Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILERS!!,

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILERS!!, Page: <<   < prev  14 15 [16] 17 18   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 10:29:59 AM   
elab49


Posts: 54583
Joined: 1/10/2005
Something else that stuck up it's hand and said 'but, wait'.

JGL went to see Bats - oh please come back to us, la di da.
And then gave Gordon grief when Bane read out the statement.

Why? Did he not think Bats had killed Harvey when he went to give him his support? Did he not care then? And now suddenly he does? Or was the problem that JGL was the only one that could add the counterpoint when Gordon's actions were outed so he had to say the words even though, from that character, they didn't really make much sense. Without the interaction with Bats the conflict would have been believable, but with it? And, yet again, one scence conflict then disappears into the muddle of time past either and fades to nothing again.


_____________________________

Lips Together and Blow - blogtasticness and Glasgow Film Festival GFF13!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation] LIKE AMERICA'S SWEETHEARTS TOO. IT MADE ME LAUGH A LOT AND THOUGHT IT WAS WITTY. ALSO I FEEL SLOWLY DYING INSIDE. I KEEP AGREEING WITH ELAB.


Annual Poll 2013 - All Lists Welcome

(in reply to jrewing1000)
Post #: 451
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 10:31:30 AM   
elab49


Posts: 54583
Joined: 1/10/2005
And I thought the main reason the ending was being discussed was because some posters had forgotten that Alfred wasn't the only one to get a heads-up. 

_____________________________

Lips Together and Blow - blogtasticness and Glasgow Film Festival GFF13!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation] LIKE AMERICA'S SWEETHEARTS TOO. IT MADE ME LAUGH A LOT AND THOUGHT IT WAS WITTY. ALSO I FEEL SLOWLY DYING INSIDE. I KEEP AGREEING WITH ELAB.


Annual Poll 2013 - All Lists Welcome

(in reply to elab49)
Post #: 452
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 10:38:49 AM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: Qwerty Norris

Also, the fact that there are a number of people on this thread debating the end, proves that it totally works.

Whilst I personally feel he survives, there is enough suggestion in there to argue that he doesn't - and for a film of this magnitude to provide both closure & ambiguity in one go is a hell of an achievement.


It is great that there is such debate about the end. But my issue is that if it turns out that Batman survived, I would feel cheated by the writer, not impressed.



Technically the original Batman *did* die, but someone else (it looks like) rose up to take his place! And as far as most people are concerned Bruce Wayne did die. There were times when Batman had to sacrifice the Wayne name for his mission (like the scene in Batman Begins when he slags of all the guests, and some dude comments that the "apple has fallen very far from the tree") - doesn't the end bring that tension in the films to a logical conclusion? The billionaire playboy is restored to one of Gotham's best sons, leaving his mansion for orphans to play about in, meaning that his name will be associated with doing good in the same way Thomas Wayne's makes people remember the train system and the like. The only people who know "Bruce Wayne" is still alive are Selina and Alfred (It's obvious Blake doesn't know, else he'd want to phone up for some crime-fighting tips!) . I know you think *how* the ending went down is a cheat, but doesn't the fact of most people thinking that Bruce Wayne is dead - with a funeral and everything - as well as the first Batman definitely dying, mean that the audience gets to have its cake and eat it too?


(in reply to jrewing1000)
Post #: 453
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 10:58:54 AM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

Something else that stuck up it's hand and said 'but, wait'.

JGL went to see Bats - oh please come back to us, la di da.
And then gave Gordon grief when Bane read out the statement.

Why? Did he not think Bats had killed Harvey when he went to give him his support? Did he not care then? And now suddenly he does? Or was the problem that JGL was the only one that could add the counterpoint when Gordon's actions were outed so he had to say the words even though, from that character, they didn't really make much sense. Without the interaction with Bats the conflict would have been believable, but with it? And, yet again, one scence conflict then disappears into the muddle of time past either and fades to nothing again.



Blake mentioned Batman murdering Harvey to get Bruce to speak to him. I don't think he believed it. It was a way to imply that Blake new that Bruce was really Batman (the polis are unlikely to have considered playboy Bruce Wayne a suspect for the murder of Harvey Dent!) Remember how big a Batman fanboy Blake is when he speaks to the orphan. Blake looks up to Gordon as well as Batman, and his anger in that scene is entirely believable - Gordon says that Batman took the rap (using the analogy of plunging hands into filth), and Blake says that Gordon's hands look plenty dirty from where he's standing. This is entirely consistent with the portrayal of Blake - idealistic beat cop, looks up to Gordon and (especially) Batman - that we've seen in the movie to that point. I'm not sure why you regard it as jarring. Was there anything Blake said that indicated he'd accepted the cover story of Batman killing Dent? When Matthew Modine tells Blake to avoid pursuing the stock market robber to pursue Batman, the "man who killed Harvey Dent", Blake is not exactly enthusiastic about it.


(in reply to elab49)
Post #: 454
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 11:04:05 AM   
jrewing1000


Posts: 486
Joined: 23/11/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: Qwerty Norris

Also, the fact that there are a number of people on this thread debating the end, proves that it totally works.

Whilst I personally feel he survives, there is enough suggestion in there to argue that he doesn't - and for a film of this magnitude to provide both closure & ambiguity in one go is a hell of an achievement.


It is great that there is such debate about the end. But my issue is that if it turns out that Batman survived, I would feel cheated by the writer, not impressed.



Technically the original Batman *did* die, but someone else (it looks like) rose up to take his place! And as far as most people are concerned Bruce Wayne did die. There were times when Batman had to sacrifice the Wayne name for his mission (like the scene in Batman Begins when he slags of all the guests, and some dude comments that the "apple has fallen very far from the tree") - doesn't the end bring that tension in the films to a logical conclusion? The billionaire playboy is restored to one of Gotham's best sons, leaving his mansion for orphans to play about in, meaning that his name will be associated with doing good in the same way Thomas Wayne's makes people remember the train system and the like. The only people who know "Bruce Wayne" is still alive are Selina and Alfred (It's obvious Blake doesn't know, else he'd want to phone up for some crime-fighting tips!) . I know you think *how* the ending went down is a cheat, but doesn't the fact of most people thinking that Bruce Wayne is dead - with a funeral and everything - as well as the first Batman definitely dying, mean that the audience gets to have its cake and eat it too?




I would personally prefer that he did die. It's far more plausible that he died, and Alfred was imagining things. More poetic, more romantic, and more filmic. There is absolutely no need for Wayne to survive. Having him survive somehow lessens the impact of the ending, it's just too happy and neat. Yes of course it is more open ended than actually seeing Wayne die, which creates debate.

But I prefer genuine mystery as a basis for discussion, rather than trying to second guess what the director 'left out' and chose not to show us.

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 455
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 11:05:13 AM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

And I thought the main reason the ending was being discussed was because some posters had forgotten that Alfred wasn't the only one to get a heads-up. 



In fairness, If you didn't have the last scene with Alfred, you could say that Bruce definitely did die (he got the pearls off Selina, and he died at sea with the pearls still on them,), he fixed the autopilot as a favour for Fox (this one's a bit of a stretch admittedly), he had arranged for a new Batsignal to be delivered in the event of his death (sounds dopey, but is it any more of a stretch than those bandits flying Bruce Wayne to Hong Kong in The Dark Knight and then picking up Batman shortly afterwards, without blowing his secret identity?) and then left the Batcave co-ordinates for Blake to continue on as Batman. If there wasn't a final shot of Bruce Wayne still alive, then the audience could legitimately assume (the movie instead just ending with Blake being the new Batman) that Bruce Wayne definitely died.

(in reply to elab49)
Post #: 456
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 11:14:53 AM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: Qwerty Norris

Also, the fact that there are a number of people on this thread debating the end, proves that it totally works.

