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

[TheBat812]

The reason to care about Gotham is because of how much it has meant to Bruce throughout the course of the films. I don't need them to make me feel for Gotham anymore, this is one of the advantages of being the last in a trilogy - because I've already been with them through tremendous terrors, I can already picture how they're feeling just through the shots of the empty streets. Maybe Nolan expected too much out of the audience, and maybe when you see that shot you just see an empty clean street, but I feel the fear of Gotham's citizens, trapping them in their homes with no hope. NOT seeing them is a powerful tool in this case, cinematically.

 

[The Joker]

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.

That's one of the best analysis I've read on it, Doc

Crippling the movie emotionally, that is essentially the major drawback of it. To be emotionally invested in the plight of Gotham's populace I need to see and feel their pain and fear. I didn't. Empty streets is the equivalent to a newspaper headline or TV reports. Second hand information that doesn't show you anything about the people.

Yes, Gordon's deception never being followed through with any consequences for him, and the complete lack of response about the big Harvey Dent cover up was bad move.

The only reason to care about Gotham is because of how much it has meant to Bruce throughout the course of the films.

Nolan never took it for granted that we should just care about Gotham just because Bruce does before this. He gave us reasons to by giving Gotham life via it's people.

In this movie that seemed to be non existent. But then he expects us care about dull characters like Foley. Take his death scene for instance, he's killed and the camera zooms in on his body dramatically like we're supposed to be affected that he's just been killed as though this was Gordon or Alfred who'd just been gunned down.

I doubt anyone batted an eyelid at his death but the way it was shot he was obviously expecting it to mean something. Like with the Gotham situation, he was executing something and expecting the audience to care about this city's people without really investing any time in the people to give us reasons to care about them. If he had never bothered with Gotham's populace before in the first two movies either this may not stick out as much as it does. Or if Bane's plan was not so heavily based on the people of Gotham and trying to inspire them to revolt against authority, against the rich, and bring some home truths to them like the Harvey Dent cover up.

 

[batfreakforever]

why would the "viewer or fan" not care about gotham. You care about gotham because its bruces mission to protect it. Its thats simple. Some fans even said that they wouldnt care if the bomb blew up gotham because they didnt see the regular joe. Wtf! If the bomb blows up the city bruce fails.

 

[batfreakforever]

The reason to care about Gotham is because of how much it has meant to Bruce throughout the course of the films. I don't need them to make me feel for Gotham anymore, this is one of the advantages of being the last in a trilogy - because I've already been with them through tremendous terrors, I can already picture how they're feeling just through the shots of the empty streets. Maybe Nolan expected too much out of the audience, and maybe when you see that shot you just see an empty clean street, but I feel the fear of Gotham's citizens, trapping them in their homes with no hope. NOT seeing them is a powerful tool in this case, cinematically.

This guy gets it. Its good to know im not alone in my views.

 

[BatLobster]

The reason to care about Gotham is because of how much it has meant to Bruce throughout the course of the films. I don't need them to make me feel for Gotham anymore, this is one of the advantages of being the last in a trilogy - because I've already been with them through tremendous terrors, I can already picture how they're feeling just through the shots of the empty streets. Maybe Nolan expected too much out of the audience, and maybe when you see that shot you just see an empty clean street, but I feel the fear of Gotham's citizens, trapping them in their homes with no hope. NOT seeing them is a powerful tool in this case, cinematically.

Agreed. I think Nolan absolutely saw this as an advantage of being the last film in the trilogy, and viewing it all as one big movie. The first 5 hours of it do a great job of establishing the character of the city and showing the range of people that inhabit it and convincing us that it's worth saving, the last 2:45 chose to focus on more specific characters to represent various good, bad and grey aspects of the city, even elevating "ordinary" characters like Blake to the forefront of the action.

 

[Fudgie]

Brilliant strategy. First 5 hours about the character of the city. Start a revolution in the city with the people and then ignore the character of the city when ya have a revolution going on in it.

