Knightfail
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I agree with most of what is on this list.
I mean, though I really liked the twist with Talia, she didn't make a whole lot of difference. With more screentime, and more influence over Wayne's decisions, her betrayal would have made a lot more sense, and had more dramatic impact.
It was the exposition that really got to me in this film. Almost every major scene seemed to have someone explaining what is going on. it was really sloppy writing, and the information could have easily been inferred by the visuals/action.
That said, I feel like Nolan had improved in a couple of key areas:
It was nice to see Gotham during the day, and I liked the increase in scale - in previous movies, you got less sense of it being a big city, and more of it being a small district, consisting purely of dark alleyways.
Oh boy have the fist fights improved. When Bane and Batman go at it, you can see every punch connect (each one sounding like an explosion). The Batman/Bane fights are fairly crucial, so I'm pleased Nolan got it right.
I mean, though I really liked the twist with Talia, she didn't make a whole lot of difference. With more screentime, and more influence over Wayne's decisions, her betrayal would have made a lot more sense, and had more dramatic impact.
It was the exposition that really got to me in this film. Almost every major scene seemed to have someone explaining what is going on. it was really sloppy writing, and the information could have easily been inferred by the visuals/action.
That said, I feel like Nolan had improved in a couple of key areas:
It was nice to see Gotham during the day, and I liked the increase in scale - in previous movies, you got less sense of it being a big city, and more of it being a small district, consisting purely of dark alleyways.
Oh boy have the fist fights improved. When Bane and Batman go at it, you can see every punch connect (each one sounding like an explosion). The Batman/Bane fights are fairly crucial, so I'm pleased Nolan got it right.
I agree with the passage of time point, the previous movies occurred over (what seemed) a few days/weeks, whilst this one had the 'months' thing compressed into a few hours.. didn't really work.
I found the Robin twist to be rather exciting, as obvious as that one was
The explanations point is also true, but only for some cases for me. I liked the Bane battling Batman part, the constant dialogue about how weak Batman was compared to Bane was quite heart-pounding
The 'explanation' that got on my nerves was the scene where Catwoman was trying to locate the device that wiped her records. The antagonist in the scene was literally explaining the sole purpose of the device to her face, where she obviously knew what it was and what it would do.
"I'm after this.."
"What?? You mean THAT?"
"Yeah, tha-"
"The device that can wipe your criminal history?"
"That's the on-"
"The machine where, in the blink of an eye, all of your records are deleted in a fraction of a second??!?!?!?!?!"
"Yeah, that's the id-"
"The electronic arrangement of equipment that, when activated, allows for the user----"
You get the idea, that was kind of disappointing.
But overall, I liked the film
I found the Robin twist to be rather exciting, as obvious as that one was
The explanations point is also true, but only for some cases for me. I liked the Bane battling Batman part, the constant dialogue about how weak Batman was compared to Bane was quite heart-pounding
The 'explanation' that got on my nerves was the scene where Catwoman was trying to locate the device that wiped her records. The antagonist in the scene was literally explaining the sole purpose of the device to her face, where she obviously knew what it was and what it would do.
"I'm after this.."
"What?? You mean THAT?"
"Yeah, tha-"
"The device that can wipe your criminal history?"
"That's the on-"
"The machine where, in the blink of an eye, all of your records are deleted in a fraction of a second??!?!?!?!?!"
"Yeah, that's the id-"
"The electronic arrangement of equipment that, when activated, allows for the user----"
You get the idea, that was kind of disappointing.
But overall, I liked the film
My questions (WITH SPOILERS):
1) How does Batman survive the fusion bomb at the end? He was shown to be in the cockpit of his plane mere seconds before detonation, and the blast radius was at least 6 miles. They said "autopilot", but I didn't see him eject in time. Also, he would then land in the icy water, in full body-armor, and either sink like a rock or freeze to death in minutes. Plus, if he swam to shore, someone would've spotted him.
2) How did Batman get INTO Gotham in the first place? He was stripped of all his gear and belongings and Gotham was entirely cut off from the rest of the world. How'd he get into the city?
3) The giant, flaming bat-signal on the bridge. Yeah, it's cool and all, but when did Bruce get the time to climb the bridge (monitored by both police and criminals) and prep it with gasoline all over... and then calmly wait at the bottom for Gordon's execution to spring the signal?
4) If the goal of the League of Shadows with Ra's Al Ghul was to eliminate the problems of Gotham by destroying the city, and 8 years later Gotham is practically crime-free, citizens are living peacefully, and Batman himself is retired, why on earth would they attack? Gotham HAD peace. They're the ones that caused all the problems.
