Am I the only one that feels like TDKR prevents Nolan's trilogy from being perfect?

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by The Joker

I used to feel the way you do about the lack of a Joker reference, Shadowboxer. But given it wasn't done out of sloppy writing where the script just clean neglected to mention him, and it was a conscious decision by Nolan out of respect for Ledger's memory, I am fine with it.

If anything else the legacy of his actions ripple through the movie. We know who destroyed Harvey. We know who killed Rachel. We know who's responsible for Bruce's mental state.

This too.

Lack of a Gotham POV is more of an issue than the Joker not being mentioned.

[MagnarTheGreat]

Foley isn't called Deputy Commissioner in the dialogue in the film, but it's pretty obvious he's the next highest ranking official to Gordon from his role in the movie.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by JackWhite

This too.

Lack of a Gotham POV is more of an issue than the Joker not being mentioned.

The pressence of Gotham and the people of Gotham was sorely missed in this movie.

[ShadowBoxer]

Originally Posted by JackWhite

This too.

Lack of a Gotham POV is more of an issue than the Joker not being mentioned.

I agree , another missing element to the movie was the Gotham city citizens pov.

[jmc]

Originally Posted by comics

I agree. I'd add that him hating Batman is what Gotham became after Dent's death. He's the Gotham POV that many here claim is lacking in TDKR.

That's an argument I've never bought. Foley's only interest is in himself throughout the entire movie, and besides he's a high ranking cop, he doesn't have the perspective of the regular people.

[AnneFan]

Originally Posted by jmc

That's an argument I've never bought. Foley's only interest is in himself throughout the entire movie, and besides he's a high ranking cop, he doesn't have the perspective of the regular people.

Agreed.

"I'm going to do what Jim Gordon couldn't".

Foley wants the glory.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by JackWhite

Had the film took place just a year or two after TDK, then yeah, I would have excepted some mention of the Joker. But considering it was 8 years, the only previous character who really demanded mentioning was Dent, because of the whole lie.

I'm still surprised at how many people still cry a foul for Joker not being mentioned.

And they cry foul even when told that it was Nolan's decision to not even mention the name of Joker or give any reference to him because of Ledger's death, which, imo, should be very understandable.

Originally Posted by JackWhite

Lack of a Gotham POV is more of an issue than the Joker not being mentioned.

While it is very arguable that there isn't a Gotham POV, I feel that we had enough(which still wasn't really enough) that was necessary while trying to focus more on Bruce Wayne and tying up his story which is the main reason why Nolan even returned for a third film, to finish up Bruce's arc. We had some viewpoints from the main characters, the minor characters and even some others such as regular patrol officers, the priest and that one orphan. We had, imo, little reception of Batman's return and that, I feel, was fine. But when it comes to Dent's reveal? That's where I felt Gotham's POV was lacking the most.

Originally Posted by MagnarTheGreat

Foley isn't called Deputy Commissioner in the dialogue in the film, but it's pretty obvious he's the next highest ranking official to Gordon from his role in the movie.

He isn't called Deputy Commissioner at all? Even if Foley is in a high-ranking position, if the title 'Deputy Commissioner' isn't even used than that's one complaint I don't have anymore as I never understood why that position is even given. I can just view Foley as a detective working under Gordon as we saw with Stephens, Ramirez and Wuertz in TDK.

[jmc]

Originally Posted by AnneFan

Agreed.

"I'm going to do what Jim Gordon couldn't".

Foley wants the glory.

Absolutely.

[MagnarTheGreat]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

He isn't called Deputy Commissioner at all? Even if Foley is in a high-ranking position, if the title 'Deputy Commissioner' isn't even used than that's one complaint I don't have anymore as I never understood why that position is even given. I can just view Foley as a detective working under Gordon as we saw with Stephens, Ramirez and Wuertz in TDK.

It's not in the dialogue in the movie. It's in the old script and the virals. He's not some random detective, he is shown to have all of the same authority as Gordon, particularly when Gordon goes underground and is later hospitalized. My takeaway is not the same as those guys in TDK at all.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by MagnarTheGreat

It's not in the dialogue in the movie. It's in the old script and the virals. He's not some random detective, he is shown to have all of the same authority as Gordon, particularly after Gordon is hospitalized. My takeaway is not the same as those guys in TDK at all.

Stephens had fairly a great amount of power though once Gordon was believed to be dead, even ordering to turn the Bat signal on and to turn it off which I always thought was Gordon's shtick to do and only his.

