#561  
Old 07-25-2012, 07:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovemovies View Post
One very small thing I forgot to mention was:

As a HUGE fan of the tv show Prison Break, it put a smile on my face to see the guy who played Bellick in the movie and he's playing a prison guard yet again!

It also amused me to see William Devane play the President of the United States.

Just two small faces that put a smile on my face when they showed up on screen.
I would have LOVED to see Nicky Katt show up as that swat guy from Dark Knight in the riot scene...
Reply With Quote
  #562  
Old 07-25-2012, 08:18 PM
Okay, that's NOT good.
Reply With Quote
  #563  
Old 07-25-2012, 10:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
Impressive self-restraint. I'd be going crazy if I hadn't seen the movie by now.

Spoiler:
I can see him enjoying the ending. He seemed to understand that Nolan intended on ending Bruce Wayne's story and be okay with other liberties that were taken, such as Bruce wanting to stop being Batman in TDK. If anything, I think he'll be disappointed that the love triangle between Bruce, Selina, and Talia wasn't more fleshed out.
Okay, I finally saw this film last night, but I got in very late, and had to go to work early today, so I haven't had any posting time (reworking websites is a very time consuming occupation). So, few things:

I LOVED the ending. There, I said it. Here's why:

Its perfectly in line with the comics. First, some history. For the last few decades of Batman comics, there's been a very decisive picture of how Bruce Wayne/Batman would "end up". Those who watched Batman Beyond, and saw Bruce living with his dog all along in that dark, black house that is Wayne manor, no color, no nothing, know what I'm talking about. This interpretation of Batman's "end" was cemented by Miller in The Dark Knight Returns and became comic book dogma: old Bruce, falling apart physically from years of being Batman, all alone, having alienated everyone in his life. That's the way Batman ends, to a modern audience.

It wasn't always so.

Back in the 1960's, DC had an aging problem, the characters from the Golden Age had aged considerably, and DC wanted to reboot the universe without getting rid of the old characters. Crisis hadn't been invented yet, so people were making due with what they had. DC created a multi-verse, and put the original, Detective Comics #27 Batman on earth two, and the new, silver age, rebooted Batman on earth one. There were actually two batmans, the older one on earth two and the younger one on earth one. Hence, the brand new give away comic that shops have been giving customers for the last two weeks:



Now, in the late fifties, one of the crux arguments of the senate witchhun...hearings on comics that nearly shut down the industry was the accusation that Batman encouraged homosexual behavior (that's why silver age batman was given a string of girlfriends in the 60's, and its where the "billionare playboy" comes from). In the 60's, golden age Batman actually does retire. Selina Kyle reforms, and Batman and Catwoman get married. Why do I personally think this is one of the coolest stories of all time? Because anything that paves the way for:



is cool in my book. I'm a big fan of Helena Wayne. She had the coolest line in one of the latest issues of World's Finest, where she said "some parents teach their kids to swim by throwing them in the pool, mine taught me by throwing me out of a plane."

So, yes, the idea that Batman has a bad ending to his career is a relatively new invention (DKR came out in 85) but it has a powerful hold on people's psyche because it seems to "make sense" given the arc of the character in current print. However, it wasn't always this way. I will say this, if Bruce had wound up with anyone BUT Selina, I would be unhappy. Bruce has dated plenty of hot chicks, but one, and only one, ever got him to the chapel and had the minister pronouce sentence: Selina. The reason being is because Selina is in love with Batman (she doesn't much care for Bruce Wayne) and she's the only girlfriend who is compatible with Bruce being in a relationship and being Batman. Selina doesn't make Bruce choose, because she doesn't want him to give up Batman.

That's what Alfred "gets" that there is a choice, and Rachel laid it down in the last two films: either find love, marry and be happy, or be Batman. Because no woman was going to stick around after she found out, not even Rachel. Selina is the only one who never asks him to make that choice. She loves her mask too, and she doesn't want to give up being Catwoman anymore than she wants Bruce to quit. Bruce finally finds "true love" in the form of a person who will accept him for what he is, and doesn't want to make him into something else.

The whole sleeping with Talia thing does work in the sense that, if there was ever going to be a #2 to Selina, it would be Talia. The biggest thing that stands between Talia and her "beloved" ever getting together is him. Talia loves Bruce, but her higher devotion is to her father, and to his ideals. I did think Bruce and Talia throwing down was cool, because it happened:



In son of the demon, a book that Grant Morrison recently brought back into continuity. The "son" is Damian Wayne, this guy:



So, there is at least the foundation of a physical relationship. Like I said before, one of the things I was looking forward to in this film was the "love triangle" between Bruce/Selina/Talia. Its well pronounced in the comics (Talia trying to "elimanate the competition" etc.) and I think Nolan does at least a decent job introducing it in the films.

Okay, last thing, and my full review will be in my next post, time permitting. The issue of "Robin". Off the top of my head, here are all the Robins, I can remember:

Dick Grayson - the original Robin, who served from the 40's all the way to the 80's. Grayson grew up, left Robin and became Nightwing. Also interesting, like John Blake, Dick Grayson's current occupation is a cop. That's his day job in the comics.

Jason Todd - Jason was Dick's replacement, after Jason got caught trying to steal the tires on the Batmobile. Jason was a troubled youth, who, got into trouble. He wasn't liked by readers, and DC killed him off in Death in the Family.

Tim Drake - Tim Drake is a guy who, like John Blake, is an excellent natural detective. After Jason's death, Tim got the job when he deduced that Batman and Bruce Wayne were the the same person. Tim is currently red robin (he too has moved out from under Bruce's shadow)

Stephanie Brown - was only Robin for about Half a year, and eventually became Batgirl, She died in war games and was brought back later. She was in Africa the whole time.

Damian Wayne - the current Robin, and Bruce's biological child via Talia. Worked far better than I thought he would. The kid had chemistry with Dick Grayson as Batman, but now that his pop is back, the dynamic is even more interesting.

Carrie Kelly - Honorable mention Robin. She was Robin in the landmark work The Dark Knight Returns.

So, being Robin is like like being a padawan leaner in Star Wars, you learn the ways of the force, and then you "Graduate".

