The Dark Knight Rises... I. AM. EXCITE.

[HeartfeltDawn]

 

Enjoyed it, but not as much as Dark Knight. The main reason probably being that Bane was boring, imo, compared to the Joker. He seemed like a very typical villain to me, albeit a huge and clever one. My favourite parts of Dark Knight where the ones where Joker got to speak or where his plans got revealed - and those plans were much more interesting than the "explosives in the cement" thing. Nothing like that here. The back-story of Bane and Tate seemed very cliche to me, too.

 

 

That's the problem with TDKR. There's little time for more backstory that would add so much to the film. Bane could have been so much more had he been given more time to talk. He isn't a dumb villain but the lack of dialogue for him makes him seem two-dimensional at times. The complaints of TDK being slow weren't things I agreed with not because it isn't slow, but because the slowness at times creates a wonderful tension. There isn't that same tension in TDKR.

[MuffFuzz]

Just saw it again for a second time last night. I {censored}ing loved it even more this time! With all the buzz and hype died down, I was able to really take everything in, like what I usually do when a film comes out on DVD/Blu Ray. Great film. I actually take back what I said about Bruce's detective work in TDKR. It's mostly at the start, but I love how he tracks down Selina with the tracking device on the pearls. It was setup in a very nice way, because I thought Bruce would have lost a few steps being the recluse that he was, but once he met Selina after she ripped him off, it's like bam, right back into Batman mode. Dude was still sharp. Bruce and Selina's back and forth banter at the masquerade ball was a real highlight of the first act.

Batman spying on Catwoman on the rooftop, then making his grand entrance! The way he jumped off the ledge and he and Catwoman began to lay the smackdown. One of my favorite moments from the trilogy.

I know some people complained about no batarangs since BB, but I liked how he had those batarangs laced with tranquilizers. Very Batman-esque.

Another scene I liked was how Alfred had this twinkle in his eyes after Bruce finally got back out into the real world, to meet with Lucius and track down Selina. But it's when Bruce put on the leg brace, and sick-kicks the brick, Alfred had this look of "no, not like this". The way he kind of looks up then down, and then warns him not to go back out there.

I actually enjoyed the subtle hints of Miranda eventually showing her true colors. I noticed it the first time, but I got a chance to really pick out the details this time around. I didn't feel she was really rushed, but I would have liked possibly a mention or scene that really gave us a solid hint to there being a kind of missed chance at romance between her and Bruce. I definitely felt she cared for him. After they made love she asks Bruce to run away with her, but he replies with some other time. If Bruce had only not gotten involved, lol.

I still wish the hospital scene with Bruce and Gordon would have been longer. And an explanation of how Bruce got back into Gotham would have been nice. Something like in TDK; how when Bruce took the ballet crew for a boat trip and the plane to smuggle him in came up and he jumps into the water to board it. Something quick and to the point like that would have been appreciated. But it's not a huge gripe now.

A few more scenes with breathing room would have been the most beneficial, but even so, the first act and a half really worked well with the setup for Bruce to return as not only Batman, but a public Bruce Wayne also.

I stand behind a solid 9 out of 10. I will never follow a film this closely again, because it kind of ruined my first experience watching it, but upon second viewing it really came across as a real fine film.

[V]

 

It is less problematic. It doesn't remove all issues, but it certainly diminishes them greatly. Propaganda is dangerous because of the intent, not just because of the material publicized. If Nolan and the producer(s) never aimed to spread a particular point about social classes and whatnot, even if it just so happened to be that way because of excutive producers getting their hands dirty, you're only interpreting the movie that way, which is very similar to the way in which some have interpreted the Aurora shooting as a direct result of Bob Kane's work and Nolan's hugely successful trilogy. If there is no proof, in this case maybe a past history of spreading propaganda and highly one-sided politic views, it's just an opinion and merely coincidental. I can see what you're saying completely, but I don't think the integrity of the film should be questioned because of it.

 

 

Ok, let me clarify. The intent matters to how you might view Nolan or whoever else would be responsible for something viewed as propaganda. This could, conceivably, change someone's interpretation of the film. But it's still ultimately the interpretation of the film that matters. Whatever you get from it was always already an interpretation and if it comes off as propaganda the film's interpretation itself has more ability to change your view of Nolan and his compatriots than any argument they can make outside the film can change the way the film is perceived. If the pieces fit within the movie, they fit. Whether or not they were meant to fit that way is not going to change the structure they have created.

 

If, for example, you make an abstract painting and it turns out that people find it to look like a vagina then you still painted a vagina whether or not you meant to.

[V]

Incidentally, though, I saw the film a second time with a different crowd of people and I'm not sure I totally agree with this Batman as conservative force thing. I mean, yes, he's conservative in the way all superheroes are conservative. He responds to problems as they crop up. It's been said that superman is the ultimate conservative superhero because he actually has the power to enforce a system of peace that he just never bothers to create because he just responds to problems within the existing system to re-enforce it.

