#481  
Old 07-22-2012, 08:11 PM
I'm checking out again tonight. I got a feeling I'll enjoy it the second go round.
Reply With Quote
  #482  
Old 07-22-2012, 09:24 PM
When "The Dark Knight" was released in 2008, I don't think I commented here, and it's just as well that I didn't. I held the unpopular and uncommon opinion that Christopher Nolan's second "Batman" film was too dark, too serious, too long, too heavy with its theme. It was just too much period. I liked seeing the Joker taken more seriously than he was on "Batman: The Animated Series," and loved seeing a closer presentation of Two-Face to match the cartoon. But as a whole, Nolan tried way too hard to please us. If it was possible for Joel Schumacher and the studio both to take the franchise too lightly with "Batman & Robin," (and I don't believe the underrated "Batman Forever" is the same case), it is also possible for another filmmaker to take the franchise far too seriously to the point where it is no longer fun to watch.

I felt that to be case with "The Dark Knight" and that feeling and effect in "The Dark Knight Rises" is multiplied. Compared to TDKR, TDK suddenly looks a lot a better. I gave TDK only **1/2 (out of 4 stars), for the amazing effort put into it, and losing points for overheated feeling at the end. Well, my gosh. I don't think anyone can deny the huge effort and passion Nolan put into this third chapter, but it is very much shortchanged by it's extreme overheatedness when it is over. Where was the fun? Why was everyone so damn serious? Is there something wrong with a little fun in a "Batman" movie? TDKR gets only ** from me.

Just as fans feel that Schumacher should never have directed the third and fourth "Batman" films in the first run, I feel that Nolan was wrong to direct any "Batman" films as well. After three straight fun-less films from Nolan, Tim Burton's contribution to the first-run series aren't so bad. I always felt that "Batman" and "Batman Returns" were typically weird Tim Burton films guest-starring Batman...

Spoiler:
...I followed "Batman: The Animated Series" and wondered if that woman from the charity group really was Talia Al Ghoul. Apparently, I wasn't only the one. However, this is coming from somehow who avoided all media for TDKR and the upcoming movie talk thread. I only knew what I saw from the previews and avoided repeated showings of previews. And I was pleasantly surprised to see it was the case. What they did with her character, upon revealing, wasn't bad but it didn't compare to the cartoon just how TDK's Two-Face didn't compare to it either. I wanted to see more of Two-Face and Talia.

And speaking Two-face, I appreciated what they did with Harvey Dent's dedication in this. I don't feel that "nobody cares about him anymore." To have Gordon wishing to one day tell the truth about what happened to him, and have Bane do that for him instead made sense. It cleared Batman's name, and that had to be done for him to be remembered as Gotham's "Dark Knight" along Harvey Dent's "White Knight." Dent should still be remember what he did before becoming Two-Face.

Acting as a trilogy, it was great to see Batman "sacrifice" himself and save Gotham. Other than Neo from the "Matrix" series, how many heroes do that? Am I missing a long list of movies/series to do that? John McClane hasn't "died hard" yet to save others, and I don't think Jack Bauer did either. It made sense for Batman and gave Bruce Wayne a nice sense of closure.

And Bane. Why on earth give him that muzzle mask instead of his tradional Mexican wrestler's mask? Did Nolan feel it wasn't serious enough for his take? But this this is minor problem compared to what Bane does to Batman. I expected to see him first hurt Batman. Great. Nolan got that right. But what's all this nonsense with Batman being taken to the pit and healing his wounds for three months while Bane turns Gotham City inside out? Did not like this aspect one bit. Batman should have gotten away badly beaten, Alfred should have been there to tend to his wounds, and Bane should have led a smaller-scale takeover of the city. If it's possible, what they did was too large-scale and imprisoning Batman/Bruce Wayne took me right out of the movie. By that point, this was a no longer a "Batman" movie to me. It is a typically complex Christoper Nolan movie guest-starring Batman...


...In the end, my favorite "Batman" film remains "Batman Forever." Go ahead and laugh, I don't care. It's Two-Face was far removed from the cartoon but still entertaining. But it got The Riddler down 100%. Plus, Val Kilmer knew how to play Batman and Bruce 100%, with different vocal work and without getting laryngitis. I can't say that about Christian Bale. He played a good Batman and Bruce Wayne, but his performance through three films is shortchanged by overwhelming themes that didn't belong.

EDIT: On one more note, I completely forgot to mention Catwoman. That's because she wasn't in the movie. Selina Kyle never truly becomes Catwoman. Her cat burlgler career and her glasses opening up to form cat ears are not enough. Her character was wasted in this.

And also, Nolan's film's show how much impact Wayne Manor and the Batcave have - especially when they are not present in the movies. Both were completely absent in TDK, but the Batcave was never truly present in Part 1 and Part 3. Where are the platforms leading to super computers and gadget shops? Was I spoiled by all that in the first-run series? Well, that is one more aspect that is better than Nolan's realistic take on the series.

Batman - **1/2 out of 4
Batman Returns - ** or **1/2
Batman Forever - ***
Batman & Robin - **1/2 (so bad, it's good)

Batman Begins - after TDK and TDKR, down from *** to **1/2
The Dark Knight - **1/2
The Dark Knight Rises - **

Last edited by Duke Nukem; 07-22-2012 at 10:27 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #483  
Old 07-22-2012, 09:45 PM
Id agree ^ but i still had moments i got a great kick out of. I loved catwomans entrance in wayne manor, again i also felt she never matched the sassiness and mysteriously sexy tone she showed in her first scene! She feels like, mellowed out the rest of the film!

Bane v batman the 1st time is fantastic, when the lights went out and bane began speaking to batman...."i was born in the darkness"...fantastic. Bane electrified the film and was damn good. However in the 3rd act, he doesnt do shit, and gets blown away by catwoman. I guess hes dead? No explanation on any further bane details. It has great stretches surrounded by nonsense/filler
Reply With Quote
  #484  
Old 07-22-2012, 10:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by poopontheshoes7 View Post
Saw it again. Even better the second time. I simply just don't see many of the issues people are forming with this. The only time I would say the pacing was off was during the opening scene at Wayne manor. Other than that it moved masterfully. I was never confused as to what the plot was doing or what actions the characters took. It was no more jumbled or hard to decipher then TDK, which moved almost a bit too fast sometimes imo.

What I truly love about this film is it feels epic. Properly epic. The plot, the characters, the action. It's a HUGE film that just kept on building and building until it exploded in a last block that is the most tense and suspenseful piece of action film making in a long time. And a lot of it was done with practical effects, which was such a breath of fresh air!
I agree with pretty much everything you said, minus TDK moving too fast at times. The pace of this movie was completely justified by the story; it's a slow build up to one hell of an epic and tense finale! There's plenty to keep you interested until the climax of the film as well, (I especially liked the arcs of Bane, Catwoman, and John Blake). This is the epic we needed and the epic we deserved! hehe.

But yeah...can't understand for the life of me why some people are being so hard on this film, tearing apart plot points like
Spoiler:
Catwoman killing Bane, which i believed was completely appropriate because she let Bane destroy Batman the first time around.
I also loved the dialogue and philosophy/overall theme of this particular Dark Knight film.
Reply With Quote
  #485  
Old 07-22-2012, 10:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by poopontheshoes7 View Post
Saw it again. Even better the second time. I simply just don't see many of the issues people are forming with this. The only time I would say the pacing was off was during the opening scene at Wayne manor. Other than that it moved masterfully. I was never confused as to what the plot was doing or what actions the characters took. It was no more jumbled or hard to decipher then TDK, which moved almost a bit too fast sometimes imo.

