The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

[SpartanX]

Originally Posted by GuruAskew

TDKR is a bigger failure than QoS. On their own merits QoS is flat-out superior as a film but it also gets a break for being a troubled production whereas TDKR had no such handicap and managed to disappoint.

I think QoS falling between two of the best Bond movies ever is going to further harm it already-shaky reputation but its substantially better than a good chunk of the Bond films of the past regardless of what the Internet hive mind has decided.

Defending TDKR, on the other hand, is also largely a product if said hive mind. There is an undeniable residual fanboyism that goes back from before the film was even released. "In Nolan We Trust" and all that nonsense.

To a point the people who preordered tickets to 10 different showings before they ever saw the film are always gonna be there treating it like a misunderstood masterpiece but less then a year later the tide has definitely turned whether the fans will admit it or not. TDKR failed as a trilogy-ender just as badly as so many have before it.

This whole idea of cramming Batman into a trilogy is the most demonstrable evidence of Nolan's misunderstanding of (at best, and contempt for, at worse) the character because there is no ending to the Batman story, especially not one that satisfied everyone, and certainly not one that involves the character retiring happily.

There's a reason why people have accepted The Dark Knight Returns and Batman Beyond: they portray an older version of the character whose ideals are strong even as his physical body weakens. No Batman fan wants to see him happily sipping coffee in an Italian cafe. But that's what you get when a self-loathing fanbase lines up to kiss the ass of a pretentious director who will happily strip away iconography like the Batsignal and the Batcave, not to mention his barely-Batmobile. If Nolan could have gotten away with getting rid of the cape and cowl he probably would have too. And all of these immature nerds who were tired of seeing "boring grown-up films" recognized by the Hollywood establishment loved him for it.

But no, Nolan sat on a beloved character for 8 years and stripped away those iconic and defining features so he could put the character in a bunch of meandering Michael Mann and Bond "homages" set against shiny buildings.

And now that he's done and his trilogy stands as a complete statement with a beginning, a middle and an end people are starting to see that it for the flawed and inept piece of filmmaking that it really is.

Warner Bros. has basically thrown the four previous Batman films under the bus (some more deservedly than others) and hung all their hopes on this overrated trilogy and its causing them headaches now as they need to copy what Marvel/Disney are doing and they have to reconcile TDKR's ridiculous ending with their Justice League movie. None of this would have been happening if they would have done what they've been doing on Bond for years: rolling with the punches, learning from their mistakes and understanding that if people don't like the most recent Bond film that they just need to get it right the next time, and it's a lot easier and more effective to plug that constantly-evolving Batman (and Superman, for that matter) into a team movie.

Umm... You're saying Nolan didn't understand the character of Batman? Wow. You clearly didn't understand the trilogy. This is the MOVIES not the COMIC BOOKS. Most extremely popular comic book characters stories go and for forever. Nolan's trilogy has a structured beginning, middle, and end.

Yeah and there's a reason WB through the Burton/Schumacher films under the bus...they haven't aged well.

[Sherlock_Jr]

Originally Posted by SpartanX

Umm... You're saying Nolan didn't understand the character of Batman? Wow. You clearly didn't understand the trilogy. This is the MOVIES not the COMIC BOOKS. Most extremely popular comic book characters stories go and for forever. Nolan's trilogy has a structured beginning, middle, and end.

Yeah and there's a reason WB through the Burton/Schumacher films under the bus...they haven't aged well.

I don't think Nolan understood Batman at all. Batman was, first and foremost, the "world's greatest detective." He didn't do 2 minutes of detective work in the entire trilogy, except for Googling Catwoman and finding a mis-spelled headline.

Although I really dug Batman Begins, for the way that they essentially made fear a character and the impetus of why he becomes Batman. But then that's completely discarded by the 3rd film where Batman is now a "symbol" and it's implied that anyone (JGL) can take up the mantle with none of the (years of) training or psychological turmoil that Bruce Wayne had to go though to get to Batman in the first place.

[spawningblue]

Craig Bonds better then Nolan Batman trilogy? No, god no.

Craig Bond films better then so called older Bond snorefests? , a lot of kids in this thread I assume.

[brucewayne99]

Or! Or, or... stick with me here... or people have a different opinion then you! 87 % on Rotten Tomatoes tells me that for the most part, people loved the movie.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by GuruAskew

TDKR is a bigger failure than QoS. On their own merits QoS is flat-out superior as a film but it also gets a break for being a troubled production whereas TDKR had no such handicap and managed to disappoint.

