The Dark Knight Rises Why is everyone slamming TDKR?

[Frodo]

An example to me of a truely polarizing Batman film woud be Batman Returns.

Further, an example of a Batman film which had everybody slamming on it would be Batman and Robin, and trust me, TDKR has recieved nowhere near as much polarization or being slammed as those 2 films.

The film may not have been as universally praised as TDK but alot of critics did like it, and alot of people liked it . It was a hit . You can't really ask for more than that .

 

[The Joker]

An example to me of a truely polarizing Batman film woud be Batman Returns.

Yeah, I think in terms of fan base reaction TDKR is the Batman Returns of Nolan's trilogy.

 

[Frodo]

Yeah, I think in terms of fan base reaction TDKR is the Batman Returns of Nolan's trilogy.

Yeah, I think I would agree that the fans the reaction to TDKR is closer to BR. Amoung the GA , TDKR had a much greater support from the public than BR did in the 90s.

 

[The Joker]

Well yes, Batman Returns got a backlash for being too dark and violent. Thanks to those complaints we got Joel Schumacher and Batman Forever lol.

 

[Shikamaru]

I never found it dark; just violent. I think the violence is what put people off.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I never found it dark; just violent. I think the violence is what put people off.

Black blood spewing out of the penguin is what scared the soccer moms into boycotting McDonald's, which then forced McDonald's to stop including Batman Returns toys with Happy Meals. I also suspect these soccer moms were offended by the amount of blatant sexual innuendo in the film. Even 20 years later that movie has more controversial sexual references than any of the PG-13 superhero flicks that you see on the market.

 

[CJ]

Why is everyone slamming TDKR?

Becuase it was a terrible movie.

/thread

 

[BatLobster]

Becuase it was a terrible movie.

/thread

rofl

 

[Anno_Domini]

True. A lot of people make it seem like TDKR was received like Spider-Man 3 was, and both films couldn't be more different in terms of quality.

Yep

Yeah, I think in terms of fan base reaction TDKR is the Batman Returns of Nolan's trilogy.

True.

Among the GA , TDKR had a much greater support from the public than BR did in the 90s.

And true.

Becuase it was a terrible movie.

/thread

Lulz.

 

[Adder]

In all honesty, going around the internets lately - I see alot of 'hate' and disdain for 'The Dark Knight Rises'. In forums, user comments on news articles and YouTube, IMDB, etc.

Even in today's article on 'SHH' about the new 'Iron Man III' poster, the top rated comment was about how "terrible" 'The Dark Knight Rises' is and a few others that echoed that sentiment were also the second and third most top rated.

I've noticed this internet-crapping on the film since maybe...October-ish? But I never said much about it. But now I feel like getting a discussion about it going.

I know many, many films get internet hate or a slamming in forums that actually did amazingly well or very good with critics/audiences and are quite loved - is this the case with 'The Dark Knight Rises'?

I've even seen it on 'Worst or Most Disappointing Sequels' lists or 'Worst of 2012', too. Not to mention I've seen many claim that "The film failed, nobody liked it and it ruined the trilogy" or "It wasn't very well received at all...critics only gave it high marks to avoid death threats."

Am I the only one baffled at how a well received film can attain this reputation on the internet amongst fans and forum users? Are they trying to buck the consensus against the film and brand it as a 'hated'/'terrible' sequel?

I've seen many films get this online stigma despite getting good/great reviews from critics and most people - in the end it doesn't matter because the internet forum-users are equal to such a small, minuscule voice that what they say is the ramblings of a vocal minority that 99.9% of the population doesn't hear or value - but still.

What gives? Is this a vocal minority internet bandwagon-hate or is this 'The Dark Knight Rises's reputation now?

yes, this is TDKR reputation now. as time goes on people snap out of their denial. TDKR is another example of the 3rd movie curse.

I suspect when this franchise is rebooted many fan boys will fall in love with the reboot and then more will be broken out of their denial.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

^No, it is not another example of a third movie curse. A third movie curse that grosses over a $1 billion at the box office with the critical reviews and general audience reaction it has received? Not even close.

I've said it before. The film would not have had the legs it did if people hated it like the tiny minority insists. SM3 had awful legs, which backed up the idea that even the general audience agreed with some of the angry fans on it.

