414 réponses à ce sujet

[android654]

If that's the case, then Liam was an even bigger jump than I thought.

I can't attest to that, since Turkey's the only country in that region that I can claim any kind of "experthood" on.

[Kathleen321]

Mr.House wrote...

Kathleen321 wrote...

Now that we're discussing spoilers. Was anyone else terrified at the end that Bruce Wayne had actually died? The whole time I was thinking, "oh god not another Mass Effect 3 not another Mass Effect 3 not another Mass Effect 3." If he had died after that explosion it would have been just as devastating to me. :/

I had a theory that Bruce might fake his death, so while I was shedding tears when he was flying the bomb away from Gotham and at the grave scene, I still had some hope he survived, so when I saw him with Selina I smilled like a kid at a candy store.

Great to see Nolan supports the Bruce and Selina couple, great way to end the story.

OMG! I KNOW!! I'm a huge supporter of Batman+Catwoman and always have been. Bruce and Selina have always had the most chemistry and the two kisses they shared on film had me squeeling and fangirling like crazy. Bruce finally found himself a girl that can keep up with him. I can go on and on how these two are the perfect match....

[Rockworm503]

Crazy how this movie's been out barely 2 days and already this thread is hidden in page 2.

[addiction21]

It was okay

[Naughty Bear]

The film was fun but I feel Bane did not give off that 'feel'. Joker made the room so tense and creepy where ever he went and his pencil trick just made it creepier. 3 hours this film was, went in at 8 and finished at 11.

[Annie_Dear]

I was underwhelmed by it.

And the ending... Really?

[Brockololly]

Just saw it in IMAX and I loved it. Not perfect, but thats a great way to end a trilogy.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
- While Anne Hathaway portrayed catwoman well, I do not see the point of why she was there. She fulfilled no crucial role to the story or to Batman's development as a character. The chemistry between the cat and the bat is almost non-existent, let alone any well written romance between the two. All in all she felt pointless.

Totally disagree there. She serves as an impetus for getting Bruce out of his reclusive ways. And her ties to Bane are what lead Batman to Bane. And ultimately, she's the person that gives Bruce the chance for a normal life and a clean slate.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
- Batman and Bruce received poor characterization, again. Only BB managed to capture at least some of the complexity of Batman (I am an exception here in that I like BB the more times I see it), TDK and TDKR did not.

Disagree. One of the reasons Iliked TDKR is that much more than TDK, it was a movie where Bruce was the main character and not subservient to the villain, like I felt he was in TDK with the Joker.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
- Plotholes like how Batman got back to Gotham. Why was his leg broken in the beginning? What the **** was Ra's al Ghul's apparition? Stupidity like an all out charge and brawl at the end instead of people taking cover and using their guns.

Yeah...I'll agree that there are lots of leaps in logic. But if you filled in all of those plot holes it would have been a 10 hour movie. Stuff like his beaten up body in the beginning makes sense- being Batman left him with a broken down body. And it seems he wasn't really keeping good care of himself. Reminded me of The Dark Knight Returns and Kingdom Come.

The Ra's hallucination was just that. A hallucination. I imagine being in excruciating pain as your back is broken and not being in th best state of mind might have you seeing things.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
- Alfred. Not only because he talked a lot, again, but because he ****ing abandoned Bruce in his time of need? What? What was the point? That's incredibly OOC.

I can sort of see why he left. It wasn't necessarily that he didn't care, it was that he saw Bruce becoming Batman again as a suicide mission. And he didn't want to be a part of Bruce just basically comitting death by Batman.

Its a bit of a stretch, and certainly plot wise necessary for Talia to come into the picture, but it wasn't that big of deal, IMO.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
- Stop trying to make us give **** about Rachel. Begins failed in the romance department, Dark Knight failed even more. We are not going to relate to Bruce's pain if the romance was not done well.

Thats not a reason to ignore it  though. Her death is part of the reason Bruce gave up being Batman and its a major issue for him. It would have been more odd if they just ignored it, IMO.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
- Way too much Robin Black. We get it, he's the successor of batman, we don't need that much time on him, time that could have been used for far more important things.

Too much time, maybe, but Joseph Gordon Levitt did a really nice job I thought. The whole second act of the movie had major issues with pacing and the story as it is required Bruce imprisoned, so thats kind of why they needed Blake out doing things.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
- Bane. Now I found him great throughout most of it. He was intimidating and impressive, both physically and mentally. At one point his manner of speech made me chuckle ("Impossible!"), but in general I liked both the voice and how he talks a lot. BUT his end was horrible and extremely anti-climatic. Very poorly done.