 

I think Batman in this movie is different than that.

 

1. He's already, at the beginning of the movie, changed the structure of Gotham's law enforcement by agreeing to the ruse that creates the Dent act. That's a pro-active move rather than a response.

 

2. At the end of the movie he does something similar by making himself a symbol usable for the prevention of crime rather than going to fight individual criminal acts.

 

3. As much as we might agree with Bane's stance against the rich...he's still going to blow up a city so...I mean what else is Batman supposed to do but stop him? I guess if he were Dr. Manhattan he'd just let him do it.

[Dr. Goldenglove]

That's the problem with TDKR. There's little time for more backstory that would add so much to the film. Bane could have been so much more had he been given more time to talk. He isn't a dumb villain but the lack of dialogue for him makes him seem two-dimensional at times. The complaints of TDK being slow weren't things I agreed with not because it isn't slow, but because the slowness at times creates a wonderful tension. There isn't that same tension in TDKR.

 

Indeed. The backstory they had for him seemed rushed and a bit of a let-down - a child escaping from an evil prison and then it turns out he was the other person in the prison? Too many films and books have had similar plot "twists" for this to be anything but unsurprising.

 

The Joker was perfect in that respect - no dental, no DNA, no name - it all added up to a very spooky and complex character.

 

Also, wouldn't the radioactive fallout from the explosion not only make Gotham uninhabitable, but cause radiation poisoning in all of the people who were in the city?

[AngryGoldfish]

Indeed. The backstory they had for him seemed rushed and a bit of a let-down - a child escaping from an evil prison and then it turns out he was the other person in the prison? Too many films and books have had similar plot "twists" for this to be anything but unsurprising. The Joker was perfect in that respect - no dental, no DNA, no name - it all added up to a very spooky and complex character. Also, wouldn't the radioactive fallout from the explosion not only make Gotham uninhabitable, but cause radiation poisoning in all of the people who were in the city?

 

 

I still see Bane as simply a pawn for Ra's Al Ghul's whims, just like it has been for many episodes of the original cartoon and Arkham City. I wouldn't be surprised if that was a common storyline in the comics as well, but I've never read any of them.

 

Yeah, it would bring about a mass populous of Gotham city being poisoned by radiation, birthing children with no hearts or ingrowing fingernails, etc., but there would be no higher class leaching off the lower class, which is what Ra's, Talia and Bane all had problems with.

[V]

I think it was supposed to be a neutron bomb. The point of a neutron bomb is it has less longterm fallout and kills people mainly with its initial blast of neutron radiation.

[Cliff Fiscal]

Bane must not pay for his own utilities and gas.......otherwise, he wouldn't have used that infinite power source as a bomb.

[gambit]

Gotham was supposedly rid of all the corruption, mob etc after Batman nicked them all right? so why does the original Ras Al Ghoul plan (to wipe out the city because of the corruption and villany wasn't it?) still stand?

 

or have i got it wrong?

 

anyway, i thought the whole plan to wipe Gotham off the map from Batman Begins was a bit weak anyway, so i was disapointed they brought it back up in 'Rises'..

 

that's why Dark Knight was good; no evil nuclear time-bomb device. just the will and menace of a madman.

[AngryGoldfish]

Gotham was supposedly rid of all the corruption, mob etc after Batman nicked them all right? so why does the original Ras Al Ghoul plan (to wipe out the city because of the corruption and villany wasn't it?) still stand? or have i got it wrong? anyway, i thought the whole plan to wipe Gotham off the map from Batman Begins was a bit weak anyway, so i was disapointed they brought it back up in 'Rises'.. that's why Dark Knight was good; no evil nuclear time-bomb device. just the will and menace of a madman.

 

Ra's Al Ghul and the League of Assassins/Shadows wanted to bring balance to Gotham by demolishing the works of the upper class and bringing everyone down to the same level, hence why Bane and his crew attacked Wall Street and the Stock Exchange, and why they were throwing all the rich folks out of their expensive hotel rooms, but ignoring the lower class and middle class.

[AngryGoldfish]

And as far as Ra's Al Ghul and the League of Assassins, they never stop doing what they do. So although they tried to first destroy the criminal overlords of Arkham and then Gotham in Batman Begins, ultimately the Dent Act did it for them. Still, they felt corruption was still prevalent due to the way the rich kept getting richer and the poor kept getting poorer. If you remember, the League of Shadows was said to be around for years. They had already destroyed Gotham once and seen it grow again under new rule. That's the idea behind Ra's Al Ghul and the League of Assassins: they never stop trying to perfect or bring balance to Gotham and the world in general, because it always needs doing, like an operating system always needs reinstalling if a problem arises.

[gambit]

so the league of shadows is like bill gates to gothams blue screen of death.. i see..

 

does that make lex luthor the steve jobs of metropolis?!