What a total fail at story telling.

 

[BatLobster]

Worked for me.

 

[Fudgie]

Everything worked for you in TDKR.

 

[BatLobster]

Just about. Except Modine's read of, "Jesus Blake, every cop in the city is down there! GARSH!".

That was pretty awful. Makes Talia's death scene look good.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Brilliant strategy. First 5 hours about the character of the city. Start a revolution in the city with the people and then ignore the character of the city when ya have a revolution going on in it.

What a total fail at story telling.

First 5 hours

Once more, Batman Begins does NOT do any better of a job telling Gotham's emotions than TDKR. BB and TDKR both have main and minor characters, not a citywide feeling as in TDK.

 

[The Joker]

Once more, Batman Begins does NOT do any better of a job telling Gotham's emotions than TDKR.

Yes, it does;

Joe Chill, an example of the desperate who took the lives of Bruce's parents. Shows how bad in Gotham things got. An example of the kind of person who kills when they're hungry as Ra's put it.

The homeless man, a flavor of the lowest in Gotham who are not bad guys, haven't given into the desperation and accept the poverty situation of Gotham. He could have mugged Bruce or tried to steal from him, but he didn't.

D.A. Finch and his reluctance to prosecute because Falcone has half the city bought and paid for. An example of the "Good people scared" that Rachel spoke about.

Flass, the corrupt Cop. An obvious one. The rotten apples good people like Gordon has to work with and can't do anything about it.

Judge Faden, the corrupt judge. This man can set people free to line up for assassination for Falcone. An example of how Falcone's corruption has spread into the legal system.

The upper class people at the hotel scene. People who are not desperate, not affected by crime, and therefore have a divided opinion on Batman tackling crime in Gotham. Some think he's great, others think he is crazy, shouldn't take the law into his own hands etc.

Earle, more upper class. A man in power who abuses his power by covering up thefts in his company. He's not corrupt. He's just a bad egg.

The Felafel guy, the lower class. Struggles to earn a living and is abused by the corrupt like Flass by taking his money.

The Narrows kid, more lower class. The kind of good people who populate the Narrows. The "dirty" section of Gotham.

There's a whole bunch of different types and classes of Gothamites and all used effectively in the story to paint a personality and reaction to all things in Gotham. Far more than TDKR ever gives.

To paraphrase what someone else said; If the story revolves around a city being taken over you need to know how the city is reacting. Gotham IMO felt more like a city in TDK than TDKR. Gotham looks in good shape to me. The "Ghost town" thing is just a cheap excuse to me to convey Gotham's state. We've seen Gotham reactions in BB and TDK a few examples being the BB dinner table scene (swimming pool), Police discussion in BB, Rachel and her lawyer friend, things working differently after Falcone's taken down, Dinner table scene in TDK, Chaos in hospitals, Ferry scene, Chaos outside TV station, Pub with Engel's Joker speech, Army around with heaps of traffic and others. All these things no matter how big or small or whether you like them or dislike them build a city outside of Batman/Gordon/Dent/Alfred etc.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Solo characters, and TDKR had just as much. Wall Street *****ebags, Selina Kyle's friend, the numerous police officers, Stryver, the Congressman.

 

[Fudgie]

Yes, it does;

Joe Chill, an example of the desperate who took the lives of Bruce's parents. Shows how bad in Gotham things got. An example of the kind of person who kills when they're hungry as Ra's put it.

The homeless man, a flavor of the lowest in Gotham who are not bad guys, haven't given into the desperation and accept the poverty situation of Gotham. He could have mugged Bruce or tried to steal from him, but he didn't.

D.A. Finch and his reluctance to prosecute because Falcone has half the city bought and paid for. An example of the "Good people scared" that Rachel spoke about.

Flass, the corrupt Cop. An obvious one. The rotten apples good people like Gordon has to work with and can't do anything about it.

Judge Faden, the corrupt judge. This man can set people free to line up for assassination for Falcone. An example of how Falcone's corruption has spread into the legal system.

