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

[Brain Damage]

I feel like perhaps some people are misinterpreting "safe" with "generic". The ticking time bomb and things like that were extremely generic plot points, but things like breaking Batman and putting him in a prison for a large chunk of the movie are not. It's generic for a villain to best the hero on their first encounter, but I challenge you to name me one other superhero film where the hero gets so completely defeated.

It may not have lived up to its own ambitions, but I honestly do believe it's the ballsiest Batman movie ever made and perhaps that ever will be made.

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

Why does TDK being only 12 minutes shorter have to do with anything?

One of the "risks" listed was making a big budget blockbuster 2 hours and 37 minutes long. I don't see how making it 12 minutes longer than TDK was is such a risk. It's only 14 minutes longer than The Avengers.

Originally Posted by I Am The Knight

True. For example, another threequel, Spider-Man 3, also features a relative unknown character as it's main villain, Sandman. And the villain every kiddy wanted desperately to see, Venom, was only in the film for about 10 minutes, and then he gets killed. Also, turning your main character into an emo b*tch is far more polarizing than putting him into a Pit Or turning Superman into a womanizing drunkard in Superman III, and then have him battle himself in some kind of psychological junkyard fight.

Exactly. My god the past threequels really did some crazy crap lol.

Besides, once TDK became a HUGE hit, Nolan knew he had carte blanche to do whatever he wanted, and the audience would eat it up. I'd say Batman Begins was a riskier film to make, despite adhering to a more conventional superhero formula than it's sequels. It was a complete reinvention of the character for main audiences, with a villain even more obscure than Bane, to the GA at least. TDKR was always going to be a huge hit, anyway. It still adheres to formula, especially during the third act. And It even has a happy ending where the main character overcomes all obstacles and goes off to live in Europe with a hot woman.

The actual interesting and "not safe" aspects of the film are under developed, and they have more to do with commentaries on modern society than "Durr Bane has more screentime than Batman, so transgressive".

Exactly.

Batman Begins was a lot riskier than TDKR. Bringing back a franchise that had been dead for 8 years, and using two villains, Ra's and Scarecrow, who general audiences had no clue about, was riskier. Heck after the popularity of Batman 1989 and Jack Nicholson's Joker, it was also more risky to reinvent an iconic villain like the Joker in TDK. The success of TDK guaranteed bums in seats no matter what villain Nolan chose. Besides he had Catwoman, a big villain name, to attract people.

Originally Posted by Ryan

Whatever people's opinions are, its interesting how much passionate debate surrounds this film, which I didn't seem to see after the last 2 films. Lots of forums get tired of the Nolanites and I guess with this film I can see their perspective. I've been a huge fan of his films and his first 2 Batman films have been what I"ve been waiting for. I still consider those 2 films to not only be the best Batman films ever made but the best superhero movies I"ve ever seen. Despite my love of those films, it didn't mean that TDKR would get a 'free ride" and it seems with some, that to suggest its anything less then perfect is to committ some type of heresay. I liked certain aspects of the film, but as a whole I did not. I agree that it apparently ended the threequel curse but it seemed to do so in the safest way possible, with a tried and true formula, without ruffling too many feathers in the process. The risks taken with BB and TDK will always be what made them magical to me.

I couldn't agree more. Especially with the bold part.

[JackWhite]

After watching various scenes online from TDKR, I'm getting this nagging feeling that it's not going to hold up as well as BB and TDK on repeated viewings, lol. I recently watched the "light up scene" and the only reaction shot we see from a Gothamite is Foley's! Yes, I knew this before, but seeing it again is just a big WTF?

With that being said, the first act was just perfection to me. Everything from the prologue all the way to Batman and Bane's first encounter had me on the edge of my seat. Then in the second act, Blake's appearance becomes a little too apparent.

[The Guard]

I feel like perhaps some people are misinterpreting "safe" with "generic".

Agreed. And really, a lot of the generic issues are found in the third act, not the entire film.

