The Dark Knight Rises Batman Begins v.s The Dark Knight Rises

[The Joker]

QFT, but the big exception is Scarecrow. I didn't like the way he was taken out in BB. It felt like Nolan and Goyer didn't know how to write him out of the story and decided to half-ass it. That's my biggest issue with the character in that movie.

True, but I forgive Begins for the lame Scarecrow take down because he wasn't killed or captured. He was on the loose at the end, so he didn't end his life in a pathetic way like Bane and Talia did.

 

[Diabo]

The Dark Knight Rises, by far. The story is way more envolving.

 

[Diabo]

Or they have watched enough to know that her death scene was particularly bad/comical

Honestly, to me TDKR is by far the greatest comic book movie ever made. But at the theater, during that scene, a girl starts laughing hysterically in the middle of a very silent audience, and it really made me feel bad. There´s no excuse for that scene. It´s very anti-climatic. it´s simply badly executed.

 

[Ryan]

Bane's death was embarrassingly bad. So was Talia's.

Before TDKR the villains all had good exits. Ra's serenely closing his eyes before the train crashes. Joker's awesome monologue hanging upside down, then laughing his head off at Batman when he reveals what he did to Dent. Batman's surprise tackle of Dent in those tense final moments where he's tossing the coin to decide Gordon's son's fate.

Bingo!

 

[Diabo]

Bane´s death was amazing in its own kind of way. It wasn´t meant to be "epic", but unexpected. Being Nolan a director who likes to ground movies in reality as much as possible, Bane´s death was his way of showing how fragile and unstable life really is, since even the most powerful and intimidating human can die in the most pathetic and unpredictable way possible. I loved it. I love to be surprised.

 

[Travesty]

I would say Talia's death was embarrassingly bad, while Bane's was extremely underwhelming and anticlimactic.

Bane's death reminds me of the first TMNT movie, where there was this huge build up to The Shredder fight, and then he just gets thrown off the building.

 

[shauner111]

Bane´s death was amazing in its own kind of way. It wasn´t meant to be "epic", but unexpected. Being Nolan a director who likes to ground movies in reality as much as possible, Bane´s death was his way of showing how fragile and unstable life really is, since even the most powerful and intimidating human can die in the most pathetic and unpredictable way possible. I loved it. I love to be surprised.

My exact thoughts.

Plus, Bane was about to shoot Batmans head off, instead he gets a hole in his chest and thrown across the hall by the blast of a damn canon. Not only does that make Catwoman badass, but it's a pretty crazy death. It was just as abrupt as Harveys death.

 

[Diabo]

Better than the same old same old. At least it caught me completely by surprise and that´s something i find enjoyable in this day and age. It wasn´t anti-climatic. The problem is that people are used to watch the same crap over and over again, so their brains have been conditioned to expect a loud, epic, exuberant and predictable ending for every villain. They´re used to see it coming. Glad Nolan did something different.

 

[The Joker]

Bane slipping on a banana peel and falling and cracking his skull would be a surprise, too, that doesn't mean it should be in the movie. Bane's pitiful demise was the bad kind of surprise. They're embarrassing, anti climatic, and just plain bad. Give me same old, same old any day if it means it's superior over something "different".

Btw glad to see BB took the lead in the poll.

 

[Diabo]

Bane slipping on a banana peel and falling and cracking his skull would be a surprise, too, that doesn't mean it should be in the movie. Bane's pitiful demise was the bad kind of surprise. They're embarrassing, anti climatic, and just plain bad. Give me same old, same old any day if it means it's superior over something "different".

Btw glad to see BB took the lead in the poll.

Unlike slipping on a Banana peel, being killed by your enemy isn´t comedic incident.

 

[The Joker]

Catwoman was nothing to Bane other than a pawn to be used. There was not even a single interaction between her and Bane in the entire movie. So yeah it was comedic. Complete with Catwoman making a quip right after she did it.

Did you see anyone quipping after the other villains died or were defeated? The scene was a joke.