The upper class people at the hotel scene. People who are not desperate, not affected by crime, and therefore have a divided opinion on Batman tackling crime in Gotham. Some think he's great, others think he is crazy, shouldn't take the law into his own hands etc.

Earle, more upper class. A man in power who abuses his power by covering up thefts in his company. He's not corrupt. He's just a bad egg.

The Felafel guy, the lower class. Struggles to earn a living and is abused by the corrupt like Flass by taking his money.

The Narrows kid, more lower class. The kind of good people who populate the Narrows. The "dirty" section of Gotham.

There's a whole bunch of different types and classes of Gothamites and all used effectively in the story to paint a personality and reaction to all things in Gotham. Far more than TDKR ever gives.

To paraphrase what someone else said; If the story revolves around a city being taken over you need to know how the city is reacting. Gotham IMO felt more like a city in TDK than TDKR. Gotham looks in good shape to me. The "Ghost town" thing is just a cheap excuse to me to convey Gotham's state. We've seen Gotham reactions in BB and TDK a few examples being the BB dinner table scene (swimming pool), Police discussion in BB, Rachel and her lawyer friend, things working differently after Falcone's taken down, Dinner table scene in TDK, Chaos in hospitals, Ferry scene, Chaos outside TV station, Pub with Engel's Joker speech, Army around with heaps of traffic and others. All these things no matter how big or small or whether you like them or dislike them build a city outside of Batman/Gordon/Dent/Alfred etc.

Quoted for truth.

Solo characters

Characters being the operative word. So what if they were solo? Lots of TDK's ones were, too. Did they not show ya different kinds of Gotham people being different voices for the people? Yeah they did. Ya had group ones in Begins as well like the posh snobs at the hotel and the Cops in the station with Loeb and Gordon talking Batman one guy or a creature or an a-hole in a costume.

and TDKR had just as much. Wall Street *****ebags

Didn't tell ya nothing about Gotham's situation or Batman or Bane's siege. We know rich people can be *****es. We saw some in the last two movies like Earle and Reese.

Selina Kyle's friend

Yeah and what did that little honey show ya about Gotham that Selina already didn't?

the numerous police officers

Didn't say or do nothing.

Stryver

LOS lackey.

the Congressman.

What did he show ya except he likes sexy women.

 

[Anno_Domini]

If the cops are people who "didn't say or do nothing" than that Falafel guy for sure didn't do anything.

 

[Fudgie]

If the cops are people who "didn't say or do nothing" than that Falafel guy for sure didn't do anything.

Falafel guy was poor lower class Gotham citizen who had kids to feed and gets ripped off by fat bent Cop Flass who takes the guys' money. Shows ya how the bent Coppers of Gotham take what they like from anyone. Ya saw that earlier as well when Flass was in that store getting candy bars and Gordon sees him taking a wad of cash from the cashier.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Lol, Falafel guy was nothing more than something to set up a meme.

 

[Fudgie]

Lol, Falafel guy was nothing more than something to set up a meme.

Nope. They could have left it at Flass taking cash in that store. But Nolan wanted to show bent Flass taking money from a guy who's poor and has kids he needs to support. That's how ya create a Gotham persona. Give us the little people in Gotham suffering from the crime and corrupt *****es who take advantage of the desperate.

 

[TheBat812]

Yes, it does;

Joe Chill, an example of the desperate who took the lives of Bruce's parents. Shows how bad in Gotham things got. An example of the kind of person who kills when they're hungry as Ra's put it.

The homeless man, a flavor of the lowest in Gotham who are not bad guys, haven't given into the desperation and accept the poverty situation of Gotham. He could have mugged Bruce or tried to steal from him, but he didn't.

D.A. Finch and his reluctance to prosecute because Falcone has half the city bought and paid for. An example of the "Good people scared" that Rachel spoke about.

Flass, the corrupt Cop. An obvious one. The rotten apples good people like Gordon has to work with and can't do anything about it.

