RE: The Dark Knight Rises

Follow @empiremagazine

Forum Home

Register for Free!

Log In

Moderator Tickets

FAQ

Users Online

RE: The Dark Knight Rises

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Favourite Films >> RE: The Dark Knight Rises

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 7:57:58 PM

superdan

Posts: 7236
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: SWOTBM

quote:

ORIGINAL: superdan

Agree with a lot of those points, especially the ones about Bane's fate and Matthew Modine. The chase where he just abandons trying to catch a bunch of guys who'd shot up and robbed the stock exchange was ridiculous. It started so well, with the cop saying to his rookie partner something along the lines of "You're going to see a show tonight boy!" as Batman re-emerges from his (weird) self-imposed exile, but that stupid decision makes it such a daft scene. I'd also forgotten that apparently a broken back can be fixed by hauling someone up on a rope and physically pushing the bones back in - a medical procedure so effective it allows the patient to endure two bone-jarring falls with a rope around your waist and another pounding by the guy who broke it in the first place.

But in the circumstances, Batman is the guy who has been on the run for 8 years and killed Harvery Dent (who, given Gordon's lie, was only slightly more revered than God at this point). I don't think it was unreasonable that they go after Batman than Bane.

I actually liked Modine's development. He starts out as the selfish/cowardly cop and gradually gains some confidence/courage, him seeing the Batsign was a very nice touch imo.

They had a hundred cars. I am pretty sure they could have covered both Batman and Bane.

Plus helicopters etc. There's no way it should have been an either/or. You'd think that someone who had that much at their disposal yet manages to lose Batman and catch only one or two robbers (that Batman subdues) would probably lose his job

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 31

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 8:04:33 PM

Rob

Posts: 2415
Joined: 30/9/2005

Very mixed feelings. Overall there are things I loved but also things I'm still undecided on. I really enjoyed it and I'm seeing it again but as it stands it's probably the weakest of the trilogy for me and by quite some way.

_____________________________

Same thing happened to me when I played Neil Armstrong in Moonshot. They found me in an alley in Burbank trying to re-enter the earth's atmosphere in an old refrigerator box.

(in reply to superdan)

Post #: 32

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 8:16:31 PM

SWOTBM

Posts: 1955
Joined: 6/5/2007

quote:

ORIGINAL: superdan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: SWOTBM

quote:

ORIGINAL: superdan

Agree with a lot of those points, especially the ones about Bane's fate and Matthew Modine. The chase where he just abandons trying to catch a bunch of guys who'd shot up and robbed the stock exchange was ridiculous. It started so well, with the cop saying to his rookie partner something along the lines of "You're going to see a show tonight boy!" as Batman re-emerges from his (weird) self-imposed exile, but that stupid decision makes it such a daft scene. I'd also forgotten that apparently a broken back can be fixed by hauling someone up on a rope and physically pushing the bones back in - a medical procedure so effective it allows the patient to endure two bone-jarring falls with a rope around your waist and another pounding by the guy who broke it in the first place.

But in the circumstances, Batman is the guy who has been on the run for 8 years and killed Harvery Dent (who, given Gordon's lie, was only slightly more revered than God at this point). I don't think it was unreasonable that they go after Batman than Bane.

I actually liked Modine's development. He starts out as the selfish/cowardly cop and gradually gains some confidence/courage, him seeing the Batsign was a very nice touch imo.

They had a hundred cars. I am pretty sure they could have covered both Batman and Bane.

Plus helicopters etc. There's no way it should have been an either/or. You'd think that someone who had that much at their disposal yet manages to lose Batman and catch only one or two robbers (that Batman subdues) would probably lose his job

Yeah, but, they just wanted to make super sure they caught Batman

However, I still think that it's not completely ridiculous, especially since some of that can be put down to Modine's selfishness and desire to outdo Gordon (I honestly didn't see it as that much of an issue when I first saw it).

Still, would have been sensible to put at least 10 of the 100 cars on Bane

_____________________________

PSN: light_brigade
Gamertag: chauders

(in reply to superdan)

Post #: 33

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 8:17:13 PM

Vadersville

Posts: 2905
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: superdan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: thedrin

I'm really surprised that people were expecting Wayne to continue as Batman following the end of Batman 2.

