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

[Victarion]

Timeskip is my only issue. I FINALLY got that Bane's rally speech was given to the prisoners; the montage is what happened after the speech (Yes, I was that slow). So to that end Nolan showed us how Gotham was affected; the ghost town state made sense. I simply would've liked to see more of that throughout the 5 month period.

Using Talia like a fleshed out Osito was an interesting turn of events that worked well to develop Talia and Bane as characters. I would've liked to seen Talia escaping the Pit as material to develop a relationship with Bruce after he escaped the Pit. That would make it an entirely different film, of course. I didn't and don't dislike the film for not going in that direction though.

I felt Nolan succeeded in presenting the Hero with a Dark Mirror without beating the concept over the viewer's head.

 

[BatLobster]

I felt Nolan succeeded in presenting the Hero with a Dark Mirror without beating the concept over the viewer's head.

Agreed. *cough Venom cough*

 

[Deserana]

Talia really isn't much of an issue to me I felt she served her purpose fine yes more screentime would have been nice but not exactly vital. I do like that Talia and Bane were a partnership I don't however like that Bane is just done away with once Talia is revealed. Once you realise that "Bane's story" is infact Talia's who is Ra's Daughter who is Miranda she has more than enough story to her even if she isn't actually SEEN for that long. My only issue with Talia is that she is revealed and killed in about 5 minutes. If the reveal happened before the final battle I would have little to no problem with her.

I always see her plan as delusional if anything as if she just wants to finish what her Dad started even if Gotham was in the best possible state it could be.

 

[JackWhite]

Had the montage of Bane's dictator-like reign been expanded upon; you'd have more insight into the plight of Gotham. It's all there and shown during his rant - courts being convened, the rich being ripped from there comfy homes, spoils enjoyed, blood being shed, the police surviving; only to serve true justice. It's just not seen in extreme detail.

 

[Mindreaper21]

I had much more to say, but it sounded like a rant...My point is simply that I believe TDKR was a poor attempt to tie together two movies with two completely different tones that led to it being the weakest link. Instead of the focus of the trilogy being on the evolution of Nolan's take on Batman, it became a story about how Batman couldn't get over his childhood crush who never really wanted to be with him. Everything he trained for, fought for and swore by, he was willing to give it all up for her...I don't believe that TDKR prevented the trilogy from being perfect. The trilogy declined from Batman Begins.

 

[BatLobster]

I had much more to say, but it sounded like a rant...My point is simply that I believe TDKR was a poor attempt to tie together two movies with two completely different tones that led to it being the weakest link. Instead of the focus of the trilogy being on the evolution of Nolan's take on Batman,it became a story about how Batman couldn't get over his childhood crush who never really wanted to be with him. Everything he trained for, fought for and swore by, he was willing to give it all up for her...I don't believe that TDKR prevented the trilogy from being perfect. The trilogy declined from Batman Begins.

Bull.

 

[Polaris23]

This trilogy is so special to me because it not only conjures up great Batman stories, but it also leaves plenty to the imagination, such as this:

[YT]h2Q4k9FAfgo[/YT]

 

[Fudgie]

I had much more to say, but it sounded like a rant...My point is simply that I believe TDKR was a poor attempt to tie together two movies with two completely different tones that led to it being the weakest link. Instead of the focus of the trilogy being on the evolution of Nolan's take on Batman, it became a story about how Batman couldn't get over his childhood crush who never really wanted to be with him.

Quoted for truth.

 

[BatLobster]

I'm sorry but to say it's a story about Bruce not being able to get over a childhood crush is laughable. It's a story about a guy who holds on to everything finally learning to let go. Period.

 

[Victarion]

Indeed. Rachel was an OC, but Bruce's fixation on her showed how badly Chill murdering his parents affected him.

 

[TheFuture]

It's the perfect trilogy to me because TDKR was exactly the ending I wanted. What kept me so emotionally involved in the entire story of the trilogy was Bruce and his journey.

At the end of TDK grief had consumed Bruce's life. His parents, Rachel and Harvey: he lost all of them. I wanted to see this pain and grief catch up with him and that's exactly what I got in TDKR. A lot of people hated the first hour but I loved it. I found it so fascinating watching Bruce, a broken man, struggle to get over the trauma in his life and trying to reinsert himself back into the world. To me, the people who complain about not enough Batman failed to get what the trilogy was essentially all about: Bruce.....and I think TDKR did a great job in completing his story.

So yeah, where was I.....in sum, I loved TDKR because it gave me exactly what I wanted so in turn, it is a perfect trilogy for me.

Oh and OP, in future give your own opinion when starting a thread, you don't want people thinking you're a troll now do you?

