The Dark Knight Rises The TDKR General Discussion Thread - - - Part 152

[Snow Queen]

It's like I stepped into a time machine in this place.

 

[Shikamaru]

This thread is like gravity. All it takes is a little push...

 

[Ryan]

This thread is like gravity. All it takes is a little push...

Ha, well put!

 

[The Joker]

The Art Directors Guild

Anne Hathaway presented Christopher Nolan with the award for Outstanding Contribution to Cinematic Imagery. After a worshipful introduction by Hathaway, Nolan walked out to a standing ovation and delivered a humble speech that largely paid tribute to the artists he’s worked with, in particular his longtime art director Nathan Crowley.

“Whatever I’ve contributed to cinematic imagery is due to my collaborations with my designers,” Nolan said, listing the numerous examples of Crowley’s, and other artists’ contributions to his films. “I think the art department stands for everything wonderful about movies, everything exciting about movies. They stand for how wonderful movies could be if we’d just stand back and let them work. The diseinegrs I’ve had the good fortune to work with have always fought to keep that flame alive, never ever giving up on that aspirations. To be surrounded by people who aren’t just following your vision, butoften are reminding you of what you wanted, that’s one of the great privileges of being a director.

 

[shauner111]

I understand exactly what you're saying, Shauner. That's why I think what you're doing was unnecessary. The ending was not meant to be cryptic or ambiguous. You didn't have to place yourself inside the movie's universe to get a better understanding or perspective. It was one of the most clear cut spelled out messages in the movie. I'm saying your approach of placing yourself in the movie universe to view was pointless and doesn't negate the the fact of what the ending was saying to the audience. You telling me you are choosing to take some in movie universe view as though it was real approach to it is basically you saying you're deciding to view the way you want, and not the way it actually is.

It's not Gordon's "opinion", it's the movie's message that is spelled out through Gordon, and previously by Batman and Alfred, too. In the context of the movie universe yes it's three characters saying the same thing. But this universe is not real, and these characters are being used to convey the message of the movie via their dialogue. So why you choose to ignore that pretend as though this is movie reality so you can reduce it just being Gordon's opinion (when it wasn't even just him who said this) as a get out of jail free card for the bizarre turn TDKR went, is beyond me.

You say you don't care what message Nolan was giving in the movie because you want to interpret it your own way, how does that make your position on this more valid when you're arguing against what the director was saying, as opposed to what you want to believe. That's a rather pointless argument don't you think. You're free to think what ever you want of course, but to try and argue against those of us who are listening to what the movie actually tells us, well that's a debate you can never win because it's fact vs personal opinion. Facts win every time.

When in the Nolan Batman universe was any criminal ever too scared to mention they ran afoul of Batman? That defeats the whole purpose of the Batman image. He's supposed to spread a fearsome reputation by having his name and what he did spread throughout Gotham. If crooks kept quiet about when they ran into him his reputation would be non existent. Furthermore it totally defeats the purpose of Blake spelling out that the night Dent died was the last time anyone saw Batman. There's nothing else in the movie that suggests he was active as Batman post Dent's death. Especially considering he is hobbling on a busted leg he got from the fall with Dent at the end of TDK. Had been resuming active duty as Batman he would have sorted his leg out before going back out on the streets. But given the sorry condition his leg is in TDKR he obviously just left it because he never had reason to go out as Batman again since. 2+2=4.

Why would Batman stay out there if he was still seen as a murderer, because he is still needed. Because he can still do what ever he has to do, with the city hating him and the Cops hunting him because.....wait for it.....he can endure it and take it. He can be what ever Gotham needs him to be. He didn't fold like a tent and not stop the Joker just because the city was hating him and blaming him for the Joker killings. He didn't quit when the Cops gave him a merry chase half way across the city in Begins. Being wanted by the law and seen as a bad guy doesn't stop Batman from doing the job.