Whilst I personally feel he survives, there is enough suggestion in there to argue that he doesn't - and for a film of this magnitude to provide both closure & ambiguity in one go is a hell of an achievement.


It is great that there is such debate about the end. But my issue is that if it turns out that Batman survived, I would feel cheated by the writer, not impressed.



Technically the original Batman *did* die, but someone else (it looks like) rose up to take his place! And as far as most people are concerned Bruce Wayne did die. There were times when Batman had to sacrifice the Wayne name for his mission (like the scene in Batman Begins when he slags of all the guests, and some dude comments that the "apple has fallen very far from the tree") - doesn't the end bring that tension in the films to a logical conclusion? The billionaire playboy is restored to one of Gotham's best sons, leaving his mansion for orphans to play about in, meaning that his name will be associated with doing good in the same way Thomas Wayne's makes people remember the train system and the like. The only people who know "Bruce Wayne" is still alive are Selina and Alfred (It's obvious Blake doesn't know, else he'd want to phone up for some crime-fighting tips!) . I know you think *how* the ending went down is a cheat, but doesn't the fact of most people thinking that Bruce Wayne is dead - with a funeral and everything - as well as the first Batman definitely dying, mean that the audience gets to have its cake and eat it too?




I would personally prefer that he did die. It's far more plausible that he died, and Alfred was imagining things. More poetic, more romantic, and more filmic. There is absolutely no need for Wayne to survive. Having him survive somehow lessens the impact of the ending, it's just too happy and neat. Yes of course it is more open ended than actually seeing Wayne die, which creates debate.

But I prefer genuine mystery as a basis for discussion, rather than trying to second guess what the director 'left out' and chose not to show us.



I'm not sure what you mean by romantic and poetic. If Bruce Wayne is dead, then Alfred's grief at "abandoning" Bruce has an element of truth, and fantasing about Bruce still being alive as a means to cope with the pain, however understandable, is the stuff of Lear-esque tragedy, not affirming poetry.

As for filmic: in Inception, Nolan played fair so that the audience had enough information (at the end) to know what was a dream and what was a reality. In the earlier flashbacks to Alfred in the cafe we are supposedly being shown 'objective' reality (Alfred is recounting something that actually happened, Bruce is accepting its veracity). To use the exact same framing etc etc for what is actually a fantasy sequence would surely mean that Nolan wasn't playing fair? I'd maintain that poor Alfred being reduced to hallucinating about Bruce Wayne still being alive isn't much of a happy ending either.

I remember the writers saying that they came up with the last shots of The Dark Knight Rises first, and then in a sense worked back to them. It comes down, to me, to thinking if Bruce Wayne/Batman has 'earned' the happy ending and if the steps taken to get there are consistent ( in terms of Bruce's character and dramatically). I think they are. Do you think the ending per se is flawed, i.e. (aside from what you feel is a cheap trick in being shown the Bat flying out to see) it's not just a question of the dramatic steps that lead up to it?

(in reply to jrewing1000)
Post #: 457
The Dark Knight Rises - 22/7/2012 11:33:15 AM   
mattdavies86

 

Posts: 113
Joined: 30/4/2006
From: Bath
A good discussion video on IGN.

http://uk.ign.com/videos/2012/07/22/the-dark-knight-rises-spoilercast

I'm pretty much in agreement - a fantastic movie with a few flaws.

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 458
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 11:34:20 AM   
elab49


Posts: 54583
Joined: 1/10/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

Something else that stuck up it's hand and said 'but, wait'.

JGL went to see Bats - oh please come back to us, la di da.
And then gave Gordon grief when Bane read out the statement.

Why? Did he not think Bats had killed Harvey when he went to give him his support? Did he not care then? And now suddenly he does? Or was the problem that JGL was the only one that could add the counterpoint when Gordon's actions were outed so he had to say the words even though, from that character, they didn't really make much sense. Without the interaction with Bats the conflict would have been believable, but with it? And, yet again, one scence conflict then disappears into the muddle of time past either and fades to nothing again.



Blake mentioned Batman murdering Harvey to get Bruce to speak to him. I don't think he believed it. It was a way to imply that Blake new that Bruce was really Batman (the polis are unlikely to have considered playboy Bruce Wayne a suspect for the murder of Harvey Dent!) Remember how big a Batman fanboy Blake is when he speaks to the orphan. Blake looks up to Gordon as well as Batman, and his anger in that scene is entirely believable - Gordon says that Batman took the rap (using the analogy of plunging hands into filth), and Blake says that Gordon's hands look plenty dirty from where he's standing. This is entirely consistent with the portrayal of Blake - idealistic beat cop, looks up to Gordon and (especially) Batman - that we've seen in the movie to that point. I'm not sure why you regard it as jarring. Was there anything Blake said that indicated he'd accepted the cover story of Batman killing Dent? When Matthew Modine tells Blake to avoid pursuing the stock market robber to pursue Batman, the "man who killed Harvey Dent", Blake is not exactly enthusiastic about it.




He all but rolls his eyes

But that's the point. If he doesn't accept the cover story he already knows that Gordon has lied about Batman killing Dent so must already know there is more to it. After all, he knows to go up to the roof by the signal to find Gordon, to.

For him to go to Bats he already knows it bollocks and likely has a good feel for why. And as you say, you can see that partly in action during the chase. So it doesn't fit with his reaction later. Yes, if he did believe there was something then the father-son (dear god, another one) thing they had going would prompt that outburst. But not from someone who's already been seen to have a shrewd idea of what might have happened.


_____________________________

Lips Together and Blow - blogtasticness and Glasgow Film Festival GFF13!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation] LIKE AMERICA'S SWEETHEARTS TOO. IT MADE ME LAUGH A LOT AND THOUGHT IT WAS WITTY. ALSO I FEEL SLOWLY DYING INSIDE. I KEEP AGREEING WITH ELAB.


Annual Poll 2013 - All Lists Welcome

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 459
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 12:02:28 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

Something else that stuck up it's hand and said 'but, wait'.

JGL went to see Bats - oh please come back to us, la di da.
And then gave Gordon grief when Bane read out the statement.

Why? Did he not think Bats had killed Harvey when he went to give him his support? Did he not care then? And now suddenly he does? Or was the problem that JGL was the only one that could add the counterpoint when Gordon's actions were outed so he had to say the words even though, from that character, they didn't really make much sense. Without the interaction with Bats the conflict would have been believable, but with it? And, yet again, one scence conflict then disappears into the muddle of time past either and fades to nothing again.



Blake mentioned Batman murdering Harvey to get Bruce to speak to him. I don't think he believed it. It was a way to imply that Blake new that Bruce was really Batman (the polis are unlikely to have considered playboy Bruce Wayne a suspect for the murder of Harvey Dent!) Remember how big a Batman fanboy Blake is when he speaks to the orphan. Blake looks up to Gordon as well as Batman, and his anger in that scene is entirely believable - Gordon says that Batman took the rap (using the analogy of plunging hands into filth), and Blake says that Gordon's hands look plenty dirty from where he's standing. This is entirely consistent with the portrayal of Blake - idealistic beat cop, looks up to Gordon and (especially) Batman - that we've seen in the movie to that point. I'm not sure why you regard it as jarring. Was there anything Blake said that indicated he'd accepted the cover story of Batman killing Dent? When Matthew Modine tells Blake to avoid pursuing the stock market robber to pursue Batman, the "man who killed Harvey Dent", Blake is not exactly enthusiastic about it.




He all but rolls his eyes

But that's the point. If he doesn't accept the cover story he already knows that Gordon has lied about Batman killing Dent so must already know there is more to it. After all, he knows to go up to the roof by the signal to find Gordon, to.