I think QoS falling between two of the best Bond movies ever is going to further harm it already-shaky reputation but its substantially better than a good chunk of the Bond films of the past regardless of what the Internet hive mind has decided.

Defending TDKR, on the other hand, is also largely a product if said hive mind. There is an undeniable residual fanboyism that goes back from before the film was even released. "In Nolan We Trust" and all that nonsense.

To a point the people who preordered tickets to 10 different showings before they ever saw the film are always gonna be there treating it like a misunderstood masterpiece but less then a year later the tide has definitely turned whether the fans will admit it or not. TDKR failed as a trilogy-ender just as badly as so many have before it.

This whole idea of cramming Batman into a trilogy is the most demonstrable evidence of Nolan's misunderstanding of (at best, and contempt for, at worse) the character because there is no ending to the Batman story, especially not one that satisfied everyone, and certainly not one that involves the character retiring happily.

There's a reason why people have accepted The Dark Knight Returns and Batman Beyond: they portray an older version of the character whose ideals are strong even as his physical body weakens. No Batman fan wants to see him happily sipping coffee in an Italian cafe. But that's what you get when a self-loathing fanbase lines up to kiss the ass of a pretentious director who will happily strip away iconography like the Batsignal and the Batcave, not to mention his barely-Batmobile. If Nolan could have gotten away with getting rid of the cape and cowl he probably would have too. And all of these immature nerds who were tired of seeing "boring grown-up films" recognized by the Hollywood establishment loved him for it.

But no, Nolan sat on a beloved character for 8 years and stripped away those iconic and defining features so he could put the character in a bunch of meandering Michael Mann and Bond "homages" set against shiny buildings.

And now that he's done and his trilogy stands as a complete statement with a beginning, a middle and an end people are starting to see that it for the flawed and inept piece of filmmaking that it really is.

Warner Bros. has basically thrown the four previous Batman films under the bus (some more deservedly than others) and hung all their hopes on this overrated trilogy and its causing them headaches now as they need to copy what Marvel/Disney are doing and they have to reconcile TDKR's ridiculous ending with their Justice League movie. None of this would have been happening if they would have done what they've been doing on Bond for years: rolling with the punches, learning from their mistakes and understanding that if people don't like the most recent Bond film that they just need to get it right the next time, and it's a lot easier and more effective to plug that constantly-evolving Batman (and Superman, for that matter) into a team movie.

Hand grenade: check
Safety pin pulled: check
Hand grenade lobbed: check

[ManWithNoUsername]

Originally Posted by spawningblue

Craig Bonds better then Nolan Batman trilogy? No, god no.

Craig Bond films better then so called older Bond snorefests? , a lot of kids in this thread I assume.

Its an opinion. When I said I like the new Bonds more is because all 3 of them feature what I loved about Bond, way before Daniel Craig came along. The character is still in tact across multiple actors.

With the new Batman movies, yes I like them just as movies, but much of what I love about the Batman comics does not exist much or at all in these movies. So little of him sneaking around in the shadows, so little detective work, boring looking Gothams that are way too identifiable as Chicago, Pitt and NYC. That sort of lazy filmmaking doesnt fly with me at all. If you're going to show NYC in Rises, how about Photoshopping out the Freedom Tower???? Sheesh. Just awful.

Begins sort of feels like a Batman movie to me. They put some effort into that one with the Narrows, but the other 2, flat out lazy. TDK feels like Heat to me with Batman shoehorned into it. Is it that hard to Photoshop out the antennae on the Sears tower so Im not reminded this is just a movie in Chicago? Nolan is highly overrated.

I definitely love the new Bonds more than these new Batmans. I dont think they are terrible, but just not as good FOR ME.

[insomniac013]

Originally Posted by Reubania

I think I almost spat my drink out of laughter. It was THE worst scene in the whole movie. I cringed. Don't get me wrong, I ADORE Marion as an actress, but she kinda plays the same kind of character (very similar feel and nuance to her character in "Inception" - funnily, another Nolan movie) and they could have done so much more with her in TDKR. But boy did I see the twist coming and her "acting" was almost laughable. I don't blame her of course. I blame Nolan and his brother for writing a poor character and underutilising her talents. They should be

I thought she was amazing in Inception.