I'm sorry but some hearsay from Jett (one of the worst rabid Nolan fans ever) about some quote Nolan supposedly only deemed to say to him out of the dozens of TDKR related interviews Nolan has given, doesn't sway me at all. If the movie gave any real grounds to believe Bruce continued as Batman post TDK, I'd be all for it. It would make the direction TDKR took feel more organic after TDK's ending. But it doesn't. So any far flung theories about Batman activities post TDK are nothing but fan fics.

I know that i dont have to but im doing it anyway because i do it with every film. Im invested in a movie, i place myself in the shoes of a character or as a fly on the wall. I also try to see the director's message he/she's trying to send out, if they have one at all.

I dont knoe what to say other than..it's Gordons opinion. Why else would a character speak? Is he a fake character? Is he breaking the 4th wall? No, he's a character plain and simple and he's talking to his son, so it's his opinion, based on what he's been told and his thoughts on the Batman mixed together. Regardless if it works as a clear message to the audience or not, it's from Gordon's POV. The fact that you're arguing with me over that point is hilarious. You're acting like im telling you "THERE IS NO MESSAGE!", of course there's a message, but im not talking about that. You're getting a hard head this week. "Viewing it the way you want and not how it actually is"? What? Yes, im the viewer and ill view it the way i want. How i view it is what it will be.

What im saying in a nutshell is, IF i were to only look at the characters for what they're saying (remember, Gordon is not just talking to a camera like a idiot. He's speaking to his son) then yes...it's from his thoughts. How are we even debating that??

I do care what message he's telling me but i dont have to in every case. Even nolan's message or opinion doesn't matter, it's how we choose to see it. There's 2 ways this could have ended up and Nolan went with the left turn instead of the right, though they both work (my opinion of course, i see why you think it could be unnatural).

Facts do not win every time because you can bend facts with art. I can't stop a person from interpreting the end of Rises as a dream even though i believe there's facts staring at them in the face saying "this is reality". Same with Inception's ending. But they're free to think that way and you know what? They're not necessarily wrong for believing the dream. But this isn't even as complicated as that. He's telling his son what he thinks of the dude. Pretty simple stuff. But it's a little more vague than what you're making it out to be. There's no guarantee that Batman WILL put that suit on for months/years to come because the character does not know the future. In this case it almost doesn't matter what the film-maker is trying to plant in the audiences brain. You will not change my opinion on that.

So since we never seen a criminal too scared to speak about Batman to authorities, that means it can't happen ever? That's the worst argument i've heard in months. So i never seen a chocolate chip cookie in the trilogy so it can't exist? The guy is now seen as a dude who dresses up as a bat + he'll murder you if you f**k with him OR he'll hand you over to the police. He's now seen a psychotic unpredictable Batman, nobody knows how he'll react. So you're telling me there is zero possibility that a criminal won't s**t his pants, too scared to talk after he sees the Batman? That's not even fan-fic, that's just a straight up possibility yo! Just like those chocolate chip cookies! We have 8 friggin years where they didn't show us f**k all, that doesn't mean God snapped his fingers and that universe went pitch black until Bane hopped on a plane..

At this stage in Gotham, the point is not to spread the word of Batman. It's been spread. The point is to be low key. He's being hunted and he can't be caught doing usual good deeds. I dont care if that means hiding in the shadows just to keep an eye on things or staying in his mansion. The world already knows he's a murder and wanted. He doesn't need to ride down the streets luring cops out once a week in order to keep that alive.

Blake says it's the last time anyone saw Batman, true. But because nobody saw batman...Batman wasn't there? He's a ninja. Get rid of the batmobile and he can probably go out a handful of times without being seen. More than that? Sure, he'll probably be seen. But just because there's no "confirmed sightings" doesn't mean a person didn't see him, shaking in his/her boots enough to shut their mouth. Hell, the less he goes out, the more of a urban legend he becomes, much like his original appearances. "Meh, i was just seeing things"...."I saw the Batman tonight im telling you! ---You're seeing things, he's long gone". Again, your fan-fic criticism is coming...but these are just possibilities. Nothing more, nothing less. I dont even care about that anyway, i have no problem going along with the "retirement for 8 years". My earlier opinions still stand.

You're taking Nolans dialogue as gospel it seemsso how about this. What was the point of inserting the lines from Alfreds mouth about Bruce not being in the cave for so long? I've seen it everywhere, it got the fans thinking.

Things happen in life out of nowhere and it makes plans change, in fiction too. Despite what Batman said and believed, the Dent Act happened. Let me indulge you and say Batman never stated that he'll do this for the little people. To beat the piss out of every purse snatcher on every block until he can't do it anymore. That's not Bale's plan, he went after the mob and to inspire. So with the mob off the street, and regular crimes going down (but still there, which is said by Mayor Garcia) Batman is no longer needed. We didn't anticipate the Dent Act plot, and neither did the characters because that's how life works sometimes. Curveballs are thrown. Thank God.

 

[The Joker]

I know that i dont have to but im doing it anyway because i do it with every film. Im invested in a movie, i place myself in the shoes of a character or as a fly on the wall. I also try to see the director's message he/she's trying to send out, if they have one at all.

I dont knoe what to say other than..it's Gordons opinion. Why else would a character speak? Is he a fake character? Is he breaking the 4th wall? No, he's a character plain and simple and he's talking to his son, so it's his opinion, based on what he's been told and his thoughts on the Batman mixed together. Regardless if it works as a clear message to the audience or not, it's from Gordon's POV. The fact that you're arguing with me over that point is hilarious. You're acting like im telling you "THERE IS NO MESSAGE!", of course there's a message, but im not talking about that. You're getting a hard head this week. "Viewing it the way you want and not how it actually is"? What? Yes, im the viewer and ill view it the way i want. How i view it is what it will be.

What im saying in a nutshell is, IF i were to only look at the characters for what they're saying (remember, Gordon is not just talking to a camera like a idiot. He's speaking to his son) then yes...it's from his thoughts. How are we even debating that??

I do care what message he's telling me but i dont have to in every case. Even nolan's message or opinion doesn't matter, it's how we choose to see it. There's 2 ways this could have ended up and Nolan went with the left turn instead of the right, though they both work (my opinion of course, i see why you think it could be unnatural).

Facts do not win every time because you can bend facts with art. I can't stop a person from interpreting the end of Rises as a dream even though i believe there's facts staring at them in the face saying "this is reality". Same with Inception's ending. But they're free to think that way and you know what? They're not necessarily wrong for believing the dream. But this isn't even as complicated as that. He's telling his son what he thinks of the dude. Pretty simple stuff. But it's a little more vague than what you're making it out to be. There's no guarantee that Batman WILL put that suit on for months/years to come because the character does not know the future. In this case it almost doesn't matter what the film-maker is trying to plant in the audiences brain. You will not change my opinion on that.

So since we never seen a criminal too scared to speak about Batman to authorities, that means it can't happen ever? That's the worst argument i've heard in months. So i never seen a chocolate chip cookie in the trilogy so it can't exist? The guy is now seen as a dude who dresses up as a bat + he'll murder you if you f**k with him OR he'll hand you over to the police. He's now seen a psychotic unpredictable Batman, nobody knows how he'll react. So you're telling me there is zero possibility that a criminal won't s**t his pants, too scared to talk after he sees the Batman? That's not even fan-fic, that's just a straight up possibility yo! Just like those chocolate chip cookies! We have 8 friggin years where they didn't show us f**k all, that doesn't mean God snapped his fingers and that universe went pitch black until Bane hopped on a plane..

At this stage in Gotham, the point is not to spread the word of Batman. It's been spread. The point is to be low key. He's being hunted and he can't be caught doing usual good deeds. I dont care if that means hiding in the shadows just to keep an eye on things or staying in his mansion. The world already knows he's a murder and wanted. He doesn't need to ride down the streets luring cops out once a week in order to keep that alive.

