- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: OFFICIAL - The Dark Knight Rises Discussion Thread - *SPOILERS*
Posted on 7/25/12 at 12:21 pm to hiltacular
Posted on 7/25/12 at 12:21 pm to hiltacular
hell, on this board alone you had people absolutely blown away by TDK only to come back later and give a different opinion after seeing it a few more times and picking at its flaws.
TDKR will likely benefit from DVD viewings when you aren't sitting in your chair waiting on someone to blow you away with that type of performance
TDKR will likely benefit from DVD viewings when you aren't sitting in your chair waiting on someone to blow you away with that type of performance
2
Posted on 7/25/12 at 12:38 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
TDK gets a pass because of Ledger's performance as the Joker.
The Joker was phenomenal, no doubt, but I think TDK is the most liked Batman movie because it is the only one with a Batman in it the entire movie.
Begins - Batman shows up 1 hour into the +2 hour movie. Understandable because it is an origin story, but still a fact.
Rises - between Batman starting crippled, getting crippled again, jail, etc., Batman only exists in the movie for probably about 1.5 hours of the 2 hour and 45 minute movie. That is a lot of Batman movie without a Batman.
TDK - Batman exists for the full 2 hours and 32 minutes; not only does he exist, but he keeps getting better [new armor and gadgets] and is kicking arse.
Like I said earlier in this thread... 3 Batman Movies, 7.6 hours of film... and, maybe, 4.5 hours of actual Batman, 2.5 of which are in The Dark Knight.
So, sure, the Joker puts TDK over the top, but I think the fact that TDK is the only movie to have Batman the full runtime helps tremendously. Somehow swap the villains in TDK and TDKR, and I would bet that TDK is still more popular because Batman is kicking arse the whole time.
Posted on 7/25/12 at 12:39 pm to BilJ
BTW, I wanted to add something about Tim Burton's films. I think alot of people forget how good they were because of what Nolan has done. Classic movie sets, painted backdrops, I love these movies and I would be excited if WB were to put the property back into his hands.
Posted on 7/25/12 at 12:42 pm to CGB Spender
No thanks on bringing burton back
Posted on 7/25/12 at 12:45 pm to Cajun Revolution
quote:
I was kind of disappointed because I went in looking for an iconic performance from Bane, ala, the Joker and it just wasn't happening.
Maybe Bane's character just doesn't allow that type of performance like the Joker did..
I think the mask really hurt here. Hardy is a good actor, but with the mask on, most of the time he just looks like he is moving his arms around because you can't see him talking. Not nitpicking!
just contrasting the twoThis post was edited on 7/25/12 at 12:48 pm
Posted on 7/25/12 at 12:56 pm to Archie Bengal Bunker
Yeah...I wasn't expecting an Oscar-worthy performance from Tom Hardy. Let's face it, the Joker is probably the only comic book villain out there that allows an actor to really step up and steal the show. In both Batman '89 and The Dark Knight, the Joker was the most memorable part of those films.
Posted on 7/25/12 at 1:42 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
But if you are going to criticize the film, please don't bring up the lack of realism as one of the reasons why you didn't like it.
As it's been explained several times, I think you are now just intentionally missing people's point about this, but I'll try one more time.
It's not "realism", its that the first two movies attempted to ground itself in the reality, while still requiring the usual suspension of disbelief. The films weren't "realistic" per se, but the tone of the film was meant to at least ground the film in reality. It was a loose grounding to be sure, but it still had that anchor. And this film abandons those anchors entirely. It just felt tonally off, and it missed those anchors and it became too fantastical.
As to the cops and Bruce Wayne, I've always felt it has been clear to the world Wayne has been funding Batman, not that he actually is Batman. Sort of like the end of the movie. And even the one guy willing to out Batman is put into his place by Fox, when he reminds him that he is attempting to blackmail is a super rich guy who beats people up for fun.
Posted on 7/25/12 at 1:47 pm to Baloo
quote:
It's not "realism", its that the first two movies attempted to ground itself in the reality, while still requiring the usual suspension of disbelief. The films weren't "realistic" per se, but the tone of the film was meant to at least ground the film in reality. It was a loose grounding to be sure, but it still had that anchor. And this film abandons those anchors entirely. It just felt tonally off, and it missed those anchors and it became too fantastical.
I completely disagree with all of this. For me this film didn't require any more suspension of disbelief than either of the previous ones.
Posted on 7/25/12 at 1:48 pm to Scoob
quote:
my brothers and I work in hospital and know how things work with trauma. injuries would have been iffy for a person; helwan's vet hospital can't won't do what OLOL would. so dad's best pal BJ died from shock as they tried a chest tube with the old man holding him.