For him to go to Bats he already knows it bollocks and likely has a good feel for why. And as you say, you can see that partly in action during the chase. So it doesn't fit with his reaction later. Yes, if he did believe there was something then the father-son (dear god, another one) thing they had going would prompt that outburst. But not from someone who's already been seen to have a shrewd idea of what might have happened.




But when Blake goes to Bruce he doesn't give a big list of deductions that he's made that proves Bruce is Batman. Much of its instinctive. Blake doesn't believe Batman killed innocent people because he's a Batman believer (aren't we all? and it's not in keeping with Batman's character. I'd argue it's a hell of a leap to get from that position to thinking that Batman and Gordon cooked up a conspiracy (as opposed to the police genuinely not knowing who killed the people Dent did, and pinning it on Batman) . Batman being blamed for an unsolved murder is one thing, it being revealed that Gordon definitely did know who killed the people that Dent killed but went along with blaming it on Batman anyway is the sort of revelation that would cause genuine anger in a rookie, especially since the revelation is being made in the context of Bane reading it out and using it to further his evil agenda. If Batman had explained to Blake how the Dent cover story situation went down then I imagine his reaction might have been different, although he'd probably still have some element of rookie idealism.





(in reply to elab49)
Post #: 460
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 12:40:33 PM   
jrewing1000


Posts: 486
Joined: 23/11/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: Qwerty Norris

Also, the fact that there are a number of people on this thread debating the end, proves that it totally works.

Whilst I personally feel he survives, there is enough suggestion in there to argue that he doesn't - and for a film of this magnitude to provide both closure & ambiguity in one go is a hell of an achievement.


It is great that there is such debate about the end. But my issue is that if it turns out that Batman survived, I would feel cheated by the writer, not impressed.



Technically the original Batman *did* die, but someone else (it looks like) rose up to take his place! And as far as most people are concerned Bruce Wayne did die. There were times when Batman had to sacrifice the Wayne name for his mission (like the scene in Batman Begins when he slags of all the guests, and some dude comments that the "apple has fallen very far from the tree") - doesn't the end bring that tension in the films to a logical conclusion? The billionaire playboy is restored to one of Gotham's best sons, leaving his mansion for orphans to play about in, meaning that his name will be associated with doing good in the same way Thomas Wayne's makes people remember the train system and the like. The only people who know "Bruce Wayne" is still alive are Selina and Alfred (It's obvious Blake doesn't know, else he'd want to phone up for some crime-fighting tips!) . I know you think *how* the ending went down is a cheat, but doesn't the fact of most people thinking that Bruce Wayne is dead - with a funeral and everything - as well as the first Batman definitely dying, mean that the audience gets to have its cake and eat it too?




I would personally prefer that he did die. It's far more plausible that he died, and Alfred was imagining things. More poetic, more romantic, and more filmic. There is absolutely no need for Wayne to survive. Having him survive somehow lessens the impact of the ending, it's just too happy and neat. Yes of course it is more open ended than actually seeing Wayne die, which creates debate.

But I prefer genuine mystery as a basis for discussion, rather than trying to second guess what the director 'left out' and chose not to show us.



I'm not sure what you mean by romantic and poetic. If Bruce Wayne is dead, then Alfred's grief at "abandoning" Bruce has an element of truth, and fantasing about Bruce still being alive as a means to cope with the pain, however understandable, is the stuff of Lear-esque tragedy, not affirming poetry.

As for filmic: in Inception, Nolan played fair so that the audience had enough information (at the end) to know what was a dream and what was a reality. In the earlier flashbacks to Alfred in the cafe we are supposedly being shown 'objective' reality (Alfred is recounting something that actually happened, Bruce is accepting its veracity). To use the exact same framing etc etc for what is actually a fantasy sequence would surely mean that Nolan wasn't playing fair? I'd maintain that poor Alfred being reduced to hallucinating about Bruce Wayne still being alive isn't much of a happy ending either.

I remember the writers saying that they came up with the last shots of The Dark Knight Rises first, and then in a sense worked back to them. It comes down, to me, to thinking if Bruce Wayne/Batman has 'earned' the happy ending and if the steps taken to get there are consistent ( in terms of Bruce's character and dramatically). I think they are. Do you think the ending per se is flawed, i.e. (aside from what you feel is a cheap trick in being shown the Bat flying out to see) it's not just a question of the dramatic steps that lead up to it?



I couldn't care less if it's a happy ending or not. I am only concerned with plausibility and consistency with what's being shown. There is a grey area of course, which is the basis for this entire debate.

As for writing from the end first and working your way back. I'd say that's the worst way to write a screenplay. Star Wars prequels anyone??

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 461
RE: Amazing Batman - 22/7/2012 1:33:40 PM   
Cool Breeze


Posts: 2351
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet
SPOILERS...


Flawed masterpiece is the best description of my feelings regarding TDKR after having wacthed it last night.This could change however.

Im a huge fan of what Nolan, Bale,and all involved who have made this series as great as it has become.My expectations for this film were huge and for the most part they were met.Im still processing the film as there was so much to take i and further viewings are a must so i will summarize my thoughts briefly.

Christian Bale was FANTASTIC in this one.He has been the ONLY actor to accurately portray Batman/Bruce Wayne in this series but his performance in TDKR is amazing and carries the whole film.Going through intense pain (both mental and physical) it is just a fanatastic perfromance.

Anne Hathaway.Wow! She was sooo sexy and bad ass as Selina Kyle.I loved her character and her on again, off again alliance with Batman is one of the highlights of the film.

Bane.A true force of nature and a well matched adversary for Batman.I really liked this voice and had no trouble understanding him.The fights between him and Batman are the action highlights of the whole trilogy for me.

The action sequences.First rate and proves Nolan and his team just get better and better at this stuff.The final chase with The Bat and armoured trucks is true cinematic spectacle that even outdoes anything in Avengers Assemble.

Talia.I was genuinely surprised by this twist as i have to admit i didnt see it coming.Kudos to Marion Cotillard for pulling it off.I think she could have done with more screentime however.

There are flaws.The film is long and does drag at times in the middle section ( Particularly the whole Bruce trapped in the pit plot ).Batman is actually off screen for long sections of this movie and i can see how that may disappoint some who just want to see superhero action.

As i said i am still processing the film so im sure i will rate it higher after further viewings.For the record though, i believe Batman does die in the end and Alfreds vision of Bruce and Selina is what he wishes to see.I just dont see Bruce settling down with Selina.Oh and Joeseph Gordon Levitt was awesome and loved the indication that he may become Robin (Nightwing maybe?)

Four stars.

< Message edited by Cool Breeze -- 22/7/2012 1:36:24 PM >


_____________________________

'' Iv played Oskar Schindler, Michael Collins, Rob Roy Mcgregor, even ZEUS for gods sake! No one is going to believe me to be a green grocer! ''
Post #: 462
RE: Amazing Batman - 22/7/2012 2:30:56 PM   
burtbondy


Posts: 167
Joined: 16/11/2007

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

SPOILERS...


Flawed masterpiece is the best description of my feelings regarding TDKR after having wacthed it last night.This could change however.

Im a huge fan of what Nolan, Bale,and all involved who have made this series as great as it has become.My expectations for this film were huge and for the most part they were met.Im still processing the film as there was so much to take i and further viewings are a must so i will summarize my thoughts briefly.

Christian Bale was FANTASTIC in this one.He has been the ONLY actor to accurately portray Batman/Bruce Wayne in this series but his performance in TDKR is amazing and carries the whole film.Going through intense pain (both mental and physical) it is just a fanatastic perfromance.

Anne Hathaway.Wow! She was sooo sexy and bad ass as Selina Kyle.I loved her character and her on again, off again alliance with Batman is one of the highlights of the film.