Blake says it's the last time anyone saw Batman, true. But because nobody saw batman...Batman wasn't there? He's a ninja. Get rid of the batmobile and he can probably go out a handful of times without being seen. More than that? Sure, he'll probably be seen. But just because there's no "confirmed sightings" doesn't mean a person didn't see him, shaking in his/her boots enough to shut their mouth. Hell, the less he goes out, the more of a urban legend he becomes, much like his original appearances. "Meh, i was just seeing things"...."I saw the Batman tonight im telling you! ---You're seeing things, he's long gone". Again, your fan-fic criticism is coming...but these are just possibilities. Nothing more, nothing less. I dont even care about that anyway, i have no problem going along with the "retirement for 8 years". My earlier opinions still stand.

You're taking Nolans dialogue as gospel it seemsso how about this. What was the point of inserting the lines from Alfreds mouth about Bruce not being in the cave for so long? I've seen it everywhere, it got the fans thinking.

Things happen in life out of nowhere and it makes plans change, in fiction too. Despite what Batman said and believed, the Dent Act happened. Let me indulge you and say Batman never stated that he'll do this for the little people. To beat the piss out of every purse snatcher on every block until he can't do it anymore. That's not Bale's plan, he went after the mob and to inspire. So with the mob off the street, and regular crimes going down (but still there, which is said by Mayor Garcia) Batman is no longer needed. We didn't anticipate the Dent Act plot, and neither did the characters because that's how life works sometimes. Curveballs are thrown. Thank God.

That's my point. You don't have to place yourself in the character's shoes to know what message the director is sending out via this character. The message Gordon was spelling out (as well as Batman and Alfred) was blatantly obvious. But you try and diminish it as simply being an opinion of a supporting character so you can make the direction TDKR look more credible, when it doesn't.

It's not Gordon's opinion. It's the message Nolan is sending to the audience via Gordon. Not to mention Batman and Alfred, too. Why you keep side stepping that fact and turning reality into movie fantasy land is beyond me. That's not the way it works. That's not how the movie's ending was meant to be conveyed. That Gordon was just giving is point of view. You keep saying you will look at it what ever way you want. You do that by all means. But it's the wrong P.O.V. you're taking. This is not an opinionated issue. It's a fact. The ending was not intended to simply be an opinionated message.

You cannot bend facts with art. Facts are facts. You can't skew them into something they're not. They're not something that can be viewed as anything other than what they are. Art is something that is subjective. Facts are not. The ending was not a subjective piece.

Your analogy with a chocolate chip cookie to how the criminal element react to Batman is rather silly. Why would the criminal element suddenly be tight lipped about running into Batman? That makes no sense, and is just an unfounded what if scenario. What would they have to lose by saying they saw him? Nothing. Batman counts on his fearsome reputation to spread via these criminals, so for them to suddenly keep silent about running into him is as nonsensical as your theory of Batman tree sitting with a busted leg post TDK.

Why would criminals having already been captured by Batman, or beaten up by him, and telling said authorities he did that. deter him from his work? He doesn't need to keep a low profile. Did he keep a low profile in Begins when they were after him? Did he keep a low profile in TDK when they wanted him to turn himself in? No and no. None of your theories are supported by the movies. You're talking fan fic.

Blake's words were the message to the audience that Batman's last outing was the night Dent died. Which made sense given Bruce's sorry physical condition. He's still injured from the fall with Dent at the end of TDK. He left his body to ruin after that night when he stopped being Batman. Again 2+2=4.

What does Alfred's lines about him not being in the cave in a long time prove? Does he have to be Batman to set foot in the cave? Heck the very scene where those lines were said had him in the cave and he wasn't Batman. This is the kind of straw clutching unsupported reaching that I'm talking about.

Nobody's talking about Batman beating up purse snatchers. There was no hint that organized crime was eradicated for good at the end of TDK just because the Joker was captured. Something which TDKR backs up because the Dent Act allowed them to sink it's teeth into the organized crime in Gotham. Throwing curve balls is fine as long as they feel natural and organic to the story. Shikamaru's aforementioned X-Men example with Xavier is a great one. The problem is the deux ex machina plot device and direction TDKR took which flies in the face of TDK's ending message.