Batman 2's conclusion sees Batman and Gordon agreeing to protect the name of Harvey Dent so that his good works are not undone. Wayne's intention was always to create a Gotham which no longer needed Batman. Mission accomplished. Yes, during the course of Batman 2, Wayne's primary motivation for wanting to retire the Batman was taken away from him, but other reason's still existed.

Actually it set up the normal universe where Batman would be an enemy of both crime and the police. It felt clear to me that he would still be around, if only to be the symbol that Gotham needed.

Exactly. The whole end of TDK ("Set the dogs on me", "Because we have to chase him", "Because he can take it" etc.) becomes kind of meaningless. We are left with the impression he's going to have to try and fight crime while being public enemy #1. It's hardly the noble sacrifice in that sense, when he doesn't get pursued or hounded by the police at all because he just doesn't show up again.

This is my biggest problem with the 8 Years Later aspect. I thought that if anything Bruce Wayne would become a recluse in the third film because Bruce has given up on his Widentity and has gotten lost in Batman after the events of TDK. Even when they said he was no longer Batman at the start of the film I was hoping that it wasn't an immediate retirement. Maybe he fought on for a few years and then gradually gave up.
The oddest thing is there are contradicting accounts of Batman's disappearance throughout the film...
Blake says that Batman disappeered that night after murdering Dent, the GCN news says repeatedly he hasn't been seen since Dent's death, Gordon says the same thing on more than one occassion.
And yet, there's loads of mentions of Batman protecting gotham for years! But there was only on year between BB and TDK... on top of that there's the newly kitted out batcave that didn't exisit in TDK. Why bother if you had retired as Batman? Alfred even says, it's been awhile since you've been down here, meaning that he has used it... Fox references requests from Bruce for gear we haven't seen.
so did he disappear straight away or carry on for a bit??

< Message edited by Vadersville -- 20/7/2012 8:27:50 PM >

_____________________________

Confusion is a way of life, not a state of mind

(in reply to superdan)

Post #: 34

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 8:55:36 PM

thedrin

Posts: 549
Joined: 9/1/2007
From: Ireland

The forum ate my post. Second try.

Well maybe I'm in the minority on this but I believe that Batman 2's ending allows Batman to retire. I assume the aspect of the cover up that Gordon (and anyone who doesn't know about the cover up but wants Dent's prisoners in prison - a lot of people) would focus on is that Harvey is a hero. The story of Batman's villainy doesn't aid that massive political issue. Without another political issue keeping it in the headlines, it would drop out of media rotation pretty quickly. I'd imagine the Mayor would be glad Batman has disappeared and to get him out of the papers. If he still operates and keeps himself in the public eye then the repeated (and presumably media captured spectacular) failure of the Gotham police to catch him will undermine any claims he has that he has made Gotham a safer place. It would also put Gordon under serious pressure as commissioner.

quote:

And yet, there's loads of mentions of Batman protecting gotham for years! But there was only on year between BB and TDK... on top of that there's the newly kitted out batcave that didn't exisit in TDK. Why bother if you had retired as Batman? Alfred even says, it's been awhile since you've been down here, meaning that he has used it... Fox references requests from Bruce for gear we haven't seen. so did he disappear straight away or carry on for a bit??

I'll go back to see it at some point and I'll keep an eye out for that bolded stuff, but I don't remember any of it.

The point about the Bat Cave is a good one. I'm grasping at maybes and possiblies here, but maybe that aspect of the reconstruction of Wayne Manor was already complete by the end of Batman 2 since it's possible that the reinforcement of the foundations was one of the first parts of the reconstruction to take place. Also, it's not a particularly high tech cave. A raising platform and catwalk and not much else.

< Message edited by thedrin -- 20/7/2012 8:59:28 PM >

(in reply to Vadersville)

Post #: 35

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 9:14:19 PM

Vadersville

Posts: 2905
Joined: 30/9/2005

Off the top of my head:
Bane says that Batman protected Gotham for years (plural) when taunting him about his failure.
When Bruce hallucinates Ras Al Ghul, he says that you fought to protect Gotham for years. (again plural)
Fox makes it seem like Bruce came to him dozens of times for different stuff, granted these could have been between BB and TDk but it's said as if it used to be a regular thing as opposed to hey, remmebr that year you dressed up as a bat and asked me for some gadets all the time?
Alfred also goes on about Batman looking after Gotham for years too.
And yeah you are clutching at straws with your cave theory.

