Yes, I totally agree!
The Dark Knight Rises (Post-release)
- Thread starter Vivek
- Start date
Yes, I totally agree!
Hey, it's not just Bruce and Alfred that is in that scene you know. Gosh, everyone always wants to leave out the ladies. You people make me sick.
astroboy
Master Member
As for a reboot, I'd love to see one of two things:
1. Spin-off with blake. batman beyond or nightwing. I don't see him as trying to be batman
2. A new take on batman that tries not to be either camp, or dark. Lets go comic book circa 1970's. Blue cape. Grey suit. No armor. Something that would fit in with Marvels' take on their heroes. Personally, I think that's the only type of batman that could fit in with the JLA
1. Spin-off with blake. batman beyond or nightwing. I don't see him as trying to be batman
2. A new take on batman that tries not to be either camp, or dark. Lets go comic book circa 1970's. Blue cape. Grey suit. No armor. Something that would fit in with Marvels' take on their heroes. Personally, I think that's the only type of batman that could fit in with the JLA
MooMooEgg
Sr Member
Just my two cents, and I apologize for the blocks of text...
I've been reading a lot of reviews after seeing the film, and I've noticed that a majority of the complaints have been about the film not being fun and that Batman not being in the film enough.
Regarding the "fun" aspect. I can understand why people feel this way, but neither BB nor TDK were truly bright, happy films. In TDK, the Joker did bring a kind of insane and perverse lightheartedness to the film, and that was due to the nature of the character. Bane sin't like the Joker, nos should he be. He's there to be an imposing, physical force to counteract Batman's strength. I feel Nolan did a good job making the character stand on his own. No, he's not as calm or collected as Ra's, not as mysterious or enjoyable as The Joker, but there was more than enough backstory and physical presence brought to Bane to make him a decent character.
Many complaints have been that Bane can't hold a candle to the Joker, and my response to this is -- of course he can't. The Joker is the most iconic and popular of Batman's Rogue Gallery, someone who nearly everyone recognizes and feels familiar with. On the other hand, many people don't know who Bane is so it's hard for them to accept him as easily (not to mention you don't see and expressive face and it's hard to understand him in this incarnation). I read a few reviews that mentioned The Joker would have been perfect as the villain again because the whole aspect of mass chaos was in line with what he was trying to accomplish in TDK. I disagree, because the chaos here was more organized and had a definite goal, whereas The Joker's violence in TDK was more random and unstructured. Plus, if Heath Ledger was still with us and he did reprise his role as the main antagonist, I feel like people would be saying "The Joker again?". *coughx-menmagnetocough*
Regarding the lack of Batman presence: yes, I admit there could have been more scenes featuring Bats. For the geek in me though, the first showdown with Bane was amazing fanboy ambrosia appeased my need for Batman in the second half. I understand that won't satisfy the general viewer though (I actually laughed while reading a review stating that the encounter was unnecessarily brutal), but the structure of the story didn't call for too much Batman screen time.
I feel like Nolan's movies were more about the city as the main character, and Batman more as a constructive/destructive force affecting it. The tone of the trilogy, especially of TDKR, reminded me a lot of Gotham Central, where Batman was barely in the story and the officers of the Gotham Police Department were the main characters. Batman showed up only on occasion and was constantly alluded to, and honestly those stories are some of the best "Batman" tales out there (I hear the second half of TDKR draws a lot from the No Man's Land storyline, but I haven't read that yet).
Yes, I understand this does sound like fanboy rant trying to justify some of the flaws in the film. But again, just my two cents.
I've been reading a lot of reviews after seeing the film, and I've noticed that a majority of the complaints have been about the film not being fun and that Batman not being in the film enough.