Since I was never into the virals though and if it's not in any dialogue on film, I will just picture Foley being a high ranking detective that worked closely with Gordon who would have just taken Gordon's place as Commissioner if he is ever fired or quit. Much better to think of as this way when I hate the title 'Deputy Commissioner' which wasn't even a position in BB or TDK. Gordon becomes Commissioner after Loeb dies, so obviously there wasn't such a position as DC in that film.

[Eros]

Originally Posted by JackWhite

This too.

Lack of a Gotham POV is more of an issue than the Joker not being mentioned.

Non mentioning a character because the actor died is silly, the best way to honor a man is to keep his memory alive, not act like he never existed. Playing the joker was ledgers finest work as an actor, besides his daughter was his legacy.Good people die everyday, hell every second, but you cant just let their work die with them. I respect his decision, but he missed an opportunity.

[BlueLightning]

His work didn't die, it was done in TDK. In any case, bringing the Joker on this film would'nt feel right. It isn't designed that way, he is just a character too big. The isn't needed for the story to tell. Besides, as Joker said, the effects of his actions are felt on the film.

[Doc Samson]

Honestly, the way Nolan's handled the Joker sort of elevates it to that ghostly, force of nature character he wanted. No (official) behind the scenes material on Ledger and his preparation, no relevant backstory or knowledge of where he came from in TDK, and no information on where he's at in TDKR. He came, caused destruction, and literally disappeared. Make no mistake though, almost every important plot element in TDKR has his DNA written all over it.

[The Guard]

See, I heard some stuff about a Foley character being in No Man's Land but hadn't thought much of it.

What did Foley do in NML?

He gets obsessed with maintaining order and goes a bit nutso. Gets a bit too willing to go outside the law, ultimately gets a bit trigger-happy/militant.

The scene from THE DARK KNIGHT where the hostages are dressed like clowns? That happens in NO MAN'S LAND, and Foley shoots several of them before he can be brought down.

[TheGuy]

Originally Posted by jmc

That's an argument I've never bought. Foley's only interest is in himself throughout the entire movie, and besides he's a high ranking cop, he doesn't have the perspective of the regular people.

It's not his interest though, but his character that matters and what he presents to the film.(he does present something) During the first chase scene, Foley talks about his hate for Batman to Blake showing us a perspective of Gotham. His douchey demeanor, as Happy Jack stated is indicative of the police's complacency as a result of 8 years of clean streets. This is backed up by the mayor ignoring the media questioning him about the cops going underground.

Foley: "Who do you wanna catch? Some robber or this son of a b**** who killed Harvey Dent?"

Gordon: "I want him found"
Foley: "Yeah, the masked man"

Mayor: "It's just a training exercise"

I could go on. Nolan gave us few regular joes because they never mattered. The characters of the movie represented something of Gotham.

[jmc]

Originally Posted by comics

It's not his interest though, but his character that matters and what he presents to the film.(he does present something) During the first chase scene, Foley talks about his hate for Batman to Blake showing us a perspective of Gotham. His douchey demeanor, as Happy Jack stated is indicative of the police's complacency as a result of 8 years of clean streets. This is backed up by the mayor ignoring the media questioning him about the cops going underground.

Foley: "Who do you wanna catch? Some robber or this son of a b**** who killed Harvey Dent?"

Gordon: "I want him found"
Foley: "Yeah, the masked man"

Mayor: "It's just a training exercise"

I could go on. Nolan gave us few regular joes because they never mattered. The characters of the movie represented something of Gotham.

They should have mattered, the one film where their perspective was required is the one film without it. Foley doesn't represent anyone other than himself, he's a selfish coward looking to make a name for himself.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by Eros

Non mentioning a character because the actor died is silly, the best way to honor a man is to keep his memory alive, not act like he never existed. Playing the joker was ledgers finest work as an actor, besides his daughter was his legacy.Good people die everyday, hell every second, but you cant just let their work die with them. I respect his decision, but he missed an opportunity.

The memory of Ledger's Joker is alive...in The Dark Knight.

How else could they continue with Ledger's joker in TDKR? Any line or reference of Joker would only feel like a throwaway line to just keep him mentioned in Nolan's Batuniverse and that would only bring down this epic legacy of Ledger's Joker, imo. Best to keep the legacy alive only in the film Heath Ledger is actually in. And plus, the audience still at least is aware of Joker's doing and what he has done to Bruce Wayne in TDKR.

Originally Posted by The Guard

He gets obsessed with maintaining order and goes a bit nutso. Gets a bit too willing to go outside the law, ultimately gets a bit trigger-happy/militant.

The scene from THE DARK KNIGHT where the hostages are dressed like clowns? That happens in NO MAN'S LAND, and Foley shoots several of them before he can be brought down.

Hrm...yah, I couldn't see them doing that to Foley in TDKR, lol.

