Rank every comic book film - where do the Spider-Man films fit in?

[Spiderdevil]

Among the people you've discussed with should include myself as I've put Bane in the same league and I've noticed some other posters here as well. Perhaps not your friends or anyone you talk to personally, but I've definitely found some Bane love on here.

But not enough to say that people will take his name along with Ledger's when remembering Nolan's trilogy while only Molina's Ock is in the same league

Read the novelization. Those three things worked just fine in the novelization.

Difference between a 2 and a half hour movie and a novel

 

[Anno_Domini]

But not enough to say that people will take his name along with Ledger's when remembering Nolan's trilogy while only Molina's Ock is in the same league

I beg to differ. Someone using his eyes to show his emotions as Tom Hardy had to and playing as an intelligent villain as Bane was finally correctly written. I feel he's very up there with Joker, Doc Ock, Loki and Magneto. I'm sure when someone finally creates a top villains list, Hardy's Bane will be on the list.

Difference between a 2 and a half hour movie and a novel

Difference is nothing, really, seeing as how most the of the entire novel was filmed.

 

[The Joker]

People complain about Batman's voice as well but Bale's Batman is definitely a favorite.

Bale's Batman also has the great Bruce Wayne scenes to fall back on where the voice is not an issue (90% of his screen time in TDKR is Bruce Wayne stuff). Bane doesn't have that luxury of other strong scenes where his voice is different.

The complaint of Bane's voice will certainly lessen over time.

Wishful thinking I'd say. The ones for Batman's voice didn't.

 

[Spiderdevil]

I beg to differ. Someone using his eyes to show his emotions as Tom Hardy had to and playing as an intelligent villain as Bane was finally correctly written. I feel he's very up there with Joker, Doc Ock, Loki and Magneto. I'm sure when someone finally creates a top villains list, Hardy's Bane will be on the list.

He did nothing extraordinary with his eyes and nor did his plan seem intelligent to me.And he wasnt properly written,especially on how easily he is killed off and made to look like a side-kick in the final minutes
His relationship with Talia Al Ghul is also left ambiguous.None of his back story is adequately explained
He doesnt even come close to likes of Da Foe let alone Ledger's Joker

Difference is nothing, really, seeing as how most the of the entire novel was filmed.

You dont get it,there is a whole lot difference between having all the plot points in a novel and cramming everything in a 2 and a half hour movie
I explained it before why Eddy Brock/Venom/Symbiote needs atleast 2 movies to be shown properly
He didnt even get the whole movie,he had to share it with Sandman and Goblin
You cram so many things in one movie and its a recipe for disaster
That and the stupid retcon.Raimi started on the wrong foot

Best thing would be to seperate it out.Throw Sandman out of the picture,concentrate on Goblin Junior being the villian for the whole movie while showing Spidey getting the symbiote.Developing Eddy Brock throughout the movie.Spidey ripping off the symbiote and it falling on Eddy Brock should have been the final scene.Then Venom would have had whole of SM4 to play the villian

 

[Anno_Domini]

Bale's Batman also has the great Bruce Wayne scenes to fall back on where the voice is not an issue (90% of his screen time in TDKR is Bruce Wayne stuff). Bane doesn't have that luxury of other strong scenes where his voice is different.



Wishful thinking I'd say. The ones for Batman's voice didn't.

What's funny is that, if you do think it is wishful thinking, then it only confuses me when Bane's dialogue isn't very hard to understand. Heck, I got every word on my first viewing and it's only the obvious fanboy nitpick to bring up Bane's voice, imo. Maybe that's why I never bring up Bane as a complaint for TDKR either then, lol.

He did nothing extraordinary with his eyes and nor did his plan seem intelligent to me.And he wasnt properly written,especially on how easily he is killed off and made to look like a side-kick in the final minutes

Really? Tom Hardy didn't express any sort of emotion through his eyes? That is VERY debatable as even posters in the TDKR boards would argue with this. Hardy did an excellent job in the film as Bane and while some can say his plan wasn't "intelligent", while Bane isn't meant to be this very amazing genius, Bane and Talia's plan was complex to the point of the viewers knowing that Bane at least had to use his brain, much more than what we can say with Bane in Batman & Robin.

And again, I must ask this...how is getting shot by a canon missile being killed off easily? Yes, the death itself was quick, but it took a canon missile to do such! Plus, needless to say, someone had to kill Bane and it was best that it was Catwoman since she almost left Bruce to die before at the hands of Bane and Bane was also going to blow Batman's head off with a shotgun.

