|
I was for some reason expecting a lot worse of a movie than this. It was a fine show and highly entertaining.
Minor gripes: - Bane's anticlimactic demise - Cops in pursuit had semi-irritating lines and observations - Not enough Cillian Murphy
Don't quite understand the negativity for the film judged as a whole, but I digress. Can only say I personally left the theater a happy man.
|
On July 30 2012 13:37 Zooper31 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 10:56 Poffel wrote:On July 30 2012 10:07 Zooper31 wrote:On July 30 2012 06:30 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 30 2012 06:24 Poffel wrote:On July 30 2012 06:19 Zooper31 wrote:On July 30 2012 06:17 Poffel wrote: Over the last pages, I've seen a couple of posts where people complain about the way Bane dies. Am I the only one who found the death of Talia much more disturbing? I have to admit that at least I had a hard time to reconciliate Batman shooting and killing two persons with my expectiations of the character. He never shot Bane. That was Catwoman. As for Talia I can't remember but I believe he shot the vehicle she was driving so the city wouldn't blow up lol. I know that he didn't shoot Bane himself. With the "two persons", I was refering to Talia and her driver. As for the rest of your answer, I'm unsure what you're implying. That it's ok if Batman violates his principles for the higher good of saving the city? Or that shooting at a vehicle, thereby causing the death of the persons inside, is remarkably different from shooting persons? It is very different because the driver caused their deaths by not turning. Batman's fire wasn't direct fire; it was trying to corral the driver to a certain point of the city, but he refused to turn and caused his own death. Basically this. It's not like he held the a gun in his hand and shot someone in the head. He was trying to get the driver to change course and the guy flew off the road. Stratos_speAr and Zooper31, I can only recommend you both to rewatch the scene. Calling multiple full frontal hits on the drivers cabin indirect fire or a non-lethal attempt to pull someone over would be far-fetched even if the end result wasn't death, which it was. I am perfectly fine with you not being as disturbed by this depiction of Batman as I was, but there is little point in arguing about what happened there, especially if you don't remember it. Batman had no intention of killing the passengers, they were constantly mentioning that Batman needed to make the drivers change course or the city was gonna blow up, how is killing the drivers going to achieve that. Can't drive if you're dead. You are correct that he indeed shot directly on the cabin of the truck. I believe Batman was within his principles, never killing anyone, to do this. Could you please tell me why I should assume that Batman acted upon command of Lucius (who, I assume, is the "they" you are referencing in your post) and would have wanted the truck to keep driving, given that it makes no sense (we're talking about a truck in a city on an island with no bridges), and more importantly given that Batman demonstrably had a different plan that he hadn't shared with Lucius, notably a plan that was better and obviously depended on the truck stopping? Additionally, if it wasn't Batman who killed them, who was it? The driver because he forgot to bring his fog light to see the street in case of heavy explosions on the windscreen? Why not the car manufacturer who didn't install air bags?
|
i am a bit disapointed by this movie, it would be a great movie if there were not some scenes that are completely amateur level : when marion cotillard dies in the car, this was so bad acting, i would expect way better for a oscar actress; also some scenes are too long and boring, when the little boy sings in the stadium for example... but in general it was a good movie, i wouldnt say awesome, but i enjoyed it.
|
i would also say that i have been disapointed by most of the big productions of 2012, batman could be better, promeetheus a complete disaster etc bad acting, bad script, bad production, looks like the films are rushed thats not very professionnal from hollywood!