 

[Diabo]

Catwoman was nothing to Bane. There was not even a single interaction between her and Bane in the entire movie. So yeah it was comedic. Complete with Catwoman making a quip right after she did it.

A character doesn´t need to directly interact with another in order to exist a conflict of interests between them. Maybe you would only kill someone to save the person you like if you had already interacted with the aggressor before? Otherwise it would be a comedy? Not quite sure if i follow your logic.

Plus, we don´t see them interacting, but Catwoman did say they were trying to kill her, so i see no reason to believe they never interacted before. And even if they didn´t, i don´t see how is that relevant in any way.

 

[shauner111]

Catwoman was nothing to Bane other than a pawn to be used. There was not even a single interaction between her and Bane in the entire movie. So yeah it was comedic. Complete with Catwoman making a quip right after she did it.

Did you see anyone quipping after the other villains died or were defeated? The scene was a joke.

 

[The Joker]

A character doesn´t need to directly interact with another in order to exist a conflict of interests between them.

Yes they do if that character is to be the one to take the big bad main villain out permanently in the end.

Maybe you would only kill someone to save the person you like if you had already interacted with the aggressor before?

So a Cop would only shoot someone who's armed and dangerous if they already knew them lol?

Otherwise it would be a comedy? Not quite sure if i follow your logic.

That makes two of us. I've no idea what you're talking about.

Plus, we don´t see them interacting, but Catwoman did say they were trying to kill her, so i see no reason to believe he and her never interacted before.

Carmine Falcone sent his men to kill Rachel Dawes in Begins, but they never met. Joker killed Commissioner Loeb, Judge Surillo, and many other people I'm sure he never met before. Characters don't have to have interacted for one to have the other killed.

It doesn't matter if she interacted with him before anyway. The fact is we as the audience never saw it. So it never felt personal between Bane and Catwoman. They never felt like enemies. Bane never acknowledged Catwoman's presence in the movie.

 

[Diabo]

Sometimes i do feel that people don´t know exactly what to say. They just know they hate a movie and they´re not ok with other people liking it, so they will always try to find whatever reason is possible to discredit the film, even if it doesn´t make any sense, or it´s completely irrelevant.

"But Bane never interacted with Batman before. Why would he fight him? It makes no sense. It´s anti-climatic"

"But we never saw Bruce shaving. How come in one scene he has a beard and in the other he doesn´t? That´s anti-climatic."

Some people are truly obsessed with trashing a movie until they make sure there isn´t one single user saying anything positve about it. It is, indeed, an obsession. And you just have to read these boards to see it.

 

[Diabo]

Yes they do if that character is to be the one to take the big bad main villain out permanently in the end.

That´s a rule created by you. Don´t be too surprised if you find out that many people don´t agree with it.

It doesn't matter if she interacted with him before anyway. The fact is we as the audience never saw it. So it never felt personal between Bane and Catwoman. They never felt like enemies. Bane never acknowledged Catwoman's presence in the movie.

He acknowledged her presence by having his men trying to kill her. And why do they have to directly interact in order to be enemies? They just need to have a conflict of interests. And they had. Bane wanted Batman dead, Catwoman didn´t. Bane wanted to explode the city, Catwoman apparently didn´t, that´s why she helped to save it. I see plenty of reasons for her to kill him.

Oh, and btw, don´t speak on my behalf, ok? "we, we, we, we, we" We, who? The audience? You can only speak for yourself and for those you know. I´m the audience and i don´t feel the same way as you do.

 

[The Joker]

That´s a rule created by you. Don´t be too surprised if you find out that many people don´t agree with it.

That's not a rule, it's just good common sense. And most people do agree with it (I don't just mean the fans as Bane's death is one of many frequently criticized aspects in this movie), go look at all the other great comic book movies. You ever see any of the main villains killed off by someone they never even met in the movie?

He acknowledged her presence by having his men trying to kill her.

Which we never see.

And why do they have to directly interact in order to be enemies? They just need to have a conflict of interests. And they had.

Oh right so since the Priest from Blake's orphanage had a conflict of interest with Bane, too, that makes them enemies as well so it would have been just fine for him to have blown Bane away.

