EPT[M] The Dark Knight Rises (SPOILERS) - Page 50
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
czylu
477 Posts
| ||
Milkis
5003 Posts
Dark Knight Rises is an amazing movie simply because of what it did given its restrictions -- it had to conclude the series, answer the questions opened by the first two movies. I think it did this tremendously well. The story feels complete -- the things Batman was struggling with in the first two movies all came back into the third movie and it had to be answered. It's definitely not as focused as the Dark Knight -- I almost feel like it couldn't be. Dark Knight was an ideological battle between Batman and the Joker over anything else IMO and that really shined through which made it very easy to focus on that. The way Joker thinks is also incredibly different from how we think in general and I think that also added the shock factor. I almost feel like the third movie didn't have room to do that -- it had to focus on the Batman and him overcoming and rising again, but at the same time there was so many themes it was playing with and there isn't a unifying theme like the Dark Knight. It feels a bit rushed and underdeveloped because of that. + Show Spoiler + How he rose back up was pretty unconvincing since he seemed like a character with a much more burden on his soul than his descent into the pit after hitting "rock bottom" and his struggles there led him to be, and it just didn't feel convincing what conviction he gained -- especially since it was definitely meant to contrast Bane's "punches of belief" (or something like that). Maybe the rope not being there showed how dedicated he was? These are all minor nitpicks, I think, because I think it did play some of the themes VERY well + Show Spoiler + (one that sticks to me is the one regarding trust that was brought up between batman/alfred at the very beginning) | ||
|
MajorityofOne
Canada2506 Posts
Hathaway and Gordon-Levitt are actually so good, also. Might be the strongest supporting cast ever in an action flick | ||
|
McKTenor13
United States1383 Posts
| ||
|
zev318
Canada4306 Posts
On July 21 2012 04:32 Vaporized wrote: what was the fucking theme of avengers?? of transformers?? of the vast majority of films that come out these days? MONEY! | ||
|
Lightwip
United States5497 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + It didn't live up to TDK, though nothing really could have. Not as much replay value either. A good movie in its own right, but it seemed more like a comic book story than the Batman created in TDK. Too much happened too quickly, even within 2.5 hours. + Show Spoiler + Also, that nuclear explosion would've destroyed a good part of the city from just the shockwave and flooding. | ||
|
Quasimoto3000
United States471 Posts
Bravo. | ||
|
sjperera
Canada349 Posts
On the bit before the ending... I wish Batman was given sometime in the Bat, to maybe take off his cowl and ride into the ... would have made some people really believe... but yes, loved the ending... loved the movie... going to see it again ASAP... and then, maybe... a third time. | ||
|
Nick!
Scotland701 Posts
| ||
HawaiianPig
Canada5155 Posts
On July 21 2012 05:05 Milkis wrote: I loved the Dark Knight because it was pretty profound in many different ways. I think that it's very clear that the Dark Knight had a lot of freedom, since it didn't really have to connect with the first movie. Dark Knight Rises is an amazing movie simply because of what it did given its restrictions -- it had to conclude the series, answer the questions opened by the first two movies. I think it did this tremendously well. The story feels complete -- the things Batman was struggling with in the first two movies all came back into the third movie and it had to be answered. It's definitely not as focused as the Dark Knight -- I almost feel like it couldn't be. Dark Knight was an ideological battle between Batman and the Joker over anything else IMO and that really shined through which made it very easy to focus on that. The way Joker thinks is also incredibly different from how we think in general and I think that also added the shock factor. I almost feel like the third movie didn't have room to do that -- it had to focus on the Batman and him overcoming and rising again, but at the same time there was so many themes it was playing with and there isn't a unifying theme like the Dark Knight. It feels a bit rushed and underdeveloped because of that. + Show Spoiler + How he rose back up was pretty unconvincing since he seemed like a character with a much more burden on his soul than his descent into the pit after hitting "rock bottom" and his struggles there led him to be, and it just didn't feel convincing what conviction he gained -- especially since it was definitely meant to contrast Bane's "punches of belief" (or something like that). Maybe the rope not being there showed how dedicated he was? These are all minor nitpicks, I think, because I think it did play some of the themes VERY well + Show Spoiler + (one that sticks to me is the one regarding trust that was brought up between batman/alfred at the very beginning) You pretty much summed up my thoughts. I have a lot of nitpicks, but overall, I can't really say it didn't do what it needed to do. The 99% is there, it's just missing the 1% to make it feel as complete as TDK did. A lot of the solutions to my nitpicks are "spend more time developing X". It's so dense that there just wasn't time do flesh out all of the themes and storylines thoroughly. It does its job though. Now that I think about it, this franchise really mirrors the original star wars trilogy in that respect. A New Hope was necessary and enjoyable, Empire was the best and Return of the Jedi did what it needed to do sufficiently. | ||
|
cscarfo1
United States307 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Even better hearing Robin was there the whole time | ||
|
lynx.oblige
Sierra Leone2268 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Bane literally breaks Batman's back in the comics but there is no confirmation as to whether or not he completely broke his back in the movie. So yes, it is possible that "fixing" whatever injury he sustained was actually that easy. Robin is just Blake's first name. It is a sort of homage or easter egg in the film. He is not actually meant to be a Robin. Bale actually states that he won't appear in these films if Robin appears. | ||
|
sambo400
United States378 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + I lold when the scarecrow came back | ||
|
Zaqwert
United States411 Posts
If felt a little disjointed, like the pacing was off, might have tried to be too big. | ||
|
FireBlast!
