Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Dark Knight Rises' started by Thread Manager, Jul 25, 2012.
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]389543[/split]
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]389081[/split]
That's something that bothered the minute i saw it on screen. It makes absolutely no sense.
So many convenient things, so many plot holes. It's a shame.
My short review of the film: I really liked it! Is it as good as The Dark Knight? No. But it's still a good movie, on par at least with Batman Begins (which, given how this film directly harkens back to that film and comes full circle is very appropriate).
My longer, more spoiler-filled review of the film: All the performances were solid, with maybe a couple of exceptions. In particular Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Gary Oldman, and Morgan Freeman were just as good as they have been in the last two installments.
I thought Tom Hardy as Bane was great. Granted, he sounded like Goldfinger from James Bond with a plastic bucket over his head, but he delivered in showing that Bane was very much the dark reflection of Batman. I especially liked the both the moment where he utterly breaks Batman and the following scene where he explains to Bruce exactly what he's going to do to Gotham and Bruce by providing a false sense of hope makes the despair that much greater.
I also really enjoyed Anne Hathaway's performance as Selina Kyle. It's not only a far more faithful version of Catwoman than what's been on the big screen, but it's crystal clear why she does what she does and why she acts the way she does. Plus she's got very good chemistry between herself and Bale--particularly that masked ballroom scene. And did no one think she looked seriously hot when riding the Batpod? But while I did like the relationship between Bruce and Selina, I did feel it was a bit rushed towards the end. Still, it was perfectly clear why the two of them were growing mutually attracted to one another; it just needed to "marinate" a bit more, if that makes any sense.
Joesph Gordon-Levitt's character of John Blake was also another highlight. I thought his overall story arc was rather fitting, and, because he has both the qualities of both Bruce Wayne and Gordon while also not having their faults, he's able to bring balance to both of those characters--much like how
the character who shares his real first name does for Batman in the comics. And speaking of Blake's real name being Robin? Yeah, that was admittedly pretty cheesy, but understandable considering how, for all intends and purposes, the character was pretty much Nolan's version of Dick Grayson anyway.
The weakest performance, however, I think unfortunately goes to Marion Cotillard as
Miranda Tate/Talia al Ghul. Oh sure, I thought the twist with her being behind everything made perfect sense, at the same time, it was way too telegraphed almost from the very beginning. That's because Cotillard didn't come across the least bit convincing when she's supposed to be pretending to be a philanthropic businesswoman; it's only when she reveals herself as Talia and her motives to Batman that she finally begins to shine.
I also agree that, in terms of the pacing, the film can be pretty slow, particularly the beginning it has to establish everything that's happened in the past eight years and introduce new characters and, to some degree, the middle of the movie where Bane and the League of Shadows take over Gotham. But for the most part, there was lots of exciting and riveting stuff, particularly those last 30-40 minutes. Absolutely fantastic! Nolan has improved tremendously when it comes to staging large actions scenes, and the ones in this movie were top notch.
And as for "The Bat?" Very cool! Particularly the scene where it's chasing the Tumblers--best action sequence in the movie, bar none.
All that said, there certainly wasn't enough scenes of Bruce being Batman, although considering how it's more or less Bruce Wayne's story overall, this is pretty easy to let slide. It also would have been nice to have a scene showing how Bruce was able to get back into Gotham in spite of the military blockade and all but one of the bridges being blown up.
Also, I actually thought that Nolan didn't go far enough in showing just how much a major city like Gotham would have collapsed after five months without any civil government or authority in place. There needed to be trash on the street, gutted cars on fire, people rioting for food and medicine, rolling blackouts, etc. Granted, the film effectively shows how all these people are forcibly being dragged out of their homes by the mob, the mock trials, and also how, in the aftermath, people were too scared to come out of their houses; but they also needed to show how Gotham had become akin to a third-world city under Bane's rule. A better example of a society on the brink of collapse is Children of Men, and that's what I think Gotham should have looked like more during Bane's occupation.
the way Bane died, and while it does show that Bruce was right about Selina being good all along, my gosh was that just a lazy, deus ex machina on Nolan's part. Bane's been built-up as this badass villain, so you'd think he'd go out with a little more style than being blasted by the Batpod's cannons. Come on, Nolan! You can do better than that.
With regards to the ending, I thought it couldn't be a more appropriate and fitting conclusion for this particular trilogy of Batman films. Granted, some are questioning the logic of
how Bruce was able to escape from a 6 mile wide nuclear explosion, with some as going as far as to suggest Alfred only imagined seeing Bruce and Selina in the cafe (even though there's more than enough evidence given in the film that the ending is exactly what it purports to be)
it really does work when you consider what the past two films and this one have been establishing about Bruce as a character, not to mention perfectly satisfying given what has happened over the course of the trilogy.
All in all, I'd give it three out of four stars, but still very close to being three and a-half out of four.
I'll be brief and say of all the Batman films done in the past, TDKR is the only one to prove that Batman is human and not only can he fall into defeat, but he can learn to pick himself up and rise to victory. The Batman who stuck to the shadows and made his prey fear him in BB makes a glorious return along with TDK Batman who was more on the offense side and overall creates the character of Batman 100% for this movie.
Not going to write a huge analyzis.
1) [BLACKOUT]Selina's motivation to find some program that will erases her criminal record from all databases of the world, just stupid and way too unrealistic;[/BLACKOUT]
2) [BLACKOUT]How Bane and Miranda died, grand story of these characters deserves a better end;[/BLACKOUT]
3) The way how the movie is cut, they tried to fit too much in to 2:45, it feels like the actual time is about 30-45 minutes longer;
I absolutely loved everything else. And especially Selina and the ending. I can nitpick more, but those problems aren't significant and don't affect much.
In my top of Nolan movies, I rate TDKR number three, after Inception and TDK.
I just came back from seeing it, and dont have time to fully review it now, but all Ill say, as a hardcore fan since '88, I was the first one who actually stood up and started clapping. It exceeded my expectations by miles
I think TDK will always be my favorite of the Nolan trilogy but right now Begins and Rises are battling for second. I have less issues with Begins than Rises (at this point but that's subject to possible change I suppose) but something about Rises, despite my gripes, I'm really beginning to love.
That's not unfair.
some people will look at this movie and see nothing but 2 and half hours of plot holes, because they are denying themselves the true symbolic/thematic vision nolan brought to life over the course of three films. each film is in itself perfectly balanced and each holds it's own in the overall trilogy while playing into an very well constructed narrative. BB and TDKR bookend the saga, their plots mirroring each other in numerous ways. TDK acts as its own piece - a perfect connection between where batman/bruce begins and how his legends must ultimately end. in tdk we see Bruce fighting with something he created, rather than fighting the powers that helped make him batman (LoS). it's a wonderful character piece, fleshed out in detail and shot with beautiful action sequences and captivating dialogue.
i don't see how people can be angry at nolan, or pretend that he has destroyed the batman mythos, with this trilogy (or more specifically in the final installment of the trilogy). he has taken it to new heights in my opinion, and if you can't accept the themes which drive the overall plot in TDKR than i don't see how you can still say you love TDK or BB. they are one story - and it is a complete story and MANY PEOPLE WHO SAW IT thought it a very logical and realistic version of the bat.
ugh, i want to make people see the beauty of the entire trilogy, and look at it at as a whole but so many people seem to be upset that batman didn't in this movie. they seem upset that bruce got what he wanted/needed and that nolan wrote a well balanced and entertaining conclusion to his epic depiction of Bruce Wayne. i wish you all could see what i see in this movie...its frustrating being limited by language and the alphanumeric keys on my keyboard.
and the fans of this movie seem angry or seem to put out "venom" because people who say things like batman not being able to escape the blast radius, or bruce wayne choosing not to disassemble the nuclear reactor (because completely shutting down 8 years of work and the best chance at renewable energy man has ever seen makes perfect sense) are some kind of glaring plothole. they are not plotholes, they are ideas nolan suggests in the movie that you were unable to pick up on or appreciate - likely because he decieved you too well in his ploy to do what he did with bruce.
ugh, i don't want to sound angry but why does the discussion of this movie have to be so one-sided. i wish i could really wrap my head around some of the flaws that people have been griping about so that i could see the movie from a totally different perspective. but i can't. i just loved it. absolutely loved it.
The movie was great but nolan doesnt know how to film hand to hand combat scenes. Alot of flailing hits didnt make good for watching.
Bane and Talias death scenes were pretty cheap. Especially Bane he deserved better than that.
Bane was already defeated by Batman though and since he wasn't going to kill Bane, it kind of made scene to have someone else. Plus, his sudden death coincided with you finding out he was just a lackey.
Wow, it was epic but have some moments like from Transformers or Fast & Furious. Actors great, Catwoman very sexy but Nolan made better movies. 8.5/10
Just tagging this to avoid any inadvertent spoilers:
Finally saw this. My initial reaction was: I enjoyed a lot of it, but I didn't think it was very coherent. Nolan is an excellent filmmaker, there is no denying his talent. So, there are a lot of impressive sequences. But... if this was supposed to mean something, I couldn't tell what it was. TDK didn't have that problem.
I loved Anne Hathaway as Catwoman, my only complaint here is that I wish she were in it more. This film needed other stuff to be cut or simplified to get Catwoman more screentime.
Bane was impressive... at times. But I thought he was undercut very harshly at the end, to the point that I wasn't even sure what his motivations really were any more at that point.
