This is the only review of Bob's I've ever watched that I came away from simply saying '...you're absolutely wrong.' I just saw the midnight showing and don't agree with anything mentioned in this video. This review was so off annoying my boyfriend asked me to turn if off around the four-minute mark, but I insisted we watch the rest of it because it was almost over and I (usually) respect Bob's opinion on movies.
Everything Bane does is more intense than the Joker. The stakes are higher, the action is more intense and the Joker as portrayed by Heath ledger could never orchestrate a plot as complicated and well-planned as. The Joker in the Dark Knight employed nothing but greedy, insane psychopaths that were nothing but idiotic, brainwashed or blackmailed bodies to be disposed of in his name.
The plot of The Dark Knight is laughable when you place it anywhere near the smallest of candles. You can't take anything the Joker does seriously when you seriously take into consideration how even the smallest parts of his schemes could go awry at any moment. He needed so much to go coincidentally right (the smallest instance being Harvey Dent's coin flips at any point after being hospitalized) at such precise moments that, and in such small amounts of time, that it's a joke that he accomplished anything. And even buying into that, the most devastating outcome he could have accomplished is that a couple boats get blown up, some cops get killed and he gets away.
Heath Ledger did an amazing job as the Joker, but due to his death and the time the movie has had to saturate popular opinion it feels that people have romanticized his role to a point where no other performance even has the right to compare, whether it's genuinely better or not. Sure, maybe Bane can't pull off the charismatic insanity Ledger had, but his character doesn't lend itself to that. He isn't fun because simply because he's insane, he's engaging as a powerful, terrifying mastermind in a way the Joker characteristically never could be. His plan, recruited help and fail-safes make more sense and are far better thought out, as is the plausibility of him reaching any later stage of his efforts. By the time of his defeat, luck seems to be more on Batman's side than his, which is the complete opposite of the Joker's.
As for the pacing I didn't see any problem in it. The movie only skips over segments of time that are unnecessary to the audience, keeping the film from being six hours or so long, with plenty enough narrative to keep the viewer constantly aware of what's happening and engaged in the plot. As for the action, I don't know what Bob wanted. The fistfighting scenes were wonderfully executed, plenty stylish and brutal. Was he expecting Star Wars III level flipping and jumping around? I can't even tell what he wanted there.
All the supporting characters in the movie only made the whole package better, not take away from the main protagonist. The reinvented backstories are no more bothersome than the reimagining of Heath Ledger's Joker (come on, the guy could wash off his makeup for Christ's sake). And Batman not constantly being Batman successfully showed the character being more human than machine, with his breakdown, rediscovery in himself and ending being consistent to the story the director had in store, versus just being another terminator that can do no wrong.
By the end credits I felt they -had- successfully surpassed The Dark Knight with the weight of the plot, personal evolution of the characters and brought a satisfactory (if possibly temporary) end to the series. Everything done was consistent, exciting fantastically produced.
So far everything I've read or heard here to the contrary has only come off as unsupported whining. I expected far more from Bob.
Everything Bane does is more intense than the Joker. The stakes are higher, the action is more intense and the Joker as portrayed by Heath ledger could never orchestrate a plot as complicated and well-planned as. The Joker in the Dark Knight employed nothing but greedy, insane psychopaths that were nothing but idiotic, brainwashed or blackmailed bodies to be disposed of in his name.
The plot of The Dark Knight is laughable when you place it anywhere near the smallest of candles. You can't take anything the Joker does seriously when you seriously take into consideration how even the smallest parts of his schemes could go awry at any moment. He needed so much to go coincidentally right (the smallest instance being Harvey Dent's coin flips at any point after being hospitalized) at such precise moments that, and in such small amounts of time, that it's a joke that he accomplished anything. And even buying into that, the most devastating outcome he could have accomplished is that a couple boats get blown up, some cops get killed and he gets away.
Heath Ledger did an amazing job as the Joker, but due to his death and the time the movie has had to saturate popular opinion it feels that people have romanticized his role to a point where no other performance even has the right to compare, whether it's genuinely better or not. Sure, maybe Bane can't pull off the charismatic insanity Ledger had, but his character doesn't lend itself to that. He isn't fun because simply because he's insane, he's engaging as a powerful, terrifying mastermind in a way the Joker characteristically never could be. His plan, recruited help and fail-safes make more sense and are far better thought out, as is the plausibility of him reaching any later stage of his efforts. By the time of his defeat, luck seems to be more on Batman's side than his, which is the complete opposite of the Joker's.
As for the pacing I didn't see any problem in it. The movie only skips over segments of time that are unnecessary to the audience, keeping the film from being six hours or so long, with plenty enough narrative to keep the viewer constantly aware of what's happening and engaged in the plot. As for the action, I don't know what Bob wanted. The fistfighting scenes were wonderfully executed, plenty stylish and brutal. Was he expecting Star Wars III level flipping and jumping around? I can't even tell what he wanted there.
All the supporting characters in the movie only made the whole package better, not take away from the main protagonist. The reinvented backstories are no more bothersome than the reimagining of Heath Ledger's Joker (come on, the guy could wash off his makeup for Christ's sake). And Batman not constantly being Batman successfully showed the character being more human than machine, with his breakdown, rediscovery in himself and ending being consistent to the story the director had in store, versus just being another terminator that can do no wrong.
By the end credits I felt they -had- successfully surpassed The Dark Knight with the weight of the plot, personal evolution of the characters and brought a satisfactory (if possibly temporary) end to the series. Everything done was consistent, exciting fantastically produced.
So far everything I've read or heard here to the contrary has only come off as unsupported whining. I expected far more from Bob.