Short version: I saw it at a midnight opening, full price, with three friends. One friend is dyed in the wool Batman fanboy, two others are not necessarily Batman fans, but like Batman and some of the versions, I generally dislike Batman, but like some of his incarnations. All four of us are in agreement on these things: 1) 1960's Batman is fun, if campy. 2) Batman: The Animated Series was best thing ever (and the only version I actively like). 3) Batman Begins and The Dark Knight were great movies.
Three of us came out of the movie disappointed. My local theater chain does weekday, half-price showings before noon. I could have waited for a half-price midday show.
I did notice alot of the quibbles Bob had, but the majority of my issues were with the second half, namely the "lower-class revolution" and the final battle sequence.
The problem with the revolution is that there isn't one. We get a few scenes of "loot the rich people" capped with a throwaway socialist justification of (paraphrased and interpreted) "They have more money they don't deserve, so lets take it because they don't deserve it." This all ends when Bane goes to Blackgate and intones (paraphrasing and interpretation incoming) "This prison is full of mean, harsh, hardened criminals and murderers who deserve to be here. But they wouldn't be here if the laws were fair, so lets make things fair by letting them out and giving them guns." After that point, the streets are clear and pristine, completely lifeless. No looters, no vagrants, just the merc convoys and the occasional cop. And we're told the cops that had remained above ground were being hunted down, and yet these few are left to their devices when there isn't a single other living thing on the streets, at all.
As for the final battle. When the military had managed to get Special Forces on the ground to meet with the remaining police, they were ambushed and killed quickly and efficiently. Professional soldier (military or merc) quickly and efficiently. Then later, when the cops make their march on Bane, they are faced with most of the merc/convict crew, armed with body armor, military grade automatic weapons, and a few of the Tumblers, while the cops had, at best, law enforcement issue vests, handguns, and the occasional shotgun. Plus, they made their march over open ground, with no cover, and no tactic other than Zerg Rush. And despite superior numbers the cops weren't completely mowed down by massed automatic weapons fire? This is age-old, a smaller, better equipped force defeating a numerically superior but worse equipped force. Its practically US military modus operandi, and in a lot cases it works.
And then there's the Bat. Despite its unrealistic design, for all intents and purposes, it functions like a military-grade helicopter. Okay, yes, I can suspend my disbelief for this thing, to an extent. But it has no autopilot, something that even functioning military prototypes have. And then it pulls an "outrun the heatseeking missiles" routine followed by turning them back on the shooter, and then I go cross-eyed. Simply, helicopters are not that fast (I could say similar about the speed required to get rid of the bomb within the time limit), and surface-to-air missiles are not that slow.
Why do I have problem? Because for all of Nolan's directorial flourishes, as well as the unrealistic things that appear, one thing Nolan had otherwise remained consistent with within his works have been deference to the technology and hardware and how it can possibly/actually/realistically function. The Tumbler can exist and function as shown/advertised, so can the Pod, except for maybe the spinning wheels bit. Even the Inception Dream Machine, while not real, was said to be operating under very specific, very reasonable (potentially realistic) set of guidelnes. The Bat can't.
And seriously, the Pod's guns are more powerful than the Bat's? Are those little .50 Caliber barrels shooting grenades or something?
)
