quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hood_Man

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChudMonkey

quote:



I did watch it again. There is one single quick shot of people on the bridge - the camera is focused entirely on the bus.

But its more than just a bus and some kids as your original post said. It may not be an epic sweeping shot but the bridge is narrow and covered in debris - how many people can you show at once? It also pans back later on to show the bus with several vechicles behind it

A few vehicles doesn't constitute an exodus though, this is Gotham City not Delhi

Yeah this is a city of 12 million people. They don't even't cut back to the underground tunnel.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChudMonkey

quote:





I dunno - Dark Knight managed to show a big crowd of people heading towards a bridge easily enough.

Not sure he needed to show it though - it was more important to have Blake interact with the kids and show him try to reassure / save them. We could have had him running through crowds of people shouting "COME ON - HEAD TO THE BRIDGE!" whilst waving his hands around but is has more emotional pull to show him protecting other vulnerable children who have a direct link to his and Batman's story. I think the shots we saw proved that he was trying to save others without having to have more scenes of crowds piling through a city

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hood_Man

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChudMonkey

quote:



I did watch it again. There is one single quick shot of people on the bridge - the camera is focused entirely on the bus.

But its more than just a bus and some kids as your original post said. It may not be an epic sweeping shot but the bridge is narrow and covered in debris - how many people can you show at once? It also pans back later on to show the bus with several vechicles behind it

A few vehicles doesn't constitute an exodus though, this is Gotham City not Delhi

Yeah this is a city of 12 million people. They don't even't cut back to the underground tunnel.

It was 30 million in TDK.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChudMonkey

...and who's to say everyone would have fled....if they'd seen Bane on TV they may be more scared to leave in case he blew the bomb up...they have no way of knowing that the bomb is going to explode anyway (at least I don't remember a scene which highlighted this to the public - I thought the point of the bomb plot was that people were given hope they could escape even though Talia planned to blow Gotham up anyway)....plus Blake would not be able to tell 12 million people that they can escape. Its him and like 5 kids...they could possibly try to warn 2 or 3 blocks worth of Gothamites...not exactly going to be thousands rampaging across the bridge is it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hood_Man

The plan wasn't to tell all 12 million, Batman just told him to save as many as he could. Word spreads too, and since Gotham can still get television reception I'd assume the phones were still working as well.

Anyway that's just one scenario, there were other moments such as the bridges collapsing and the streets and roads blowing up that could have shown people fleeing in terror. Gotham was a living, breathing city in Begins and Dark Knight, even when it was just scenes in the slums or street criminals comparing the odds of meeting Batman to winning the lottery (or whatever it was). And a scene with Batman in a nightclub that isn't awful

Gotham seemed remarkably dead this time (even before the siege).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hood_Man

The plan wasn't to tell all 12 million, Batman just told him to save as many as he could. Word spreads too, and since Gotham can still get television reception I'd assume the phones were still working as well.

Anyway that's just one scenario, there were other moments such as the bridges collapsing and the streets and roads blowing up that could have shown people fleeing in terror. Gotham was a living, breathing city in Begins and Dark Knight, even when it was just scenes in the slums or street criminals comparing the odds of meeting Batman to winning the lottery (or whatever it was). And a scene with Batman in a nightclub that isn't awful

Gotham seemed remarkably dead this time (even before the siege).

Did you notice post blowing up there were still cars normally going up and down the streets?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hood_Man

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hood_Man

The plan wasn't to tell all 12 million, Batman just told him to save as many as he could. Word spreads too, and since Gotham can still get television reception I'd assume the phones were still working as well.

Anyway that's just one scenario, there were other moments such as the bridges collapsing and the streets and roads blowing up that could have shown people fleeing in terror. Gotham was a living, breathing city in Begins and Dark Knight, even when it was just scenes in the slums or street criminals comparing the odds of meeting Batman to winning the lottery (or whatever it was). And a scene with Batman in a nightclub that isn't awful

Gotham seemed remarkably dead this time (even before the siege).

Did you notice post blowing up there were still cars normally going up and down the streets?