In TDKR however she was pretty much wasted and so was Talia.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by insomniac013

I thought she was amazing in Inception.

In TDKR however she was pretty much wasted and so was Talia.

Yeah I think they threw her in to have 3 villains, the only good thing is I adore Cotillard. Talia Al Ghul deserved a lot more lead-in and development than she got, even if you count the twist and the "escape story".

[Reubania]

Originally Posted by insomniac013

I thought she was amazing in Inception.

In TDKR however she was pretty much wasted and so was Talia.

Oh, she WAS amazing in Inception! But I felt Nolan wanted her to essentially reply her character in that movie for TDKR. It was lazy and such a waste on a beautiful, talented actress.

[Falaskan]

Originally Posted by SpartanX

Sorry, dont like how Bond's isnt campy anymore? Deal with it. Casino Royale and Skyfall are the best Bond movie of all time. U mad?

lol the old ones were campy, weren't they.

[Gh0stface]

Tom Hiddleston won best villain, what a joke. Tom Hardy was robbed.

[King Troll]

Originally Posted by Gh0stface

Tom Hiddleston won best villain, what a joke. Tom Hardy was robbed.

Calvin Candie was robbed

[GuruAskew]

Originally Posted by King Troll

Calvin Candie was robbed

Agreed. But Hiddleston's Loki really is a better villain than Hardy's Bane. I'd even say better by far.

[The Laughing Man2501]

Originally Posted by GuruAskew

Agreed. But Hiddleston's Loki really is a better villain than Hardy's Bane. I'd even say better by far.

I've gotta disagree with that. It is an opinion which is better, but mine is that Hardy did better with Bane than Hiddleston did with Loki. Hardy made me not care about all the changes they made to the character for the movie, and that's no small feat.

[Early Memphis]

Originally Posted by Gh0stface

Tom Hiddleston won best villain, what a joke. Tom Hardy was robbed.

Originally Posted by King Troll

Calvin Candie was robbed

Originally Posted by GuruAskew

Agreed. But Hiddleston's Loki really is a better villain than Hardy's Bane. I'd even say better by far.

Yeah, Hiddleston's Loki wasn't much, but then again, other than that weird, miked-up voice, neither was Tom Hardy's Bane. It wasn't exactly a banner year for great villains (haven't seen Django yet).

[King Troll]

Originally Posted by GuruAskew

Agreed. But Hiddleston's Loki really is a better villain than Hardy's Bane. I'd even say better by far.

I agree completely but bane has some good lines such as
Bane: fffffaasxcffchjh dn ffbjjh

[Gh0stface]

Originally Posted by King Troll

I agree completely but bane has some good lines such as
Bane: fffffaasxcffchjh dn ffbjjh

If you couldn't understand Bane, then you need to get your hearing checked.

[Cabby]

Originally Posted by Darth Anakin

Yeah I think they threw her in to have 3 villains, the only good thing is I adore Cotillard. Talia Al Ghul deserved a lot more lead-in and development than she got, even if you count the twist and the "escape story".

I don't think that was the reason Talia Al Ghul was thrown in. I think it was to tie the trilogy together but I wish it wasn't a "twist" and she was just flat out the villain in the film. I could have lived without Bane. I wouldn't have minded if it was just Catwoman as the villain/hero with Talia as the main villain. Bane, I felt, was thrown in just to make the film function as it's own summer tentpole but in terms of the actual trilogy narrative, Al Ghul should have been the main villain.

[Extremis]

Originally Posted by Cabby

I don't think that was the reason Talia Al Ghul was thrown in. I think it was to tie the trilogy together but I wish it wasn't a "twist" and she was just flat out the villain in the film. I could have lived without Bane. I wouldn't have minded if it was just Catwoman as the villain/hero with Talia as the main villain. Bane, I felt, was thrown in just to make the film function as it's own summer tentpole but in terms of the actual trilogy narrative, Al Ghul should have been the main villain.

No. Wrong. Wrong. False.

Stop acting like Bane is a pawn.

[JohnWayne]

I hated Banes voice and actually found it annoying throughout the movie. Not sure if it was my sound system but his voice sounded louder than everybody else's. I think Bane was the reason TDKR was the only movie out Nolans trilogy to not get nominated for any oscars.