Bane.A true force of nature and a well matched adversary for Batman.I really liked this voice and had no trouble understanding him.The fights between him and Batman are the action highlights of the whole trilogy for me.

The action sequences.First rate and proves Nolan and his team just get better and better at this stuff.The final chase with The Bat and armoured trucks is true cinematic spectacle that even outdoes anything in Avengers Assemble.

Talia.I was genuinely surprised by this twist as i have to admit i didnt see it coming.Kudos to Marion Cotillard for pulling it off.I think she could have done with more screentime however.

There are flaws.The film is long and does drag at times in the middle section ( Particularly the whole Bruce trapped in the pit plot ).Batman is actually off screen for long sections of this movie and i can see how that may disappoint some who just want to see superhero action.

As i said i am still processing the film so im sure i will rate it higher after further viewings.For the record though, i believe Batman does die in the end and Alfreds vision of Bruce and Selina is what he wishes to see.I just dont see Bruce settling down with Selina.Oh and Joeseph Gordon Levitt was awesome and loved the indication that he may become Robin (Nightwing maybe?)

Four stars.

Thats a good point about Bruce and Selina. Its completely not in Bruce/Batmans nature to settle down with a career criminal .

(in reply to Cool Breeze)
Post #: 463
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 2:33:03 PM   
mackey

 

Posts: 336
Joined: 15/7/2007



[/quote]

I would personally prefer that he did die. It's far more plausible that he died, and Alfred was imagining things. More poetic, more romantic, and more filmic. There is absolutely no need for Wayne to survive. Having him survive somehow lessens the impact of the ending, it's just too happy and neat. Yes of course it is more open ended than actually seeing Wayne die, which creates debate.

But I prefer genuine mystery as a basis for discussion, rather than trying to second guess what the director 'left out' and chose not to show us.
[/quote]

Spoilers

My view is that it’s fairly clear that Bruce survives and I was very happy with that. Surely he deserves to live after all he’s given and lost to protect and save Gotham on numerous occasions? For me, a major part of the reason Bane ’broke’ him during their first fight was because Bruce didn’t really care whether he lived or died; Alfred tells him as much when he tells him he’s afraid he ’wants to fail’. When Bruce eventually rises from the prison, he’s learned that he wants to live and it’s exactly this desire that gives him the strength to defeat Bane (and ultimately the League of Shadows). As for it being poetic, romantic and filmic? In the context of the film and the trilogy as a whole it completely ticks all those boxes in my opinion. He has finally given everything and has found a way to live without being Batman; it’s a perfect fit. The hero dying doesn’t automatically mean it’s more emotional. Happy endings can provide an emotional wallop too.

_____________________________

I know that look; it's the same look my father gave me when I told him I wanted to be a ventriloquist.

(in reply to jrewing1000)
Post #: 464
tDKR - 22/7/2012 2:52:05 PM   
film_society

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 22/7/2012
He doesn’t die.
There is a quite fun debate raising its head on the net over the final shots with some suggesting that Alfred’s grief is causing him conjure a vision that he is desperate to see, made real only through his grief  but upon reflection, there is no debate to be had here.
The promotion for The Dark Knight Rises was as portentous as the film-makers could get away with- even the title itself is an ascension metaphor. The reply “Not Everything” in response to Selina’s plea to consider what Bruce has already given for Gotham also was notable by its leading presence in the trailers. To invoke what is still in my eyes is still Nolan’s definitive work, The Prestige, we were only witnessing the Pledge in the title & trailers and, in the final shots of the disposal of the bomb, the Turn. Ultimately this is only a trick to tease Nolan’s implicit question- could Batman be Dead?
The main problem I had when first watching The Dark Knight Rises was that of my expectations of what the film would do clashed with the story Nolan ultimately wanted to tell and this is one great example of this issue. When Alfred mentions his Florentine fantasy I felt that it has been immediately made clear that this would be the conclusion of the film- the added set up of showing Alfred sitting in the cafe only underlined it. At the time this annoyed me as I felt it was clumsy storytelling and that it undermined the drama to come but the pointedness of the tease of the scene is there to address the thematic question of Batman’s ultimate fate.
How do we know he’s alive? Logically there are many little clues that the Bruce that Alfred sees is real (why would Alfred imagine Bruce is with Selena, wearing the pearls of course, when Alfred has barely met her? Why would Nolan insist on including the fairly clumsy plot thread of Bruce being suddenly technically able to fix the autopilot and then remind you of it with Lucius’ final scene in the saga?). Practicalities of how Bruce could have survived are irrelevant and if a pedantic viewer wants want to scrutinise it the film does contains many small practical holes (How is Alfred an expert on Bane? How does Wayne get back to Gotham from the pit so readily considering he’s broke and the city is under national surveillance? Was the cane psychosomatic? Did Bane think hooking up Bruce with a spine doctor and a group of wizened Zen-spouting Yodas was a good call? Had Bruce grown new knees by the end as he did a newly functioning spine?!)
The real reason we know that Alfred’s vision of Bruce is not a phantom, however, is thematic.
Parallels with the ending of Inception have been cited but for Cobb  the answer to the question of whether he was dreaming or not was irrelevant to the character- the point was that he had chosen to embrace where he was, concluding his story. The inclusion of any mild ambiguity here is not for narrative purposes for thematic- Nolan knows that Batman Cannot be Killed- no more than you could kill James Bond (and Nolan’s take on the character of Bruce Wayne has always been more Bond than classical Batman) and Nolan only raises the doubt in the audience’s mind  running into the conclusion so that he can firmly answer it “No” . The Batman has risen to become an symbol to Gotham- literally a statue representing what one man would give to protect the citizens and this is what Bruce ultimately has longed for for his city- the chance to inspire. Many times in the saga and especially in Rises Bruce mentions how Batman is more powerful as a symbol, as an idea. He hoped that Harvey Dent would become that symbol and gambled that Harvey’s legacy alone would be enough to sustain it but ultimately knew that Gotham needed to have this idea of  sacrifice made real and present amongst them for his work to be finally done. To quote another comic book adaptation  “ideas are bulletproof”- Batman cannot be killed, metaphorically  and, as Alfred sees in parallel, to make the point complete, physically. Nolan delivers the only ending to this saga that he could- Bruce’s far away retirement as, in the film’s final shot, a new Dark Knight Rises.
Post #: 465
RE: tDKR - 22/7/2012 3:06:30 PM   
blackduck


Posts: 1604
Joined: 1/10/2005
mixed opinions on this, emotionally it was a perfect ending to the trilogy. And I loved it. But as a stand alone film it didn't hold up. To enjoy this you have to accept massive leaps in the plot. Not just the usual batmanapearing exactly where he's ended (but they do push it in this one). The plot leaps in some daft ways, the way he loses is money for one. Also didn't like the bat copter, just didn't look like something that should fly, probably had a bat-fridge in the back so he could survive the nuclear blast

_____________________________

I am but an egg.

(in reply to film_society)
Post #: 466
RE: Magnificent - 22/7/2012 5:04:20 PM   
Qwerty Norris


Posts: 3971
Joined: 26/10/2005
From: Edinburgh
quote:

ORIGINAL: Barbrosa

This trilogy shows Chris Nolan to be a prolific film maker in a class of his own.
But as with The Dark Knight I disagree with 12A certificate given.
This film is not for children, it is for the grown up minds of adults to understand not easily disturbed children.


Some children have a better understanding of grown up themes than some adults give them credit for.

The 12A is a 12A for a reason.