What I truly love about this film is it feels epic. Properly epic. The plot, the characters, the action. It's a HUGE film that just kept on building and building until it exploded in a last block that is the most tense and suspenseful piece of action film making in a long time. And a lot of it was done with practical effects, which was such a breath of fresh air!
Agree 100%. I must also add in that I loved the emotional, nuanced character arcs of both Bruce and John Blake in the film.
Reply With Quote
  #486  
Old 07-22-2012, 10:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
Nobody knew unless they were already following the production of the film. There is absolutely no evidence that Marion is while watching the film.
Actually there is a massive close-up hint of it but it's easily forgotten because of everything that happens after it. After her special scene with Bruce there is an extreme close up of Bruce touching her back and over a particular unusual birth mark/scar. I always thought this was somewhat of a POV shot of Bruce aswell but I guess not. Either way, during the trilogy screening this was quite obvious. So much follows afterwards thought that it's easy to forget.


Don't remember if they show the other character part of that league having the mark though?
Reply With Quote
  #487  
Old 07-22-2012, 10:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rilocay View Post
Actually there is a massive close-up hint of it but it's easily forgotten because of everything that happens after it. After her special scene with Bruce there is an extreme close up of Bruce touching her back and over a particular unusual birth mark/scar. I always thought this was somewhat of a POV shot of Bruce aswell but I guess not. Either way, during the trilogy screening this was quite obvious. So much follows afterwards thought that it's easy to forget.


Don't remember if they show the other character part of that league having the mark though?
Yeah, I remember that scar, Miranda says something like "an old mistake" and Bruce admits that he has plenty of those. We were discussing this scar in another thread and we're struggling to reach a consensus on it. Some think it's from a League of Shadows tattoo, but for the life of me I can't remember any reference to a League of Shadows tattoo in this film or in Batman Begins. So how could it be a clue if there's no reference to it in the film? Bruce was trained in the League of Shadows after all, so why is he so dismissive of it?

What about that scar is a clue of her being in the LOS? I must have missed it.
Reply With Quote
  #488  
Old 07-22-2012, 10:46 PM


I have to say I was greatly entertained the entire time. I thought Tom Hardy was great as Bane, and Hathaway was a serviceable Catwoman.

I love how Nolan has tried to cram a side villain in every movie, Falcone, Maroni and now Dagget (though it was Roland Dagget and not John in the cartoons).

The threat level was upped this movie, though it was still essentially a ticking time bomb scenario, at times reminiscent of Begins. Wayne's recovery seemed to happen awful easily as well.

Not sure about the John Blake elements either, but it was a good film and a decent closer to the series.

8/10
Reply With Quote
  #489  
Old 07-22-2012, 11:00 PM
On second viewing, I liked the film a bit more. The movie is Nolan's most unwieldy effort yet - the pace stops and starts and not all the movie's themes and ideas congeal like they do in his best films.

However, it's still epic and crazy on many levels. I loved Hardy as Bane. Many standout scenes and some wonderful emotional moments (although not enough of them).

8/10

Batman Begins: 8/10
The Dark Knight: 9/10
Reply With Quote
  #490  
Old 07-22-2012, 11:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
Spoiler:
Yeah, I remember that scar, Miranda says something like "an old mistake" and Bruce admits that he has plenty of those. We were discussing this scar in another thread and we're struggling to reach a consensus on it. Some think it's from a League of Shadows tattoo, but for the life of me I can't remember any reference to a League of Shadows tattoo in this film or in Batman Begins. So how could it be a clue if there's no reference to it in the film? Bruce was trained in the League of Shadows after all, so why is he so dismissive of it?

What about that scar is a clue of her being in the LOS? I must have missed it.

Back in Batman Begins when Bruce passed his penultimate test and was about to be inducted into the League of Shadows. There was a fire pit with a hot poker in it containing the emblem of the LOS. You're branded with it once you're officially initiated.

Spoiler:
I'm really feeling like the only person who knew Tate was Talia. I swear I saw other people here as well as elsewhere who were like "Yeah sure, she's not Talia" (sarcastically), especially when they saw he in a photo wearing some Tibetan inspired looking garb. All those parts where he sleeps with her, and near the end where Bane pulls her out of the mock court, when Batman bursts into where she's held and hands her the gun I was like "Yup, they're setting it up for the big reveal". I think even soda knew, because he was excited by the idea of two of the most important women in Batman/Bruce's life were going to appear in Nolan's final batman film.

Last edited by electriclite; 07-22-2012 at 11:17 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #491  
Old 07-22-2012, 11:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke Nukem View Post
When "The Dark Knight" was released in 2008, I don't think I commented here, and it's just as well that I didn't. I held the unpopular and uncommon opinion that Christopher Nolan's second "Batman" film was too dark, too serious, too long, too heavy with its theme. It was just too much period. I liked seeing the Joker taken more seriously than he was on "Batman: The Animated Series," and loved seeing a closer presentation of Two-Face to match the cartoon. But as a whole, Nolan tried way too hard to please us. If it was possible for Joel Schumacher and the studio both to take the franchise too lightly with "Batman & Robin," (and I don't believe the underrated "Batman Forever" is the same case), it is also possible for another filmmaker to take the franchise far too seriously to the point where it is no longer fun to watch.
I completely agree with you on Dark Knight. At the time of release it was a bit overwhelming with all the excitement and buzz, but after its time had passed I settled in the same boat. The Dark Knight is far too heavy and there is no fun to be had in repeat viewings. My biggest disappointment with the latter two films of the Nolan trilogy is the complete lack of atmosphere and set design. Begins had an interesting concept with the train, The Narrows and Arkham. But they never refer to Arkham or the Narrows again. Nolan did nothing to make Gotham look different than any other city instead it became increasingly ordinary. I have always loved the original series of films for their set design, less their story/action sequences. A perfect Batman movie to me would consist of Tim Burton directing the design and look of the film, while another director focused on the script and action sequences. Tim Burton's films have the WORST action sequences. He is completely unable to create them. Begins is the closest to a perfect live-action Batman film. And I will still wait for the ultimate rendition. My second disappointment is the latter two films take place mostly in the DAYTIME, no criminal is scared of "Daylight Batman"!

I do appreciate Nolan trying to take Batman to another level, but his shortcomings as a director always show once time has passed. All of his Batman films have poor editing where its obvious he has jumped quickly from one moment to another. His fight scenes have gradually improved, Begins having the worst. The final Batman mano-a-mano was the best of the series.

I still think The Dark Knight is the weakest of the three films, due to its relentlessly nightmarish tone and tacked on final act. There is too much going on and it does not flow well. But, Ledger's performance will be remembered as nothing short of masterful. Begins has my pick as best at this point. I will have to see DKR again, but it is definitely an improvement over DK. I disagree Duke
Spoiler:
in that I did manage to enjoy this installment. There is a underlying feeling of hope through the film, and I did not feel trapped in a nightmare. Plus, the denouement was very satisfying especially Batman's reveal to Jim Gordon.
Having loved Batman since seeing Tim Burton's incarnation upon its release at 4 years old, I will always be open to see anyone take on Bob Kane's legacy, even if it isn't exactly to my preferences.
Reply With Quote
  #492  
Old 07-23-2012, 12:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.HyDe807 View Post
I'm checking out again tonight. I got a feeling I'll enjoy it the second go round.
same here, but on $5 tuesdays. hopefully i enjoy this time around as well.
Reply With Quote
  #493  
Old 07-23-2012, 12:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
Yeah, I remember that scar, Miranda says something like "an old mistake" and Bruce admits that he has plenty of those. We were discussing this scar in another thread and we're struggling to reach a consensus on it. Some think it's from a League of Shadows tattoo, but for the life of me I can't remember any reference to a League of Shadows tattoo in this film or in Batman Begins. So how could it be a clue if there's no reference to it in the film? Bruce was trained in the League of Shadows after all, so why is he so dismissive of it?

