In hindsight what changes would you do

[ThePhantasm]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

I can only imagine the fouls of "realism" being thrown out if Bane got up from being shot by a canon, lol.

Of course it made sense to me once I reflected on it. But nonetheless my immediate reaction was to think he would get back up, just because it didn't seem like a proper exit for the character.

It doesn't bother me too much though when I rewatch the film, as Batman still technically defeated Bane.

[RustyCage]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

To each their own then. The only thing I found embarrassing when it comes to a villain in Nolan's trilogy was Scarecrow being defeated by Katie Holmes helming a taser.

The writers viewed Scarecrow as a goofy lackey. This is also why, although I think Nolan could have absolutely hammered a perfect Riddler interpretation like no one else, I'm a bit relieved they didn't go with Riddler.

It was apparent from an interview with Nolan himself that he didn't grasp the value of Riddler's character, and felt like he was a Joker knock-off. So, Riddler would've likely received an embarrassing goofy lackey treatment too - such as we see in books like The Long Halloween (and we know how much that one inspired the creative team).

The real disappointment was that they had a genius chance to do Scarecrow properly through their idea to keep bringing him back in each film, especially if they used Knightfall as more of an influence on Rises. Crane being the sole available Arkham inmate that we'd call a 'super villain' to wear Batman out like Bane staged in the comics would give the writers room to seriously tap his potential and give us some cool Scarecrow moments, more punch to the surprise of him returning again, and a worthy demise for a change.

Alas... we are left with a cameo. Still enjoyable, but not what it could have been.

I actually had my fingers crossed pretty hard for that one.

[ThePhantasm]

I agree Scarecrow was an all around wasted opportunity in the trilogy, especially with Cillian Murphy in the role as he is perfect as Jonathan Crane.

[RustyCage]

Originally Posted by ThePhantasm

... especially with Cillian Murphy in the role as he is perfect as Jonathan Crane.

Wholeheartedly agree there. Murphy was the ideal Crane to me.

Such a tragedy not to exercise his talent!

[Brain Damage]

Originally Posted by The Joker

That was the worst one of all.

See, that one works a lot better for me. Scarecrow was portrayed from the beginning as someone who only manages to appear intimidating through theatricality and deception, so him being defeated in such an easy way was fitting of the character. Even aside from that, Scarecrow never feels like the movie's chief bad guy (certainly not in the way Bane does) and by the time he gets taken out of the picture, Ra's Al Ghul has been established as the main villain for a good amount of screentime already.

Compare that to Bane, who gets demoted from lead villain and blown off screen in the span of about 2 minutes. And while Scarecrow was a weakling who appears strong through smoke and mirrors, Bane was anything but.

[RustyCage]

You know what I would do? I'm surprised I didn't think of this before.

As an extension of the idea to use Scarecrow more (which he deserved) to mirror Knightfall where Batman has to take down Arkham inmates that Bane freed, I would have loved to see Batman have a crazy fear-toxin hallucination of Bane.

Like instead of being handed Batman on a silver platter, I favor the idea of Bane just being at the Batcave, alone, when Bruce returns exhausted. He's worked things out, his prey is vulnerable. He's clever.

Maybe Bruce is still buzzing from a burst of fear toxin, so the shock of seeing this hulking figure waiting for him where he thought he was safe exaggerates Bane in some terrifying manner.

Then we could have the moment of '..He knows who I am... I'm not even safe in my own home..' in Bruce's face that we didn't get to see in the film.

That was part of what made Bane so great in the books. Ingenuity, the fear he could inflict on Bruce without lifting a finger. And yet, if he did lift his finger...

(Edit) Found this just now:

[Figs]

Originally Posted by Brain Damage

See, that one works a lot better for me. Scarecrow was portrayed from the beginning as someone who only manages to appear intimidating through theatricality and deception, so him being defeated in such an easy way was fitting of the character. Even aside from that, Scarecrow never feels like the movie's chief bad guy (certainly not in the way Bane does) and by the time he gets taken out of the picture, Ra's Al Ghul has been established as the main villain for a good amount of screentime already.

I think the problem is that he was beaten by a lame character like Rachel Dawes. I would have rather had Batman throw a batarang at him, knocking him off the horse to help Rachel and the kid.