The box office gets more and more frontloaded every year. TDKR, with a massive $160m opening and nearly 3 hour runtime, still managed a 2.8 multiplier. That is stellar by the standards of the superhero genre circa 2012.

Combine the bold with an 8.6 rating on IMDB which is generated by internet users, 8.4 user score on Metacritic (internet users not critics) and 92% audience liking it with an average rating of 4.5/5 on RT (again internet users not critics) and it is most definitely a case of minority internet bandwagon hate. These people go on and on about how much they dislike the film or how much they dislike it on here and on other sites, which is their right, but that gives the impression that so many or everyone is slamming it. But if that was the case you wouldn't get that kind of reaction in the numbers I just listed. Whereas those that did like it, enjoy it or loved it, while some still stick around to discuss the film, a lot have just moved on. I loved it but hardly ever discuss it on these boards or anywhere else for that matter, so I am an example of that.

 

[BatLobster]

I think it's more the people who think that this will be remembered in the same kind of negative light as Spider-Man 3 or X-Men 3 who are in denial.

The thing is TDKR has probably already taken the brunt of the heat it's gonna take, because the critics were so vocal. Now that discussion on the film has died down, the way I see it, it's reputation can either stay the same or improve over the years. It's true that some fans will turn on it if the reboot is good, but that applies to the whole Nolanverse in general. And that's my point, in the end it will be remembered alongside the first two films as part of Christopher Nolan's take on Batman. It's not gonna be a case of "The first two films and that other film". If anything TDK will be remembered the most, but I don't think any of the films will be singled out as "the bad one" for the most part. Some people who feel the need to do that will probably hone in on TDKR to slap that label with, but for the most part it's just not necessary for this series because it doesn't have a bad film to its name.

 

[Anno_Domini]

TDKR is another example of the 3rd movie curse.

This is denial, bud.

 

[ЯɘvlveR]

because instead of opening up the dc universe with that batman, it pretty much just shut the door. nolan bankrupted him, aged him damn near a decade, and retired his ass to italy. imho.

 

[georgec]

Nolan told a compelling, enclosed story about Bruce Wayne and dared to give him an ending other than being cursed to fight criminals and later aliens for the rest of his life.

It was not Nolan's responsibility to set Batman up for everyone's expectations of Justice League. Hating him for not doing so is just plain excessive.

He didn't write Batman into a corner. He made general audiences care about Batman again and told a damn good three-part story while doing so.

For all the love people had for the Nolanverse all these years leading up to TDKR, it's contradictory that after seeing TDKR people would then complain that the Nolanverse doesn't have a segue into the more fantastical, much less "real world" grounded Justice League. You know, everyone's favorite things about Nolan's Batman universe were basically things that would preclude integration with Justice League.

There is nothing stopping DC and WB from starting up JL, casting a new Batman, and just doing it that way. That would be the better way than shoehorning Nolan's Batman into JL and effectively undermining the primary, internal, emotional journey Bruce Wayne had from BB to TDKR. A journey that ended with Bruce moving past his pain, anger, and grief.

 

[Anno_Domini]

because instead of opening up the dc universe with that batman, it pretty much just shut the door. nolan bankrupted him, aged him damn near a decade, and retired his ass to italy. imho.

Let alone that Nolan wanted to have a solo story of Batman, why is it a problem that his Batman isn't part of a bigger universe? Do you complain about how Raimi did that with Spider-Man? Or Donner and Superman? Or even Burton with Batman(before the call out to Superman in Schumacher's installment)?

 

[Human Torch]

I'm sorry to say,but TDKR has too large a segment of people saying it failed to break the 3rd act curse.That by definition means it did indeed fail to brake the curse.

It's not a film like TDK,where it's universally praised and two or three vocal critics can be put down as a very tiny minority.

 

[Vid Electricz]

An example to me of a truely polarizing Batman film woud be Batman Returns.

Further, an example of a Batman film which had everybody slamming on it would be Batman and Robin, and trust me, TDKR has recieved nowhere near as much polarization or being slammed as those 2 films.

The film may not have been as universally praised as TDK but alot of critics did like it, and alot of people liked it . It was a hit . You can't really ask for more than that .

