The Dark Knight Rises Why is everyone slamming TDKR?

[MaxPalombella]

I just wanted to ask you guys on your thoughts on something.
I have been thinking about this for a while now (a bit too much time on my hands) and this concerns the final chapter of the Dark Knight trilogy, as in "Rises". I loved it when I went to see it. Stunned by the visuals and performances. Hardy as Bane was incredible and Bale gave hands down his best performance, as did everyone else! Yet the more I think on it, the more i realized that there was something wrong with it and I think you guys must have noticed it to. The story wasn't finished.

Now don't get me wrong! I really love the Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy, it's one of my favourites BUT it should have been four films. As in four points to bring Bruce Wayne full circle! Hardy as Bane was a powerhouse performance but his reveal as a love struck henchman was a total miss-step in my opinion. Marion Cotiliard as Talia al Ghul was completely underused and could have been so much more. She needed to have been Bruce Waynes actual girlfriend from the start of Rises and a chance for Bruce to live happily, finally.
Miranda Tate reveals herself near the end as Talia, but instead they could have left that reveal until the very end of the film, when she flees Gotham and lives to fight another day. Batman did NOT need to "die" and could have ended Rises with him asking Robin in the cave "if he was ready to begin?" (like Ras al Ghul did to Wayne). Batman had YEARS of training with ninjas (under Liam freaking Neeson).

Blake was a policeman, and now he is suddenly supposed to be BATMAN? He would be dead in days! They should have then set the fourth and final film with Batman and Robin (who is now trained by Bruce himself) struggling to fight Talia and her army. She then reveals that she was pregnant and now they have a young son, Damian. By the end of it, Talia would have been defeated, Robin would have truly earned his place as the new Batman, and Bruce Wayne would step down to be a father to his son, Damian. FULL CIRCLE!

Nolan is no doubt a brilliant story-teller and filmmaker but he really missed something there. Perhaps he simply wanted to move on and make more films like Inception (and I'm ok with that frankly!). Who knows what the DC universe holds, but all I do know is God help the man who follows Mr Nolan.

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

I just wanted to ask you guys on your thoughts on something.
I have been thinking about this for a while now (a bit too much time on my hands) and this concerns the final chapter of the Dark Knight trilogy, as in "Rises". I loved it when I went to see it. Stunned by the visuals and performances. Hardy as Bane was incredible and Bale gave hands down his best performance, as did everyone else! Yet the more I think on it, the more i realized that there was something wrong with it and I think you guys must have noticed it to. The story wasn't finished.

Now don't get me wrong! I really love the Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy, it's one of my favourites BUT it should have been four films. As in four points to bring Bruce Wayne full circle! Hardy as Bane was a powerhouse performance but his reveal as a love struck henchman was a total miss-step in my opinion. Marion Cotiliard as Talia al Ghul was completely underused and could have been so much more. She needed to have been Bruce Waynes actual girlfriend from the start of Rises and a chance for Bruce to live happily, finally.
Miranda Tate reveals herself near the end as Talia, but instead they could have left that reveal until the very end of the film, when she flees Gotham and lives to fight another day. Batman did NOT need to "die" and could have ended Rises with him asking Robin in the cave "if he was ready to begin?" (like Ras al Ghul did to Wayne). Batman had YEARS of training with ninjas (under Liam freaking Neeson).

Blake was a policeman, and now he is suddenly supposed to be BATMAN? He would be dead in days! They should have then set the fourth and final film with Batman and Robin (who is now trained by Bruce himself) struggling to fight Talia and her army. She then reveals that she was pregnant and now they have a young son, Damian. By the end of it, Talia would have been defeated, Robin would have truly earned his place as the new Batman, and Bruce Wayne would step down to be a father to his son, Damian. FULL CIRCLE!

Nolan is no doubt a brilliant story-teller and filmmaker but he really missed something there. Perhaps he simply wanted to move on and make more films like Inception (and I'm ok with that frankly!). Who knows what the DC universe holds, but all I do know is God help the man who follows Mr Nolan.

