explanation? I know nothing can be done about it so me continuing to bitch is sorta stupid, but that's how much it bothered me.


Other than that, I share the sentiment a couple of you have expressed, in that it's actually growing on me more with time. I think expectations played a lot in my slight disappointment, and now that the anticipation is over and I've seen it I will probably appreciate it more on repeat viewings.
Reply With Quote
  #433  
Old 07-21-2012, 09:40 PM

I really wasn't too hyped for this film prior to release, and I think that helped me enjoy it for what it was. I really, really liked this one. I loved Batman Begins, but I felt the same disappointment with The Dark Knight that many are feeling with this film. Sure, I could nit-pick it to death, but if you really tried you could do that with almost any movie. I won't get too detailed with it, but having seen it twice, I'll rank the films as such:

Batman Begins - 8.5
The Dark Knight - 7/10
The Dark Knight Rises - 8/10
Reply With Quote
  #434  
Old 07-21-2012, 09:41 PM
For the record, DaveyJoeG, I didn't just plagiarize you with the whole "theme has been present" sentiment. You posted that while I was typing mine, dang it, and made the point I was trying to with far less rambling. Good job.
Reply With Quote
  #435  
Old 07-21-2012, 09:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chillingworth View Post
For the record, DaveyJoeG, I didn't just plagiarize you with the whole "theme has been present" sentiment. You posted that while I was typing mine, dang it, and made the point I was trying to with far less rambling. Good job.
No worries man, you did a great job explaining it. I mean the theme has been there, so it's no surprise that people who have been paying attention actually picked up on it.
Reply With Quote
  #436  
Old 07-21-2012, 09:44 PM
You know what I think this film did better than the previous two? The comic relief. Each film had moments of levity with some light comedic moments, but 99% fell flat. With this film, the small comedic moments all hit the right notes and had me smile or chuckle.
Reply With Quote
  #437  
Old 07-21-2012, 09:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycheoutsteve View Post
where did you get 6 months from? Was there an extra on a dvd that i missed?
from the wiki:http://batman.wikia.com/wiki/The_Dark_Knight

Quote:
Taking place roughly 9 months after the first film, The film begins with the disguised Joker ....
Reply With Quote
  #438  
Old 07-21-2012, 09:55 PM
6 months was the general time span used in all of the marketing for The Dark Knight. And when the hell are we going to see a review from soda??

Last edited by DaveyJoeG; 07-21-2012 at 10:01 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #439  
Old 07-21-2012, 10:10 PM
Spoiler:


Quote:
Gordon types up a statement telling everyone the truth about Harvey Dent and when he doesn't read it at the ceremony, he just decides to keep it in his jacket pocket at all times in case the leader of the underground revolution happens to kidnap him.
I went along with him keeping the letter close to heart. He didn't want anybody reading it. To each his own, but maybe you overlooked the trope where the character keeps the precious letter on his person because it's that secret. It's common enough in spy movies, although I have never actually experienced this in real life and have no comparison for beyond movies.

Quote:
Also, if they're not letting anyone in or out of the city (as the bridge scene with JGL clearly hammered home), how does Wayne get back in?
Batman later showed up on the ice, didn't he? Maybe Bale walked across the ice like the badass motherfucker who trained with Liam. Or maybe he flew there. Batman's only super power is his ability to miraculously appear in precarious positions, brooding and posed. Nobody knows how he perches himself on top of slim skyscrapers without somebody noticing a costumed man monkeying his way up the shaft either, but now I'm starting to sound pornographic.

Quote:
Also, I'm sure Batman wasn't too concerned with the whole "24 hours til the bomb goes off" scenario because he clearly had time to make an over-the-top-I-just-finished-watching-Zorro flaming bat symbol on the bridge instead of taking care of business like he should have.
I just wanted to quote he clearly had time to make an over-the-top-I-just-finished-watching-Zorro flaming bat symbol on the bridge instead of taking care of business because that's awesome. I could go on about the importance of the batman's symbol, but it's standard superhero heroics.