Agreed. Up until his speech he was awesome. Him breaking Batman's back was awesome.  The problem was again, that second act where after he turns Gotham into No Man's Land basically, he sort of disappears until that last fight. And yes, his death (?) was very anticimatic. Its just sort of like "That's it?"

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I liked his motivation somewhat, but the part about having the bomb detonate after 5 months FOR NO REASON AT ALL barring the typical stupid villain lulz moment. Ra's al Ghul operated with deadly efficiency and didn't give a damn about giving people false hope (how is what bane doing giving hope anyways? We don't even see if the people like it)

Yeah, I thought that was kind of weak. Again, it gets to the issues with the second act of the movie where they seemingly need to give Bruce time to have his training montage type moment and time to heal, but it leaves a kind of awkward lull in things where people have to sort of sit and spin their wheels while Bruce heals up.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
- Talia. I saw it coming but that's not the problem. The problem is that she is very under-developped. Why is she so obsessed with her father's work? We never got to see the relationship between the two. A simple flashback could have added a lot to her motivation. The chemistry between her and batman was non-existent so the shock of betrayal didn't really have an impact (they just ****ed for no reason). Also, why the hell is she so obsessed that she and Bane want to die in Gotham? What's the point of the League if it's going to be destroyed with Gotham? Talia's weakness in character and motivation axiomatically weakens Bane. Talia was just a much less developed and much less impactful Ra's al Ghul 2.0.

I saw it coming just in how she was interested in green energy and shared Ra's al Ghul's same verbal mannerisms from Begins. Her development kind of reminded me of Harvey Dent going to Two Face in TDK. Its a bit abrupt and sudden and you feel like it would work better if you had either a couple more hours for more screentime or split the movie in two.

Her motivations weren't a problem really- Ra's wanted to destroy Gotham. She's carrying on her father's work.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
It would have given Bane a much more sympathetic side, a certain humanity that also pushed to save Talia as a child. It would have also made all his revolutionary speeches to not be utter BS. In addition, it would have referred back to Ra's. Ra's would have intended for Bane to be his successor, but seeing his lack of decisiveness and necessary harshness, he excommunicated him and sought another successor: enter Bruce Wayne. Talia would have kept contact with Bane.

This would have also added a lot more characterization for Talia. She would have been torn between her love for Bane and her fanatical devotion to her father (which with a flashback would have been put in context). It would have made her a far more interesting character.

As for Bane's end, I would have preferred if he sacrificed his life for Talia. Yea sure it's melodramatic, but it's fitting and tragic. Maybe at the end Bane would have tried to stop Talia (who could be mentally unstable) from detonating the nuke and killing Gotham and them along with it. But as the catwoman fires at Talia, Bane saves her and takes the shot. Which would only serve to make Talia even more insane. That would have been good characterization. That Talia's life is dominated by two men, her love Bane and her father Ra's.

And all that would have added about 5 hours to the movie.

I don't think they needed to humanize Bane more. They did that enough. The only thing I would have maybe liked to see would have been to somehow put Miranda Tate/Talia back in The Dark Knight or even Batman Begins somehow to give her a more genuine relationship with Bruce. That's what it always comes down to in the comics- that Ra's wants Batman as his heir and he wants Talia  to marry Bruce. And Bruce does love her, but he knows Ra's and Talia are nutjobs.


The problems the movie has are the same ones I have with the The Dark Knight, really: that its so crammed with material, it could really have been 2 movies to have some breathing room. I like how Nolan's Batman movies all work well as standalone movies, but I do wish he laid the groundwork for certain characters like Talia or Dent/Two Face a bit earlier.



Anyway, I really enjoyed it. I'd probably rank the Nolan movies as Batman Begins>> TDKR> TDK. Or maybe TDK and TDKR as about equal. TDKR does a lot to make Batman Begins even better, IMO.

And as much as I LOVED seeing Crane as judge on the kangaroo court, that should have been the Joker. GIven Ledger's death , they weren't going to recast him or anything, but given how they make allusions to and flashbacks for just about every other character in Begins and TDK, the Joker's absence given how Bane frees the Arkham and Blackgate prisoners felt kind of apparent, even if you know the real world reasons why the joker was absent.

[Brockololly]

slimgrin wrote...
Also am I the only one who thought the fight scenes were lackluster?

Nolan has never been very good at filming fight scenes.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Actually Ra's is ethnically
Chinese (not sure if Han). A group of Chinese (probably Muslims)
migrated to Arabia and Ra's was born there.