More next post...
Reply With Quote
  #564  
Old 07-25-2012, 10:29 PM
Great post, Soda. I'm looking forward to reading more of your thoughts!
Reply With Quote
  #565  
Old 07-25-2012, 10:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by soda View Post
So, there is at least the foundation of a physical relationship. Like I said before, one of the things I was looking forward to in this film was the "love triangle" between Bruce/Selina/Talia. Its well pronounced in the comics (Talia trying to "elimanate the competition" etc.) and I think Nolan does at least a decent job introducing it in the films.
That was an issue I had with this film. Knowing the history between Talia and Bruce from the comics, it didn't seem like there were any sincere emotions here. It bothered me, because Talia (at least to me) always seemed conflicted about Bruce and her father, and was certainly the jealous type.

Granted, in this movie, I guess Miranda being Talia was supposed to be a surprise (a subtle reveal is her scar, but that's very subtle), so any Talia-like reaction to Selina wouldn't have really fit in. But I would've liked to believe their relationship a bit more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by soda View Post

Jason Todd - Jason was Dick's replacement, after Jason got caught trying to steal the tires on the Batmobile. Jason was a troubled youth, who, got into trouble. He wasn't liked by readers, and DC killed him off in Death in the Family.

Stephanie Brown - was only Robin for about Half a year, and eventually became Batgirl, She died in war games and was brought back later. She was in Africa the whole time.
Todd is much more interesting as Red Hood as he ever was as Robin, but I didn't realize he was killed because fans didn't like him.

Brown was part of Birds of Prey, right?
Reply With Quote
  #566  
Old 07-25-2012, 10:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shinigami View Post
Fair warning for the uninitiated -
"But we are not uninitiated."

Reply With Quote
  #567  
Old 07-25-2012, 11:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Kenshin View Post
That was an issue I had with this film. Knowing the history between Talia and Bruce from the comics, it didn't seem like there were any sincere emotions here. It bothered me, because Talia (at least to me) always seemed conflicted about Bruce and her father, and was certainly the jealous type.

Granted, in this movie, I guess Miranda being Talia was supposed to be a surprise (a subtle reveal is her scar, but that's very subtle), so any Talia-like reaction to Selina wouldn't have really fit in. But I would've liked to believe their relationship a bit more.
I can understand that as a fan of the comics, but it just doesn't work in this film adaptation. It's all much more condensed and finite, and Bruce's brief affair with Talia was a nice homage to their relationship in the comics. Like you said, one of the most intriguing aspects of their relationship is Talia's conflict between Bruce and her father... but in these films Ras Al Ghul is dead.
Reply With Quote
  #568  
Old 07-25-2012, 11:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Kenshin View Post
Todd is much more interesting as Red Hood as he ever was as Robin, but I didn't realize he was killed because fans didn't like him.

Brown was part of Birds of Prey, right?
He was. How unpopular was Jason Todd? In the 1980's, DC published a death in the family, and set up a 1-900 number that fans could call in (I swear, I'm not making this up!) and in which they could vote. You called one number, and Jason would live, another and Jason would die. The verdict was death (it was a squeaker of a vote, though) and the version of death in the family where Jason died was published.

I don't think Steph was ever formally a part of Birds of Prey. Lady Shiva had a run of a few issues on that book, but I don't think Steph ever cracked the lineup. It is a common confusion because Steph's mentor is the same person who runs the birds, Oracle. Steph, to me, is one of the great untapped potentials in comics (you can probably tell I have a "thing" for Gotham Girls). Her run with Bryan Q. Miller was very, very well received, and I hope that run has paved the way for her to have a bigger role in the DCU. To me, Steph is, in a nutshell, the Peter Parker of the DCU, she has that youthful enthusiasm, the biting sarcasm and one liners, the problems up and down her personal life, etc. that characterized the best runs on Amazing Spiderman.

Okay, formal review next post...
Reply With Quote
  #569  
Old 07-25-2012, 11:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
Like you said, one of the most intriguing aspects of their relationship is Talia's conflict between Bruce and her father... but in these films Ras Al Ghul is dead.
Touche. HOWEVER, there are many forms of immortality, and... ugh, nevermind.

Quote:
Originally Posted by soda View Post
He was. How unpopular was Jason Todd? In the 1980's, DC published a death in the family, and set up a 1-900 number that fans could call in (I swear, I'm not making this up!) and in which they could vote. You called one number, and Jason would live, another and Jason would die. The verdict was death (it was a squeaker of a vote, though) and the version of death in the family where Jason died was published.
You're a credible dude who clearly knows his stuff, Soda, but I still had to Google that to actually believe it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by soda View Post
I don't think Steph was ever formally a part of Birds of Prey. Lady Shiva had a run of a few issues on that book, but I don't think Steph ever cracked the lineup. It is a common confusion because Steph's mentor is the same person who runs the birds, Oracle. Steph, to me, is one of the great untapped potentials in comics (you can probably tell I have a "thing" for Gotham Girls). Her run with Bryan Q. Miller was very, very well received, and I hope that run has paved the way for her to have a bigger role in the DCU. To me, Steph is, in a nutshell, the Peter Parker of the DCU, she has that youthful enthusiasm, the biting sarcasm and one liners, the problems up and down her personal life, etc. that characterized the best runs on Amazing Spiderman.
Interesting... then I guess I have no idea who she is. Granted, I was always more of a Marvel comic reader (and Japanese manga), but I'm surprised I have no clue who this character is. Research time.
Reply With Quote
  #570  
Old 07-26-2012, 12:32 AM
Box Office News!! I know everyone is curious - here are the international and domestic numbers - also some estimates of how the shooting effected TDKR from a $ standpoint.

Box Office - http://afterthecut.com/2012/07/26/th...crosses-300-mi llion-in-5-days/
Reply With Quote
  #571  
Old 07-26-2012, 01:04 AM
Formal review time. First, my final score for rises: 9.5/10. I thought Rises was in between Begins and TDK, in terms of quality. I've been reading some of the critics on this thread today, and I gotta say, suspension of disbelief is something that seems relevant here. Every single movie ever made has these technical problems, every movie has the "how did Bruce get back from India?" question. Movies, as a constraint of the medium, have these flaws because there simply isn't enough screen time to vet these details, and, even if there were, people would probably find the details of how Bruce got back to be "boring". If you want to be "epic", and have a grand scale, details slipping through the cracks is a part of the package. In an epic tale, there simply isn't the space to go through and explain every detail. In that case, you'd have a ten hour film, and even then, things would get skipped.