[BlueLightning]

Originally Posted by jmc

They should have mattered, the one film where their perspective was required is the one film without it. Foley doesn't represent anyone other than himself, he's a selfish coward looking to make a name for himself.

I think this is because the different focus of the film. While The Dark Knight is an external exploration of Bruce Wayne and the consequences of his actions as Batman, Rises returns to the internal exploration that was present in Begins. The problem was that there was just too much story, and unlike in Begins, the point of view of the people is lacking. On the other hand, it serves a purpose in the film. The absence of people on the streets, the lack of a voice manage to convey that plausible fear that people in that kind of situation can have.

[Fudgie]

Originally Posted by JackWhite

This too.

Lack of a Gotham POV is more of an issue than the Joker not being mentioned.

Originally Posted by Ryan

The pressence of Gotham and the people of Gotham was sorely missed in this movie.

Originally Posted by ShadowBoxer

I agree , another missing element to the movie was the Gotham city citizens pov.

Co-signed gents.

Originally Posted by The Guard

He gets obsessed with maintaining order and goes a bit nutso. Gets a bit too willing to go outside the law, ultimately gets a bit trigger-happy/militant.

The scene from THE DARK KNIGHT where the hostages are dressed like clowns? That happens in NO MAN'S LAND, and Foley shoots several of them before he can be brought down.

That would have been so much more interesting than the annoying douche Foley Modine played.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by The Guard

He gets obsessed with maintaining order and goes a bit nutso. Gets a bit too willing to go outside the law, ultimately gets a bit trigger-happy/militant.

Sounds interesting. I would have much preferred they would have taken this route with the Dark Knight himself. Having him mope around for an 8 year hiatus is so blah. Since Nolan had taken elements from The Dark Knight Returns, I wish he would have examined what made that book so popular in the first place. It would have been great to have seen Batman, 8 years older, maybe more broken down, but more determined, more bitter and paranoid. That kind of Batman is something that I could truly see Bruce having to escape and get out before it became all too consuming.

[Slushy]

Had the movie ended after the first Batman Vs. Bane fight, that would've been perfect.

[JackWhite]

After Foley's initial reaction to the bat symbol on the bridge, we could have easily got another 2-3 quick cuts of random Gothamites either in their homes or out in the streets looking up to it in disbelief while also feeling inspired. Really surprised we just got Foley's reaction.

Another one is when Gordon is on trial at the Kangaroo court. We should have had more Gothamites yelling at Gordon in disgust over the Dent cover up, also throwing things at him would have really added to the tension.

Just those two things add a lot to the weight of those scenes.

[Brain Damage]

Originally Posted by JackWhite

After Foley's initial reaction to the bat symbol on the bridge, we could have easily got another 2-3 quick cuts of random Gothamites either in their homes or out in the streets looking up to it in disbelief while also feeling inspired. Really surprised we just got Foley's reaction.

Another one is when Gordon is on trial at the Kangaroo court. We should have had more Gothamites yelling at Gordon in disgust over the Dent cover up, also throwing things at him would have really added to the tension.

Just those two things add a lot to the weight of those scenes.

I was honestly expecting a few cuts to other Gothamites when Foley's wife called him to the window and was surprised when we didn't get any.

I hadn't thought about the spectators at Gordon's trial, but you bring up a good point, that would have made the scene more powerful. On that note, I'm disappointed the Dent cover up isn't brought up again after Blake reprimands Gordon for it. I know that that conversation is one of the things that leads to Blake abandoning the shackles of the rules, but I wanted to see more of a resolution with Gordon's arc about the cover up.

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by Brain Damage

I was honestly expecting a few cuts to other Gothamites when Foley's wife called him to the window and was surprised when we didn't get any.

I hadn't thought about the spectators at Gordon's trial, but you bring up a good point, that would have made the scene more powerful. On that note, I'm disappointed the Dent cover up isn't brought up again after Blake reprimands Gordon for it. I know that that conversation is one of the things that leads to Blake abandoning the shackles of the rules, but I wanted to see more of a resolution with Gordon's arc about the cover up.

It's not like they don't tackle these things, but after TDK, I expected at least half of that in TDKR. Gordon does have to answer to the people for his involvement in the lie, but it's dealt with way too fast. When he was arrested by Barsad on the streets, I remember thinking "Oh no, there is no more running away from it now."

[TheBat812]

The only reason to show Gotham citizens more is the expectations set up by the first two films. On its own, TDKR did not need more citizen shots, there already are some weaved in there when needed, and never once was I wondering 'gee, I wonder how the people feel about this.' The answer was always conveyed in another, and frankly better, way.