5) If the true aim of the League, Talia, and Bane was to dupe Bruce into giving them the bomb, why did they jeopardize their plan by staging massive terrorist attacks that served no real purpose other than to get their men killed and put their plan at risk?
6) How did they know where Batman's armory was? The only ones that knew were both Bruce and Lucius Fox.
7) Batman's plane seriously was just camped out at the top of a building for nearly a year? He didn't even take it back to the cave. He just left it out in the open under a suspicious looking tarp and nobody found it?
8) It may not be a plothole, but does the movie seriously expect me to think that a 10 year old girl has the strength and will to crawl out of a hole in the ground, but none of these strong, full-grown men could do it? Or, for that matter, they couldn't just build a ladder or something out?
9) People know who Bruce Wayne is. He's a rich, famous billionaire playboy. If Bill Gates faked his death and was then spotted in public, you'd think someone would notice.
10) "You won't give up on me, will you Alfred?" "Never." -Batman Begins. Alfred totally gives up on him. Dammit, Alfred!
1) How does Batman survive the fusion bomb at the end? He was shown to be in the cockpit of his plane mere seconds before detonation, and the blast radius was at least 6 miles. They said "autopilot", but I didn't see him eject in time. Also, he would then land in the icy water, in full body-armor, and either sink like a rock or freeze to death in minutes. Plus, if he swam to shore, someone would've spotted him.
2) How did Batman get INTO Gotham in the first place? He was stripped of all his gear and belongings and Gotham was entirely cut off from the rest of the world. How'd he get into the city?
3) The giant, flaming bat-signal on the bridge. Yeah, it's cool and all, but when did Bruce get the time to climb the bridge (monitored by both police and criminals) and prep it with gasoline all over... and then calmly wait at the bottom for Gordon's execution to spring the signal?
4) If the goal of the League of Shadows with Ra's Al Ghul was to eliminate the problems of Gotham by destroying the city, and 8 years later Gotham is practically crime-free, citizens are living peacefully, and Batman himself is retired, why on earth would they attack? Gotham HAD peace. They're the ones that caused all the problems.
5) If the true aim of the League, Talia, and Bane was to dupe Bruce into giving them the bomb, why did they jeopardize their plan by staging massive terrorist attacks that served no real purpose other than to get their men killed and put their plan at risk?
6) How did they know where Batman's armory was? The only ones that knew were both Bruce and Lucius Fox.
7) Batman's plane seriously was just camped out at the top of a building for nearly a year? He didn't even take it back to the cave. He just left it out in the open under a suspicious looking tarp and nobody found it?
8) It may not be a plothole, but does the movie seriously expect me to think that a 10 year old girl has the strength and will to crawl out of a hole in the ground, but none of these strong, full-grown men could do it? Or, for that matter, they couldn't just build a ladder or something out?
9) People know who Bruce Wayne is. He's a rich, famous billionaire playboy. If Bill Gates faked his death and was then spotted in public, you'd think someone would notice.
10) "You won't give up on me, will you Alfred?" "Never." -Batman Begins. Alfred totally gives up on him. Dammit, Alfred!
SPOILER ALERT: can't be assed to add several spoiler tags to certain sections.Fappy said:
this seems to sum up my feelings on it completely. i had a few niggling doubts, but overall i still loved the film. personally i liked how it was a total contrast to the dark knight in some aspects in regards to the villans (the joker used subterfuge and guerrilla tactics while the gotham police and batman were the powerhouses, yet in DKR bane and his men become in control and the police have to sneak around).
my main gripe was with bane though. don't get me wrong, i thought he was brilliant, and tom hardy was fantastic playing him, but the insta-death thing pissed me off, he deserved a better send off than that. the problem was in creating bane's new image as the sidekick, he suddenly became less important and we were expected to stop caring about him...
but i digress, i really liked the film and the ending satisfied me overall
I've said it before. Every movie has plot holes. Godfather, Star Wars, Avengers; it doesn't matter. Every story has holes because no author is omnipotent. The measure of a movie's worth is in its ability to make you forget the plot holes, and on that front the Dark Knight Rises succeeded for a lot of people.
I think DKR tried for a more complicated presentation, and while that certainly did come up short in some areas, I'll never fault a filmmaker for trying.
I think DKR tried for a more complicated presentation, and while that certainly did come up short in some areas, I'll never fault a filmmaker for trying.
Does nobody else have issue with having all the policemen escape from their 5-month long confinement looking no worse for wear than they day they were trapped?