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by The Guard

Agreed. And really, a lot of the generic issues are found in the third act, not the entire film.

Indeed.

TDKR had a risky setup from the get go - Bane as the main villain, Bruce being retired at the start of the film, Bane eventually breaking Batman and throwing him in the pit and of course "the will they or won't they?" premise of Batman's demise. I think more of the generic issues lie with the script/storytelling - Another doomsday device, a character not being who we thought they originally were, etc, etc.

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by JackWhite

After watching various scenes online from TDKR, I'm getting this nagging feeling that it's not going to hold up as well as BB and TDK on repeated viewings, lol. I recently watched the "light up scene" and the only reaction shot we see from a Gothamite is Foley's! Yes, I knew this before, but seeing it again is just a big WTF?

A lot of people had that problem. A lack of a Gotham voice. All the reactions you get to the major events in the movie are from the main cast. Never got to see Gotham's reaction to either of Batman's returns, the revelation of the Dent cover up etc.

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by The Joker

A lot of people had that problem. A lack of a Gotham voice. All the reactions you get to the major events in the movie are from the main cast. Never got to see Gotham's reaction to either of Batman's returns, the revelation of the Dent cover up etc.

Not to mention Gordon not having to pay a price for his involvement in the cover up.

[Ryan]

Ha, I thought someone might point that out BatLobsterRises. I actually don't think it was your posting in particular that felt like a personal attack, so I apoligize if that's how I sounded. To answer your question, I don't feel that the debates surround TDKR are about the film being controversial. The mentality has been more of a "with us or against us" type attitude which has entirely turned me off from having any really good discussions about the film. Again, I enjoy reading others thoughts on the film and definately do consider what other's point out.

[BatLobsterRises]

Originally Posted by JackWhite

Not to mention Gordon not having to pay a price for his involvement in the cover up.

Well, technically he was sentenced in Crane's court. I think the bit where Barsad tells him he's being arrested under the authority of "the people of Gotham", this is essentially his comeuppance for the coverup. Everybody's guilt at the sentencing hearings was considered "self evident", but this is especially true in the case of Gordon.

I also think he paid enough of a price for the coverup, as it was eating him up inside for 8 years and he had to watch it all blow up in his face.

Originally Posted by Ryan

Ha, I thought someone might point that out BatLobsterRises. I actually don't think it was your posting in particular that felt like a personal attack, so I apoligize if that's how I sounded. To answer your question, I don't feel that the debates surround TDKR are about the film being controversial. The mentality has been more of a "with us or against us" type attitude which has entirely turned me off from having any really good discussions about the film. Again, I enjoy reading others thoughts on the film and definately do consider what other's point out.

Nope, it never did but I was re-reading the posts on the last page and realized mine could seem like a direct attack if taken the wrong way so I wanted to clear the air. All good.

And I think you'd find that there are a number of posters on here who have very different views on the film but can still have a civil discussion. Maybe it's still more the exception than the rule, but it's better than nothing I suppose.

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

Well, technically he was sentenced in Crane's court. I think the bit where Barsad tells him he's being arrested under the authority of "the people of Gotham", this is essentially his comeuppance for the coverup. Everybody's guilt at the sentencing hearings was considered "self evident", but this is especially true in the case of Gordon.

I also think he paid enough of a price for the coverup, as it was eating him up inside for 8 years and he had to watch it all blow up in his face.

True, but I guess I expected something more intimate with Gordon admitting his wrong doings in front of a crowd of anonymous Gothamites. Kind of like how in the beginning during the Harvey Dent day scene, Gordon was going to fess up and tell everyone in attendance the real truth. That could be just a personal gripe that I have, and seeing the film again might clear things up for me in that regard.

[Robin91939]

Originally Posted by JackWhite

True, but I guess I expected something more intimate with Gordon admitting his wrong doings in front of a crowd of anonymous Gothamites. Kind of like how in the beginning during the Harvey Dent day scene, Gordon was going to fess up and tell everyone in attendance the real truth. That could be just a personal gripe that I have, and seeing the film again might clear things up for me in that regard.