Its a lot like what Shim said about the conversion process from comics to film. Comics are a unique medium in that you get 22 pages a month, no more, no less. Everything you want to say for that month has to fit in those 22 pages. If it doesn't, you have to wait until next month, or just leave it unsaid. A writer and an artist are, therefore, trying to leave out the stuff that they think audiences will "get" on their own. Movies and comics are very different, but at their heart of hearts, they're both sequential art. Movie directors are doing the same thing: trying to go over the important stuff to construct a narrative and leaving some of the details, that they "think the audience will get" out. Its not sloppiness on the part of the filmmaker, its the reality of the medium.

Part of that "leaving stuff out" is the implied contract between audience and filmmaker. The audience will give a certain level of suspension of disbelief if the stuff that filmmaker presents is plausible within the framework of the film. Plausibility means different things based on different subject matter. Back in the day, Gotham was destroyed in the comics every other week, but it always popped back up, the same as ever, in time for next month's issue. That obviously strained credibility, but we're talking about a universe where Superman welded a building back together with his heat vision. Most of the nit-picks I'm seeing listed with regard to TDKR are not unplausible with regards to the universe Nolan has created, they're just not explained in the film. There is a difference. You leave something, as a filmmaker, to the intelligence of your viewing audience.

Much has been said about the way Nolan ended this movie, in fact, I said quite a bit about it myself. I indicated that the "all alone" version of Batman's end was popularized in the mid 80s. Even in DKR, we saw the logical counter-point to the "all alone" version of Batman's end: the "all together" version. Batman strikes me as the kind of person who would build robots to enforce order in his city (like he did in Kingdome Come). Batman strikes me as the kind of person who would realize, after fighting crime for some time, that the job of protecting the city was too big for any one person. He strikes me as the type who would build his own personal army (like he did at the end of DKR). Its the reason why Batman Inc. makes so much sense to me. Batman is a symbol, it makes sense he would franchise that symbol around the world. Batman strikes me as the type who would hire a full time staff for the bat-cave and then, have those people monitor every aspect of Gotham, and move out his knights to the places they're needed most. Batman strikes me as being smart enough to figure out that a "one man war on crime" is a loser strategy, for any man.

Which is why I think self destruction is such a big part of this movie. I probably don't have to point out the thematic narrative that Bruce is a mess at the start of the film, and that Bane breaks down every single part of Bruce. I think, in a weird way, that the Bruce Wayne of the first part of the movie, if asked to cart of the nuke in a plane so it explodes over the ocean, wouldn't WANT to survive the explosion. He has to hit rock bottom, which he does, before he can rise, and build himself back up.

I think this is what Alfred sees, and this is why he quits. He thinks Bruce is suicidal, and that, eventually, he'll do something that brings about his own demise. Alfred is trying to shake Bruce out of it, but bruce doesn't listen. However, in an odd way, old Alf is wrong too. Its the reason why Bruce and Selina makes so much sense: Alfred thinks its either get the girl or be Batman (which is why he brings up Rachel's letter) Selina represents an alternative: get the girl and be Batman. I could easily see Bruce settling into an Oracle role (like he does for Terry in Batman Beyond) and moving his troops all around the city. That is to say, I don't think Bruce's time being involved with Batman will end after this film. I think Nolan left the ending ambigious enough: If you wanted to believe Bruce passed on the cape and cowl, you could, if you wanted to believe he was recruiting a "Nightwing" and planned to return to continue his war, with Selina also at his side, you could do that too. I think the name Robin would lend us to suspect the second hypothesis. However, there are details that suggest the first.

As an aside, to anyone whose ever read Homer's Illiad, one of the most powerful things about the poem, for me, is the inherent logic in what Homer is doing. The word "Illiad" translates to "a poem about Illum", and Illum is Homer's name for the city of Troy. What's interesting to me, and what confuses the hell out of young students, is where Homer decides to stop the narrative. At the end of his poem, Troy is the same as it was when the poem started. The Greeks haven't made the Trojan Horse yet, the city hasn't been burned down yet. The war, at that point, is still a good year from being over. Yet, Homer chooses this line to end his poem about Troy with:

"And there the Trojans buried Hector, breaker of horses"

The last line of the Illiad is the burial of Hector. In Homer's mind, Troy and Hector are one and the same, the city and the man are linked. The death of one means the death of the other is inevitable, so the mechanics of how the inevitable actually occur don't interest Homer. When Hector dies, Troy's fate has been sealed. I would argue that in the mind's of many of the citizens of Gotham, Batman and Gotham are linked in the same way. Without its champion, Gotham will decscend into chaos and disorder. I think coupling of a man and his city is very strongly represented in Nolan's bat-verse, which is why I think that in a future film, Bruce will take up the cowl again, and he will save his city again. However, I think he's also figured out what Hector figured out: I can't take on the Greeks by myself. Despite his circumstances, Hector never gets down on himself, and his moment in book six with his wife and son is beyond touching. I think at the end of rises, Bruce realizes there is room for others in his life, a woman, and an apprentice. Its what Alfred really wanted, and I can see a whole new Batman in the next film: a Batman who fights crime with his allies, whose still a dick most of the time, but a Batman who realizes that life does have its moments.

Its the thing Bruce has never allowed himself. His parent's death consumes him, and he never has let himself enjoy the moment. Its part of what gives Batman his appeal, and its a function of his parent's murder: Bruce believes, deep down inside, that any happy moments will be taken from him, so he guards against having any. That ethic is why Dick Grayson is not the same Batman as Bruce, but, as a father figure for Damian, its why Dick is a much better Batman than Bruce. Dick went through very much the same tramatic experience that Bruce did, but he hasn't let it prevent him from having some joy in life. That's what I like about Nolan's ending, particularly as an ending for the Bruce Wayne/Batman dynamic, the idea that even Bruce Wayne would eventually stop and see where the path he's heading down leads, and muster the willpower to make a change.

Okay, good things and bad things, first the bad things:

-I don't think TDKR did anything truly "bad", but there were some things that could have been better. I liked Hathaway's take on Selina, and I Hardy did and an exellent job with Bane, but I would have liked to see Bane's motives fleshed out a little bit better.

-The opening airplane sequence. While it was a cool use of action filmmaking, I don't think it added a whole bunch to the overall film, in terms of plot. It was there to showcase Bane as a villian, which it did well, but it did but perhaps that screen time could have been used to fill in details in other places?

-I agree with the comments that editing seemed off a bit in places. Whatever awards this film wins, best film editing likely won't be one.

-I'm not a fan of plot devices, like a ticking bomb, to move along plot. It takes a movie's plot and boils it down to a cliche. I like films that don't talk down to me, and the whole saving the city from the fusion bomb was very cliche. This is probably my biggest problem with the film, and its pretty much the same issue I had with Batman Begins.


