RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,329
Posts: 5,353,110
Members: 24,618
Currently online: 721
Newest member: jmacenulty

TrekToday headlines

Sci-Fried To Release New Album
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek into Darkness Soundtrack
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Horse 1, Shatner 0
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Drexler TV Alert
By: T'Bonz on Jul 26

Retro Review: His Way
By: Michelle on Jul 26

MicroWarriors Releases Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Ships Of The Line Design Contest
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Next Weekend: Shore Leave 36!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

True Trek History To Be Penned
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science Fiction & Fantasy

Science Fiction & Fantasy Farscape, Babylon 5, Star Wars, Firefly, vampires, genre books and film.

View Poll Results: How do you rate "The Dark Knight Rises"?
Excellent 147 58.33%
Good 61 24.21%
Fair 26 10.32%
Poor 12 4.76%
Terrible 6 2.38%
Voters: 252. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 26 2012, 03:46 PM   #541
Set Harth
Rear Admiral
 
Set Harth's Avatar
 
Location: Gallifrey Falls
Re: "The Dark Knight Rises" Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

Saul wrote: View Post
But honestly it's really up to the viewer to believe what he wants.
Thanks a lot, Inception.
__________________
"In the future... do I make it?"
"No."
Set Harth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 26 2012, 04:12 PM   #542
Allyn Gibson
Vice Admiral
 
Allyn Gibson's Avatar
 
Location: South Pennsyltucky
View Allyn Gibson's Twitter Profile Send a message via AIM to Allyn Gibson Send a message via Yahoo to Allyn Gibson
Re: "The Dark Knight Rises" Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

Set Harth wrote: View Post
Saul wrote: View Post
But honestly it's really up to the viewer to believe what he wants.
Thanks a lot, Inception.
See, I thought of the ending to TDKR as an Atonement ending, not an Inception ending (because I've not seen Inception and have no idea how it ends). Cecelia and Robbie never got to live out the lives they deserved to live, so Briony imagined the life they should have had. Bruce died in the nuclear detonation, so Alfred imagined the life that should have been.

At least, that was the way I read it in the theater.

I've come to think that the ending is unintentionally ambiguous. The problem is that Nolan tells us three mutually-exclusive things about the nuclear device. He tells us it's a neutron bomb (in other words, a sub-Hiroshima low-explosive yield, high-radiation yield device), that it has a 6 mile blast radius (in other words, a 700-kiloton device), and that it has a 4-megaton yield (in other words, a 13-mile blast radius).

I still think of "Bruce dies" at the Occam's Razor ending. It's the simplest solution to what's seen on screen. You don't have to invent a scenario to explain how Bruce escapes the explosion that doesn't make the narrative as shown a lie.
__________________
"When David Marcus cited the great thinkers of history -- "Newton, Einstein, Surak" -- Newt Gingrich did not make his list." -- 24 January 2012

allyngibson.net
Allyn Gibson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 26 2012, 04:16 PM   #543
Guartho
Rear Admiral
 
Guartho's Avatar
 
Location: Guartho
Re: "The Dark Knight Rises" Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

sojourner wrote: View Post

Nope, fusion reactors still don't work that way. You literally can't turn one into a WMD.
1. Maybe that's why it was a big deal that that Russian scientist was the only one who knew how to do it.

2. How do you know what "literally" can or can't be done with a fusion reactor when there's no such thing as a man-made fusion reactor?
__________________
"I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell." RIP, Red Ranger

(AKA "Mr. Donkey Kong King" for no apparent reason)
Guartho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 26 2012, 05:19 PM   #544
stj
Rear Admiral
 
stj's Avatar
 
Location: the real world
Re: "The Dark Knight Rises" Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

^^^Physics. Unlike normal combustion, where the activation energy is pretty small, the energy required to fuse two nuclei is intrinsically large. That is essentially the engineering problem. It's just too hard to focus that much energy on the small amount of fuel (tritium?) that is in the apparatus. It must be a small amount of fuel or the thing would just be a chain reaction, aka bomb. It's like saying you can turn a microwave into a bomb by putting forty barrels of witches' brew into it. If you could somehow fit the extra fuel in, turning such a reactor into a bomb by just shoving in more fuel wouldn't require much specialized knowledge.

On the other hand, if you posit some handwaving tech in which there is an unobtainium catalyst that (by some paradigm shift in physics) lowers the quantity of energy required to fuse nuclei, it obviously would require greatly specialized knowledge to build/make whatever does this. But once built, such a catalytic process would easily operate on any desired amount of fuel, meaning it would be even easier to turn into a bomb!