I would have liked if in the montage at the end, after he discovered the newly refurbished signal, if a couple of shots later we either saw him at Gotham airport or in Cleveland (which I wish they had used Chicago) greeting or being greeted by his wife and kids... That would have been nice closure for his arc.

-R

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by Robin91939

I would have liked if in the montage at the end, after he discovered the newly refurbished signal, if a couple of shots later we either saw him at Gotham airport or in Cleveland (which I wish they had used Chicago) greeting or being greeted by his wife and kids... That would have been nice closure for his arc.

-R

I agree. Ideally I'd have loved if his family had come to see him when he was in hospital. Maybe a scene where his wife says that she sees he's still letting this city live under the illusion of the man who nearly murdered their son was a great man and a hero.

Further delve into Gordon's conflict a bit.

[BatLobsterRises]

Yeah, I hear you JackWhite. I guess I was glad to see that Gordon still kind of stuck behind what he and Batman did at the end of TDK to some degree when Blake challenged him. The wrongs of it had become obvious, but it's easy to forget that they were two men with the weight of the world on their shoulders trying to make the best out of a horrible situation. I think having a city holiday named after Dent and a legislation passed in his name is what made the burden of the lie too much to bear. They got what they wanted, but they probably could have never imagined it working to such an extreme degree.

But I could understand wanting to see him be more open with the public and give a heartfelt apology too.

Originally Posted by The Joker

I agree. Ideally I'd have loved if his family had come to see him when he was in hospital. Maybe a scene where his wife says that she sees he's still letting this city live under the illusion of the man who nearly murdered their son was a great man and a hero.

Further delve into Gordon's conflict a bit.

That would have been a nice touch.

[BlueLightning]

I would have liked if in the montage at the end, after he discovered the newly refurbished signal, if a couple of shots later we either saw him at Gotham airport or in Cleveland (which I wish they had used Chicago) greeting or being greeted by his wife and kids... That would have been nice closure for his arc.

Originally Posted by The Joker

I agree. Ideally I'd have loved if his family had come to see him when he was in hospital. Maybe a scene where his wife says that she sees he's still letting this city live under the illusion of the man who nearly murdered their son was a great man and a hero.

Further delve into Gordon's conflict a bit.

Actually that would be very nice indeed. I almost can picture it in my head.

[Brain Damage]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

That would have been a nice touch.

Much more than that, it would have been some a major opportunity for some great character development.

[BatLobsterRises]

Originally Posted by Brain Damage

Much more than that, it would have been some a major opportunity for some great character development.

Perhaps. But this is the problem when you have so many characters being played by great actors that could warrant their own films .

Actually, there's "A Good Day to Die Hard" version of this movie somewhere where Gordon is the main character...James Jr. comes to visit his dad in the hospital (mom still hates hit guts), only for the two of them to have to stick together throughout the whole siege as they work together to stop Bane .

Of course if they went that route in the film, James Jr. would pretty much have to replace Blake entirely in the script. I kind of liked the continuation of the surrogate father/son themes and I find it really sad that Gordon becomes "orphaned" from his family in a way, but it could have been an interesting direction to take the story nonetheless.

[Lord]

I remember thinking Blake was that kid that received a gadget from Batman in Batman Begins, i liked John Blake more than i expected, the final twist about him actually made me smile

[Deserana]

Originally Posted by JackWhite

Not to mention Gordon not having to pay a price for his involvement in the cover up.

A reaction to this would have been very interesting. They could have cross-cut Bane's speech with Gordon sat down with a flash-mob outside the GCPD as surely if Gordon covered it up wouldn't the natural thought of the citizens be that the majority of the police knew? It would also show that people are believing Bane and turning to him.

I think there is a lack of Gotham's voice but small things like what I mentioned would have heavily improved an already great film IMO. Just moments like that was all that was needed.