Okay positives:

-Acting was superb. I liked Tom Hardy's Bane, I found his performance very sound. However, as a villian, he wasn't as good as Heath Ledger's Joker (who is?) and, as a Villian, he isn't as good as Liam Nesson's Ra's Al Ghul. Third potato in a very strong race.

-Catwoman was one of the highlights of the film for me. I know I'm in the minority, but I didn't particularly care for Michelle Phiffer's Catwoman in Batman Returns, because I found it too over the top, Hathaway nailed Catwoman, the "gray" character, the one who you never know which side she's on, or what she's going to do in a given situation. Some would say that poor writing, to have a character change motivations so quickly, but that's what Selina's been in comics for decades: the x-factor, the person whose always on the same side, her own. Hathaway did a better job of conveying that than Phiffer did.

-I liked the new leg brace that Bruce got that helped him walk without a cane. That Brace seemed eerily reminisent of the nano-tech inspired, strength and speed enhancing, suit that Bruce Made in Batman Beyond.

-Nice to see a shout out to Robin. I had no problem that Blake could figure out Batman = Bruce Wayne. In the comics, a young 10 year old Tim Drake figures it out. I think that Blake is an ammalgamation of all the Robins (hence the name) and that he's a composite character.

-I also like all of the little details from the comics that Nolan incorporated. I saw details from a wide variety of stories (some of which I've mentioned) in the film, I saw a ton from No Man's Land and Cataclysm (in which Ra's released a plague in Gotham, and the federal government quarantines the city, nobody in or out. Sound familiar?) as well as Broken Bat (and the wall of Arkymn come tumbling down).

-I like the supporting characters. I like how Gotham is a city of both everyday heroes and everyday villians. How Bruce Wayne thinks he's alone, but he's really not in trying to find a way to save his city.

-I like that Batman finds a way to tell the most important people to him that he's alive at the end of the film (Blake, Gordon, Fox, and Alfred. They deserved to know) I find the notion of Batman "dying" at the end of the film to be very overrated. In comics, death is used primarily for shock value and to push sales, very rarely for story reasons. Maybe I'm jaded, but I don't particularly care for main characters dying at the end of a story. I don't see how that would have made this a better movie.

-I like that there was a point to this film, philosophically, but that the film wasn't heavy handed. Some critics have maintained that the film has a message it wants to get across but that the message collapes under its own weight. I never understood that. The last two matrix movies collapsed under their own weight. A good director has to know when he's crossed the line between having a point and getting preachy. You need to make your point fast and succintly. And if you can hit a bunch of them with precision, all the better. If you can also hide the more complex implications, even better. I felt that TDKR was a film with a message, and that the message was subordinate to the overall plot. Too many films make the mistake of being the other way around: they pick a message first, and then, construct a plot around it.

-something my friend said when we were leaving the theatre last night struck me. Now that I've seen TDKR, Amazing Spiderman looks like a piece of shit in comparison. TDKR is so much better, in just about every way, and is a superior technical acheivement. I enjoyed Amazing Spiderman, but could never shake that "cookie cutter" feeling when I was watching it. I could never shake the feeling that the execution of the film was subpar.

So, all in all a pretty great movie, up there with Avengers for the best I've seen this summer. 9.5/10 sounds about right.
Reply With Quote
  #572  
Old 07-26-2012, 05:46 AM

I just want to say how awesome Tom Hardy was in this film.

I showed my dad what Hardy actually looks like and he couldn't believe it was the same actor that played Bane.



Reply With Quote
  #573  
Old 07-26-2012, 11:55 AM
Absolutely fantastic review, Soda. I had a terrific time reading that and it really has me thinking about themes and allusions that I hadn't considered before. I particularly like what you say about Bruce's fate. I think if he had died, it would have been a bit cheap and for shock value and you'd have people complaining about that too. I think this is the best of both worlds, and the natural and believable end for this particularly version of Bruce Wayne.
Reply With Quote
  #574  
Old 07-26-2012, 12:19 PM
Soda - I love your comparison of Hector/Troy and Batman/Gotham - TDKR/"The Iliad".

Excellent analogy.
Reply With Quote
  #575  
Old 07-26-2012, 01:17 PM
I also enjoyed your review Soda, thanks. A question for you (or anyone) though:

Spoiler:
Did Blake know for sure that Bruce was alive in the end? I know he left him a "package" with instructions and directions to the Batcave but I thought it was just left as part of the will. Also... did Gordon know at the end that Bruce was alive? I may have totally missed that one as well...
Reply With Quote
  #576  
Old 07-26-2012, 01:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cop No. 633 View Post
Well, this looks like it's time to further explain the complaint about it not being fun. Post Master made a good point that fun is a very subjective term, and so did Shini, who has explained that the realistic take in and of itself is a fun concept to bring to the superhero genre in film. And I totally understand that point.

Spoiler:
For me, the movie wasn't fun because I basically found a lot of the story to be half-assed to a degree. I felt like Nolan barely skimmed the surface of the subjects he was trying to cover in TDKR. For example, the Robin subplot felt tedious even though JGL was solid. If Nolan really wanted to him to be Robin, he should have actually put him in the final act of the film. Instead, we get the equivalent of a striptease with no payoff. The final shot of the film did nothing for me. If Nolan was going to try to put Robin in the film, he should've had the balls to go all the way with the idea, and not just put his toe in the water like an amateur storyteller. It was Nolan trying to have his cake and eat it too after he'd said he never wanted to do a Robin storyline in his films. Well, he went and did it, but he did a pretty weak version. And he had the perfect moment to actually have Robin emerge after Batman disappears: after the explosions and Batman is in exile.

Which segues into another part that was skimmed: the post-disaster Gotham. What exactly was going on with Gotham in those 2 or 3 months after Bane blew up the stadium and bridges? I have no fucking clue because the movie never bothers to explore what happens. We follow the cops, Batman, John Blake, but not the city. That's something I found lacking that I enjoyed about the Dark Knight. Nolan actually made Gotham feel like a real city whereas in this, it's merely a backdrop. It just felt like it cut from Bane blowing up the bridges to Batman in the prison, and then we fast forward to the ending. It completely wastes the situation. And I mostly blame it on Nolan fumbling around with the first hour and a half of the film. He had all these espionage sub-stories happening that it hurt the rest of the film because he didn't have the time to smell the roses. I would've loved to have seen what happened to Gotham after the disaster, but instead it just becomes an excuse to have the battle between the cops and terrorists/inmates, which for me wasn't really all that exciting to watch.