I think that's the thing. After TDK, people were expecting the next film to either surpass it in terms of quality or at least maintain the same level of quality. When that didn't happen, of course the internet backlash is going to be huge (because people on the internet-more specifically fanboys-have never been accused of overreacting or needlessly picking things apart before).

The hatred for it seems based more on it's predecessor and the insane, sky-high expectations that followed rather than it being an empircally poor film- that combined with fanboy zealotry/overreaction/nitpicking.

 

[Shikamaru]

I think that's the thing. After TDK, people were expecting the next film to either surpass it in terms of quality or at least maintain the same level of quality. When that didn't happen, of course the internet backlash is going to be huge (because people on the internet-more specifically fanboys-have never been accused of overreacting or needlessly picking things apart before).

The hatred for it seems based more on it's predecessor and the insane, sky-high expectations that followed rather than it being an empircally poor film- that combined with fanboy zealotry/overreaction/nitpicking.

I disagree. I wouldn't count TDKR even on Batman Begins' level of quality, which is not as high as TDK's. Thus I don't buy the "all the haters just expected it to top TDK" argument. In fact, I think most of the time that argument is used to dismiss any criticism as just "fanboyish complaints".

You're also ignoring a lot of the arguments made against TDKR by saying what you said. Although I do have issues with the plot holes, character development, and other stuff like that in the movie, my main issues with the movie is the fact that I believe it ignores & contradicts things from the previous 2 movies (a lot more from TDK though) and the messages & claims it makes about Batman that are not true to the essence of Batman. I don't see how you can simplify those complaints to me just being upset that it wasn't as good as TDK.

Also, while I do think bashing TDKR based on the fact that it isn't as good as TDK is wrong and stupid, I do sympathize with those people to a small extent because 1) Nolan said he wouldn't do another movie unless it is just as good or better than TDK and 2) The movie was marketed as the most epic in scale out of all of them - "The epic conclusion to the epic trilogy" as the trailers dubbed it.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

I'm sorry to say,but TDKR has too large a segment of people saying it failed to break the 3rd act curse.That by definition means it did indeed fail to brake the curse.

It's not a film like TDK,where it's universally praised and two or three vocal critics can be put down as a very tiny minority.

I don't understand.

TDKR is higher rated than Batman Begins on RT and metacritic.

If anything this is the 'first-act curse'....or whatever.

It might be getting more noticeable internet flak than BBegins because that's what happens when it doesn't live up to the predecessor (TDK) and because of that predecessor, you have a lot more people paying attention.

 

[Shikamaru]

Nolan told a compelling, enclosed story about Bruce Wayne and dared to give him an ending other than being cursed to fight criminals and later aliens for the rest of his life.

It was not Nolan's responsibility to set Batman up for everyone's expectations of Justice League. Hating him for not doing so is just plain excessive.

He didn't write Batman into a corner. He made general audiences care about Batman again and told a damn good three-part story while doing so.

For all the love people had for the Nolanverse all these years leading up to TDKR, it's contradictory that after seeing TDKR people would then complain that the Nolanverse doesn't have a segue into the more fantastical, much less "real world" grounded Justice League. You know, everyone's favorite things about Nolan's Batman universe were basically things that would preclude integration with Justice League.

There is nothing stopping DC and WB from starting up JL, casting a new Batman, and just doing it that way. That would be the better way than shoehorning Nolan's Batman into JL and effectively undermining the primary, internal, emotional journey Bruce Wayne had from BB to TDKR. A journey that ended with Bruce moving past his pain, anger, and grief.

Let alone that Nolan wanted to have a solo story of Batman, why is it a problem that his Batman isn't part of a bigger universe? Do you complain about how Raimi did that with Spider-Man? Or Donner and Superman? Or even Burton with Batman(before the call out to Superman in Schumacher's installment)?

I wouldn't say Nolan isolating his Batman from a shared universe is a problem and I don't think Nolan had to make him part of a shared universe if he didn't want to but I do think that it was a loss of potential.

If we take a look at MOS, the premise seems very similar to BB. Both movies are about Batman/Superman respectively trying to find their path in life by travelling the world and eventually learning what it means to be Superman and Batman. I think it would've been genius to start off a shared universe with both Batman and Superman's origins full explored and then show how the rest of the universe grows with them. Furthermore, I think starting a shared universe with Batman is genius to begin with because the best way to start off a DC shared universe is from the street level with Batman. The appearance of other superheroes around the world would've also fit really well with the whole theme of escalation that the Nolan films had.