What about that scar is a clue of her being in the LOS? I must have missed it.
I need to rewatch Batman Begins to be certain, but I think when Bruce entered the house of Ra's, they had a branding iron with that symbol to initiate new members. If that is the case, Talia's scar would be a brand that she was in the League, not a removed tattoo. I don't know, though, as I didn't even notice the scar when watching the movie. My sister is the one who told me about it.

I didn't know she was Talia going into the movie because I ignore any talk about a movie beforehand. I kind of figured it out when they mentiond a child of Ra's (I know he only has one) and it became definitively clear when she tried to sabotage Gordon stopping the nuke.
Reply With Quote
  #494  
Old 07-23-2012, 03:38 AM
Movie Mini-Review: THE DARK KNIGHT RISES

The Dark Knight Rises

****1/2 out of ***** (9/10) Excellent

The expectations for The Dark Knight Rises have been immeasurably high following after the superb piece of work known as The Dark Knight. The pressure on the filmmakers to deliver here was high, and exacerbated by the death of Heath Ledger, which forced the writers to exclude the Joker from the final installment (he was originally supposed to be involved). This, plus the film's lengthy running time (165 min.), caused some people to wonder if this film would be an overstuffed letdown with far too much going on (think Spider-man 3). Fortunately, neither of these supposed "strikes" takes hardly anything away from the finished film. Once again we are given a memorable and well-acted villain, with Tom Hardy playing the role of Bane. He is cold, calculating, and knows exactly what he's doing. He is a real threat to the Dark Knight, and a compelling character in his own right. Is he as memorable as Heath Ledger's Joker? No, he is not. Ledger's Joker is already considered to be among the rare film performances that becomes instantly iconic, quotable, and quickly integrated into the pop culture lexicon. This cannot be said for Bane. However, the directors foresaw this and made the film very much about Bruce Wayne/Batman first and foremost, as was the case in the first film in the trilogy, Batman Begins. The Dark Knight was a movie where the villain stole the show and was essentially the centerpiece of the movie. Here The Batman is the centerpiece, and this is the most compelling and well-written Batman Christian Bale has been given in the entire series. Bale gets more chances to shine here than in the other two films combined. Still, there probably is nothing instantly quotable or pop culture status here. While the film is long, it is not overstuffed, and contains a well-thought-out and character-driven drama. This film has the broadest and most ambitious scope of the three, hence giving it its longer running time. However, as with The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight Rises probably could have had about ten minutes cut out without losing anything, thus giving the film a tighter pace. Also as with the previous film, all of these cuts could have been made in the first hour. Admittedly, this movie does take a while to get going, but the slower pace of the first hour sets up character arcs that are well paid off throughout the rest of the film, so this is quickly forgiven. Most importantly, this film is an immensely satisfying conclusion to the entire trilogy, and the stakes are higher than ever. The best moments in this film are probably more exciting and more satisfying than ANYTHING in the previous two films. In short, this film is VERY slightly below The Dark Knight overall. It has more pacing flaws and lacks an iconic performance like Ledger's Joker, but this is still a masterfully made piece of work that further reinforces the idea that Christopher Nolan is by far the best blockbuster Hollywood director working right now. This film is not to be missed!
Reply With Quote
  #495  
Old 07-23-2012, 03:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke Nukem View Post
When "The Dark Knight" was released in 2008, I don't think I commented here, and it's just as well that I didn't. I held the unpopular and uncommon opinion that Christopher Nolan's second "Batman" film was too dark, too serious, too long, too heavy with its theme. It was just too much period. I liked seeing the Joker taken more seriously than he was on "Batman: The Animated Series," and loved seeing a closer presentation of Two-Face to match the cartoon. But as a whole, Nolan tried way too hard to please us. If it was possible for Joel Schumacher and the studio both to take the franchise too lightly with "Batman & Robin," (and I don't believe the underrated "Batman Forever" is the same case), it is also possible for another filmmaker to take the franchise far too seriously to the point where it is no longer fun to watch.

I felt that to be case with "The Dark Knight" and that feeling and effect in "The Dark Knight Rises" is multiplied. Compared to TDKR, TDK suddenly looks a lot a better. I gave TDK only **1/2 (out of 4 stars), for the amazing effort put into it, and losing points for overheated feeling at the end. Well, my gosh. I don't think anyone can deny the huge effort and passion Nolan put into this third chapter, but it is very much shortchanged by it's extreme overheatedness when it is over. Where was the fun? Why was everyone so damn serious? Is there something wrong with a little fun in a "Batman" movie? TDKR gets only ** from me.

Just as fans feel that Schumacher should never have directed the third and fourth "Batman" films in the first run, I feel that Nolan was wrong to direct any "Batman" films as well. After three straight fun-less films from Nolan, Tim Burton's contribution to the first-run series aren't so bad. I always felt that "Batman" and "Batman Returns" were typically weird Tim Burton films guest-starring Batman...

Spoiler:
...I followed "Batman: The Animated Series" and wondered if that woman from the charity group really was Talia Al Ghoul. Apparently, I wasn't only the one. However, this is coming from somehow who avoided all media for TDKR and the upcoming movie talk thread. I only knew what I saw from the previews and avoided repeated showings of previews. And I was pleasantly surprised to see it was the case. What they did with her character, upon revealing, wasn't bad but it didn't compare to the cartoon just how TDK's Two-Face didn't compare to it either. I wanted to see more of Two-Face and Talia.

And speaking Two-face, I appreciated what they did with Harvey Dent's dedication in this. I don't feel that "nobody cares about him anymore." To have Gordon wishing to one day tell the truth about what happened to him, and have Bane do that for him instead made sense. It cleared Batman's name, and that had to be done for him to be remembered as Gotham's "Dark Knight" along Harvey Dent's "White Knight." Dent should still be remember what he did before becoming Two-Face.

Acting as a trilogy, it was great to see Batman "sacrifice" himself and save Gotham. Other than Neo from the "Matrix" series, how many heroes do that? Am I missing a long list of movies/series to do that? John McClane hasn't "died hard" yet to save others, and I don't think Jack Bauer did either. It made sense for Batman and gave Bruce Wayne a nice sense of closure.

And Bane. Why on earth give him that muzzle mask instead of his tradional Mexican wrestler's mask? Did Nolan feel it wasn't serious enough for his take? But this this is minor problem compared to what Bane does to Batman. I expected to see him first hurt Batman. Great. Nolan got that right. But what's all this nonsense with Batman being taken to the pit and healing his wounds for three months while Bane turns Gotham City inside out? Did not like this aspect one bit. Batman should have gotten away badly beaten, Alfred should have been there to tend to his wounds, and Bane should have led a smaller-scale takeover of the city. If it's possible, what they did was too large-scale and imprisoning Batman/Bruce Wayne took me right out of the movie. By that point, this was a no longer a "Batman" movie to me. It is a typically complex Christoper Nolan movie guest-starring Batman...


...In the end, my favorite "Batman" film remains "Batman Forever." Go ahead and laugh, I don't care. It's Two-Face was far removed from the cartoon but still entertaining. But it got The Riddler down 100%. Plus, Val Kilmer knew how to play Batman and Bruce 100%, with different vocal work and without getting laryngitis. I can't say that about Christian Bale. He played a good Batman and Bruce Wayne, but his performance through three films is shortchanged by overwhelming themes that didn't belong.

EDIT: On one more note, I completely forgot to mention Catwoman. That's because she wasn't in the movie. Selina Kyle never truly becomes Catwoman. Her cat burlgler career and her glasses opening up to form cat ears are not enough. Her character was wasted in this.