_____________________________

Qwerty's Top 10 of 2013 (so far)

1. Zero Dark Thirty
2. No
3. A Hijacking
4. Behind the Candelabra
5. In The Fog
6. Good Vibrations
7. McCullin
8. Beyond the Hills
9. The Place Beyond the Pines
10. Wreck-it Ralph
Post #: 467
The Ending (spoilers) - 22/7/2012 5:12:53 PM   
yiannis21


Posts: 14
Joined: 24/8/2008
Although I am yet to rewatch the film (booked for Tuesday) I struggle to understand how anybody can take a view of the ending that ISN'T literal, and it's not some cheesy cop-out either, but is directly linked to the themes of the whole trilogy.

Massive, massive spoilers follow, by the way, in case the title wasn't warning enough!!!



BB introduces Wayne as someone literally lost, without purpose. By the end of the film, he has been given two purposes - Batman and Rachel Dawes. These combined become his reasons for living. By becoming Batman, he can save Gotham from the evils which resulted in his parents' murders, the crime, the poverty, the corruption and the apathy that his parents themselves tried to fight. Bruce can continue his parents' legacy while getting some lateral measure of vengeance (I imagine a parallel universe Batman that sees the face of Joe Chill in every criminal). So far, so predictable - that is Batman's origin and mission in a nutshell, after all. Rachel, though, gives something more important to him - a reason to hang up the cowl when his job is done. Without that, he is destined to go on forever, chasing down every last mugger and street thug. I think a few people wanted that to be the case, mainly because it's, you know, more like the comics, but you can't have a character arc if the character's metaphorical journey never ends. The promise of love that Rachel offers allows for that.

Of course, TDK comes along and royally fucks that up! Not only with the very obvious Rachel-being-exploded stuff, but also with the fact that, had she lived, she would have rejected Bruce anyway. Although Bruce doesn't know it yet ("Alfred, is that burning paper I smell?"), his dreams of closure were built on a lie he told himself. He only has Batman left and a lie destroys that too. Driven to desperation by the Joker, Batman commits to the lie that closes the film, destroying the legend of Batman and everything he stood for in order to hide the truth about Dent.

Coming on to TDKR, a lot of criticism (yes you, Harry Knowles!) has been saying that Batman would never have retired. Bullshit, I say, although not as many times as Harry. For a start, think about it logically. I know the maths are a little hazy at the end of TDK with regards to exactly who Dent killed, but we're told "five dead, two of them cops". So Batman is now a mass murderer and cop killer. That will be broadcast in every news medium in Gotham repeatedly, and people will believe it. To make matters worse, he kidnaps the brave District Attorney that everybody loves, and who was recently horribly crippled by a terrorist explosion, and pushes him off a building. Now Batman is a sadistic fuck as well as a mass-murdering cop killer. Do you seriously think anyone in Gotham will be GLAD to see Batman? Yeah, I know the kid at the orphanage probably would be, but he's just a kid, in love with the image and mythos and blind to the "truth" about that deranged freak. 90% of the people of Gotham would run a mile at the sight of Batman. Secondly, you have the Dent Act and the general clean-up of crime hammered home, meaning that, even if Batman could be out and about, there's nothing for him to do, beyond - as I said earlier - a few muggers and street thugs. Eventually the Dent Act will be shown to have merely swept everything under the carpet, but it's clearly worked for the past eight years.

The Bruce at the start of TDKR is being held up by three lies - that Gotham doesn't need Batman, that the Dent Act is the answer rather than an illusion, and that Rachel died loving him, not Dent. The pull of these lies combine to keep his life stationary, caught in a moment he can't move on from. For me, Bruce being an inert recluse for eight years makes perfect sense. He's effectively waiting to die and I love that you clearly see the effect this has on Alfred, the person who cares about him the most. Of course, Bane comes along and quickly shows the first two lies of Bruce's life for what they are. Gotham does need Batman and the Dent Act is indeed an illusion of safety. At this point Bruce still has his one lie - that his reason for living died at the hands of the Joker. Although the film doesn't specifically go there, you could easily see his willingness to become Batman again as almost a suicide, maybe not even as a conscious decision but rather showing his unconscious desire to not go on any more. Bane is the one that can end it. In desperation, Alfred shatters the last of the three lies about Rachel, even though it drives them apart. It doesn't work, though, and Batman still walks in to his death.

Handily for the storytelling, though, Bane doesn't oblige Bruce's death wish and leaves him alive. This is Bruce Wayne - the actual character beyond the damn suit - at his lowest point. People have complained that Batman disappears at this point in the movie and the pace slows, but frankly I felt Batman wasn't gone from the film enough at this point and that the return happened too quick. I still felt the themes of the film (or at least the themes I read into it, which is kinda the point of this post!) resonate, but things could have been played out slower and clearer. Then again, I have no problem with long films. Anyway, at this point Bruce has been stripped of the lies he propped himself up with (thanks, Mr Nolan for the really obvious "cane" symbology) and is left with a stark choice: give up, lie down and die, or rediscover the purpose you once had in your life, the purpose of being Batman and saving Gotham. Some people have simplified this to the choice of "live or die", but given what just happened to him at the hands of Bane, it is more likely the choice between two deaths. Give up and definitely die, or keep fighting and probably die, but maybe save a whole load of people on the way. This reminds me of Lord of the Rings, particularly Boromir or the elves - fighting a battle that you know you're going to lose, but fighting anyway because you are the only one that can. It is a noble choice Bruce makes to keep on fighting, but the themes already discussed mean that it is not enough and that Bruce still needs - and deserves,dammit! - a ray of light at the end. Step up, one Ms S. Kyle.

Although this is again a part of the film that I thought could have been expanded, I thought the introduction of Selina as ultimately Bruce's true reason to continue was perfect. Although I am not a comic book reader and don't know about all of Bruce's romantic exploits, I always saw Catwoman as his perfect match. Childhood loves aren't going to cut it when you've had Bruce Wayne's childhood, neither are fawning psychotherapists, and, unless the comic Vicky Vale is vastly different, I don't think some reporter is going to do it either, even if she does look like Kim Basinger and sympathises about your childhood. Catwoman, on the other hand, has always seemed tailor-made for the "will-they-won't-they" partnership - the ultimate Mulder & Scully. They both have a duality to their personalities that they both alternate between fighting against or rejoicing in. They both have ultimately a strong moral core - thinking about what's right, rather than what's legal or permitted - but also a great deal of anger. Bruce turns his into righteous fury, whereas Catwoman has tended to turn hers towards crime, thrill seeking or revenge. In TDKR, I like how it hints that Bruce sees something of himself in her - trapped in this persona that isn't you, fighting to get free and not knowing how. I can easily imagine this playing on his mind during the prison scenes and (unless I am remembering incorrectly) it is telling that she is the first person he searches out on his return, although I want to watch it again to pay a bit more attention to the dialogue. When he gives her the Batpod I see that as a bit of a test - I trust you to do what you say no matter what, so even if you only do that it will be worthwhile, but I see something else in you and I believe that you can reward my faith. Her return during the climactic fight means Bruce's faith has been rewarded and the kiss seals it - HERE is my closure, my reason for doing all of this and, ultimately, my reason for ending it. Rachel was never, could never, be it, because it was always destined to be Selina.To me it is the most inspired choice in the whole series.