Bane wanted Batman dead, Catwoman didn´t. Bane wanted to explode the city, Catwoman apparently didn´t, that´s why she helped to save it. I see plenty of reasons for her to kill him.

So did all of Gotham City. That doesn't mean any of them should be the ones to kill Bane.

Oh, and btw, don´t speak on my behalf, ok? "we, we, we, we, we" We, who? The audience? You can only speak for yourself and for those you know. I´m the audience and i don´t feel the same way as you do.

Don't tell me what to do. I'll phrase my posts what ever way I want as long as they are respectful and within the rules. I have not inappropriately used the word we at all in that post you quoted. Or are you trying to say that we did see Bane and Catwoman interact? Unless you saw some special cut of the movie the rest of the world didn't.

 

[JackWhite]

I gotta agree with Mr. J on this one. Had Selina and Bane interacted; it would have made Bane's demise at her hands a lot better. But even then it feels very rush rush to me too. Almost like Nolan didn't have the time to give Bane a decent sendoff because Batman has to deal with the bomb subplot right after, not to mention give Talia a sendoff too.

 

[The Joker]

I gotta agree with Mr. J on this one. Had Selina and Bane interacted; it would have made Bane's demise at her hands a lot better. But even then it feels very rush rush to me too. Almost like Nolan didn't have the time to give Bane a decent sendoff because Batman has to deal with the bomb subplot right after, not to mention give Talia a sendoff too.

Thank you

Honestly when Bane and Catwoman were announced for this movie, I thought we might get something like this where they teamed up and then eventually became enemies;

But they never so much as had a fleeting interaction between them. Catwoman felt like she had more of a personal grudge with Daggett than she ever did with Bane.

 

[JackWhite]

No problem, dude.

I expected the same thing too. I figured Bane would force Catwoman to lure Batman into the sewers, which is what we got. But I also expected to have Selina think that after she gives him Batman there "alliance" would be over, then Bane would be like nope, which would add more tension to her screen time with Bane. Then you can have her kill Bane all you want, lol.

 

[Diabo]

That's not a rule, it's just good common sense. And most people do agree with it (I don't just mean the fans as Bane's death is one of many frequently criticized aspects in this movie), go look at all the other great comic book movies. You ever see any of the main villains killed off by someone they never even met in the movie?

No, it´s not commin sense. It´s your opinion. Your personal rules. That´s why i don´t see that many people walking around saying "she didn´t interact with bane before, that´s why it´s comical". Even those who didn´t particularly like the death, don´t neccessarly disliked it for the reasons you presented as "common sense".

"Most people"

Why are you talking about "most people"? Are you trying to validate your arguments by claiming the majority agrees with you? Well, in that case, we will have to come to the conclusion that The Dark Knight Rises, despite what you say, is really a great movie. At least, that´s what "Most People" say, judging by ratings and reviews. I´m right, you´re wrong, based on "Most People". Funny how things can be easily turned around, huh?

Which we never see.

Wich she tells. A lot of things that happen in movies are only told and not shown. Should we discard the fact that Bane was trained by the League, just because "we never see"? Your logic simply doesn´t work, and i don´t even think you actually believe otherwise.

Oh right so since the Priest from Blake's orphanage had a conflict of interest with Bane, too, that makes them enemies as well so it would have been just fine for him to have blown Bane away.

Again, your logic is flawed, like 90% of everything you say on this forum.

First, the priest, like any citizen of Gotham, had more than enough reasons to want to kill Bane. They´re suffering because of him, so Bane his their enemy, despite the fact they never interacted in a direct way.

Second, to compare one of the main characters in the movie with a priest that barely appears is pure non sense. I´m pretty sure everyone but you can understand the HUGE difference between Catwoman and that priest.

Don't tell me what to do. I'll phrase my posts what ever way I want as long as they are respectful

And i will respectfully remind you the FACT that you are in no position to speak on behalf of anyone but you and the people you know. I´m the audience and i don´t agree with you, so speak for yourself.

 

[The Joker]

No problem, dude.