And also, Nolan's film's show how much impact Wayne Manor and the Batcave have - especially when they are not present in the movies. Both were completely absent in TDK, but the Batcave was never truly present in Part 1 and Part 3. Where are the platforms leading to super computers and gadget shops? Was I spoiled by all that in the first-run series? Well, that is one more aspect that is better than Nolan's realistic take on the series.

Batman - **1/2 out of 4
Batman Returns - ** or **1/2
Batman Forever - ***
Batman & Robin - **1/2 (so bad, it's good)

Batman Begins - after TDK and TDKR, down from *** to **1/2
The Dark Knight - **1/2
The Dark Knight Rises - **
I thought it was extremely entertaining, just like the previous two, and I think that's perfectly enough to constitute fun. I hate that stupid idea of these films being "funless" and having to be campy or some bullshit like other comic book films just because that's what it is based upon. Yes, Nolan integrated modern themes within his three films and made three films based on a man creating a character because his parents were murdered in front of his eyes as a young child (I know how fun that is).

And about Batman Forever, Two Face being an abortion of a character is a huge deal and Riddler was way too over the top (even for Riddler) to be 100% right. Plus, Bruce Wayne/Batman is a charismatic bastard which is what makes him really likable in the end. Val Kilmer had the charisma of a towel in Batman Forever.
Reply With Quote
  #496  
Old 07-23-2012, 08:59 AM
Miranda's accent made me think she was Talia, right from the get go. Her accent is similar to Raz Al Ghul's and like Batman, I don't believe in coincedence. I figured the kid escaping wasn't Bane especially seeing the giant massive mystery person protecting the child. I dunno, maybe I was just nerdy enough to figure it out sooner.
I do dislike how rushed Bane's death was. I would have preffered she hit his mask and he slowly just fade away till he dies, knowing he lost. Such a brutal bad guy deserved a less rushed off-screen death.
Reply With Quote
  #497  
Old 07-23-2012, 09:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GodMagnus View Post
Miranda's accent made me think she was Talia, right from the get go. Her accent is similar to Raz Al Ghul's and like Batman, I don't believe in coincedence. I figured the kid escaping wasn't Bane especially seeing the giant massive mystery person protecting the child. I dunno, maybe I was just nerdy enough to figure it out sooner. .
Since when did Ras Al Ghul have a French accent?
Reply With Quote
  #498  
Old 07-23-2012, 09:19 AM
Thought these were hilarious.














Reply With Quote
  #499  
Old 07-23-2012, 09:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke Nukem View Post
When "The Dark Knight" was released in 2008, I don't think I commented here, and it's just as well that I didn't. I held the unpopular and uncommon opinion that Christopher Nolan's second "Batman" film was too dark, too serious, too long, too heavy with its theme. It was just too much period. I liked seeing the Joker taken more seriously than he was on "Batman: The Animated Series," and loved seeing a closer presentation of Two-Face to match the cartoon. But as a whole, Nolan tried way too hard to please us. If it was possible for Joel Schumacher and the studio both to take the franchise too lightly with "Batman & Robin," (and I don't believe the underrated "Batman Forever" is the same case), it is also possible for another filmmaker to take the franchise far too seriously to the point where it is no longer fun to watch.

I felt that to be case with "The Dark Knight" and that feeling and effect in "The Dark Knight Rises" is multiplied. Compared to TDKR, TDK suddenly looks a lot a better. I gave TDK only **1/2 (out of 4 stars), for the amazing effort put into it, and losing points for overheated feeling at the end. Well, my gosh. I don't think anyone can deny the huge effort and passion Nolan put into this third chapter, but it is very much shortchanged by it's extreme overheatedness when it is over. Where was the fun? Why was everyone so damn serious? Is there something wrong with a little fun in a "Batman" movie? TDKR gets only ** from me.

Just as fans feel that Schumacher should never have directed the third and fourth "Batman" films in the first run, I feel that Nolan was wrong to direct any "Batman" films as well. After three straight fun-less films from Nolan, Tim Burton's contribution to the first-run series aren't so bad. I always felt that "Batman" and "Batman Returns" were typically weird Tim Burton films guest-starring Batman...

Spoiler:
...I followed "Batman: The Animated Series" and wondered if that woman from the charity group really was Talia Al Ghoul. Apparently, I wasn't only the one. However, this is coming from somehow who avoided all media for TDKR and the upcoming movie talk thread. I only knew what I saw from the previews and avoided repeated showings of previews. And I was pleasantly surprised to see it was the case. What they did with her character, upon revealing, wasn't bad but it didn't compare to the cartoon just how TDK's Two-Face didn't compare to it either. I wanted to see more of Two-Face and Talia.

And speaking Two-face, I appreciated what they did with Harvey Dent's dedication in this. I don't feel that "nobody cares about him anymore." To have Gordon wishing to one day tell the truth about what happened to him, and have Bane do that for him instead made sense. It cleared Batman's name, and that had to be done for him to be remembered as Gotham's "Dark Knight" along Harvey Dent's "White Knight." Dent should still be remember what he did before becoming Two-Face.

Acting as a trilogy, it was great to see Batman "sacrifice" himself and save Gotham. Other than Neo from the "Matrix" series, how many heroes do that? Am I missing a long list of movies/series to do that? John McClane hasn't "died hard" yet to save others, and I don't think Jack Bauer did either. It made sense for Batman and gave Bruce Wayne a nice sense of closure.

And Bane. Why on earth give him that muzzle mask instead of his tradional Mexican wrestler's mask? Did Nolan feel it wasn't serious enough for his take? But this this is minor problem compared to what Bane does to Batman. I expected to see him first hurt Batman. Great. Nolan got that right. But what's all this nonsense with Batman being taken to the pit and healing his wounds for three months while Bane turns Gotham City inside out? Did not like this aspect one bit. Batman should have gotten away badly beaten, Alfred should have been there to tend to his wounds, and Bane should have led a smaller-scale takeover of the city. If it's possible, what they did was too large-scale and imprisoning Batman/Bruce Wayne took me right out of the movie. By that point, this was a no longer a "Batman" movie to me. It is a typically complex Christoper Nolan movie guest-starring Batman...


...In the end, my favorite "Batman" film remains "Batman Forever." Go ahead and laugh, I don't care. It's Two-Face was far removed from the cartoon but still entertaining. But it got The Riddler down 100%. Plus, Val Kilmer knew how to play Batman and Bruce 100%, with different vocal work and without getting laryngitis. I can't say that about Christian Bale. He played a good Batman and Bruce Wayne, but his performance through three films is shortchanged by overwhelming themes that didn't belong.

EDIT: On one more note, I completely forgot to mention Catwoman. That's because she wasn't in the movie. Selina Kyle never truly becomes Catwoman. Her cat burlgler career and her glasses opening up to form cat ears are not enough. Her character was wasted in this.

And also, Nolan's film's show how much impact Wayne Manor and the Batcave have - especially when they are not present in the movies. Both were completely absent in TDK, but the Batcave was never truly present in Part 1 and Part 3. Where are the platforms leading to super computers and gadget shops? Was I spoiled by all that in the first-run series? Well, that is one more aspect that is better than Nolan's realistic take on the series.

Batman - **1/2 out of 4
Batman Returns - ** or **1/2
Batman Forever - ***
Batman & Robin - **1/2 (so bad, it's good)

Batman Begins - after TDK and TDKR, down from *** to **1/2
The Dark Knight - **1/2
The Dark Knight Rises - **

Fucking aaaaaaa......never thought I would see someone rate Batman and Robin the same as BB and TDK and higher then TDKR. It's your opinion , but damn I can't take you seriously at all...the world is coming to an end soon.
Reply With Quote
  #500  
Old 07-23-2012, 10:04 AM
Christopher Nolan concludes his take on the Batman legend with a thunderous and an at times brutal and
emotional finale.
Nolan's version of Batman has always been a more realistic take on the story of a smart,strong,but mortal
man inspired by tragedy to do extraordinary feats.
TDKR opens 8 years after the events of The Dark Knight and we see Bruce Wayne as a shadow of himself
facing the aforementioned trials of a mortal man,but there is no rest for the weary when a sexy cat burgurlar
Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle and a new villain Tom Hardy as Bane enter his life.