Also I should add
that Hejazi Arabs (the area around Mecca and Medina), bare strong
resemblance to Levantine Arabs in terms of facial structure.

Well, the movie version of Ra's doesn't seem especially Arab or Chinese- maybe the fake Ra's played by Ken Watanabi in Begins. But basically because way back in Begins, Liam Neeson was officially playing Henri Ducard, not Ra's. The fact that he was Ra's was the twist. So its debatable what the name really meansin Nolan's universe, or if it wasn't really just a title of sorts being passed down.

[android654]

Brockololly wrote...
Well, the movie version of Ra's doesn't seem especially Arab or Chinese- maybe the fake Ra's played by Ken Watanabi in Begins. But basically because way back in Begins, Liam Neeson was officially playing Henri Ducard, not Ra's. The fact that he was Ra's was the twist. So its debatable what the name really meansin Nolan's universe, or if it wasn't really just a title of sorts being passed down.

But it is the same character. The Lazarus Pit exists in Nolan's universe now, so the 600 year old character is the same one Liam is playing. You could argue that Ra's inhabited Henri's body, since there are stories where his mind and soul is placed in the body of Talia after his "death(s)." SO the plausible explanation would be, Henri finding Ra's and his loyalty allows him to lay in the pit with Ra's. The result is Henri's mind is now polluted with Ra's. As his most faithful student, Henri does not resist Ra's' impulses and as time dragged on, Ra's took over Henri's consciousness completely.

[slimgrin]

Brockololly wrote...


The problems the movie has are the same ones I have with the The Dark Knight, really: that its so crammed with material, it could really have been 2 movies to have some breathing room. I like how Nolan's Batman movies all work well as standalone movies, but I do wish he laid the groundwork for certain characters like Talia or Dent/Two Face a bit earlier.

That is exactly the f*cking problem. Why does Nolan and his brother think more is more when they did it just right with Batman Begins? God it pisses me off because both The Dark Knight and Dark Knight Rises suffer from the same thing: they have too much in the plot. Period. People were skittish about this aspect leading up to release and Jonathon Nolan dismissed it in rather arrogant fashion.

The story lacked focus, it neglected main characters, all so they could revel in plot twists and sleight-of-hand story telling. I don't need another 'save the city before the bomb goes off' scenario. Modern audiences are callous to that now. I don't need another 'saved at the last moment' by something, which the movie did time and again. Batman, the Bat, or catwoman dashing in at the last second - this is a cheap tactic to build suspense. It doesn't work.

At the end of the movie, I was relieved Nolan is through with Batman, because it no longer suits him. And I'm saying this as a huge Nolan fan. These big budget affairs are not his best work.  

Modifié par slimgrin, 23 juillet 2012 - 07:50 .

[Abraham_uk]

slimgrin wrote...

Brockololly wrote...


The problems the movie has are the same ones I have with the The Dark Knight, really: that its so crammed with material, it could really have been 2 movies to have some breathing room. I like how Nolan's Batman movies all work well as standalone movies, but I do wish he laid the groundwork for certain characters like Talia or Dent/Two Face a bit earlier.

That is exactly the f*cking problem. Why does Nolan and his brother think more is more when they did it just right with Batman Begins? God it pisses me off because both The Dark Knight and Dark Knight Rises suffer from the same thing: they have too much in the plot. Period. People were skittish about this aspect leading up to release and Jonathon Nolan dismissed it in rather arrogant fashion.

The story lacked focus, it neglected main characters, all so they could revel in plot twists and sleight-of-hand story telling. I don't need another 'save the city before the bomb goes off' scenario. Modern audiences are callous to that now. I don't need another 'saved at the last moment' by something, which the movie did time and again. Batman, the Bat, or catwoman dashing in at the last second - this is a cheap tactic to build suspense. It doesn't work.

At the end of the movie, I was relieved Nolan is through with Batman, because it no longer suits him. And I'm saying this as a huge Nolan fan. These big budget affairs are not his best work.  

Everything you said is perfectly valid.

They are quite hard to follow. At least they were to me. But I really loved the plots and the characters. For me despite the number of characters on screen, each character had a reason to be there and were very well fleshed out. But it is still a lot to take in.

As for those huge threats to the entire city. Well, my suspension of disbelief is a very strong brick wall that can withstand just about anything. Also for me "save the city before the bomb goes off scenario" certainly worked for me. Batman is a superhero after all. If Batman has a much smaller threat to deal with, then he is just a "hero" without the "super" prefix.

