The Dark Knight Rises Is "The Dark Knight Rises" as grounded in reality as its predecessors?

[Micromind]

I didn't ignore it. I answered that one. People were scared of Joker and ya still got to see them being scared and panicked and what they thought of the situation. Same in Begins when things were so crappy and desperate in Gotham Nolan showed how desperate and crappy the people were and how it was affecting those little people. Ya heard what they thought about Batman causing a ruckus in Gotham.

Blake was the only one putting those stupid little chalk symbols on the wall cos he saw that little kid drawing one on the bench in the orphanage. That's where he got the idea from. He was the only one doing it. A main character. What a surprise.

Five months of control by Bane's mercenaries can hardly be compared to a few days of anarchy caused by Joker or RaS Al Ghul.

Bane and his mercenaries along with freed criminals of Black Gate prison and his kangaroo courts were enough to terrorize Gotham's citizens, plus the fact that almost all of the police force was missing and the looming threat of bomb.

 

[Fudgie]

Precisely

It's those major plot occurrences like Batman's return which should have sparked Gotham reaction. But we never saw it. It's all laid on the main characters whom we already know how they feel about all of this anyway. Yet the plot is about the people of Gotham, and they're the ones robbed of a voice.

Exactly. Showing the likes of the stock exchange people didn't add anything. All it did was show us people in Gotham City go the Stock Exchange. Which is obvious anyway when you have millionaires living in the city. Do we need to know there's religious people in Gotham by showing Sunday mass in a church, too? Because it would serve as much purpose as the stick exchange people did.

It's all about execution. One orphan saying he would like Batman to come back is as much of an insight we got from the Gotham people.

Quoted for truth.

 

[Fudgie]

Five months of control by Bane's mercenaries can hardly be compared to a few days of anarchy caused by Joker or RaS Al Ghul.

Ehhh yeah it can when the J-Man got 'em all so scared they were evacuating the city and calling in the National Guard. Five months of a siege and ya didn't get a whisper from anyone. Ya never felt Gotham's panic and desperation. No tension. Just a bunch of mute sheep with no personality. That stupid time leap from day one of siege to month 5 of it never made it feel like the city was under siege for that long either.

Ya know why ya felt the chaos in TDK and the desperation in Begins? Cos Nolan showed it with the people. Oh yeah.

Bane and his mercenaries along with freed criminals of Black Gate prison and his kangaroo courts were enough to terrorize Gotham's citizens, plus the fact that almost all of the police force was missing and the looming threat of bomb.

Yup and all of those things ain't stopping Nolan from showing how this crap was affecting the people. Reactions. They didn't all go mute and lose their damn voices as soon as Bane took over. Just like the main characters didn't. Nolan just ignored them.

Fact.

 

[Anita18]

Ehhh no they didn't. What was so *****ey about them? *****ebags are someone like Mr. Earle or Reese.

"Change is either good or bad. I vote bad." "Why?" "I flipped a coin."

This is why gas prices fluctuate so much.

Also, the way that they flippantly threw money at the shoe shiner.

At any rate, I don't think there was a need to actually show Gotham all panicky at the end. There were snippets of it in the montage during Bane's speech. And the streets are EMPTY. You ever see a large city like NYC where the streets are desolate? It's very disconcerting. It's very obvious that something was wrong. At the end of 5 months, I bet most Gothamites were resigned to hiding instead of being panicked.

 

[Micromind]

"Change is either good or bad. I vote bad." "Why?" "I flipped a coin."

This is why gas prices fluctuate so much.

Also, the way that they flippantly threw money at the shoe shiner.

At any rate, I don't think there was a need to actually show Gotham all panicky at the end. There were snippets of it in the montage during Bane's speech. And the streets are EMPTY. You ever see a large city like NYC where the streets are desolate? It's very disconcerting. It's very obvious that something was wrong. At the end of 5 months, I bet most Gothamites were resigned to hiding instead of being panicked.

Agreed.

 

[Fudgie]

"Change is either good or bad. I vote bad." "Why?" "I flipped a coin."

He was kidding. You know. Humor.

Also, the way that they flippantly threw money at the shoe shiner.

Ehhh he handed him the money and walked off. What did ya expect him to do, hand it on a silver tray?

At any rate, I don't think there was a need to actually show Gotham all panicky at the end.

Yeah there was. It's a siege. Siege = panic. Siege = chaos. Siege = desperation. Siege = terror.

Never saw that.

There were snippets of it in the montage during Bane's speech.

Snippets ain't good enough for a take over a of a whole city. That's like saying showing snippets of Joker's chaos was enough to make ya believe the people were scared of him.