WOW! Dude you are having a bad. Really sorry about that. Hope your dad doesn't take it too hard. Or at least harder than he's already is.
Posted on 7/25/12 at 1:53 pm to Cajun Revolution
See I'm different because I found it hard to imagine anybody putting on a performance in the league of the Joker. That's almost impossible. So I expected both Bane and Salina to be awesome and they delivered on that hope, at least to me. So I wasn't disappointed in the villians as a whole at all. I wanted an epic conclusion and I feel I got that.
Posted on 7/25/12 at 1:55 pm to Baloo
quote:
And this film abandons those anchors entirely. It just felt tonally off, and it missed those anchors and it became too fantastical.
I just don't see it especially after the villain plot of Batman Begins and the Joker's arc in The Dark Knight.
I mean in Batman Begins, the League of Shadows' plan was to dump chemical agents into Gotham's water supply and then disperse them by vaporizing the water in the mains. I guess no one cooks or boils water in Gotham because, if they had, people would have felt the effects of the toxin long before that microwave emitter was ever turned on.
And in The Dark Knight, the Joker's plan is even MORE fantastical. He knows Batman is going to try to save Harvey so he shoots a rocket launcher in the direction of Harvey's vehicle because he knows Batman is going to come out of nowhere in his Tumbler to intercept the shot. He somehow knows how quick Batman is and how a-little-less-quick the police are so that he can send Batman to save Harvey and send the police to fail to save Rachel. And worst of all, he knows that a police officer will stay with him INSIDE the prison cell so that he can take him hostage, kill a lot of police officers, and make his escape. If the police officer wasn't stupid, he would have been watching him from outside the cell, from the other side of the mirror-window.
quote:
As to the cops and Bruce Wayne, I've always felt it has been clear to the world Wayne has been funding Batman, not that he actually is Batman.
He should have then been arrested for aiding and abetting a wanted criminal if that's the case, most especially after the events of The Dark Knight.
This post was edited on 7/25/12 at 1:57 pm
Posted on 7/25/12 at 2:02 pm to Archie Bengal Bunker
quote:
The Joker was phenomenal, no doubt, but I think TDK is the most liked Batman movie because it is the only one with a Batman in it the entire movie.
Begins - Batman shows up 1 hour into the +2 hour movie. Understandable because it is an origin story, but still a fact.
Rises - between Batman starting crippled, getting crippled again, jail, etc., Batman only exists in the movie for probably about 1.5 hours of the 2 hour and 45 minute movie. That is a lot of Batman movie without a Batman.
TDK - Batman exists for the full 2 hours and 32 minutes; not only does he exist, but he keeps getting better [new armor and gadgets] and is kicking arse.
I think me and you already debated about this a few times I just don't think it is a bad thing to have other characters have screen time. Much less calculate it to a T. I don't think most people like TDK mainly because it has Batman in it the most. The Joker is my favorite character of any of the three movies. But TDK, if I was forced to pick, is probably my least favorite movie overall. It might be because I got too much Batman. I like not seeing him as Batman. His progression. His training. His difficulties as Wayne. His imprisonment in TDKR. Thats one thing no other Batman movie ever has done. These movies are relatively realistic and you get more story than just the Batman.
Posted on 7/25/12 at 2:35 pm to iwyLSUiwy
Am I the only one who thinks it was a huge missed opportunity not involving Alfred more? I have mentioned this but I don't think anyone answered me.
Let's completely dismiss the comics bc I have no idea what went down in them and discuss what could have been.
It was very clear Bane knew that Wayne=Batman. It is also very clear to the entire world that Alfred is basically Wayne's father/best friend/hero/etc. I really think it would have been a powerful moment if Bane had captured Alfred and either Alfred or Bruce sacrificed one for the other. The fight between them was the perfect setup. It's like Nolan wanted it to be emotional (Alfred crying at the grave) but didn't want to do what needed to be done.
In TDK, the Joker went after Rachel which is fine except most people hated Rachel and didnt give a shite if she died. Almost everyone genuinely liked Alfred.
Thoughts?
ETA this may have been discussed but I havent seen it in the pages I've read.
Let's completely dismiss the comics bc I have no idea what went down in them and discuss what could have been.
It was very clear Bane knew that Wayne=Batman. It is also very clear to the entire world that Alfred is basically Wayne's father/best friend/hero/etc. I really think it would have been a powerful moment if Bane had captured Alfred and either Alfred or Bruce sacrificed one for the other. The fight between them was the perfect setup. It's like Nolan wanted it to be emotional (Alfred crying at the grave) but didn't want to do what needed to be done.