I expected the same thing too. I figured Bane would force Catwoman to lure Batman into the sewers, which is what we got. But I also expected to have Selina think that after she gives him Batman there "alliance" would be over, then Bane would be like nope, which would add more tension to her screen time with Bane. Then you can have her kill Bane all you want, lol.

Exactly. That would have been fifty times better than what we got.

No, it´s not commin sense. It´s your opinion. Your personal rules.

No, it's common sense. That's why all the great movies use it. That's why you can't find a decent example of it otherwise.

That´s why i don´t see that many people walking around saying "she didn´t interact with bane before, that´s why it´s comical". Even those who didn´t particularly like the death, don´t neccessarly disliked it for the reasons you presented as "common sense".

No, because it's not the primary reason why it was so bad. It was the comical nonchalant way he was just blown away, and then forgotten about 5 seconds later.

You're the one who got into the lesser specifics about Catwoman being Bane's enemy so to you that made it ok. That's why we're discussing that now. You brought this element up.

"Most people"

Why are you talking about "most people". Are you trying to validate your arguments by claiming the majority agrees with you? Well, in that case, we will have to come to the conclusion that The Dark Knight Rises, despite what you say, is really a great movie. At least, that´s what "Most People" say, judging by ratings and reviews. I´m right, you´re wrong, based on "Most People". Funny how things can be easily turned around, huh?

No I'm not trying to validate my argument that way. That's stupid. By that logic it would be like saying because Transformers made more money than Batman Begins it's a better movie.

You were the one who was saying I shouldn't be surprised that many people don't agree with it, when it's the total opposite. Most people do. I was correcting you on that. Many people do agree with it. It's one of the most common criticisms against the movie.

Wich she tells. A lot of things that happen in movies are only told and not shown. Should we discard the fact that Bane was trained by the League, just because "we never see"? Your logic simply doesn´t work, and i don´t even think you actually believe otherwise.

Yeah things that didn't need to be shown. Like Bane being trained by the League. It wasn't necessary to see him get the training to know he was. He shared their ideals and philosophies, and was able to quote things Ra's had say to Bruce verbatim when he was training him. Not to mention we saw his back story in the pit with Talia, and how he was rescued by Ra's. There was more than enough there to feel the connection of Bane to the League.

Catwoman and Bane felt like strangers, never sharing one single interaction, with one only saying she's scared of him, and the other not even acknowledging her existence at all in one single scene. That is not nearly enough to validate Catwoman getting to the "enemy" who kills Bane.

Ever hear the expression show don't tell? You want to make your audience believe two characters are enemies then show it.

Again, your logic is flawed, like 90% of everything you say on this forum.

How do you know everything I say on this forum? You're only new. Are you an oldbie sneaking back under a new name? I had a feeling you were. Your posting style is very familiar. Which formerly banned user are you?

First, the priest, like any citizen of Gotham, had more than enough reasons to want to kill Bane. They´re suffering because of him, so Bane his their enemy, despite the fact they never interacted in a direct way.

Exactly. So by your logic it would be a-ok for him to kill Bane in the movie.

Second, to compare one of the main characters in the movie with a priest that barely appears is pure non sense. I´m pretty sure everyone but you can understand the HUGE difference between Catwoman and that priest.

Oh no no no, now you're shifting tactics. You never mentioned it had to be a main character. You just mentioned motivations for doing it.

Ok so if it has to be a main character then I guess it would have been fine if Lucius or Alfred wasted Bane yes? They're main characters and they share the same motives as Catwoman, so they are Bane's enemies.

And i will respectfully remind you the FACT that you are in no position to speak on behalf of anyone but you and the people you know. I´m the audience and i don´t agree with you, so speak for yourself.

I am in every position to speak on your behalf and everyone else when it comes to this issue because I know for a FACT you or anyone didn't see any interaction between Catwoman and Bane in this movie because you all saw the same movie as me. So I am totally right when I say we never saw it.

That's a fact. Deal with it.

 

[Diabo]

Exactly. That would have been fifty times better than what we got.