Had this been the case, we would've had the perfect way to start off a shared universe IMO and we would've gotten the JL movie a lot sooner. Now starting a shared universe with MOS which is an origin story and then doing a Batman reboot that isn't an origin is not a bad idea but I do think that it is the next best thing while doing a shared universe starting with BB was the best thing, imo.

Some people might respond to this post by asking "Nolan's Batman couldn't have fit into a shared universe to begin with" but keep in mind that I said "if Nolan made his Batman able to fit into one from the beginning", which means that the things that were there in BB and TDK established it as a non-superpowered universe wouldn't have been there to begin with. And in all honesty, it's not like you had to make major changes to BB and TDK to fit them in a shared universe either, since MOS will keep a part of the realism that was found in the TDK trilogy. All you had to do was make Batman smarter, do better choreographed fights, give him and the world around him a slightly more comic booky look, and do a few other slight changes here and there to the plot. The plot of both films overall would've stayed about 90 - 95% the same.

I don't understand.

TDKR is higher rated than Batman Begins on RT and metacritic.

If anything this is the 'first-act curse'....or whatever.

It might be getting more noticeable internet flak than BBegins because that's what happens when it doesn't live up to the predecessor (TDK) and because of that predecessor, you have a lot more people paying attention.

I said I wouldn't even count TDKR on BB's level of quality, not the critics.

I know a lot of people who went back and payed more attention to Batman Begins after they saw TDK and liked it. Heck, I personally was surprised at how well BB holds up against TDK when I watched them back to back. It held up better than I thought it would when I saw them separately.

 

[TheBat812]

I disagree. I wouldn't count TDKR even on Batman Begins' level of quality, which is not as high as TDK's. Thus I don't buy the "all the haters just expected it to top TDK" argument. In fact, I think most of the time that argument is used to dismiss any criticism as just "fanboyish complaints".

You're also ignoring a lot of the arguments made against TDKR by saying what you said. Although I do have issues with the plot holes, character development, and other stuff like that in the movie, my main issues with the movie is the fact that I believe it ignores & contradicts things from the previous 2 movies (a lot more from TDK though) and the messages & claims it makes about Batman that are not true to the essence of Batman. I don't see how you can simplify those complaints to me just being upset that it wasn't as good as TDK.

Also, while I do think bashing TDKR based on the fact that it isn't as good as TDK is wrong and stupid, I do sympathize with those people to a small extent because 1) Nolan said he wouldn't do another movie unless it is just as good or better than TDK and 2) The movie was marketed as the most epic in scale out of all of them - "The epic conclusion to the epic trilogy" as the trailers dubbed it.

If you honestly think TDKR contradicted themes and messages from TDK, you did not fully understand the point of what was presented in TDK. What happened in TDK was a corruption of Bruce's ideals and goals. In TDKR he refinds and even expands upon his original purpose. The beauty of Nolans' trilogy is that no character is ever really dogmatically correct. The only one throughout is the "Why do we fall? So we can learn to pick ourselves up." In TDK Bruce falls hard, and in TDKR he must learn to pick himself up without those who'd helped prop him up for so long previously. The idea that not everything we have learned and cling to is correct is most importantly shown with the Doctor redefining fear for Bruce. Previously, Bruce held onto his father's idea of "don't be afraid," when that was the wrong approach. He needed to feel fear in order to understand how to solve the problems he wanted to solve. Gordon, Alfred, Selina, Lucius, all experience versions of this in their arcs during TDKR.

The characters through the trilogy make good points for the contexts in which they are placed, but that does not make them universally correct. They also make poor decisions based upon these flawed views, which they face the subsequent repercussions of, and then must overcome. I think alot of the people (not all) who have issues with TDKR simply did not really understand the subtext of TDK, and therefore think Nolan was contradicting himself. They couldn't be more wrong.


