Why is everyone slamming TDKR?

[the last son]

Longer, how long should one have to sit through a movie? Some people take movies way too seriously. 2hrs 45 minutes is more than enough time to get your point across, if you can't do that than you are the problem not the viewer.

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by the last son

Longer, how long should one have to sit through a movie? Some people take movies way too seriously. 2hrs 45 minutes is more than enough time to get your point across, if you can't do that than you are the problem not the viewer.

For what Rises was trying to achieve, is 3 hours and 15-20 minutes asking too much? Especially if some scenes were just a little longer, a little bit more epic and well played out? I really think not.

[Gotham's Knight]

Originally Posted by the last son

Longer, how long should one have to sit through a movie? Some people take movies way too seriously. 2hrs 45 minutes is more than enough time to get your point across, if you can't do that than you are the problem not the viewer.

Go watch the Lord of the Rings.

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by Gotham's Knight

Go watch the Lord of the Rings.

That too.

[Gotham's Knight]

Originally Posted by JackWhite

That too.

Or Schindler's List.

[jmc]

Originally Posted by the last son

Longer, how long should one have to sit through a movie? Some people take movies way too seriously. 2hrs 45 minutes is more than enough time to get your point across, if you can't do that than you are the problem not the viewer.

No it's not long enough, there's enough story going on in the film to cover a 12 episode HBO series. It's a condensed version of a story that needed far more time to tell the narrative properly. 3hrs 15min minimum.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by jmc

So I finally bought Rises on DVD coz it was on special and watched it again. I haven't seen it since July last year so it gave me the opportunity to watch it with relatively fresh eyes.

I'll reiterate what I've said before about it, it's not a bad movie, but having watch it again for the first time in over six months I've come to the conclusion the film is a very flawed masterpiece that is undone by the very medium it was created in. I can now see why people like this move, because it can be enjoyed, it just can't be enjoyed from the perspective of Nolan's past work because this is still without a doubt his worst movie. The problem is Nolan tried to combine spectacle with substance but somewhere along the line things became muddled, concessions and compromises were made and story elements were sacrificed in order to fit in the 2 and 3/4 hour time frame. All the film needed was an extra time to thoroughly combine spectacle with substance in order for it to truly rank along side Nolan's best because it's very much a highlights package of a much longer story.

I believe this is where the frustration myself and others have stems from. Looking back at TDK and BB those films aren't really blockbuster spectacles, they're very much films of substance first and action second and that's where the fault of Rises lies, Nolan pushed the substance back in order to elevate the spectacle. I'll give kudos to him for trying to elevate things for a grand finish but in doing so he had to cut corners because the line between serious movie and superhero film is never more evident than here. Avengers wore its spectacle heart on its sleeve and was unapologetic about it, it was simple and it worked. Rises drops the ball because it's just trying to do way to much and achieve the same result. Nolan kinda painted himself into a corner when he chose to make a genuine spectacle, I will give him props for attempting it because Rises is ambitious as hell, it's just the story he was trying to do was hamstrung from day one given the medium it was being made in and as a result there are some really dumb moments in the film. I've said this before but the story here could have used an extra 30-40 mins easily but that was never going to happen.

Frankly no matter how much I look at it I cannot rank Rises along side with TDK and Begins because it's really not the same type of film as the other two, which is ironically what I was hoping for from the get go, just not the execution I was expecting. I'm still disappointed don't get me wrong, I still expected better, but if I look at it through the same spectrum as the Avengers it's enjoyable, but just not as great as it should have been. I wish I didn't have to look at it through that spectrum but it's a concession I can make in order to watch the film. Simply put, TDKR is a popcorn movie dressed up.

Great post. Loved your review.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by jmc

So I finally bought Rises on DVD coz it was on special and watched it again. I haven't seen it since July last year so it gave me the opportunity to watch it with relatively fresh eyes.

I'll reiterate what I've said before about it, it's not a bad movie, but having watch it again for the first time in over six months I've come to the conclusion the film is a very flawed masterpiece that is undone by the very medium it was created in. I can now see why people like this move, because it can be enjoyed, it just can't be enjoyed from the perspective of Nolan's past work because this is still without a doubt his worst movie. The problem is Nolan tried to combine spectacle with substance but somewhere along the line things became muddled, concessions and compromises were made and story elements were sacrificed in order to fit in the 2 and 3/4 hour time frame. All the film needed was an extra time to thoroughly combine spectacle with substance in order for it to truly rank along side Nolan's best because it's very much a highlights package of a much longer story.