Another thing which makes the 8 year retirement a bit of a cop out is the fact that Bruce's character arc in The Dark Knight was from his original idea that he could be Batman for a finite amount of time and then Gotham would be safe, to thinking he could hand over the job to Dent to realising that Gotham will always need Batman and he's in it for the long run.

Funny, so fra most of my comments have been criticisng elements of the film but I have to say that overall I loved it!

_____________________________

Confusion is a way of life, not a state of mind

(in reply to thedrin)

Post #: 36

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 9:21:25 PM

thedrin

Posts: 549
Joined: 9/1/2007
From: Ireland

quote:

Another thing which makes the 8 year retirement a bit of a cop out is the fact that Bruce's character arc in The Dark Knight was from his original idea that he could be Batman for a finite amount of time and then Gotham would be safe, to thinking he could hand over the job to Dent to realising that Gotham will always need Batman and he's in it for the long run.

Wait, what?

(in reply to Vadersville)

Post #: 37

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 9:32:08 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18903
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

Why did they need Catwoman to get his fingerprints? Couldn't they have just got Talia to so that?

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to thedrin)

Post #: 38

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 9:33:38 PM

Olaf

Posts: 23364
Joined: 26/2/2007
From: 41�N 93�W

dude, sweet TDKR sig quote.

_____________________________

I tried to groan, Help! Help! But the tone that came out was that of polite conversation.

Empire Top 100 Albums Poll 2013: CLICK HERE

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 39

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 9:34:50 PM

superdan

Posts: 7236
Joined: 31/7/2008

(in reply to Olaf)

Post #: 40

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 9:36:29 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18903
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

Oh yeah. Maybe that is secretly what annoyed me the most about the film.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to superdan)

Post #: 41

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 9:52:28 PM

superdan

Posts: 7236
Joined: 31/7/2008

Was it explained in the movie how Bane knew where Batman's armoury was? It probably was and I missed it but if someone could explain it to me I'd appreciate it.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 42

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 9:55:43 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18903
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: superdan

Was it explained in the movie how Bane knew where Batman's armoury was? It probably was and I missed it but if someone could explain it to me I'd appreciate it.

Talia I persume.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to superdan)

Post #: 43

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 10:01:43 PM

SWOTBM

Posts: 1955
Joined: 6/5/2007

I'm trying to remember if we saw Fox after he was climbing up that ladder, did we? Also, Fox said that they could probably claim back the money they lost through fraud, so presumably Wayne Enterpises will not go bust...

_____________________________

PSN: light_brigade
Gamertag: chauders

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 44

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 10:04:55 PM

superdan

Posts: 7236
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: superdan

Was it explained in the movie how Bane knew where Batman's armoury was? It probably was and I missed it but if someone could explain it to me I'd appreciate it.

Talia I persume.

I thought that might be it, but it leaves the question of how she knew, given it was all off the books and that Bane must have known about it for some time given the set-up he had underneath

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 45

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 10:21:41 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18903
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: superdan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: superdan

Was it explained in the movie how Bane knew where Batman's armoury was? It probably was and I missed it but if someone could explain it to me I'd appreciate it.

Talia I persume.

I thought that might be it, but it leaves the question of how she knew, given it was all off the books and that Bane must have known about it for some time given the set-up he had underneath

The LoS always knew that Bruce was Batman so I persume it would be easy from there to find the stuff out.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to superdan)

Post #: 46

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 10:31:28 PM

superdan

Posts: 7236
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: superdan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

quote:

ORIGINAL: superdan

Was it explained in the movie how Bane knew where Batman's armoury was? It probably was and I missed it but if someone could explain it to me I'd appreciate it.

Talia I persume.

I thought that might be it, but it leaves the question of how she knew, given it was all off the books and that Bane must have known about it for some time given the set-up he had underneath

The LoS always knew that Bruce was Batman so I persume it would be easy from there to find the stuff out.