When I watch Batman films, I expect to see a superhero. That is exactly what we're getting.

[Kathleen321]

The biggest problem I had with this movie was Talia. From the first scene to last scene all I could think was why the hell is this character here? At first I thought she was a sloppy love interest because Nolan isn't so great in the romance department. But when I found out she was behind everything I only felt relieved knowing she would have to be killed at some point. I loved this movie but it had it's problems. There were a bunch of plot holes. Like how the hell did Bruce Wayne get back to Gotham? How the hell did he do it undetected? Bane's men would have noticed a plane or helicopter flying over the city and all the bridges were gone. Did he tip toe over the ice or something? It kinda bothered me how he just showed up out of nowhere.

[Brockololly]

slimgrin wrote...
That is exactly the f*cking problem. Why does Nolan and his brother think more is more when they did it just right with Batman Begins? God it pisses me off because both The Dark Knight and Dark Knight Rises suffer from the same thing: they have too much in the plot. Period. People were skittish about this aspect leading up to release and Jonathon Nolan dismissed it in rather arrogant fashion.

I dunno. I still think they pulled it off ok in both TDK and TDKR, just that they could have done better. Maybe its worth noting that I think Jonathan Nolan wasn't involved in writing Batman Begins? Pretty sure it was Christopher Nolan and David Goyer who wrote Begins, with Goyer helping out with the story in both TDK and TDKR but not actually doing any writing.

slimgrin wrote...
The story lacked focus, it neglected main characters, all so they could revel in plot twists and sleight-of-hand story telling. I don't need another 'save the city before the bomb goes off' scenario. Modern audiences are callous to that now. I don't need another 'saved at the last moment' by something, which the movie did time and again. Batman, the Bat, or catwoman dashing in at the last second - this is a cheap tactic to build suspense. It doesn't work.

At the end of the movie, I was relieved Nolan is through with Batman, because it no longer suits him. And I'm saying this as a huge Nolan fan. These big budget affairs are not his best work. 

I take TDKR as maybe being more than the sum of its parts. It has some of the absolute best moments in Nolan's Batman movies and some of the worst. Are there cliche moments and plot holes and poor pacing? Sure. But I guess I respect what he was shooting for in ambition even if it falls a bit short.

And I greatly respect Nolan for the ending. The cheap grimdark Hollywood ending would have been for Batman to make the "noble, heroic sacrifice" to die with the bomb. But he didn't. Having Batman basically "die" in the mind of Bruce Wayne and letting Bruce have a clean slate is brilliant. It fits the whole theme of Nolan's movies and TDKR specifically. Its not about not being afraid to die, its that Bruce Wayne was afraid to live on his own, out of the shadow of his past tragedies. He is able to put that behind him finally.

From Batman Begins:

Rachel Dawes: But then I found out about your mask.

Bruce Wayne: Batman's just a symbol, Rachel.

Rachel Dawes: [Rachel touches Bruce's face] No, *this* is your  mask. Your real face is the one that criminals now fear. The man I loved - the man who vanished - he never came back at all. But maybe he's  still out there, somewhere. Maybe some day, when Gotham no longer needs  Batman, I'll see him again.



From TDK:

Rachel Dawes: Dear Bruce. I need to be honest and clear. I'm going to marry Harvey Dent. I love him, and I want to spend the rest of my life  with him. When I told you that if Gotham no longer needed Batman we  could be together, I meant it. But now I'm sure the day won't come when  *you* no longer need Batman. I hope it does; and if it does I will  be there, but as your friend. I'm sorry to let you down. If you lose  your faith in me, please keep your faith in people. Love, now and  always, Rachel. 

Bruce is able to finally let go. Gotham no longer needs Bruce Wayne as Batman. Blake can do that. Its a fantastic ending that makes me more than willing to overlook some of the other problems the movie might have.

Kathleen321 wrote...
 Like
how the hell did Bruce Wayne get back to Gotham? How the hell did he do
it undetected? Bane's men would have noticed a plane or helicopter
flying over the city and all the bridges were gone. Did he tip toe over
the ice or something? It kinda bothered me how he just showed up out of
nowhere.

Same way those special operations guys got into the city? Maybe Bruce smuggled himself in via the food and supply shipments the city was getting?

I didn't have much of an issue with this. They definitely could have explained it somehow though as it sort of undermined the whole vibe they were seemingly going for in trying to make Gotham feel cut off.

Modifié par Brockololly, 23 juillet 2012 - 09:23 .

