oh nex, i thought u had something there
The Dark Knight Rises
-
-
I'll be seeing the movie for the first time with a dude at the front of the theater signing all the dialogue, it's gonna be slammin'
finally putting this free ticket to use
-
@The:
I'll be seeing the movie for the first time with a dude at the front of the theater signing all the dialogue, it's gonna be slammin'
finally putting this free ticket to use
-
@Nex:
Everyone needs to stop what they're doing and take 5 minutes to read this:
http://www.uproxx.com/gammasquad/2012/07/your-sarcastic-guide-to-alleged-plot-holes-in-the-dark-knight-rises/ It'll answer some questions (Why did Talia and Bruce sleep together?) as well as raise some that strangely haven't been asked ("Why didn't Bane kill all the cops?") as well as leave us with a very insightful ending, all in a rather unbiased fashion.
Seriously, it's a good read.
Hey that was pretty meh, if you want a better rebuttal to the criticisms why not try here?
http://www.batman-on-film.com/TDKRises_opinion_15-things-rebuttal_byJett_7-26-12.html
Zephos, Daz, and even you Lion-chan should give this a read.
-
Maybe I'm just not a polished film watcher (if there is such a thing) but I noticed a lot of the things people who don't like this movie are pointing out and i still managed to really enjoy it. It's not a perfect movie, but few are claiming that it is. I stopped trying to criticize these movies based on gaps of logic, after no one is suspicious that the return of a famous billionaire that was missing for seven years immediately precedes the appearance of a mysterious, masked vigilante in Batman Begins. This movie entertained me, like the others did, but it also provided a satisfying conclusion in my opinion. The fact that Batman can walk on thin ice or that some dude deduced his identity was not enough to take me out of this movie. However, I can see why people didn't like it and its fine that they didn't. Citizen Kane it ain't.
-
Hey that was pretty meh, if you want a better rebuttal to the criticisms why not try here?
http://www.batman-on-film.com/TDKRises_opinion_15-things-rebuttal_byJett_7-26-12.html
Zephos, Daz, and even you Lion-chan should give this a read.
I already have a problem with the first point.
"Even though it's supposed to be a realistic take on Batman, it's still a comic book movie so turn your brain off"
I'm sorry, that just doesn't work both ways. Are we supposed to take it seriously or not? The tonal inconsistency is the most annoying thing about the movie for me. That's not even getting to the main root of the issue. It's fine for fans to turn their brains off and just treat it like a comic book movie, just don't praise it as being a masterpiece of writing and then use excuses like "you're taking it too seriously" to justify it. Lazy writing is still lazy writing.
-
@Monkey:
i am probably not gonna like it but
i am very excited to see a guy pantomime out superhero dialogue
gonna be the bomb
-
Maybe I'm just not a polished film watcher (if there is such a thing) but I noticed a lot of the things people who don't like this movie are pointing out and i still managed to really enjoy it. It's not a perfect movie, but few are claiming that it is.
A guy got death threats lol, plus it has like an 89% on RT.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Hey that was pretty meh, if you want a better rebuttal to the criticisms why not try here?
http://www.batman-on-film.com/TDKRises_opinion_15-things-rebuttal_byJett_7-26-12.html
Zephos, Daz, and even you Lion-chan should give this a read.
Pretty much every point was "it's a comiccc book movviie!" lol
Nigga do I need to bring up Die Hard again.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Besides bad writing and lazy explanations are not part of being anything but bad.
-
@Monkey:
A guy got death threats lol, plus it has like an 89% on RT.
There is always that crazy minority. And all the tomato score means is that 89% thought it was good rather than bad. That could mean 5/5 or 3/5. I know you seemed to really dislike it, but can't you see why more people would say this movie was great or even decent, rather than horrible?
-
There is always that crazy minority. And all the tomato score means is that 89% thought it was good rather than bad. That could mean 5/5 or 3/5. I know you seemed to really dislike it, but can't you see why more people would say this movie was great or even decent, rather than horrible?
@RobbyBevard:
Avatar currently has 83% on Rotten Tomatoes.