Quote:
3. Ticking time bomb scenario. Give me a freaking break! Nolan should have been better than to use this cop out to finish his trilogy. It's nothing more than a contrived lot device to keep the audience on the edge of their seats for the finale.
Yeah, I didn't like the tome bomb either. I didn't mind I countdown - didn't even notice in the heat of the movie, but I didn't like the nuclear threat and the final scene of batman flying the bomb off to sea. That disappointed me. It was merciless logic on the part of the writers, since a nuclear threat is well and logical for a mercenary like bane, but I wish he would have shown more mercy to the tone of the film and the appropriate scale. I'm not the end-all-be-all measure of what should or shouldn't be in a batman movie, but the nuclear threat disappointed me with its impersonal spectacle.

Quote:
8. Bane's army, equipped with semi-automatic weapons, decides that instead of using those weapons against a group of cops that just spent months underground sharing rations of food and water, they'll just get into a giant fist fight. Right . . .
To add to what davey said, you can also see muzzle bursts from Bane's camp when the cops are charging.


Beyond that, I haven't been reading much praise for Bane's prison. One of my favorite sub plots in the movie. It was a solid set piece with curious substance and an interesting locale full of interesting accents. I liked the small scale of the triumph and I liked the therapy it gave Bale's Wayne. His exotic journeys in the first act of Batman Begins were my favorite parts of the movie, mixing in the legitimacy of foreign affairs and arduous travel with the comic book mysticism already prevalent in the mythology of an iconic character like batman. One of the best things about Nolan's trilogy is his ability to introduce concepts about heroism accessible to all sorts of audiences at all sorts of ages. The writers don't elaborate these concepts into ponderously complicated depths, shooing off the young'uns, but there are enough demonstrations of competing ideologies that none of the concepts in these movies feels disposable. Sometimes they might be simplistic, but iconography is always simplistic. It's the nature of the icon. And it's such a balancing act to portray an icon without being pulled down by its limitations. The Nolan team has done such a good job with this stuff.

Quote:
I know its Harry Knowles but I just wanted to share the hilarity of his review...its spoileriffic so don't read the whole thing, but boy do I get a kick outta this guy and his douchebagery!
The unpleasant side of fans. Passion is incredible stuff, whether it's positive or negative, but this proprietary nature some fans feel over these works is... Well, it's a double edged thing. There's a lot to say for an adaption staying true to the material, but there's just as much to say about fans whose familiarity with a source material inadvertently limits that source material, and the fan in question remains unable to enjoy explorations above and beyond and beside and below. One of the best impressions I have of comics is their ability to (as soda would put it) beta test these characters over and over again. I doubt comics ever stop this test, either, although they move on from iterations that don't work. I imagine comics frequently try different tones, approaches and contexts for these heroes, and the fanbase is supposed to be flexible enough for these characters to sustain through variances in our cultural sensibilities. Fans have a sharper tongue than most, but I used to think they would also be the most able to appreciate new angles on beloved characters.

Never mind that everything Knowles complained about seems to have actually happened in the Batman comics before, and never mind his assertion that Bruce hung up the cowl just because Rachel died - I never had that impression and the movie was never explicit. To be honest, his 'exile' was sort of assumed after Dark Knight left him a vigilante. Bruce sacrificed the Batman symbol so Gotham could survive, and the conversations he has with Alfred about getting his life together aren't about getting Batman together, but getting himself together. Alfred doesn't even want Bruce to continue risking his body for the city, encouraging him instead of help the city through other means.
Reply With Quote
  #440  
Old 07-21-2012, 10:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
6 months was the general time span used in all of the marketing for The Dark Knight. And when the hell are we going to see a review from soda??
This week. He said he would probably see it Monday or Tuesday.

I really can't wait to read his take on the ending.
Spoiler:
I personally feel he will have issues.

Last edited by electriclite; 07-21-2012 at 10:48 PM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump