It was around the time of the prologue being released, but yah, it did sound bad...that's why I loved what we got in the film, lol.
What would have been your idea on how to have Bane break Batman though?
My idea would've been the standard idea. Bane comes to Gotham, studies Batman and comes up with a plan to beat him, then breaks him. Either that or I would've had Batman get broken during his first encounter with Bane and then have Batman realize that he needs to step up his game in order to beat Bane and does some extra training then comes back and beats him.
I was speaking on Batman Begins which is why the parenthesis are close to Batman Begins, lol.
Ah, I see. I don't remember there being mercenaries that looked like that in BB though lol. Maybe you can refresh my memory.
You never get an answer on why the LoS are so loyal to Ra's either in BB, but you have to just go with it while watching the film(besides "Ducard"'s fake line on how Ra's saved him).
The difference is that BB doesn't constantly ask the viewers to question why Ra's' men are so loyal while TDKR does.
But, thinking back on TDKR, Alfred did mention the coup that Bane underwent in Africa(I believe it was Africa), so perhaps they are just regular mercenaries and Bane and Talia keep the League of Shadows name around because of their relation to the LoS.
That would make more sense. We still don't know whether or not Talia went with Bane after Ra's excommunicated him or if she stayed with Ra's. That would also explain why she doesn't understand her father's motivations at all since she was going to kill herself with the city. She doesn't seem to have ever spoken to her dad or anyone in the LOS since she is not aware of the fact that the LOS' role is to destroy bad corrupt cities. She seems to think her dad formed the LOS with the sole purpose of destroying Gotham (even said "I'm going to fulfill my father's destiny!"). Problem is that destroying Gotham wasn't Ra's al Ghul's destiny but just the next city he was going to take care of. Once Gotham was destroyed, he would've moved on to the next corrupt city. And granted that she also hated her dad, it would make sense for her to not stay with the LOS.
However, there is also evidence to suggest that she did indeed stay with the LOS and didn't just keep the name. Evidence such as the fact that she knows that Bruce left her dad in a train to die which she wouldn't know unless she was with the LOS (though honestly, even the remaining LOS might not know that). I would also say that her calling herself the LOS and wanting to complete her father's mission greatly imply that she had some current involvement with the LOS. So overall, it could go either way. That's another thing that confuses me in the movie and something that Nolan should've cleared up. Maybe you can clear things up for me.
Where did you get that from?
From a statement the production crew made many months ago where they said they finished shooting the film and the final step is to edit it because it is around 4 h long. That and the avid TDKR supporters usually say that to me whenever I bring up things that don't make sense or should've been explained better as a means of defending the movie.
I also posted a link a few pages back where someone talks about Bane's origin being completely cut out. I imagine exploring Bane's origin was a major part in the film.
And Bane called out on the Tumblers to fire like a General would and went straight after the main guy(Batman) like a General would.
Let me clarify my last post then. Talia was in the role of the King (Queen technically but you get the point) and the King is the one that makes the plan and orders the General to carry them out, while the General is on the battlefield carrying them out. Bane was basically Talia's representative during that final fight and the King's representative is never higher or more important than the actual King.
Talia watching was just the plan to be there as Bane wanted her to keep close as said by Bane after he saw the burning Bat symbol.
Going back to the King analogy, this would be the General saying "Don't worry, my King! I shall destroy the evil tyrant for you."
I don't think any mention of Bane had to be made at all EXCEPT I would have liked to see the police haul Bane's dead body out of City Hall. Besides that, though, the bigger thing to take care of was the bomb and a mention of Bane didn't seem necessary. Plus, seeing Batman showing up would have given Talia the idea something happened to Bane as it would seem wasteful for Talia to bring up something about him during her last breaths.
I'm not talking about the story. I'm talking about the movie's whole attitude towards Bane after the Talia reveal. They establish him to not be as big of a bad we thought he was, shows he has no honor after he tries to kill Batman with a gun who beat him fair and square (you would think he would have some respect for him since he seems to have that same honor from the comics throughout the movie till that point), is killed in the most pathetic way possible and then is not only never mentioned again but treated as if he was there to begin with (at least till Talia's death).