[TDK elbowstrike]

One thing i would change about the trilogy, the fight scenes. I know this has been done to death, but they could've shown his fighting style a bit better. It didnt ruin the movies for me or anything, but i dont recall Bats kicking anybody. My martial arts training is admittedly limited, but everyone knows a well placed kick is many times more powerful/devastating than a punch. It would make sense to me that a well trained martial artist and crimefighter would not limit themselves to just punches and elbow strikes. I didnt see him kick anyone once, though i could be wrong. I thought once he changed his armor in TDK, since he said he was "carrying too much weight" that he would be faster and use more kicks and acrobatics. Just a nitpick.

[BatmanBeyond]

Originally Posted by RustyCage

Hey man! Long time, I remember you.

Don't get me wrong, I was disappointed here and there, but overall it's still awesome. The conversation just tends to lean toward nitpicks on here. lol

For the sake of balance, I loved how they handled Bruce and Selina's chemistry. Best acting of the whole film.

My feelings are basically the same, although I think I'd give it an 8 (I remember you saying you'd give it a 7 in another topic...correct me, if I'm wrong).

But yeah, the great chemistry between Anne and Bale was a joy to behold.

[BatLobsterRises]

Originally Posted by RustyCage

Holy crap. That is awesome.

[RustyCage]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

Holy crap. That is awesome.

I knowww man, would've been so crazy to see. Imagine, if Rises were a two-parter, we could have had more Scarecrow to finally do him justice, meaning potentially that picture you like as a result, and we could have also had the whole 'catch me if you can' Catwoman/Batman thing that was missing from the film.

And hey, Bane could've had more time to make more of a philosophical point, had a stronger climax in that regard like he deserved, and stood up taller in his own boots. Fans would have like zero room to be disappointed at missed potential. You wouldn't have even had to argue with me in the other thread at all.

Would have been lovely if Part 1 ended with Batman getting his back broken, Part 2 picked up with him waking up in the prison pit. Leave people in suspense, and the public buzzing with the first one ending on such a grisly note.

That's what I would've done, anyway.

[RustyCage]

Originally Posted by BatmanBeyond

My feelings are basically the same, although I think I'd give it an 8 (I remember you saying you'd give it a 7 in another topic...correct me, if I'm wrong).

But yeah, the great chemistry between Anne and Bale was a joy to behold.

There have been two polls I've voted on so far. In one, I voted 8. In the other, I voted 7. So it's somewhere between there.

It probably leans more toward 8 though, I think.

[Anno_Domini]

I've been thinking about this so much and this would definitely have been such a better idea too...

kill of Jen during her first appearance in that shoot out since she has no reason to show up later on in the film as well and use her little screen time to use Coleman Reese for TDKR. With Wayne losing his money and whatever, Reese could have been used to try to and fix that problem only to die by the hands of Bane. Plus, Jen and Reese are two arcs that are just out there in the open when the trilogy ends so it would have been nice to see closure on both parts.

Originally Posted by RustyCage

That's what I would've done, anyway.

I think a two-parter would've been the very best idea, especially with the IMAX run time limit, but Nolan insisted on only three films as the core beginning, middle and end theme, which, I'm totally fine with, but anyone can imagine just how truly epic, amazing and awesome The Dark Knight Rises would've been as two parts. They would've been hailed the best CBMs of all time, imo, as a two-parter and show how Nolan indeed made a better product than The Dark Knight.

[TheBat812]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

To each their own then. The only thing I found embarrassing when it comes to a villain in Nolan's trilogy was Scarecrow being defeated by Katie Holmes helming a taser.

Embarassing for scarecrow, which was completely deserving. I thought it was a brilliant way to take him out. For the false threat he was the entire movie.

Bane was killed by a goddamn rocket. That's incredibly badass. Sure it was jarring at first, but it's worked incredibly well for me since that initial viewing.

[TDK elbowstrike]

One thing I would change now looking back is Bane giving that cadaver a blood transfusion from Pavill. I think they should have left that out all together. Dental records are The first thing authorities look at to identify a john doe. I always wondered what the logic behind this scene was for this and many other reasons. Maybe someone else can clear this up for me because it confuses me a bit.