-And how they then proceeded to charge 3 of those light tank vehicles and Bane's mob armed with assault rifles... And all the police had was small-arms guns.
-And then they proceeded to get into a huge, melee brawl instead of actually using their weapons.
-And how they then proceeded to charge 3 of those light tank vehicles and Bane's mob armed with assault rifles... And all the police had was small-arms guns.
-And then they proceeded to get into a huge, melee brawl instead of actually using their weapons.
I completely disagree with the passage of time stuff. I think they showed it quite well. Bruce looks significantly more weathered. I don't think the Robbin twist was really meant to be a twist. They were just confirming what the audience was already guessing.
The Talia twist surprised me and helped give a much more human view to Bane. I actually sympathized with him a bit after that. Bruce living his life and fulfilling Alfred's fantasy was just icing on the cake for me.
Another thing. Many people didn't like Bane's death but I actually enjoyed it. Not because of the one liner that came after but the fact that he was built up the entire movie as this unbeatable tank but then it shows that he really is just human.
The Talia twist surprised me and helped give a much more human view to Bane. I actually sympathized with him a bit after that. Bruce living his life and fulfilling Alfred's fantasy was just icing on the cake for me.
Another thing. Many people didn't like Bane's death but I actually enjoyed it. Not because of the one liner that came after but the fact that he was built up the entire movie as this unbeatable tank but then it shows that he really is just human.
Did you even watch the movie? That wasn't Bane's motivation at all... He used those ideas as propaganda to tear the city apart. He just wanted Gotham to be destroyed because he believed the corruption was too deep. These are the same ideals carried by the rest of the League of Shadows.Tirunus said:
I didn't have a problem with most of the plot holes raised here. All of batman's questionable feats I answered with; because he's the goddamn batman.
However, one thing that gnaws at my appreciation for this movie is why the nuclear blast doesn't send a tsunami straight for Gotham.
If someone could settle that for me I would be most grateful.
However, one thing that gnaws at my appreciation for this movie is why the nuclear blast doesn't send a tsunami straight for Gotham.
If someone could settle that for me I would be most grateful.
The Chitauri are established (without a word of dialogue, incidentally) as being both bio-mechanical in nature both by their basic design and by their interactions with eachother and the surrounding area: Portions of their "armor" are hooked-in to pre-set spaces on their physical bodies, they manipulate their weapons and vehicles partially by inserting their limbs into them (we also see that they are "hooked up" to their aerial "bikes" by cords similar to the Na'Vi when Black Widow severs one.) They are also "connected" to the huge whale-monster guys for transport, and when one of them crashes through the train station it's "death" is signaled by it's eyeball "shorting out" with electricity and exploding like blown fuse.Gunnyboy said:
Given all that, plus the fact that they generally behave like "hive" creatures (re: drones driven by a central intelligence, hence why they make such a great rent-an-army) it's not too far of a reach that when said central controlling intelligence is destroyed/cut-off their function (and possibly power-source?) ceases.
You know, there's that one thing that bothers me. So.. here be Spoilers:
Am i the only one who thinks that it wasn't actually Nolans intention to let Batman survive at the end but rather that he was pressured by the studio into doing so? I mean, that rather awkward foreshadowing at the beginning, the fact that we are given no explanation of how he survived the explosion... i don't know, something about it seems off.
Am i the only one who thinks that it wasn't actually Nolans intention to let Batman survive at the end but rather that he was pressured by the studio into doing so? I mean, that rather awkward foreshadowing at the beginning, the fact that we are given no explanation of how he survived the explosion... i don't know, something about it seems off.
I hate film critics who think people give a toss about their thoughts on the film - i thought this film was a great end to the Nolan trilogy, and it was executed perfectly in every form - cast, character, story, environment, music et al. Nolan is a genius, do you really think he gives a toss that you're too dumb to understand his film(s)?!
If it was such a bad film, explain why, really, after only 5 films he is being inducted into the hall of fame.
Dumbass, try watching it again with a more open mind!
If it was such a bad film, explain why, really, after only 5 films he is being inducted into the hall of fame.
Dumbass, try watching it again with a more open mind!
You obviously give a toss about Bob's thoughts on the film... enough to listen to his opinion, read his follow-up, and post your response and opinion here on the thread.HitcH55 said:
Besides, this may come as a supreme shock to you, but Christopher Nolan is actually not a perfect film director and Dark Knight Rises was not, in fact, a perfect film. I love Nolan's films, I love his Batman films, and I even enjoyed Dark Knight Rises, but a week after seeing it and I have a laundry list of plotholes, implausibilities, characters behaving out-of-character, and narrative impossibilities. The film is good, yes, but it is far from a perfect film. It's actually a mess of a film that has enough talent backing it up to surpass it's huge problems to end up being enjoyable, but that does not mean the problems don't exist.