Just pointing out like Robby said, high RT scores don't always mean it's a fantastic movie. I personally liked TDKR, but I can still acknowledge that it has flaws.
-
@Mr.:
Just pointing out like Robby said, high RT scores don't always mean it's a fantastic movie. I personally liked TDKR, but I can still acknowledge that it has flaws.
I'm pretty sure I basically just said that.
I was referring to critics' reception, not the quality of the movie itself.
-
There is always that crazy minority. And all the tomato score means is that 89% thought it was good rather than bad. That could mean 5/5 or 3/5. I know you seemed to really dislike it, but can't you see why more people would say this movie was great or even decent, rather than horrible?
Aside from the "MASTERPIECE" crowd, there's a lot of folks like you who keep talking like people who hated it are snobs who don't like just "cool chill action movies bro".
Wronnnnng. NNNNKK. -
@Monkey:
Aside from the "MASTERPIECE" crowd, there's a lot of folks like you who keep talking like people who hated it are snobs who don't like just "cool chill action movies bro".
Wronnnnng. NNNNKK.Sorry if I'm coming off that way. I guess I just think you are over analyzing it. I understand why you don't like it and I still managed to really enjoy it. It doesn't make me better than you. I don't really care about what anyone else thinks, that doesn't factor in when I'm watching movies. If I see it again and realize I can't enjoy it with all the plot holes you pointed out I will come crawling back.
-
Sorry if I'm coming off that way. I guess I just think you are over analyzing it.
I'm really not. If you think this is overanalysis you'd have a heart attack if I introduced you to some of the dumb "scholarly" bullshit out there.
-
@Monkey:
I'm really not. If you think this is overanalysis you'd have a heart attack if I introduced you to some of the dumb "scholarly" bullshit out there.
Yea.. I thought of that the second I posted it lol. I'm probably under analyzing. I see the plot holes and they don't take away my enjoyment of the movie. I will leave it at that.
-
@Thousand:
I already have a problem with the first point.
"Even though it's supposed to be a realistic take on Batman, it's still a comic book movie so turn your brain off"
I'm sorry, that just doesn't work both ways. Are we supposed to take it seriously or not? The tonal inconsistency is the most annoying thing about the movie for me. That's not even getting to the main root of the issue. It's fine for fans to turn their brains off and just treat it like a comic book movie, just don't praise it as being a masterpiece of writing and then use excuses like "you're taking it too seriously" to justify it. Lazy writing is still lazy writing.
Yeah I will agree here, but I think he did answer some general concerns about the film like the whole back breaking thing, yeah he replied with idiotic ''it's a comic book movie!'' but he did answer that he never got his back broken his vertebrae was messed up and that's that, which is more believable that he got healed that quickly with the doctor.
To be fair though, I never viewed Nolan's Batman as realistic in any shape or form. But I see your point
@Monkey:
A guy got death threats lol, plus it has like an 89% on RT.
No its actually like a 87% and who got death threats?
-
I'm pretty sure I basically just said that.
I was referring to critics' reception, not the quality of the movie itself.
Reread the post, now I understand what you meant. My bad.
-
Yeah I will agree here, but I think he did answer some general concerns about the film like the whole back breaking thing, yeah he replied with idiotic ''it's a comic book movie!'' but he did answer that he never got his back broken his vertebrae was messed up and that's that, which is more believable that he got healed that quickly with the doctor.
Except it doesn't explain why Bane didn't cut off Bruce's legs or something.
More importantly, he walks with a hobble for eight years yet completely recovers from a slipped vertebra after some rope and a lot of push ups? Yeah…
-
oh nex, i thought u had something there
I did. A very annoyed something. But I decided that it wasn't worth it to stir up trouble.
No its actually like a 87% and who got death threats?
The guy who wrote the first negative review and very earnestly compared it to Transformers.
-
No its actually like a 87%
-
Something about Bane's mask I didn't understand. How does it hold back the pain? Does it have some sort of pipe that travels down his mouth and esophagus? He wouldn't have been able to enunciate as clearly as he did unless it was a small pipe, but if that were the case, I don't think a whole mask would be necessary.