 

[shauner111]

Before i have time to respond, this is awesome. This thread will live on forever.

 

[georgec]

Dial it back you hotheads.

 

[shauner111]

t:

 

[Kane52630]

You're not the only one shauner, I too place myself in the shoes of a character or be a fly in the wall. I mean when Mr Freeze wanted to turn Gotham Observatory's telescope into a giant freeze ray and freeze all of Gotham...I really felt the character in his POV. His message was clear to the audience and you understand the pain he's going through. That's how life works sometimes. It's just.... *sniffs* beautiful filmmaking.

 

[Victarion]

I would've hung it up too after having my city threatened with a nuke, an ages of terrorist group, a pyromaniac-nihilist, and a hotbed of mobsters. It just isn't worth it to keep running myself ragged I'm likely have something or someone else trying to outdo the last lunatic.

 

[The Batman]

You're not the only one shauner, I too place myself in the shoes of a character or be a fly in the wall. I mean when Mr Freeze wanted to turn Gotham Observatory's telescope into a giant freeze ray and freeze all of Gotham...I really felt the character in his POV. His message was clear to the audience and you understand the pain he's going through. That's how life works sometimes. It's just.... *sniffs* beautiful filmmaking.

 

[shauner111]

That's my point. You don't have to place yourself in the character's shoes to know what message the director is sending out via this character. The message Gordon was spelling out (as well as Batman and Alfred) was blatantly obvious. But you try and diminish it as simply being an opinion of a supporting character so you can make the direction TDKR look more credible, when it doesn't.

It's not Gordon's opinion. It's the message Nolan is sending to the audience via Gordon. Not to mention Batman and Alfred, too. Why you keep side stepping that fact and turning reality into movie fantasy land is beyond me. That's not the way it works. That's not how the movie's ending was meant to be conveyed. That Gordon was just giving is point of view. You keep saying you will look at it what ever way you want. You do that by all means. But it's the wrong P.O.V. you're taking. This is not an opinionated issue. It's a fact. The ending was not intended to simply be an opinionated message.

You cannot bend facts with art. Facts are facts. You can't skew them into something they're not. They're not something that can be viewed as anything other than what they are. Art is something that is subjective. Facts are not. The ending was not a subjective piece.

Your analogy with a chocolate chip cookie to how the criminal element react to Batman is rather silly. Why would the criminal element suddenly be tight lipped about running into Batman? That makes no sense, and is just an unfounded what if scenario. What would they have to lose by saying they saw him? Nothing. Batman counts on his fearsome reputation to spread via these criminals, so for them to suddenly keep silent about running into him is as nonsensical as your theory of Batman tree sitting with a busted leg post TDK.

Why would criminals having already been captured by Batman, or beaten up by him, and telling said authorities he did that. deter him from his work? He doesn't need to keep a low profile. Did he keep a low profile in Begins when they were after him? Did he keep a low profile in TDK when they wanted him to turn himself in? No and no. None of your theories are supported by the movies. You're talking fan fic.

Blake's words were the message to the audience that Batman's last outing was the night Dent died. Which made sense given Bruce's sorry physical condition. He's still injured from the fall with Dent at the end of TDK. He left his body to ruin after that night when he stopped being Batman. Again 2+2=4.

What does Alfred's lines about him not being in the cave in a long time prove? Does he have to be Batman to set foot in the cave? Heck the very scene where those lines were said had him in the cave and he wasn't Batman. This is the kind of straw clutching unsupported reaching that I'm talking about.

Nobody's talking about Batman beating up purse snatchers. There was no hint that organized crime was eradicated for good at the end of TDK just because the Joker was captured. Something which TDKR backs up because the Dent Act allowed them to sink it's teeth into the organized crime in Gotham. Throwing curve balls is fine as long as they feel natural and organic to the story. Shikamaru's aforementioned X-Men example with Xavier is a great one. The problem is the deux ex machina plot device and direction TDKR took which flies in the face of TDK's ending message.