Ah right. Luckily they missed his second 'stash'

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 47

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 10:57:36 PM

Vadersville

Posts: 2905
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: thedrin

quote:

Another thing which makes the 8 year retirement a bit of a cop out is the fact that Bruce's character arc in The Dark Knight was from his original idea that he could be Batman for a finite amount of time and then Gotham would be safe, to thinking he could hand over the job to Dent to realising that Gotham will always need Batman and he's in it for the long run.

Wait, what?

What's confusing you?

_____________________________

Confusion is a way of life, not a state of mind

(in reply to thedrin)

Post #: 48

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 20/7/2012 11:30:38 PM

thedrin

Posts: 549
Joined: 9/1/2007
From: Ireland

quote:

realising that Gotham will always need Batman and he's in it for the long run.

This bit. I didn't get that at all from 2.

(in reply to Vadersville)

Post #: 49

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 21/7/2012 12:35:12 AM

Vadersville

Posts: 2905
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: thedrin

quote:

realising that Gotham will always need Batman and he's in it for the long run.

This bit. I didn't get that at all from 2.

Seriously? It's the whole point of Bruce's arc in the film. Directly lifted from the comics where Bruce at first thought it would just be a temporary thing him being Batman, he'd come back to Gotham, stamp out crime and then that would be it. But like Gordon says at the end of Batman Begins, escalation. Heck in The Dark Knight, Bruce even out right says that the day is coming when he won't be Batman anymore, he asks Rachel to wait for him, tells her and Alfred that Dent is the one who is going to carry on his legacy, saving the city without evening wearing a mask. then it all goes up shit creek without a paddle. Rachel dies, Dent, "Gotham's White Knight" is corrupted and Batman takes the blame... "Because he's the hero that Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now...and so we'll hunt him...because he can take it...because he's not a hero...he's a silent guardian, a watchful protector...the Dark Knight."

_____________________________

Confusion is a way of life, not a state of mind

(in reply to thedrin)

Post #: 50

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 21/7/2012 1:03:17 AM

Lang

Posts: 1348
Joined: 15/8/2006
From: The Wall, Aberdeenshire

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82

I can't help but think that the role occupied by Scarecrow would have at one time been intended for The Joker.

very strange i had the same thought...the scene when Gordon gets judged made me chuckle

_____________________________

#6 member of The Wire fan club. PM Dantes Inferno to join.

PS Tag Riddle_Me_This

'Winter is Coming'

(in reply to adambatman82)

Post #: 51

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 21/7/2012 2:36:45 AM

thedrin

Posts: 549
Joined: 9/1/2007
From: Ireland

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vadersville

quote:

ORIGINAL: thedrin

quote:

realising that Gotham will always need Batman and he's in it for the long run.

This bit. I didn't get that at all from 2.

Seriously? It's the whole point of Bruce's arc in the film. Directly lifted from the comics where Bruce at first thought it would just be a temporary thing him being Batman, he'd come back to Gotham, stamp out crime and then that would be it. But like Gordon says at the end of Batman Begins, escalation. Heck in The Dark Knight, Bruce even out right says that the day is coming when he won't be Batman anymore, he asks Rachel to wait for him, tells her and Alfred that Dent is the one who is going to carry on his legacy, saving the city without evening wearing a mask. then it all goes up shit creek without a paddle. Rachel dies, Dent, "Gotham's White Knight" is corrupted and Batman takes the blame... "Because he's the hero that Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now...and so we'll hunt him...because he can take it...because he's not a hero...he's a silent guardian, a watchful protector...the Dark Knight."

The first bolded part is solved by the second bolded part. I'm not sure what insight Gordon is meant to have into Wayne's unspoken and supposed realisation that he's in it for the long run.

I've never read the comics. Is it possible your transferring aspects of the source material over to the film that didn't make the transition? If I completely misinterpreted the film I'd like to know, but I really don't see it.

< Message edited by thedrin -- 21/7/2012 2:37:26 AM >

(in reply to Vadersville)

Post #: 52

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 21/7/2012 3:32:22 AM

Ghidorah

Posts: 2629
Joined: 6/10/2005

Anyone who haven't seen the film should skip my post.