I believe this is where the frustration myself and others have stems from. Looking back at TDK and BB those films aren't really blockbuster spectacles, they're very much films of substance first and action second and that's where the fault of Rises lies, Nolan pushed the substance back in order to elevate the spectacle. I'll give kudos to him for trying to elevate things for a grand finish but in doing so he had to cut corners because the line between serious movie and superhero film is never more evident than here. Avengers wore its spectacle heart on its sleeve and was unapologetic about it, it was simple and it worked. Rises drops the ball because it's just trying to do way to much and achieve the same result. Nolan kinda painted himself into a corner when he chose to make a genuine spectacle, I will give him props for attempting it because Rises is ambitious as hell, it's just the story he was trying to do was hamstrung from day one given the medium it was being made in and as a result there are some really dumb moments in the film. I've said this before but the story here could have used an extra 30-40 mins easily but that was never going to happen.

Frankly no matter how much I look at it I cannot rank Rises along side with TDK and Begins because it's really not the same type of film as the other two, which is ironically what I was hoping for from the get go, just not the execution I was expecting. I'm still disappointed don't get me wrong, I still expected better, but if I look at it through the same spectrum as the Avengers it's enjoyable, but just not as great as it should have been. I wish I didn't have to look at it through that spectrum but it's a concession I can make in order to watch the film. Simply put, TDKR is a popcorn movie dressed up.

This was a nice review to read, but I can only agree on TDKR should be longer.

I mean,

I can now see why people like this move, because it can be enjoyed, it just can't be enjoyed from the perspective of Nolan's past work because this is still without a doubt his worst movie.

isn't really true at all. I'd find Insomnia to be Nolan's worst film and I would also rank TDKR as a great ending to the trilogy that ties at least 90% of the storylines from BB and TDK. I won't lie, I can see how some people such as yourself and others can find TDKR to be "below" of the past two Batman flicks from Nolan, but TDKR just makes the trilogy as a whole even greater, imo.

Originally Posted by the last son

Longer, how long should one have to sit through a movie? Some people take movies way too seriously. 2hrs 45 minutes is more than enough time to get your point across, if you can't do that than you are the problem not the viewer.

So every single film longer than 2 hours and 45 minutes should have been shorter?

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by jmc

So I finally bought Rises on DVD coz it was on special and watched it again. I haven't seen it since July last year so it gave me the opportunity to watch it with relatively fresh eyes.

I'll reiterate what I've said before about it, it's not a bad movie, but having watch it again for the first time in over six months I've come to the conclusion the film is a very flawed masterpiece that is undone by the very medium it was created in. I can now see why people like this move, because it can be enjoyed, it just can't be enjoyed from the perspective of Nolan's past work because this is still without a doubt his worst movie. The problem is Nolan tried to combine spectacle with substance but somewhere along the line things became muddled, concessions and compromises were made and story elements were sacrificed in order to fit in the 2 and 3/4 hour time frame. All the film needed was an extra time to thoroughly combine spectacle with substance in order for it to truly rank along side Nolan's best because it's very much a highlights package of a much longer story.

I believe this is where the frustration myself and others have stems from. Looking back at TDK and BB those films aren't really blockbuster spectacles, they're very much films of substance first and action second and that's where the fault of Rises lies, Nolan pushed the substance back in order to elevate the spectacle. I'll give kudos to him for trying to elevate things for a grand finish but in doing so he had to cut corners because the line between serious movie and superhero film is never more evident than here. Avengers wore its spectacle heart on its sleeve and was unapologetic about it, it was simple and it worked. Rises drops the ball because it's just trying to do way to much and achieve the same result. Nolan kinda painted himself into a corner when he chose to make a genuine spectacle, I will give him props for attempting it because Rises is ambitious as hell, it's just the story he was trying to do was hamstrung from day one given the medium it was being made in and as a result there are some really dumb moments in the film. I've said this before but the story here could have used an extra 30-40 mins easily but that was never going to happen.

Frankly no matter how much I look at it I cannot rank Rises along side with TDK and Begins because it's really not the same type of film as the other two, which is ironically what I was hoping for from the get go, just not the execution I was expecting. I'm still disappointed don't get me wrong, I still expected better, but if I look at it through the same spectrum as the Avengers it's enjoyable, but just not as great as it should have been. I wish I didn't have to look at it through that spectrum but it's a concession I can make in order to watch the film. Simply put, TDKR is a popcorn movie dressed up.