I don't think I did actually, a car driving at night when the lights were flickering on and off is all I remember.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChudMonkey

...and who's to say everyone would have fled....if they'd seen Bane on TV they may be more scared to leave in case he blew the bomb up...they have no way of knowing that the bomb is going to explode anyway (at least I don't remember a scene which highlighted this to the public - I thought the point of the bomb plot was that people were given hope they could escape even though Talia planned to blow Gotham up anyway)....plus Blake would not be able to tell 12 million people that they can escape. Its him and like 5 kids...they could possibly try to warn 2 or 3 blocks worth of Gothamites...not exactly going to be thousands rampaging across the bridge is it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hood_Man

Just got back from seeing it a second time. Less frustrating than the first viewing, but also a lot flatter. Turns out the Imax really did make a huge difference to the experience of seeing it first time, as this time it just wasn't that interesting.

One thing I picked up on that I missed first time though (and possibly has been mentioned by others)... my understanding of Nolan's Batman is that he is a symbol to inspire the people of Gotham to rise up and take back their city from the criminal underworld, right? He can't fight crime on his own forever, he just has to give everyone the push that they need to do it themselves.
This was mentioned all throughout Batman Begins, it was mentioned in The Dark Knight, and it was reinforced several times in The Dark Knight Rises. Batman even took the time to erect a burning Bat Symbol on the bridge, as a sort of call to arms to encourage people to fight back, even though he had mere hours to save the city (or only 45 minutes, I'm not exactly sure when that deadline was reached).

Was it just me or did this not happen? The signal inspired Matthew Modine to come out and lead his men, and Batman inspired Blake to take on the cause at the end (or implied that he might do it), but apart from a few hundred Gotham Police Officers I didn't see anyone else raise arms against Tyranny, certainly not the citizens of Gotham anyway.

What did I miss?

You didn't miss anything. The people of Gotham, outside of the stadium scene, are pretty much absent from the film. The exodus that Blake leads out is a bus and some kids. Which compared with the way the people of the city were threaded into TDK seems odd. It is one of the big issues I have with the film.

Might have been interesting with the police were fightng and losing then down another street the people themselves rose up and fought Banes goons. A moment of triumph for the city. But mostly the city feels empty in the film.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

No where did I say it was a failing. Just that it might have been an interesting theme to have explored - esp if it functioned as a reponse to Bane's "Take back your city!" call to arms.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

No where did I say it was a failing. Just that it might have been an interesting theme to have explored - esp if it functioned as a reponse to Bane's "Take back your city!" call to arms.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

No where did I say it was a failing. Just that it might have been an interesting theme to have explored - esp if it functioned as a reponse to Bane's "Take back your city!" call to arms.

Yeah, but there's a great risk of cheesiness. It would be a bit much if Batman came back and five minutes later all the regular citizens are retaking Gotham. His return, thematically, was meant to inspire hope, which it did. Plus remember it wasn't Batman himself going door to door for the exodus, and realistically I'm not sure if millions and millions of people would risk the bridge because some kid said a cop said Batman said they should go (although maybe more guys would have wanted to escape up Selina's tunnel, so to speak)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ROTGUT

......even better than the Avengers IMO. But what a shame that people had to die because of it. Nolan’s movie is attracting such flak in the media because of the actions of one lone, smirking psycho scumbucket. I hope Warner Bros can make some amends and show due respect – but nothing can make up for losing loved ones in such tragic circumstances.

As for the film itself? Pulse pounding, muscular entertainment from start to finish and a superb ending to what will be remembered as one of the best movie trilogies ever. Tom Hardy’s brilliant portrayal of Bane makes Joel Schumacher’s Batman and Robin version look even more like the pathetic rubbish it always was. And Ms Hathaway almost steals the whole thing with her slinky, cynical version of Catwoman (not called by name in this film). Bale does a creditable job of portraying a broken man who can’t quite come to terms with his own destiny and – arguably - his best and most powerful work comes when he’s not actually in costume. The supporting players also get their time in the limelight as well. Michael Caine provides the films one most pivotal and poignant moment and - as Gotham burns - Gary Oldman and Morgan Freeman grab some more action this time too. Brilliant and understated SFX help to create the vision of a city in complete and total meltdown, mixed up with some awesome looking physical props and sets.
“Some men just want to watch the world burn” – but if this is the Nolan swansong – at least he’s left the caped crusader in decent shape. Surely James Bond awaits him after this. He HAS to direct one!!!