His relationship with Talia Al Ghul is also left ambiguous.None of his back story is adequately explained

What do you need help on, because I can explain it for you since yes, the backstory is given great detail in the film and only you suspect that Bane and Talia were lovers when nothing suggests this

He doesnt even come close to likes of Da Foe let alone Ledger's Joker

Who's Da Foe?

And even though I NEVER said Hardy's Bane is the greatest villain or matches Ledger's Joker, he is in the top ten for sure.

You dont get it,there is a whole lot difference between having all the plot points in a novel and cramming everything in a 2 and a half hour movie
I explained it before why Eddy Brock/Venom/Symbiote needs atleast 2 movies to be shown properly
He didnt even get the whole movie,he had to share it with Sandman and Goblin
You cram so many things in one movie and its a recipe for disaster
That and the stupid retcon.Raimi started on the wrong foot

I don't get what? That the novelization was basically filmed page after page by Raimi? Because yes, it pretty much was and then Raimi filmed alternate scenes and more pointless scenes. What you don't seem to get is that we could have very much gotten the novelization of Spider-Man 3 and that gave each villain its main due and would be a very promising film.

Plus, after the novelization, the retcon is the only awful thing about the threequel.

Best thing would be to seperate it out.Throw Sandman out of the picture,concentrate on Goblin Junior being the villian for the whole movie while showing Spidey getting the symbiote.Developing Eddy Brock throughout the movie.Spidey ripping off the symbiote and it falling on Eddy Brock should have been the final scene.Then Venom would have had whole of SM4 to play the villian

Ehhh, no. Sandman does indeed work and should be in a third and fourth film in your idea with it still culminating to a two on two battle at very end, albeit done much, much better and no giant Sandfool.

 

[The Joker]

What's funny is that, if you do think it is wishful thinking, then it only confuses me when Bane's dialogue isn't very hard to understand. Heck, I got every word on my first viewing and it's only the obvious fanboy nitpick to bring up Bane's voice, imo. Maybe that's why I never bring up Bane as a complaint for TDKR either then, lol.

But that's you. Everyone is different. Since you brought it up, I generally don't have a problem with Bale's Batman voice, apart from maybe two scenes where it got too much. But on the whole I liked it.

But not everyone has the same appreciation for it that I do, much like not everyone found Bane's voice as enjoyable or as easy to understand as you did.

 

[Anno_Domini]

But that's you. Everyone is different. Since you brought it up, I generally don't have a problem with Bale's Batman voice, apart from maybe two scenes where it got too much. But on the whole I liked it.

But not everyone has the same appreciation for it that I do, much like not everyone found Bane's voice as enjoyable or as easy to understand as you did.

And those scenes are the reasons I brought up Bale's Batman voice, those two scenes during the final Joker scene and Batman wanting to know what Bane did with the trigger. Those two scenes combined are more confusing as in trying to hear what Batman had to say than any of Bane's dialogue, imo. It took me two viewings to understand both of those pieces of dialogue, lol.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Among the people you've discussed with should include myself as I've put Bane in the same league and I've noticed some other posters here as well. Perhaps not your friends or anyone you talk to personally, but I've definitely found some Bane love on here.

I don't think Bane even comes close to Heath Ledger's Joker. I wouldn't even place him next to SM2's Doc Ock. Other than his voice, I didn't really find anything interesting about him. Outside of these boards, I have rarely found anyone even bring up the idea that Bane was in the same league as the Joker.

People complain about Batman's voice as well but Bale's Batman is definitely a favorite. The complaint of Bane's voice will certainly lessen over time.

My problem with Bane is that it sounds like he is always right next to the microphone, whether he is far away or next to the screen. And despite his voice being dubbed over and "fixed," there are still several moments where you can't understand him. Especially at the football stadium.

 

[Picard Sisko]

What's funny is that, if you do think it is wishful thinking, then it only confuses me when Bane's dialogue isn't very hard to understand. Heck, I got every word on my first viewing and it's only the obvious fanboy nitpick to bring up Bane's voice, imo. Maybe that's why I never bring up Bane as a complaint for TDKR either then, lol.

So if I complain about his voice because I can't understand him, that's nitpicking? I think his voice sounds awesome, but there are moments where nobody could understand what he was saying.

Really? Tom Hardy didn't express any sort of emotion through his eyes? That is VERY debatable as even posters in the TDKR boards would argue with this. Hardy did an excellent job in the film as Bane and while some can say his plan wasn't "intelligent", while Bane isn't meant to be this very amazing genius, Bane and Talia's plan was complex to the point of the viewers knowing that Bane at least had to use his brain, much more than what we can say with Bane in Batman & Robin.

Well, there is certainly no argument there.