-
@Monkey:
lol, I wish the thread would end with this pic. Perfect thread finisher.
-
Added for relevancy
-
I think the movie was great, but flawed. The Dark Knight was a masterpiece of a movie. TDKR has some inconsistencies, but I still really enjoyed it overall. There wasn't enough to ruin the movie to me by a long shot.
There were several scenes and moments in the movie I feel were done perfectly. Batman's first fight with Bane, the football game, etc. were done to perfection. Bane was well played. I'm still not a big Ann Hathaway fan in general. She did okay in this movie though.
My biggest complaint is that I feel the beginning of this movie is not consistent with the end of the Dark Knight. In and of itself, TDKR is great and the opening is an interesting place to take Bruce Wayne. As a sequel to the Dark Knight though, it feels like there's something missing - a chapter that broke him mentally.
At the end of the Dark Knight, yes Rachel had died, but his response was to say "I've seen now what I have to become to stop men like him". He took the blame for Harvey's murders and said "You'll hunt me, set the dogs on me, because that's what needs to happen." and "I'm whatever Gotham needs me to be"….the implication was that he would go on fighting crime in Gotham, even as he was hunted, hated, an outcast. Everything the Joker said he would become...he would keep fighting, because he's not a hero, he's a silent guardian, a watchful protector, the Dark Knight. He doesn't need to be loved the same way as Harvey Dent, the White Knight. Moreover, Alfred burned Rachel's letter to give Bruce the hope to carry on as Batman, to "endure".
It just seemed inconsistent in the way both of those lies came crashing down in The Dark Knight Rises.
As for John Blake discovering Batman's identity, I have no problem with that. He should be smart, an expert detective, if he's going to take over as Gotham's next masked vigilante. A man like Sherlock Holmes for example could deduce Bruce's identity. Elementary, my dear Gordon.
Bruce's relationship with Miranda Tate seemed sudden - not the sex part, but the fact that he handed over his company to her.
I feel like all of this could be resolved if there were a prequel / sequel which filled in some missing information after the Dark Knight - perhaps Batman fighting a villain in the shadows, out of the public eye (thus no appearances since the night of Harvey's murders), while Bruce Wayne continues to be the spectacle he always was. It would establish some sort of relationship with Miranda that doesn't take off because of his lingering feelings for Rachel, and a villain like Riddler or Hugo Strange that could really get into his head and break him mentally to the state he was in at the beginning of TDKR, all outside the eye of the general public of Gotham. It would be a quieter, more subtle movie. They could balance this by having John Blake / (K)Nightwing fighting in the present against said big baddy.
I actually would like a sequel / prequel trilogy to Nolan's Batman series. I don't think TDKR is beyond saving, I think there are things that can be done to correct the two biggest problems (Miranda Tate's quick relationship with Bruce and the inconsistency in Bruce's mental state at the end of TDK and beginning of TDKR) could be explained through a missing chapter to at least establish Miranda as a long time member of Wayne Enterprises with whom Bruce had some sort of burgeoning relationship cut short before it really went anywhere. This would also explain Alfred's change of heart in regards to Batman's importance to Bruce and Gotham. At the end of TDK he was pretty much pro-Batman. We could see Wayne Manor's completion. I mean, why did Bruce even put in all the Batman gadgets in the new Wayne Manor if he was intending to hang up his cape at the time?
The other inconsistency seems to be his physical state. In Nolan's movie timeline, Bruce really was only Batman for a few months. He returned to Gotham, fought Falcone, Scarecrow, and Ras in Batman Begins, just starting out as a hero, with the intention of building an expanded Bat Cave in the restored Wayne Manor. The Dark Knight picks up right where Begins left off. We saw a Joker card at the end of BB, leading directly into Batman's fight with Joker in TDK. Wayne Manor is still destroyed and he's living in his penthouse apartment. The Joker incident lasts at most a few weeks...then that's it? He hangs up his cape and retires from being Batman? How did he sustain such injuries in a short amount of time? I feel like it's reasonable if he had spent more time taking on crime in Gotham. Within the context of TDKR it feels like he only was Batman for a really short period of time.