Nicely said

It really doesn't hold up beside BB or TDK.

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

In my opinion, it's got higher highs and lower lows than the rest of the trilogy.

[Anno_Domini]

All three films have lows and all three films have highs. I mean, not even Lord of the Rings is a perfect trilogy, but those two are still the best trilogies to ever hit the cinema.

[BatLobsterRises]

jmc, I'm glad that you gave the film a second chance and glad you are now able to find some level of enjoyment in it, even if that means lowering your expectations. In my humble opinion, the substance was still there but just played more subtly than it had been in TDK. If that makes it a popcorn movie, then it's just the type of popcorn movie that I love.

However, I don't think even the biggest proponent of Rises would argue that additional running time for the movie to tackle a story of that scale wouldn't have been greatly cherished. They wrote a novel and to some extent gave us the footnotes. But I guess that's what keeps me coming back. For me, the movie feels like this vast world for the imagination to inhabit.

Anyway, I enjoyed seeing your review 8 months later.

[Anno_Domini]

Oh, I think a good 99% would've been fine to see a longer TDKR for sure, but Nolan tried his best to give all he could to fit under the IMAX time limit and for me, it worked except for a few things(Batman's first return deserved more "hooplah"(although I can see how Nolan wanted to continue the pace and keep Bane as the main thing the police were trying to deal with) and Coleman Reese should've returned).

And BatLobster, I agree...TDKR felt like a far more subtle film from Selina's head turn while Jen asking her if that's what she wanted with the "storm" and everything to Gordon being mentioned as a war hero in the beginning of TDKR and is a war hero at the end of TDKR and that's why he's still the Commissioner.

[JackWhite]

Here's a good question - would you guys have liked zero IMAX shots, yet have a longer film for TDKR (3 hours and 20 minutes, including credits) ?

[Anno_Domini]

Longer film.

[Thoix]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

Longer film.

I agree, although I do love the scenes in IMAX.

[Gotham's Knight]

Third option: An intermission so they can switch reels.

[Anno_Domini]

Still going with longer film and no IMAX.

[BatLobsterRises]

After TDK, I think no IMAX would have been a huge let down for me. I get a little sad when I imagine seeing Bruce climb out of the pit for the first time and it not being 90 feet tall.

I know it's choosing style over substance, but the IMAX experience was just such a key factor in making the last two movies so larger than life for me. Nothing beats that overwhelming feeling for me.

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

Still going with longer film and no IMAX.

For some reason I thought you might have gone with IMAX or die, lol.

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

After TDK, I think no IMAX would have been a huge let down for me. I get a little sad when I imagine seeing Bruce climb out of the pit for the first time and it not being 90 feet tall.

I know it's choosing style over substance, but the IMAX experience was just such a key factor in making the last two movies so larger than life for me. Nothing beats that overwhelming feeling for me.

I'll admit, Bruce climbing out of the pit, in IMAX, was unreal for me the first time I watched TDKR.

[Anno_Domini]

Going back, maybe Nolan shouldn't have even touched IMAX with TDK if it was going to shortchange TDKR.

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

Going back, maybe Nolan shouldn't have even touched IMAX with TDK if it was going to shortchange TDKR.

There really wasn't any way of knowing that back then.

I think you either cut TDKR into two parts or cut Blake or Talia out of the film and keep it one whole movie with IMAX shots.

[Gotham's Knight]

Originally Posted by JackWhite

There really wasn't any way of knowing that back then.

I think you either cut TDKR into two parts or cut Blake or Talia out of the film and keep it one whole movie with IMAX shots.

I'd go split the reels and swap them right after Bane leaves Bruce in the prison. It wouldn't feel complete without Blake and Talia.

[BatLobsterRises]

Yeah, with the intensity that Nolan focuses on one film at a time I think it might be abusing hindsight a bit to suggest that he should have considered staying away from IMAX on TDK due to how it might effect the next film. Nolan really broke the mold with the IMAX stuff on this trilogy. It's undoubtedly going to be one of the major legacies it leaves on a technical level.

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by Gotham's Knight

I'd go split the reels and swap them right after Bane leaves Bruce in the prison. It wouldn't feel complete without Blake and Talia.

I like that idea, except I think it would leave more impact on the audience had they been left with Bane's speech at Blackgate and maybe a closing shot of Bruce in the pit.