To me that is the main problem with this film, at least on first viewing: I couldn't tell what Bane was trying to accomplish. Admittedly, Ra's reasons for destroying Gotham weren't really a strong point of the first film in the trilogy either. Oddly enough, his motivations tend to be clearer in the comics: Ra's sees humanity as a pestilence destroying the planet and wants to control the population. But in the films it seems to be more about the city as a source of corruption. But what does this correspond to in the real world? Nothing, really, that I can see. Unless one believes in some sort of fantasy of urban decay and decadence. The Joker doesn't have this problem in TDK because he is simply an agent of chaos. But Ra's motivations, and therefore Bane's, are moral and ethical (cleansing the corruption, etc.). So, that needs to mean something, and I thought that this movie couldn't really decide whether it wanted this to be about class warfare, popular uprising, or simply wiping out the city's population.
I also felt the movie suffered from some sloppy writing and editing at times. Some scenes seemed out of place (like Alfred's various descriptions of Bane), and I also thought the movie tended to lose track of certain characters for too long.
Batman's fall and rise are really strong, though. Nothing fancy here, just the hero's struggle. These scenes were better than the ones in Gotham, I thought, possibly because they were simpler.
To me the problem with Batman on film remains Batman himself (in costume, I mean). I don't think anyone has yet captured what makes the character so awesome in the comics, just in terms of the mechanics of what he does, the fear he generates, his intimidation factor, the coolness factor, etc. This should be a really simple thing, but I don't think anyone yet has gotten it right. It tends to be the villains that really shine in the batman films, or Batman without the costume (as is the case in this film).
All in all, a respectable end to the trilogy, definitely, but TDK will remain Nolan's best batman film. I guess that was probably inevitable.
Seriously, you've gone past clutching at straws. You're now jumping on any criticism people have and claiming you saw it too.
If you hated the film so much, there's an X button on your Left if it's Macintosh, and Right if it's Windows. Use it pal, you're becoming a nuisance.
He didn't have to anymore than the citizens of Gotham had to; he set the autopilot.
Oh, I know. I'm just responding to the claims that
Alfred only imagined Bruce was still alive when the film clearly made the case that he did. And not just the auto-pilot either but also the missing pearl necklace--which has a tracking device by the way so Alfred could be able to find Bruce that way--the repaired bat-signal for Gordon, his leaving the instructions for John Blake to find the Batcave. Also, Bruce knew all about Alfred's fantasy of seeing him in the cafe in Italy, so it also stands to reason that Bruce is re-enacting that for Alfred's benefit.
YES YES YES! I am not the only one who wants to scream when reading UaalaDan's posts.
You didn't like it. Fine. Move on, man. Don't be a killjoy for the people who did.
I disagree, Talia may have had the vision but it was Bane's brain who carried out the vision and how it would come about. They were in it together. Plus, she ignored orders to keep Bruce alive..he was about to kill him.
Far cry from a lackey if ya ask me.
He didn't reaslise it could be used as a weapon until Pavel published his paper. Once he realised this he mothballed the project, presumably with the idea that at some point in the future it could be resurrected after he had the opportunity to ensure it's safety.
It wasn't a plot-hole that he mothballed it because there was no indication that there was a direct threat to it.
Saw it last night, loved it, had some problems but it was amazing, 10/10 for me.
Saw it last night, and while it's good, it's wasn't great for me. I agree with many of the issues others have had with it, especially the comments around it being choppy and cut to trim the running time. There were moments where it just moved far too quickly, and some instances seemed watered down to maintain the PG-13 rating.
I would have been happy with another half an hour, and a 15 rating to make it more realistic. With so much implied violence and death, a movie still needs the visual validation so you can appreciate the severity of the situation facing Gotham.
There was also too many convenient happenings that just left you thinking "Nolan could have done better there". But no matter - his vision is still awe-inspiring, and the characters have an emotional depth that fills you with pride that you have been on this journey with them. The hairs were standing up on my neck for the final sequence.
So - rather than dwell on the final film's misgivings, I would like to thank Chris Nolan for dedicating the last eight or so years of his life in bringing Batman to us. I'd like to thank Christian Bale for putting his body and mind through the mill to give us fans the Batman/Bruce Wayne dynamic we could believe in and, more importantly, 'care' to believe in. And I'd like to thank all of you fans out there for making these past eight years an incredible spolier and non-spolier filled journey, filled with amazing conversation, art and a couple of friends won along the way.
Final movie verdict? 7/10 - you'll find too much to nitpick about, but Catwoman was superb. And can anyone tell me where I can buy a 'Bat'. That thing rules. Period.
Talia and Bane were equal partners who jointly operated League of Shadows, Talia provided the vision and purpose, Bane was the one who executed it using his mind and muscle.
Bane even say the line" I am LOS".
Btw, how did you like the movie Bruce_Begins?