The Dark Knight Rises TDKR SPOILERS (read at your own risk) - Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Saw it last night. Some thoughts for those who haven't seen it looking for interpretations and I guess those who have as well:

I really liked the movie. 4.5/5 stars. Not 5/5, because there are small problems. But those problems, in my humble opinion, are outweighed but the epic final hour and just overall good feeling I had walking out (at 3 am) lol. The thing I disliked the most was Blake figuring out Bruce's identity without much explanation. That was a little odd and rushed. There are other things people pointed out that you could poke holes in, but to me those were small things that you just have to accept in movies like this. Also, the idea that Alfred imagined seeing Bruce at the end, or that it's even up for interpretation, is wrong. First of all, Nolan wouldn't want to follow Inception with another ambiguous ending. It would seem unimaginative. He goes out of his way to make clear that Bruce has moved on. The scene with Lucius finding out the autopilot was fixed has no purpose other than to show the audience he survived. More than that, the fact that the pearls are missing is the biggest "clue." He took the pearls back from Selina early in the movie, but obviously gave them back as they left Gotham together. Those were his mother's pearls. The symbolism couldn't be more clear. He moved on from his parents' death, and the passing off the pearls to Selina is a symbol for that. I believe she's also wearing them in the cafe.
 
One Nod in partiular I like but maybe it's just me but...

I like the NOD to West Batman just before they unveil the statue. The cover looked like West Batman's Cape. I loved it.

It really shows how much at least from what I make of it Nolan was inspired by Adam West era Batman

p.s.

Also in my view the film's ending may have been inspired by Batman TAS' Epic Episode : Perchance to Dream.
In that Bruce and Selina are together
 
Last edited:
Batman jr. said:
It seems that Nolan has stirred it up big time with TDKR...

Anyway, how was

Neeson's cameo
Click to expand...

Great. It was handled in a way that you don't know if it was actually him or if Bruce was just hallucinating. Similar to Willem Dafoe's cameo as Norman Osborne in Spider-man II.
 
eal2727 said:
Saw it last night. Some thoughts for those who haven't seen it looking for interpretations and I guess those who have as well:

I really liked the movie. 4.5/5 stars. Not 5/5, because there are small problems. But those problems, in my humble opinion, are outweighed but the epic final hour and just overall good feeling I had walking out (at 3 am) lol. The thing I disliked the most was Blake figuring out Bruce's identity without much explanation. That was a little odd and rushed. There are other things people pointed out that you could poke holes in, but to me those were small things that you just have to accept in movies like this. Also, the idea that Alfred imagined seeing Bruce at the end, or that it's even up for interpretation, is wrong. First of all, Nolan wouldn't want to follow Inception with another ambiguous ending. It would seem unimaginative. He goes out of his way to make clear that Bruce has moved on. The scene with Lucius finding out the autopilot was fixed has no purpose other than to show the audience he survived. More than that, the fact that the pearls are missing is the biggest "clue." He took the pearls back from Selina early in the movie, but obviously gave them back as they left Gotham together. Those were his mother's pearls. The symbolism couldn't be more clear. He moved on from his parents' death, and the passing off the pearls to Selina is a symbol for that. I believe she's also wearing them in the cafe.
Click to expand...

Don't forget to vote:

http://forums.superherohype.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=25319
 
The Incredible Hulk said:
Great. It was handled in a way that you don't know if it was actually him or if Bruce was just hallucinating. Similar to Willem Dafoe's cameo as Norman Osborne in Spider-man II.
Click to expand...

Whoa, I loved that moment! :woot:

Anyway, no matter what people say, I still think Neeson was the perfect casting choice for Ra's. :o
 
I have been reading this forum for a couple weeks. I don't mind spoilers.*
But! I do want to point out that you guys look way too deep into the ending.*
I just saw the movie. And honestly. No offense but I think most of the people's take on the ending is kind of um... For lack of a better/less insulting word. *Stupid.*

From what people were posting... The ending was made out to be open ended...or unclear... Honestly, it's pretty obvious. First off... Robin, is not a new batman or someone who is taking up the mantle. He's robin... The way he swings through the water fall. The way he helps batman. Everything he does is robin. She says "you should use your real name.... Robin". *
So what if he's not dick Greyson or any of the other robins. Ras was never ducard I never heard anyone cry about that?*
Yes he finds the batcave... Where do you get the "taking up the mantle" from? Last time I checked. Robin worked with batman in the cave as well. Just because hes rising up on the platform doesnt mean hes findig the suit * *Come on hes looking up! Its a metaphor of the whole "rises" part. *

Just because someone takes up the mantle in the comics doesn't mean Blake *is going to. It's never truly implied that he's going to be the next batman. It's pretty freakin obvious that he's robin. Did you guys not hear her say "robin" .... Seriously chill out people. Think about this logically. Why would Nolan call him robin??? Guys it's a movie. Seriously.*

"well Bruce left to Italy with Selina" so. Who's to say he wont come back... Or that he stopped , that scene was there for a reason... to show that he's still alive... And so Alfred will be happy. No one wants Alfred's last scene to be him crying.*

My point is you guys need to relax and take in just how good of a movie this is. you guys expect the ending to be all complicated because of the inception ending which quite frankly left us all saying "what the f***? Was he or no?"*

Guys it's simple. Nolan said straight up. This is the end of the story. Batman saved Gotham. Inspired the city. Robin helped. Now robins in the cave. Batman obviously isn't dead... Idk why everyone doesn't like it so much. Seriously. Like I said. Chill people enjoy the movie and it's epicness. It's Nolan's take on it. If you dont like it. Well then go watch the old batman movies. Or the cartoon. This was a great movie. End of story.*


Sorry for the long post ;)
 
I'd like to know why the BEST fight scene took place near the middle of the film and not the end....