|
On July 30 2012 23:38 Poffel wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 13:37 Zooper31 wrote:On July 30 2012 10:56 Poffel wrote:On July 30 2012 10:07 Zooper31 wrote:On July 30 2012 06:30 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 30 2012 06:24 Poffel wrote:On July 30 2012 06:19 Zooper31 wrote:On July 30 2012 06:17 Poffel wrote: Over the last pages, I've seen a couple of posts where people complain about the way Bane dies. Am I the only one who found the death of Talia much more disturbing? I have to admit that at least I had a hard time to reconciliate Batman shooting and killing two persons with my expectiations of the character. He never shot Bane. That was Catwoman. As for Talia I can't remember but I believe he shot the vehicle she was driving so the city wouldn't blow up lol. I know that he didn't shoot Bane himself. With the "two persons", I was refering to Talia and her driver. As for the rest of your answer, I'm unsure what you're implying. That it's ok if Batman violates his principles for the higher good of saving the city? Or that shooting at a vehicle, thereby causing the death of the persons inside, is remarkably different from shooting persons? It is very different because the driver caused their deaths by not turning. Batman's fire wasn't direct fire; it was trying to corral the driver to a certain point of the city, but he refused to turn and caused his own death. Basically this. It's not like he held the a gun in his hand and shot someone in the head. He was trying to get the driver to change course and the guy flew off the road. Stratos_speAr and Zooper31, I can only recommend you both to rewatch the scene. Calling multiple full frontal hits on the drivers cabin indirect fire or a non-lethal attempt to pull someone over would be far-fetched even if the end result wasn't death, which it was. I am perfectly fine with you not being as disturbed by this depiction of Batman as I was, but there is little point in arguing about what happened there, especially if you don't remember it. Batman had no intention of killing the passengers, they were constantly mentioning that Batman needed to make the drivers change course or the city was gonna blow up, how is killing the drivers going to achieve that. Can't drive if you're dead. You are correct that he indeed shot directly on the cabin of the truck. I believe Batman was within his principles, never killing anyone, to do this. Could you please tell me why I should assume that Batman acted upon command of Lucius (who, I assume, is the "they" you are referencing in your post) and would have wanted the truck to keep driving, given that it makes no sense (we're talking about a truck in a city on an island with no bridges), and more importantly given that Batman demonstrably had a different plan that he hadn't shared with Lucius, notably a plan that was better and obviously depended on the truck stopping? Additionally, if it wasn't Batman who killed them, who was it? The driver because he forgot to bring his fog light to see the street in case of heavy explosions on the windscreen? Why not the car manufacturer who didn't install air bags?
Because up until that point, they wanted to try to defuse the bomb, why? because Bruce and Wayne Industries had invested 50% of their total funds into the development of it and still hoped it could be used for the greater good. It wasn't until the very end that the chamber got flooded, and batman had no other out than take it out with him, and realized he could finally escape with his life, and leave behind batman as the shining symbol it was supposed to be.
|
On July 30 2012 23:38 Poffel wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 13:37 Zooper31 wrote:On July 30 2012 10:56 Poffel wrote:On July 30 2012 10:07 Zooper31 wrote:On July 30 2012 06:30 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 30 2012 06:24 Poffel wrote:On July 30 2012 06:19 Zooper31 wrote:On July 30 2012 06:17 Poffel wrote: Over the last pages, I've seen a couple of posts where people complain about the way Bane dies. Am I the only one who found the death of Talia much more disturbing? I have to admit that at least I had a hard time to reconciliate Batman shooting and killing two persons with my expectiations of the character. He never shot Bane. That was Catwoman. As for Talia I can't remember but I believe he shot the vehicle she was driving so the city wouldn't blow up lol. I know that he didn't shoot Bane himself. With the "two persons", I was refering to Talia and her driver. As for the rest of your answer, I'm unsure what you're implying. That it's ok if Batman violates his principles for the higher good of saving the city? Or that shooting at a vehicle, thereby causing the death of the persons inside, is remarkably different from shooting persons? It is very different because the driver caused their deaths by not turning. Batman's fire wasn't direct fire; it was trying to corral the driver to a certain point of the city, but he refused to turn and caused his own death. Basically this. It's not like he held the a gun in his hand and shot someone in the head. He was trying to get the driver to change course and the guy flew off the road. Stratos_speAr and Zooper31, I can only recommend you both to rewatch the scene. Calling multiple full frontal hits on the drivers cabin indirect fire or a non-lethal attempt to pull someone over would be far-fetched even if the end result wasn't death, which it was. I am perfectly fine with you not being as disturbed by this depiction of Batman as I was, but there is little point in arguing about what happened there, especially if you don't remember it. Batman had no intention of killing the passengers, they were constantly mentioning that Batman needed to make the drivers change course or the city was gonna blow up, how is killing the drivers going to achieve that. Can't drive if you're dead. You are correct that he indeed shot directly on the cabin of the truck. I believe Batman was within his principles, never killing anyone, to do this. Could you please tell me why I should assume that Batman acted upon command of Lucius (who, I assume, is the "they" you are referencing in your post) and would have wanted the truck to keep driving, given that it makes no sense (we're talking about a truck in a city on an island with no bridges), and more importantly given that Batman demonstrably had a different plan that he hadn't shared with Lucius, notably a plan that was better and obviously depended on the truck stopping? Additionally, if it wasn't Batman who killed them, who was it? The driver because he forgot to bring his fog light to see the street in case of heavy explosions on the windscreen? Why not the car manufacturer who didn't install air bags?