And the streets are EMPTY. You ever see a large city like NYC where the streets are desolate? It's very disconcerting. It's very obvious that something was wrong. At the end of 5 months, I bet most Gothamites were resigned to hiding instead of being panicked.

Wow empty streets. That sure paints a picture of Gotham's people in a time of their greatest crisis ever. I am so grateful I saw empty streets instead of seeing the poor people of Gotham in their despair.

Not.

They should have just showed a mugging in Batman Begins and Flass on the take and then said Gotham was hopelessly corrupt.

 

[The Joker]

At any rate, I don't think there was a need to actually show Gotham all panicky at the end. There were snippets of it in the montage during Bane's speech. And the streets are EMPTY. You ever see a large city like NYC where the streets are desolate? It's very disconcerting. It's very obvious that something was wrong. At the end of 5 months, I bet most Gothamites were resigned to hiding instead of being panicked.

I think there was definitely a need. This is not some small plot device that was being executed here. This was a city wide siege. A revolution that was aimed at the people of Gotham City. So if it's aimed at the people then the only good way to do it is to show us the people and how they are handling this so called revolution.

Showing deserted streets doesn't paint that kind of a picture. Much like just showing newspaper headlines or news reports wouldn't be a great way to show the Joker's created a chaotic backlash on Gotham City.

 

[Anita18]

Ehhh he handed him the money and walked off. What did ya expect him to do, hand it on a silver tray?

Did you not watch this scene? There was no handing off of anything. He threw money at the guy's face and walked away without even looking at him. I watch for these things, you know you find out a guy's real character by how they treat service staff.

Wow empty streets. That sure paints a picture of Gotham's people in a time of their greatest crisis ever. I am so grateful I saw empty streets instead of seeing the poor people of Gotham in their despair.

Not.

At the end of FIVE MONTHS under siege, people are tired and they are so scared they just want to lay low and hope everything dies down. Foley exemplified that. It's only an intrepid few who dare to revolt. It's the same across history.

But agree to disagree, whatever.

 

[Anita18]

I think there was definitely a need. This is not some small plot device that was being executed here. This was a city wide siege. A revolution that was aimed at the people of Gotham City. So if it's aimed at the people then the only good way to do it is to show us the people and how they are handling this so called revolution.

Showing deserted streets doesn't paint that kind of a picture. Much like just showing newspaper headlines or news reports wouldn't be a great way to show the Joker's created a chaotic backlash on Gotham City.

Seeing the boy's home filled to the brim with adults and families and decidedly non-orphans was the big hint for me.

 

[Micromind]

Dude, Different circumstances produce different reactions from people.

The situation in BB and TDK is Not comparable to situation TDKR, but You insist that people should behave in similar way.

 

[Fudgie]

Did you not watch this scene? There was no handing off of anything. He threw money at the guy's face and walked away without even looking at him. I watch for these things, you know you find out a guy's real character by how they treat service staff.

Then you ain't remembering it right. He handed him the money. He didn't throw it at him.

At the end of FIVE MONTHS under siege, people are tired and they are so scared they just want to lay low and hope everything dies down. Foley exemplified that. It's only an intrepid few who dare to revolt. It's the same across history.

Two ways for ya to look at this one. Neither is good. Here it is. Nolan skipped over the whole siege and just went straight to the climax ignoring the people in the city suffering through this crap.

The second is when the siege started or when it was coming to a head, he still could have filled in some Gothamites in this situation. Then ya have the other money shots like the Batman coming back. Dent's phoney hero image getting exposed. Did ya see what any Gothamites thought of those whopping things that affected their city? Nope. Course not. Jusdt the same old main characters.

Nolan ignore the Gotham people.

 

[Anita18]

Dude, Different circumstances produce different reactions from people.

The situation in BB and TDK is Not comparable to situation TDKR, but You insist that people should behave in similar way.

Right. If the Joker's siege lasted for months, I think people's reactions would be similar to what we were shown in TDKR. There's a point where people stop panicking and are resigned to their fates, more or less.

 

[The Joker]

Seeing the boy's home filled to the brim with adults and families and decidedly non-orphans was the big hint for me.

All that showed you was the rich had been thrown out of their homes, which we knew anyway.

 

[Fudgie]

Dude, Different circumstances produce different reactions from people.

The situation in BB and TDK is Not comparable to situation TDKR, but You insist that people should behave in similar way.

Ummm lets see; Gotham in a desperate situation in Begins? Check. Gotham in a desperate situation in TDK? Check. Gotham in a desperate situation in TDKR? Check.

Villain comes in and wreaks havoc on Gotham in Begins? Check. Villain comes in and wreaks havoc in TDK? Check. Villain comes in and wreaks havoc in TDKR? Check.