Man, im frustrated... I want to like this movie, but like Harvey Dent, i keep going back and forth... The second viewing will allow me to make my final verdict...

as of now... 6.5
 
Batman jr. said:
It seems that Nolan has stirred it up big time with TDKR...

Anyway, how was

Neeson's cameo
Click to expand...

Was ok
I didnt like that he faded away they should have just had Bruce wake up from the dream rather than that.
but it was just good to see Neeson again.
 
Art Damage said:
It's 6 in the morning, I'm not sure what to think of this movie right now and first and foremost...that's utterly sad considering the high amount of hope I had for this film.


Let me start this off by saying, I REALLY think I need more viewings of this movie...perhaps to let some parts that rubbed me the wrong way soak in better and me have a clearer vison. I liked it but it all really comes down to this...



I REALLY disliked John Blake and how things ended up. I think it's a really piss on the franchise to have the possibility of Blake's character taking up the role of the Bat..which DOES NOT make sense with the marketing of the film with the "legend ending."

What was really the point of having Blake come into the Batcave at all? I felt that his character was in the movie WAY too much and could have benefited the film more with being completely written off, giving the Bruce Wayne struggle to deal with Bane's fight so much more compelling...



PLEASE, someone explain why this works for you at all so you can help me better understand it. Cause I've been in a four hour discussion with my brother about it...and we're still not digging it.
Click to expand...


Because he's robin. Plain and simple.
 
I honestly think, even if Nolan denies it, the third movie would've been drastically different had Ledger lived....
 
[QUOTE="_____";23922215]I honestly think, even if Nolan denies it, the third movie would've been drastically different had Ledger lived....[/QUOTE]

I think he may have at least cameo'd
 
Meerski said:
I have been reading this forum for a couple weeks. I don't mind spoilers.*
But! I do want to point out that you guys look way too deep into the ending.*
I just saw the movie. And honestly. No offense but I think most of the people's take on the ending is kind of um... For lack of a better/less insulting word. *Stupid.*

From what people were posting... The ending was made out to be open ended...or unclear... Honestly, it's pretty obvious. First off... Robin, is not a new batman or someone who is taking up the mantle. He's robin... The way he swings through the water fall. The way he helps batman. Everything he does is robin. She says "you should use your real name.... Robin". *
So what if he's not dick Greyson or any of the other robins. Ras was never ducard I never heard anyone cry about that?*
Yes he finds the batcave... Where do you get the "taking up the mantle" from? Last time I checked. Robin worked with batman in the cave as well. Just because hes rising up on the platform doesnt mean hes findig the suit * *Come on hes looking up! Its a metaphor of the whole "rises" part. *

Just because someone takes up the mantle in the comics doesn't mean Blake *is going to. It's never truly implied that he's going to be the next batman. It's pretty freakin obvious that he's robin. Did you guys not hear her say "robin" .... Seriously chill out people. Think about this logically. Why would Nolan call him robin??? Guys it's a movie. Seriously.*

"well Bruce left to Italy with Selina" so. Who's to say he wont come back... Or that he stopped , that scene was there for a reason... to show that he's still alive... And so Alfred will be happy. No one wants Alfred's last scene to be him crying.*

My point is you guys need to relax and take in just how good of a movie this is. you guys expect the ending to be all complicated because of the inception ending which quite frankly left us all saying "what the f***? Was he or no?"*

Guys it's simple. Nolan said straight up. This is the end of the story. Batman saved Gotham. Inspired the city. Robin helped. Now robins in the cave. Batman obviously isn't dead... Idk why everyone doesn't like it so much. Seriously. Like I said. Chill people enjoy the movie and it's epicness. It's Nolan's take on it. If you dont like it. Well then go watch the old batman movies. Or the cartoon. This was a great movie. End of story.*


Sorry for the long post ;)
Click to expand...

Sorry. Nolan's never been a literalist, not in any film he's ever done. There's always a ton of implied imagery and things that are left up to the viewers own interpretation, or just things that are teased but never really revealed (the spinning top at the end of Inception for example.) That's what keeps people talking about his films. He doesnt spoon feed you everything.

The scenes you mentioned above about Blake, the cafe, etc. are left open purposefully. That's how he works.

Sure, Blake's name is Robin apparently, but yet his scene in the bat cave is almost frame for frame the one in BB when Bruce discovers it from the rope, to the bats, to the standing holding the light, etc. There's room for discussion on both ends, and both likely have good points.