His plan was to get them to turn from beginning. He only changed his plan after seeing what happened after the car crashed. Furthermore, it was the driver's fault because not only did he refuse to turn, but he kept on a straight course that led them straight into that gap in the road.
|
Ok, personally im dissapointed in the movie. I liked Bane, the whole Bruce development, and acting from Alfred. Several things seemed kinda amateur though. + Show Spoiler +1) First scene Batman escaping the police was completely utter shit way to resolve from a writers standpoint. 2) The whole hymn of the US :/ I wanted the stadium to blow up much earlier. 3) I dont get the whole "Lets get EVERY FUCKN COP inside the tunnels" train of thought. Seriously that stupid to do it? And how did Bane know they would do this, and how did he prepare so well to get them ALL stuck inside? 4) Talia ending scene was horribad. 5) Bane puppy eyes ending scene data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/77e98/77e98be67f263e78995d632fb850d627ce97d99f" alt="" 6) All cops go forward in a narrow lane against a concave curve of bad guys, ALL with uzis. They rush forward and start having battles with their fists. This was so lame. 7) No one can enter or leave Gotham. Yet somehow magically Bruce is in the middle of Gotham after he gets out of the prison and KNOWS where catwoman is. Apart from these scenes and a couple of stuff im sure im missing, the ending was pretty cool. I stayed for most of the credits but didnt see an extra scene coming. Was there one?
|
wait, did the US NOT sneak in a handful of CIA agents. and did they not afterwards get their asses kicked? so if they could sneak in a small group of people, you seriously think, mofo'ing BATMAN, 1 guy, can't get back into the city too? cmon people need to stop nitpicking this.
|
On July 30 2012 23:38 Poffel wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 13:37 Zooper31 wrote:On July 30 2012 10:56 Poffel wrote:On July 30 2012 10:07 Zooper31 wrote:On July 30 2012 06:30 Stratos_speAr wrote:On July 30 2012 06:24 Poffel wrote:On July 30 2012 06:19 Zooper31 wrote:On July 30 2012 06:17 Poffel wrote: Over the last pages, I've seen a couple of posts where people complain about the way Bane dies. Am I the only one who found the death of Talia much more disturbing? I have to admit that at least I had a hard time to reconciliate Batman shooting and killing two persons with my expectiations of the character. He never shot Bane. That was Catwoman. As for Talia I can't remember but I believe he shot the vehicle she was driving so the city wouldn't blow up lol. I know that he didn't shoot Bane himself. With the "two persons", I was refering to Talia and her driver. As for the rest of your answer, I'm unsure what you're implying. That it's ok if Batman violates his principles for the higher good of saving the city? Or that shooting at a vehicle, thereby causing the death of the persons inside, is remarkably different from shooting persons? It is very different because the driver caused their deaths by not turning. Batman's fire wasn't direct fire; it was trying to corral the driver to a certain point of the city, but he refused to turn and caused his own death. Basically this. It's not like he held the a gun in his hand and shot someone in the head. He was trying to get the driver to change course and the guy flew off the road. Stratos_speAr and Zooper31, I can only recommend you both to rewatch the scene. Calling multiple full frontal hits on the drivers cabin indirect fire or a non-lethal attempt to pull someone over would be far-fetched even if the end result wasn't death, which it was. I am perfectly fine with you not being as disturbed by this depiction of Batman as I was, but there is little point in arguing about what happened there, especially if you don't remember it. Batman had no intention of killing the passengers, they were constantly mentioning that Batman needed to make the drivers change course or the city was gonna blow up, how is killing the drivers going to achieve that. Can't drive if you're dead. You are correct that he indeed shot directly on the cabin of the truck. I believe Batman was within his principles, never killing anyone, to do this. Could you please tell me why I should assume that Batman