TDKR review/discussion - FILLED WITH SPOILERS!!!

  • Thread starter R063R
  • 50 comments
  • 3,904 views
292
Northern Ireland
N. Ireland
R063R_GL4560W
Hello all

Want to start a thread for everyone who HAS seen The Dark Knight Rises because I'm interested in what everyone else is thinking about it. Have seen one other thread in this section concerning Rises and at the minute they are debating whether or not it is etiquette to be posting spoilers about the movie. I want to just clarify that this thread will have spoilers - loads of them, probably. Hence the thread title - if you don't want the movie ruined for you, then don't enter the thread.

If you have seen it, however, then I welcome you to post all opinions and thoughts on the movie without fear of someone having a pop at you for spoiling it for them. They seen the thread title, they could have avoided clicking on it and opening it, but they didn't - so it's their own fault.

I'm going to leave it a while before posting anything about the movie so hopefully if someone's curiosity DOES get the better of them and they enter the thread, then this OP wont ruin it for them immediately - they will hopefully realise that we will have loads of spoliers in here and will know not to enter it again. Until they have seen it and then I want them to come straight back in here and post!

Thanks guys!
 
Well, I loved it but did have one problem with the film. The twist in which Bane is revealed to not be Ra's Al Ghul's child, and instead Miranda (Talia) is. I understand that's how it is in the comics but it was a bit weird because the whole thing had been built up for Bane by that point.
 
3rd movie was utter trash. The characters are as shallow as can be (except Alfred, but he's hardly in the movie). The story is ridicules, and you'd be hard pressed not to laugh at the twists the movie throws at you. The only parts of the soundtrack that were any good, were the ones they recycled from the previous movie. The cinematography was good, though not as good as in the 2nd movie. The climax is plain stupid, and will leave anyone with a working mind, sighing at how stupid it all is.

It doesn't help that the dialogue is pathetic, and does little to use the great line up of actors in the movie. Special effects are of course nice, but this isn't a freakin mindless action movie. It's supposed to have depth!

The end will have you laughing out loud of how stupid it is, though you probably won't laugh, simply because of how dissapointed you'll feel. I wasn't expecting the movie to be as good as The Dark Knight, but I sure as hell wasn't expecting it to be a pathetic excuse of a movie either.

Honestly, how anyone can defend this trash, is beyond me. The entire story is overly simple, and yet they managed to drag it out over the span of 2 hours and 45 minutes.

The entire climax is just generic "WE MUST GET TO THE BOMB BEFORE IT BLOWS!!!". It wasn't exciting, it was just plain stupid. In the 2nd movie, the tension relied on the actions of different people, bringing both civilians, the protagonist and the antagonist, into the mix. The 3rd movie relies solely on a timed bomb. Utterly pathetic... No one doubted that Gordon would reach the bomb in time to plant the signal jammer. It's just plain reduntant.

And just how stupid do Nolan think the viewers are? We're supposed to buy that the entire police force would storm a wall of automatic gunfire, head on? REALLY? They should've been cut in half. The way the finale battle scene was handled, was just lazy. Bain could've been an interesting antagonist, but he isn't given anything to work with. Not to mention, that in the end, he wasn't even the master mind behind it all. Or at least, I don't think he was? :boggled:

BTW. Has Ra's Al Ghul and the Shadow Fighters ever been mentioned before? I assume it was a theme in the 1st movie? Been forever since I've seen it, so can't remember. I know for sure, it wasn't mentioned in the 2nd. Was it just another thing the writers pulled completely out of their butts?

God, this movie was horrible...
 
BTW. Has Ra's Al Ghul and the Shadow Fighters ever been mentioned before? I assume it was a theme in the 1st movie? Been forever since I've seen it, so can't remember. I know for sure, it wasn't mentioned in the 2nd. Was it just another thing the writers pulled completely out of their butts?

Ra's Al Ghul and the League of Shadows were the main antagonists in the 1st film.
 
1.
The only parts of the soundtrack that were any good, were the ones they recycled from the previous movie.

2.
The climax is plain stupid, and will leave anyone with a working mind, sighing at how stupid it all is.

3.
The end will have you laughing out loud of how stupid it is, though you probably won't laugh, simply because of how dissapointed you'll feel.

4.
The entire climax is just generic "WE MUST GET TO THE BOMB BEFORE IT BLOWS!!!" .......... No one doubted that Gordon would reach the bomb in time to plant the signal jammer. It's just plain reduntant.

5.
And just how stupid do Nolan think the viewers are? We're supposed to buy that the entire police force would storm a wall of automatic gunfire, head on? REALLY? They should've been cut in half.

6.
Bain could've been an interesting antagonist, but he isn't given anything to work with. Not to mention, that in the end, he wasn't even the master mind behind it all. Or at least, I don't think he was? :boggled:

1.
I bought the score last week the moment it came out on iTunes - can agree with some of what you say, but can disagree with some too. The Batman riff/sound/whatever-you-call-it is iconic, and will be something that is forever, and immediately, connected with the trilogy. Same goes for the ever-rising chilling string riff for the Joker in TDK. 'Despair' on the Rises score I think was when Wayne was trying to escape Bane's pit - there are some low-volume minor-chord Batman sounds suggesting pain, and failure, and - well - despair, as the title suggests, then there is a long (but not too long) major-chord build to the same sound suggesting majesty and power. That said, 'Mind If I Cut In?' on the score, which is new and original to this film in the trilogy is a very simple piano melody, yet very haunting and very beautiful.