Tom Hardy is quite good as Bane. Not as intimidating or unpredictable as Heath Ledgers Joker but
displays enough cold brutality and Darth Vader like phonetics to impress as a big screen menace.
Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle is slinky,sexy, and at times quite ferocious.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt as John Blake a young, brave and smart police officer brings a new, bright energy
to the film.His belief and faith in Batman is shared by Commissioner Gordon [the always good Gary Oldman]
Though her screen time felt brief to me i liked Marion Cotillard as Miranda Tate and the film would not be the
same without the class of Morgan Freeman as Lucius Fox

It's Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne/Batman and Michael Caine as Alfred Pennyworth who impress the most.
It's a strained 'father son relationship'in which Alfred wants Bruce to leave his loss,despair, and Batman behind.
The scenes they share together are perfection.

TDKR feels a bit bloated and drawn out at times and i guess it feels that way because Nolan has spoiled audiences with
storytelling that has been more streamlined and to the point,but the good definitely outweighs the films flaws.
In the end my inner fan boy was satisfied and like the great showman they are Christopher Nolan and his brother
Jonathan Nolan leave the Batman series and an applauding audience wanting more.

Scale of 1-10 an 8 Ĺ
Reply With Quote
  #501  
Old 07-23-2012, 11:27 AM
I find it difficult to fathom that now some people are complaining Nolan went too " dark" with the narrative concerning his version of Batman .

That's hilarious because he finally took him seriously and gave us an adult version, as close to R rated comic book hero movies as you can get and TDKR is the most adult of all three.

These films aren't for kids, you want that go see Avengers or IM or whatever cutesy comic book movie is available , that's not to disparage other franchises but Nolan did something unprecedented with this trilogy, he didn't pander to the kiddies just for the sake of box office. He made the films the way he wanted and they still made money . Looking back i wonder how the studio agreeed to these films especially the last two.

Yes they are relentlessly downbeat but for good reason, this is the unglamorous side of being a "hero" not the nice and palatable one we always get .

After seeing some of those complaints i have a new apprecaition for all of the films and what Nolan has done with them even if i felt they weren't "dark" ( in a narrative sense ) enough for my tastes.

TDKR is a stroke of bold genius ( once again, could have been even more brutal and bittersweet than it was ) , Christopher Nolan has gone where no comic book hero movie has gone before or even dared to tread. Maybe things get wrapped up a bit too neat, maybe, it's still an uncomfortable experience

It is odd because this isn't for the younger folks in the audience, i mentioned that before a couple of days ago, no, this movie is unsettling and most times unflinching . I'm hoping for an unrated cut

Kids, go buy your Ironman masks and your Hulk fists, leave this series to the adults.
Reply With Quote
  #502  
Old 07-23-2012, 01:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by electriclite View Post
Back in Batman Begins when Bruce passed his penultimate test and was about to be inducted into the League of Shadows. There was a fire pit with a hot poker in it containing the emblem of the LOS. You're branded with it once you're officially initiated.

Spoiler:
I'm really feeling like the only person who knew Tate was Talia. I swear I saw other people here as well as elsewhere who were like "Yeah sure, she's not Talia" (sarcastically), especially when they saw he in a photo wearing some Tibetan inspired looking garb. All those parts where he sleeps with her, and near the end where Bane pulls her out of the mock court, when Batman bursts into where she's held and hands her the gun I was like "Yup, they're setting it up for the big reveal". I think even soda knew, because he was excited by the idea of two of the most important women in Batman/Bruce's life were going to appear in Nolan's final batman film.
Ah yes, I remember this scene. I actually watched Batman Begins on Thursday night, but I didn't link the hot poker to the scar. I've seen the movie many times and was wondering what exactly the purpose of the poker was. For some reason I thought he was going to brand Bruce's ninja armor with it, I think I mis-remembered that from my first viewing. But having never seen a reference to the actual brand later in the film, I wondered if Ken Watanabe was just being melodramatic by pointing that thing in Bruce's face. Then he did the chest bump thing and I always expect him to say "word" after that.

So yeah, I can accept that as being a really, really subtle hint that Talia is a member of the LOS. Extremely subtle because it's never really made obvious that the other members have been branded. We see Bane without his shirt at the beginning, with no sign of a brand, so it makes me shudder to think of where the LOS actually brand the men. Also it's pretty harsh that Ras would brand his own daughter, the rightful heir to the LOS.

Spoiler:
I was aware of the Talia rumors going into the film, I followed the production of the film very closely and I was more convinced that Tate was Talia than Blake was anything special. However, going into the movie I did my best to cleanse all that from my mind and just take it at face value and viewed her simply as Miranda Tate. The scar did grab my attention, although instead of a brand I took it as some type of old battle wound.

Cotillard's performance is pretty damn good and elevates her villain and gives the character a bit more depth. When Bane brings her, Fox, and a board member down to activate the reactor, Miranda is genuinely convincing in her compassion when she convinces Fox to obey Bane to avoid bloodshed. Upon a second viewing you realize she's just being manipulative to get what she wants. It's little moments like these that help improve the character that is a bit underwhelming at first.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy Dud View Post
The Dark Knight Rises

****1/2 out of ***** (9/10) Excellent

The expectations for The Dark Knight Rises have been immeasurably high following after the superb piece of work known as The Dark Knight. The pressure on the filmmakers to deliver here was high, and exacerbated by the death of Heath Ledger, which forced the writers to exclude the Joker from the final installment (he was originally supposed to be involved). This, plus the film's lengthy running time (165 min.), caused some people to wonder if this film would be an overstuffed letdown with far too much going on (think Spider-man 3). Fortunately, neither of these supposed "strikes" takes hardly anything away from the finished film. Once again we are given a memorable and well-acted villain, with Tom Hardy playing the role of Bane. He is cold, calculating, and knows exactly what he's doing. He is a real threat to the Dark Knight, and a compelling character in his own right. Is he as memorable as Heath Ledger's Joker? No, he is not. Ledger's Joker is already considered to be among the rare film performances that becomes instantly iconic, quotable, and quickly integrated into the pop culture lexicon. This cannot be said for Bane. However, the directors foresaw this and made the film very much about Bruce Wayne/Batman first and foremost, as was the case in the first film in the trilogy, Batman Begins. The Dark Knight was a movie where the villain stole the show and was essentially the centerpiece of the movie. Here The Batman is the centerpiece, and this is the most compelling and well-written Batman Christian Bale has been given in the entire series. Bale gets more chances to shine here than in the other two films combined. Still, there probably is nothing instantly quotable or pop culture status here. While the film is long, it is not overstuffed, and contains a well-thought-out and character-driven drama. This film has the broadest and most ambitious scope of the three, hence giving it its longer running time. However, as with The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight Rises probably could have had about ten minutes cut out without losing anything, thus giving the film a tighter pace. Also as with the previous film, all of these cuts could have been made in the first hour. Admittedly, this movie does take a while to get going, but the slower pace of the first hour sets up character arcs that are well paid off throughout the rest of the film, so this is quickly forgiven. Most importantly, this film is an immensely satisfying conclusion to the entire trilogy, and the stakes are higher than ever. The best moments in this film are probably more exciting and more satisfying than ANYTHING in the previous two films. In short, this film is VERY slightly below The Dark Knight overall. It has more pacing flaws and lacks an iconic performance like Ledger's Joker, but this is still a masterfully made piece of work that further reinforces the idea that Christopher Nolan is by far the best blockbuster Hollywood director working right now. This film is not to be missed!
This is a wall of text that is very unpleasant to read. It would be a good idea to break your review into several paragraphs to make it easier for others to read.