The only other flaw I feel.....is that this could have been two movies.
The first part could've been the fall of Gotham and the breaking of the bat, ending with Bruce climbing out of the pit....the final scene being bruce, recovered standing at the top of the pit, staring off into the horizon. It has a great Luke Skywalker vibe and gives more time to some of the events earlier int he movie. We needed a few scenes earlier on to establish Bane, establish why he had such control over his minions.
This would've allowed the climax of the movie more time....I feel like the action was well done, but the ending was rushed. Both Talia and Bane's exits were rushed as was Talia's betrayal. I would've also liked to see more of Gotham under Bane's control. He said he wanted to give them hope to make them truly desperate, but aside from the EXCELLENT court house scene, we really didn't get much sense at all of how the people of Gotham responded to Bane's rule. There just were empty streets with Bane's patrols rolling around. If you've read 20th Century Boys SPOILERS I would've liked to see something more like the intro / background of Tokyo in the year 3FE END SPOILERS I would also have liked to see Bruce using his street smarts / criminal experience to get himself back into Gotham. I mean he trained on ice with Ras, so I could see him slowly making his way across the frozen river. It would have been cool to see him using those skills offering more call backs to his Batman Begins training.
Nuclear bombs in movies are always as double edged sword. They up the ante to the nth degree. It's the biggest thing you can do, the stakes don't get any higher, and unfortunately Nolan's use of the bomb is too close to comic-booky. The initial set-up in the football stadium was excellent. The weakness? The timer. When he put the timer on the bomb, 5 months, that's where the real problem comes in. Bruce gets back to Gotham with 12 hours to spare, stops to make a flaming bat symbol to announce his return, and then saves the day with 2 minutes on the timer. It's just too cliche for Nolan. Bane and Talia are like a more sadistic take on Ras....playing with their food before they eat it in a sense. They want to give people hope, snatch it away, and make them truly desperate before the kill them in their misery and desperation. It's quite sadistic....but their plan doesn't do that. They give people hope...but never take it away. "Go about your lives under this new regime. You're in for the long haul. We came here, we conquered, and we'll blow the whole city to hell if anyone, external or internal tries anything. Taking me out will do nothing, because the detonation device is in an unknown citizen's hands." Brilliant. Now....they're basically imprisoned, they have hope, etc. But ... then they'll just be blown to hell in 5 months anyway. When do they become desperate? They die in an instant. They never feel desperate, and the entire League of Shadows goes down with them. Also, at least give Talia some sort of exit strategy.
How about, Bane's plan is to keep the bomb stable, give them hope...then start the countdown and make an announcement he's going to destroy the city when the countdown begins. Again 20th CENTURY BOYS SPOILERS Just like Friend's announcement 7 days before he decides to kill everyone on earth * END SPOILERS*, explaining that Gotham is going to pay for it's sins / crimes / depravity. THEN we would see them truly desperate, their hope stolen right out from under them. Say he starts the countdown when Batman returns, ahead of schedule. It would make Batmans' return seem much less like a "right in the nick of time, the hero saves the day" type ending. Throw an extra 10 minutes on the timer at the end so that the bomb can get far enough away from the city so that nuclear fall out won't kill everyone in Gotham.
I know this sounds critical, but don't get me wrong, I still thought it was a great movie. It had a lot of excellent scenes, and had the makings of a masterpiece, but it just had some things that brought it down. It was still a great movie to me, 8/10, but not the masterpiece that was The Dark Knight.
The other thing that just felt off to me was that the Joker was completely ignored. I know Nolan said he did it out of respect for Ledger, but I almost feel like it was the exact opposite. Ledger died, so his character was completely swept under the rug...they mention everything else and everyone BUT the Joker...I feel like if anything, it disrespected his legacy and the tremendous role he played in The Dark Knight. I'm not doubting Nolan's intentions, just the message that it really sent by completely leaving out any mention of his character in TDKR.
There was still a LOT that worked in the movie, a lot to love. I personally like The Dark Knight and Batman Begins better. The Dark Knight Rises had the makings of a masterpiece, but didn't quite make it to that point.