And again, I must ask this...how is getting shot by a canon missile being killed off easily? Yes, the death itself was quick, but it took a canon missile to do such! Plus, needless to say, someone had to kill Bane and it was best that it was Catwoman since she almost left Bruce to die before at the hands of Bane and Bane was also going to blow Batman's head off with a shotgun.

I wouldn't say he got killed off easily, but they could have done something more epic with his death. I'd like to get the same feeling I got when I saw Norman got impaled by his glider in SM1.

And even though I NEVER said Hardy's Bane is the greatest villain or matches Ledger's Joker, he is in the top ten for sure.

Bane is an okay villain, but in all honesty I didn't find him more interesting than Lizard in TASM.

Plus, after the novelization, the retcon is the only awful thing about the threequel.

Does the novel explain the plot holes? How Bruce got back to Gotham at least?

I really don't like that Bruce quit being Batman for 8 years, so you can add that to the retcon.

 

[Anno_Domini]

I don't think Bane even comes close to Heath Ledger's Joker. I wouldn't even place him next to SM2's Doc Ock. Other than his voice, I didn't really find anything interesting about him. Outside of these boards, I have rarely found anyone even bring up the idea that Bane was in the same league as the Joker.

To bring up your final sentence, outside of these boards, I can rarely find anyone who would put Doc Ock in a list of top villains as pretty much all of my friends circle hates all three of Raimi's films, so...yah, stalemate right there

I can say, at least, my friends would indeed mention Bane as a great villain and at least up there with Ledger's Joker, but not quite there. And I'd agree, although I would have definitely placed Molina's Ock in that list as well.

But if you're talking about lists of top CBM villains...I haven't seen any updated ones counting any 2012 CBMs.

My problem with Bane is that it sounds like he is always right next to the microphone, whether he is far away or next to the screen. And despite his voice being dubbed over and "fixed," there are still several moments where you can't understand him. Especially at the football stadium.

I knew exactly what he said in my first viewing, so I can't understand it being hard to hear, but to each their own I suppose.

So if I complain about his voice because I can't understand him, that's nitpicking? I think his voice sounds awesome, but there are moments where nobody could understand what he was saying.

It indeed is nitpicking, because I find it incredibly difficult to understand how someone couldn't understand him simply when I could. I don't have any superior hearing than the other person.

Well, there is certainly no argument there.

Obviously.

I wouldn't say he got killed off easily, but they could have done something more epic with his death. I'd like to get the same feeling I got when I saw Norman got impaled by his glider in SM1.

I most certainly got that feeling. Something such as a glider killed Norman while a canon missile killed Bane. Both major extremes that killed the villain. I suspect people are really calling it a cheap and easy death because Bane didn't really have some magnificent speech as you'd expect with villains as that's the "thing" in CBMs now. Alas, Bane did have his speech, but through Talia al Ghul.

Bane is an okay villain, but in all honesty I didn't find him more interesting than Lizard in TASM.

Sorry, but I had to laugh at that. If Bane wasn't anymore interesting, than he would have ruined TDKR as Lizard did, imo, in TAS-M.

Does the novel explain the plot holes? How Bruce got back to Gotham at least?

I really don't like that Bruce quit being Batman for 8 years, so you can add that to the retcon.

When I speak of the novelization, I am speaking on Spider-Man 3's novelization. Lol, this is like the second time you don't read my previous posts.

BUT...I will say this; Bruce returning to Gotham City never felt like a plot hole to me. Harvey Dent, the District Attorney, wasn't even sure that Wayne Manor was in Gotham City's limits so Bruce could have easily found a way into Gotham through his own mansion. If the DA has no idea what covers all of Gotham, how could Bane's men?

And...Bruce Wayne retiring as Batman isn't a retcon. That's the silliest thing I ever heard. It's definitely a direct continuation to The Dark Knight when the Dent Act was created. It may not have been the continuation fans wanted, but it's one Nolan chose and is NOT a retcon

 

[Picard Sisko]

To bring up your final sentence, outside of these boards, I can rarely find anyone who would put Doc Ock in a list of top villains as pretty much all of my friends circle hates all three of Raimi's films, so...yah, stalemate right there

I can say, at least, my friends would indeed mention Bane as a great villain and at least up there with Ledger's Joker, but not quite there. And I'd agree, although I would have definitely placed Molina's Ock in that list as well.

We obviously have friends with very different tastes then. And I am not just referring to my circle of friends, but people I speak to in comic book shops, or people I work with in classes.

It indeed is nitpicking, because I find it incredibly difficult to understand how someone couldn't understand him simply when I could. I don't have any superior hearing than the other person.

Its not nitpicking if you actually had trouble understanding what he said. Its actually a legit complaint.