No, it's common sense. That's why all the great movies use it. That's why you can't find a decent example of it otherwise.

It´s the standard way of doing things in an industry that´s afraid to break the rules and innovate. But once in a while, someone breaks the rules. There´s always a first time for everything.

No, because it's not the primary reason why it was so bad. It was the comical nonchalant way he was just blown away, and then forgotten about 5 seconds later.

You're the one who got into the lesser specifics about Catwoman being Bane's enemy so to you that made it ok. That's why we're discussing that now. You brought this element up.

To me and to many people. You keep talking like if your opinion was the law, wich it isn´t. Plenty of people had no problem understanding why she killed Bane. Plenty of people had no problem with the scene.

No I'm not trying to validate my argument that way. That's stupid. By that logic it would be like saying because Transformers made more money than Batman Begins it's a better movie.

Not really the same thing, since Batman Begins had better reviews.

You were the one who was saying I shouldn't be surprised that many people don't agree with it, when it's the total opposite. Most people do. I was correcting you on that. Many people do agree with it. It's one of the most common criticisms against the movie.

No, you weren´t correcting me on anything because i didn´t say "most people"; i said "many people", wich is the reality. Many people don´t agree with you. You act like your opinion represented a fact, but the only fact is that there are many different opinions, and while many people had problems with that scene, many hadn´t.

And again, if to you the percentage of people who like or dislike something is relevant, than we gotta agree you´re wrong. Most people loves the movie. So you´re wrong. Your opinion is wrong.

Catwoman and Bane felt like strangers, never sharing one single interaction, with one only saying she's scared of him, and the other not even acknowledging her existence at all in one single scene. That is not nearly enough to validate Catwoman getting to the "enemy" who kills Bane.

She took Batman to Bane. She told Batman, in front of Bane, they were trying to kill her. So it´s more than obvious they have met before.

She had the skills, she had the interest and she had the emotional bond with Batman, so i see no problem in her saving him by killing Bane. To me it was a cool and surprising moment that went against all my expectations. I loved it, and many people loved it too.

Ever hear the expression show don't tell? You want to make your audience believe two characters are enemies then show it.

And to me it was shown more than once. I didn´t went like "what? they were enemies?", so i guess the movie did a good job stating whose side she was.

How do you know everything I say on this forum? You're only new. Are you an oldbie sneaking back under a new name? I had a feeling you were. Your posting style is very familiar. Which formerly banned user are you?

All threads are public. I read the forums, so i read your opinions. And i read you repeating yourself like if you were desperate to change everyone´s mind.

Oh no no no, now you're shifting tactics. You never mentioned it had to be a main character. You just mentioned motivations for doing it.

Ok so if it has to be a main character then I guess it would have been fine if Lucius or Alfred wasted Bane yes? They're main characters and they share the same motives as Catwoman, so they are Bane's enemies.

I´m not shifting anything. I´m simply stating that it makes more sense to be someone who has a strong presence in the movie and the right motivations. The priest has the right motivations, but not a strong presence in the movie.

I would have been ok with Alfred killing Bane, depending on the context and circumstance.

I am in every position to speak on your behalf and everyone else when it comes to this issue because I know for a FACT you or anyone didn't see any interaction between Catwoman and Bane in this movie because you all saw the same movie as me. So I am totally right when I say we never saw it.

You said "we never saw it so it never felt personal". You´re telling me how i feel, wich you are in no position to. You can´t tell me how i feel. I feel it was personal because the movie showed me enough evidence that they were enemies. You don´t get to tell me how i feel, pal. Stick to your feelings. Let mine alone.

And even if it wasn´t "personal", the simple fact she likes Batman and wanted to save him would have been more than enough to kill Bane.

 

[Travesty]

Oh boy....

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Bane and Catwoman are iconic and memorable. More so than Nolan's Ras Al Ghul.

I also thought Bane's slow takeover of Gotham more interesting than Nolan's origin story for Batman which I always felt cheated Batman of his true origin (trained since a child around the world to mold himself into the ultimate crime fighter with dozens of mastered skills, not just ninjitsu).