When I was talking about the movie not being fun, it wasn't because it lacked one-liners, jokes, etc. I don't need that in a Batman film, but what I do want is proper attention to detail. I want to get lost in the story. That's fun to me. With TDKR, I was constantly aware of all the plot mechanics. There were scenes that were literally just to spoon feed information to either the audience or another character (basically all the Gordon scenes in the hospital where JGL runs in to tell him what's happening), or I noticed a common problem with Nolan: he has to always explain the theme of his film through a character. I kind of can't stand that. It was annoying when they did it in Batman Begins, it was annoying in the Dark Knight (when they're all talking about the theme of the movie over dinner in the restaurant), and it's still annoying when they have Alfred or Catwoman talk to Batman about what the movie's about. For me, it's clumsy writing. It's what you're not supposed to do, but Nolan is obsessed with doing that. Why? I have no idea. Maybe he thinks the audience won't get the message unless somebody explains it for us. I really wish he would stop it though. It's a terrible habit.

I couldn't care less whether or not Nolan deviated from the DC universe or changed characters to suit his story. You're supposed to do that as a filmmaker. The problem was that I found his choices to be prosaic. The film lacked depth because it kept insisting that it had depth. I felt as if the film kept hammering at me, "Look, I may be a film about a guy in a cape, but I have depth! Look, there are terrorists destroying a city! Doesn't that remind you of 9/11?!" And yes, it did, but at the same time, Nolan had nothing interesting to say about terrorism, or about what it's like to live in fear of people who are bent on destroying your society. I'm all for comics and adaptations to speak about the time we're living in, but please have something to say about it instead of just borrowing a situation like that for entertainment's sake. That's not smart filmmaking to me. It's as if all Nolan had to say was, "Terrorists are bad people." Again, that seems to be a problem I have with Nolan in that he spends too much time trying to construct a complex plot when deep down, there's not really a whole lot going on in the movie. When Bane goes to the stock market exchange to wreak havoc, it's actually really disappointing to see it was just to make Wayne stock plummet. You'd think somebody in the League would want to just make the whole market crash and still find a way to take control of Wayne Enterprises. But again, it felt so petty once you find out what that whole scenario was for.

The twists were also telegraphed, such as the Talia Al Ghul twist. It would have been more interesting if it came sooner than at the end. She was essentially a plot device disguised as a character. There was no real depth to her as a villain because most of the time she's playing a boring businesswoman named Miranda Tate, which harkens back to my complaint that Nolan half-assed a lot of stories and characters in this film. He gave us the weakest versions of Robin and Talia Al Ghul. Maybe because he thought Bane was so interesting that he didn't need to explore Talia, but I I found him to be a redundant character. Most of his scenes felt the same.

One more thing that bothers me, which again ties back to my assertion that Nolan didn't follow through on his ideas: the scene where Bane reads Gordon's letter to the public. Were we supposed to believe that everyone who saw that on TV actually believed Bane? What was supposed to be the dramatic impact of that moment? The man had a few scraps of paper. He had no real proof. I mean, we live in a time of internet rumors and hearsay, we're a savvy bunch now. Would everyone actually believe what Bane had to say at that point? He may as well have been reading Gordon's diary to a couple of students at lunch time. I found that moment to be really sloppy. It had no dramatic impact because in the end, that moment had no real effect on the rest of the story because Bane would've attacked the prison anyway. It changed nothing in the story. Levitt was mad at Gordon for a scene, but then it's all good. And it doesn't seem to bother other people (which goes back to my point about Nolan not focusing on Gotham at all -- we don't know how it affects people in the city). I just feel Nolan missed something crucial here. Imagine the scene where Bane's people are going after Gordon in the hospital. Now imagine, that instead of the badass "Gordon kills em" moment, what if his men were able to break in the room? Now, what if those men weren't there to kill Gordon but to capture him, and they do. Now the scene with Bane reading the note has more power because guess who's on his knees next to him... Gordon. And Gordon is the one guy who could confirm the letter for the whole city. And he does (let's say Bane threatens the life of a cop or something). And Gordon tells the truth. Nolan could've even upped the ante and had Bane kill Gordon right after his confession... or instead, he lets all the inmates kill Gordon out of revenge of the Dent Act. Now that's drama. That's how you milk a scene for all its worth. And that's why I didn't really enjoy the Dark Knight Rises. I'm glad you guys really dug it. I respect everybody who loves the movie, and you're not going to get any guff from me. I just simply didn't enjoy it and those are my reasons.

I could go on and on with my problems with the film, but I think you guys can get where I'm coming from. I really wanted to enjoy this film. I bought my tickets a week in advance to see it on IMAX. I was giddy that day... But alas, I simply couldn't enjoy it like I wish I had. I did enjoy certain things about the film like Catwoman. I thought Anne Hathaway did a bang-up job and I think they actually wrote her better than the other characters. She had a real personality whereas other characters like Matthew Modine's Captain were just so one note. Even Bane felt one note to me. I wasn't really impressed by what he did in the film or the performance. I also did really enjoy the fake trials held by the Scarecrow. That was something I felt was straight out of a Batman panel.
Spot on sir, spot on.
Reply With Quote
  #577  
Old 07-26-2012, 01:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gyro_44 View Post
I also enjoyed your review Soda, thanks. A question for you (or anyone) though:

Spoiler:
Did Blake know for sure that Bruce was alive in the end? I know he left him a "package" with instructions and directions to the Batcave but I thought it was just left as part of the will. Also... did Gordon know at the end that Bruce was alive? I may have totally missed that one as well...
Soda, your knowledge is unparalleled and yet, I did not enjoy it nearly as much as you did simply because I feel Nolan made us suspend our belief too much

In regards to Gordon
Spoiler:
At the end of the movie Gordon is walking by the Bat symbol / spotlight and realizes that it's fixed. He looks around completely in awe because he clearly didn't fix it and so Batman must have done it to send Gordon the message.
Reply With Quote
  #578  
Old 07-26-2012, 02:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post
Soda, your knowledge is unparalleled and yet, I did not enjoy it nearly as much as you did simply because I feel Nolan made us suspend our belief too much

In regards to Gordon
Spoiler:
At the end of the movie Gordon is walking by the Bat symbol / spotlight and realizes that it's fixed. He looks around completely in awe because he clearly didn't fix it and so Batman must have done it to send Gordon the message.
I think ..