In TDK, the Joker went after Rachel which is fine except most people hated Rachel and didnt give a shite if she died. Almost everyone genuinely liked Alfred.
Thoughts?
ETA this may have been discussed but I havent seen it in the pages I've read.
This post was edited on 7/25/12 at 2:36 pm
Posted on 7/25/12 at 2:41 pm to hiltacular
quote:
Am I the only one who thinks it was a huge missed opportunity not involving Alfred more?
I see your point and that storyline may well have worked.
However, I think the fact that Alfred truly left, never seeing Bruce again (or Bruce him) until after his "death" was much more powerful.
Posted on 7/25/12 at 2:45 pm to udtiger
quote:
However, I think the fact that Alfred truly left, never seeing Bruce again (or Bruce him) until after his "death" was much more powerful.
See I didn't think it was powerful at all. I also never got the impression that he left. Wasn't the timeline: fight w Alfred/Bruce, batman goes into the "prison", escapes and saves Gotham?
Their is never time to digest that Alfred has even left. He is never even mentioned after the fight.
Posted on 7/25/12 at 2:55 pm to iwyLSUiwy
We will again just have to disagree. The side characters are important, without them, there isn't much of a story. But, people are lining up to see Batman. He is the name-sake of the franchise.
In Begins the build up is to him donning the suit for the first time. And for me, the best parts are him taking out Falcone on the dock, revealing who he is to Rachel, interrogating Crane after poisoning him, and helping Gordon save the day [Gordon stopped the Train after-all]. The beginning is necessary to get there, but I even enjoy the parts of him just looking over the city from a perch [unimportant, something I don't recall him doing in TDKR].
In TDK, taking down Crane, taking down Lau, popping in and out on Gordon [nice scene in Rises where Selina does it to Bruce], showing up at his own party, random perching. The other parts such as the chase and joker interrogation could be argued for Bats or the Joker, but those scenes still require Batman.
In Begins the build up is to him donning the suit for the first time. And for me, the best parts are him taking out Falcone on the dock, revealing who he is to Rachel, interrogating Crane after poisoning him, and helping Gordon save the day [Gordon stopped the Train after-all]. The beginning is necessary to get there, but I even enjoy the parts of him just looking over the city from a perch [unimportant, something I don't recall him doing in TDKR].
In TDK, taking down Crane, taking down Lau, popping in and out on Gordon [nice scene in Rises where Selina does it to Bruce], showing up at his own party, random perching. The other parts such as the chase and joker interrogation could be argued for Bats or the Joker, but those scenes still require Batman.
Posted on 7/25/12 at 3:16 pm to Baloo
quote:
And no offense to Tom Hardy, but Bane was no Joker. There was no scene like Joker sticking his head out the window of a car like a dog.
One of the things I like most about this trilogy is the evolution of the villians a long with Bruce Wayne/Batman.
In the first movie, Ras was going to happen whether or not Batman was involved. He was there for Gotham's sins, and would have happened whether or not Bruce Wayne came into the picture.
Second movie, the Joker exists solely because Batman came into the picture. He's able to completely rob the mob and throw the city into chaos due to the mob viewing him the lesser evil compared to continiously getting their shite pushed in versus Batman.
So in the third movie, I think the final installment of the villain had to be one who's sole focus and existence was to destroy Bruce/Batman. That's what made Bane/Talia work so well for me. On top of that, not being able to completely understand Bane/see his complete facial mannerisms made the character that more polarizing. Every scene he was in, his character was the main priority. Oh, Batman and Selina are escaping? Who cares look at Bane nonchalantly Jarret Leeing like a boss.
The only other villain I think that could have pulled that off was Eckhart's Two Face. But yeah, that was taken off the table.
Posted on 7/25/12 at 3:31 pm to Javzz
quote:
On top of that, not being able to completely understand Bane/see his complete facial mannerisms made the character that more polarizing. Every scene he was in, his character was the main priority.
Bane toying with Batman before he beats him down was a really great scene. His little monologue about the dark was perfect.
Also his speech in front of the prison was one of my favorite scenes. Hardy's mannerism and the look in his eyes were incredible.
Posted on 7/25/12 at 3:47 pm to hiltacular
quote:
Am I the only one who thinks it was a huge missed opportunity not involving Alfred more?
nolan covered this in the deleted scenes.. it was Alrfed that flew the chopper to the prison and brough bruce back to gotham to save the day. ended up on the cutting room floor due to run time constraints.
Posted on 7/25/12 at 3:57 pm to BilJ
Quick question. I have seen Batman Begins. I have not seen The Dark Knight (I know, what a travesty). Seeing TDKR in the next two days is optimal. Would it be OK to see this one without having seen The Dark Knight originally?
Page 74 of 88
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News