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

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by Blackheart

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

Ending at a hour and eighteen minutes...would that have made it the shortest CBM?

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by Ryan

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.

To do what exactly during those eight years though?

Did 'we won' mean nothing to you?

[The Joker]

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.

Exactly

[Anno_Domini]

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.

Sorry if I'm posting three in a row, but I can never quote multiple posts on my phone, but anyways...

these two would have been nice, except for there would be, really, no reason for Gotham civilians to see that burning logo because it is just the police in that war against Bane's army. What you bring up would only have been great if Batman's army had more people than just the cops, imo.

But the second one? I would have really liked it if we saw people throwing cabbage or rotten foods at Gordon while he was on trial. Even if it's been five months since Dent's reveal, it would've been pretty awesome to see. I thought the Blake/Gordon conversation was fine and it wouldn't add up with anything going on afterwards since Gordon was really in hiding with the other remaining cops, but once he was put on trial, the crowds should've let him have it.

[Ryan]

Love it

The Honest Trailer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQJuGeqdbn4


Its up there with Kevin's smith plot holes podcast.

[Anno_Domini]

which most definitely peaked with the Joker. Ugh I miss Heath Ledger.

Yah, I didn't care to watch after reading this.

Didn't know Nolan created a trilogy for Joker.

[Ryan]

Great trailer, even if your fan of the movie..have to have a laugh over it

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by Blackheart

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

I will agree that most of my problems with the film happened after that point...for the most part.

[Deserana]

The honest trailer is hilarious but if jeez I really hate how people are just putting down Batman's 8 years purely to Rachel.

I do think that TDKR is the weakest now but still amazing the other two are far more air tight and this has some very un-Nolany moments. The honest trailer just points some out. I can't believe the same guy who wrote some of the most detailed and air-tight films such as The Prestige, TDK, Inception and Memento also wrote this. I love it and it's a solid 9/10 and better than anything else I've seen this year but I do think there are some very "off" moments with this film. I almost get the vibe that the Nolan's didn't go back and watch the other two before they did this.

I think my only MAJOR issue with this film is Gotham. I can live with 10 minutes of Batman, a huge scale film but this city needed to feel like a city. With BB and TDK that was brought across IMO perfectly but here.... nah. I mean a big gripe I have is that after 8 years this big character in Gotham's life has returned and we never once see how Gotham reacts to this. Then when he is gone and Bane reveals to the city that he was the hero not once do we ever see the city want him back. As far as we know only Gordon, Blake and Selina know Bruce has gone. So you're telling me not ONE cop goes "Gee schucks mister Gordon we could really do with a Batman about now" or "Hey where has that Batman gone that was here a few days ago". Yes we have the statue at the end but we never see the city accept Batman back. Gotham is the issue in this film. The bat-symbol scene should have been THEE scene where the audience goes "YEAH, here he is to save the city" but instead to me it is just "Oh look Batman is back".

[Llama_Shepherd]

Nolan tried to put too much into the film and then paid the price when he had to cut portions out to satisfy the 2:50 runtime of IMAX reels. With luck, there may someday be an extended edition.

[The Guard]

And makes you ask questions like: (Goes on for three minutes)

Comedy gold.

Sigh...

[The Eradicator]

I'm still hoping that one day we get to see that original 400 page draft that Jonathan Nolan wrote.

In the interview contained in The Dark Knight Trilogy script book, I do remember reading that Jonah had taken this story to some place really extreme, and that Chris Nolan had to scale it back down from that. I really wonder what it was.

[Raiden]

I'm also disappointed with TDKR, from the fact that Batman is more like a supporting character in this movie, to Talia Winter's flawed plan (and even worse contingency plan; c'mon, she really thinks she can just escape with the bomb?), and Bane being neutered toward the end of the movie, etc etc. It really ended the trilogy on a really unsatisfying conclusion, and Blake is just not interesting enough for me to be the successor of the whole Batman mytho.

[MAKAVELI25]

Originally Posted by Deserana

I think my only MAJOR issue with this film is Gotham. I can live with 10 minutes of Batman, a huge scale film but this city needed to feel like a city. With BB and TDK that was brought across IMO perfectly but here.... nah. I mean a big gripe I have is that after 8 years this big character in Gotham's life has returned and we never once see how Gotham reacts to this. Then when he is gone and Bane reveals to the city that he was the hero not once do we ever see the city want him back. As far as we know only Gordon, Blake and Selina know Bruce has gone. So you're telling me not ONE cop goes "Gee schucks mister Gordon we could really do with a Batman about now" or "Hey where has that Batman gone that was here a few days ago". Yes we have the statue at the end but we never see the city accept Batman back. Gotham is the issue in this film. The bat-symbol scene should have been THEE scene where the audience goes "YEAH, here he is to save the city" but instead to me it is just "Oh look Batman is back".