So that brings us to the ending, where I really can't understand the fuss. People are arguing about the timing, when Bruce jumped, blast radius statistics and everything else and Mr Nolan must be chuckling at how a simple editing trick could fool so many so easily. By showing a shot of Bruce seemingly "still" in the cockpit just before it explodes, Nolan teases that maybe he might have died, but that's a quick bluff, nothing more. Do you think TDKR is the first film to play tricks with the sequence of events during editing to make people believe one thing when the reverse is true? Of course it isn't. How many times has editing in motion pictures (or even TV) tricked us into thinking the hero died, or went over the cliff with the stagecoach, or is too far away to reach the critical action in time? What about the tank over the cliff in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade? Or the double doorbell trick from Silence of the Lambs? Or Ace getting blown up/not blown up in Casino? Considering Nolan is a director that actively uses misdirection, shouldn't we be watching out for it rather than being caught by it? It's like me watching a magic trick where someone takes a card in their left hand, then makes it disappear and appear in their right hand, then going up to them and berating them for how shit the magic trick is, as the card was clearly shown in the left hand for a split second, so any attempt to try and persuade me that the card is actually in the right hand is bullshit. Even though I - and the rest of the audience - can clearly see that the card is in the right hand, because I saw the card in the left hand then the whole point of the magic trick must mean that the card is still in the left hand, therefore I will continue to believe that despite all evidence to the contrary. You can look up this mental condition in the dictionary, by the way, under "Delusional".

Just to be absolutely, 100% clear that Bruce is alive, the following scenes at the end hammer the point home as unsubtly as possible:

- Although I need a second watching to get the timing, where exactly did Blake get the coordinates for the Batcave from? I'm pretty sure that happens after the explosion. In any case, there are only two possibilities: Batman gave Blake the coordinates before so he could continue Batman after Bruce's death (in which case it's a little pointless, as Blake and millions of others might be dead afterwards), or Batman gave Blake the coordinates after so he could continue after Bruce retired for good. It is the only point that supports both interpretations equally, and so in that case it is the balance of other evidence that confirms the second possibility to be the true one, as seen below.

- The Batman sign on top of MCU was repaired. This must have been Bruce who repaired it, as no one else would have motivation to (Blake might have done in the future, but this is before he discovers the cave) and, more importantly, this must have been done AFTER the explosion as not even Bruce would have had a reason to do so.

- The Bat's autopilot was fixed. Why would a man with a reason to live manually pilot a vehicle to his certain death when it has a FUNCTIONING AUTOPILOT?!!

- The necklace is listed as missing during the probate. This was last seen in Bruce's possession. I don't think he lost it somehow.

- The shot of fucking Bruce Wayne alive at the end!!!!! Seriously, how clear and unambiguous does Nolan have to get? The fucker's alive, ok?! Some people - even those that don't think Bruce is dead - may have complained about that shot and how they would have preferred to leave it on the shot of Alfred, but actually showing Bruce in the cafe serves two purposes that are both essential. Firstly, it is the only way to show, rather than hint, that it is Selina who has helped him find his peace (oh look, the necklace!) and also gives the final and definitive closure of that wonderful little smile on Wayne's face. He is at peace and happy for the first time and by god has he earned it!

So can we please get a grip, people? It isn't metaphysical and neither is it bad screenwriting. It's a well thought-out ending that ties in the themes across all three films to create a true character arc and complete trilogy. The fact that it does so with a simple, almost playful bit of misdirection thrown in is simply how Chris Nolan rolls.

< Message edited by yiannis21 -- 22/7/2012 6:04:17 PM >


_____________________________

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"

(in reply to film_society)
Post #: 468
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 5:15:58 PM   
Prawnman

 

Posts: 22
Joined: 22/7/2012
(SPOILERS) The Dark Knight Rises is a bloated mess of movie, despite it being beautifully shot, the tone dark and with some good performances the script just didn't hold up. It have massive leaps in logic in a realm where it has tried to have some basis in reality. It also fell for the age old problem with third in a trilogy movies, it has far too many characters and Batman himself gets totally lost. In fact the character himself has about 20 minutes of screen time in its 2 hours 45 of its running time, its like during the script process they totally lost interest in him and literally dropped him into a cave out of the way so they could concentrate on something else. Catwoman adds absolutely nothing to the plot and does nothing to drive it forward. It was a character that wasn't really needed. Joseph Gordon Levitt's character just appears from nowhere, again quite literally, on a rooftop to disclose to Gordon that something was very fishy about Harvey Dent's demise and from that point becomes the real focal point of the movie. He has everything sussed to the point he makes everyone else look at a bit dim. Bane is again wasted, massive in stature, imposing, intellectual mastermind terrorist which eventually transpires he is just a lapdog who is quite handy at mixing cement. Its a real shame.

The biggest flaw has to be Bruce Wayne/Batman himself, using the device from Miller's Dark Knight Returns that Batman is a bit passed it and can't really hold his own anymore just didn't work. Wayne/Batman is too weak, he is at the point where sliding on to a Stannah Stairlift is too much of an effort for him. Which makes him pretty much redundant until he has his Rocky moment in the cave he has been shoved while recovering from a broken back by being suspended by a piece of rope for a while. Reading that back, it really does seem as ridiculous as it sounds. Bruce Wayne is literally broken, bad knees, broken back, his internal organs mangled from scene one and isn't a real threat unless he is in his flying bat car thingy.

The Dark Knight Rises is essentially about death, or things coming to an end, but crippling the hero from the start rather than making his demise the main focus of the film is its major failing.

The Dark Knight never really rises, more flounders around a bit until someone puts him out of his misery.

< Message edited by Prawnman -- 22/7/2012 5:19:57 PM >

(in reply to Qwerty Norris)
Post #: 469
RE: - 22/7/2012 5:23:56 PM   
kenada_woo


Posts: 1668
Joined: 30/9/2005
2nd viewing and I was waaay off. Anyway, there's lots of foreshadowing throughout the film.

The whole auto pilot stuff with the bat plane, when Wayne turns back up in Gotham...Bale plays a blinder, he's planned a get out in advance, when him and fox go to get the emp from the plane, he cracks a joke about the autopilot not working but plays it like he's probing fox to see if he knows if its fixed...fox doesn't think its fixed saying "the autopilot is you"

Later catwoman tells Batman if he's gonna eject and drop the bomb out to sea to which Batman says the autopilot doesn't work.

There's also 2 bat planes (you see em when fox shows Wayne the bat) so when fox asks those scientists blokes if they've fixed the autopilot, they find out wayne already fixed it 6 months ago.

So with the knowledge that the autopilot was fixed, its up to you to suspend belief that he ejected with around 10 seconds to spare (it takes around 5 secs to cut from Batman, to Blake, to the bomb saying 5 seconds).

Additional foreshadowing goes towards Talis/miranda Tate. Not content with seeing the scar on her shoulder...there's also uncertainty to trust the story of the child that escapes the prison

they talk about the kid escaping...but then mention that the kid got the plague and the doctor had to fix the kids face. But when we see the flashbacks, the kids face is okay...then the bloke helping Wayne get better changes the subject by saying "we don't talk about this anymore as its banes prison" so something isn't clear cut from there (you also see bane with his face covered fighting everyone in those flashbacks)

To also clear up the bane mask thing...no one knows it to administer pain relief to Bane. The CIA guy at the start doesn't know and asks "why does he wear the mask?" CIA bloke dies on the plane. Since that, Alfred says there's nothing on him apart from knowing he was trained by the league of shadows and was booted out.

It's only confirmed to Wayne the mask is to protect Vanes face from falling off and stop the pain, when he's told in the prison

< Message edited by kenada_woo -- 22/7/2012 5:32:07 PM >


_____________________________

http://dereksdontrunfilms.blogspot.co.uk/

"You bailed out a Jamaican street named Monkey the other day, I want him. This other piece of shit, Screwface, I want him. I know you're a scumbag and a puke, I don't mind that, but give me what I need and I'll leave here a nice guy. If you don't, I'm gonna fuck you up. "

Hatcher. Marked For Death

Post #: 470
RE: Amazing Batman - 22/7/2012 5:38:20 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: burtbondy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

SPOILERS...


Flawed masterpiece is the best description of my feelings regarding TDKR after having wacthed it last night.This could change however.

Im a huge fan of what Nolan, Bale,and all involved who have made this series as great as it has become.My expectations for this film were huge and for the most part they were met.Im still processing the film as there was so much to take i and further viewings are a must so i will summarize my thoughts briefly.