 

[Anno_Domini]

I had much more to say, but it sounded like a rant...My point is simply that I believe TDKR was a poor attempt to tie together two movies with two completely different tones that led to it being the weakest link. Instead of the focus of the trilogy being on the evolution of Nolan's take on Batman, it became a story about how Batman couldn't get over his childhood crush who never really wanted to be with him. Everything he trained for, fought for and swore by, he was willing to give it all up for her...I don't believe that TDKR prevented the trilogy from being perfect. The trilogy declined from Batman Begins.

Never really wanted to be with him?

Did you skip Batman Begins as a whole?

 

[zmystico]

I enjoyed TDKR MORE than TDK, no trilogy is perfect, but I believe this one got pretty damn close.

 

[Fudgie]

I'm sorry but to say it's a story about Bruce not being able to get over a childhood crush is laughable. It's a story about a guy who holds on to everything finally learning to let go. Period.

What's everything? He let go of Batman after TDK for 8 years.

 

[BatLobster]

Pain. The need to deal with his demons through Batman. He let go of Batman but still had the internal need for it. Whether it's losing his parents, Rachel or the original reason for his mission, Bruce's life was defined by loss.

 

[Fudgie]

Says who? He still ain't feeling pain about his parents and Rachel's deaths?

Yeah don't think so.

 

[BatLobster]

No I'm saying he is. But to just focus on the Rachel part misses the bigger picture.

The pain is buried. But it still drives his life. That's who Bruce Wayne is.

 

[Deserana]

It's the perfect trilogy to me because TDKR was exactly the ending I wanted. What kept me so emotionally involved in the entire story of the trilogy was Bruce and his journey.

At the end of TDK grief had consumed Bruce's life. His parents, Rachel and Harvey: he lost all of them. I wanted to see this pain and grief catch up with him and that's exactly what I got in TDKR. A lot of people hated the first hour but I loved it. I found it so fascinating watching Bruce, a broken man, struggle to get over the trauma in his life and trying to reinsert himself back into the world. To me, the people who complain about not enough Batman failed to get what the trilogy was essentially all about: Bruce.....and I think TDKR did a great job in completing his story.

So yeah, where was I.....in sum, I loved TDKR because it gave me exactly what I wanted so in turn, it is a perfect trilogy for me.

Oh and OP, in future give your own opinion when starting a thread, you don't want people thinking you're a troll now do you?

Agreed. The first half is my favourite part of the film, TDKR is the only film in a franchise where I felt that time had passed in the world. From set details, to the look, to the characters, to the dialogue it felt to me like 8 years had passed in Gotham and that really enhanced the first half of the film.

I also don't understand how people can say that Bruce is only down is because of Rachel. It's almost as if they have skipped TDK yes Rachel is the only one explicitly talked about but there is a lot more to it than that. IMO he didn't just give up Batman, he had no reason to be Batman the Dent act cleared a lot up and Bruce wouldn't have wanted anything to do with a Gotham built on a lie.

I have issues with TDKR but the first hour and in particular the way Bruce is handled was pretty darn near perfect for me (other than the magical leg brace).

 

[The Joker]

Gordon: "We were in this together, then you were gone"
Bruce: "The Batman wasn't needed any more. We won"
Gordon: "Based on a lie"

Yeah, it wasn't just about Rachel. If it was he would have quit after Joker killed her in TDK.

 

[Mindreaper21]

I've seen all 3 films and I stand by what I say. TDK changed everything. That fact that Bruce was trying find a way to stop being Batman all for Rachel's affection made her the center of the story. He believed that if he had her, his pain would end. Everything else revolved around that. Bruce didn't seem to have a worry in the world about the thing that is supposed to haunt him most, which is the death of his parents. Nearly every decision Bruce made had something to do with Rachel. After TDK he gave up, because after losing Rachel, bringing her killer to justice, and failing to save a man that she cared for as well as deeming him to be his successor, he felt he had nothing left to fight for. Instead of fighting for justice like he swore by, he became selfish...Yes, I did say Rachel never really wanted to be with Bruce, because she always had an excuse and constantly told him that she couldn't be with him unless he changed certain things about himself. She led him astray and was cold to him up until her death.

Even in TDKR, Bruce lashed out at Alfred over Rachel and Alfred didn't come back until Bruce's "funeral". So, Alfred's and Harvey's loss had something to do with Rachel. Like I said though, TDKR is a poor attempt to connect to entirely different stories. Like it or not, Rachel became the core of Bruce's pain, and not his parents. Even Alfred was trying to get Bruce to get over Rachel and find love the whole time. You can look at the Trilogy on the surface with all the villains, Batman fighting for his city, and all the pain he hold's in. Though, if Rachel lived to be in TDKR, I guarantee she would be at the center again. Eventually in the end, he got over Rachel and found a successor, but it took the entire trilogy to get to that point.