TDKR had just as much going for it subtextually as either of the other films, maybe even more, since it could use those ideas and expand upon them. People get hung up thinking TDK was both more realistic and more 'unique' of a film, when it was just as absurd and utilized just as many conventions as TDKR. Maybe the use of Ledger and his performance just blinded many people to that fact, but more likely it just came first, thereby ruining the illusion for people who think they know everything, but clearly don't. Not that everybody has to love TDKR, but you should be able to at least appreciate what went into the film if you have any film knowledge/appreciation.

 

[Anno_Domini]

I'm sorry to say,but TDKR has too large a segment of people saying it failed to break the 3rd act curse.That by definition means it did indeed fail to brake the curse.

It's not a film like TDK,where it's universally praised and two or three vocal critics can be put down as a very tiny minority.

Define this "too large a segment of people".

Because there was a poll that had a vast amount of posters giving the threequel a 9 or 10 as well as there being a poll that positions TDKR right between TDK and BB.

Alongside a few that would love to just blast TDKR for not being on par with TDK or just hating everything Christopher Nolan touches, anyone who would say the movie didn't break the "curse" is just kidding themselves. The GA greatly loves the movie, the critical acclaim is very high compared to many awful 3rd movie outings...

so please, define the "too large a segment of people" idea you have. And if you're meaning fanboys, well...they'd hate on anything, lol.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

TDKR has more obvious negatives than BBegins.

However, it also has many stronger positives. It reaches heights that BBegins does not.

The good outweighs the bad in the eyes of most, presumably, given their reviews.

Again, saying it fell victim to the 'third-movie curse' objectively is ridiculous when it did better critically than BBegins.

 

[Anno_Domini]

I wouldn't say Nolan isolating his Batman from a shared universe is a problem and I don't think Nolan had to make him part of a shared universe if he didn't want to but I do think that it was a loss of potential.

If we take a look at MOS, the premise seems very similar to BB. Both movies are about Batman/Superman respectively trying to find their path in life by travelling the world and eventually learning what it means to be Superman and Batman. I think it would've been genius to start off a shared universe with both Batman and Superman's origins full explored and then show how the rest of the universe grows with them. Furthermore, I think starting a shared universe with Batman is genius to begin with because the best way to start off a DC shared universe is from the street level with Batman. The appearance of other superheroes around the world would've also fit really well with the whole theme of escalation that the Nolan films had.

Had this been the case, we would've had the perfect way to start off a shared universe IMO and we would've gotten the JL movie a lot sooner. Now starting a shared universe with MOS which is an origin story and then doing a Batman reboot that isn't an origin is not a bad idea but I do think that it is the next best thing while doing a shared universe starting with BB was the best thing, imo.

Some people might respond to this post by asking "Nolan's Batman couldn't have fit into a shared universe to begin with" but keep in mind that I said "if Nolan made his Batman able to fit into one from the beginning", which means that the things that were there in BB and TDK established it as a non-superpowered universe wouldn't have been there to begin with. And in all honesty, it's not like you had to make major changes to BB and TDK to fit them in a shared universe either, since MOS will keep a part of the realism that was found in the TDK trilogy. All you had to do was make Batman smarter, do better choreographed fights, give him and the world around him a slightly more comic booky look, and do a few other slight changes here and there to the plot. The plot of both films overall would've stayed about 90 - 95% the same.

I agree it's a missed opportunity, but I also think a different Batman is best for a shared DC cinematic universe. Superman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, Flash, Aquaman...these guys are God-like and Batman needs to be more based on the "Bat God" from the comics as opposed to this very real regular human that Nolan gave us in his trilogy that wasn't the greatest at everything he did. The only kind of shared universe I could see Nolan's version of Batman be in is just a World's Finest with Superman with a very real human being teaming with this God-like alien. Those parallels would be awesome to see, but to place that version of Batman in a team filled with these God-like archetypes would be too much, hence there needs to be balance and Batman needs to be more like the comics in a Justice League deal.

TDKR has more obvious negatives than BBegins.

However, it also has many stronger positives. It reaches heights that BBegins does not.

The good outweighs the bad in the eyes of most, presumably, given their reviews.

Again, saying it fell victim to the 'third-movie curse' objectively is ridiculous when it did better critically than BBegins.

That idea is definitely ridiculous indeed, but I wouldn't say TDKR has more obvious negatives than BB. Such as that one article posted days ago, I find that TDKR more "obvious negatives" are just more obvious because they're not looked at so much with BB or even TDK.