Christian Bale was FANTASTIC in this one.He has been the ONLY actor to accurately portray Batman/Bruce Wayne in this series but his performance in TDKR is amazing and carries the whole film.Going through intense pain (both mental and physical) it is just a fanatastic perfromance.

Anne Hathaway.Wow! She was sooo sexy and bad ass as Selina Kyle.I loved her character and her on again, off again alliance with Batman is one of the highlights of the film.

Bane.A true force of nature and a well matched adversary for Batman.I really liked this voice and had no trouble understanding him.The fights between him and Batman are the action highlights of the whole trilogy for me.

The action sequences.First rate and proves Nolan and his team just get better and better at this stuff.The final chase with The Bat and armoured trucks is true cinematic spectacle that even outdoes anything in Avengers Assemble.

Talia.I was genuinely surprised by this twist as i have to admit i didnt see it coming.Kudos to Marion Cotillard for pulling it off.I think she could have done with more screentime however.

There are flaws.The film is long and does drag at times in the middle section ( Particularly the whole Bruce trapped in the pit plot ).Batman is actually off screen for long sections of this movie and i can see how that may disappoint some who just want to see superhero action.

As i said i am still processing the film so im sure i will rate it higher after further viewings.For the record though, i believe Batman does die in the end and Alfreds vision of Bruce and Selina is what he wishes to see.I just dont see Bruce settling down with Selina.Oh and Joeseph Gordon Levitt was awesome and loved the indication that he may become Robin (Nightwing maybe?)

Four stars.

Thats a good point about Bruce and Selina. Its completely not in Bruce/Batmans nature to settle down with a career criminal .



If she's got a whole new identity and she's living (presumably) off the Wayne billions then she's hardly still a career criminal is she? And the heart wants what it wants. If most people think Bruce Wayne is dead, then he's got no need to hook up with a stereotypical high society wife or anything. It's hardly outwith Batman's character to think a criminal can change their ways, especially given all the stuff in The Dark Knight Rises about Bruce understanding (personally, not abstractly, and not while in Batman mode) how the non privileged half have to live. In all the years they've been doing Batman comics, can you think of anyone who would - all else being equal, and assuming she renounced crime - be a better match for Bruce's partner that Catwoman? Admittedly, Talia's the mother of the comic Batman's son, but none of Wayne's other hoes come anywhere close to being as sparky,hot and interesting as Catwoman (and personally I do think Bruce Wayne, Anthony and Cleopatra style, would want such a partner if a situation arose where his life would allow him to have one)



(in reply to burtbondy)
Post #: 471
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 5:41:00 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: Prawnman

The biggest flaw has to be Bruce Wayne/Batman himself, using the device from Miller's Dark Knight Returns that Batman is a bit passed it and can't really hold his own anymore just didn't work. Wayne/Batman is too weak, he is at the point where sliding on to a Stannah Stairlift is too much of an effort for him. Which makes him pretty much redundant until he has his Rocky moment in the cave he has been shoved while recovering from a broken back by being suspended by a piece of rope for a while.



Didn't the dude in the prison not just say that Bruce had a loose vertebrae or something? Bane doesn't break Batman's spine like he did in the comics.

Plus, dodgy facial hair and limp aside, it's not like Bruce totally goes to seed in the 8 years he's retired. He's still pretty buff and fits into the Batsuit!


(in reply to Prawnman)
Post #: 472
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 5:47:26 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: Qwerty Norris

Also, the fact that there are a number of people on this thread debating the end, proves that it totally works.

Whilst I personally feel he survives, there is enough suggestion in there to argue that he doesn't - and for a film of this magnitude to provide both closure & ambiguity in one go is a hell of an achievement.


It is great that there is such debate about the end. But my issue is that if it turns out that Batman survived, I would feel cheated by the writer, not impressed.



Technically the original Batman *did* die, but someone else (it looks like) rose up to take his place! And as far as most people are concerned Bruce Wayne did die. There were times when Batman had to sacrifice the Wayne name for his mission (like the scene in Batman Begins when he slags of all the guests, and some dude comments that the "apple has fallen very far from the tree") - doesn't the end bring that tension in the films to a logical conclusion? The billionaire playboy is restored to one of Gotham's best sons, leaving his mansion for orphans to play about in, meaning that his name will be associated with doing good in the same way Thomas Wayne's makes people remember the train system and the like. The only people who know "Bruce Wayne" is still alive are Selina and Alfred (It's obvious Blake doesn't know, else he'd want to phone up for some crime-fighting tips!) . I know you think *how* the ending went down is a cheat, but doesn't the fact of most people thinking that Bruce Wayne is dead - with a funeral and everything - as well as the first Batman definitely dying, mean that the audience gets to have its cake and eat it too?




I would personally prefer that he did die. It's far more plausible that he died, and Alfred was imagining things. More poetic, more romantic, and more filmic. There is absolutely no need for Wayne to survive. Having him survive somehow lessens the impact of the ending, it's just too happy and neat. Yes of course it is more open ended than actually seeing Wayne die, which creates debate.

But I prefer genuine mystery as a basis for discussion, rather than trying to second guess what the director 'left out' and chose not to show us.



I'm not sure what you mean by romantic and poetic. If Bruce Wayne is dead, then Alfred's grief at "abandoning" Bruce has an element of truth, and fantasing about Bruce still being alive as a means to cope with the pain, however understandable, is the stuff of Lear-esque tragedy, not affirming poetry.

As for filmic: in Inception, Nolan played fair so that the audience had enough information (at the end) to know what was a dream and what was a reality. In the earlier flashbacks to Alfred in the cafe we are supposedly being shown 'objective' reality (Alfred is recounting something that actually happened, Bruce is accepting its veracity). To use the exact same framing etc etc for what is actually a fantasy sequence would surely mean that Nolan wasn't playing fair? I'd maintain that poor Alfred being reduced to hallucinating about Bruce Wayne still being alive isn't much of a happy ending either.

I remember the writers saying that they came up with the last shots of The Dark Knight Rises first, and then in a sense worked back to them. It comes down, to me, to thinking if Bruce Wayne/Batman has 'earned' the happy ending and if the steps taken to get there are consistent ( in terms of Bruce's character and dramatically). I think they are. Do you think the ending per se is flawed, i.e. (aside from what you feel is a cheap trick in being shown the Bat flying out to see) it's not just a question of the dramatic steps that lead up to it?



I couldn't care less if it's a happy ending or not. I am only concerned with plausibility and consistency with what's being shown. There is a grey area of course, which is the basis for this entire debate.

As for writing from the end first and working your way back. I'd say that's the worst way to write a screenplay. Star Wars prequels anyone??


I'm not asking if you have a happy ending per se, merely if you think Bruce Wayne/Batman appearing to die but actually retiring is a bad ending in and of itself. I think it's a good one, and thematically fufilling, but YMMV irrespective of the steps Nolan takes to get us there.

I like the Star Wars prequels, but it's hardly the best analogy. Wouldn't most people who disliked them say that the main problem (aside from thinking that Lucas sucks at dialogue, as if the 80s Lucas was a Wildean wit, but I digress....) was that there wasn't enough story moments and so the story had to be bloated out with trade disputes guff? The cool shots that have been in Lucas' vision for 30 years plus, and that he's been writing towards - such as the Anakin pov of the mask being put on and the first breaths of Darth Vader in Episode III - are surely some of the best/least bad elements of the prequels.