Dark Knight Rises was heavily flawed and was a big let down. It like Nolan ego got too big for the movie and his self impose restrictions no longer exist. Some of the flaws might be because Dark Knight was too dark and WB may wanted a nicer film.
The problem with this film was too much flaws.

Alfred

Ok he wasn't in the movie for long but how did he know about Bane and the Pit?

Talia

They become lovers the second time they met and all of a sudden they went their seperate ways. Their relationship should had been extended some how like they were in a relationship before the movie begun. Everything else was fine except for her death and her character should of been more conflicted.

Robin

What the point of trying to hide the fact he is Nightwing and only reveal it at the end. His character could of been put to better use when Bruce were placed in the pit. Instead team Nolan want to use this as a twist at the end.

Gordon

Annoying when his character was superb in the previous films.

There are three huge constant flaws to this film. The first off is the choppyness of this and the way the story flowed was horrible. The original shooting script was four hours long and Nolan should of in my opnion split Rises into two parts. Instead he hacked and slash his way to create a film just under three hours. I don't mind a few short cuts but this film is filled with them. Like I said if you are going to have Nightwing in this film then have a proper Nightwing in this film. Not let the viewers know at the end of the film that was Nightwing.
The second flaw is all these homages. I thought Ra Al Ghul's ghost was excellent but the rest made the film feel out of place. It felt like Nolan tried to prevent futures directors from extended his series by doing his best to make it feel like a conclusion.You are telling a story and most film goers are smart enough to register if a sequel down by a different director is canon or not. Instead you put your Nolan stamp on it and in effect mess your film up big time.
The third part is the nicer touch. I don't know if all these complaints about Dark Knight was too dark has influence Nolan. This film is really children friendly.

I really enjoyed the first act but what followed became a simplistic Sumer Blockbuster and not in a good way either.

< Message edited by Ghidorah -- 21/7/2012 3:33:01 AM >

(in reply to thedrin)

Post #: 53

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 21/7/2012 5:05:14 AM

Spaldron

Posts: 10487
Joined: 6/10/2006
From: Chair

I still need time to digest but my initial thoughts are that TDKR is probably the finest of Nolans trilogy and this years best blockbuster by a mile. I wont go on for too long as its really early and I need to see it a few more times but I could barely find fault in the films execution. Sure there are a couple of plot holes and a few missed opportunities but none of that matters when presented with such an astounding spectacle.

The film manages to blend the fast paced fun of BB with the complexity of TDK, giving us some genuine emotional heft TDK lacked and raising the stakes for Gotham similar to BB toxic gas in the shape of the bomb. This of course isn't exactly a new idea (energy device turned "boom") but its Nolans nod to Hitchcock with the whole ticking timebomb scenario. The addition of Blake as a sidekick is refreshing (loved the Robin reveal) whilst Bane surely steals the show, far from the mindless hulk who smashes things (although he does smash) and is genuinely frightening for most of the film. Alos for the mentioned spectacle, TDKR contains some of the best action sequences of any summer film in recent memory.

Highlights;

The opening plane heist.

Bales performance, easily the best of the trilogy.

The red herring plot twist that wasn't what we thought it was but actually was.

The first Batman/Bane fight was truly epic and brutal beyond the films rating. You really felt every crunch, and loved the back-break homage (even if his back wasn't really broke)

Neeson's/Murphy's cameos respectively.

The Bat.

The stadium attack, this will live in cinema history as iconic.

The stock exchange siege with the following bike chase.

Batman's comeback especially the Fire Rises signal (now it makes sense) sent tingles up my spine

The final war, pretty much everything about the final 30 minutes (mostly)

A few bad points and questions;

Bane's death was ultimately a let down, I would've preferred he'd gone out toe to toe with Bats instead of just being blown away so easily.

I think Bruce's time in the prison could've been expanded upon instead of just having a Rocky style comeback.

What were Bane's motivations other than fulfilling the LOS mission or was that it?

How did Bruce get from wherever he was (assuming India) all the way back to Gotham and crucially, back into the city in the space of a day or so, considering he had no money or means to re-enter a city completely shut off? Also what was the point about the supplies he was carrying with him? I smell a deleted scene somewhere, none of this was explained.