FIVE STARS

quote:

ORIGINAL: ROTGUT

......even better than the Avengers IMO. But what a shame that people had to die because of it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: KeithM

NB = posting this before reading any of the above, so apologies if repeating points others have already made.

Disappointed. Very drab, not enough Batman, too many plot holes, too much assumed knowledge, the villain - Megaphone Man (I mean Bane) - is uninspired and his dialogue over-mannered... I wouldn't go so far as to say it's boring, but neither would I say it was riveting either. I didn't hate it, there are parts I really liked, but I'm disappointed I didn't like it overall as much as I wanted to.

6/10

Some of my problems in more detail (SPOILERS):

Bane? "Gotham must be destroyed mwuah ha ha haaah" (little finger inserted into mouth)? So how did the master strategist who it turns out is only a flunky meet his end? He got shot. Batman's entire philosophy shown to be empty and worthless. Guns ARE the answer after all... Batman also shot and killed at least one guy with his cannons (the driver of the truck Marion was in). So, a murdering hypocrite too.

Oh any why exactly must Gotham be destroyed? Surely Batman and Gordon had fulfilled the League's remit and cleaned up the uncleanable? So what if it was predicated upon a lie? The League permit any means to fulfil their goal, including mass murder, so a little lie wouldn't clash with their philosophy at all. Yeah I get it that it was actually revenge motivated, and it was all about consequences, but if the League is being used as the stick to make the point, why wasn't more made of the fact that, however attained, Gotham WAS cleaned up. [frick] Dent. Their priorities should have been elsewhere - to wherever the next Gotham/Gomorrah is. Say, Rapid City... Now - and this is a fanboy thing I'll admit - if you're going to use a fictional, made-up city* why not use a DC one? Would it have hurt to have played Metropolis, or Central City, or Star City? Apart from Metropolis it would have largely passed unnoticed by most, but it would have been a nice nod to the fans (ok that was nerd-nitpicky, but it could so easily have been nerd-pleasing without detracting anything).

*there is a real Rapid City, Dakota, but my mostly irrelevant point stands.

Anyway, add 'confused motivations for the villains' to the list (like was Ras Al Ghul's death broadcast on National TV? How would she know all this? That Batman foiled Ras' plot and his subsequent death is known, but how and the specifics of Ras' death and Batman's degree of direct involvement could not be...) Nor could they have known that Dent's death story was a lie until they discovered Gordon's 'confession'. None of that was satisfactorily explained. Suspicions are one thing, but there was too much assumed knowledge for my liking (like Blake's explanation of how he knew Wayne was Batman - because his smile was fake when he visited the orphanage? Hmm. Yet to Gordon it comes as a total surprise? No.)

How did he get from the Pit back to Gotham? With no money? (Not to mention how he got back onto a locked down Gotham island, without his contacts, toys or money). Why did he trust Marion in the first place? I know he was under pressure, but for someone who's shown to be extremely paranoid, he doesn't do the simplest background check? Some World's Greatest Detective he turns out to be. Turns out that outsmarting Bruce Wayne isn't that hard.

Why did none of the cops have beards and how come they were full of fight and energy after emerging from the sewers after more than 3 months? How long does it take to recover from a broken back btw? Coupla days? Weeks? Bit longer...?

Oh look, here's Alfred. Wonder if he's going to blub. Yep, sure does. Every time he's on screen the film grinds to a halt - gone is the hardened ex-soldier with pearls of grim wisdom, to be replaced by soppy old geezer who bursts into tears at every opportunity.

What was the top speed of that copter? At what point did he switch the auto-pilot on* and jump out and how did he get clear once he did? The blast radius of the bomb was 6 miles... you do the math.

*That confused me too - the guy said it was altered 6 months ago, but didn't Fox only give it to him just prior to the sewer explosion which was ~3 months ago? Would need to double-check that, but it stuck out at the time as an 'eh? what?' thing. Willing to let it slide, but it seemed convenient.

I got more gripes (quite a few actually), but I really wish I didn't (Robin? Liked the character, kinda liked the way they set him up to take over, like the actor - which is all good because I hate Robin normally - but hated the way they seemed to crowbar that name in - just unnecessary and seemed cheap).

It wasn't terrible, and there were things I liked about it, but I get the distinct impression that less thought went into this instalment than the first two. And it just weren't that exciting, which is ok with some films. But not the goddamn Batman's.

