The Dark Knight Rises Your opinon on TDKR thus far

[Aesculapius]

Actually with both movies I recall thinking "WTF are they thinking?" when I heard about the direction they were taking and then when I saw the movie I walk away thinking "OMG that is so cool!" This movie has a few elements in it that I question, like the rogues gallery (Bane and Catwoman? Odd duo.) But I have complete faith that I will love the result.

 

[Mr. Fixit]

I'm optimistic as well. I have no reason not to be. There's no news or scrap of info I've heard so far that shakes me up or gives me doubts.

The title is meh.....but I couldn't care less about that.

I also think it's cool that when the trilogy is complete we'll be able to look back at a nice bunch of bat villains...Ra's, Scarecrow, Two-Face, Joker, Bane, Catwoman and some great mob bosses.

 

[Grayson]

The title is meh.....

I don't think it'll ever grow on me. If the movie turns out to be bad, I'll be joining the groups of people who say that the horrid title was the first indication t:

 

[Visceral]

The only thing that makes me cautious about this film is the fact that other third installments have been bad. Nothing about this franchise has done me wrong thus far.

 

[aeioulul]

I don't think it'll ever grow on me. If the movie turns out to be bad, I'll be joining the groups of people who say that the horrid title was the first indication t:

Personally, I dont think this movie will be bad, probably an " Ok " movie but not that bad. and Im glad that im not the only one disliking the title, the title is just too funny.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

I'm really excited that's about it, what am I supposed to do base all of my opinions on a film with a cast list and one official picture release?

sounds kinds silly to me, who isn't excited for this film? Someone who lives in a cave themselves lol

 

[Laderlappen]

I guess Im neutral. I was optimistic about pretty much everything for TDK. The only thing I was pessimistic about was that Rachel Dawes was gonna be in it BUT I was optimistic about Gyllenhaal playing her. This time around there is a couple of things that worries me.

The title: I hate it. I really hate it. Yeah its just a title but still
Bane: Tom Hardy. Will he be big enough? The pic made me alittle bit more optimistic.
Marion + JGL: It is really dissapointing that they got cast for original characters which looks like just small parts. Especially when the movie felt like it could have used one more villain.

The only thing Im really optimistic about is Catwoman. I love that Catwoman is in the movie. And Hathaway is a good choice I think.

Im still optimistic about the movie though.

 

[Gotham Knight]

I couldn't be more optimistic.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I guess Im neutral. I was optimistic about pretty much everything for TDK. The only thing I was pessimistic about was that Rachel Dawes was gonna be in it BUT I was optimistic about Gyllenhaal playing her. This time around there is a couple of things that worries me.

The title: I hate it. I really hate it. Yeah its just a title but still
Bane: Tom Hardy. Will he be big enough? The pic made me alittle bit more optimistic.
Marion + JGL: It is really dissapointing that they got cast for original characters which looks like just small parts. Especially when the movie felt like it could have used one more villain.

The only thing Im really optimistic about is Catwoman. I love that Catwoman is in the movie. And Hathaway is a good choice I think.

Im still optimistic about the movie though.

See, I had the reverse effect with the bolded part. When I heard that JGL and Marion were rumored to be in the movie at first, I was extremely nervous. Basically because of one fact. Name ONE comic book movie where there are three big-name villains in it that's any good.

There aren't any. And to clairify, I'm talking about MAIN villains, not side villains. Yeah, BB and TDK had lots of villains, but guys like Gambol, Chechen, and Maroni weren't main villains. They were supporting characters. I have yet to see a superhero movie done well where it has more then two main villains and one of the villains doesn't suffer from under-exposure.

The closest I can think of is Batman Returns, but even then, I thought Bruce Wayne/Batman suffered in terms of screen-time, and there weren't many supporting characters in the film because of it. Added to the fact that Shreck was an original character, and he didn't require the extensive amount of backstory Batman's main rogues gallery does. But it's probably the film that's done it the best.

 

[Laderlappen]

See, I had the reverse effect with the bolded part. When I heard that JGL and Marion were rumored to be in the movie at first, I was extremely nervous. Basically because of one fact. Name ONE comic book movie where there are three big-name villains in it that's any good.

There aren't any. And to clairify, I'm talking about MAIN villains, not side villains. Yeah, BB and TDK had lots of villains, but guys like Gambol, Chechen, and Maroni weren't main villains. They were supporting characters. I have yet to see a superhero movie done well where it has more then two main villains and one of the villains doesn't suffer from under-exposure.

The closest I can think of is Batman Returns, but even then, I thought Bruce Wayne/Batman suffered in terms of screen-time, and there weren't many supporting characters in the film because of it. Added to the fact that Shreck was an original character, and he didn't require the extensive amount of backstory Batman's main rogues gallery does. But it's probably the film that's done it the best.

Catwoman isnt really a villain. This movie really only has one villain. Even if we count Catwoman, had Marion or JGL played a villain this would have had the exact amount of main characters as TDK. How many of those characters are villains shouldnt matter. Just like it shouldnt matter how many good guys the movie has. Neither should it matter that the movie is based on a comicbook. Other movies have had 3 villains so why cant a comicbook movie?

The reason why there might not be any great comicbook movies with
3 villains is not because it wouldnt work. Its simply because almost all of them have one or two. People seem to think that 3 villains doesnt work because Spiderman 3 had 3 villains and failed. Even if thats not the reason why it failed.