Im not trying to make it more credible by doing this. I already said that i can go along with the 8 year retirement and feel fine about it. I think Rises still makes sense if Batman disappeared the night Dent died. It doesn't have to be the case though. Characters on the outside are saying Batman was gone that night, because they didn't see him with their own eyes nor did they hear stories from random civilians. Not once did we hear Bruce Wayne and Alfred Pennyworth actually speak to each other about how Bruce never put the cowl on again after Two-Face lost his life. Everything was vague in conversation, for a reason. Nolan is Mr. Specific most of the time. If he's being vague, it's usually for a reason, it's to keep your imagination going. If he wants us to believe a straight up fact, he wouldn't have included dialogue such as "last confirmed sighting". Since there could be unconfirmed sightings. He would have begun with Bruce telling Alfred straight up in a convo that he rode the batpod home that night, took off his mask for the final time. These words were never said and that's why people still interpret this in their own way.

It doesn't necessarily matter what the movie was trying to convey, we have our own interpretations and any artistic director will tell you right now that they don't have a problem if i see it differently than them. That is how it works.

It's Gordon's opinion AND a message.

Everything is a subjective piece, especially Nolans endings.

How does that not make sense if a criminal becomes tight lipped once they fear him as a now psychotic murderer? Makes perfect sense to me. They became wise to his act. They knew he could injure them, but he wasn't demonic. He wasn't going to kill them either. They started fearing the Joker more because he was more unpredictable. Joker was killing them off. Now Joker is locked up and guess what? They fear Batman again because now BATMAN is the unpredictable killer. Why did he suddenly kill people? In their eyes he obviously snapped, and so any point he could snap and kill a criminal if they encounter him. It wasn't the same anymore after TDK. Makes sense to me that they would bite their tongue.

Yes he does need to keep a low profile. He's wanted. Especially after the Dent Act happens, he has to keep it low because the streets are being cleaned up and an appearance by wanted criminal like the Batman would F that up.

I think it's a curveball that worked organically. You didn't. When it comes to that, there's not much we can discuss. I already stated in previous posts why i think it was organic for a Dent Act to happen and for Batman to hang up the suit.

 

[The Joker]

Im not trying to make it more credible by doing this. I already said that i can go along with the 8 year retirement and feel fine about it. I think Rises still makes sense if Batman disappeared the night Dent died. It doesn't have to be the case though. Characters on the outside are saying Batman was gone that night, because they didn't see him with their own eyes nor did they hear stories from random civilians. Not once did we hear Bruce Wayne and Alfred Pennyworth actually speak to each other about how Bruce never put the cowl on again after Two-Face lost his life. Everything was vague in conversation, for a reason. Nolan is Mr. Specific most of the time. If he's being vague, it's usually for a reason, it's to keep your imagination going. If he wants us to believe a straight up fact, he wouldn't have included dialogue such as "last confirmed sighting". Since there could be unconfirmed sightings. He would have begun with Bruce telling Alfred straight up in a convo that he rode the batpod home that night, took off his mask for the final time. These words were never said and that's why people still interpret this in their own way.

This is where you are completely wrong. There is no vagueness here. Blake's line is straight up saying the last time anyone saw Batman was 8 years ago. No other dialogue anywhere in the movie implies differently. So if Nolan had any intentions of giving the message that Batman was still active for any length of time post Dent's death he would have said so in some shape or form in the movie. But he didn't.

So why would you believe there was supposed to be some grey area here? Just because you want to fabricate such a scenario to dispel the many complaints against it? You can't do that when you have nothing from the movie to support it. It's just fan fic. Batman can't go out being Batman fighting crime without someone seeing him. Not to mention he had a busted leg which he never fixed. So unless he's an idiot trying to be Batman on a damaged leg, as well as a quiet tree sitter, you have no justifiable reason to believe he was out there after Dent died.