2./3./4.
Linking these 3 points together - yes, I agree I felt the bomb was very unoriginal, but.... Even with all my hours surfing IMDb and the relating news articles and suspected spoilers of how it would end, I was able to switch off from all of that and let it surprise me. There WAS the possibility that Nolan would kill off his hero, and it would give the trilogy the definite end that was promised from the teaser trailer. About a month ago, I was nearly hoping that Batman or Wayne or even both would be killed because I could see no other way the story could properly and conclusively end. For the last 45 minutes of the film there was always a niggling idea in the back of my own mind that the bomb MAY just go off and destroy a part of Gotham and all the characters we had fell in love with in the last 7 years of our lives. Nolan said the theme of Rises was pain, and what could have been a more painful and devestating finish to the trilogy than that? We would've been walking out of the cinemas like zombies, empty and speechless.

5.
Totally and entirely agree. The GCPD with their pistols and the Underground Army with their automatic machine guns, yet the VAST majority of cops were able to run the best part of 100 metres avoiding every single bullet out of hundreds and end up going toe-to-toe with the army of villains. How Foley died was almost comical as well.

6.
Also agree - Bane was built up to be badass the entire movie and to a point he was... That point was when it turned out that he was only a secondary villain and that a woman was the main villain. Like he was almost hired to do the dirty work and almost insulting his alleged superior intelligence.
 
Well, I loved it but did have one problem with the film. The twist in which Bane is revealed to not be Ra's Al Ghul's child, and instead Miranda (Talia) is. I understand that's how it is in the comics but it was a bit weird because the whole thing had been built up for Bane by that point.

Its a cheap tactic used in films and books (and probably one day it will be used in games as well when they get decent script writers).
You feed the viewer/reader with constant evidence and then reveal that actually its a big twist. Some people like to think this as a "clever twist" but personally I don't consider it clever to bascially spend an entire film/book going "this guy is the bad guy, look how bad he is" and then turn around and go "no actually its her".

After seeing this film twice this weekend, I will admit that it does drop some very small hints during the plot..well actually it doesn't drop hints, it just doesn't specifically say the child is Bane apart from people talking about "legends". So its very vaguely implied that its Bane but doesn't really suggest it isn't Bane.

To be honest, the way this twist was handled is one of the two reasons I was disappointed with this film.

The other being what everyone has already said in this thread in that the main plot is a very generic, stereotypical plot involving a bomb with some equally generic action scenes and character decisions.

When Talia does the typical villain brag-talk which allows Gordon to block the detonator signal says it all. If she had just pressed it, they would have succeeded. But no, instead they do the typical speeches and ceremony about how they're so clever and great.

Not to mention why did Batman waste his time trying to get the bomb back to Fox when he could have just flown it away as soon as Gordon planted the detonator-blocker? They wasted a good 5 minutes or more in a redundant chase scene.

And then yeah the very Hollywood happy ending. Of course I didn't expect it to end with Batman going out in a nuclear explosion as thats just not going to get positive reviews. But it would have been a better ending. Although I don't think Nolan had to kill Batman for the ending to be good, a plot that didn't involve a fricking nuclear bomb would have enabled a better ending I feel.
 
1.
After seeing this film twice this weekend, I will admit that it does drop some very small hints during the plot..well actually it doesn't drop hints, it just doesn't specifically say the child is Bane apart from people talking about "legends". So its very vaguely implied that its Bane but doesn't really suggest it isn't Bane.

2.
Not to mention why did Batman waste his time trying to get the bomb back to Fox when he could have just flown it away as soon as Gordon planted the detonator-blocker? They wasted a good 5 minutes or more in a redundant chase scene.

1.
I watched it three times in the opening day, each time re-watching scenes to see what I had missed the previous times of watching. As far as I am aware, it never even so much as hints at Bane being the child born in the prison. Wayne, I believe, asks several times while in the pit but never actually gets a straight answer, even when he is 'visited' by Ra's. It is implied, but no character actually confirms it. Go back and watch it again and when there is a scene with the child in the prison, look out for the mother - she is like a twin of Marion Cotilliard, which I think was quite a clever/sneaky move of Nolan casting a woman that looked so similar. Kudos to any first-time watchers who picked it out first time. I didn't!

2.
They had to stop the trailer carrying the bomb before Batman could whisk it away into the air using the Bat. Gordon planted the jammer, Talia pressed the trigger, then she left Batman with Bane while she went to find the bomb herself. Batman was stuck with Bane until Catwoman reappeared. Then when the trailer is finally stopped, Talia triggers the emergency flood into the bunker where Fox is, meaning that it can't be reconnected and, therefore, definitely blow.
 
1.
1: I bought the score last week the moment it came out on iTunes - can agree with some of what you say, but can disagree with some too. The Batman riff/sound/whatever-you-call-it is iconic, and will be something that is forever, and immediately, connected with the trilogy. Same goes for the ever-rising chilling string riff for the Joker in TDK. 'Despair' on the Rises score I think was when Wayne was trying to escape Bane's pit - there are some low-volume minor-chord Batman sounds suggesting pain, and failure, and - well - despair, as the title suggests, then there is a long (but not too long) major-chord build to the same sound suggesting majesty and power. That said, 'Mind If I Cut In?' on the score, which is new and original to this film in the trilogy is a very simple piano melody, yet very haunting and very beautiful.

2: I was nearly hoping that Batman or Wayne or even both would be killed because I could see no other way the story could properly and conclusively end. For the last 45 minutes of the film there was always a niggling idea in the back of my own mind that the bomb MAY just go off and destroy a part of Gotham and all the characters we had fell in love with in the last 7 years of our lives. Nolan said the theme of Rises was pain, and what could have been a more painful and devestating finish to the trilogy than that? We would've been walking out of the cinemas like zombies, empty and speechless.