And the logic that a bad film negates years of prior work means nothing. Directors like Nolan aren't god-like. They're human. They make mistakes. All the great directors of film have their ups and downs, no matter how many great films they've done.
Director Neill Blomkamp was nominated for Best Picture on his very first movie. I don't see what the number of films means for anything. Spielberg's first major motion picture was the enduring JAWS and George Lucas directed Star Wars and then nothing else for 30 years while Godfather director Francis Ford Coppola made "Jack". The quality of their work has varied widely from film to film, crew to crew.
Ultimately, it doesn't make someone a "dumbass" to question the dumb logic of a dumb, if entertaining, movie. And trust me, Dark Knight Rises is just as dumb as the Transformers movie plots are, even if they're a bit more professional about it. The more I think about Dark Knight Rises, the more plotholes and inconsistencies pop up. If anything, I'd say the "dumbasses" are the people so close-minded in their worship of Nolan and his "genius" that they refuse to acknowledge any problems that exist in any of his films, such as Dark Knight Rises.
Dark Knight Rises is still a good film. It is. But it has its problems, BIG ones, and plugging your ears and drowning out the complaints with cries of "Nolan is a genius" doesn't make those problems go away.
I do feel that MovieBob misses the point of TDKR, even though I am a huge fan of all of his critiques. I can understand where he's coming from, and this film is very unpolished in its length, plot, and structure. However, even with all of it's complications, it worked for me. It's kind of rare for a film, with bunch of problems which would nag the most critical or intelligent of film goers, would work despite these problems in the eyes of someone like me. Yes, it does things which Nolan should have maybe second guessed, but it still works, and more effectively than the most nagging of critics realize.
Just to clarify the whole pit escape thing. The reason why others didn't escape is because that damn rope was preventing them from leaping far enough, and it was necessary to discard the rope in order to make that leap. There's a chance you could die, but unless you get rid of the safety harness, you'll never escape. It's logical to me, and I think that the purpose of this method was to show that in a situation like this, it is pure will and not safety precautions which enable escape. It definitely makes Batman more badass by proving himself as the second person ever to really escape that pit (though his badassness does get ruined when Talia stabs him after his temporary defeat of Bain).
I've noticed that fans complained about Talia's motives being petty and flimsy. At first glance, she seems more irrational than the Joker, by claiming that she wants to destroy Gotham to make ammends with her father after his death. Learning that she was the whole brains behind the operation, with an equally capable and intelligent steroid pumper as her lackey, she's scarier and colder than Ra'as Al Ghul, Bain, and even the Joker combined. She was inaccurate when she claimed Bruce "murdered" her father. She's got her facts wrong, or maybe she's deliberately loose on her facts. Bruce first saved her father's life after destroying the League's temple, then when they fought each other again, he merely abandoned Ra'as to safe himself on a train that was on collision course. From I understand, Ra'as seemed prepared to die, even though Bruce didn't directly kill him, Ra'as wanted him to kill him, that way Bruce would learn to be unmerciful to his emenies and succeed as a worthy heir to the leader of the League of Shadows.
Considering these bits from the first movie, I'm guessing that either Talia's warped interpretation of the facts and her movtivations are the result of some heavy duty father-daughter issues (as well as from the fact that she was born in hell on earth), or because she's just messing with Bruce's head. Think of it. She's the only woman Bruce is seen having sex with in the entire trilogy, he gains her trust, is given his company, and after he recovers from a broken back and defeats Bain she stabs him right in the abdomen. I think that Talia wanted to twist the knife deeper into his conscience by reminding him of his betrayal of Ra'as and the League, laced with the fact that her childhood was more traumatizing than his. I think her reasons for breaking Bruce and destroying Gotham are deliberate bullshit. She was indocrinated under the League of Shadows to kill traitors and destroy cities which they don't like. Her daughter-father falling out explanation feels rather like a subtle ode to the Joker's inconsistent explanation for how he got his scars. You don't buy it, and there's probably much more to the story than you're led to believe, or that the story is much simpler than previously thought.
I do think that it would have been smarter for Talia to recruit Bruce back to the League, after proving his escape from the pit and defeating Bain, rather than wound him again and discard him as worthless. I mean, the relationship between Talia and Bruce in the comics was much more complex, that you would expect her feelings for Bruce to be mixed in the film rather than purely black and white.