Such a thing would be pretty blue sky (gross understatement.) It might explain why Wayne is supposed to decide to suppress the tech. But if it's easy, then why pretend just one person knows how?
__________________
The people of this country need regime change here, not abroad.
stj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 26 2012, 05:36 PM   #545
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: "The Dark Knight Rises" Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

oh, does the Alfred revelation to Bruce scene remind anyone of that now endlessly mocked scene of Harry Osborn's butler telling Harry "oh by the way, Spider-Man didn't kill your dad. Sorry I didn't tell you earlier. Laters?"

I mean, apparently it's been eight years and just now Alfred realizes his lie didn't make things better like he thought it would?
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 26 2012, 05:50 PM   #546
Guartho
Rear Admiral
 
Guartho's Avatar
 
Location: Guartho
Re: "The Dark Knight Rises" Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

I figured Bruce only then admitted to Alfred, maybe even to himself, that it was all about Rachel.
__________________
"I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell." RIP, Red Ranger

(AKA "Mr. Donkey Kong King" for no apparent reason)
Guartho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 26 2012, 05:53 PM   #547
Guartho
Rear Admiral
 
Guartho's Avatar
 
Location: Guartho
Re: "The Dark Knight Rises" Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

stj wrote: View Post
On the other hand, if you posit some handwaving tech in which there is an unobtainium catalyst that (by some paradigm shift in physics) lowers the quantity of energy required to fuse nuclei, it obviously would require greatly specialized knowledge to build/make whatever does this. But once built, such a catalytic process would easily operate on any desired amount of fuel, meaning it would be even easier to turn into a bomb!
This is close to what I'm saying. Basically I just mean, that if we knew how a fusion reactor would really work, we'd have one. Therefore, it's well within my suspension of disbelief that a practical fusion reactor would have some aspect of how it works that makes it possible to convert it into a bomb, unlike a fission reactor.

Whether C4 is involved or not is not really an issue, but then, I didn't notice the C4 when I saw the movie in the first place. I just thought he reconfigured the caboobledobber and then pulled the whatsahoosit safety control out.
__________________
"I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell." RIP, Red Ranger

(AKA "Mr. Donkey Kong King" for no apparent reason)
Guartho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 26 2012, 05:54 PM   #548
Saul
Rear Admiral
 
Saul's Avatar
 
Location: 東京
Re: "The Dark Knight Rises" Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

Set Harth wrote: View Post
Saul wrote: View Post
But honestly it's really up to the viewer to believe what he wants.
Thanks a lot, Inception.
Lots of films are open ended. Not everything needs to have a definite answer.

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
Given that the autopilot is repaired and that Bruce says the clean slate program is real, I think it's pretty clearly implied that they're together and really there, for Alfred's benefit.
Yeah, and given the escaping of the blast of a 6 mile radius nuclear explosion etc...

Oh.....
__________________
"It's not that you can see the strings, it's that 40 years later you're still looking at them." - Steven Moffat
"This movie was big. Imagine how big it could have been with me in it?" William Shatner
Saul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 26 2012, 06:18 PM   #549
sojourner
Vice Admiral
 
sojourner's Avatar
 
Location: I'm at WKRP
Re: "The Dark Knight Rises" Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

Guartho wrote: View Post
stj wrote: View Post
On the other hand, if you posit some handwaving tech in which there is an unobtainium catalyst that (by some paradigm shift in physics) lowers the quantity of energy required to fuse nuclei, it obviously would require greatly specialized knowledge to build/make whatever does this. But once built, such a catalytic process would easily operate on any desired amount of fuel, meaning it would be even easier to turn into a bomb!
This is close to what I'm saying. Basically I just mean, that if we knew how a fusion reactor would really work, we'd have one. Therefore, it's well within my suspension of disbelief that a practical fusion reactor would have some aspect of how it works that makes it possible to convert it into a bomb, unlike a fission reactor.

Whether C4 is involved or not is not really an issue, but then, I didn't notice the C4 when I saw the movie in the first place. I just thought he reconfigured the caboobledobber and then pulled the whatsahoosit safety control out.
First off, Guy was talking in the real world, not the movie.


To continue, we do have fusion reactors that work. Lots of them. The problem is that none of them are efficient enough to produce net energy. The physics on how they work are quite well known which is why it can be said that they literally cannot be turned into a bomb. It's one of the many reasons that fusion is better than fission for energy generation. If something goes wrong you won't get a catastrophic failure. It just stops working and maybe does some damage to the reactor in the process.