-
Just a quick thought:
Think people are right that Avengers and Dark Knight Rises had similar flaws. For example, Batman's sudden reappearance in the middle of Gotham City makes about as much sense as Banner puttering into the middle of a warzone on a scooter in the middle of a sweeping metropolis at the exact right moment. Or Batman recovering from a severe spinal injury by having some dude poke him with a stick makes about as much sense as Black Widow erasing a Norse God's magical brainwashing by smacking a friend in the face. Or Bane's overly-complicated plan makes about as much sense as Loki's overly-complicated plan relying on the entire team of heroes ending up in the exact right locations with pretty much pinpoint accuracy.
But this just makes me believe all the more that DKR's problem isn't in consistency or using comic-book logic, it's that the series adopted a tone that eventually becomes at odd with its source material. In a sense, Nolan's decision to make this a "real world in which a dude dresses as a bat and fights crime" just accentuated all the problems we'd normally let slide in a comic book film.
-
Batman's sudden reappearance in the middle of Gotham City makes about as much sense as Banner puttering into the middle of a warzone on a scooter in the middle of a sweeping metropolis at the exact right moment.
Banner was in the city already and the action and destruction was being contained within an 8 block radius that could be seen from miles around. When there's a giant pillar of energy shooting into the sky fromt he tallest tower in the city…. it's pretty easy to guess where you need to go. And there was a setup scene of him heading there.
He didn't have to get onto a blocked off island that no one was allowed in or out of.
Or Batman recovering from a severe spinal injury by having some dude poke him with a stick makes about as much sense as Black Widow erasing a Norse God's magical brainwashing by smacking a friend in the face.
Loki's control was tenuous at best. Even those he was controlling directly could disobey him a little and put kinks in plans. (Like a flaw in his superweapon.) And without direct contact the control was insuffiecient (as seen with Tony). Widow smacking Hawkeye didn't stop the mind control, but brought him back to his own self control.
Or Bane's overly-complicated plan makes about as much sense as Loki's overly-complicated plan relying on the entire team of heroes ending up in the exact right locations with pretty much pinpoint accuracy.
Loki's plan was "Let Hulk into the place with the weapons and go crazy." Not that complicated. He didn't need pinpoint accuracy or any of the other heroes. They were just there, and he messed with whoever was in the room with him and improvised on the spot. Thor in particualar whose buttons he knew how to push.
But this just makes me believe all the more that DKR's problem isn't in consistency or using comic-book logic, it's that the series adopted a tone that eventually becomes at odd with its source material. In a sense, Nolan's decision to make this a "real world in which a dude dresses as a bat and fights crime" just accentuated all the problems we'd normally let slide in a comic book film.
Well yeah. Tone is a huge part of it.
-
@Vongola_Boss_XI:
At the end of the Dark Knight, yes Rachel had died, but his response was to say "I've seen now what I have to become to stop men like him". He took the blame for Harvey's murders and said "You'll hunt me, set the dogs on me, because that's what needs to happen." and "I'm whatever Gotham needs me to be"….the implication was that he would go on fighting crime in Gotham, even as he was hunted, hated, an outcast. Everything the Joker said he would become...he would keep fighting, because he's not a hero, he's a silent guardian, a watchful protector, the Dark Knight. He doesn't need to be loved the same way as Harvey Dent, the White Knight. Moreover, Alfred burned Rachel's letter to give Bruce the hope to carry on as Batman, to "endure".
One time I made the argument with someone else about how Nolan's iteration of Batman was always planning to fight crime for a finite period of time, but this was prior to revisiting Begins and TDK - and while he was stating he wanted to retire, the way stories were headed did seem to be pushing him toward not being able to accomplish that dream, which would have felt more like a Batman story to me, because, what most folks tend to ignore is that Batman's story is ultimately tragic (how strongly that is emphasized depends on a particular writer), and I mean in a way more fundamental than the core tragedy that forms him. Superman comes from a tragic beginning as well - but his story isn't not inherently tragic. There's a futilty in Batman that is part of that liminality - he crosses the unusual border between hope and despair as well. I was rather encouraged when that theme showed up in TDKR, and then disappointed that it went nowhere.