1: About the soundtrack. I pay a lot of attention to the soundtrack of movies, and while the soundtrack for the 2nd movie wasn't really what you'd listen to on your own, it had a perfect fit with the movie. From the very start of the movie, it sets the tone for the entire thing. Throughout the movie, the soundtrack enforces tension when needed, and goes into a more dramatic score, when Batman is leaving at the end. It does all these things perfectly.
The score for the 3rd movie, does reuse the "A Dark Knight" theme from the 2nd movie whenever we see Batman appearing in some amazing fashion (like when he emerges from the alley in the "Bat". And it does fit the character and franchise very well. Then there's the interesting theme when he tries to climb out of the pit, which is completely ruined by being way too loud. It actually became incomprehensible.

If I recall right, there was also a violin theme, which tried to enforce the tension in a scene (I think it might have been when he did the last and succesfull jump, when attempting to climb out of the pit). This theme was just dreadful. The track was obscenely loud and intrusive, and actually managed to take over what was happening on the screen (if that makes any sense). Obviously, I'm not very good at explaning these things, but overall, I'd say that the score for the 3rd movie, suffered from an extreme case of being incomprehensible and was without any real sense of directions.

2: The ending really had me shaking my head in disbelief. Was a happy ending like that really neccesary? I mean, him dying in a nuclear blast out at sea (how the hell did he manage to get that far out?) would've been lame too. But not quite as silly as him sitting at a diner... I do think a death would've been more appropriate.

You mention that we were at risk of losing characters that we've known for quite some time now, but how many of them did we really know? Aside from Bruce, Alfred, Gordon and Fox, did we know anyone else from previous movies?

I like Alfred. In fact, he was the only character I felt displayed any kind of emotion in the movie. But I'm amazed at how little he's in it. I can't help but wonder what he was doing during the occupation of Gotham? Fox also has a very small role and he hardly had anything interesting to do. Gordon was great in the 2nd movie, but I just didn't care about him in this one. He just seemed so indifferent about the whole thing. Where was the emotion?
And then there's of course Bruce. There was HUGE potential here with the way his character had developed. But once again, I don't see how they used any of it. This is mostly due to the dialogue he's given. No substance.

As for the new characters. Well, Catwoman really wasn't very interesting. We learned very little about her, and overall, she seemed more like a plot device, rather than an important character. Her romance with Bruce/Batman also felt forced. Blake was very likeable, but was also the victim of bad dialogue.

As already mentioned, Bane could've been very interesting. But they don't use him that much. His character is very restricted in the number of way he can express himself, as we can only see his eyes. His voice is kind of unique, though I still can't decide whether I liked the voice, or hated it. Only time I felt Bane was truely intimidating, was when he talked and finally killed the rich guy who thought he could use Bane to accomplish his own goals (The guy who wanted to take over Wayne Enterprises).

And last we have the real villain. But what do we actually know about her? I'm assuming her whole "save the world by clean energy" thing, was just an act. So what we're left with, is that she's consummed with hatred. The whole "Give Gotham back to the people" had zero point. In fact, why did they even do that? It obviously wasn't the main objective, and even if it was, it would've been left mute by the fact that the nuke goes off no matter what.

I wanted to like this movie so much. Which is why I was bordering on actually being angry when I got out of the theater. The depth and intelligence seen in the 2nd movie, just wasn't here.

Sorry for the long read guys. I got carried away. :guilty: :)
 
1.
I watched it three times in the opening day, each time re-watching scenes to see what I had missed the previous times of watching. As far as I am aware, it never even so much as hints at Bane being the child born in the prison. Wayne, I believe, asks several times while in the pit but never actually gets a straight answer, even when he is 'visited' by Ra's. It is implied, but no character actually confirms it. Go back and watch it again and when there is a scene with the child in the prison, look out for the mother - she is like a twin of Marion Cotilliard, which I think was quite a clever/sneaky move of Nolan casting a woman that looked so similar. Kudos to any first-time watchers who picked it out first time. I didn't!

I did say it never actually stated Bane was the child, it just heavily implied it through lack of straight answers and constant reference to "the legend". Bane himself even implies it when he talks about "growing up in the darkness". I still felt it wasn't really well done, it relied too much on giving misnformation and vague answers rather than subtle hints.
Watching it the second time only confirmed what I thought that it really didn't put much effort into this and felt like a lazy twist rather a clever one.

I still don't see why Batman had to go fight Talia and Bane. He could have focused on the bomb with Gordon, stopped the truck and wisked it away. Or he could have had Catwoman do it.
I don't get why the plan was to disarm it rather than just do the easy thing and chuck it out to sea like they did anyway. It just again felt like a lazy way to make Batman's job harder.

It also still doesn't explain why Talia goes all typical fail-villain and decides to talk too much before pressing the button. Of course it wouldn't have been a very good ending if she had pressed the button earlier but that doesn't excuse such a generic and predictable set of events.

Then there's the interesting theme when he tries to climb out of the pit, which is completely ruined by being way too loud. It actually became incomprehensible.

This. It happened a bit in the Dark Knight too but it got more annoying in this film. There were even some scenes which the music went too loud when there was dialogue! Its nice for people to pay more attention to audio and soundtracks as I personally feel audio makes up half the experience. But there definitely was far too much random increasing music volume in this film. It just gets very irritating.
 
Last edited:
The Dark Knight Rises is a very enjoyable film. It has great cinematography and the story is great up until the last 30 minutes. It makes references to characters not seen in the films (asking Gordon if he saw any giant alligators in the sewers too -Croc) and it introduces new characters that you can quickly learn to like. Surprisingly, Anne Hathaway really kind of stands out here. Even with some poor lines she made her character have more emotion than anyone else but Alfred. Michael Caine sells the whole emotional bit where he will risk losing their relationship to not lose Bruce altogether. I suggest anyone who has enjoyed the Nolan Batman films see it.