Same for the cafe, Was Alfred seeing what he wanted to see for his own sense of closure? Or did Bruce do that as a way of letting him know he was OK and doing what he dreamed for him all along? You make of it what you want, but no one is really going to be wrong or right.
 
Last edited:
The cafe scene is open-ended in that we don't know Bruce's future. Not in the sense that it could be Alfred's imagination.
 
The Incredible Hulk said:
Sorry. Nolan's never been a literalist, not in any film he's ever done. There's always a ton of implied imagery and things that are left up to the viewers own interpretation, or just things that are teased but never really revealed (the spinning top at the end of Inception for example.) That's what keeps people talking about his films. He doesnt spoon feed you everything.

The scenes you mentioned above about Blake, the cafe, etc. are left open purposefully. That's how he works.

Sure, Blake's name is Robin apparently, but yet his scene in the bat cave is almost frame for frame the one in BB when Bruce discovers it from the rope, to the bats, to the standing holding the light, etc. There's room for discussion on both ends, and both likely have good points.

Same for the cafe, Was Alfred seeing what he wanted to see for his own sense of closure? Or did Bruce do that as a way of letting him know he was OK and doing what he dreamed for him all along? You make of it what you want, but no one is really going to be wrong or right.
Click to expand...

Honestly I see your points. And I can see where some people might picture this. And I don't think there is much wrong with it ...
But why would he imagine it... Why would she call him robin. Why is the auto pilot fixed. Why are the pearls gone. It's all right there. People honestly are choosing to believe too much simply because it's Nolan. But honestly not all of his endings have that "what if" factor. Look at batman begins.. He straight up tells you "joker is in the next one"

It's open ended in the fact that we don't really know Bruce's future. We just know he's happy (happier)


The only thing that bothered me was the nuke... It looked kinda lame.
 
eal2727 said:
The cafe scene is open-ended in that we don't know Bruce's future. Not in the sense that it could be Alfred's imagination.
Click to expand...

Well I did wonder that but I think they left it open for us to interpret it whichever way we want.
 
JackN said:
One Nod in partiular I like but maybe it's just me but...

I like the NOD to West Batman just before they unveil the statue. The cover looked like West Batman's Cape. I loved it.

It really shows how much at least from what I make of it Nolan was inspired by Adam West era Batman
Click to expand...

seriously? :dry:
 
Meerski,
Just my opinion, but I don't think his being alive was left open for interpretation. How come he never imagined him in the years before? Always saw someone else's face, not Bruce's. And what about the pearls? That to me is the biggest telltale. I agree Nolan is not a literalist, and that's why I think the pearls had so much significance. Passing the pearls from his mother to a woman he could be close to was the final step in leaving his pain behind. I just don't see Nolan putting in scenes like that and the autopilot if not to make a point. Certainly everyone is entitled to his/her opinion and I'd never get angry about someone thinking differently than I do, but I feel pretty strongly about this. I also think the fact that it's not the last scene is significant. If anything is open-ended, it's Blake's future. THAT is totally up for speculation.
 
If the Cafe scene was suppose to be left up to our interpretation, then why even tell us the auto pilot was fixed? He fixed it and lived. No need for interpretation IMO.
 
Agreed as well. And since it made me smile from ear to ear....I love it.
 
Meerski said:
Honestly I see your points. And I can see where some people might picture this. And I don't think there is much wrong with it ...
But why would he imagine it... Why would she call him robin. Why is the auto pilot fixed. Why are the pearls gone. It's all right there. People honestly are choosing to believe too much simply because it's Nolan. But honestly not all of his endings have that "what if" factor. Look at batman begins.. He straight up tells you "joker is in the next one"

It's open ended in the fact that we don't really know Bruce's future. We just know he's happy (happier)
Click to expand...

All good points, and good job on bringing up the auto-pilot being fixed. When I first saw the film, I took it as meaning that Bruce sacrificed himself even though he didnt have to.

But now that you mention it, that would give him a way out of getting killed by the nuke, although then again it brings up the question how the hell would he have gotten far enough away from it to survive? Especially considering they showed him still in the Bat with the clock around the 10 second mark.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

ChrisB
  • Locked
The Dark Knight Rises The Dark Knight Rises Info Hunters Thread
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
87K
Thread Manager
T
ChrisB
  • Locked
The Dark Knight Rises The Dark Knight Rises Info Hunters Thread
38 39 40
Replies
996
Views
90K
BatmanBeyond
BatmanBeyond
T
The Dark Knight Rises TDKR SPOILERS (read at your own risk) - Part 5
17 18 19
Replies
463
Views
24K
Just_Human
Just_Human
T
  • Locked
The Dark Knight Rises TDKR SPOILERS (read at your own risk) - Part 4
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
37K
Thread Manager
T
T
  • Locked
The Dark Knight Rises TDKR SPOILERS (read at your own risk) - Part 2
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
39K
Thread Manager
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Staff online

Members online

Total: 4,384 (members: 20, guests: 4,364)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,399
Messages
22,097,333
Members
45,893
Latest member
DooskiPack

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"