acted upon command of Lucius (who, I assume, is the "they" you are referencing in your post) and would have wanted the truck to keep driving, given that it makes no sense (we're talking about a truck in a city on an island with no bridges), and more importantly given that Batman demonstrably had a different plan that he hadn't shared with Lucius, notably a plan that was better and obviously depended on the truck stopping? Additionally, if it wasn't Batman who killed them, who was it? The driver because he forgot to bring his fog light to see the street in case of heavy explosions on the windscreen? Why not the car manufacturer who didn't install air bags?
You should assume it because it's what happened. Lucius was yelling which directions the truck needed to take in order to get the core back to the reactor in time. This was all happening as Batman was shooting at the truck making him turn down different streets. Once Talia took control of the truck and made the driver stop avoiding rockets, he crashed and flew off the road. The truck never needed to go over the bridges and leave the island, just back to where it came from. You can't say Batman had planned all along to sacrifice himself and fake his own death, he came to that conclusion once the truck was no longer mobile and the reactor got flooded with no time left. He was forced to come up with a new plan. I've alrdy stated my opinion on how Batman wasn't responsible for their deaths. He showed them he was willing to use force to stop them, they ignored him and pushed on anyways resulting in their deaths.
On July 31 2012 02:25 Kazeyonoma wrote: wait, did the US NOT sneak in a handful of CIA agents. and did they not afterwards get their asses kicked? so if they could sneak in a small group of people, you seriously think, mofo'ing BATMAN, 1 guy, can't get back into the city too? cmon people need to stop nitpicking this.
Also this completely, stop nitpicking how he got back into the city.
|
United Kingdom16710 Posts
And you do realise those agents were found out pretty quickly (Bane even knew the name & rank of the one in charge). They also had government resource, and the advantage of anonymity, whilst Bruce was broke as hell, and very well known to Bane and his men (though he had the element of surprise). Still, Bruce sneaking back into Gotham is a very minor complaint, and certainly pales in comparison to some of the more glaring issues.
|
So if we accept he could sneak into Gotham, how did he know where cat woman was?
If your answer is "he's batman" then why doesn't he know where lucius is and instead needed catwomans help?
|
On July 31 2012 03:59 levelping wrote: So if we accept he could sneak into Gotham, how did he know where cat woman was?
If your answer is "he's batman" then why doesn't he know where lucius is and instead needed catwomans help?
Lucius and the other Wayne enterprise board members were held in a particular location because of their knowledge of the reactor. Catwomen was just out in the open and she was still probably staying at her old apartment, where bruce has already been in, and if not there were earlier scenes of her being out in public anyways. Bruce probably could have figured out where Lucius was after some sleuthing because "he's batman" but that would've taken time, which he can't really spare considering there's a bomb. It's much easier just to ask catwoman. Plus, he wanted her help for saving the city, not just for finding lucius, so that's another reason to talk with he.r
On July 30 2012 13:34 Melo. wrote: Did anyone else feel Bane was the only villain who truly instilled a sense of helplessness, where the audience begins to think "Damn, can Batman really do it?". Obviously we know Batman was gonna win before the movie started, but the type of feeling Bane/Nolan were able to create was something truly unique IMO.
yup, totally agree. I first got a hint of it when Batman saves catwoman in their first encounter, and Bane is just standing there on the building looking at the batcopter fly away. All I kept thinking during that was "shit Bane probably wants that batcopter. Batman's fucked."
|
I enjoyed the film, it was a fitting end to Nolans story.But he and I differ greatly on who Bruce Wayne is. He did nothing to help Gotham and hid away for 7 years?