Regarding the "fun" aspect. I can understand why people feel this way, but neither BB nor TDK were truly bright, happy films. In TDK, the Joker did bring a kind of insane and perverse lightheartedness to the film, and that was due to the nature of the character. Bane sin't like the Joker, nos should he be. He's there to be an imposing, physical force to counteract Batman's strength. I feel Nolan did a good job making the character stand on his own. No, he's not as calm or collected as Ra's, not as mysterious or enjoyable as The Joker, but there was more than enough backstory and physical presence brought to Bane to make him a decent character.
Many complaints have been that Bane can't hold a candle to the Joker, and my response to this is -- of course he can't. The Joker is the most iconic and popular of Batman's Rogue Gallery, someone who nearly everyone recognizes and feels familiar with. On the other hand, many people don't know who Bane is so it's hard for them to accept him as easily (not to mention you don't see and expressive face and it's hard to understand him in this incarnation). I read a few reviews that mentioned The Joker would have been perfect as the villain again because the whole aspect of mass chaos was in line with what he was trying to accomplish in TDK. I disagree, because the chaos here was more organized and had a definite goal, whereas The Joker's violence in TDK was more random and unstructured. Plus, if Heath Ledger was still with us and he did reprise his role as the main antagonist, I feel like people would be saying "The Joker again?". *coughx-menmagnetocough*
Regarding the lack of Batman presence: yes, I admit there could have been more scenes featuring Bats. For the geek in me though, the first showdown with Bane was amazing fanboy ambrosia appeased my need for Batman in the second half. I understand that won't satisfy the general viewer though (I actually laughed while reading a review stating that the encounter was unnecessarily brutal), but the structure of the story didn't call for too much Batman screen time.
I feel like Nolan's movies were more about the city as the main character, and Batman more as a constructive/destructive force affecting it. The tone of the trilogy, especially of TDKR, reminded me a lot of Gotham Central, where Batman was barely in the story and the officers of the Gotham Police Department were the main characters. Batman showed up only on occasion and was constantly alluded to, and honestly those stories are some of the best "Batman" tales out there (I hear the second half of TDKR draws a lot from the No Man's Land storyline, but I haven't read that yet).
Yes, I understand this does sound like fanboy rant trying to justify some of the flaws in the film. But again, just my two cents.
Werstrooper
Well-Known Member
Well one thing is for sure, Banes death was quicker than the Jokers pen trick.
Kit Rae
Sr Member
Exactly. This film needed the villain to be as far from the Joker as possible. In terms of the overall three-film story arc, it was very wise not to do a similar villain. I can't wait to watch all three films back to back when DKR hits Blue Ray. Each film is so different that together they work very well as a complex, ever changing story arc. I was not a big fan of the second half of BB, but wrapping up that storyline in DKR has made BB much more interesting.
Westies14
Master Member
Each film is so different???:wacko
I'm so surprised to see someone have this perspective! My biggest criticism of the series by far is how similar each film is. Two out of three have the same group of baddies with the same mission. All three have a very intelligent and well-organized antagonist (two of them very bizarre) trying to plunge Gotham into anarchy. In two out of three that antagonist appeals directly to the people of gotham, asking them to cross the line. You've got law enforcement against law enforcement in all three. Bridges blown/island isolated in two. People trying to escape Gotham in two of 'em. There are a thousand other similarities, some intentional or thematic and others just inside the same box. They're all three decent flicks, but they're really three films on the same scope dealing with the same type of antagonist and threat.
- D
I'm so surprised to see someone have this perspective! My biggest criticism of the series by far is how similar each film is. Two out of three have the same group of baddies with the same mission. All three have a very intelligent and well-organized antagonist (two of them very bizarre) trying to plunge Gotham into anarchy. In two out of three that antagonist appeals directly to the people of gotham, asking them to cross the line. You've got law enforcement against law enforcement in all three. Bridges blown/island isolated in two. People trying to escape Gotham in two of 'em. There are a thousand other similarities, some intentional or thematic and others just inside the same box. They're all three decent flicks, but they're really three films on the same scope dealing with the same type of antagonist and threat.