I had fun and will want to watch it again, unlike something like Transformers 3. And that says something about the quality of how Nolan presents his story. Because TDKR makes a lot of the same mistakes. It plays into stereotypes of the action genre and even breaks a bit with its past story.

Since this is the spoilers allowed thread I will delve fairly deep into the story to explain my issues here, so anyone who hasn’t seen it and doesn’t mind spoilers, but doesn’t want most of the story revealed might want to step away.

I’ll start with the small things though. First, and no one else has mentioned this, but I know from things I heard said exiting the theater and conversations with friends that I am not alone: Bane’s voice. He sounds like he is using a bullhorn in a tunnel, so you never quite feel like you know where it is coming from. Perhaps if I hadn’t been in an IMAX theater with surround sound it wouldn’t have been so confusing, but the very first time he speaks I am looking at him (unknown to me at that time) and I think it must be an off-screen character that just walked in as a surprise because it sounded like it was behind me. Then the guy he is talking to looks at him. I was confused for a second because the way it was projected did not indicate it was the guy under the hood in the center of my screen. I wanted to chock it up to it being inside a mostly empty airplane fuselage, but then it continued throughout the film. I actually kind of laughed when he grabbed the referee’s microphone at the football stadium, because I thought he didn’t need it. If Bane’s mask had some sort of audio projection built into it then I would have understood, but it didn’t. It was just a painkiller delivery system.

And that brings me to my second issue. Bane’s mask made no sense. It was a form before function design for the movie. It gave him this Predator type of appearance, designed to create a feeling of menace at first sight. But that wasn’t the purpose in the story. It was a delivery system for painkillers. I don’t even see how it worked unless he was constantly breathing or drinking them and it was somehow creating them from atmospheric air. There were no tanks or anything it was attached to. Something going into the back of his head at the base of the brain or the spine would have made sense. This did nothing but to force them to have to redub all of Bane’s lines, which wound up giving them the problems I mention above.

Speaking of voices. Oh look, its angry Batman again. Must we repeat the worst scene from The Dark Knight? Batman’s in a rage and yelling at someone to tell him where something is in a barely coherent growl again. Here’s a Halls. Now clear your throat.

And back to The Dark Knight. I think we all remember the ferry scene. It was a test of humanity. A boat full of ordinary citizens vs. a boat full of prisoners. Neither chooses to destroy the other. It was a great moment. Even when the majority agreed to kill the others in order to save themselves no one could actually agree to be the trigger man. Joker is furious. He was proven wrong. People are not just as low as he is. Well, until a guy takes over the city and calls for class warfare. So, the people of Gotham would never kill convicted felons, many with murderous records, but the rich people are fair game?
But wait, you say. It was the inspirational memory of Harvey Dent that kept them honest. Really? I mean, I know the Joker says as much and that is why he pushes Dent’s newly found madness over the edge, but it has been eight years. Two things here. An eight-year-old memory should be fading at this point. The simple prosperity of the last eight years should be all that is necessary. Even if I were to believe that Dent was a mad man I’d have to say that the best eight years of Gotham’s recent history is enough to convince me that we should still stick to our current path. Of course, all of that is predicated on the fact that I would be willing to believe a word a terrorist who is holding me hostage says. He reads a supposed letter from Commissioner Gordon, who seems to be missing. I’d assume the guy killed the commissioner, which would be too convenient that the only guy who can confirm the validity of the letter is not around. Never mind the fact that the letter exonerates Batman, who was revered and inspirational himself right up until Dent’s death. We got our original hero back. I still have a memory to follow.

In short, when I saw the citizens of Gotham takeover in mob rule I was shaking my head. I tried convincing myself that the fear of the bomb pushed them to it, but then they treat the guy trying to stop the bomb just as bad.

And in what world does someone miss at the feet of a charging opponent the way the police vs. the mob played out? It took Bane’s forces intervening to make it look like the unarmed cops were outmatched.

And I will go ahead and agree with the others here, the chasing the nuke before it goes off bit is so overdone at this point that it isn’t funny. My brother-in-law’s one starring role in his acting career had him as a villain with a nuke in the back of a van. That was a low budget independent film made locally where nearly all the actors had thick Kentucky accents. It also featured a football game at an important story moment. The Nolan Brothers came up with an idea two random guys from nowhere can write.

That reminds me, there is a football game and we send nearly every cop in the city to search the sewers? That doesn't come close to making sense.

And the bomb. I’m not a nuclear scientist but I don’t believe the materials involved in the current theories are so unstable that they will explode on their own in less than 60 days. But then Nolan kind of hurt himself here. We see that timer when it first goes into a truck. They let me know exactly how much time passes between Bane’s takeover and Batman’s return. Not nearly enough. A broken back healed enough to allow Bruce Wayne to buff up, escape a prison on foot, and make it back in time to sneak into the city unlike anyone else could, all by getting punched in the back and being hung up by a rope under his arms? You may as well have brought in the League of Shadows’ healing pool from the comics. At least that could be spun as having some undiscovered medicinal properties.

And my last gripe. Bane’s death. One last big fight and against the clock, here we go, and BOOM! Ah, Catwoman, you have such impeccable timing it is almost as if the gods reached down from the heavens and placed you there just in time. They must have. You road a jet propelled motor bike into the building in complete silence.