 

[Deserana]

Even in TDKR, Bruce lashed out at Alfred over Rachel and Alfred didn't come back until Bruce's "funeral". So, Alfred's and Harvey's loss had something to do with Rachel. Like I said though, TDKR is a poor attempt to connect to entirely different stories. Like it or not, Rachel became the core of Bruce's pain, and not his parents. Even Alfred was trying to get Bruce to get over Rachel and find love the whole time. You can look at the Trilogy on the surface with all the villains, Batman fighting for his city, and all the pain he hold's in. Though, if Rachel lived to be in TDKR, I guarantee she would be at the center again. Eventually in the end, he got over Rachel and found a successor, but it took the entire trilogy to get to that point.

I have to disagree with this. Like I said earlier Rachel was the only issue that was actually talked about in length and for good reason. Bruce was under the assumption that once Gotham didn't need Batman they'd be together. In TDKR that happens but Rachel is dead AND his city is also built on a lie and that lie is based around a man who became the very thing Bruce was trying to prevent and he was made that way by a psychopath who in a roundabout way was only around because Batman was around. I certainly wouldn't say it was Rachel.

Surely if it was Rachel Bruce would never have been able to get back into the suit and find peace at the end? The film in general is about moving on. Not about getting over a lost girlfriend though that is a big part of it.

 

[The Joker]

I've seen all 3 films and I stand by what I say. TDK changed everything. That fact that Bruce was trying find a way to stop being Batman all for Rachel's affection made her the center of the story. He believed that if he had her, his pain would end. Everything else revolved around that. Bruce didn't seem to have a worry in the world about the thing that is supposed to haunt him most, which is the death of his parents. Nearly every decision Bruce made had something to do with Rachel. After TDK he gave up, because after losing Rachel, bringing her killer to justice, and failing to save a man that she cared for as well as deeming him to be his successor, he felt he had nothing left to fight for. Instead of fighting for justice like he swore by, he became selfish...Yes, I did say Rachel never really wanted to be with Bruce, because she always had an excuse and constantly told him that she couldn't be with him unless he changed certain things about himself. She led him astray and was cold to him up until her death.

Even in TDKR, Bruce lashed out at Alfred over Rachel and Alfred didn't come back until Bruce's "funeral". So, Alfred's and Harvey's loss had something to do with Rachel. Like I said though, TDKR is a poor attempt to connect to entirely different stories. Like it or not, Rachel became the core of Bruce's pain, and not his parents. Even Alfred was trying to get Bruce to get over Rachel and find love the whole time. You can look at the Trilogy on the surface with all the villains, Batman fighting for his city, and all the pain he hold's in. Though, if Rachel lived to be in TDKR, I guarantee she would be at the center again. Eventually in the end, he got over Rachel and found a successor, but it took the entire trilogy to get to that point.

Hang on, Bruce's mission and ideals never changed after Begins. He wanted to inspire Gotham's people. In TDK he was starting to see that was happening in a negative way. The copycats for starters ("That wasn't what I meant when I said I wanted to inspire people"). Then the Joker comes along, a character who was a total reaction to Batman's presence in Gotham, or as Nolan said "the logical response to Batman in Gotham". This was even hinted at in the Batman Begins ending when Gordon was talking about escalation;

Gordon: "What about escalation?"
Batman: "Escalation?"
Gordon: "We start carrying semi automatics. They buy automatics. We start wearing Kevlar, they buy armor piercing rounds"
Batman: "And?"
Gordon: "And you're wearing a mask. Jumping off rooftops. Take this guy; armed robbery, double homicide, got a taste for the theatrical like you. Leaves a calling card"

Gordon is basically saying the underworld is going to react to the crackdown on them, and Joker is the reaction to Batman. This is another reason why he feels Harvey Dent is a better hero than Batman can be. A hero with a face who won't inspire the likes of the Joker ("I was meant to inspire good. Not madness. Not death").

Yes, being with Rachel was definitely something Bruce wanted. But it wasn't the defining factor in handing over Gotham to Harvey. He made Harvey prove himself and all by delivering him Lau and seeing could Harvey deliver the goods by getting him to sing. And he did. Harvey locked up half of the city's criminals in an afternoon. More of a triumph than Batman ever managed by himself.

When Joker started murdering people in Batman's name, he felt he couldn't endure that. Batman finally found what he thought was a limit Batman couldn't go passed. ("Today I found out what Batman can't do. He can't endure this").