Bane being in love with Talia in his own sort of weird way is of the comics. People can think its platonic or whatever in the movie, in the comics it's obsession.

Spoiler

...and other women.

Spoiler

Black Canary:

[[I really need to get some Scandal Savage images]].

Bane in No Man's Land:

Spoiler

Talia's relationship with Bruce here is on the lame side of things here, because she's secretly Grant Morrison's Talia and not Dennis O'Neil's Talia. I think they ended up watering down this aspect of both Talia and Selina to get them both in film (thanks Jonah) in the way they did.

So, I do agree there was a lot of "throw everything and the kitchen sink" into this movie because they were thinking it was their last shot (ignoring the Justice League junk for a moment).

 

[Snow Queen]

"B-but they're yummy." ~The tactical, cunning genius: Bane

 

[Anno_Domini]

I just wanted to ask you guys on your thoughts on something.
I have been thinking about this for a while now (a bit too much time on my hands) and this concerns the final chapter of the Dark Knight trilogy, as in "Rises". I loved it when I went to see it. Stunned by the visuals and performances. Hardy as Bane was incredible and Bale gave hands down his best performance, as did everyone else! Yet the more I think on it, the more i realized that there was something wrong with it and I think you guys must have noticed it to. The story wasn't finished.

Now don't get me wrong! I really love the Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy, it's one of my favourites BUT it should have been four films. As in four points to bring Bruce Wayne full circle! Hardy as Bane was a powerhouse performance but his reveal as a love struck henchman was a total miss-step in my opinion. Marion Cotiliard as Talia al Ghul was completely underused and could have been so much more. She needed to have been Bruce Waynes actual girlfriend from the start of Rises and a chance for Bruce to live happily, finally.
Miranda Tate reveals herself near the end as Talia, but instead they could have left that reveal until the very end of the film, when she flees Gotham and lives to fight another day. Batman did NOT need to "die" and could have ended Rises with him asking Robin in the cave "if he was ready to begin?" (like Ras al Ghul did to Wayne). Batman had YEARS of training with ninjas (under Liam freaking Neeson).

Blake was a policeman, and now he is suddenly supposed to be BATMAN? He would be dead in days! They should have then set the fourth and final film with Batman and Robin (who is now trained by Bruce himself) struggling to fight Talia and her army. She then reveals that she was pregnant and now they have a young son, Damian. By the end of it, Talia would have been defeated, Robin would have truly earned his place as the new Batman, and Bruce Wayne would step down to be a father to his son, Damian. FULL CIRCLE!

Nolan is no doubt a brilliant story-teller and filmmaker but he really missed something there. Perhaps he simply wanted to move on and make more films like Inception (and I'm ok with that frankly!). Who knows what the DC universe holds, but all I do know is God help the man who follows Mr Nolan.

Ehh...I don't think that would've been a great idea at all. Nolan wanted to focus on Bruce Wayne through and through, and he did such while also continuing the legacy of Batman(passing the mantle down to Robin John Blake) and that is, really, fine enough because we didn't need a film with Batman and Robin. This was always a story of Bruce Wayne as it didn't need to really expand with Batman having sidekicks or what have you as Schumacher brought into his films.

Bane being in love with Talia in his own sort of weird way is of the comics. People can think its platonic or whatever in the movie, in the comics it's obsession.

Spoiler

...and other women.

Spoiler

Black Canary:

[[I really need to get some Scandal Savage images]].

Bane in No Man's Land:

Spoiler

Talia's relationship with Bruce here is on the lame side of things here, because she's secretly Grant Morrison's Talia and not Dennis O'Neil's Talia. I think they ended up watering down this aspect of both Talia and Selina to get them both in film (thanks Jonah) in the way they did.

So, I do agree there was a lot of "throw everything and the kitchen sink" into this movie because they were thinking it was their last shot (ignoring the Justice League junk for a moment).