It doesn't necessarily matter what the movie was trying to convey, we have our own interpretations and any artistic director will tell you right now that they don't have a problem if i see it differently than them. That is how it works.

Of course it matters what the movie is trying to convey. You can't re-write it into something it's not just because that suits you better to see it that way. Unless you can give me a source that states it was suppose to be a vague subjective thing.

It's Gordon's opinion AND a message.

No it's the movie's message. Gordon is simply the mouth piece to deliver it, just like all characters in Nolan's movies are used to vocally deliver the movie themes and messages.

Everything is a subjective piece, especially Nolans endings.

So you think it's subjective to believe the ending to TDKR was a dream then?

How does that not make sense if a criminal becomes tight lipped once they fear him as a now psychotic murderer? Makes perfect sense to me. They became wise to his act. They knew he could injure them, but he wasn't demonic. He wasn't going to kill them either. They started fearing the Joker more because he was more unpredictable. Joker was killing them off. Now Joker is locked up and guess what? They fear Batman again because now BATMAN is the unpredictable killer. Why did he suddenly kill people? In their eyes he obviously snapped, and so any point he could snap and kill a criminal if they encounter him. It wasn't the same anymore after TDK. Makes sense to me that they would bite their tongue.

How does not make sense? That's a rhetorical question right? Why would Batman being a killer make them afraid to say they saw Batman? Or were beaten up and captured by him? What's he going to do break into jail and murder them for saying he was the one who caught them? You any idea how stupid that sounds?

They had no problem saying they saw Batman when they thought he was a bloodthirsty bat creature in Begins. Why would they suddenly stop saying they saw him now just because they think he killed a few people.

Yes he does need to keep a low profile. He's wanted. Especially after the Dent Act happens, he has to keep it low because the streets are being cleaned up and an appearance by wanted criminal like the Batman would F that up.

He was wanted for the majority of Begins and he didn't keep a low profile. Why would he suddenly start now? When have the Cops ever been a threat to him? We're talking about a guy who can take out two SWAT teams, and Joker's men, and save a bunch of hostages, too, all at the same time.

Batman never needed to keep a low profile in this trilogy, wanted or not.

I think it's a curveball that worked organically. You didn't. When it comes to that, there's not much we can discuss. I already stated in previous posts why i think it was organic for a Dent Act to happen and for Batman to hang up the suit.

Fair enough. But your reasoning doesn't sound convincing.

 

[BatLobster]

At this point, I honestly feel like the diehard fans of the trilogy that are left need to put differences about Rises aside and find some common ground. At this point anyone who is still arguing about TDKR is clearly passionate about The Dark Knight Trilogy as a whole. Everyone else has just resorted to constant trolling at this point, and it'll only get worse for the time being.

 

[Panthro]

Not to be "trolling" but has anyone else noticed, I don't know, a double standard when it comes to the voices of the Dark Knight trilogy? I've seen lots of people on line bashing the gravelly voice Christian Bale used as Batman (many even going so far as to say WB should have had Kevin Conroy dub him whenever he was in the suit) and I've seen people poke fun at Tom Hardy's voice as Bane, but I'e never seen anyone complain about the voice Heath Ledger used for the Joker.

Has anyone else noticed this or am I just crazy?

 

[BatLobster]

I think probably because people generally liked his Joker voice and thought it fit the character (though it was still a weird choice that nobody saw coming). I don't think there's any conspiracy there.

Anyone saying they should've had Conroy dub the Bat-voice is pretty much an idiot.

 

[The Joker]

Not to be "trolling" but has anyone else noticed, I don't know, a double standard when it comes to the voices of the Dark Knight trilogy? I've seen lots of people on line bashing the gravelly voice Christian Bale used as Batman (many even going so far as to say WB should have had Kevin Conroy dub him whenever he was in the suit) and I've seen people poke fun at Tom Hardy's voice as Bane, but I'e never seen anyone complain about the voice Heath Ledger used for the Joker.