See the desperate situations affect Gotham's people in Begins? Check. See the desperate situations affect Gotham's people in TDK? Check. See the desperate situation affect Gotham's people in TDKR? Nope.

See how Batman affects Gotham's people in Begins? Check. See how Batman affects Gotham people in TDK? Check. See Batman's return affect Gotham's people in TDKR? Nope.

See how Falcone affects Gotham's people in Begins? Check. See how Gotham's people idolized Dent in TDK? Check. See how the Dent lie affected people in TDKR? Nope.

Facts.

 

[Anita18]

Then you ain't remembering it right. He handed him the money. He didn't throw it at him.

I just watched it. He tossed the cash at the man, then quickly puts his wallet back into his jacket. There was no time for an exchange using hands.

But if you want to let your bias affect the way you interpret things that actually happened, go right ahead.

 

[Fudgie]

I just watched it. He tossed the cash at the man, then quickly puts his wallet back into his jacket. There was no time for an exchange using hands.

Screencap it or send me a link to where ya watched it.

 

[Anita18]

Screencap it or send me a link to where ya watched it.

Can't. It's literally a second-long motion and I'm not going to break forum rules to do it. There's Google.

 

[The Joker]

I have to back up Anita on that one. I do recall the stock exchange guy tossing the money at the shoe cleaner rather than handing it to him.

 

[BatLobster]

Yeah. That one stood out to me on the first viewing. They made the traders blatantly *****ey. It's also a very cheap tip if I recall too lol

 

[Anita18]

Also, Nolan did not ignore the Gotham people. What we're disagreeing on is whether he should have showed more of it. That's fair - people disagree on "how much someone should have done" all the time. I think that's how people get embroiled in politics arguments when we ultimately agree on the same things.

Could Nolan have shown more? Yes, duh, but I understand why he couldn't have. Time constraints, and he did what he could and we got the jist. Did he 100% ignore them? No.

 

[JackWhite]

Screencap it or send me a link to where ya watched it.



Facts ain't bias.

More like opinion, dude. The difference between The Joker and your dislike of the film is he isn't just blatantly trying to tear down the film at every chance he can get, with what has now become obvious trolling on your part. Discussion about what we like or didn't like about the film is fine, but the negativity in your posts is exhausting. You refute everything everyone posts on here in defense of the film. If you hate it that much what are you doing here? I saw Avengers about a month ago, wasn't too thrilled with it, but you don't see me harping about it over on the Avengers forum.

Say your peace and be done with it, or at least argue your points with some class and decency.

 

[Doc Samson]

While I do agree, and have said as much here, that I feel the film is crippled emotionally because it's so devoid of the regular Gothamite point of view, I also think the type of occupation Bane put in place could "plausibly" cause a similar desolate reaction. At least for the common man.

This is a terrorist who not only has a nuke, but high powered weaponry courtesy of Wayne Enterprises. Not to mention fully armed fanatical extremists along with freshly released prisoners patrolling the streets. I highly doubt people would just be freely moving about, no matter what kind of propaganda Bane was spewing. He snapped a man's neck, presumably live on TV from the football game. Gotham should inherently not trust him.

It's that trust however, that we needed to be privy to, because without seeing how Gotham reacts to Gordon's letter, or even if they believe it, arguably the most emotionally charged aspect of the trilogy isn't really resolved or dealt with, on any level. Honestly, I at least wanted to see Gordon, at the end, being apprehended or made to stand before a congressional committee of some sort to answer for this scandal. At least a probe into the factual basis of it. But he essentially gets away with it, and that's the most crucial disappointment with the lack of Gotham perspective, to me, because the main thing I wanted to know at the end of TDK was how that particular plot point would be resolved.

 

[TheBat812]

While I do agree, and have said as much here, that I feel the film is crippled emotionally because it's so devoid of the regular Gothamite point of view, I also think the type of occupation Bane put in place could "plausibly" cause a similar desolate reaction. At least for the common man.

This is a terrorist who not only has a nuke, but high powered weaponry courtesy of Wayne Enterprises. Not to mention fully armed fanatical extremists along with freshly released prisoners patrolling the streets. I highly doubt people would just be freely moving about, no matter what kind of propaganda Bane was spewing. He snapped a man's neck, presumably live on TV from the football game. Gotham should inherently not trust him.

It's that trust however, that we needed to be privy to, because without seeing how Gotham reacts to Gordon's letter, or even if they believe it, arguably the most emotionally charged aspect of the trilogy isn't really resolved or dealt with, on any level. Honestly, I at least wanted to see Gordon, at the end, being apprehended or made to stand before a congressional committee of some sort to answer for this scandal. At least a probe into the factual basis of it. But he essentially gets away with it, and that's the most crucial disappointment with the lack of Gotham perspective, to me, because the main thing I wanted to know at the end of TDK was how that particular plot point would be resolved.