I feel like all of this could be resolved if there were a prequel / sequel which filled in some missing information after the Dark Knight - perhaps Batman fighting a villain in the shadows, out of the public eye (thus no appearances since the night of Harvey's murders), while Bruce Wayne continues to be the spectacle he always was. It would establish some sort of relationship with Miranda that doesn't take off because of his lingering feelings for Rachel, and a villain like Riddler or Hugo Strange that could really get into his head and break him mentally to the state he was in at the beginning of TDKR, all outside the eye of the general public of Gotham. It would be a quieter, more subtle movie. They could balance this by having John Blake / (K)Nightwing fighting in the present against said big baddy.
Hugo Strange would have served the story better than Bane and Talia in my opinion, since had they continued immediately after Dark Knight ended with Bat's an outlaw and not retiring they could have him as a psychiatric consultant for the task force designated to hunt him down on Bat's psychological motives for doing what he does, maybe playing around the creepy idea of "he knows me better than he knows myself" angle. I mean you could have made Strange the guy who created Bane's mask or in fact the one who set's Bane against Batman. I mean so many story possibilities, yet they choose to step backward to the first film. I also really not a fan of the ending of this movie, in my mind this character can't really have a happy ending, a lukewarm and upbeat one sure but this?! I was expecting some form of callback to the first film when Bruce realizes Batman's place in Gotham and he must never give up until people are shaken out of their apathy. Realizing Batman is a symbol that is burdening but something he most endure to help Gotham restore itself back to the way it was. Really not liking that organized crime is fixed after only eight years, it's a really contrived, unrealistic premise with no real, convincing story payback, even more so disliking Gotham being cleaned up of its criminal element after an act named after Dent. Batman stories work best when Gotham is portrayed as corrupt, and riddled with problems obscuring that vital element is almost sacrilegious to the mythos in my view. It's also way too simplistic and kinda lame especially when your dealing with a more real world Gotham(like Zephos called Gothattan) I mean come on! Organized crime is wiped out completely? So much for the ''realistic Batman.''
Then again if Nolan had done Strange, I really feel it'd be accused as too much a retread of the Joker, because the only version of Strange that would work in this version of Batman is the one from ''Prey'' and that one is straight up insane and that had he been involved with Bane the complaints of FUCK YOU BANE IS NO HENCHMEN! would be worse than how it was handled in this film with Talia.
Oh well, hoping Strange will appear in the inevitable reboot in, and if anything he should appear as the main villain for the first second reboot film and not go with the traditional, recognizable villains from the Batman lore.
Seeing as the character has yet to appear in a cinematic Bat-film, I think next film should give him the silver-screen spotlight. -
I would kill to see a fourth movie with Maxy Zeus as the villain.
-
@Monkey:
I would kill to see a fourth movie with Maxy Zeus as the villain.
I think your joking…..
Dumb question....
Is it because he was originally a history teacher?
expecting an insult
-
I think your joking…..
Dumb question....
Is it because he was originally a history teacher?
expecting an insult
Tell me Nolan's SHUPER SHERIOUS GRIMDARK style trying to work around that character who has been out of place for decades even in the comic wouldn't be fucking hilarious.
-
@Monkey:
Tell me Nolan's SHUPER SHERIOUS GRIMDARK style trying to work around that character who has been out of place for decades even in the comic wouldn't be fucking hilarious.
trembles at the thought
Hey I still itching to see his take on Mad Hatter. -
Calender Man, son .
-
@cyan:
calender man, son .
No fuck you son nolan's take on kiteman would be awesome.
Kiteman is such a rich villain.
-
Woody Allen as Clock King.
-
No wait wait wait i found the best DC villain nolan could use
behold the majesty of
THE CALCULATOR
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
ffuck you useless-ass computer that won't let me save edits
THE CALCULATOR
!
