Dark Knight Rises - Now that we know the cast — Page 28

darth_ender said:

Just watched this for the first time since the theater.  I have to say I liked it even better this time.  I'm a big fan of watching films with subtitles, so I picked up a lot better on many of the subtleties of the plot.  Understanding it better made for a better story.  The first time I loved it as a thrill ride that I only was able to follow fairly well.  This time it was much clearer and Bane's motives made much more sense to me.  The whole OWS stuff was merely an opportunity to further torture Gotham and not anything he believed in at all.  Many of the themes were interesting, and sort of countered the themes of the previous film.  While TDK showed us the grey area of the necessity of living and believing a lie, TDKR showed us the ultimate damage that can come from that lie.  While BB taught Batman to face and conquer his fear, TDKR required him to thrive in it and be motivated by it.  And obviously, the overarching theme of overcoming all odds and rising returns.  I understand that it's not a film for everyone, but gosh I really enjoy it, and much of the criticism leveled against it still sounds rather picky to me, rather than rational and based on the same standards held for other films.  I really love this movie, and I find the whole trilogy to be a successful series!

I might able to really like TDKR, if not for the ending.  

I just can't get myself over

Spoiler:

Bruce retiring from being Batman and going away with Catwoman.    Stupid and asinine.  She set him up for Bane to beat the s__t out of him.    She helped Bane with his plan.    She is an accessory to all of the crimes Bane committed, at least the ones he committed after she set up Batman.    She is a criminal and she should be in jail.    

I just can't get over it.    Perhaps someone can do a fan edit and have Batman actually die in the end.   Although it would be a sad ending,  it would be an ending I could tolerate.  

I think two fan edits could resolve the problem for me:

1) Slightly rearrange the ending so that all the hinting at Bruce's possible survival remain, but that the last shot is Alfred looking at the camera, smiling, and nodding. It would still be slightly ambiguous, much like Inception, where we're pretty darn sure that we know everything ended up happy, but there's just a teeny tiny bit of doubt.

OR

2) Cut all references to his survival and simply imply that John Blake took over, thus strengthening the message that Batman's a symbol, not a person, and that even with Bruce dead, Batman lives on.

Personally I favor the first option.

Nevertheless, I still really enjoy the film, despite a slightly weakened ending. I feel it could have been slightly better with one of the two endings I mentioned, but as it is, the true ending does not damage the film too seriously for me.

I agree with your reasoning as well.  No way Bruce would ever give up the cape and cowl.    He is more Batman than Bruce Wayne.  

I can't get over why they hired Tom Hardy, got him to rebuild his body to that level, stuck a mask over his mouth and allowed him to perform in that ridiculous voice.

They could have hired any muscleman in a mask and got a good voice actor in and got a character you could believe in and understand for a fraction of the price.

It has been done before.

Killing off Bane like that was silly too.

That and the whole city under occupation plot had zero tension.

All the Bale films are overrated but they were also rather good this one was pretty rubbishy. 

To be honest, the only good thing about the whole Nolan trilogy was Heath ledger. Nolan said himself that he never went to film school, and in TDKR it shows. Even RLM stated once that he isn't a "real" filmmaker and can't hold a candle to directors like David Fincher or Paul Thomas Anderson. His batman films are on par with Burton's and Scumacher's, if not worse in light of the third film. No one can make a good third film, it is just an impossibility.

generalfrevious said: His batman films are on par with Burton's and Scumacher's, if not worse in light of the third film. No one can make a good third film, it is just an impossibility.

 

As a film school grad, I can tell you the sign of a good filmmaker is that they never went to film school. It's kind of an inside joke in the actual film industry. There's a few of us school grads in there, but we're a distinct minority.

Okay, you got me there. But will Nolan be considered a great filmmaker 20 years down the road? If he is, it won't be for the batman movies. 

He will be, and that's exactly why he will be. Whether you agree is another matter. But they are already considered modern classics.

Dark knight yes, begins maybe, TDKR no. There are too many plot holes in the story, rather sloppy continuity errors, and 30 minutes and half a dozen characters could have been cut from it. Plus, at the end everyone in Gotham would end up dying of radiation sickness, making batman's sacrifice null and void.

I guess. All I know is that I was entertained by the film more than the previous two. Star Wars has a ton of plot holes as well, but in the end I don't really care. Some movies are better than the sum of their parts.

It not the plot holes themselves, it's wether or not they break suspension of disbelief. In Star Wars and the dark knight, you don't really notice them at all because you are too invested in the story. But in a film like Prometheus and TDKR, they pull you out of the movie because they add up too fast and become the focus instead of the story.

Plus, Nolan's films have a reputation for being too talky and more based on ideas instaead of visuals. In a visual medium like film, that's not really encouraged.

generalfrevious said:

Even RLM stated once that he isn't a "real" filmmaker and can't hold a candle to directors like David Fincher or Paul Thomas Anderson. 

 

Well, RLM sure sure is a credible authority to cite. The guy that made "Memento" and "The Prestige" isn't a real filmmaker. Gotcha. 

He has made his films overlong as of late. Do you remember any films he made in the last 10 years that were under 2 hours.

To be honest, I like Nolan as a filmmaker, and I don't hate TDKR as some people on the Internet do. I mean I really enjoyed inception and the dark knight to be honest with you. 

generalfrevious said:

He has made his films overlong as of late. Do you remember any films he made in the last 10 years that were under 2 hours.

 

I can say the same for Katherine Bigelow, Paul Thomas Anderson,  Peter Jackson, and Steven Spielberg, and every Marvel superhero film.  

Just because it's over 2 hours doesn't mean it's overlong.

I would like to think that Nolan will be considered a great director, 20 years from now, and I think there is evidence to support that hope. His movies have made over $1.6 billion in the US. He's received three Oscar nominations (though admittedly not for directing), two nominations each from the PGA and the WGA, which, again, weren't for directing, but, then again he's received three nominations from the DGA which were, obviously, for directing. He has three films many would consider classics (Memento, The Dark Knight, Inception) and others (Insomnia, Batman Begins, The Prestige) that have very devoted followings. And as for the Dark Knight Trilogy, its influence on the mainstream cinematic landscape has been a major, and some would say, beneficial one.

All of this in 15 years (since he started in 1998).

I forgot he was doing that. Still skeptical. Probably will work out.

Nolan has stamped Batman pretty distinctly for the majority of the world, I know  bloggery computer guys are going through the 3rd movie with a red pen these days, but its still going to be pretty definitive for everyone else for a long time. The justice league movie has 2 big hills to climb, establishing a new Batman so soon and not appearing to just be the RC cola version of Avengers.