The above is very true. There are a lot of minor elements I hate, (8 year exile, Bane being a henchman, Bane/Talia's stupid plot, Blake, Foley, Selena's lack of screentime) but the biggest weakness with the film is that Gotham doesn't feel like a real city. There doesn't seem to be much at stake in the end because TDKR fails where TDK succeeds so marvelously, making us care about characters beyond the main cast. If the nuclear bomb had blown up I wouldn't have cared because I did not care about Gotham as a city. BB and TDK somehow managed to make us care about Gotham's inhabitants, the minor citizens. I can still remember how much tension I felt during that ferry scene with the Joker, and yet I felt nothing when I thought Bane was going to blow up the whole city.

[TheBat812]

Originally Posted by MAKAVELI25

The above is very true. There are a lot of minor elements I hate, (8 year exile, Bane being a henchman, Bane/Talia's stupid plot, Blake, Foley, Selena's lack of screentime) but the biggest weakness with the film is that Gotham doesn't feel like a real city. There doesn't seem to be much at stake in the end because TDKR fails where TDK succeeds so marvelously, making us care about characters beyond the main cast. If the nuclear bomb had blown up I wouldn't have cared because I did not care about Gotham as a city. BB and TDK somehow managed to make us care about Gotham's inhabitants, the minor citizens. I can still remember how much tension I felt during that ferry scene with the Joker, and yet I felt nothing when I thought Bane was going to blow up the whole city.

There was a reason for showing the people in TDK. They were directly involved with the boat situation. In this movie, they're all hiding in their houses. No reason to show them, and we get an idea of what a situation is like for a normal family with the Foley family. The tension for the city came not from the people of Gotham, but from whether or not Bruce will fail in his mission to save it.

[Hamill-Joker]

Got the movie on blu-ray today and watched it. While I think that I like The Dark Knight a lot, I enjoyed TDKR more. It may be my favorite of the series.

I just don't buy a lot of criticisms about the movie. I feel like it because of my main interest in history, if I started picking apart a movie like Casablanca because of the historical inconsistencies or the fact that the Germans wouldn't let someone like Victor Lazlow to walk around free in Casablanca. That also doesn't even go over the macguffin of the letters of transit that never ever get used in any meaningful way.

[ShadowBoxer]

Originally Posted by Ryan

Love it

The Honest Trailer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQJuGeqdbn4


Its up there with Kevin's smith plot holes podcast.

Not only is that trailer funny as hell, it also brings up some valid points. Rises is good but there are some issues the keep it from being a perfect ending to the trilogy as this trailer hilariously points out.

[Hamill-Joker]

How did Superman and Lois get back to civilization after he lost his powers in Superman 2?

[MAKAVELI25]

Originally Posted by TheBat812

There was a reason for showing the people in TDK. They were directly involved with the boat situation. In this movie, they're all hiding in their houses. No reason to show them, and we get an idea of what a situation is like for a normal family with the Foley family. The tension for the city came not from the people of Gotham, but from whether or not Bruce will fail in his mission to save it.

This movie needed more viewpoints from Gotham's inhabitants than the Joker's did. Bane and Talia's whole plan is predicated upon torturing the people of Gotham and yet we don't get to see their reactions to any of what occurs. A major theme is also the idea of Batman finally becoming the symbol he was supposed to be for the people, yet the only ones in the whole movie shown to be truly inspired by him are Blake, Foley (a borderline annoying character who barely matters), and the random orphan kid (essentially a cameo). I would argue that this movie required MORE of the presence of Gotham's regular citizens than TDK did

[Anita18]

Originally Posted by Raiden

I'm also disappointed with TDKR, from the fact that Batman is more like a supporting character in this movie, to Talia Winter's flawed plan (and even worse contingency plan; c'mon, she really thinks she can just escape with the bomb?), and Bane being neutered toward the end of the movie, etc etc. It really ended the trilogy on a really unsatisfying conclusion, and Blake is just not interesting enough for me to be the successor of the whole Batman mytho.

Maybe that was the point. Bruce is too emotionally caught up in Batman. As Ra's said, "With all your resources, all your strength, all your moral authority, and all you could achieve was a lie?"

Sometimes the most boring stuff is the most productive.