Judge Faden, the corrupt judge. This man can set people free to line up for assassination for Falcone. An example of how Falcone's corruption has spread into the legal system.

The upper class people at the hotel scene. People who are not desperate, not affected by crime, and therefore have a divided opinion on Batman tackling crime in Gotham. Some think he's great, others think he is crazy, shouldn't take the law into his own hands etc.

Earle, more upper class. A man in power who abuses his power by covering up thefts in his company. He's not corrupt. He's just a bad egg.

The Felafel guy, the lower class. Struggles to earn a living and is abused by the corrupt like Flass by taking his money.

The Narrows kid, more lower class. The kind of good people who populate the Narrows. The "dirty" section of Gotham.

There's a whole bunch of different types and classes of Gothamites and all used effectively in the story to paint a personality and reaction to all things in Gotham. Far more than TDKR ever gives.

To paraphrase what someone else said; If the story revolves around a city being taken over you need to know how the city is reacting. Gotham IMO felt more like a city in TDK than TDKR. Gotham looks in good shape to me. The "Ghost town" thing is just a cheap excuse to me to convey Gotham's state. We've seen Gotham reactions in BB and TDK a few examples being the BB dinner table scene (swimming pool), Police discussion in BB, Rachel and her lawyer friend, things working differently after Falcone's taken down, Dinner table scene in TDK, Chaos in hospitals, Ferry scene, Chaos outside TV station, Pub with Engel's Joker speech, Army around with heaps of traffic and others. All these things no matter how big or small or whether you like them or dislike them build a city outside of Batman/Gordon/Dent/Alfred etc.

You only 'need to know' if your story demands it. There's no crowd reactions to be had when the entire city is shut in their own houses in fear. The use of desolate imagery being a 'cheap excuse to convey Gotham's state' is a gross misrepresentation of what they add to the film IMO. Even on first viewing, there was an incredibly unsettling feeling to Gotham for me. Leaving the terror of Gothams' citizens to the imagination by simply showing that there is NOBODY out, and everybody is locking themselves up, is a much more effective method to me than showing in this instance.

Or put it this way, I probably would never have complained about it if it were in there, but never once did I think, "wow I don't get how Gotham is feeling about this, why can't we get more insight on that perturbing piece of the puzzle?" We already get everything we need through the more featured characters. It becomes superfluous and derivative in places where the tension is not about the reaction, but how it's revelation affects the principle characters. IE with Gordon's letter reveal - showing the different crowd reactions just reinforces possible outcomes we already know, but they don't even affect our character directly (meaning he does not see nor is he affect by these reactions). We already understand the shame Gordon feels, why do we need crowds to tell us, oh ya, "that was indeed shameful and it hurts so deep." I understand why it natural to think that might be warranted (convention), but that doesn't make it necessary or better.


TDK needs the crowd shots because the tension lies in the moment, but TDKR is about a long siege, where the tension is with the characters' flaws and the repercussions of such, and whether they can come to terms with their faults and still come out of it inspiring hope in a better system.

 

[Fudgie]

You only 'need to know' if your story demands it. There's no crowd reactions to be had when the entire city is shut in their own houses in fear. The use of desolate imagery being a 'cheap excuse to convey Gotham's state' is a gross misrepresentation of what they add to the film IMO. Even on first viewing, there was an incredibly unsettling feeling to Gotham for me. Leaving the terror of Gothams' citizens to the imagination by simply showing that there is NOBODY out, and everybody is locking themselves up, is a much more effective method to me than showing in this instance.

Or put it this way, I probably would never have complained about it if it were in there, but never once did I think, "wow I don't get how Gotham is feeling about this, why can't we get more insight on that perturbing piece of the puzzle?" We already get everything we need through the more featured characters. It becomes superfluous and derivative in places where the tension is not about the reaction, but how it's revelation affects the principle characters. IE with Gordon's letter reveal - showing the different crowd reactions just reinforces possible outcomes we already know, but they don't even affect our character directly (meaning he does not see nor is he affect by these reactions). We already understand the shame Gordon feels, why do we need crowds to tell us, oh ya, "that was indeed shameful and it hurts so deep." I understand why it natural to think that might be warranted (convention), but that doesn't make it necessary or better.