I most certainly got that feeling. Something such as a glider killed Norman while a canon missile killed Bane. Both major extremes that killed the villain. I suspect people are really calling it a cheap and easy death because Bane didn't really have some magnificent speech as you'd expect with villains as that's the "thing" in CBMs now. Alas, Bane did have his speech, but through Talia al Ghul.

I didn't get that feeling at all. In fact, it didn't really have an impact on me, period. He was shot down, and that's that.

And Norman didn't have a speech. He just said "Peter, don't tell Harry" and dropped dead. The Glider came out of nowhere and impaled him, after Spider-Man dodged it. The blood rushing out of his mouth really made his death feel so much more brutal, too.

Sorry, but I had to laugh at that. If Bane wasn't anymore interesting, than he would have ruined TDKR as Lizard did, imo, in TAS-M.

So basically you are laughing at my opinion.

BUT...I will say this; Bruce returning to Gotham City never felt like a plot hole to me. Harvey Dent, the District Attorney, wasn't even sure that Wayne Manor was in Gotham City's limits so Bruce could have easily found a way into Gotham through his own mansion. If the DA has no idea what covers all of Gotham, how could Bane's men?

Its a plot hole. It was never explained, and I don't think that Harvey's comment about Wayne Manor justifies that. He was joking about how huge the mansion was, that's all. Bruce was in the middle of nowhere in a foreign country with nothing on him... no gadgets, no food or water, NOTHING. And getting back to Gotham should have been explained, even if they dedicated a few minutes or so to that.

And...Bruce Wayne retiring as Batman isn't a retcon. That's the silliest thing I ever heard. It's definitely a direct continuation to The Dark Knight when the Dent Act was created. It may not have been the continuation fans wanted, but it's one Nolan chose and is NOT a retcon

I never said Bruce retiring as Batman is a retcon.

I was saying that Bruce retiring is another bad thing about TDKR you can add to the list.

 

[Anno_Domini]

We obviously have friends with very different tastes then. And I am not just referring to my circle of friends, but people I speak to in comic book shops, or people I work with in classes.

So you are only speaking about people you meet day to day, ahh, alright. Well yes, we definitely have friends with different tastes.

I can't wait to see some site set up a list of great CBM villains, though.

Its not nitpicking if you actually had trouble understanding what he said. Its actually a legit complaint.

A complaint I will never understand, so to me, it does still sound like a nitpick.

I didn't get that feeling at all. In fact, it didn't really have an impact on me, period. He was shot down, and that's that.

And Norman didn't have a speech. He just said "Peter, don't tell Harry" and dropped dead. The Glider came out of nowhere and impaled him, after Spider-Man dodged it. The blood rushing out of his mouth really made his death feel so much more brutal, too.

Norman's speech before he got killed about how he was a father to Peter and how Peter should save him. Don't call that a speech?

So basically you are laughing at my opinion.

No, laughing at the idea that if Bane wasn't as interested any more than Lizard, than surprised how I don't simply lose all interest in TDKR once Bane shows up as was the case in TAS-M.

Its a plot hole. It was never explained, and I don't think that Harvey's comment about Wayne Manor justifies that. He was joking about how huge the mansion was, that's all. Bruce was in the middle of nowhere in a foreign country with nothing on him... no gadgets, no food or water, NOTHING. And getting back to Gotham should have been explained, even if they dedicated a few minutes or so to that.

If that was meant to be a joke, then Nolan definitely can't write jokes my friend. And he had nothing leaving Gotham as well in Batman Begins. Sure, he jumped onboard on a ship leaving, but if he has that kind of mind to do whatever he needs to do leave, then of course one would ask if Bruce would have done all he could. Do we need to go full circle even more and journey with Bruce coming back to Gotham while we watched him leave Gotham in BB?

I never said Bruce retiring as Batman is a retcon.

I was saying that Bruce retiring is another bad thing about TDKR you can add to the list.

I really don't like that Bruce quit being Batman for 8 years, so you can add that to the retcon.

What's the retcon that you're adding unto Bruce's retirement then?

 

[Picard Sisko]

So you are only speaking about people you meet day to day, ahh, alright. Well yes, we definitely have friends with different tastes.

Those people in addition to my friends.

I can't wait to see some site set up a list of great CBM villains, though.

Same. When is the last one that came out?

A complaint I will never understand, so to me, it does still sound like a nitpick.

To each his own. But I heard plenty of people in the theatre asking about what he was saying at the Football stadium.

Norman's speech before he got killed about how he was a father to Peter and how Peter should save him. Don't call that a speech?

True. I was really just thinking about what he said as he was dying.

No, laughing at the idea that if Bane wasn't as interested any more than Lizard, than surprised how I don't simply lose all interest in TDKR once Bane shows up as was the case in TAS-M.