-
ugh i was mislead by the website or something there was only open captioning, oh well
so this was okay?
i liked bane's voice and his hilarious accent– the alternative is him sounding deep and rugged, which is boring. his voice had personality, which he needed. like, the way he spoke was 100% of his personality. i really liked the mixing decision for him where his audio is at the forefront of the speakers. even if this wasn't an artistic decision, but one to make him audible, I think the idea behind doing it is good enough that i'd have prefered it no matter what.
After a strong entrance though he sort of fell off the map and it wasn't until I checked my watch to confirm it was 2:10 into the movie that I realized how cluttered the movie had gotten by the climax. too many characters, there wasn't really any cohesive theme tying it together although I swear the movie seemed to think it was going for something in its characters and the characterization. It felt like a movie about a cartoon city, not really a movie about batman.
i don't think any of these concepts about its plot were shitty, but i think it was really loose and hamfistedly handled. sorry guys, but stuff like bruce just apparating into gotham in, what, 18 hours after climbing out of Cursedgrumpastan wasn't "I turn off my brain and enjoy the movie", it was just kind of lazy.
I am 100% positive that the general ideas and setpieces were laid out and a lot of the narrative chocies were just made the way they were to glue all of these cocnepts together, because I legitimately did not feel any real cohesion between each of the movie's three or so acts. bane and talia working together i thought was ok, something about it didn't work for me, like I said bane kinda fell apart at the end and everything in the final scenes was kind of "uhhhh" to me
was it fun?
catwoman was fun. bruce had his moments in the first 1/3rd. i dunno. i will never see this movie again and i have no interest. it's not fun enough and when everything about it is hilarious unrealistic cartoon extraveganza, that's basically a bummer.
-
@Cyan:
No wait wait wait i found the best DC villain nolan could use
behold the majesty of
THE CALCULATOR
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
ffuck you useless-ass computer that won't let me save edits
THE CALCULATOR
! http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_UYYZ-fcvBNo/TVKY6o3ymtI/AAAAAAAAAlo/yxGr4fV4zzE/s1600/calculator.jpg
How could Nolan do this? He one of the most important villains in the Bat-mythos, his take on this villain would have been great.
Look how this character could have fitted into Nolan's uber seriuous, uber dark world semi-realistic world!
-
Bat-Mite could be a very dark and mysterious character that would work perfectly in Nolan's world!
And Bat-Dog!! -
See that's the fun of a goddamn action movie. Like if nothing else, the Neo-Tokyo situation Bane got Manhattan into was a cool challenge for Batman to break into. A sweet infiltration sequence. They set up a cool physical environment, a city on an island (Manhattan!) with it's bridges and tunnels blown out with people who will blow it up if they see you come. That's a tough break to deal with, so seeing how Batman would pull that off would be really cool. I mean it's been done before (Escape From New York) and similar things have been done (Akira) but I was kind of excited to see how they would handle it.
Then they didn't. They just as Holy said, apparated Bruce there.
It's not only lazy, not only stupid, it's a cheat on the premise of an action movie!! -
Yo this is the thread ender right hear
For the touting of this being the realistic Batman, this sure does have a lot of implausible events in this but however…...There is one real Batman and it's this fool
Look at that real world Batman, you truly are a fighter.
Okay thread end now. Lets close.
-
@Cyan:
No wait wait wait i found the best DC villain nolan could use
behold the majesty of
THE CALCULATOR
Calculator was actually fixed and modernized during Identity Crisis to be pretty awesome as a master strategist intel guy. And yes, even he mocked his old costume.
Identity Crisis also tried to fix a couple other villains, notably Dr. Light and Captain Boomerang… but mostly it just made it so Light's main characteristic was being a rapist... (which he never shuts up about now) and KILLING Captain Boomerang and giving the role to his son... who really hasn't managed to make it any cooler to be Captain Boomerang.
Of course, the universe has been Crisis rebooted 3 or 5 times since then, so who knows what the deal is now.
-
Damn it robby!
I guess this will be the thread ender!
-
Damn it robby!
I guess this will be the thread ender!
Kinda earlier for this thread to have an ender the move hasn't even been out 2 weeks.
By the way, have you seen it yet?