Has anyone else noticed this or am I just crazy?

How is that a double standard if people legitimately don't have a problem with his voice? It would be different if he was doing a gravelly kind of voice like Batman, or a muffled sometimes inaudible voice like Bane and nobody complained. That would be a double standard.

 

[I Am The Knight]

The Joker on point as always regarding TDKR.

 

[Panthro]

Double standard probably wasn't the right term, so much as it's just my own personal irritation at people constantly dumping on Bale and Hardy while Ledger is apparently off limits.

 

[Victarion]

At this point, I honestly feel like the diehard fans of the trilogy that are left need to put differences about Rises aside and find some common ground. At this point anyone who is still arguing about TDKR is clearly passionate about The Dark Knight Trilogy as a whole. Everyone else has just resorted to constant trolling at this point, and it'll only get worse for the time being.

Respectfully, I think the strength of the TDKT lies in its divisive nature. Ceasing dialogue because one doesn't like having someone disagreeing with oneself is a disservice to the trilogy. Arguing the same points over and over, likewise, are a bit of a disservice. Defenders like yourself and shauner tend to raise good points, as do those that take a more critical approach. This is a trilogy in which each film fits in its own subgenre, stands alone and can be taken as one entry in a greater whole. This is best exemplified by the varying opinions on the films. Therefore trying to silence any critical dialogue about the movies is in direct opposition to the greatest strength of the TDKT.

 

[Shinobi]

Just rewatched this. Powerful and emotional. Amazing film. Bravo!

 

[Brother Jack]

Respectfully, I think the strength of the TDKT lies in its divisive nature. Ceasing dialogue because one doesn't like having someone disagreeing with oneself is a disservice to the trilogy. Arguing the same points over and over, likewise, are a bit of a disservice. Defenders like yourself and shauner tend to raise good points, as do those that take a more critical approach. This is a trilogy in which each film fits in its own subgenre, stands alone and can be taken as one entry in a greater whole. This is best exemplified by the varying opinions on the films. Therefore trying to silence any critical dialogue about the movies is in direct opposition to the greatest strength of the TDKT.

Dialogue is one thing, circular bickering is another. At this point everyone has aired their grievances and their kudos. The same points have been dissected and argued over ad nauseum. Everyone's set in their beliefs and are not being convinced of anything new. From what I've seen there's really no constructive reason for the debate anymore beyond people just enjoying the sound of their own voices. Which is fine but not what I'm into personally.

 

[Victarion]

Dialogue is one thing, circular bickering is another. At this point everyone has aired their grievances and their kudos. The same points have been dissected and argued over ad nauseum. Everyone's set in their beliefs and are not being convinced of anything new. From what I've seen there's really no constructive reason for the debate anymore beyond people just enjoying the sound of their own voices. Which is fine but not what I'm into personally.

You've said it better than I could.

 

[BatLobster]

Dialogue is one thing, circular bickering is another. At this point everyone has aired their grievances and their kudos. The same points have been dissected and argued over ad nauseum. Everyone's set in their beliefs and are not being convinced of anything new. From what I've seen there's really no constructive reason for the debate anymore beyond people just enjoying the sound of their own voices. Which is fine but not what I'm into personally.

Yeah, that's all I was getting at. I'd never want to discourage a debate, especially if it's an interesting one, but when it's the same people arguing the same points over and over, I feel a line has to be drawn somewhere. It gets exhausting, and we've been at it on and off for 2 and a half years now. Even why I try to get back into it, I quickly get bored of it, because you know where every conversation is going. I feel like could easily act out a one man show of a TDKR debate, playing the parts of The Joker, myself, shauner, Shika, etc. haha.

My point is, it's become very fashionable to bash this trilogy. It's part of the inevitable cycle that happens with these movies and that's fine. I was just pointing out that anyone still arguing over the finer points of the third movie is a fan of this trilogy at heart, and that's something to take some comfort in, especially when so many have turned on it or just enjoy mocking/trolling it.

Anyway, just my .02.