And in the end, no one expected Batman to be dead. But the cliché was forgivable as the final scenes were the kind of sappy endings we all want these things to end with. It all feels…good and right. Happy endings all around.
 
And last we have the real villain. But what do we actually know about her? I'm assuming her whole "save the world by clean energy" thing, was just an act. So what we're left with, is that she's consummed with hatred. The whole "Give Gotham back to the people" had zero point. In fact, why did they even do that? It obviously wasn't the main objective, and even if it was, it would've been left mute by the fact that the nuke goes off no matter what.
The point was to convince the people of Gotham that they had been oppressed by the government & that they were giving Gotham back to the people for them to do whatever they want. The real goal was for Bruce to watch Gotham fall into anarchy & that all the criminals he had put away were released to run free. It was to break him emotionally.

Talia's goal was that of her father's; that the human race must be cleansed, hence the bomb.
 
In short, when I saw the citizens of Gotham takeover in mob rule I was shaking my head. I tried convincing myself that the fear of the bomb pushed them to it, but then they treat the guy trying to stop the bomb just as bad.
It wasn't fear of the bomb. It was the anger at being lied to about the circumstances surrounding Harvey Dent's death.
 
prisonermonkeys
It wasn't fear of the bomb. It was the anger at being lied to about the circumstances surrounding Harvey Dent's death.

I addressed that. They were given the truth from a terrorist holding them hostage reading a letter from a guy who was conveniently not available to confirm or deny its content. And even then that should not be enough to turn normal people away from eight years of prosperity. Keep in mind these are all the same people from the ferry. Harvey Dent's name never came up in that ferry. Hell, the prisoners acted the same on their ferry and most of them were there because of Dent.
 
For those questioning the soundtrack, this answers some of it. In 2 minds, great idea to make it more interactive, but that doesn't work very well when I want to listen to it whilst at work for instances and can't be absorbed by it solely.

The way that the plot initially develops is very clever (though coincidental how the tunnels are blocked just as Gotham's entire force are under ground) to begin with and how they come to rule over Gotham. I don't understand the long game though. They take rule using a nuclear bomb with a 5 month expiry date. Granted that the conclusion of the plan was to finish Ra's work and destroy Gotham, but why not just set it off sooner? Bane was fortunate to come into possession of Gordon's speech telling the truth about Dent, which he used to send a clear message to the outside world. They gave the lower classes the power, they sent clear messages, but this was all intended to come to nothing when Gotham was destroyed.

It has then been mentioned how Talia gives a timely speech, but what of the months before that? Once the police were out of the tunnels, why wait any longer to blow up Gotham? Situation was only going to get worse so cut loses before message (since that seems only point) gets out that the people fought back. When Batman appeared, why wait? That's a bonus, Gotham destroyed and Batman killed in the process. Multiple other times I'd be pushing that trigger if I was only interested in watching Gotham burn.

I did still enjoy the film though. Much has been made about the negative points, but I wonder how much TDKR is suffering in reviews due to the acclaim of TDK.

EDIT: Just read McLaren's post above and it addresses most of my post. Will leave though anyway, as it doesn't cover why the bomb was not activated sooner once events unravel within the last 12 hours.
 
1.
The ending really had me shaking my head in disbelief. Was a happy ending like that really neccesary? I mean, him dying in a nuclear blast out at sea (how the hell did he manage to get that far out?)

2.
You mention that we were at risk of losing characters that we've known for quite some time now, but how many of them did we really know? Aside from Bruce, Alfred, Gordon and Fox, did we know anyone else from previous movies?

3.
Gordon was great in the 2nd movie, but I just didn't care about him in this one. He just seemed so indifferent about the whole thing. Where was the emotion?

4.
And then there's of course Bruce. There was HUGE potential here with the way his character had developed. But once again, I don't see how they used any of it. This is mostly due to the dialogue he's given. No substance.

5.
Only time I felt Bane was truely intimidating, was when he talked and finally killed the rich guy who thought he could use Bane to accomplish his own goals.

1. The afterburners on the Bat were programmed to come on when the autopilot was engaged - you see them burning after the Bat goes over the bridge Blake is standing on.

2. I think that's more than enough characters to be killed off! Lucius and Alfred were two that I was very fond of - if either of them had been killed off I would have been gutted.

3. Maybe the mental torment of the truth about Dent had turned him into a mere shadow of the man he once was. That's what a mental illness would do to somebody. Was obviously bad enough if Barbara took the kids and left him. Of course he's heartbroken and dejected over it - maybe it's better acting than you give him credit for. We do find out very early that his family left him.

4. Personally, I think the sequence from Batman's first exit out of the Bat in the Cave, and the lines with Alfred at the computer followed by the heart-to-heart in the corridor in Wayne Manor between Bruce and Alfred was Bale's best acting in the entire trilogy. Same could be said for Caine and his performance in that sequence.

5. Bane and Batman's first meeting I thought was amazing. We have mentioned the score here already a number of times. This was a scene of huge importance and yet there was no score whatsoever to create tension or build effect - just the sound effects of punches landing made it very visceral for me.

6.
I still felt it wasn't really well done, it relied too much on giving misnformation and vague answers rather than subtle hints.

7.
I still don't see why Batman had to go fight Talia and Bane. He could have focused on the bomb with Gordon, stopped the truck and wisked it away. Or he could have had Catwoman do it.
I don't get why the plan was to disarm it rather than just do the easy thing and chuck it out to sea like they did anyway. It just again felt like a lazy way to make Batman's job harder.

8.
It also still doesn't explain why Talia goes all typical fail-villain and decides to talk too much before pressing the button. Of course it wouldn't have been a very good ending if she had pressed the button earlier but that doesn't excuse such a generic and predictable set of events.