 

[Texas Zombie]

You can have three villains, it's just all in the delivery.

Nolan is very good with multiple villains, the movie should play out nicely.

The villains in raimi's films are much more black and white, I feel that besides joker they all have shades of grey.

Bane could simply think batman is evil for all we know and he is the sworn protector of the city, which I doubt, but the point is Nolan is clever.


If you simply revert back to oh well a microchip in his head made him do it or a chemical, it seems as though there is no character transformation and the character is flat.

But say bane knows what venom may do to him, he has an internal battle, and yet he decides to continue.


And catwoman is certainly not a hero, so idk where that leaves her.

 

[BigEggo]

im happy with:
tom hardy as bane - brilliant actor for my 3rd favourite batman villain (joker and twoface are my 2 favourites)
JGL - great actor
marion cotillard - likewise
the inclusion of a young ra's sounds fascinating
the viral campaign in its early stages has been cool
the main cast back

unhappy with:
hathaway - not a good actor IMO.and she looks more like the joker.
catwoman - i just dont like the character.and unless bane is sidelined i expect she will very much be overshadowed by whatever he does.she seems like a forced inclusion so far,but ill admit that is based on almost nothing-just the fact that i find she is usually a foil for batman and not very interesting in her own right.
mad scientist inclusion - shades of batman and robin
the possibility of talia al ghul. no thanks.
its still more than a year away.siiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh.

 

[Gianakin_]

Catwoman made sense the moment Rachel died, imo.

 

[BigEggo]

thats kind of what i meant.rachel was the love interest for the first 2,when she died nolan had a difficult decision to make on what to do with that side of batman/bruce,and catwoman was the only obvious choice that wasnt simply a rethread of rachels character (apart from arguably talia,but we may still see her in this,although i hope not). her character slots right into the place left behind by rachel as love interest 2.0 (complex moral alignment version) and with bane already the lead villain, im guessing another factor of catwoman being involved is how famous she is in the rogues gallery,arguably only behind the joker,and how that will work marketing wise.

banes character was obviously chosen on merit - he doesnt exactly scream mainstream villain after batman and robin.catwoman may just have been the best character for this gap in the story or something.

 

[Grayson]

Well I'm officially at the optimistic stage, what with Marion announcing that her role is small, which can't possibly mean she's Talia.

 

[Jokers_Wild]

I couldn't be more optimistic.

Same here. I was super optimistic from the moment I saw the first Joker pic released four years ago...and look how everything turned out with TDK!

Since then, we've had Inception (another amazing film)...I'm convinced right now that Nolan can't make a bad movie. I have no reason to doubt as of this moment.

 

[wampa1]

I'm looking forward to the end of this franchise. After 6 Batman movies in the past 20 odd years, I don't think I'm going to get excited about any new Bat-film until they start acknowledging the wider DC Universe.

 

[Secret_Riddle]

I've loved everything Nolan has had his name on. From the title, to the casting..Nolan simply wouldn't do it if it wasn't going to come together in the end. Even if the movie ends up being disappointing, it will likely still represent a complete vision.

Some of the hate the Nolan Batman films get on these boards is ridiculous.

 

[Nightwatcher11]

ever since it was announced Nolan was returning... I've never been more excited. I personally believe this will be his best film and best Batman film yet.

 

[MaceB]

Single biggest dissapointment is clearly the title. Uninspired, bulky sounding, and corny. Knightrise would have been better than TDKR, and that still isn't very good.

 

[Jick]

I have the same feelings about the title.
I think Batman Rises would have been more appropriated, if the "Rises" was really necessary.. I get the feeling that WB wanted to capitalize more on "The Dark Knight" name and convinced Nolan.

 

[Gianakin_]

I don't think the title was WB's idea. Why is it hard to believe that either Nolan has a reason for the specific title, or that he was in a corner in terms of the title and went with that one?

 

[Bat-Mite]

catwoman - i just dont like the character.and unless bane is sidelined i expect she will very much be overshadowed by whatever he does.she seems like a forced inclusion so far,but ill admit that is based on almost nothing-just the fact that i find she is usually a foil for batman and not very interesting in her own right.

A forced inclusion? Reeally? I've been saying since TDK that she was going to be in this film because 1) Nolan loves The Long Halloween and 2) Catwoman was the only major character from that story that hadn't been used yet. I was wrong about Bane because I was doubting that he'd be in it until around the time he was actually announced, but I never doubted Catwoman. She was the only thing about this film that I was certain about from the beginning.

As for her not being interesting.. well, you're entitled to your opinion, but it does beg the question as to how she could have her own comic book series that was successful enough to last for 15 years. That's an extremely long time for a character that supposedly relies upon Batman to have any appeal.

 

[MaceB]

I don't think the title was WB's idea. Why is it hard to believe that either Nolan has a reason for the specific title, or that he was in a corner in terms of the title and went with that one?

Well, if it was Nolan's idea.. it was a bad one. People assume it was WBs decision because it smacks of marketing much more than creativity.

 

[Bat-Mite]

I don't think the title was WB's idea. Why is it hard to believe that either Nolan has a reason for the specific title, or that he was in a corner in terms of the title and went with that one?

Exactly. Hell, when it comes down to it, TDK is going the be the only film in this trilogy that has an awesome name. Batman Begins was a pretty sucky movie title also, but people seem to give that one a pass simply because it was such a good film.