Escorting her into the Tumbler, that's all. How is that really a big deal though?
When one of Bane's really loyal men who is willing to die for him any second follows her as opposed to him staying with an already really injured Bane without Bane or Talia telling him to escort Talia to the Tumbler (basically the guy just follows her), it shows that she is really the main big bad and holds more power than Bane.
One order that Bane doesn't listen to. Usually when a General gives an order to someone "lower", they take the order and listen.
I know: Bane wasn't a lackey, lol.
As I said, that's something that doesn't make sense in the movie to begin with. I'm assuming it is either a plot hole Nolan didn't address or there was something cut out from there. Bane did say "You know I have to kill you now" before he was going to kill him, implying that something happened in that specific moment that just made it necessary for Bane to kill Batman.
That doesn't mean Talia is the sole leader.
It does not reveal she is the sole leader but it implies it because it makes her seem a lot more of a worthy adversary over Bane and makes her Batman's equal. Her and Batman are the only people to have ever achieved the one challenge no man could achieve, including Bane. The reveal that it wasn't Bane who got out of that hole pretty much destroys the high ranking status he had before and the notion that he is anywhere close to Batman's level.
Batman beating Bane by breaking his mask and telling him that he climbed, something Bane never did made it feel, to me, that he just grabbed a shotgun to kill Batman quickly as he became jealous that Batman is the better man. Again, doesn't make Bane seem like a "lackey"; just showed his fear that even was noticed when he saw the burning Bat logo: "Impossible."
That is not a proper portrayal of Bane then. Bane doesn't hold jealousy and fear in that way. Bane has honor. In Knightfall, he even asked Batman (Azrael) to kill him after Batman (Azrael) beat him fair and square and he acknowledged him as his superior.
Before you defend Bane by saying "This is Nolan's version of Bane", think about that statement. Why fix something that isn't broken? There was nothing wrong or unrealistic about a Bane with pride and honor like the one in the comics and Nolan stripped Bane of both of those things and turned him into a coward and jealous man (according to you anyways). Why would you be happy about that? Don't you think a Bane with same pride and honor would've worked in TDKR just as good or even better? Don't you think the movie could've been just as good or even better if that was the case?
I rarely get a "lot of people" idea except for only a few that states it on the TDKR boards.
Those are the "a lot of people" I'm talking about
. lol
Platonic love is non-sexual love. Basically love that parents have for kids, friends have for other really close friends, etc.
So Bane's "crime" is that she cared for Talia in the same way her father presumably did. Doesn't sound like that big of a crime to me.
Sprinting? We see him limping at the end of TDK. Even the script of TDK, I believe, states Batman limping to his Bat-pod.
Once again, I can buy he would be a bit wrecked after that fall but I don't buy that fall gave him all those injuries and made them so severe that they would last for 8 years.
And the injuries were for that entire year, not just the events of TDK.
He seemed fine to me throughout TDK.
I respect your views, but I would have to disagree as I view it in an entirely different way. Just because The Long Halloween inspired BB and TDK doesn't mean the Nolans and Goyer were going to bring the idea of the "rise of freaks", but once again, I respect your views and can see why you didn't like TDKR. As for me, who views it differently, it's why I really love TDKR. And the film is polarizing because of that very moment, imo. Many view it the way you do, many view it the way I do. But I am sure you are aware of that.
Yes, I am aware of that. I am interested to hear your more in depth views on the movie though.
It does not mean that being inspired by BB and TDK automatically means that the freaks theme is there but based on events in both BB and TDK, I saw that being set up multiple times especially in the dialogue. I'm pretty sure that the Joker line I quoted in my last post is also taken straight from the book. You can't say you're heavily influenced by the book, allude to the freaks theme multiple times in both movies (though a lot more in TDK), and then expect people to not know what you're talking about it. I see it set up there and I didn't have to look too deep into the film.