Damn...Bane was very much wanting to just get laid by someone

 

[A Necessary Evil]

Aren't we all?

 

[TheGuy]

I might one day think Rises is Nolan's best film. It's slowly growing in on me and could surpass Inception and TDK when I do a marathon of the three.

 

[batfreakforever]

The reason these fans slam TDKR is because they don't understand it. It's proved with the comments they make on forums and reviews. Really, why did batman/bruce retire? It's said in the movie, he won. People don't listen or are simply in denial of what is said & done in the movie/story. They assume too much about what nolan thinks and says. It's crazy. If he changes his mind,so what. HE SAID NO ROBIN. Now he has Robin, he lied to us. Whatever people. This aint the movie we were promised! What the.... You have no idea what,when or how Nolan wanted, just because The Joker was'nt in TDKR. Yeah, the road to the end of Bruce 's arc might of been different but as long as they set out to finish with what they wanted, with Bruce passing on the mantle,finishing his mission & living with selina. A normal life.

 

[Brain Damage]

The reason these fans slam TDKR is because they don't understand it. It's proved with the comments they make on forums and reviews. Really, why did batman/bruce retire? It's said in the movie, he won. People don't listen or are simply in denial of what is said & done in the movie/story. They assume too much about what nolan thinks and says. It's crazy. If he changes his mind,so what. HE SAID NO ROBIN. Now he has Robin, he lied to us. Whatever people. This aint the movie we were promised! What the.... You have no idea what,when or how Nolan wanted, just because The Joker was'nt in TDKR. Yeah, the road to the end of Bruce 's arc might of been different but as long as they set out to finish with what they wanted, with Bruce passing on the mantle,finishing his mission & living with selina. A normal life.

Oh god, not this again.

 

[The Joker]

Posters like batfreakforever are the reason why Nolan fans have a bad rep. There's nothing more ignorant than declaring loads of people didn't 'get' this movie.

 

[batfreakforever]

I understand that people don't like the flick but alot of the reasons are petty and really sad.

 

[Hellion]

The reason these fans slam TDKR is because they don't understand it. It's proved with the comments they make on forums and reviews. Really, why did batman/bruce retire? It's said in the movie, he won. People don't listen or are simply in denial of what is said & done in the movie/story. They assume too much about what nolan thinks and says. It's crazy. If he changes his mind,so what. HE SAID NO ROBIN. Now he has Robin, he lied to us. Whatever people. This aint the movie we were promised! What the.... You have no idea what,when or how Nolan wanted, just because The Joker was'nt in TDKR. Yeah, the road to the end of Bruce 's arc might of been different but as long as they set out to finish with what they wanted, with Bruce passing on the mantle,finishing his mission & living with selina. A normal life.

I somewhat agree, but old news dude...

 

[The Joker]

I understand that people don't like the flick but alot of the reasons are petty and really sad.

Even that sounds better than saying they don't get it. For instance Hathaway's Catwoman has been taking a bit of a beating lately because of the lack of the 'cat' motifs. I'd call some of them petty, but I would never say they don't get it.

It's just a case that they didn't like what they got.

 

[batfreakforever]

So why the threads and comments about simple questions that are and were answered in the film. Seriously posters/older posters still say why bruce retired (which they still cant get right) and that he ''quit''. (which he didnt). He won.

 

[Brain Damage]

So why the threads and comments about simple questions that are and were answered in the film. Seriously posters/older posters still say why bruce retired (which they still cant get right) and that he ''quit''. (which he didnt). He won.

Most people fully understand why Bruce stopped being Batman. Doesn't mean they like it.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

I get what he's saying.

There are a lottttt of people who say they didn't like how "Bruce quit because he was sad about Rachel" or how "Bruce quits at the end because he wanted to chill out"

 

[batfreakforever]

Posters like batfreakforever are the reason why Nolan fans have a bad rep. There's nothing more ignorant than declaring loads of people didn't 'get' this movie.