Spoiler:
Only Alfred knew Bruce was alive. Everyone else thinks he died. I think it is possible Gordon found out when he saw the bat signal but i don think he did. We will never know for sure i guess.
Reply With Quote
  #579  
Old 07-26-2012, 02:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gyro_44 View Post
I also enjoyed your review Soda, thanks. A question for you (or anyone) though:

Spoiler:
Did Blake know for sure that Bruce was alive in the end? I know he left him a "package" with instructions and directions to the Batcave but I thought it was just left as part of the will. Also... did Gordon know at the end that Bruce was alive? I may have totally missed that one as well...
Spoiler:
I think Gordon knows because the Bat signal was fixed. Lucius will suspect because Bruce fixed the auto-pilot. I do not believe Blake knows.He received his bag in the will but no hint that Bruce survived.
Reply With Quote
  #580  
Old 07-26-2012, 03:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyNet View Post
Here is something interesting I just read and makes perfect sense about that ending:

Spoiler:
At the cafe:

People have a problem with Alfred finding Bruce Wayne at this Cafe, a one in a million chance.. BUT it is known that Bruce's mothers pearls have GPS on them... and at the end of the movie when they are going over Bruce's estate, they specifically say that the pearls are missing. Thus Alfred could have GPS'd the pearls and boom, found Bruce.. and yes it could be anywhere, but because of the story told by Alfred earlier, it was perfect to find him at the specific cafe.. that is making a movie, if people dont like those small liberties that are made to make a movie, they just wont like anything!


I really don't get how people find it so hard to believe Bruce would be there. Alfred said he went to that cafe EVERY YEAR......How hard is it to believe Bruce just wouldn't go there at the time I knew he would be there?

People think about things way too much or they don't listen to dialog in the film. Nothing about that scene bothered me, knew it was the same place he was talking about earlier.
Reply With Quote
  #581  
Old 07-26-2012, 03:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post
Soda, your knowledge is unparalleled and yet, I did not enjoy it nearly as much as you did simply because I feel Nolan made us suspend our belief too much

In regards to Gordon
Spoiler:
At the end of the movie Gordon is walking by the Bat symbol / spotlight and realizes that it's fixed. He looks around completely in awe because he clearly didn't fix it and so Batman must have done it to send Gordon the message.
Spoiler:
Hmmm, I guess that makes sense. I really liked that moment and found it quite poignant - when Gordon is moving his hand over the Bat signal. But I didn't even equate it with it being fixed and that it could have been a message to Gordon. That could be.

But what about Blake? I don't see how he knew Bruce was alive in the end...
Reply With Quote
  #582  
Old 07-26-2012, 04:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gyro_44 View Post
Spoiler:
Hmmm, I guess that makes sense. I really liked that moment and found it quite poignant - when Gordon is moving his hand over the Bat signal. But I didn't even equate it with it being fixed and that it could have been a message to Gordon. That could be.

But what about Blake? I don't see how he knew Bruce was alive in the end...
Spoiler:
Who else would have left him the GPS coordinates of the Batcave?
Reply With Quote
  #583  
Old 07-26-2012, 06:15 PM
Spoiler:
I interpreted the renewal of the Bat Symbol for Gordon at the end to be a hint that Bruce may continue on as Batman, or that there at least will be more crime-fighting on behalf of Bruce Wayne in some way, shape, or form. Why else would he fix the symbol? I think that Lucius would have to know once he found out the auto-pilot was fixed, and Blake would undoubtedly begin hunting for the truth and eventually I believe he could piece together Wane's whereabouts either through interrogating the others, or his own research.

Last edited by MisoGenie; 07-26-2012 at 07:57 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #584  
Old 07-26-2012, 06:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisoGenie View Post
Spoiler:
Gordon would undoubtedly begin hunting for the truth and eventually I believe he could piece together Wane's whereabouts either through interrogating the others, or his own research.
Spoiler:
WHERE IS HE!?!
Reply With Quote
  #585  
Old 07-26-2012, 07:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gyro_44 View Post
Spoiler:
Hmmm, I guess that makes sense. I really liked that moment and found it quite poignant - when Gordon is moving his hand over the Bat signal. But I didn't even equate it with it being fixed and that it could have been a message to Gordon. That could be.

But what about Blake? I don't see how he knew Bruce was alive in the end...
Spoiler:
Nothing leads me to believe that Blake knows Bruce is alive. It's entirely likely that Bruce had left Blake the bag with GPS, etc. in his will long before he died.
Reply With Quote
  #586  
Old 07-26-2012, 07:56 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
Spoiler:
WHERE IS HE!?!
Spoiler:
Oh, snap! You actually just made me realize that I put Gordon as in Joseph Gordon-Levitt, not as in the character Gordon. My bad! I'll correct that now!
Reply With Quote
  #587  
Old 07-26-2012, 08:55 PM
I haven't read your review yet soda, I will do soon. I'm just happy that you give it such a high rating

For the naysayers: sounds like you wanted a different film than the one Nolan envisioned as the finale. The point was not Gotham's people or the rise of an apprentice in action, but Bruce Wayne. He was at the center of it all and that's why it worked, for me anyway.

But can we ALL at least agree that the opening of the film is THE BEST introduction to a villain ever? It's so perfect, the dialogue, the music, the stunt work, Tom Hardy ... it's one of the most entertaining action sequences I've ever seen (and yes, I'm including MI:4 and Avengers which had some of the best action in recent memory). It trumps the bank robbery from TDK by a mile.

IT WAS SO GOOD. "Crassshhinng thiiis plaanne" ... love how he delivers that line.

UPDATE: Just read soda's review. Bang on sir. Gotham is Bruce Wayne, I felt like there were many parallels to indicate that (most notably how broken Batman was vs. the crippling of Gotham). One question for you though:

Spoiler:
What did you think of how Nolan handled Talia? If there is a weakness in this film, as I've mentioned before, it lies with the handling of her character.

Also, Bane's demise. Kind of came out of nowhere. I find that it fit the character perfectly because for all the shit he did and how powerful he thought himself to be, to be dismissed like that, almost off screen, by Catwoman and not Batman was the equivalent of spitting in his face. Having said that though, personally, because I was so impressed with Bane as a character in this movie, I was slightly disappointed that he just dies like that. What do you think?