-
I came into this thread to say I enjoyed the movie and will probably not watch it again. Being able to drink in the movie theater was a treat and by the time Bale was loudly grunting "WHERE'S THE TRIGGER!!!!?!?!" with his jowels shaking… I was guffawing. Bane had a neat voice. Hathaway sold Catwoman better than I anticipated, yet I felt her role was somewhat shoehorned in.
I came in here to say that...
But instead I get spoilers for the Wire... a several year old show i've finally gotten around to watching (about halfway through season 3).
G'night AP.
-
-
This was a 1-time watch for me as well. Had a good enough time with the film, although it did feel unnecessarily long at times (especially during a lot of the police and fight scenes, which seemed to drag on and on in my mind). Hathaway made a much better Catwoman than I was expecting, whereas I found Alfred's falling-out with Bruce to be somewhat unconvincing and more like a hook to hang some drama on. Bale made a few great, unintentionally hilarious faces during some of the action sequences.
More than anything, I found myself wishing there was subtitling for the times Batman and Bane were talking on screen. I maybe understood about 70% of the gravelly dialogue while in the theater. Bane's voice fluctuated from dignified and understandable to an incomprehensible rumble.
Basically, there was nothing that jumped out at me to which I could say, "Wow, I really loved the part where ________!"
It was okay.
-
Can't have too much Batman Bomb Disposal in here. Can't we all agree this ending would have made the movie much, much better?
Also if he had to use Shark Repellent.
-
More than anything, I found myself wishing there was subtitling for the times Batman and Bane were talking on screen. I maybe understood about 70% of the gravelly dialogue while in the theater. Bane's voice fluctuated from dignified and understandable to an incomprehensible rumble.
It was okay.
ah. ok good. it wasn't just me. i thought i was missing some plot points or something because of this, but it really was just crammed together half assed.
also, did I just read "boomerang man" what is this. an episode of the tick?
-
Finally saw it. I have enjoyed myself and had fun. Worthy finale. In terms of concluding, Toy Story 3 and Return of the jedi are superior. Therefore, the Toy Story and Star Wars trilogy are better imho. Return of the Joker deserves more love.
Review
! Pros
- Great performance overrall.
- Anne Hattaway was really good and I just love strong female thief character in leather suit miam indeed.
- Cotiallard was miam but not as good. I sure am in love with the french femme fatale archetype. Her role (Bane was similar to Renard) was very reminiscent from Elektra King (the epitome of the femme fatale imho) from a James Bond.
- I was glad that unlike TDK the film was more focused on Bruce Wayne and it felt more like Batman Begins.
- I really liked when Batman returns from his retirement which was a very cool and effective entrance. I liked the shot when he was surrouned by the cops
- I kinda like the ending where the platform rises and Bruce survives… somehow. Very simple and effective.
! Cons
! - Too many characters. It kinda has the same problem of Spiderman 3 which was one hell of a mess in terms of characters and plot points to solve. Consequently, it kinda dissolves the tension to a lot of scenes- The climax was not that great because there are too many things going on at the same time and I lose track. Its pretty much the same problem that Plinkett complained in the phantom menace that there were too many action sequences happening which dissolved the tention. Here its even worse because it was like that during the whole cause everyone was running. Its not like the end of Jurassic Park where they had to turn the power back on in which every characters had a different and complementary tasks to do ( Hammond and Malcom giving instructions on how to get the power back to Ellie, Muldoon acting as bait to the raptors).
- Bane did not live to up to all the hype he had during the trailers. His death was so anticlimatic which contradicted all his hype. I was expected to go.
- The twist with Miranda would have worked better if it was revealed in the middle of the film.
- The rise was rather unimpressive cause I was expecting more than a jump.
- I did not like Blake's character, I thought he was rather bland and uninteresting.
- There were not enough Caine and Oldman imho. I felt Alfred did his whining in order to get rid of one character to make things less messy. It kinda remined me of Harry being amnesic in order to take him out of the film.
! Overrall, I still liked the film and I would give the film a 3/4 stars Ebert style (good conclusion) however I loved all the glamourous appeal and therefore my "other brain" is telling me to give half a star more.