- D
He's not the only one, I also think that each of these movies are different, they all have a different atmosphere, different colors and different themes. Of course there are similarities, almost everyone in Batman's rogue gallery want the same thing : kill batman and destroy/control the city, criminals aren't complicated ! Yet each of them have their own ways of doing so and their own motivation to do so, that's what make a difference !
Too Much Garlic
Master Member
Being shot with a weapon strong enough to smash Tumblers I think it's a safe bet that he's dead.Who says Bane is dead? All we know is he got blasted by the pod and was thrown back and not seen from that point on. Something to the imagination left untouched at the end. Almost like how they get rid of characters who later come back from the dead in soap operas!
Yes indeed, it appears to be covered a bit more explicitly in the novelisation (if that holds any weight?):
“Now that the Dent Act had made it all but impossible for the city’s criminals to cop an insanity plea, it (Blackgate Prison) had replaced Arkham Asylum as a preferred location for imprisoning both convicted and suspected felons. The worst of the worst were sent here, except for the Joker, who, rumor had it, was locked away as Arkham’s sole remaining inmate. Or perhaps he had escaped. Nobody was really sure. Not even Selina.”
From Nuke the Fridge
niennumb1
Master Member
I still think Mr. Freeze dropped in (played by Schwarzenegger), took Bane's head off and spared him via a secret ops mission by Agent J. Schumaker.
"UUUAGAGAH!! GET DIS HEAD ON IICCCEEE!!!! WE FREEZE IT WELL! UAGAHAUGH!!! GET DUH HEAD TO DUH CHOPPAH!!!"
They get his frozen head to a cryo center and enter Freeze's quarters.
"It's COOOOOL that we got him in time. We will find a way to revive him and make him more CHILLING den evuh befoah! Tell Gotham deuh's a NEW storm coming... forecast... ICE!!! MMUUAAGAGHUGAH!!"
And then Bane comes back and terrorizes Gotham again as... "BBAAAAAAAAANNEEE!!!!"
Too Much Garlic
Master Member
Err... okay... :confused
3jack
Well-Known Member
I've only seen it once but I really enjoyed it. There were plot holes (Bane knowing exactly where everything was) things I wasn't overly fond of (Bane's voice really grated on me) and considering I was sat next to some guy who felt the need to keep repeating lines to his wife and giving her a running commentary "He's Robin" I kid you not he said this 6 times. Dude, your wife is sat next to you watching the same film, she knows he's Robin but over all it was good. I think Blake finding the cave was ok for me, I'd have left it with Alfred nodding at the camera and left us speculating.
I just want to know where they go from here? Please don't reboot it.
I just want to know where they go from here? Please don't reboot it.
My buddy and I saw it two nights ago and left the theater totally amped.
Personally, I liked the final Alfred Wayne scene. It was the end of the series (I believe) and liked knowing that Bruce calmed down and found a woman. If it would have had an Inception 'did the spinning top drop?' I would have let out a big groan. As far as Robin goes......I didnt see it coming:facepalm I was thinking he would be the next Batman.....not Robin.
Yea the fan boy in me would have liked to see more bat time, but over all it was well worth the ticket price.
Personally, I liked the final Alfred Wayne scene. It was the end of the series (I believe) and liked knowing that Bruce calmed down and found a woman. If it would have had an Inception 'did the spinning top drop?' I would have let out a big groan. As far as Robin goes......I didnt see it coming:facepalm I was thinking he would be the next Batman.....not Robin.
Yea the fan boy in me would have liked to see more bat time, but over all it was well worth the ticket price.
niennumb1
Master Member
It was a joke reference to "Batman & Robin" and the poor utilization of Bane in that film.
I agree with this. This movie didn't need a "make you wonder" ending. Yes, it's Nolan's style - but it's not Batman style.
And I think its apparent he is continuing on as Batman - not Robin. As someone else stated, a super hero wouldnt call themselves Robin if that was their real name. I think he was "Robin" as the cop, then took over being Batman after Wayne was gone. A neat way to have Robin without going totally overboard with it, IMO.