6. But isn't this the Nolan way...? Forcing us to fill in gaps ourselves and think our way through the movie?

7. Maybe when Batman appeared in the Bat to shoot out the cannon on top of the Tumbler he was committed to that area and stayed there - he knew Bane would be around somewhere, as you see him scanning the crowd as he walks through it, get to him and find out where the trigger is. An alternative, Batman gets to the right trailer before Gordon does with the jammer - the terrorist driving the lorry radios through to Talia that Batman is interfering and she blows the bomb. Bit pointless. Sure, Talia wants that, but does Batman? Would hardly think so. I believe their approach was tactically-orientated, having different characters all doing different things at the one time.

8. Imagine the feeling of betrayal Batman would be feeling, the torment in his head for literally gift-wrapping the energy project to Talia only for her to turn it into the bomb that now threatens to destroy his city, how much he had trusted her, the first woman he as Bruce had let in in more than 8 years (or let in EVER, possibly...) - it was essential. Bane says to Bruce in the pit that the whole process would be torture on his soul - after Talia's speech you can see how empty Batman is that he doesn't even at least attempt to fight Bane - he's been stabbed in the torso before in TDK and continued to fight.

9.
There were no tanks or anything it was attached to. Something going into the back of his head at the base of the brain or the spine would have made sense.

10.
Speaking of voices. Oh look, its angry Batman again. Must we repeat the worst scene from The Dark Knight?

9. Isn't there stitches just below the base of Bane's neck on his back? I read last year that that was something to do with the painkiller setup.

10. Actually thought that was one of the best scenes in all of TDK - the dialogue between Batman and Joker, then the sudden change in Batman's calm persona when he hears Rachel is now also in danger, and not just Dent.

11.
I don't understand the long game though. They take rule using a nuclear bomb with a 5 month expiry date. Granted that the conclusion of the plan was to finish Ra's work and destroy Gotham, but why not just set it off sooner?

12.
It has then been mentioned how Talia gives a timely speech, but what of the months before that? Once the police were out of the tunnels, why wait any longer to blow up Gotham? Situation was only going to get worse so cut loses before message (since that seems only point) gets out that the people fought back. When Batman appeared, why wait? That's a bonus, Gotham destroyed and Batman killed in the process. Multiple other times I'd be pushing that trigger if I was only interested in watching Gotham burn.

11./12. As Bane says in the pit, the entire exercise with the bomb and the five-month period is to give the people of Gotham false hope that they will survive it and come out fine on the other side. Bane compares it to the pit - each prisoner looks up and sees the sun and imagines himself climbing to freedom. There is hope right there, within touching distance. If someone says that something horrific will happen in a matter of months, with each day of survival, hope will start to increase that just maybe it won't happen. Like Foley when Gordon goes to his door on the eve of the detonation - Gordon asks what use will the hiding indoors be when the bomb goes off... Even within 24 hours of detonation, Foley still has the hope in him and responds with "That might not happen". There's also an immensely enjoyable feeling (if you're a resident of Psychoville) about causing mental pain and anguish on your biggest rival by letting them know the truth behind your motives. Maybe something in Talia had this attitude - she couldn't let Bruce or Batman die without telling him exactly what the reasoning was behind all that had happened.

****************

Anyways........ I went to see it again last night. That's number four :lol: And number five is on Saturday afternoon. After last night, any question or doubt I had was answered easily - even the stuff on any other forum or article I had read. Even the 'how did Batman survive the blast' question. Actually, a very simple answer when you know what to look for on the screen ;)
 
Foolkillers point about the mask was exactly what I was thinking too. It was just a mask for aesthetics and never explained how it delt with his pain. No tubes going into his head, no tubes into anything other than the mask. They showed a long scar on his spine and thats it. I thought maybe I was over analyzing it since I am usually in an engineer mindset all the time. But nope, they never explain how the mask helps him. At the end where Batman hooks the rubber hoses back onto the maks actually made me lol. Seriously after all the hits he took to that mask and all the metalic sounds, only to be hooked back on with a couple rubber hoses. Again maybe I over analyzed the situation with an engineer mentality.

At the beginning of the movie I couldnt comprehend why the agent just wouldnt shoot Bane in the plane. Especially after he admitted he was there to kill them. "If I remove your mask will it hurt?" "yes" "but your a big guy" "you. It will hurt you" That part was way WAY too corny. Wasnt a good start at all.

The part that got me the most was the first prison battle with Kane and batman. Batman is usually equipped with an insane amount of gadgets and goodies. Heck even in TDK he hit a button and a bunch of knives flew out of his arm pieces. He knew he was going down there. But he doesnt prepare or use anything like that against Bane. That really bothered me with the lack of preparation.

As for Banes death, they never actually show he is dead. Sure cat woman enters and shoots him, but you know how movies are. I bet he makes a return with a new mask thats actually hooked to something. lol.

The Alfred scene with Batman as they ended their relationship was the best part of the movie. Very emotional. Excellent acting in that scene.

Overall a good movie but not as good as The Dark Night. I wont even buy this one on blu ray.
 
Last edited:
6. But isn't this the Nolan way...? Forcing us to fill in gaps ourselves and think our way through the movie?

Nothing wrong with leaving it open for the viewer to think, but I just feel its too cheap to give the viewer such a huge suggestion that its Bane. To me thats not clever writing, its just manipulation. Of course, all films are about maniupulation, you manipulate the audience to feel emotions such as joy, sadness or excitement. This slightly different to that.
Perhaps it puts you in the same boots as Batman himself - he also didn't read the clues (despite being a renowned detective I might add). I just feel it would have been nice if there was more of a subtle, hidden suggestion about it. I don't think there really was. It didn't have to be obvious but it definitely needed to more obvious than the film depicted.