TDK needs the crowd shots because the tension lies in the moment, but TDKR is about a long siege, where the tension is with the characters' flaws and the repercussions of such, and whether they can come to terms with their faults and still come out of it inspiring hope in a better system.

Deserna pwned those points;

Bane wanted Gotham to tear itself apart in his big revolution right. He said he wants Bruce "watch them clambering over eachother" so that he can understand the depths of his failure. But we never see that. Gotham looks pretty fine to me. Deserted quiet streets look more tranquil and serene than terrifying. Especially in the snow.

There was two films worth of material here and Nolan done the best possible job when condensing them in to two. Gotham should have been a massive part of the story no it didn't needs heaps of social/class split but just enough to know how Gotham was. After five months Gotham should have been hanging on by a thread but at the end all we see are people walking out of their houses? As if they have been sitting in the whole time waiting for this all to blow over. It never felt like anyone wanted Batman to return.

The part where we see the flaming bat-signal to me should have been THE moment of the film. That should be the part where the whole of Gotham take a stand but all we see is one character.

A two-parter could easily have been done. It could have focused on Bruce and his current life and him preparing to take the streets once again. We could have had more of Bane and him slowly building an army underground and throughout Gotham. Gotham's current state and more in depth with the Harvey Dent act. Much much more of Selina. The Wayne Legacy and how Bruce Wayne is affecting it. Then Bane's Stock Exchange and Bruce decides it is time to return. Then Batman planning to infiltrate Bane's lair. More Miranda Tate and the energy stuff. Could also have Bane's plan a lot more fleshed out than it was and show that Gotham is still very corrupt and that the Dent act has really only papered over the cracks, this would also give more sense to Talia/Bane's reason to want to destroy Gotham. Gotham Citizens/Police reaction/Gordon reaction to Batman returning. Batman confronting Bane then Bruce thrown in prison. Bane takes over Gotham - End of Part 1. Loads to go with there may not sound interesting but I'm sure Nolan would have found a way.

Part two would be all about Bruce and him training in prison. Much more about how Gotham is coping under Bane and also Selina turning away from her crime lifestyle because of it. Groups of Gothamite rebels trying to fight Bane's men. Gotham simply turning against itself. People living in poverty. The people turning to Batman for their only hope. Some people turning/accepting Bane as their new saviour. Bruce watching his city tortured. We actually feel the 5 months pass this way and it isn't done in one cut. Much more of Bane's backstory. Then Bruce gets free gets back to Gotham and does the whole bridge stuff. Then the final battle which can also be a lot more fleshed out and feel like a city fighting for its life.

A lot of the marketing was built on Batman vs Bane/RISE/Army vs Police where in reality the fight wasn't really focused on I think 30 seconds after we see that brawl its Batman/Bane and the rest is never focused on.

Instead we got a rush job story with no Gotham people being part of it. For shame.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Nope. They could have left it at Flass taking cash in that store. But Nolan wanted to show bent Flass taking money from a guy who's poor and has kids he needs to support. That's how ya create a Gotham persona. Give us the little people in Gotham suffering from the crime and corrupt *****es who take advantage of the desperate.

That's how you create one man's persona who lives in the Narrows with his family. Gotham as a whole was mostly identified in and only in The Dark Knight whereas Batman Begins only focused on the poor as much as TDKR focused more on the rich.

 

[Fudgie]

That's how you create one man's persona who lives in the Narrows with his family.

Nope. They were not in the Narrows and it's never said that guy lived there either. Narrows persona came from the little kid who Batman met and Rachel saved.

Gotham as a whole was mostly identified in and only in The Dark Knight

Nope, Batman Begins, too. Take a look at that huge list of characters Joker posted and try and deny it.

whereas Batman Begins only focused on the poor as much as TDKR focused more on the rich.