Best thing about it was Selina Kyle. Whoda thunk that? Film should have spent more time with her.

Reboot!

quote:

ORIGINAL: sharkboy

For all those people complaining about the recovery from the back injury, I wonder what the reaction would have been had they gone with the Knightfall storyline and had it magically cured by a telepath...

quote:

ORIGINAL: FoximusPrime

quote:

ORIGINAL: Prawnman

As I said I didn't notice it myself, I didn't pick up on it. As for Blake, he came from nowhere and seemed to have sussed everything, one of the first things he says to Gordon is that the Dent thing was fishy, Gordon seems impressed by it rather than wondering who the hell this bloke is who has just turned up on the rooftop. In fact Gordon seems to have lost all common sense, sending every single cop into a tunnel and leaving the whole city exposed is an action of someone who wouldn't be in the job very long and might have lost his mind, like carrying around a written speech that could destroy his career and cripple the city. Convoluted. As is leaving an atomic bomb under the city like Fox did, a man previously who got his nickers in a twist about Batman being able to spy on everyone. These are massive leaps in character logic, then they just come across as if they have all had some kind of breakdown or been beaten with the stupid stick for 8 years.

I don't think its about spelling things out for us, its about making sense, as someone said you can ignore how Bruce got back to Gotham but how the hell did he get in with every bridge down and his only utility a piece of rope. More to the point, how come as soon as he gets there (when we have a ticking atomic bomb, time running out and all that) decide to spend his time (one man) to go up a building and perfectly produce a 100ft batsign in petrol for him to light up. It would have taken him months to do that on his own, even with a 100 man crew at least a few weeks. I'm back! But before I save the city I must make it clear that I'm back with this symbol of justice in fire......oh hang on.....my body is crocked and I've already been beaten, should I really let everyone know that I'm on their case? Yeah, it will look cool.

But isn't the bat logo on the bridge symbolic of Batman becoming the legend that was intended, striking fear into his enemies who thought he was broken, both physically and psychologically? That sort of thing isn't there as a literal device but as a metaphor for the fire (within Bruce) having risen. If you want an explanation of the logistics behind it, maybe he used the Bat to precision spray a load petrol in a short space of time? Personally, the 'why' doesn't bug me but I get that it grinds some people's gears.

I doubt very much that he had only a piece of rope with which to enter Gotham since Wayne Manor lies far outside the city, so it's most likely that he flew in either by gliding or in the Bat and stowed his equipment somewhere while he walked around incognito to get the lay of the land, not wanting to tip anyone off about Batman's return.

Gordon was impressed by Blake - maybe he reminded him of himself as a rookie or maybe he already knew about his detection skills and was considering recruiting him to the MCU, feigning ignorance when he asked his name and testing him.

His decision to send every cop underground was possibly a bit risky, but nobody suspected about the explosives until Blake discovered them too late. Gordon himself had seen Bane's army so maybe he knew the police outnumbered them (the numbers were swelled by the end by the freed Blackgate inmates).

As for the career-ending speech? Gordon's family had left him and the guilt was getting unbearable - the passage read out by Bane said as much since Harvey tried to kill his son yet the Commissioner has spent eight years deifying him for the "greater good". He wrote that he was resigning with immediate effect, so it was only a last second change of heart that led him to pocket the speech instead of read it out. Of course, he may have written it down only as a means of catharsis with no intention of reading it out.

I agree with the earlier poster who pointed out that the reason for Fox's ethical stance over TDK's sonar machine was the infringement of people's privacy (which served that film's war on terror allegory), whereas the reactor under the city was a) not switched on because of b) the research that was published a couple of months / years earlier, but after it was already built, that there was the potential for weaponisation (which was why Bruce lost half of his fortune during those eight years). Had that potential not come to light, it's implied that the reactor technology and theory was perfectly safe for its intended use and had sufficient safeties in place. I assume the plan was to flood the chamber in the event of a meltdown so as to cool it down. I don't know what Fox was planning on doing if they were able to get the weaponised core to the unflooded chamber towards the end of the film of course, but then I'm no expert on nuclear fusion! Ultimately, the reactor / bomb served as a means to create a nihilistic Gotham before Batman brought hope back to the City.