"The Dark Knight Rises" Review and Discussion Thread (spoilers)

[Trekker4747]

The problem with Wayne having given up the Batman persona between movies and the apparently for good at the end of this movie it sort of makes all of the "establishing a Batman status quo" in the first two movies pointless.

I mean he invests time and money into designing this persona and building the Batcave (which we never really satisfactorily see) all for it... To not really be used? Really the set-up of the Batman "universe" in the first two movies was a big cock-tease only for it to be pulled out at the last minute with this movie with the Batman idea never really taking off.

This movie, for me, didn't fit with everything the first two movies wanted to build up. Hell even in TDK Joker says "I can see us doing this forever." as an obvious meta-joke to what a constant source of trouble the Joker is for Batman. But, nah, Batman was able to make Gotham not a crime-riddled hellhole pretty much by making someone else the inspiration of that, and knock off six years his scant 1-year-long career having been enough.

 

[JarodRussell]

I like the, well, "realistic" aspect of Batman being only around for 1 or 2 years. It's a physically demanding job, you can't go on forever. And there are only so many villains out there, not an entire army of masked bad guys. He managed to stop organized crime, he attracted one other masked man, and then had to fight the aftermath of his membership in the League of Shadows. That's perfectly fine within the world Nolan has created.

It's like with Die Hard. The first one was perfect. Then in the second one there's this huge coincidence that he gets again trapped in a terrorist situation, which was already pushing it. In the third one, he is ONLY part of it because it's an after effect of the events of the first film. He killed Hans Gruber, his brother wants revenge. That's perfectly fine. But the 4th one is ridiculous. As is the 5th one. The McClane scenario isn't suited for so many sequels.

And I also think that a realistic Batman scenario would just play out similar to the Nolan films.

I have a very basic problem with the film. The first film used the theme of fear as a starting point for this man's journey. He learned to confront his fears before the first film ended. The third film he realized that he needed his fears. They are both logical variations of one theme and a good way to bookend a story about a man

The problem arises when you realized that the "fear" thing in the first film was just a starting point. But even as the first film ended the theme changed into something more. The whole escalation thing, the realization that the masked vigilante that he has become might have made the bag guys hit harder, and become stranger. The second film (for all of its flaws) had each character represent a different point on the morality scare. This theme isn't just different than the fear thing, but deeper. While most trilogies are well-served by going back and revisiting a theme introduced in the first film in a new way, here it seems like a cop out. And, at first glance - with all its threads and stories - the narrative of TDKR seems as complex as the TDK - the theme most definitely is not. Makes me think that there was no reason to have such a complex narrative in the third film if the underlying theme wound up being so paper theme. The complexities of the narrative in TDK served the story's themes. Here, they don't .

The fear he had in Batman Begins isn't the same fear he needed in TDKR. Not sure if I can explain it properly... Bruce Wayne has lost the will to live. He needed to learn to want to live again basically. And with the will to live comes the fear of death. That's what the leap was about. He made that jump because he was pumped with fear of dying. In Batman Begins it wasn't fear of death, it was more a fear of not being able to accomplish things, I guess. He had a clear goal: clean the streets of Gotham. And then in TDK, things got worse. And after he lost Rachel, and after he gave up being Batman, after he didn't have a goal any more, it all crumbled down so that he didn't want to live anymore. In prison, he had to "learn" that "life" should be his new goal. So he came back to stop Bane, and then leave to start a new life.

What the hell was up with Bane's voice? I couldn't understand half of what he was saying. It was almost as bad as the Bale Batvoice.

Compare this to Vader from a ANH which was 35 years ago, and I had no problem understanding anything he said.

I had no problem understanding him at all.

 

[sonak]

The problem with Wayne having given up the Batman persona between movies and the apparently for good at the end of this movie it sort of makes all of the "establishing a Batman status quo" in the first two movies pointless.

I mean he invests time and money into designing this persona and building the Batcave (which we never really satisfactorily see) all for it... To not really be used? Really the set-up of the Batman "universe" in the first two movies was a big cock-tease only for it to be pulled out at the last minute with this movie with the Batman idea never really taking off.

This movie, for me, didn't fit with everything the first two movies wanted to build up. Hell even in TDK Joker says "I can see us doing this forever." as an obvious meta-joke to what a constant source of trouble the Joker is for Batman. But, nah, Batman was able to make Gotham not a crime-riddled hellhole pretty much by making someone else the inspiration of that, and knock off six years his scant 1-year-long career having been enough.

I thought Bruce wanted to use Batman as an inspiration and wasn't so concerned about having an actual "status quo" Batman on the ground. It turned out that for a while, Dent turned out to be the better inspiration so he went with it.

 

[Warped9]

Well real histories have been founded on falsehoods. In the U.S. Columbus is celebrated for discovering America when in fact he didn't and didn't even get here. And it continues to be perpetuated.


Batman's original motivation (when the character was created) was born of personal tragedy and he wanted to fight against that happening again to anyone else. And he believed he had to go beyond the norm of becoming just another cop. He wanted to take the fight directly to the criminal element unencumbered by the limitations society has placed on law enforcement agencies and individuals. In a more modern sense he meant to be the ultimate badass town Marshall: "You're in my town now so behave or else..." His motivation and pursuit is indeed a noble one yet ultimately futile in any real sense. No matter how badaas you are someone is always going to think they can better you.