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by Deserana

A reaction to this would have been very interesting. They could have cross-cut Bane's speech with Gordon sat down with a flash-mob outside the GCPD as surely if Gordon covered it up wouldn't the natural thought of the citizens be that the majority of the police knew? It would also show that people are believing Bane and turning to him.

I think there is a lack of Gotham's voice but small things like what I mentioned would have heavily improved an already great film IMO. Just moments like that was all that was needed.

Which makes me wish it was 20 minutes longer. All of that stuff could have been added with just a little bit more time.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by The Joker

One of the "risks" listed was making a big budget blockbuster 2 hours and 37 minutes long. I don't see how making it 12 minutes longer than TDK was is such a risk. It's only 14 minutes longer than The Avengers.

Ahh, must've skipped over that part.

While it sounds silly to bring the running time as something that was "risky" for TDKR, lol, I simply find the scale and the ambitious storyline of someone(Bane) literally taking over an entire city to be quite huge risks for the threequel. And let alone, the ending. The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises gave us two chilling endings in their own right that we will never see again in any future CBM. Heck, I feel that the entire trilogy was risky from the beginning to end, but I didn't expect any less from Christopher Nolan.

[Ryan]

If it means anything or explains my thinking at all, I'd like to share my favourite scene from the entire franchise. The interogation scene with the joker. That scene seemed to transcend the genre. You have these 2 iconic characters, with no guns, no chases, no flying spaceships, trapped in the confines of a room with only dialogue as their weapons of choice. It was in that scene that these comic book character became more then that, and became something pr etty believable or as believable as we'll ever get. While others have hated the "realism' that Nolan brought to the Bat franchise, I actually enjoyed it and thought it breathed new life into the comic book movie genre. You can probably draw your own conclusions as to why I thought we lost alot of that simple yet unique intricate story telling in TDKR.

[Anno_Domini]

Imo, TDKR has a very special moment regarding Batman and the villain as well. While in TDK, we had this mental game of chess being played between Batman and Joker during the interrogation scene, in TDKR in the sewers, we had this physical fight with Bane just brutally beating on Batman while telling him his plan for Gotham and humiliating Batman who always came out on top against his foes. Just like that scene with Batman and Joker. Batman never came out on top in that scene as Joker won in multiple ways as much as Bane won by breaking the Bat and then making Wayne Enterprises' artillery his own.

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

Imo, TDKR has a very special moment regarding Batman and the villain as well. While in TDK, we had this mental game of chess being played between Batman and Joker during the interrogation scene, in TDKR in the sewers, we had this physical fight with Bane just brutally beating on Batman while telling him his plan for Gotham and humiliating Batman who always came out on top against his foes. Just like that scene with Batman and Joker. Batman never came out on top in that scene as Joker won in multiple ways as much as Bane won by breaking the Bat and then making Wayne Enterprises' artillery his own.

The first encounter between Batman and Bane was sublime. Nolan and Co. nailed it completely.

[MAKAVELI25]

Originally Posted by Ryan

If it means anything or explains my thinking at all, I'd like to share my favourite scene from the entire franchise. The interogation scene with the joker. That scene seemed to transcend the genre. You have these 2 iconic characters, with no guns, no chases, no flying spaceships, trapped in the confines of a room with only dialogue as their weapons of choice. It was in that scene that these comic book character became more then that, and became something pr etty believable or as believable as we'll ever get. While others have hated the "realism' that Nolan brought to the Bat franchise, I actually enjoyed it and thought it breathed new life into the comic book movie genre. You can probably draw your own conclusions as to why I thought we lost alot of that simple yet unique intricate story telling in TDKR.

Beautifully said. The first Bane/Batman encounter is cool, but to me it is nowhere near as powerful as that interrogation scene

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by JackWhite

The first encounter between Batman and Bane was sublime. Nolan and Co. nailed it completely.

Indeed. Just as powerful as the interrogation but as different as Bane and Joker are.