[Il Divo]

Brockololly wrote...


I can sort of see why he left. It wasn't necessarily that he didn't care, it was that he saw Bruce becoming Batman again as a suicide mission. And he didn't want to be a part of Bruce just basically comitting death by Batman.

Its a bit of a stretch, and certainly plot wise necessary for Talia to come into the picture, but it wasn't that big of deal, IMO.

Wasn't the point that he was hoping that Bruce would have to come to terms with the fact that he can't be Batman anymore, in his absence? I remember Alfred saying something about how he would gladly give up Bruce's love if it meant he'd be alive/safe. Given that, I thought the idea wasn't really to abandon Bruce, but to do everything in his power to keep him alive. Kinda goes with Harvey Dent's "Die a hero" speech in TDK.

[slimgrin]

I think the plot looks better on paper, and yes I'm glad they didn't kill Wayne in the end. But doing that wouldn't be grim dark - it's tapping into other influences, the sacrificial hero.

Did Rachael's death keep Wayne sidelined for 8 years...really? Is this the same neurotic savior of Gotham bent on justice ( revenge ) character we all know? Wayne is obsessed. He can't let go of Batman. I was never convinced Rachael meant that much to him; she shouldn't. Doesn't he spurn deep connections because of his path? "I don't have the luxury of freinds." If anything tore him down over the years, it's the mental and physical wear of battling Gotham's worst. Not losing a loved one.

Modifié par slimgrin, 23 juillet 2012 - 10:11 .

[android654]

Like Alfred, Rachel was a tie to his childhood and his parents. She, like Alfred is a physical reminder for the cause of his psychological trauma. So losing her was like reliving the death of his parents a second time.

[Il Divo]

slimgrin wrote...

I think the plot looks better on paper, and yes I'm glad they didn't kill Wayne in the end. But doing that wouldn't be grim dark - it's tapping into other influences, the sacrificial hero.

Did Rachael's death keep Wayne sidelined for 8 years...really? Is this the same neurotic savior of Gotham bent on justice ( revenge ) character we all know? Wayne is obsessed. He can't let go of Batman. I was never convinced Rachael meant that much to him; she shouldn't. Doesn't he spurn deep connections because of his path? "I don't have the luxury of freinds." If anything tore him down over the years, it's the mental and physical wear of battling Gotham's worst. Not losing a loved one.

Rachel's death definitely played a part, but TDK's ending was also instrumental. Even Bruce at one point plays with the idea of giving up being Batman, regardless of whether Rachel thinks it's possible. Taking responsibility for Dent's death gave him a motive to give up being Batman- he wasn't needed, so he could hang up his mask. The problem is that he never pushed past that point, as Alfred says. He's alive but he's not living. You see it as soon as Bane resurfaces- Wayne has purpose again and is so quick to get back into action.

[Travis2310]

Loved the movie. Hated Catwoman. Too whorish for me.

[Rockworm503]

Hmm Doug Walker (Nostalgia Critic) did not like this movie at all.
but James Rolfe (Angry Video Game Nerd) did.
It seems to be getting mixed reviews. Many love it but others did not.

[android654]

Travis2310 wrote...

Loved the movie. Hated Catwoman. Too whorish for me.

Who knew the Amish had computers and saw movies.

[Rockworm503]

android654 wrote...

Travis2310 wrote...

Loved the movie. Hated Catwoman. Too whorish for me.

Who knew the Amish had computers and saw movies.

lol.. I wasn't going to say anything.

[Travis2310]

android654 wrote...

Travis2310 wrote...

Loved the movie. Hated Catwoman. Too whorish for me.

Who knew the Amish had computers and saw movies.

She was such a b****. And she sold Batman out multiple times. I would have strapped her to the bomb before taking it out to the water.

[Rockworm503]

Travis2310 wrote...

android654 wrote...

Travis2310 wrote...

Loved the movie. Hated Catwoman. Too whorish for me.

Who knew the Amish had computers and saw movies.

She was such a b****. And she sold Batman out multiple times. I would have strapped her to the bomb before taking it out to the water.

"oh yeah thanks for helping me stop Talia and saved my life from Bane.  Oh btw I don't like I'm going to strap you to the bomb"
Thank god you were never in charge of anything with this movie.

[android654]

Rockworm503 wrote...

android654 wrote...

Travis2310 wrote...

Loved the movie. Hated Catwoman. Too whorish for me.

Who knew the Amish had computers and saw movies.

lol.. I wasn't going to say anything.

We were all thinking it.