It was a great elseworlds tale but I still havent seen a definitive Batman on screen.
|
One really cool piece of continuity that I liked:
Batman Begins: Lucius Fox says that the batsuit armor would "stop a knife." TDK: Batman has the armor altered for flexibility, but Lucius says the armor would now be more vulnerable to knives and gunfire. + Show Spoiler +TDKR: Batman gets stabbed by a knife.
|
@Talia's death
Ok, I give up. You've convinced me. It always takes two to get shot, one who fires, and another one who stands (or in this case: drives) in the way of the projectile... naturally, the victim is to blame. Furthermore, Batman eventually made the final plan up on the spot.
|
Son ... I am DISAPPOINT ... If Heath was able to do it, despite his usual pretty faggot-like roles as an actor before TDK, why can't others play villains convincingly :-( The Dark Knight Rises was "good" but it just wasn't "IT" and it left me disappointed because I expected it to be better, based on it's predecessor so to speak.
Puppy-eye Bane? ... FUCK YOU, I wished I had left the cinema -.-
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On July 31 2012 07:38 Poffel wrote:@Talia's death Ok, I give up. You've convinced me. It always takes two to get shot, one who fires, and another one who stands (or in this case: drives) in the way of the projectile... naturally, the victim is to blame. Furthermore, Batman eventually made the final plan up on the spot.
Simply put, a character is either prepared for a highly unlikely scenario
Taken from your link. Therefore it wasn't Batman's plan A but if it happened he had plan B. Can't really argue whether he had plan B or whether he came up with it after the fact, can't read his mind. Just going by what the movie gives us.
|
Some people seem to nitpick at the smallest things and makes it look like nothing can ever satisfy them. Only thing that saddens me is that Nolan won't be making anymore batman movies T.T
|
overall i liked the movie but one thing that stuck out for me between this and TDK was the perception of length rather than the actual length. with tdk and the joker, it feels like the second act begins early on and carrys on for almost 2 hours, constant action and excitement, then all of a sudden bam batman is scurrying away and we are hearing how he can take it...
in rise, it feels like the first act takes up the first hour of the film, normally this isnt a problem, but contrasted against tdk it makes the film feel like it comes to a close an hour too soon, because you forget about the first 45 minutes.
this isnt rises fault its just a little jarring comparing the two, and im aware of the difference between a second and third film of a trilogy, i just really enjoyed the pacing on tdk over rise and was hoping nolan would break the mold and use the same form for this film
|
Canada11265 Posts
Could not figure out where I recognized the CIA agent from. Petyr Baelish from Game of Thrones. I imagine someone else has posted this on here somewhere, but it was bugging me since seeing it.
On July 28 2012 18:54 Poffel wrote: Did anybody else get the impression that Batman/Bruce Wayne suffered from the "Frodo effect" in Dark Knigh Rises? Somehow it seemed to me as if Christian Bale played only a supporting role, and the whole plot seemed to be driven by other characters taking actions, making plans, and at times elaborating on their plans - while Batman was either in reactionary mode (for most of the movie) or seemed to charge problems heads-on (which both, at least for me, feels somewhat un-Batman-like, at least in comparison to his most iconic comic adaptations aka "world's greatest detective"/"earth's most dangerous man"). It was more of an ensemble story, which might have thrown some people off. I've heard the movie described as more a Bruce Wayne story than a Batman story. I quite enjoyed it minus a couple nitpicks, but I thought it was a decent ending to the trilogy.
|
|
|
|