I'd like to add, one thing that really bothers me about the movie is a severe lack of Michael Caine and Gary Oldman. I'll give the Caine thing a pass because it really worked for the story. Bruce and Alfred's fight was really hard to watch and left me feeling awful. I couldn't believe Alfred dipped out so early in the film. I would've loved to see more inspirational speeches about tangerines. The final reveal was also a great payoff.

However Gordon simply should have had more to do in the movie. I guess Nolan wanted to emphasize the desperation of the film by incapacitating some of the major supporting characters, making them incapable of helping, but man it was disappointing. He is hospitalized after his second scene and he's the reason Bane learned the truth about Harvey Dent. The scene with Bruce and Oldman in the hospital wasn't as powerful as it was in the teaser, it was too brief, and they chose underwhelming takes compared to the teaser.

Oldman's Gordon was a high light in the previous two films, and it was a shame that he had nothing to do in this film. However, I'll say that I loved his speech to Blake about having a friend to shove his hands in the much, so he can keep his own hands clean. I also like that his wife took the kids away from him, a reference to the comics, I believe. But by the end of the film when he's trying to get the EMP to the truck I was rolling my eyes thinking "oh now you want him to have a role in the story?"

Last edited by DaveyJoeG; 07-23-2012 at 01:12 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #503  
Old 07-23-2012, 01:12 PM
Saw this early Friday morning and just haven't had a chance to type out a review yet...

Will say that I absolutely enjoyed it through and through and I can't wait to see it again! Nolan has still yet to disappoint and I can't wait to see what's next.

For anyone who gives a shit I would rank them as such:

1.Batman Begins 9/10
2. TDKR 9/10
3. TDK 8/10
Reply With Quote
  #504  
Old 07-23-2012, 01:31 PM

TDK 10/10
BB 9/10
TDKR 8.5/10
Reply With Quote
  #505  
Old 07-23-2012, 02:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post

I'd like to add, one thing that really bothers me about the movie is a severe lack of Michael Caine and Gary Oldman.
It also bothered me because of how much I like those characters (and actors) but I think it worked for the story. You already mentioned why Alfred leaving was significant, but as for Oldman, I think it was necessary to allow for Blake to be more important. If Gordon was still up and running, Blake's character would've been somewhat extraneous.
Reply With Quote
  #506  
Old 07-23-2012, 06:45 PM
I'm seeing it again tonight, below is what I wrote on another website, don't have much time now to write something JoBlo-specific so thought I'd just do the ol' ctrl+c ctrl+v here. SPOILERS AHEAD

---

Crawling out of my cave for this one. The event-movie of the year would do that wouldn’t it?

So after years of waiting, it’s finally arrived and the most unfortunate thing about the premier of this movie is the Colorado incident. Looking at it now in hindsight it almost felt predictable: the amount of hype built around this franchise, coupled with the recent crazed events from the States and the fact that there’s no shortage of idiotic lunatics starving for fame and media attention in the States, all amounts to what happened.
So, DKR’s box office expectations aside (it’s still going to make a fuckload of money so who honestly cares if it beats out The Avengers?), the question is whether it lives up to the deranged hype that it amassed, thanks to the quality of the first two parts and the passionate fanbase.

The simple one-word answer is: Yes.

I can’t say I’m surprised at the negativity that’s being thrown at it and the incessant nit-picking. Those nit-pickers will always be there, hell, I’m a nit-picker sometimes and the more I watch something the more nits I find to pick, but after seeing DKR only once I can’t but not feel completely satisfied by Nolan’s Batman trilogy.

Just to go over a few of the main issues people seem to have:

1. The Music.
My eyes were in perma-squint mode while reading over people’s complaints about the movie being “too loud”. Mine was an IMAX experience, seated fourth row down, bam-smack in the middle. Basically, it was like flying first class and the overall sound of the movie was perfection. Zimmer’s score (which, to me, was love at first listen as “Gotham’s Reckoning” is now probably my all time favorite Zimmer track), the sound mixing, Bane’s voice (best. villain. voice. ever.), Batman’s voice (less bass, nice): it’s a perfect 10/10.

2. The Ending.
A big LOL to people who are throwing words like “Inception”, “dream” and “fantasy” at the ending of this trilogy. Stop kidding yourself. The only person Wayne wanted to re-assure about his escape was Alfred, and he did, by going to the only place he knew he could only find him and no one else from Gotham. The fact that the sequence didn’t end on Alfred’s smiling face makes it even more obvious that this wasn’t no dream or fantasy. Selina is there. Pointe finale.
It’s a happy-sappy-cheesy ending, yes. But it’s the only ending that makes sense. Had Batman really sacrificed himself for Gotham, one of the biggest messages of the whole film, and one of the biggest obstacles for the character himself, would have been completely lost and betrayed. He needed a way to escape Gotham, a way to stop feeling sorry for himself, a way to forgive himself for Rachel and Dent, and live his life as a normal person. Now that he’s completely bankrupt and his caped alter ego a martyr for his city, he can chill and smile with relief. Had it ended in any other way, it would have sucked. Can’t put it any plainer than that.

3. Bane vs. The Joker
Another predictable comparison is with the villains. How can ANYONE be able to top the AMAZEBALLS performance by Ledger as the Joker?! Those that cream their pants with these types of questions miss the point completely. No one is trying to top anyone off. The point is that Hardy’s Bane lives up to being a more formidable opponent for Batman and to being a more-than-good enough successor to The Joker. Bane is evil incarnate, making the Joker and his dementia seem more like an annoying pest in comparison. Joker walks into a room: you freak out and laugh/snicker a little bit. Bane walks into a room: you freak out and shit your pants.

A little bit more on Bane: Hardy played him perfectly. Like others have said, if he didn’t have the mask for 99.5% of the movie, he’d be a strong contender for an Oscar nom. His mannerisms, gestures, accent, nonchalant way of talking and walking, emotional turmoil around Talia and uncontrollable anger around Batman were exactly right. By a long mile, Bane is the highlight of the movie.
That he is disposed of with a whimper rather than a bang bothered me at first. A lot. But the more I think about it, the more I think it suits the character and his ego perfectly. When I see it again tonight, I will have to see how it makes me feel the second time around.

4. Oscar Talk
Will it? Should it? What will? Who knows. No one really, we call all just speculate and throw around various stats, predictions, interview snippets, tweet feeds and what not.
My hope is that it gets nominated for Picture, Director, Script, Editing and all the technicals because I think it deserves all of them.
My prediction is that it won’t get nominated for anything except Sound mixing and editing, and maybe Visual effects. Maybe.
The Academy doesn’t go for movies like this, doesn’t seem to like Nolan too much either and that’s just fine. They have their own little rule book, they have their own niche, and it’s actually a good thing that movies like DKR don’t apply.
The only way I can see it getting any of the more serious nominations is if the Academy tries to become all modern and trendy and pick something a little darker from this year.


The movie isn’t without its flaws, and more repeat viewings will bring those flaws up even more. (Story wise, Catwoman is a throw-away character but Hathaway did an excellent job and the script was in her favor. She was boatloads of fun. A little bit too much focus on the character of Blake for my liking, but I realize the importance of that)
After all’s said and done: it’s the perfect conclusion to what is now (or certainly should be regarded as) the greatest comic book trilogy of all time. And I can’t wait to see it again tonight.
Reply With Quote
  #507  
Old 07-23-2012, 07:31 PM
Spoiler:
Not sure if I understood it right, but the whole point of the 'revolution' was to seal off the city... but they had the detonator the whole time, right? So why not just blow up the city?