Last edited by DaMovieMan; 07-26-2012 at 09:19 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #588  
Old 07-26-2012, 10:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkisFig View Post
Soda, your knowledge is unparalleled and yet, I did not enjoy it nearly as much as you did simply because I feel Nolan made us suspend our belief too much
I actually felt the movie was the opposite: I felt the movie tried to explain a bit too much (ie, didn't give enough credit to the audience for suspension of disbelief.)

Examples always help, so I'll use one. One of the things I'm seeing, over and over again on this thread, is the whole "how did Bruce get back from India?" question. Maybe that pit that Bane left Bruce in was in India, maybe it was someplace else, doesn't really matter. People are asking how Bruce got back, and how he got back inside a quarantined Gotham.

I, for one, am totally uninterested in seeing that tale on screen. My comic book store guy and I were talking about it today, and he made the comment, "so, what do you want, like a little plane flying over a map, like in Indiana Jones? He got back, he's the goddamn Batman, getting back is well within his abilities." Its something that, IMHO, doesn't need to be shown, and doesn't need to be explained. Part of suspension of disbelief is that you understand that the movie is not real, and that the director/writer/actors are trying to tell a story.

Some things advance the story, other things don't. And in a film where you do have time constraints, I'm more than willing to cut out the stuff that doesn't really advance the story. I'm fine with Bruce showing up in Gotham in the next scene, some time obviously passed (ie, he didn't get back overnight) but the script fudged the details as far as a timeline well enough that it can fit. Bruce climbing out of the pit in India and showing up in Gotham is one thing, it doesn't need to be explained. Bruce getting out of the pit and showing up on Oa is something completely different, that I would like to see some explanation of, because while he may be the goddamn Batman, I wasn't aware that traveling across half the universe was one of his powers (you never know...) One is plausible within the confines of the film, the other isn't, and, because this is comics, the one that's not plausible can be explained by Bruce simply saying "I found a motherbox.".

Like I said above, comic fans are very well accostomed to this way of thinking. In comics, you have 22 pages a month, and that's it. There are tons of cool stuff that ends up on the cutting room floor. If you've ever read some of the silver age work of Neal Adams, that man is a master of implying things off panel. John Brynnes may be even better. When that man was creating MOS and silver age x-men, so much of what happened in the story was heavily implied, but never shown on panel. I like reading comics like that, I like watching movies like that. You want to know what would have happened if Nolan had put Bruce's journey home on screen? People would go "hey, that's not what I wanted to see, what I wanted to see was purple, not blue." Leaving stuff like that to the imagination, and the intelligence of the viewer, is the preferrable way to go, IMHO. I understand the issues some people have, but a movie isn't meant to be a medium in which every thread is tied together at the end.

Its why I believe Bruce told the people he was closest to that he wasn't really dead. He survived because he patched the auto-pilot, which means he put the bat on auto-pilot and ejected well before the bomb went off. That's what Lucius realizes. He fixes the bat-signal that was destroyed in TDK as a way to tell Gordon that he's alive and well. I doubt Bruce Wayne planned his own death in advance (I think he believed he could stop the bomb from going off) so I'd have to think he sent the coordinates to Blake AFTER the bomb went off. That's how Blake knows. And, of course, poor old Alfred knows because Bruce did something extra special for him: he gave Alfred what he really wanted. Now, all of those scenes happen so quickly that to be able to deduce what's going on does take a bit of effort, but in the end, there's nothing that's a huge leap in logic.

Okay, regarding Bane and Talia, here's my take. I think Talia was the biggest surprise for me in this film because its so, so obvious that the apple doesn't fall very far from the tree. Talia conceals her identity to the end, just like Ra's did in Batman Begins (Henry Ducard = Miranda Tate, the daughter conceals her identity just as her father did) and just like Ra's, Talia is a twisted woman who believes completely in her father's ideals. Talia's motivation in the film is to destroy Batman and by extension Gotham as revenge for what Batman did to her father. Some people were confused by Talia sleeping with Bruce, here's what I say to that.

The key to understanding Talia is actually pretty simple. She geniunely loves Bruce. In the comics, she addresses Bruce as "beloved", and Bruce geniunely reciprocates that affection. These two people do love each other, the reason they never get together is because of him. Talia has only one allegiance higher than her allegiance to Bruce, and that's her allegiance to Ra's. She will not betray her father, no matter what. And, as long as Talia is loyal to Ra's, Bruce, no matter how he feels, will not go where Talia wants him to go. Ra's in the equation is a deal-breaker for Bruce. I felt that was portrayed beautifully in TDKR, Talia and Bruce sleep together, showing geniune affection, but, when push comes to shove, Talia stabs Bruce because of her loyalty to her father. That scene also shows that Talia has the mark of the league of shadows on her (that's what that scar is, I picked up on that immediately) and that's because she is the league's field commander. I didn't find this entire thing confusing at all, but then again, I'm used to Talia from the comics, so I know how the dynamic works.

I too found Bane's death to be a weakness in the film. However, that is par for the course for Superhero movies. Think back to all the really, really quick death scenes we've seen from the villain in these movies over the years. Think back to all the films where a villian is built up over the course of two hours, and then, offed in a manner of seconds. Again, the reason its par for the course is because of the limits of cinema. Every second spend expousing on a villian's death is a second taken away from something else. I would like to see more detail on the death of the main villian, but, I understand why the choice is made that way, so it didn't really bother me that much.
Reply With Quote
  #589  
Old 07-26-2012, 10:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveyJoeG View Post
Spoiler:
Who else would have left him the GPS coordinates of the Batcave?
Spoiler:
Well of course Bruce left him the coordinates and instructions. But in the film I don't think there's anything to suggest Blake knows Bruce Wayne is alive at the end. It seemed like Blake had picked up the package, and Bruce had written Blake into his will for this to be left to him. I don't think Blake knew Bruce was still alive.
Reply With Quote
  #590  
Old 07-26-2012, 10:40 PM
One of my favorite Bane lines from the movie:

"You think darkness is your ally. But you merely adopted the dark. I was born in it. Molded by it. I didn't see the light until I was already a man, and by then it was nothing to me but blinding."