What happened to Lucius? I may have missed it but I didn't see any shots of him in the closing montages. Did he drown or get out?

Why did they have a detonator for the bomb when it was already due to go off by itself?

There were also too many McGuffins going on here, not only the energy/bomb thing but also the device that wipes your history which does/doesn't exist. What happened with that?

And Girv

quote:

To get people�s attention Bane destroys the football stadium in the scene we have all seen in the trailers. That is about as big as the film gets by the way

No different to the truck flip from TDK which was also in the trailers.

I think that's about all that needs more clarity for me, everything else worked and I can see past its flaws (just like I look past the flaws of the first two) and know that the good points far outweigh the bad. Overall I came out of this film feeling about the same as I did the first time I watched Begins (I actually didn't rate TDK that well initially, that film had to grow on me even if I'm still unsure of its third act) which was a feeling of exuberance, knowing in my gut that this film is stellar. TDRK is a truly powerful finale to the best comic-book trilogy ever filmed. Cant wait to see this another few times with Ninj.

Now bring on the Nightwing spin-off.

< Message edited by Spaldron -- 21/7/2012 9:27:49 PM >

_____________________________

And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts
And I looked and behold, a pale horse
And his name that sat on him was Death
And Hell followed with him.

(in reply to Ghidorah)

Post #: 54

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 21/7/2012 8:07:07 AM

Vadersville

Posts: 2905
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: thedrin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vadersville

quote:

ORIGINAL: thedrin

quote:

realising that Gotham will always need Batman and he's in it for the long run.

This bit. I didn't get that at all from 2.

Seriously? It's the whole point of Bruce's arc in the film. Directly lifted from the comics where Bruce at first thought it would just be a temporary thing him being Batman, he'd come back to Gotham, stamp out crime and then that would be it. But like Gordon says at the end of Batman Begins, escalation. Heck in The Dark Knight, Bruce even out right says that the day is coming when he won't be Batman anymore, he asks Rachel to wait for him, tells her and Alfred that Dent is the one who is going to carry on his legacy, saving the city without evening wearing a mask. then it all goes up shit creek without a paddle. Rachel dies, Dent, "Gotham's White Knight" is corrupted and Batman takes the blame... "Because he's the hero that Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now...and so we'll hunt him...because he can take it...because he's not a hero...he's a silent guardian, a watchful protector...the Dark Knight."

The first bolded part is solved by the second bolded part. I'm not sure what insight Gordon is meant to have into Wayne's unspoken and supposed realisation that he's in it for the long run.

I've never read the comics. Is it possible your transferring aspects of the source material over to the film that didn't make the transition? If I completely misinterpreted the film I'd like to know, but I really don't see it.

Yes, but you haven't even addressed the rest of my point. Bruce's arc is from being of the point of view that he can be Batman for a finite amount of time to then realising that this is going to take a lot longer than he thought. In fact, I'm pretty sure Nolan has said that himself at some point. Its the theme of escalation, which was set up in the final scene of Batman Begins and vocalised by the Joker more than once. How the inhabitants of the city are going to start losing the minds, how he's just the first of many, ahead of the curve, they're need to share a padded cell because at this rate Arkham will have to double up. Batman never thought he would be up against people like The Joker, he only really planned for mob bosses like Falcone and Maroni, TDK is all about that. Yes, it's from the comics but why do you think that it doesn't make the transition?

For me, this is the only big problem with the final chapter is the 8 year jump. It's kind of like how in Superman 2, Supes tells the President that he's sorry he let them down and he isn't going anywhere again, then if Superman Returns is supposed to follow on from that, he buggars off for a few years straight away. As someone else said, it makes the Batman legacy more of an unsual blip in Gotham's history if he was only Batman for a year and a bit. But then as I pointed out there's references to him going on for longer as well, so it's all a bit confusing. Personally I'd have preferred if it hadn't had such a massive gap between the two, say a two or three years. Bruce Wayne was a recluse, but because he had pretty much given up on his Wayne identity and got lost in Batman after the events of TDK, spend all his time in the cave, barely eating, sleeping or talking to Alfred and then we go into the storyline with Bane.