EDIT:
Spoiler:
Nevermind, it was all to fuck with Bruce.

Last edited by Tony_Montana; 07-23-2012 at 08:12 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #508  
Old 07-23-2012, 07:50 PM
There was some hilariously stupid writing in this.

Spoiler:
The police are buried for months but emerge in clean clothes, freshly shaven and with the energy to take on a mob of hardened criminals


Spoiler:
The police and mob are all heavily armed but only a handful of shots are fired before things erupt into a giant fist fight.


Spoiler:
A nuclear bomb is ticking down and Batman takes the time to say his goodbyes and get a smooch.


Spoiler:
Bane flies Batman halfway around the world and drops him off in a prison with people who nurse him back to health and help him find a way to escape


Spoiler:
Bruce Wayne and Batman have both disappeared from the public eye for 8 years, reemerge at the same time and nobody catches on.


There are others but I'm sure you get where I'm coming from.
Reply With Quote
  #509  
Old 07-23-2012, 08:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dellamorte dellamore View Post
I find it difficult to fathom that now some people are complaining Nolan went too " dark" with the narrative concerning his version of Batman .

That's hilarious because he finally took him seriously and gave us an adult version, as close to R rated comic book hero movies as you can get and TDKR is the most adult of all three.

These films aren't for kids, you want that go see Avengers or IM or whatever cutesy comic book movie is available , that's not to disparage other franchises but Nolan did something unprecedented with this trilogy, he didn't pander to the kiddies just for the sake of box office. He made the films the way he wanted and they still made money . Looking back i wonder how the studio agreeed to these films especially the last two.

Yes they are relentlessly downbeat but for good reason, this is the unglamorous side of being a "hero" not the nice and palatable one we always get .

After seeing some of those complaints i have a new apprecaition for all of the films and what Nolan has done with them even if i felt they weren't "dark" ( in a narrative sense ) enough for my tastes.

TDKR is a stroke of bold genius ( once again, could have been even more brutal and bittersweet than it was ) , Christopher Nolan has gone where no comic book hero movie has gone before or even dared to tread. Maybe things get wrapped up a bit too neat, maybe, it's still an uncomfortable experience

It is odd because this isn't for the younger folks in the audience, i mentioned that before a couple of days ago, no, this movie is unsettling and most times unflinching . I'm hoping for an unrated cut

Kids, go buy your Ironman masks and your Hulk fists, leave this series to the adults.

I don't even know what you're talking about. "Everyone" has complained about the ending not being dark enough.
Reply With Quote
  #510  
Old 07-23-2012, 08:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jz68 View Post
There was some hilariously stupid writing in this.

Spoiler:
The police are buried for months but emerge in clean clothes, freshly shaven and with the energy to take on a mob of hardened criminals


Spoiler:
The police and mob are all heavily armed but only a handful of shots are fired before things erupt into a giant fist fight.


Spoiler:
A nuclear bomb is ticking down and Batman takes the time to say his goodbyes and get a smooch.


Spoiler:
Bane flies Batman halfway around the world and drops him off in a prison with people who nurse him back to health and help him find a way to escape


Spoiler:
Bruce Wayne and Batman have both disappeared from the public eye for 8 years, reemerge at the same time and nobody catches on.


There are others but I'm sure you get where I'm coming from.
1. Bane was clearly supplying them all with fresh clothes, a hot shower, and a warm meal. A better question would be, why didn't Bane just kill them?

2. Well, clearly he wants to make it more dramatic and another way to make it ya know, 'full circle' to the fight we saw in Batman Begins in the Narrows. But I think the main reason they didn't show much of the shooting was because this is PG-13.

3. It was less about seeing that everyone is alright, and more about getting Selina to help him fight and Fox to help him deactivate the bomb. Did he even kiss Miranda? A bigger issue I had was Batman creating a giant Bat symbol on the side of the bridge, talk about adding damage to the city even more than it already had...

4. It seems like, originally, they helped Bruce simply stay alive under the wishes of Bane in order for him to see the destruction of his city thus breaking his 'spirit'. I think they doubted he'd get out of the Pit, so they let him try.

5. People aren't very smart in Gotham, clearly. They trust a terrorist, they don't put two and two together when Batman and Bruce are declared dead, and they send their entire police force to the sewers.
Reply With Quote
  #511  
Old 07-23-2012, 08:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jz68 View Post
Why does Batman
Spoiler:
talk in his raspy voice when he's trying to convince Selina to stick around and save Gotham? At that point, she's already aware of his real identity since she overheard Bane call him Mr Wayne.


isnt it a device in his suit??
Reply With Quote
  #512  
Old 07-23-2012, 09:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by doobie6136 View Post
isnt it a device in his suit??
He uses the Bat voice when he visits Gordon in the hospital, wearing a ski mask.
Reply With Quote
  #513  
Old 07-23-2012, 09:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jz68 View Post
He uses the Bat voice when he visits Gordon in the hospital, wearing a ski mask.
I don't think so, he was simply whispering. It doesn't sound anything like the Bat voice when he has the suit on.
Reply With Quote
  #514  
Old 07-23-2012, 09:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
I don't think so, he was simply whispering. It doesn't sound anything like the Bat voice when he has the suit on.
He was most definitely using the voice, just not as loud.
Reply With Quote
  #515  
Old 07-23-2012, 10:44 PM
[QUOTE=jz68;3579473]There was some hilariously stupid writing in this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jz68 View Post
Spoiler:
The police are buried for months but emerge in clean clothes, freshly shaven and with the energy to take on a mob of hardened criminals
Spoiler:

The mob was a mass of cops and detectives. Some who didn't get trapped underground, like Foley who was in his clean uniform for example. Plus a lot of those cop uniforms were dark so I dunno how clean they really were. Also the cops were also sent supplies by Bane's terrorists.

The Jews of the Krakow ghetto were starved and consistently broken down by the Nazi's and still led a huge revolt against them. They lost, but they they still took out some of their tormentors. The cops fought cause they had nothing else to lose, a bomb was about to go off.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jz68 View Post
Spoiler:
The police and mob are all heavily armed but only a handful of shots are fired before things erupt into a giant fist fight.
I'll give you that one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jz68 View Post
Spoiler:
A nuclear bomb is ticking down and Batman takes the time to say his goodbyes and get a smooch.
Spoiler:
The time between the cuts does not necessarily mean a minute or seconds have passed between them. They can actually be happening simultaneously. PLus it adds to the tension for the audience "Stop talking get the bomb out!" "Go, go,go!"....


Quote:
Originally Posted by jz68 View Post
Spoiler:
Bane flies Batman halfway around the world and drops him off in a prison with people who nurse him back to health and help him find a way to escape
Spoiler:

Everybody knew the way to escape the prison, just that less than 1% of them can actually get out. Only one person escaped remember? Bane brought him there, physically broken, to have Bruce go through what everyone in that prison suffers through: TRYING TO ESCAPE and eventually lose hope and finally fall into despair knowing he failed and be broken completely broken.

It doesn't matter if two guys knew how to escape if they're still there now does it?


Quote:
Originally Posted by jz68 View Post
Spoiler:
Bruce Wayne and Batman have both disappeared from the public eye for 8 years, reemerge at the same time and nobody catches on.
Spoiler:

Bruce Wayne is walking around with a cane.
Reply With Quote
  #516  
Old 07-23-2012, 11:26 PM
An uncertainty arose following the completion of The Dark Knight for Nolan. How to follow the great Dark Knight when the most important chess piece of the film, Ledgerís Joker, tragically lost his life due to an accidental overdose. How should Nolan follow through with the conclusion of Batmanís story when the ultimate villain could not be used? The result comes in the form of The Dark Knight Rises, a conclusion to Batmanís journey, allowing Nolan to meld the comic book tone of Begins, with the more grounded plot of The Dark Knight. Itís not a film that rises (no pun intended) to the heights of The Dark Knight, though itís a tad unfair to even compare the two. What it is, though, is a fairly fitting conclusion to Nolanís vision of Batman.