You need to rephrase that...
Anyways, I think Lizard was interesting, but lacked a lot of character development, that's all. In my opinion, Bane really wasn't that much more interesting.

If that was meant to be a joke, then Nolan definitely can't write jokes my friend. And he had nothing leaving Gotham as well in Batman Begins. Sure, he jumped onboard on a ship leaving, but if he has that kind of mind to do whatever he needs to do leave, then of course one would ask if Bruce would have done all he could. Do we need to go full circle even more and journey with Bruce coming back to Gotham while we watched him leave Gotham in BB?

Well, I guess Nolan can't write good jokes then, because that's what it was. A joke. Wouldn't be the first thing he is bad at doing IMO. I think the fight sequences are poorly done in his movies.

When Bruce returned to Gotham in BB, he was picked up by plane, and it wasn't taken over by Bane. Hey, that rhymes!

But yes, his return to Gotham should have been explained, because right now it is a HUGE plot hole.

 

[The Joker]

And those scenes are the reasons I brought up Bale's Batman voice, those two scenes during the final Joker scene and Batman wanting to know what Bane did with the trigger. Those two scenes combined are more confusing as in trying to hear what Batman had to say than any of Bane's dialogue, imo. It took me two viewings to understand both of those pieces of dialogue, lol.

Ok, that's a first. I've never heard anyone say they had difficulty understanding what he said there. Just that he sounded comical. Whereas understanding Bane's voice was such an issue that they redubbed the prologue because of the complaints.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Has this been mentioned on here already or no?

http://www.ign.com/blogs/zur-en-arrh/2012/07/30/the-25-greatest-superhero-movies-of-all-time-part-1
http://www.ign.com/blogs/zur-en-arrh/2012/07/31/the-25-greatest-superhero-movies-of-all-time-pt-2

Those people in addition to my friends.

I wonder what it would be if I asked my co-workers on what they think, lol.

Same. When is the last one that came out?

The last one that pops up on Google that was in 2012 was before TDKR was released

http://www.columbusalive.com/content/stories/2012/07/19/the-list-10-best-comic-book-movie-villains.html

To each his own. But I heard plenty of people in the theatre asking about what he was saying at the Football stadium.

Interesting.

True. I was really just thinking about what he said as he was dying.

A lot of villains don't really speak while they're dying, though, in CBMs.

You need to rephrase that...
Anyways, I think Lizard was interesting, but lacked a lot of character development, that's all. In my opinion, Bane really wasn't that much more interesting.

You said Bane wasn't anymore interesting than Lizard, so with me thinking that, I'm surprised I wasn't bored with TDKR from the beginning if Bane was only as interesting as Lizard.

Well, I guess Nolan can't write good jokes then, because that's what it was. A joke. Wouldn't be the first thing he is bad at doing IMO. I think the fight sequences are poorly done in his movies.

So you don't think they are better in TDKR?

When Bruce returned to Gotham in BB, he was picked up by plane, and it wasn't taken over by Bane. Hey, that rhymes!

I was speaking on Bruce leaving Gotham, he had nothing. Yes, he had Alfred when returning to Gotham City, but Bruce obviously had a way. If he can hide his Batpod in storage that we haven't seen before, then don't you think Bruce knows his ins and outs of Gotham? Lol.

But yes, his return to Gotham should have been explained, because right now it is a HUGE plot hole.

And I guess it's a plot hole as well to know how Batman is able to all of a sudden control all lights underground, have storages for his Batpod...no explanation, plot hole

Ok, that's a first. I've never heard anyone say they had difficulty understanding what he said there. Just that he sounded comical. Whereas understanding Bane's voice was such an issue that they redubbed the prologue because of the complaints.

Not really the first for who I know. I've heard others outside of these boards that had trouble as well. Everything else in TDK/TDKR were fine with Batman, but those two scenes, very difficult at times in what he was saying from beginning to end. Too bad that at least in TDK it made sense because he was being choked whereas the trigger scene, nothing was choking Batman.

 

[Picard Sisko]

I wonder what it would be if I asked my co-workers on what they think, lol.

Well, you can start by asking if they're comic book fans, or at least into comic book movies.

A lot of villains don't really speak while they're dying, though, in CBMs.

Right now, I can only think of Norman/Green Goblin dying in SM1. You also have Harry Osborn in SM3.

You said Bane wasn't anymore interesting than Lizard, so with me thinking that, I'm surprised I wasn't bored with TDKR from the beginning if Bane was only as interesting as Lizard.

Well we just have different opinions, lol.

So you don't think they are better in TDKR?

The fights were definitely an improvement, but I still feel like they weren't that great.