I didnt say I was a nolan fan. I'm a batman fan.

 

[The Joker]

I didnt say I was a nolan fan. I'm a batman fan.

That's not really the point. Your method of defense ("These people don't get it") for NOLAN's Batman movie is the kind of attitude that gives them a bad rep.

 

[jmc]

The reason these fans slam TDKR is because they don't understand it. It's proved with the comments they make on forums and reviews. Really, why did batman/bruce retire? It's said in the movie, he won. People don't listen or are simply in denial of what is said & done in the movie/story. They assume too much about what nolan thinks and says. It's crazy. If he changes his mind,so what. HE SAID NO ROBIN. Now he has Robin, he lied to us. Whatever people. This aint the movie we were promised! What the.... You have no idea what,when or how Nolan wanted, just because The Joker was'nt in TDKR. Yeah, the road to the end of Bruce 's arc might of been different but as long as they set out to finish with what they wanted, with Bruce passing on the mantle,finishing his mission & living with selina. A normal life.

Oh please, not this TDKR is hard to understand BS. I feel insulted every time someone who loves the film seems to come up with hair brain excuses as to why people criticize the film. Everything from high expectations to comprehension difficulties. Could it not simply just be because people simply don't think it's as solid a movie as films one and two? Honestly, I've had this argument before on here and other areas on the net and frankly the attitude from some people who love the film towards people who don't love it comes across as contemptuous. They act like we're being spoiled fanboys for not getting what we wanted when frankly all we wanted was a good story with a solid emotional core and to many of us Rises didn't deliver on that front. The great irony is we're being labeled whiny fanboys when they themselves act like fanboys with their inability to accept people's genuine problems with the film and dismiss any argument against the movie as being somehow ungrateful. Rises is not above criticism and frankly shouldn't be, I don't care if it's Chris Nolan, Joss Whedon or Jesus Christ himself directing the movie, if it doesn't work people have the right to say so and shouldn't have to put up with the crap that supports of the film throw their way.

 

[BatLobster]

I'm not one to play the "you don't get it" card. It's presumptuous and most of the time untrue.

However I will say, when it comes to the one particular plot point of why Bruce stopped being Batman there were a lot of people who did miss a rather important nuance there. Not anyone on here in particular, but certainly in other corners of the net. Maybe it's been cleared up by now for most now that it's been watched/discussed/debated even more.

It's not an insult to say some people missed that either; I missed plenty of things on my first few couple of viewings that were clarified later. But from the perspective of someone who loves the film, it is rather frustrating to listen to Ralph Garman and Kevin Smith podcast for 2 hours tearing the film down almost on the sole basis that Bruce would never stop being Batman because of a dead girlfriend and how it betrays the Batman character, etc. Or Harry Knowles trashing the film in his review largely because of that. And some of those people also completely neglect the fact that the Batman in Nolan's films set out from the beginning with a specific agenda to take out the mob and spent half of TDK trying to transition out of the cape and cowl. He was never meant to be a Batman who went after purse snatchers every night and just wanted to punch criminals in the face for eternity.

I can accept criticism, just at least have your facts straight and criticize with a correct premise. Again, not directed at anyone HERE.

 

[batfreakforever]

I'm not one to play the "you don't get it" card. It's presumptuous and most of the time untrue.

However I will say, when it comes to the one particular plot point of why Bruce stopped being Batman there were a lot of people who did miss a rather important nuance there. Not anyone on here in particular, but certainly in other corners of the net. Maybe it's been cleared up by now for most now that it's been watched/discussed/debated even more.

It's not an insult to say some people missed that either; I missed plenty of things on my first few couple of viewings that were clarified later. But from the perspective of someone who loves the film, it is rather frustrating to listen to Ralph Garman and Kevin Smith podcast for 2 hours tearing the film down almost on the sole basis that Bruce would never stop being Batman because of a dead girlfriend and how it betrays the Batman character, etc. Or Harry Knowles trashing the film in his review largely because of that. And some of those people also completely neglect the fact that the Batman in Nolan's films set out from the beginning with a specific agenda to take out the mob and spent half of TDK trying to transition out of the cape and cowl. He was never meant to be a Batman who went after purse snatchers every night and just wanted to punch criminals in the face for eternity.