7. Maybe when Batman appeared in the Bat to shoot out the cannon on top of the Tumbler he was committed to that area and stayed there - he knew Bane would be around somewhere, as you see him scanning the crowd as he walks through it, get to him and find out where the trigger is. An alternative, Batman gets to the right trailer before Gordon does with the jammer - the terrorist driving the lorry radios through to Talia that Batman is interfering and she blows the bomb. Bit pointless. Sure, Talia wants that, but does Batman? Would hardly think so. I believe their approach was tactically-orientated, having different characters all doing different things at the one time.

That still doesn't answer why they were set on deactivating the bomb rather than just doing what they did in the end anyway.
I still don't see why he had to engage Bane. A distraction perhaps or to at least grab the detonator if Gordon failed. But it still felt a little bit too typical really, side kick goes and finds the bomb while the hero charges the boss for a last stand. Only for it then to be turned into the typical chase scene.

8. Imagine the feeling of betrayal Batman would be feeling, the torment in his head for literally gift-wrapping the energy project to Talia only for her to turn it into the bomb that now threatens to destroy his city, how much he had trusted her, the first woman he as Bruce had let in in more than 8 years (or let in EVER, possibly...) - it was essential. Bane says to Bruce in the pit that the whole process would be torture on his soul - after Talia's speech you can see how empty Batman is that he doesn't even at least attempt to fight Bane - he's been stabbed in the torso before in TDK and continued to fight.

Indeed. It still felt too typical. Too much delight in their imminent victory.

Of course what I appear to be suggesting is a film where either Batman solves the case in half the time and the bomb never even has a chance of going off or the villain is clever enough to realise they don't need to resort to speeches and blows everyone up.
Naturally neither of these scenarios wouldn't make a great film. I still expect more effort be made to avoid the predictable story telling though.
 
My review.

It was ok, a bit too long though and the cinema I was in didn't have popcorn.

[/kimiraikkonen]
 
1.
That still doesn't answer why they were set on deactivating the bomb rather than just doing what they did in the end anyway.

2.
I still don't see why he had to engage Bane. A distraction perhaps or to at least grab the detonator if Gordon failed.

3.
Naturally neither of these scenarios wouldn't make a great film.

1. Actually, it really does answer it.

What happened - Batman tries to locate Bane to find trigger to guarantee no premature detonation. Gordon tries to locate the bomb to plant jammer - succeeds. Re-attach bomb to bunker to stabilise and prevent detonation. Talia floods bunker resulting in re-attachment impossible. Plan B of removing bomb to detonate over bay and far from human life. Outcome - Gotham intact, zero casualties.

What you are suggesting - Batman finds and stops correct trailer (while Gordon stops wrong trailer with jammer) and removes bomb to fly out over bay to detonate far from human life. Lorry driver/Tumbler driver radios through to Talia that Batman has stolen bomb. Talia blows bomb in fear of her plan being an all-out failure. Jammer several blocks away. Outcome - bomb detonates before Batman gets the Bat above the tops of the buildings, nuclear detonation with 6-mile blast radius, 12 million casualties.

Which is the more sensible option?

2. At no point whatsoever in the course of the movie is it revealed where the trigger is. To find the trigger, the one person that does know who has it must be questioned. And that one person is........... Bane.

3. The entire point was to make a great film, therefore neither of your ideas have much substance.
 
R063R
Plan B of removing bomb to detonate over bay and far from human life. Outcome - Gotham intact, zero casualties.
I would just like to point out something someone mentioned on Kotaku.com yesterday. Roughly 1 minute on bomb when Batman takes off. 6 mile blast radius.

60mph = 1 mile per minute. 6 miles = 60*6 = 360mph, not including take off and acceleration time, or that he flies over part of the city at well under that speed first. We could almost guess that he had to fly out at over 400mph.

Most of the film's issues come from that bomb. It gives us a real-time timer to put to every event in the film, from healing a broken back and buffing up, to traveling back from Nowherestan, and even flying a nuclear bomb to safe distances at speeds around half the speed of sound (not calculating for temperature variations) in a craft that is more helicopter than jet and towing a bomb via cable that it could barely lift.

This story has all the worst elements of lazy writing.
MacGuffin - Nuke
Red Herring - Bane/Talia backstory when Bruce specifically is asking about Bane. Batman dying.
Deus Ex Machina - Bane can only be beaten by a surprise appearance of Catwoman breaking Batman's rules (thus negating the philosophical point of the second film) and using relatively god-like abilities.

I would say something about the plot twists but Nolan is pretty well known for them. Although the whole "you should use your real first name, Robin" thing was cringe-worthy. Might as well had a flashing arrow that said Robin on it and a footnote that said, "for those who don't know any Batman stories from ever before."

EDIT:. One last point. Why do we fall? To waste time to add urgency to the plot.
 
FoolKiller
...... in a craft that is more helicopter than jet

I'm guessing you missed the afterburner glowing hot on the back of the Bat once it passed the bridge? Don't see too many helicopters around with afterburners on them, do we.......?
 
R063R
I'm guessing you missed the afterburner glowing hot on the back of the Bat once it passed the bridge? Don't see too many helicopters around with afterburners on them, do we.......?

I'm pretty sure my statement made it clear I was aware it was a hybrid VTOL style craft. If I wanted to beat the helicopter issue I'd question rotor stability at over 200mph (very top speed of helicopters today and why they don't have afterburners) despite having jet-like propulsion, or if it were more functional as a jet than helicopter why he fled the missiles using helicopter functionality.