Also, did anyone else like the way Bane said "league of shadows" during his first fight with Batman? He kind of hisses it like a snake, I thought it was so awesome.
Reply With Quote
  #591  
Old 07-26-2012, 10:45 PM
One thing I forgot to mention about my second viewing is that the revelation about Talia doesn't seem nearly as out of left field or underdeveloped as some claim. A lot of her early dialogue, especially during the party scene with Bruce, strongly hints at her villainy and the big reveal feels much more appropriate.
Reply With Quote
  #592  
Old 07-26-2012, 10:48 PM
Inside The Numbers - The Dark Knight Rises sits atop the Box Office for Sixth Straight Day - http://afterthecut.com/2012/07/26/ba...-straight-day/
Reply With Quote
  #593  
Old 07-26-2012, 10:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gyro_44 View Post
One of my favorite Bane lines from the movie:

"You think darkness is your ally. But you merely adopted the dark. I was born in it. Molded by it. I didn't see the light until I was already a man, and by then it was nothing to me but blinding."

Also, did anyone else like the way Bane said "league of shadows" during his first fight with Batman? He kind of hisses it like a snake, I thought it was so awesome.
Definitely one of the top Bane lines from the movie. His speach on hope is excellent too, I forget how it goes but you know the one I'm sure, feeling despair etc. But what I find is what makes these lines great is the delivery. Hardy has the ability to take the simplest line (ex: "Yes! The fire rises!") and turn the meaning into something much more powerful than it really ought to be. Plus the sound effects guys do a killer job for affect. There's a great intensity to it, I don't know. It's sick and one of my favorite things from the whole trilogy now.

soda: great thoughts on the Talia-Bruce dynamic in the movie. I think that with your vast knowledge of the stories from their origin, you were ready to absorb everything Nolan threw at you at first go. It definitely doesn't feel as jarring the second time around, but I still wish we had a few more scenes with her.

Now I'm off to watch Batman Begins
Reply With Quote
  #594  
Old 07-27-2012, 12:27 AM
I really like this piece from Forbes about John Blake. Spoilers, obviously. Read only if you've seen the film:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhugh...ises-spoilers/


This one from Time is also a good read. Again, spoilers.

http://entertainment.time.com/2012/0...w-bruce-wayne/

Last edited by SpikeDurden; 07-27-2012 at 12:40 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #595  
Old 07-27-2012, 01:52 AM
The more i think about it, the more i appreciate Bane as a villain, he dominates every scene he's in like the Joker did just in an entrirely different manner .

Of course part of the appeal of Ledger's Joker was the sadistic playfulness he exhibited and the ease at which he could go from gleeful silliness to chilling psychopath , it was quite the unsettling experience .

Bane was different, he was pure intimidation but Hardy played him in such a way that there was very subtle emotional layers on display, the performance is riveting, you simpy can't take your eyes off of him. Without the right actor this would have been a one dimensional performance .

I love the speech he makes in front of the prison, it was impassioned and you could feel the tide of public sentiment turning against good . ( That speech was also a clever way for the truth about Dent coming to light because it was haunting Gordon and he didn't have the courage to do it himself )


There's so much more though, his first reveal on the plane, his grand entrance at the stock exchange, all of it makes this version of Bane one of the best villains in a movie ever .


Just may have to see this again next week , will be the third time. I'm starting to appreciate the film more and more .
Reply With Quote
  #596  
Old 07-27-2012, 02:25 AM
I just got back from this one. Admittedly had really high expectations for it (as a co-worker said it was even BETTER than The Dark Knight) and of course I knew it wouldn't be. It wasn't, at least not in my opinion. This movie started off extremely slow for me, and I absolutely abhorred Hathaway as Catwoman. I cannot STAND the cunt and if you take her out completely, it's a far more enjoyable film.

Spoiler:
I also really LOVED seeing Cillian Murphy as "Judge Crane" mid-way through the film. I was like "fuck yeah!" - Very cool they put him in for a 3rd time.


Regardless I still liked it. It really picked up in the final 3rd of the flick, and it wrapped up Nolan's Trilogy very well. It most certainly was the weakest of the 3 movies though, however.

Last edited by jaw2929; 07-27-2012 at 03:04 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #597  
Old 07-27-2012, 05:06 AM
Just saw this in True IMAX, proper 6 story screen. This is why I love going to movies, because of films like this one. I don't mean to be rude to people with a differing opinion, but anyone not enjoying or at least appreciating this film needs their heads examined. Gripping from start to finish. When you come out of it and you are still thinking hours after, that's when you know you've seen a great film.

The ending was perfect. Mark Kermode's review hits the nail on the head.

Anne Hathaway just became that much hotter to me. Goddamn.

9/10
Reply With Quote
  #598  
Old 07-27-2012, 06:34 AM
Question: How long was Bruce gone in Batman Begins? I want to say 7 years, but I'm not 100% sure on that one.

Spoiler:
I just love the symmetry between Batman Begins and The Dark Knight Rises. Bruce is "dead" for 7 years (or however long it is) in BB and is a recluse for eight in TDKR, he loses his house, deals with somebody who is not who they seem and their henchmen (Scarecrow and Bane), even though Batman is trying to save Gotham - something Wayne Enterprises built is at the heart of the plots to destroy the city, and of course there's the obvious with the League of Shadows and the Al-Ghuls' involvement in both.


I'm looking forward to re-watching this, either Monday or Tuesday, to try and catch more similarities between the two.
Reply With Quote
  #599  
Old 07-27-2012, 07:52 AM
TDKR 9/10

Best movie of the year so far IMO.

Nolan did an excellent job ending this trilogy , it jus felt right. I loved the fact that it was a mix of BB and TDK and didn't try to top TDK frantic pace...it was perfect. Some of the things people are nitpicking about are so fucking stupid ..like how did Bruce get back to Gotham from India?...He is the fucking BATMAN!!! he can do far more difficult things and getting out from a country is probably the easiet thing to do so I don't see how this could be a problem ..Use your gat damn Brains FUCK!

I wish this wasn't Nolan's and Bale's las Batman movie...If this is ever reeboted I doubt I will even bother watching unless they try to top this Trilogy.

Thank you Mr. Nolan.

Last edited by CuatroDiablos; 07-27-2012 at 07:55 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #600  
Old 07-27-2012, 08:31 AM
Did anyone else notice, and enjoyed how Nolan made Bane and his mercenaries one step ahead of everyone in that third act? On more than one occasion when Gordon and Blake tried to get the cops out they would just fuck it all up. I thought that illustrated the gravity of the situation pretty well. It was this constant use of negating catharsis when you expect it. I just loved that, it was very noticeable to me and heightened the suspense; with mercenaries, at the pit and the climb, the convoy nuke hunting. Nolan played that up quite nicely.
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