Even if Ra'as and Talia appear to have died in their films, what if they didn't die? What if they are just monitoring Bruce's progress after being defeated by him, and still considering him to be a part of the League? Remember, that Bruce and Talia had sex. What if she is alive, and bearing his child, who becomes the murderous Robin in BATMAN AND SON? I wish.
This film provokes a lot of questions in me, and it makes wonder where all the other BATMAN crazies are waiting for while the Joker, Scarecrow, Bane, and the League of Shadows are screwing up Gotham.
Just to clarify the whole pit escape thing. The reason why others didn't escape is because that damn rope was preventing them from leaping far enough, and it was necessary to discard the rope in order to make that leap. There's a chance you could die, but unless you get rid of the safety harness, you'll never escape. It's logical to me, and I think that the purpose of this method was to show that in a situation like this, it is pure will and not safety precautions which enable escape. It definitely makes Batman more badass by proving himself as the second person ever to really escape that pit (though his badassness does get ruined when Talia stabs him after his temporary defeat of Bain).
I've noticed that fans complained about Talia's motives being petty and flimsy. At first glance, she seems more irrational than the Joker, by claiming that she wants to destroy Gotham to make ammends with her father after his death. Learning that she was the whole brains behind the operation, with an equally capable and intelligent steroid pumper as her lackey, she's scarier and colder than Ra'as Al Ghul, Bain, and even the Joker combined. She was inaccurate when she claimed Bruce "murdered" her father. She's got her facts wrong, or maybe she's deliberately loose on her facts. Bruce first saved her father's life after destroying the League's temple, then when they fought each other again, he merely abandoned Ra'as to safe himself on a train that was on collision course. From I understand, Ra'as seemed prepared to die, even though Bruce didn't directly kill him, Ra'as wanted him to kill him, that way Bruce would learn to be unmerciful to his emenies and succeed as a worthy heir to the leader of the League of Shadows.
Considering these bits from the first movie, I'm guessing that either Talia's warped interpretation of the facts and her movtivations are the result of some heavy duty father-daughter issues (as well as from the fact that she was born in hell on earth), or because she's just messing with Bruce's head. Think of it. She's the only woman Bruce is seen having sex with in the entire trilogy, he gains her trust, is given his company, and after he recovers from a broken back and defeats Bain she stabs him right in the abdomen. I think that Talia wanted to twist the knife deeper into his conscience by reminding him of his betrayal of Ra'as and the League, laced with the fact that her childhood was more traumatizing than his. I think her reasons for breaking Bruce and destroying Gotham are deliberate bullshit. She was indocrinated under the League of Shadows to kill traitors and destroy cities which they don't like. Her daughter-father falling out explanation feels rather like a subtle ode to the Joker's inconsistent explanation for how he got his scars. You don't buy it, and there's probably much more to the story than you're led to believe, or that the story is much simpler than previously thought.
I do think that it would have been smarter for Talia to recruit Bruce back to the League, after proving his escape from the pit and defeating Bain, rather than wound him again and discard him as worthless. I mean, the relationship between Talia and Bruce in the comics was much more complex, that you would expect her feelings for Bruce to be mixed in the film rather than purely black and white.
Even if Ra'as and Talia appear to have died in their films, what if they didn't die? What if they are just monitoring Bruce's progress after being defeated by him, and still considering him to be a part of the League? Remember, that Bruce and Talia had sex. What if she is alive, and bearing his child, who becomes the murderous Robin in BATMAN AND SON? I wish.
This film provokes a lot of questions in me, and it makes wonder where all the other BATMAN crazies are waiting for while the Joker, Scarecrow, Bane, and the League of Shadows are screwing up Gotham.
When I saw the difference in firepower I thought "they're gonna get smoked, why are they charging?" Upon reflection I think that's the only way they could have a chance; close the distance render the increased firepower moot, and overwhelm them with your numbers.Tayh said:
The only moments out of those that really annoyed me much were the twist demoting Bane from main villain to glorified henchman in favor of the one lady being the big bad all along and the loss of the sense of time with the 5 months Wayne had spent in that pit.
Although that first one is only because I loved so much of what the movie did with Bane in the first place.
Still a great movie though. I still put Dark Knight and Avengers ahead of Rises, but not by much. I will watch all of them plenty more times.
Although that first one is only because I loved so much of what the movie did with Bane in the first place.
Still a great movie though. I still put Dark Knight and Avengers ahead of Rises, but not by much. I will watch all of them plenty more times.