I agree with you to an extent regarding what it coudl have added. I would not say the film is crippled emotionally though, because to me this film is incredibly Bruce-centric, and the primary conflict and source of tension is whether or not he will be able to save Gotham through hope and find a way to put his pain behind him. I would agree that theoretically it would have been nice to see (although I question how: are we talking just a few inserts? or building up an emotional connection to the people of gotham? Because the latter takes time they didn't have, and they already do the former to a minimal extent), but it was a good thing to sacrifice imo, seeing that we do have at least 5 characters that represent the views of the various classes of the people of Gotham. Remember he used Tale of Two Cities as his inspiration, which is a great example of using characters to personify the masses.

I do agree about Gordon, but I felt like he did resolve his arc characterwise, but not plotwise. I just don't think they could find a place to put that that didn't disrupt the pacing of the ending, so I just look at it like they never clarified if his job was in jeopardy, and even if it were, Gordon has learned to accept the truth and its consequences.

 

[Anita18]

I agree with you to an extent regarding what it coudl have added. I would not say the film is crippled emotionally though, because to me this film is incredibly Bruce-centric, and the primary conflict and source of tension is whether or not he will be able to save Gotham through hope and find a way to put his pain behind him. I would agree that theoretically it would have been nice to see (although I question how: are we talking just a few inserts? or building up an emotional connection to the people of gotham? Because the latter takes time they didn't have, and they already do the former to a minimal extent), but it was a good thing to sacrifice imo, seeing that we do have at least 5 characters that represent the views of the various classes of the people of Gotham. Remember he used Tale of Two Cities as his inspiration, which is a great example of using characters to personify the masses.

I do agree about Gordon, but I felt like he did resolve his arc characterwise, but not plotwise. I just don't think they could find a place to put that that didn't disrupt the pacing of the ending, so I just look at it like they never clarified if his job was in jeopardy, and even if it were, Gordon has learned to accept the truth and its consequences.

I don't think anyone could deny that. Everything in TDKR revolves around Bruce's journey, which is why the relative minimizing of everything else is justified to me.

 

[Fudgie]

Can't. It's literally a second-long motion and I'm not going to break forum rules to do it. There's Google.

Google ain't showing up any results.

Also, Nolan did not ignore the Gotham people.

You're right. He gave us one orphan missing Batman. How epic.

More like opinion, dude. The difference between The Joker and your dislike of the film is he isn't just blatantly trying to tear down the film at every chance he can get, with what has now become obvious trolling on your part. Discussion about what we like or didn't like about the film is fine, but the negativity in your posts is exhausting. You refute everything everyone posts on here in defense of the film.

Trolling is breaking forum rules like insulting people by calling them names. I ain't doing that. If I want to disagree with you then I will. If you don't like it then put me on ignore.

If you hate it that much what are you doing here? I saw Avengers about a month ago, wasn't too thrilled with it, but you don't see me harping about it over on the Avengers forum.

That's you. You ain't the standard for the fan world to follow. I'm a big Batman fan. I discuss the good and the crap. Comes with being a fan of something.

Say your peace and be done with it, or at least argue your points with some class and decency.

I ain't ever going to do the former, and I always do the latter. I give my reasons for disagreement. Some of you just get all hot and bothered because it annoys you that you get strong disagreement.

While I do agree, and have said as much here, that I feel the film is crippled emotionally because it's so devoid of the regular Gothamite point of view, I also think the type of occupation Bane put in place could "plausibly" cause a similar desolate reaction. At least for the common man.

This is a terrorist who not only has a nuke, but high powered weaponry courtesy of Wayne Enterprises. Not to mention fully armed fanatical extremists along with freshly released prisoners patrolling the streets. I highly doubt people would just be freely moving about, no matter what kind of propaganda Bane was spewing. He snapped a man's neck, presumably live on TV from the football game. Gotham should inherently not trust him.

It's that trust however, that we needed to be privy to, because without seeing how Gotham reacts to Gordon's letter, or even if they believe it, arguably the most emotionally charged aspect of the trilogy isn't really resolved or dealt with, on any level. Honestly, I at least wanted to see Gordon, at the end, being apprehended or made to stand before a congressional committee of some sort to answer for this scandal. At least a probe into the factual basis of it. But he essentially gets away with it, and that's the most crucial disappointment with the lack of Gotham perspective, to me, because the main thing I wanted to know at the end of TDK was how that particular plot point would be resolved.

Quoted for truth. Emotionally crippling the movie is the perfect description. That's why I didn't give a damn about Gotham. There was no reason to.