The point was he had to do over 400mph while towing something he had trouble lifting at all. Take away the helicopter comment and the issue still remains.
 
Wow Batman huh? To be honest my very first impression was that it was good. Not great... And certainly no Dark Knight. On reflection however more things bug really bug me about it.

I'll start with things I liked, cinematography, music, Michael Cain & Anne Hathaway all are brilliant things about this movie. Particularly Selina Kyle who was used effectively to push the plot along nicely. Cain has brilliant delivery and emotes really well. Oh and Gordon-levitt is good too.

Unfortunately things I didn't like is a long list. Two of my main gripes are as follows: 1. Everything is pretty much narrated to the audience. The scenes in a movie should be able to convey what's happening without someone constantly telling us. Granted it was well narrated and effort was made to make it look like someone in the movie is explaining the goings on to other characters but good film making doesn't need this.
2. We watch Bruce Wayne spend half the movie build himself into Batman, then his life got flipped, turned upside down (yeah that's right, totally made a fresh prince reference right there) and gets his back broken so we can watch the exact same building process begin again just in a new location. We see the same thing slightly differently play out all over again. That killed me a little. There are plenty of small annoyances but those two are my main ones.

Other than that, I can't tell were Banes voice comes from, not like other characters that have projection from a certain point, it doesn't sound like its originating from him. The mask was a bit rubbish, it helps stop the pain? Why is it not feeding him venom?

The nods to fans were just thrown in with little thought. When Bane breaks Batmans back it's clearly a re enactment of the famous frame from Knightfall. But it was so quick that you could almost blink and miss it.

The Blake's first name is Robin thing was a load of crap too. If they really wanted to do some fan service the lady should have revealed Blakes real name to be Dick Greyson. Actually Blake should have been named Richard throughout the movie only to reveal that he had changed his surname from Greyson to Blake to hide his identity from the thugs that killed his dad due to gambling debts or whatever. That would have been a proper nod, and would setup possible Nightwing series considering Greyson becomes a cop when he is old enough to leave the care of Batman.

There are plenty more issues like the entire bomb plot etc but these things in particular really bug the hell out of me. At the end of the day, it's still a better Batman movie that all the previous iterations prior to Nolan but its not great when stacked beside Batman Begins which was well paced simple and effective or Dark Knight which had such brilliant performances and memorable moments.
 
Reading this thread confirms at least, I am not the only one less then blown away by this iteration.

In addition to the points raised before which were gaps or 'points of discontinuity', the following bugged me too:

1) We're introduced to a Wayne barely able to walk because of medical issues, and he has to resort to new tech 'braces' that will support his knee's to be Batman. Yet in prison, he didnt have these supports and somehow his joint cartildge issues are non-issues and he can have a normal range of movement again.

2) Broken backs can be fixed by doing push-up's and pull-ups? Some tell the medical community, stat.

3) This was pointed out before, but I am astounded Nolan thought viewer's would buy the whole "police charge automatic gun fire and never get hit" scene. Has the guy never heard of WWI?

4) The Batbike is a stupid concept - a motorbike with two huge flat-bottomed tyre cannot lean and thus cannot turn a corner. I've really missed the concept of having a single Batmobile and that's it, not a million toys to pick and choose from.

Can someone explain to be how Blake got the gps co-ordinates for the Bat cave? I must have missed that clue...
 
I can't see how people see thr Blake was of is a possible robin night wing angle I say it would make more sense for the possible azreal angle.
 
Mike Rotch
Can someone explain to be how Blake got the gps co-ordinates for the Bat cave? I must have missed that clue...
He gets a package at the Post Office. That is what he is doing when the woman says he should go by his full name, Robin.

Froudeybrand
I can't see how people see thr Blake was of is a possible robin night wing angle I say it would make more sense for the possible azreal angle.
Because it was blatantly wrote in that his true first name is Robin. Doesn't leave room for much more interpretation.
 
Ah, but it's pretty clear that Blake was never intended to be Robin. For one, Christopher Nolan has repeatedly said that the character of Robin would never appear in his films. And Blake could hardly use the name "Robin" as his superhero alias, given that it's also his first name.

No, if the studios were to continue making films in Nolan's Batverse, John Blake would continue as Batman. And if ever Nightwing were to be introduced, it would likely be Jason Todd - though given the notoriety of A Death in the Family, it would probably be a character with a backstory loosely based on Todd's own. This was something that THE DARK KNIGHT indirectly flirted with and never really developed: the Copy-Bats. Having Nightwing as a violent vigilante prowling the streets opposite Batman would make for an interesting subplot to a future film. But it would have to address the way the public and the police felt about this second vigilante. That was something I felt THE DARK KNIGHT RISES probably could have done a little better - the police weren't too concerned with Batman once he returned, even though he was wanted for six murders.

If I were making the next Batfilm, I would probably continue with Blake as Batman. I'd work Hush into the parts of The Long Halloween that THE DARK KNIGHT did not use. Blake would be trying to catch the Holiday Killer, revealed to be Alberto Falcone trying to re-establish mob control in Gotham now that the original Batman is widely believed to be dead. Meanwhile, Blake's efforts are hampered by the appearance of Hush, adapted to fit Blake's story rather than Bruce Wayne's (in this version, he would probably be a brilliant-but-naive street kid who did a deal with the mob to go to college and study medicine or vet science - but once he graduated, the mob forced him to become a mob doctor to repay his debts). This would pave the way for the emergence of Jason Todd's Nightwing in a second film, since I'd take pains to make Blake's Batman markedly different to Wayne's, and the film would address how responsible Blake is for making a new, violent vigilante.
 
Back