I can accept criticism, just at least have your facts straight and criticize with a correct premise. Again, not directed at anyone HERE.

Thats right. I'm sick of people slagging off the film because of untrue facts/plot threads. I have have to say that maybe they don't understand it because of those types of comments like that, because they go so indepth about these reasons that are not in the film. What else am I supposed to say?

 

[batfreakforever]

Oh please, not this TDKR is hard to understand BS. I feel insulted every time someone who loves the film seems to come up with hair brain excuses as to why people criticize the film. Everything from high expectations to comprehension difficulties. Could it not simply just be because people simply don't think it's as solid a movie as films one and two? Honestly, I've had this argument before on here and other areas on the net and frankly the attitude from some people who love the film towards people who don't love it comes across as contemptuous. They act like we're being spoiled fanboys for not getting what we wanted when frankly all we wanted was a good story with a solid emotional core and to many of us Rises didn't deliver on that front. The great irony is we're being labeled whiny fanboys when they themselves act like fanboys with their inability to accept people's genuine problems with the film and dismiss any argument against the movie as being somehow ungrateful. Rises is not above criticism and frankly shouldn't be, I don't care if it's Chris Nolan, Joss Whedon or Jesus Christ himself directing the movie, if it doesn't work people have the right to say so and shouldn't have to put up with the crap that supports of the film throw their way.

It goes both ways, you say people who dont like the film shouldnt take crap from people who lile it. Why should people who like it take crap from people who dont like?

 

[The Joker]

It goes both ways, you say people who dont like the film shouldnt take crap from people who lile it. Why should people who like it take crap from people who dont like?

I don't see anyone giving you crap for liking it. You can think it's the greatest movie ever made. It's your attitude towards those who dislike it that is rubbing people the wrong way.

Looking through your post history you are nearly always complaining about the critics.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Well, this is interesting...

 

[Clerk]

I'm not one to play the "you don't get it" card. It's presumptuous and most of the time untrue.

However I will say, when it comes to the one particular plot point of why Bruce stopped being Batman there were a lot of people who did miss a rather important nuance there. Not anyone on here in particular, but certainly in other corners of the net. Maybe it's been cleared up by now for most now that it's been watched/discussed/debated even more.

It's not an insult to say some people missed that either; I missed plenty of things on my first few couple of viewings that were clarified later. But from the perspective of someone who loves the film, it is rather frustrating to listen to Ralph Garman and Kevin Smith podcast for 2 hours tearing the film down almost on the sole basis that Bruce would never stop being Batman because of a dead girlfriend and how it betrays the Batman character, etc. Or Harry Knowles trashing the film in his review largely because of that. And some of those people also completely neglect the fact that the Batman in Nolan's films set out from the beginning with a specific agenda to take out the mob and spent half of TDK trying to transition out of the cape and cowl. He was never meant to be a Batman who went after purse snatchers every night and just wanted to punch criminals in the face for eternity.

I can accept criticism, just at least have your facts straight and criticize with a correct premise. Again, not directed at anyone HERE.

I think the problem is, for me personally, the movie doesn't really do a thorough enough job at exploring the whole sacrifice/motive for quitting in terms of Bruce personally. (Lets be honest, none of us thought Bruce was hanging up the costume after TDK). Yeah, if you dig deep enough, the sacrificial qualities are there, however, we the viewer are thrown in at the plot point of Bruce's social life- so all we see at the moment is the Rachel/Selina motivation. Now, I've heard the "well you dont need everything explained to you," which I agree with to an extent- Im definitely not a "how did he get back to Gotham" person- he's freakin Batman, who cares. But, for a character motive that lurks over the entire trilogy, I personally feel it was a huge missed opportunity and that the dialogue should've been redirected. I think more people, including myself, would've been more accepting of the movie had the "Muh Rachel" talk been replaced with more of the "Your victory has defeated you." The backstory and underlying assumptions may point to his "take the blame sacrifice," but the dialogue and events on-camera really do emit a "Rachel" feeling to it.