In TDKR, he had succeeded in doing what he set out to do; saving Gotham and inspiring it's people. He did that via Harvey Dent by taking the blame for Harvey's crimes, and preserving Harvey's heroic image and the city's hope in Harvey's White Knight image. That resulted in the Dent Act, which essentially wiped out crime so much that Gordon was headed for a retirement.

So what else had Bruce got left? Just his grief over losing what he thought had been his only chance at true love and a normal life. Is it any wonder he was upset with Alfred for keeping such a big secret from him? She chose Harvey over him. Learning that harsh truth about Rachel was the kick up the butt he needed to move on and get over Rachel by realizing she had not been his once chance at true love. Hence why he was able to move on with Selina.

 

[Deserana]

Hang on, Bruce's mission and ideals never changed after Begins. He wanted to inspire Gotham's people. In TDK he was starting to see that was happening in a negative way. The copycats for starters ("That wasn't what I meant when I said I wanted to inspire people"). Then the Joker comes along, a character who was a total reaction to Batman's presence in Gotham, or as Nolan said "the logical response to Batman in Gotham". This was even hinted at in the Batman Begins ending when Gordon was talking about escalation;

Gordon: "What about escalation?"
Batman: "Escalation?"
Gordon: "We start carrying semi automatics. They buy automatics. We start wearing Kevlar, they buy armor piercing rounds"
Batman: "And?"
Gordon: "And you're wearing a mask. Jumping off rooftops. Take this guy; armed robbery, double homicide, got a taste for the theatrical like you. Leaves a calling card"

Gordon is basically saying the underworld is going to react to the crackdown on them, and Joker is the reaction to Batman. This is another reason why he feels Harvey Dent is a better hero than Batman can be. A hero with a face who won't inspire the likes of the Joker ("I was meant to inspire good. Not madness. Not death").

Yes, being with Rachel was definitely something Bruce wanted. But it wasn't the defining factor in handing over Gotham to Harvey. He made Harvey prove himself and all by delivering him Lau and seeing could Harvey deliver the goods by getting him to sing. And he did. Harvey locked up half of the city's criminals in an afternoon. More of a triumph than Batman ever managed by himself.

When Joker started murdering people in Batman's name, he felt he couldn't endure that. Batman finally found what he thought was a limit Batman couldn't go passed. ("Today I found out what Batman can't do. He can't endure this").

In TDKR, he had succeeded in doing what he set out to do; saving Gotham and inspiring it's people. He did that via Harvey Dent by taking the blame for Harvey's crimes, and preserving Harvey's heroic image and the city's hope in Harvey's White Knight image. That resulted in the Dent Act, which essentially wiped out crime so much that Gordon was headed for a retirement.

So what else had Bruce got left? Just his grief over losing what he thought had been his only chance at true love and a normal life. Is it any wonder he was upset with Alfred for keeping such a big secret from him? She chose Harvey over him. Learning that harsh truth about Rachel was the kick up the butt he needed to move on and get over Rachel by realizing she had not been his once chance at true love. Hence why he was able to move on with Selina.

Excellent Post.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Yah, imo, The Dark Knight Trilogy had fine consistency with Bruce's goals and et cetera.

 

[BatLobster]

I have to disagree with this. Like I said earlier Rachel was the only issue that was actually talked about in length and for good reason. Bruce was under the assumption that once Gotham didn't need Batman they'd be together. In TDKR that happens but Rachel is dead AND his city is also built on a lie and that lie is based around a man who became the very thing Bruce was trying to prevent and he was made that way by a psychopath who in a roundabout way was only around because Batman was around. I certainly wouldn't say it was Rachel.

Surely if it was Rachel Bruce would never have been able to get back into the suit and find peace at the end? The film in general is about moving on. Not about getting over a lost girlfriend though that is a big part of it.

Absolutely. Not to mention, Bruce losing Rachel was always a mirror for him losing his parents. There's a reason the scenes following the Waynes' funeral and Rachel's death are pretty much exactly the same.

Bruce looking out window at Rachel/Bruce staring out window
"Prepared you some suppah"/"prepared you some breakfast"
Bruce ignores/feels like it's his fault, etc.

All scored to the same music cue. In TDKR, you see the pictures of the Waynes and of Rachel around Wayne Manor. Extremely painful memories. It shows that the past is always there haunting him, even if he's numb to it. Rachel's death is a cruel twist in many ways. It brings him right back to the loss he felt as a boy, plus it was the one thing anchoring him to the idea of one day living a normal life again. In TDK he's able to bounce back extremely quickly and do what needs to be done. Joker was too urgent a threat for him to mourn. That's the strength he has as Batman. But eventually, he loses that too. He's just left to rot. That doesn't make him an emo mope. He just went from damaged goods, to really damaged goods.