Also, be honest. Did you really expect Bruce to retire right after TDK's ending when you saw TDK? Most people got the vibe that he was going to continue being Batman including the ones who didn't have a problem with him retiring for 8 years as well as the ones who supported it. I'm not sure how much from Nolan's original TDKR outlined plan with the Joker changed with Ledger's death but one thing I can still say for certain is that if you analyze everything in BB and TDK, it was clear that Bruce wasn't meant to retire for 8 years and continue being Batman, even if he would've still quit and passed on the mantle by the end of the movie.
Heck, Goyer even said back when TDK first came out that one of the important story points in Batman 3 would've been Gordon leading the police on a manhunt chase to capture Batman. All of it points to it being an afterthought. The "I think you and I are destined to do this forever" line also points to it being an afterthought (this last sentence here you just read BTW was also an afterthought I added after I finished responding to your whole post
t
.
But, I would like to say...Batman can take it, but why would he when Batman's crusade came to an end with Bruce's main objective being taken care of because of the top guys being dead(Maroni, Gambol, Chechen, even Lau) and the other guys are in jail for a year or so(as stated in TDK by Dent) which gives enough time for the Dent Act to be initiated and keep the criminals behind bars?
Multiple reasons I addressed before. To recap:
1)
"Freaks" theme. Batman is there to take care of guys like the Joker who normal people including people like Harvey cannot handle.
2)
Time until the Dent Act passes. They apparently passed the act right after that night since Bruce quit right after that night. Bruce had also no idea that the Dent Act would be passed. It needed to be passed first before he could say "Now I can quit".
3)
Problems with the Dent Act. It is a complete deus ex machina act. You can't realistically have a magical act that gets rid of organized crime. Even New York, though not as bad now as in the 1980's, still has problems in that department.
4)
Unorganized crime can be more dangerous than organized crime. There is at least someone to hold Gotham's criminals by a leash with organized crime. That's not the case with unorganized crime. With such a huge criminal population like Gotham's, Batman would still be needed around to clean up the streets. It would take the police quite a long time to do this by themselves.
When TDKR was worked on immediately after TDK, then it positively means Nolan wanted to give Bruce Wayne an ending.
Nolan didn't say he was coming back till March or April 2010 and the script was only finished somewhere between Nov 2010 - Feb 2011. TDK came out in the summer of 2008. That's hardly "immediately".
Interesting for him to say that.
I would also like to point out that while he did say that he doesn't like to cut out scenes and that BB and TDK didn't have any, we know for a fact TDKR did. We don't know how much was cut out but we know that at least Bane's entire story was cut out.
www.geeksofdoom.com/2012/08/07/the-true-story-of-bane-cut-out-of-final-edit-of-the-dark-knight-rises
Still doesn't hide the fact that TDK does have its share of hate. I could even bring up a few posters on here that have stated their dislike of the film. Batman Begins is really the only film of Nolan's trilogy that I rarely hear anything "bad" about lately, but I'm sure that film has some "hate" as well.
Everything has its share of hate as big or as small as it may be. The fans were never so divided on BB and TDK as they are with TDKR.
Nothing shows Gordon is ready to light up anything just because he's touching on the rebuilt symbol in daytime.
Fair enough. But while he may not light it up right on the same day, I did get the vibe that he would light it up soon and by soon, I mean within a few days/months to a year max. That's just my vibe though. I admit I have nothing to base that on though. So I guess it pains me to say this but for this point...you win
.
I am enjoying it as well, and you're not becoming *****ey down the line as some have become as of late(and I can name names!).
Same thing can be said about you
. I always found it odd that so many people on this site consider you a fanboy and a *****e but outside of TDKR and the Spider-Man reboot, I don't think you're that different from me. I think we would get along just fine on every other topic. But then again, I've been called a fanboy and a *****e by some people in the past so maybe me saying that means nothing. lol