Nolan certainly makes big decisions towards the final end game of Bruce Wayne. The retirement of Batman and Gotham City being free of crime due to the events following The Dark Knight are big decisions, but Nolan makes it work within the context of his trilogy. Thatís what needs to be said, itís Nolanís trilogy of how he envisioned Batman, and each film iteration has itís own unique spin of the world that surrounds it. Thatís not to say he doesnít respect the comic book source material, but he tries to make it work in his own way, making way for certain sacrifices of what many comic book fans expect. For Rises, the subtle changes of the source material are mostly for the better, providing the final course and challenge that Bruce must face as he decides to retake his mantle as protector of Gotham City.

If there is something grand to be said, itís that this is truly Christian Baleís show. While he definitely shared a piece of The Dark Knight with Ledger, Eckhart, and Oldman; Rises is the showcase for allowing Bruceís storyline to come full circle, and Bale handles the out-of-the game Bruce Wayne with the right amount of stubbornness, regret, and resiliency. Everything is on the line for Bruce in this film, whether itís his straining relationship with Michael Caineís Alfred and Gary Oldmanís Commissioner Gordon, or his battle of wits and strength with the villainous Bane (Tom Hardy), a hulking brute that brings his army to go to war on Gotham City, as well as the legendary Batman.

Hardyís Bane is not like Ledgerís Joker, heís a horse of a completely color. While The Joker would jump through any plans to create chaos, Bane is cold and calculated, with one goal in mind and the means to make sure it is done. It also doesnít hurt that Hardy created himself to be a hulking brute, allowing his posture and piercing eyes to say all that needs to be said, that he will tear you apart. Hardy even utilizes a Bond-like villain voice to bring some elegance to the monster, and it certainly works.

In the more ďmiddle ground/wild cardĒ of Batmanís adversaries is Anne Hathawayís Selina Kyle/Catwoman. While there are times where the character is underutilized, mostly in the middle act, Hathaway certainly understands the character and plays her with relish. Sheís truly a femme fatale, and her developing relationship with Baleís Bruce Wayne is one of the highlights of the film. They play off each other so well, and fans of the relationship in the comic will probably be pleased with what they get in Nolanís version.

The remaining supporting cast does what they do well, even if the script doesnít really do them any favors in certain situations. Joseph Gordon Levitt is solid as John Blake, a cop that wants the truth of the events that ended The Dark Knight, as well as wondering where the Batman truly went. Marion Cotillard makes the most of her character, Miranda Tate, a businesswoman that wants to help the floundering Wayne Enterprises.

Thatís what the most glaring point of Rises, the script can ease into Bruceís concluding story, but then goes into different tangents involving political allegories that really donít add up in the long run of the film. There was that same allegorical themes in The Dark Knight, but they played a part in the story for the long run. In Rises, they just seemed to be there because Nolan wanted to make some sort of statement, and it sticks out like a ore thumb. Not to say that those moments completely derail the film, but they just feel awkward in a film that already has a lot on its plate.

But, while there are some plot inconsistencies, Nolan still is willing to make another epic event, and Rises is up for the challenge. The first act is jam packed with gunfights, fisticuffs, and a plot that doesnít seem to feel like taking a breather. Itís pretty spectacular how much Nolan evolved toward directing action sequence, with one fight scene in the middle of the film that just about steals the show. Wally Pfster is once again behind the cinematographer, and he shoots a gorgeous Gotham city, utilizing a snowy, sunny landscape over the more typical nighttime scenes that the Batman films are used to. But, letís certainly not forget Hans Zimmer, creating yet another among soundtrack that pulses and beats with a dark rhythm. Itís these three ingredients that made the Batman trilogy what it is, and Rises is all the better for it.

Much like Bruce Wayne, Nolan has created his own legacy in the world of cinema and comic book films. He has been able to create three films that were his own vision, taking his time to make sure that the vision never felt rushed or inauthentic. They were films that respected his comic book lore, but also wanted something to say about the current world we live in. The actors knew this, as did Nolanís collaborators, which made the films feel greater than the movie going audiences expected.

Thank you Nolan for these films, and for bringing quality in a summer movie season that, for the most part, lacks that effort.

8/10
Reply With Quote
  #517  
Old 07-24-2012, 12:30 AM
MASSIVE SPOILER IN PIC FORM BELOW



Spoiler:


I mean, on one hand it would be cool to see a batman movie without the constraints of bats and his rogues gallery, essentially allowing them to create new heroes, new villains and new dynamics.

On the other, it'd just be a great fuckin' time - after such massive city-wide destruction - to create a BUM BUM BUM

ARKHAM CITY




Last edited by adamjohnson; 07-24-2012 at 12:35 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #518  
Old 07-24-2012, 01:35 AM
I wouldn't mind if there were no more Batman movies for a while. I mean, aside from comic books, Batman has been overexposed in the last 20 years or so. Between the "Timm-verse" cartoons and animated movies (which I still maintain is the best Batman material ever), the 4 movies in the 90's, and now this trilogy, I think we should give it a rest.

The last time I remember something being pretty much completely new was Batman Begins, which I actually enjoyed. So there's potential if they decide to make a movie that has nothing to do with the traditional lore.

I just say wait a bit and give us the movie we all want: Batman/Superman (even though there's no way it's better than the animated World's Finest movie). Let Man of Steel come out to (hopefully) good reviews next summer, then give it another 3-4 years and have Bruce Wayne in the sequel.
Reply With Quote
  #519  
Old 07-24-2012, 01:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jz68 View Post
There was some hilariously stupid writing in this.

Spoiler:
The police are buried for months but emerge in clean clothes, freshly shaven and with the energy to take on a mob of hardened criminals


Spoiler:
The police and mob are all heavily armed but only a handful of shots are fired before things erupt into a giant fist fight.


Spoiler:
A nuclear bomb is ticking down and Batman takes the time to say his goodbyes and get a smooch.


Spoiler:
Bane flies Batman halfway around the world and drops him off in a prison with people who nurse him back to health and help him find a way to escape


Spoiler:
Bruce Wayne and Batman have both disappeared from the public eye for 8 years, reemerge at the same time and nobody catches on.


There are others but I'm sure you get where I'm coming from.
-No chance the police got clothes, shaving supplies, etc. from the wealth of materials they had given to them or anything; It's also called adrenaline, they had a ton of adrenaline after sitting still for three months and wanted revenge

-The police ran at them because they were insanely outgunned and it was their best shot, plus the other side got a fair amount of shots in and killed numerous police

-He took like a minute to do that and still had time to pull it off

-Bane was playing the odds, and really doubted he'd ever be able to recover in time

-Wayne did not disappear when Batman disappeared, he disappeared when his clean energy plan completely bombed and he lost half of his fortune. They say this in the movie, pay attention.
Reply With Quote
  #520  
Old 07-24-2012, 01:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by brodeurnumber1 View Post
-No chance the police got clothes, shaving supplies, etc. from the wealth of materials they had given to them or anything; It's also called adrenaline, they had a ton of adrenaline after sitting still for three months and wanted revenge

-The police ran at them because they were insanely outgunned and it was their best shot, plus the other side got a fair amount of shots in and killed numerous police

-He took like a minute to do that and still had time to pull it off

-Bane was playing the odds, and really doubted he'd ever be able to recover in time

-Wayne did not disappear when Batman disappeared, he disappeared when his clean energy plan completely bombed and he lost half of his fortune. They say this in the movie, pay attention.
Whatever he says is 100% correct. Marty is #1
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