[Anno_Domini]

It was something to acknowledge that they were going to trick people into thinking Pavel was dead, so they got the point across. Ideally, it wouldn't have been an attractive scene to show them changing the teeth, nails, fingerprints or what have you as we've seen many times in films where they change identities between people.

[Schlosser85]

I really wanted a Batman/Catwoman rooftop chase.

[Anno_Domini]

We sorta got one...but they were running away together, lol.

[TDK elbowstrike]

I wanted to see a short sparring session between Bats and Catwoman. I knew it wouldn't happen, but at least we got to see them take down thugs together a few times.

[-JKR-]

Only change I would've done. I would've given some scenes some minor time to breathe a bit more. Just a matter of a few minutes. Not even to add scenes, but simply to give the scenes included more space (one minor fuzz I had with the movie was Foley's death, I think it would've come out better had we seen him being rolled of by a Tumbler). But we know that, because of IMAX, the runtime had to clock in at 165 minutes and there wasn't really a way around that.
Other than that... Absolutely nothing! A movie doesn't have to be 1:1 with 'fantasy putting together of the stories' fans do before the release to be enjoyable.

[Doc Samson]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

We sorta got one...but they were running away together, lol.

Ha, that's actually the fastest I've seen a live action Batman move yet. He was OUT...

[Llama_Shepherd]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

I think a two-parter would've been the very best idea, especially with the IMAX run time limit, but Nolan insisted on only three films as the core beginning, middle and end theme, which, I'm totally fine with, but anyone can imagine just how truly epic, amazing and awesome The Dark Knight Rises would've been as two parts. They would've been hailed the best CBMs of all time, imo, as a two-parter and show how Nolan indeed made a better product than The Dark Knight.

Same, it was such a missed opportunity to not do a two-parter. We could have seen Bruce as he was affected immediately after The Dark Knight, with all the hunting and condemning he was promised, how it slowly takes his toll on him to the point where he can't be the only thing he lives for, and the emergence of his philanthropic side. It could have had more screentime devoted to every character, making all of their arcs have more meaning, espeically for characters like Foley, Talia and Robin.

However, the fact that we know Nolan- who made the best single cinematic Batman story ever- made mistakes, gives me hope someone else can do it better.

[ThreadPool]

Honestly I would have liked to see Alfred and Lucius at odds. They obviously had polarizing views on how they thought Bruce should handle things. A tension heavy scene between Freeman and Caine?!?!?!

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by Doc Samson

Ha, that's actually the fastest I've seen a live action Batman move yet. He was OUT...

Yah, lol. It was sorta weird seeing Batman move fast, but I guess Bale was able to in the TDK/TDKR suit. Imagine him trying to run that fast in the BB suit.

Originally Posted by Llama_Shepherd

Same, it was such a missed opportunity to not do a two-parter. We could have seen Bruce as he was affected immediately after The Dark Knight, with all the hunting and condemning he was promised, how it slowly takes his toll on him to the point where he can't be the only thing he lives for, and the emergence of his philanthropic side. It could have had more screentime devoted to every character, making all of their arcs have more meaning, espeically for characters like Foley, Talia and Robin.

However, the fact that we know Nolan- who made the best single cinematic Batman story ever- made mistakes, gives me hope someone else can do it better.

Agree. However much I love TDKR, I know for a fact we would've gotten a longer movie without the IMAX run time being involved, or if Nolan didn't want to do the core three-story arc idea, we would've gotten two parts for TDKR. And while I think we had fairly enough story for Robin, I think two parters or a longer film would be better development-wise for Foley and Talia. While Talia could get more screentime, Foley needed more development to make the viewer become a fan and actually care when he died.

Originally Posted by ThreadPool

Honestly I would have liked to see Alfred and Lucius at odds. They obviously had polarizing views on how they thought Bruce should handle things. A tension heavy scene between Freeman and Caine?!?!?!

That would make sense with Alfred trying to do what's best for Bruce in living his own life while Lucius was trying to do what he thought was best with Bruce coming back as Batman, but in the end, they both still cared about Bruce, just thought what would be the best for him at both ends. In the end though, Bruce did both: returned as Batman and conquered his final trial so to speak and then started a different life.

[the last son]

Freeze would have been the villain. You could have played on Batman dealing with Rachel death and freeze with his frozen wife. The way I would have wrote it would have been brilliant.