I was speaking on Bruce leaving Gotham, he had nothing. Yes, he had Alfred when returning to Gotham City, but Bruce obviously had a way. If he can hide his Batpod in storage that we haven't seen before, then don't you think Bruce knows his ins and outs of Gotham? Lol.

Still yet to be explained.

And I guess it's a plot hole as well to know how Batman is able to all of a sudden control all lights underground, have storages for his Batpod...no explanation, plot hole

I guess it is a plot hole, too

 

[Juicy J]

So basically you are laughing at my opinion.

I visit the boards once, maybe twice a week, and even on these scant visits I've come to learn that if Anno disagrees with your opinion he will laugh at it and then try to justify his belittling of you as reasonable. Just ignore it.

 

[Anno_Domini]

And I only see Juicy J on these boards to bring up my name. How thoughtful of him.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Right now, I can only think of Norman/Green Goblin dying in SM1. You also have Harry Osborn in SM3.

Villains though, so only Norman counts. Harry is more like a parallel of sorts since he's dying as one of the good guys.

The fights were definitely an improvement, but I still feel like they weren't that great.

I found both Batman/Bane fights to be very well choreographed. While never as fancy as a Raimi action sequence, both Batman/Bane fights have been the best choreographed fight scenes in any CBM that doesn't rely heavily on CGI.

Still yet to be explained.

I never needed it to be explained myself, though. Plus, needless to say, that dreadful 2 hour and 45 minute running time limit for IMAX played a part.

I guess it is a plot hole, too

Guess so, huh?

 

[Spiderdevil]

What's funny is that, if you do think it is wishful thinking, then it only confuses me when Bane's dialogue isn't very hard to understand. Heck, I got every word on my first viewing and it's only the obvious fanboy nitpick to bring up Bane's voice, imo. Maybe that's why I never bring up Bane as a complaint for TDKR either then, lol.

Besides the trailer,I never had a problem in understanding his words,its the accent which sounded terrible to me

Really? Tom Hardy didn't express any sort of emotion through his eyes? That is VERY debatable as even posters in the TDKR boards would argue with this. Hardy did an excellent job in the film

I never felt that he was doing anything extraordinary.

as Bane and while some can say his plan wasn't "intelligent", while Bane isn't meant to be this very amazing genius, Bane and Talia's plan was complex to the point of the viewers knowing that Bane at least had to use his brain, much more than what we can say with Bane in Batman & Robin.

Its not the plan that was unintelligent,but how the plan was written.
How did he assume that the whole police force would be sent down into the sewers? What does he even mean by 'Take control of your city' when he is going to blast it anyway? He totally got Ra's al ghul plans upside down,how is it intelligent to blast himself within the city?Why dont they press the trigger and blast it instead of being chased through half of Gotham.It never made sense to leave Bruce Wayne alive and keep him in a place from where he could escape

It was very lazy writting on Nolan's part,I never expected lazy writting from Nolan of all people

Needless to say,using Batman or Robin as a means of comparison and saying he is better is harldy a complement

And again, I must ask this...how is getting shot by a canon missile being killed off easily? Yes, the death itself was quick, but it took a canon missile to do such! Plus, needless to say, someone had to kill Bane and it was best that it was Catwoman since she almost left Bruce to die before at the hands of Bane and Bane was also going to blow Batman's head off with a shotgun.

Anyone can die from a canon missile but do you expect the main villian to be killed off so quickly and unceremoniously? It totally felt like Nolan wanted to get Bane out of the way to focus on the 'main' villian which was Talia.
Again Lazy writting

The way GG died in SM1 was great,the irony of getting killed with his own hands.Same with DocOck,the way he redeemed himself(I will not die a monstor),same with Harry's death in SM3(it was really emotional),even Ra's death was great(I will not kill you,but I dont have to save you).I always want the villian to die epicly

What do you need help on, because I can explain it for you since yes, the backstory is given great detail in the film and only you suspect that Bane and Talia were lovers when nothing suggests this

There is nothing to suggest anything
Where they lovers? Sibling-like? Partners?
Which is why is used the word 'ambiguous'
And the back story is never explained properly

Who's Da Foe?

William Dafoe*

There are a few things I look in a villian and Bane has none of them
Intimidating? No
Genius Plan? No
Great Back story? No
Excellent action sequences? They were Okay
Legacy? No
Great Acting? Again just okay

I don't get what? That the novelization was basically filmed page after page by Raimi? Because yes, it pretty much was and then Raimi filmed alternate scenes and more pointless scenes. What you don't seem to get is that we could have very much gotten the novelization of Spider-Man 3 and that gave each villain its main due and would be a very promising film.