One question which I know is problemly silly. What was up with Bruce's leg? Someone reckoned it was because of Harvey shooting him at the end of TDK, but he got shot in the stomach...

_____________________________

Confusion is a way of life, not a state of mind

(in reply to thedrin)

Post #: 55

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 21/7/2012 8:18:11 AM

Vadersville

Posts: 2905
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron

A few bad points and questions;

Bane's death was ultimately a let down, I would've preferred he'd gone out toe to toe with Bats instead of just being blown away so easily.

This bothered me at first, but then we did have Batman beat the living snot out of him. In Nolansverse he would be too big a threat to just lock up so he had to die and Batman doesn't kill. It's growing on me.

quote:

I think Bruce's time in the prison could've been expanded upon instead of just having a Rocky style comeback.

I struggle to think of how they could have done it better without the ticking clock against it. Sure in the comics it takes him over a year to fully mend but in filmverse that just wouldn't have worked.

quote:

What were Bane's motivations other than fulfilling the LOS mission or was that it?

That was pretty much it, but it was because of his unwavering loyalty to Talia.

quote:

How did Bruce get from wherever he was (assuming India) all the way back to Gotham and crucially, back into the city in the space of a day or so, considering he had no money or means to re-enter a city completely shut off? Also what was the point about the supplies he was carrying with him? I smell a deleted scene somewhere, none of this was explained.

I too was waiting to see how he would get in. I also suspect a deleted scene but to be honest it didn't bother me much because he is Batman.

quote:

What happened to Lucius? I may have missed it but I didn't see any shots of him in the closing montages. Did he drown or get out?

A few people have said this. He's there at Bruce's fruneral. But after that there's no sight of him, although I thought I heard him mentioned in Bruce's will...

quote:

Why did they have a detonator for the bomb when it was already due to go off by itself?

This si the bit which i don't understand when I stop and think of it. Okay I get that Bane is a bit sadistic and wanted to give the people of Gotham and Bruce hope and then destroy it by blowing up the city anyway but if Talia was holding his leash, why bother to wait five months for it to detonate by itself? Or was this about breaking the spirit of the nation as well? It's a bit hazey here.

quote:

There were also too many McGuffins going on here, not only the energy/bomb thing but also the device that wipes your history which does/doesn't exist. What happened with that?

It wasn't as bad as "Harry Potter and the Deathly How many bloody things are we meant to find now!?" but yeah, I see what you mean. I think that was just meant to provide Selina with a bit of motivation in the earlier half of the film, wanting a clean slate to disapeer. I presume Bruce used it at the end to take care of Selina's records o they could disapear together.

_____________________________

Confusion is a way of life, not a state of mind

(in reply to Spaldron)

Post #: 56

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 21/7/2012 9:12:13 AM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18903
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron

And Girv

quote:

To get people�s attention Bane destroys the football stadium in the scene we have all seen in the trailers. That is about as big as the film gets by the way

No different to the truck flip from TDK which was also in the trailers.

Not sure I see your point - the scene this one corresponds to in TDK is the when the hospital blows up - which was much more impressive really - think because it used a mix of CGI and other techniques. And I can't recall see the full scene of the hospital blowing up in the trailers - esp the shot of the Joker walking away from it.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to Spaldron)

Post #: 57

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 21/7/2012 9:16:14 AM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18903
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

Why couldn't the film have lasted a year? Three months is such a random time you might as well have made it a year. At least then you could have seen Gotham really falling into anarchy.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 58

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 21/7/2012 9:25:46 AM

Vadersville

Posts: 2905
Joined: 30/9/2005

Actually, it was five months. But then would really believe that the US Government or indeed the international community wouldn't have tried something in a year?

_____________________________

Confusion is a way of life, not a state of mind

(in reply to Rgirvan44)

Post #: 59

RE: The Dark Knight Rises - 21/7/2012 9:28:20 AM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18903
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vadersville

Actually, it was five months. But then would really believe that the US Government or indeed the international community wouldn't have tried something in a year?

Not any more than they didn't do anything within three months to be honest. The three month thing is so random and there because they needed to give Bruce time, rather than for actual plot purposes.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

(in reply to Vadersville)

Post #: 60