D.A. Finch, Judge Faden, Earle, Flass, W.E. board members, rich snobs at the hotel, Loeb and his Cops in Police H.Q. ain't poor people.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Nope. They were not in the Narrows and it's never said that guy lived there either. Narrows persona came from the little kid who Batman met and Rachel saved.

The look, the tone, the weather, all Narrows aspect from Batman Begins, so one would believe it was in the Narrows.

Nope, Batman Begins, too. Take a look at that huge list of characters Joker posted and try and deny it.

What list of characters?

D.A. Finch, Judge Faden, Earle, Flass, W.E. board members, rich snobs at the hotel, Loeb and his Cops in Police H.Q. ain't poor people.

Then they had some rich, but none of those characters minus Earle was given enough time to tell their stories. And Flass? He was stealing money and was more like a criminal.

 

[Fudgie]

The look, the tone the weather, all Narrows aspect from Batman Begins, so one would believe it was in the Narrows.

Flass doesn't agree with ya;

Flass: I never went to the drop-off point. It was in the Narrows. Cops only go there in force.

They were not in the Narrows. lol at the weather comment. As if rain only happens in the Narrows part of the city.

What list of characters?

Taaa daaa;

Joe Chill, an example of the desperate who took the lives of Bruce's parents. Shows how bad in Gotham things got. An example of the kind of person who kills when they're hungry as Ra's put it.

The homeless man, a flavor of the lowest in Gotham who are not bad guys, haven't given into the desperation and accept the poverty situation of Gotham. He could have mugged Bruce or tried to steal from him, but he didn't.

D.A. Finch and his reluctance to prosecute because Falcone has half the city bought and paid for. An example of the "Good people scared" that Rachel spoke about.

Flass, the corrupt Cop. An obvious one. The rotten apples good people like Gordon has to work with and can't do anything about it.

Judge Faden, the corrupt judge. This man can set people free to line up for assassination for Falcone. An example of how Falcone's corruption has spread into the legal system.

The upper class people at the hotel scene. People who are not desperate, not affected by crime, and therefore have a divided opinion on Batman tackling crime in Gotham. Some think he's great, others think he is crazy, shouldn't take the law into his own hands etc.

Earle, more upper class. A man in power who abuses his power by covering up thefts in his company. He's not corrupt. He's just a bad egg.

The Felafel guy, the lower class. Struggles to earn a living and is abused by the corrupt like Flass by taking his money.

The Narrows kid, more lower class. The kind of good people who populate the Narrows. The "dirty" section of Gotham.

Then they had some rich, but none of those characters minus Earle was given enough time to tell their stories.

What stories? D.A. Finch was the D.A. too frightened to prosecute or go chasing anyone on Falcone's pay until Batman gave them the dirt on 'em. Faden was the judge on the take and the one who set up Chill to get wasted. Snobs at the hotel were the rich class like Bruce who were telling what they think of Batman. Loeb, the Police Commissioner against vigilantism in Gotham even if he did bring in Falcone.

And Flass? He was stealing money and was more like a criminal.

Flass was a Cop on the take. Gordon's partner.

 

[batfreakforever]

Bane and the LOS would of came to gotham no matter what condition it was in. The dent act doesnt mean anything to the LOS. Bane just got lucky when he found gordons letter. The LOS already had reasons/excuses to destroy gotham before bruce was born. If bruce never became batman the LOS still would of attacked gotham. The LOS will continue to attack gotham until gotham is no more. Even after bruce is dead and gone. This is another reason why gotham will always need a batman. Bruce doesnt need batman anymore but gotham always will. Its said in the movie that robin will become another batman not another persona. People have said that robin needs training, but like the movie you just have to believe he is the right man for the job. As long as gotham has a batman with bruce waynes weapons and equipment gotham will be protected. The people will rally with the batman persona and he will have the equipment.

 

[batfreakforever]

answer to the question? Yes it is.