It's like this: the first episode of the show 24 that I watched was the one where Jack Bauer was having ungodly drug withdrawals. If you watch other episodes of the series, you see he was undercover in a drug cartel trying to save the country. For some viewers, however, only seeing that episode made it look like the show was about a junkie not getting his fix.

And in terms of the "he was never meant to be a Batman who goes out every night," I do see where people are getting that from, but to be fair, there are just as many heavy moments in BB/TDK that hint otherwise. "Gotham will always need Batman, love Rachel" and the whole "A White Knight Dent wont work, we need The Dark Knight Batman." I look back on the other movies now after seeing TDKR and I can see Nolan's seeds for Batman being a temporary thing, but then I also see the previously mentioned stuff and am like "wait wut."

 

[BatLobster]

I think the problem is, for me personally, the movie doesn't really do a thorough enough job at exploring the whole sacrifice/motive for quitting in terms of Bruce personally. (Lets be honest, none of us thought Bruce was hanging up the costume after TDK). Yeah, if you dig deep enough, the sacrificial qualities are there, however, we the viewer are thrown in at the plot point of Bruce's social life- so all we see at the moment is the Rachel/Selina motivation. Now, I've heard the "well you dont need everything explained to you," which I agree with to an extent- Im definitely not a "how did he get back to Gotham" person- he's freakin Batman, who cares. But, for a character motive that lurks over the entire trilogy, I personally feel it was a huge missed opportunity and that the dialogue should've been redirected. I think more people, including myself, would've been more accepting of the movie had the "Muh Rachel" talk been replaced with more of the "Your victory has defeated you." The backstory and underlying assumptions may point to his "take the blame sacrifice," but the dialogue and events on-camera really do emit a "Rachel" feeling to it.

It's like this: the first episode of the show 24 that I watched was the one where Jack Bauer was having ungodly drug withdrawals. If you watch other episodes of the series, you see he was undercover in a drug cartel trying to save the country. For some viewers, however, only seeing that episode made it look like the show was about a junkie not getting his fix.

Ah, 24 Season 3 good times

Yeah, I mean I hear you, Rachel gets brought up a few times, but I just think the distinction between him quitting being Batman and him quitting being Bruce Wayne was there.

I guess to some extent, with such a large passage of time, Bruce is sort of like a new character in this film. We have to play a little emotional catchup with him during the first act. I can understand why some were put off by that, but for me it kept things fresh and I really sympathized with his character without the movie ever really feeling like it was trying to shove it down my throat. Considering the way things went down in TDK, I always expected Bruce to be in a pretty bad state at the start of the third film. They just did it in a way differently than I expected, which is what I like as an audience member. Give me what I want/expect, but with a curveball.

And in terms of the "he was never meant to be a Batman who goes out every night," I do see where people are getting that from, but to be fair, there are just as many heavy moments in BB/TDK that hint otherwise. "Gotham will always need Batman, love Rachel" and the whole "A White Knight Dent wont work, we need The Dark Knight Batman." I look back on the other movies now after seeing TDKR and I can see Nolan's seeds for Batman being a temporary thing, but then I also see the previously mentioned stuff and am like "wait wut."

Well, Rachel's letter never said "Gotham will always need Batman". It said, "Now I'm sure the day won't come that you don't need Batman." And TDKR was true to that, Bruce was forced into retirement but he still had the need for Batman. Which is the reason Rachel rejected him, she knew he had become a shell of himself.

I totally get why it's something that would piss off a lot of fans, but I think Nolan covered his tracks pretty well. It wasn't a contradiction, just playing against expectations.