United Kingdom5251 Posts
| ||
|
sob3k
United States7572 Posts
Bane and Catwoman are really, really weak characters. | ||
|
Supamang
United States2298 Posts
On July 20 2012 21:28 karpo wrote: I enjoy lots of movies. Just because some people don't enjoy Nolan or Batman as much as you do doesn't mean they have problems finding movies to enjoy. I never said that, read my post lol On July 20 2012 21:42 maartendq wrote: I set my standards high because, well I always do, for pretty much everything. Doesn't matter if it's a movie, a book, an album or people. My standards are high and I refuse to lower them. Doesn't mean I can't enjoy an action flick like Batman (I really liked Batman Begins) but people who call The Dark Knight (Rises) the best movie ever either haven't watched any of the classics or have horrible taste, sorry. Generally, people get pumped up about a movie if the general theme or concept fits their interests. I have absolutely zero interest in superheroes, so I don't watch a lot of superhero movies or comics. On the other hand, I'm very interested in the concept of revolution, so movies like "The Wind That Shakes The Barley" or "V for Vendetta" get me really pumped up whereas other people may find them average. I have nothing against anything you said. Its completely fair to have high standards, its completely fair to not prefer superhero movies. What I'm against is what the guy I was responding to was talking about. Those people a couple pages back, they come in here saying one line like "This movie was so bad, I was so disappointed" or "Incredibly underwhelmed to be honest" or whatever with no rationale. Its like, great so you thought the movie was terrible. Why? We've all experienced that hipster douche that always thinks everything sucks, trying to impress people by appearing to be above it all. Unless you explain why you dislike a solid film like TDKR, then youre just being that hipster douche spouting negativity to look cool. Just talked to a friend who just said that the movie was weak. And I asked why, he responded with "shaky cam" or "+ Show Spoiler [mini spoiler] + lol Alfred was so butthurt On July 20 2012 23:10 Judicator wrote: Your Brood War analogy fails because TDKR is a better visual experience than the previous 2. That's not the issue. The plot devices they used were VERY obvious to any one paying attention to the movie. Bane is a very bland character or very linear, comparable to Ras A Gul light, I had generally a difficult time caring for the character itself (aka he was very much interchangeable). The development of some characters were fantastic while some others not so much and its this inconsistency that really bothered me since some parts of the movie felt like hey we need to talk about these guys because they weren't around in the first two so we need to catch them up. The pacing is well-done in that you're never really bored, but I don't think anyone can accuse Nolan of shitty pacing in any of his movies. The problem I have is that this movie came on the heels of the Joker and that in itself is very difficult to match. Did this movie match up to that? No. Lol..? How does my analogy fail? You said it right there, TDKR is a better visual experience than the previous 2, just like SC2 is a better visual experience than BW. Yeah, I agree that this movie wasnt as good as TDK. That doesn't mean that it wasnt still a great movie. How do people not get that? One of my gripes is the people who come in here hating on the movie with 1 sentence and no explanation, or just bad reasons (refer to my friend above) My other rant is about people who overanalyze things to the point that, unless theyre watching a documentary, nothing could be enjoyable as long as they rate "realism" so damn high (refer to my 2 outcomes of overly "realist" movie critics). I never watch movies with my dad anymore because I swear every time we leave the theater hes all "What do they eat? Wheres the bathroom?" Sure thats much more extreme than whats happening here, but its still like, "Who fucking cares? Fill in the blanks, its not an episode of 24. And even on that show you dont watch Jack Bauer literally dropping a deuce on the terrorists when hes gotta go." I get that some people have a harder time suspending disbelief than others, and thats the whole point as to why I say "I find it hard to believe that you guys can enjoy any movies at all" | ||
|
McFeser
United States2458 Posts
On July 21 2012 04:35 czylu wrote: The first 2 thirds was boring as hell and some parts were even laughable. I mean fixing a broken back w/ a good smack on the back, LOL. There was a guy in a wheelchair sitting in my row that yelled out "I wish it were that easy in real life!" The ending though was fricking awesome and definitely made up for the piss poor first half. + Show Spoiler + Haha, that is pretty funny (The wheelchair part) but with movies like that you have to just to believe in some movie magic and look over that little detail. A quick question though Did commissioner Gordon's letter state that he knew who Batman was? The same letter Bane read (Which contrary to what some people think, he is a really deep character). Problem is, if Gordon letter says "Batman = Bruce" that creates a pretty big plot hole when later in the movie Gordon acts surprised when he finds this out. | ||
|
CrazyAsian
United States188 Posts
On July 21 2012 11:58 McFeser wrote: + Show Spoiler + Haha, that is pretty funny (The wheelchair part) but with movies like that you have to just to believe in some movie magic and look over that little detail. A quick question though Did commissioner Gordon's letter state that he knew who Batman was? The same letter Bane read (Which contrary to what some people think, he is a really deep character). Problem is, if Gordon letter says "Batman = Bruce" that creates a pretty big plot hole when later in the movie Gordon acts surprised when he finds this out. + Show Spoiler + Not that I recall, but near the end, he makes a comment in the Bat and reveals himself to Gordon. | ||
|
GrimmJ
Canada131 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + So I've watched this film twice today. I consider myself a big fan of the 'Caped Crusader", and I do not feel that this failed as a conclusion to Nolan's Batman. This movie rightly tied up the characters from the trilogy rather nicely in one knot. I'm not sure that I find this one better than the others, probably because I don't have a particular favourite of the three. I think Bane was a good character and well portrayed by Tom Hardy (some of his dialogues in the film were difficult to understand). Catwoman was con-traversal to me, since she had a vague back-story (where did she get that suit from?). I feel as though she was used as a glue to bring the finale together , and I do wish she had some appearance in one of the other movies at least. None the less, I found the film very intense and satisfying. I maintain that it is better than all of the Marvel films this year, and I hope Nolan and his crew pick up some good recognition for this. Let me know what you thought of the end? Is another director picking this up or something? | ||
| ||