And the movie would be 5 hours long

 

[Visualiza]

Besides the trailer,I never had a problem in understanding his words,its the accent which sounded terrible to me


I never felt that he was doing anything extraordinary.

Couldn't agree more. I understood every word he uttered, but that voice just sounded ridiculous to the point of being unpleasant to listen to. I just couldn't take the guy seriously at all. Every time I think of the character, I'm reminded of this: [YT]E781QE7ZQK8[/YT]

I don't expect everyone to sound like a Greek god or a siren, but, as stated above, when it gets to the point where it's so ridiculous as to be unnerving, it kills the immersion for me.

Its not the plan that was unintelligent,but how the plan was written.

It was very lazy writting on Nolan's part,I never expected lazy writting from Nolan of all people

You're on an absolute tear in this post. We need a salute smiley, but this will have to do until then

To piggyback onto what you're saying, this was a central issue for the entire film. I recall a poster saying that the words spoken by Gordon at the end of TDK sounded like they were randomly picked out of a hat, and solely to sound (melo)dramatic and epic. My feelings about the writing in this film is akin to this, in that it seems like Nolan and Co. had a bunch of interesting ideas, locales, and set-pieces(the prison, Bane's plan, the cops in the sewer, Talia's existence and relevance), but didn't put too much thought into how it all came together to form a cohesive narrative.

You can have all of the fascinating situations you can shake a stick at, but if your plot is incoherent, it simply won't work. Every transition and resolution was a little too neatly wrapped up in a bowtie for my tastes, right down to that abysmal ending.

Needless to say,using Batman or Robin as a means of comparison and saying he is better is harldy a complement

Anyone can die from a canon missile but do you expect the main villian to be killed off so quickly and unceremoniously? It totally felt like Nolan wanted to get Bane out of the way to focus on the 'main' villian which was Talia.
Again Lazy writting

Yet another huge, glaring mistake that tends to get trivialized by apologists. The antagonist in the Bourne Legacy died in similarly anticlimactic fashion...I'm praying to the movie gods that this sort of shock-death doesn't become the norm. IMO, it reeks of a half-baked attempt to throw off the audience, and I hold to a firm belief that such decisions should only be made if they naturally flow well with the plot.

One of the common excuses I hear for this is that it's "realistic" or "unexpected". It's also realistic and unexpected for people to sometimes not talk in complete sentences or walk in a straight line, but you don't see things like that in movies(unless it's among the central themes, anyway) because it's poor writing. Time to put this realism argument to bed; realism for the sake of realism is never a good idea. It should only ever be employed if it serves the plot, and in this case, it just didn't.

A grand villain deserves a fitting and appropriate demise, whether that be by death, incapacitation, or incarceration. These silly, sudden demises I've been seeing lately seem like little more than petty shock value, not unlike the torture-porn we've seen a lot of lately in horror films.

Very solid post throughout, Spiderdevil.

 

[The Joker]

Agreed. Bane's plan was a horrendous mess. It made no sense. It was just a long drawn out pointless siege where nothing happened in it except a few Cops and rich people got killed. That's it. It was only done to give Bruce time to recover and train himself back up in the pit and then magically get back to Gotham.

Bane could have pulled the trigger on that bomb within 2 weeks and the end result would have been the same.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Yup. Agreed.

Now let's move on from this TDKR discussion since this is the Spidey boards after all.

 

[Lorus]

While I don't see TDKR as the strongest of Nolan's films, it seems that people are being incredibly disingenuous when it comes to discussing the plot or writing. Bane's plan (or Talia's) wasn't about just killing people, it was about giving Gotham hope which was intended to be ultimately hollow. It was applying the prison scenario to Gotham, thus providing a parallel between Bruce and his city and letting Bane punish Gotham as he feels they deserve. Bane explains all this directly to the camera. You can argue you don't like Bane's motivation but that doesn't mean the writing is particularly lazy and it certainly doesn't amount to a plot hole.

 

[Oscorp]

Besides the trailer,I never had a problem in understanding his words,its the accent which sounded terrible to me

Was a nice touch to me. I admit that I didn't like it at first but I have no problem with it anymore.

I never felt that he was doing anything extraordinary.

He broke Batman.

Its not the plan that was unintelligent,but how the plan was written.
How did he assume that the whole police force would be sent down into the sewers? What does he even mean by 'Take control of your city' when he is going to blast it anyway? He totally got Ra's al ghul plans upside down,how is it intelligent to blast himself within the city?Why dont they press the trigger and blast it instead of being chased through half of Gotham.It never made sense to leave Bruce Wayne alive and keep him in a place from where he could escape

It was very lazy writting on Nolan's part,I never expected lazy writting from Nolan of all people

I agree here with alot of what you say and I have had the same problem with all of Nolan's films (that I've watched). He relies heavily on chance and luck to the point that it sometimes feels ridiculous and far fetched. All of that to make everything seem smarter than it is and epic. Alot of what Joker managed to do looked clever but was very much based on luck. It's not a huge issue I have because sometimes you have to go that route to make it flow nicely and feel epic, but it doesn't always work for me.