[Anita18]

Originally Posted by MAKAVELI25

This movie needed more viewpoints from Gotham's inhabitants than the Joker's did. Bane and Talia's whole plan is predicated upon torturing the people of Gotham and yet we don't get to see their reactions to any of what occurs. A major theme is also the idea of Batman finally becoming the symbol he was supposed to be for the people, yet the only ones in the whole movie shown to be truly inspired by him are Blake, Foley (a borderline annoying character who barely matters), and the random orphan kid (essentially a cameo). I would argue that this movie required MORE of the presence of Gotham's regular citizens than TDK did

Not really. Their whole plan was to get back at Bruce, and we witness just how strongly he reacts to seeing the Special Forces guys hanging from that bridge.

Bane even tells you before he does it - it's not about Gotham. Not really. They're just pawns. They could have blown Gotham sky high whenever they wanted. It's about making Bruce suffer.

[TheBat812]

Originally Posted by MAKAVELI25

This movie needed more viewpoints from Gotham's inhabitants than the Joker's did. Bane and Talia's whole plan is predicated upon torturing the people of Gotham and yet we don't get to see their reactions to any of what occurs. A major theme is also the idea of Batman finally becoming the symbol he was supposed to be for the people, yet the only ones in the whole movie shown to be truly inspired by him are Blake, Foley (a borderline annoying character who barely matters), and the random orphan kid (essentially a cameo). I would argue that this movie required MORE of the presence of Gotham's regular citizens than TDK did

The only reason they did that was to affect Bruce. So we see more of how it's affecting him, not the people, who are doing nothing, just being in their homes. I still haven't heard a good example of where these shots are actually needed. The only one has been seeing more reactions about Gordon's letter, but even that is pretty arguably not necessary.

[MAKAVELI25]

Originally Posted by TheBat812

The only reason they did that was to affect Bruce. So we see more of how it's affecting him, not the people, who are doing nothing, just being in their homes. I still haven't heard a good example of where these shots are actually needed. The only one has been seeing more reactions about Gordon's letter, but even that is pretty arguably not necessary.

How is it not necessary, they were under siege for 5 months! Bane was a much bigger threat to Gotham's people than The Joker or Ra's, his plan affected them more than anybody's, why would they not be needed to be shown in the film whose plot concerned them the most?

[Anita18]

TDK and TDKR are about different things. TDK confronts the issue of order and chaos and what kind of world would allow for both a vigilante and a terrorist who aims to destroy just what a society consists of. TDK was about very big ideas - it was never about Batman just stopping Joker's terrorist acts. Those big ideas necessitate how the public views Batman and just how useful he is. Does a society need Batman to continue functioning? It tries to justify his existence, and in the end, it turns out Gotham doesn't need him. It does fine without his continued existence. "We won."

With that, comes TDKR, where Bruce is still emotionally caught up in Batman and can't move on. The rest of the movie gives him two choices - continue in his self-destructive course personified by Bane and Talia, or give himself a chance to start fresh, personified by Selina and Blake. It's a highly personal movie, about one man's journey, but on a much bigger canvas that involves the city. But it's not about society the way TDK was. It's about Bruce, the way BB was.

Would I have liked to see more Gothamites involved in TDKR? Of course. The more the better, since it's such a rich world. But IMO we would have moved on to HBO miniseries land rather than feature film land. TDKR was never about Gotham as a society.

[Raiden]

Originally Posted by Anita18

Not really. Their whole plan was to get back at Bruce, and we witness just how strongly he reacts to seeing the Special Forces guys hanging from that bridge.

Bane even tells you before he does it - it's not about Gotham. Not really. They're just pawns. They could have blown Gotham sky high whenever they wanted. It's about making Bruce suffer.

I don't really subscribe to the theory that they did all that just to make Bruce suffer. If it was, then Talia would've revealed her identity and plan to Bruce when he was at his most venerable, and not when he almost foil their master plan. Oh, and not to have any kind of monitor on the man that supposed to be the center of their attention while he was in the Pit made no sense whatsoever.

And I still think that Talia was literally clueless at the end, when she was being chased by Batman inside his Batwing. Why is it that she did not have the detonator in her hand as the contingency plan, anyway? There was no way for her to get out of Gotham in time, so she could've blew everything sky high, instead of crashing the van and gave Batman all the time he needed (under 5 minute) to airlift that bomb out of Gotham and still live to tour the world with Selina. The whole ending just irks me because when you really think about it, the plan was executed poorly by criminals that were supposed to be smarter than everyone and always be one step ahead.