In the context of the movie I have no problem with "superhero science" turning the device into a bomb. Heck, it was "superhero science" the minute they remove the core and the reactor keeps running.
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while...
sojourner is online now   Reply With Quote
Old July 26 2012, 06:35 PM   #550
DWF
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Re: "The Dark Knight Rises" Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

I didn't think the reactor kept running just the computer that was meant to regulate it.
__________________
The greatest science fiction series of all time is
Doctor Who! And I'll take you all on, one-by-one
or all in a bunch to back it up!"
--- Harlan Ellison, from his introduction
to the PINNACLE series of Doctor Who books
DWF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 26 2012, 06:45 PM   #551
Set Harth
Rear Admiral
 
Set Harth's Avatar
 
Location: Gallifrey Falls
Re: "The Dark Knight Rises" Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

Saul wrote: View Post
Lots of films are open ended.
Just not this one.

Saul wrote:
Not everything needs to have a definite answer.
By the same token, not everything needs to be ambiguous simply because some people are hooked on ambiguity.
__________________
"In the future... do I make it?"
"No."
Set Harth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 26 2012, 07:01 PM   #552
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: "The Dark Knight Rises" Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

Allyn Gibson wrote: View Post
I still think of "Bruce dies" at the Occam's Razor ending. It's the simplest solution to what's seen on screen. You don't have to invent a scenario to explain how Bruce escapes the explosion that doesn't make the narrative as shown a lie.
But that kind of defeats the whole point of the ending, that Bruce is finally moving on with his life, just as Alfred always hoped, while passing on the torch to Blake.

The physical logistics of when exactly Batman bailed out don't really matter as far as the overall story is concerned. It's all about the Bruce coming back one last time before riding off into the sunset . . .

(But maybe we can debate this at Shore Leave?)
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old July 26 2012, 08:19 PM   #553
Saul
Rear Admiral
 
Saul's Avatar
 
Location: 東京
Re: "The Dark Knight Rises" Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

Set Harth wrote: View Post
Saul wrote: View Post
Lots of films are open ended.
Just not this one.
And you're quite welcome to believe that.

Saul wrote:
Not everything needs to have a definite answer.
Set Harth wrote: View Post
By the same token, not everything needs to be ambiguous simply because some people are hooked on ambiguity.
You need to see something ambiguous before you think that way though.

And just for the record when I watched the film I didn't see it any other way than you did. I thought Bruce survived etc. But I do think others are welcome to think differently and I can see their points are valid.
Greg Cox wrote: View Post

But that kind of defeats the whole point of the ending, that Bruce is finally moving on with his life, just as Alfred always hoped, while passing on the torch to Blake.
But also you could say that Bruce dying is him finally having peace too. Although that's a lot darker an ending.

I don't have much problems with Bruce moving on though. I think Nolan's Bruce Wayne has always been waiting for a day to let things go and move on.
__________________
"It's not that you can see the strings, it's that 40 years later you're still looking at them." - Steven Moffat
"This movie was big. Imagine how big it could have been with me in it?" William Shatner
Saul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 26 2012, 09:16 PM   #554
davejames
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Sac, Ca
Re: "The Dark Knight Rises" Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

JD wrote: View Post
First of all, I think it's worth remembering that this is not necessarily supposed the be the exact Batman from the comics, so I think we should look at this from the perspective of the movies along.
And I don't think Bruce left because he thought Gotham didn't need him anymore. He left because he didn't need Gotham.
And it's pretty clear he didn't think things were that great in Gotham now, he did leave Blake in charge of the cave. I think if he really thought Gotham was going to be fine without a guardian he would have destroyed the cave, not left it active with a new person in control.
Well obviously he didn't end up being the Batman of the comics, but it still appeared in the first two movies that he was headed in that direction. And it certainly seemed to be the intention that this would be the most faithful depiction of the character we've ever seen.

I get that this is supposed to be Batman's last story, and that's something I was really looking forward to seeing. I just don't buy that it would ever end up being this "happy and wonderful", or that he'd be so easily cured of his obsession with helping the innocent and avenging his parents' death.
davejames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 26 2012, 09:20 PM   #555
Trekker4747
Fleet Admiral
 
Trekker4747's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: "The Dark Knight Rises" Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

Problem for me is not all of it seems to "add up," between the construction of the Batcave and all of that to not have this movie series end with Bruce in full-swing in the Batman career.
__________________
Just because it's futuristic doesn't mean it's practical.
Trekker4747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
batman, christopher nolan, the dark knight, the dark knight rises

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:31 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.