The "Take control of your city" was connected to the longer speech outside the Blackgate Prison. He means that the ordinary citiziens should take back the city from the rich and corrupt. It was all part of this whole "revolution" agenda he used to give the people false hope.

Bane wanted Gotham to die a slow death. Like he said to Bruce in the prison: he's a torturer of the soul. It's worse to die slowly and painful than quickly. However I must admit that it felt too much like an easy way for the writers to give Bruce all this time to build up himself. It didn't feel natural. It's very much like that typical stereotype villain who, when it seems like he has the upper hand against the hero, starts to unnecessarily brag about his whole plan, instead of just giving the final blow and be done with it, just long enough to let the hero come up with a way to defeat him.

So I understand why it feels lazy to some and I might say too that it felt a little lazy. But it still worked fine to me.

Anyone can die from a canon missile but do you expect the main villian to be killed off so quickly and unceremoniously? It totally felt like Nolan wanted to get Bane out of the way to focus on the 'main' villian which was Talia.
Again Lazy writting

The way GG died in SM1 was great,the irony of getting killed with his own hands.Same with DocOck,the way he redeemed himself(I will not die a monstor),same with Harry's death in SM3(it was really emotional),even Ra's death was great(I will not kill you,but I dont have to save you).I always want the villian to die epicly

I also like when villains have memorable deaths but it made alot of sense how Nolan chose to kill Bane. Actually, I really like his death because it showed that no one, not even the biggest and baddest, is immortal. I felt there was alot of thought put into his death, no matter how simple and "easy" it looked.

There are a few things I look in a villian and Bane has none of them
Intimidating? No
Genius Plan? No
Great Back story? No
Excellent action sequences? They were Okay
Legacy? No
Great Acting? Again just okay

And the movie would be 5 hours long

He's one of the most intimidating CBM villains out there. His whole presence was badass.

Genius plan? Well, up until he decided to let Gotham breathe for 5 months it was pretty genious.

Great back story? I actually loved the backstory and how it was a mystery until the very end.

Action was much improved in TDKR I'd say. But the action shouldn't be anywhere near Spider-Man for example because they are so different. It's not possible to have the same spectacular action.

I don't know what you mean with legacy. It probably won't have the same impact as TDK but that's because it follows in the same vein already. But it will be remembered as one of the few good final film in a trilogy, that makes the trilogy as a whole one of the first great ones.

To piggyback onto what you're saying, this was a central issue for the entire film. I recall a poster saying that the words spoken by Gordon at the end of TDK sounded like they were randomly picked out of a hat, and solely to sound (melo)dramatic and epic. My feelings about the writing in this film is akin to this, in that it seems like Nolan and Co. had a bunch of interesting ideas, locales, and set-pieces(the prison, Bane's plan, the cops in the sewer, Talia's existence and relevance), but didn't put too much thought into how it all came together to form a cohesive narrative.

You can have all of the fascinating situations you can shake a stick at, but if your plot is incoherent, it simply won't work. Every transition and resolution was a little too neatly wrapped up in a bowtie for my tastes, right down to that abysmal ending.

I very much agree with that bold statement. I always feel a bit uncomfortable at that part and many other scenes because as you say, it feels too unreal and "poetic" in a way that puts you out of it. This is another thing I've always had a problem with when it comes to Nolan. He tries to make every sentence sound overly poetic and epic that you feel it belongs more to an act play rather than a film. It feels like he doesn't give much thought to whether or not it actually fits naturally or feels forced, he just came up with a sentence he thought sounded awesome and had to put it in the movie no matter what.

I always feel a film like The Amazing Spider-Man is such a breathe of fresh air because it feels so much more natural, genuine, honest and real the way those characters talk and behave, compared to Nolan who makes it feel like the characters have planned out long beforehand exactly what they'll say. With Webb's two films I can see myself and other real persons in those characters in the situations they are in and how they talk and behave. I can connect to them alot more. But Nolan has the upper hand when it comes to the feel of thrill, epicness and rush.

It's pretty funny I think that Webb has very realistic personalities, behaviour, dialogue/monologue to characters in an extremely unrealistic world, whereas Nolan has a very grounded (in CBM standards) take on Batman's world but with very unrealistic dialogue/monologue and to some extent, unrealistic amount of luck and chance.