Plus, even if I agreed that, generally speaking, writing backwards from an ending is a bad idea, it wouldn't make it a rule without exceptions. You can say that, generally speaking, lesbians, pulp cliches and killer robots make for bad movies, but I'm sure there's good movies that have those things

(in reply to jrewing1000)
Post #: 473
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 5:52:42 PM   
kenada_woo


Posts: 1668
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Prawnman

The biggest flaw has to be Bruce Wayne/Batman himself, using the device from Miller's Dark Knight Returns that Batman is a bit passed it and can't really hold his own anymore just didn't work. Wayne/Batman is too weak, he is at the point where sliding on to a Stannah Stairlift is too much of an effort for him. Which makes him pretty much redundant until he has his Rocky moment in the cave he has been shoved while recovering from a broken back by being suspended by a piece of rope for a while.



Didn't the dude in the prison not just say that Bruce had a loose vertebrae or something? Bane doesn't break Batman's spine like he did in the comics.

Plus, dodgy facial hair and limp aside, it's not like Bruce totally goes to seed in the 8 years he's retired. He's still pretty buff and fits into the Batsuit!




Yes, the guy says a vertebrae is poking out and he puts it back into place. Wayne also attempts to get up from the floor before hand but can't, showing that his spine hasnt completely exploded. He then hangs for about 2months, trains for about a month and a bit before getting out.

Again, you can either go along with it or not. If not, you're gonna be the guy who crys at a john woo movie because no one ever reloads their gun.

_____________________________

http://dereksdontrunfilms.blogspot.co.uk/

"You bailed out a Jamaican street named Monkey the other day, I want him. This other piece of shit, Screwface, I want him. I know you're a scumbag and a puke, I don't mind that, but give me what I need and I'll leave here a nice guy. If you don't, I'm gonna fuck you up. "

Hatcher. Marked For Death


(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 474
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 5:54:41 PM   
Prawnman

 

Posts: 22
Joined: 22/7/2012
I can't remember exactly what his back complaint was to be fair, but the scene where the doctor tells him that his body is pretty much shot from his liver to his knees, he hobbles around on a stick and has to have a Bionic Man style knee brace kinda makes the point. One of the people I was with, who really isn't into Batman mythos or that familiar with the story turned around about half way through and said: Batman is a bit of a p*ssy isn't he?

I found it hard to argue.

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 475
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 5:54:56 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: kenada_woo


quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Prawnman

The biggest flaw has to be Bruce Wayne/Batman himself, using the device from Miller's Dark Knight Returns that Batman is a bit passed it and can't really hold his own anymore just didn't work. Wayne/Batman is too weak, he is at the point where sliding on to a Stannah Stairlift is too much of an effort for him. Which makes him pretty much redundant until he has his Rocky moment in the cave he has been shoved while recovering from a broken back by being suspended by a piece of rope for a while.



Didn't the dude in the prison not just say that Bruce had a loose vertebrae or something? Bane doesn't break Batman's spine like he did in the comics.

Plus, dodgy facial hair and limp aside, it's not like Bruce totally goes to seed in the 8 years he's retired. He's still pretty buff and fits into the Batsuit!




Yes, the guy says a vertebrae is poking out and he puts it back into place. Wayne also attempts to get up from the floor before hand but can't, showing that his spine hasnt completely exploded. He then hangs for about 2months, trains for about a month and a bit before getting out.

Again, you can either go along with it or not. If not, you're gonna be the guy who crys at a john woo movie because no one ever reloads their gun.


Yeah, you could also note that we've already seen Bruce fix his leg with an external device, so it's hardly beyond the realms of possibility that he's got a bit of extra Bat back support at the finale.

(in reply to kenada_woo)
Post #: 476
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 5:57:06 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: Prawnman

I can't remember exactly what his back complaint was to be fair, but the scene where the doctor tells him that his body is pretty much shot from his liver to his knees, he hobbles around on a stick and has to have a Bionic Man style knee brace kinda makes the point. One of the people I was with, who really isn't into Batman mythos or that familiar with the story turned around about half way through and said: Batman is a bit of a p*ssy isn't he?

I found it hard to argue.



wouldn't a p*ssy be someone who is physically fit but shied away out of cowardice? Bruce's body is rubber ducked but he still puts it on the line for Gotham. That's pretty heroic. Like Ledley King playing fitba without any cartilage in his knees!

(in reply to Prawnman)
Post #: 477
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 6:07:09 PM   
Prawnman

 

Posts: 22
Joined: 22/7/2012
(SPOILERS) I think the point they were making is that he pretty much looses every battle in the film, he loses to Bane, he gets stabbed and looses the final fight, for the little screen time Batman actually has he is loosing. Yeah he is heroic in his actions, but he is also so mangled that he can't cut the mustard anymore. This is where I think it went wrong, vulnerability is perfectly acceptable in the character, but to make him old, lost and body broken from the off hinders it far too much and gives him little to do.

Call me mad, but I expect Batman to have a fair bit of screen time, and he isn't hardly in it at all because of these reasons.

< Message edited by Prawnman -- 22/7/2012 6:08:12 PM >

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 478
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 6:10:13 PM   
kenada_woo


Posts: 1668
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Prawnman

I can't remember exactly what his back complaint was to be fair, but the scene where the doctor tells him that his body is pretty much shot from his liver to his knees, he hobbles around on a stick and has to have a Bionic Man style knee brace kinda makes the point. One of the people I was with, who really isn't into Batman mythos or that familiar with the story turned around about half way through and said: Batman is a bit of a p*ssy isn't he?

I found it hard to argue.



wouldn't a p*ssy be someone who is physically fit but shied away out of cowardice? Bruce's body is rubber ducked but he still puts it on the line for Gotham. That's pretty heroic. Like Ledley King playing fitba without any cartilage in his knees!


He isn't superhuman, Batman has always been the superhero with no super powers. So his body has taken a pounding for years so he's gonna get injuries. Plenty of the comics have dealt with that human frailty side of him.

You also take into account that there's the idea he hasn't been training since the city doesn't need him. Wayne looks thinner, fragile. So his joints etc are going to cease the less active he is.




_____________________________

http://dereksdontrunfilms.blogspot.co.uk/

"You bailed out a Jamaican street named Monkey the other day, I want him. This other piece of shit, Screwface, I want him. I know you're a scumbag and a puke, I don't mind that, but give me what I need and I'll leave here a nice guy. If you don't, I'm gonna fuck you up. "

Hatcher. Marked For Death


(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 479
RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILE... - 22/7/2012 6:12:07 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: Prawnman

(SPOILERS) I think the point they were making is that he pretty much looses every battle in the film, he loses to Bane, he gets stabbed and looses the final fight, for the little screen time Batman actually has he is loosing. Yeah he is heroic in his actions, but he is also so mangled that he can't cut the mustard anymore. This is where I think it went wrong, vulnerability is perfectly acceptable in the character, but to make him old, lost and body broken from the off hinders it far too much and gives him little to do.

Call me mad, but I expect Batman to be in it, and he isn't hardly in it at all because of these reasons.


Come on, Batman beats loads of Bane's goons up without breaking sweat! The only people who beat him are Bane (who's deliberately designed to a be a physical match for Batman, and Batman wins the rematch anyway) and Talia does get a blow in. The stabbing is a sucker punch, and it would be a bit weird for Batman to "win" a straight fight with Talia anyway - punching women isn't very heroic! (I know he fights Lady Shiva in the comics, but anybody can stab someone, so we've hardly had much evidence that Talia is a kung fu expert that Batman can defend himself from without it seeming weird) Couldn't it be argued that heroism is more heroic when it involves a genuine struggle? Batman losing to Bane, then coming back, is surely more heroic than Batman just beating up a lot of duff muggers or whatever.



(in reply to Prawnman)
Post #: 480
Page:   <<   < prev  14 15 [16] 17 18   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Stop over analysing it, for the love of god! SPOILERS!!, Page: <<   < prev  14 15 [16] 17 18   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.086