Now the Batman was also but one facet of his campaign because Bruce Wayne was also meant to be the rich man with a social conscience. He was meant to follow his father's example (mind you originally how much was really known about the Wayne's other than they were murdered?).The idle playboy persona won't hold much water with those who know what Bruce really does to help others and so it's just another disguise for the media and society at large.

For a man (or woman) to invest so much of themselves in such an undertaking it does seem silly that he'd be so undermined by a broken heart. And yet that's exactly the idea they're trying to sell us in TDKR. Yeah, maybe it's more realistic, but it doesn't resonate with the Batman of the comics (or B-TAS) who experiences setbacks and emotional disappointments and yet manages not to lose sight of his larger goals and continues his efforts. Hell, it deosn't gel with the guy we saw in BB and TDK.

To me this is a disappointment in TDKR. It taints the character of Bruce Wayne and the Batman, contradicting the person we believe him to be...or should be.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

The fear he had in Batman Begins isn't the same fear he needed in TDKR. Not sure if I can explain it properly... Bruce Wayne has lost the will to live. He needed to learn to want to live again basically. And with the will to live comes the fear of death. That's what the leap was about. He made that jump because he was pumped with fear of dying. In Batman Begins it wasn't fear of death, it was more a fear of not being able to accomplish things, I guess. He had a clear goal: clean the streets of Gotham. And then in TDK, things got worse. And after he lost Rachel, and after he gave up being Batman, after he didn't have a goal any more, it all crumbled down so that he didn't want to live anymore. In prison, he had to "learn" that "life" should be his new goal. So he came back to stop Bane, and then leave to start a new life.

I'm with you. It is a different kind of fear. And if your going to kind of mirror a theme from an earlier film, as a writer you got to take that theme in a different direction. As a normal trilogy bookend that gives a different spin on a theme introduced early on, TDKR,is fine perhaps. Though some people might complain that 40 minutes of the film were spent on one man making one jump. And what about the rest of the complex Nolanized narrative of parallel stories and mounting tension? In TDK, these kind of scenes not only added to the tension, but also added to that theme of that particular movie. But all of these random threads have to do with the kind of theme this film wants to explore (the fear needed to live again). It's as if Nolan wanted to go back to the first film's character roots but still wanted to act like this was a TDK-like crime drama. He burns the candle at both ends. And when you widdle down all the complexities, and a theme that certain is much lower in ambition than the second film, you have a Return of The Jedi-like hodgepodge of a trilogy ender.

 

[Set Harth]

I mean he invests time and money into designing this persona and building the Batcave (which we never really satisfactorily see) all for it... To not really be used? Really the set-up of the Batman "universe" in the first two movies was a big cock-tease only for it to be pulled out at the last minute with this movie with the Batman idea never really taking off.

It's inherited by Blake, cave and all.

 

[Warped9]

I mean he invests time and money into designing this persona and building the Batcave (which we never really satisfactorily see) all for it... To not really be used? Really the set-up of the Batman "universe" in the first two movies was a big cock-tease only for it to be pulled out at the last minute with this movie with the Batman idea never really taking off.

It's inherited by Blake, cave and all.

Yeah, but for a lot of us Bruce Wayne will always be the one true Batman.


Hmmm...if I keep talking about this I might end up being down on this film

 

[Kelthaz]

Well that was terrible. The entire movie was a contrived, disjointed mess. The goal of the Nolan Batman films was to be realistic -- to make you believe that someone would actually wear a batsuit and fight crime -- but this movie completely ditched that aspect. Nothing about TDKR was believable or realistic.

Oh, and the plot was a complete rehash of the first film. Nothing original, ditched its original premise, wasted time on useless characters (the Fueller cop, Robin, Catwoman, Talia, etc.), contrived situations every five minutes, and a bloated narrative.

What a huge disappointment.

 

[sidious618]

What the hell was up with Bane's voice? I couldn't understand half of what he was saying. It was almost as bad as the Bale Batvoice.

Compare this to Vader from a ANH which was 35 years ago, and I had no problem understanding anything he said.

Bane's voice was one of my favorite things about the film. I never had any trouble understanding him.

 

[Dick Whitman]

Once again the movie's ending is vague. Even if Bruce passes the mantle of Batman to Robin that does not mean he will not do good in new ways. I doubt he will just stay with Selina 24 hours a day.... Ok if I was him I would.

Maybe he will take over what is left of the League of Shadows and turn it in a better direction.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

Maybe he will take over what is left of the League of Shadows and turn it in a better direction.

I very much doubt he would be able to do that even if he tried (which I don't think he would). I'm rewatching the entire trilogy today (I'm currently waiting for the next showing of The Dark Knight Rises this evening) and I was reminded that in Batman Begins Ra's al Ghul says the League of Shadows sacked Rome, burned London, and loaded rats on trade ships in order to restore balance in the world. The League is bigger than one man and seriously doubt they would listen to Bruce to do anything different, especially when he killed several important figures in their organization and foiled their plans.

 

[Dream]

Did anyone think putting Talia in this movie was a huge mistake?

The moment she appeared, Bane turned from evil mastermind into stupid minion. He really deserved a better death than getting shot by a rocket. Talia's slow death in the truck was pretty laughable as well. Nolan tried too hard to make this movie the perfect bookend to BB.

It also annoyed me how Nolan stole Bane's background from the comics and gave it to Talia in the movie.

 

[Kelthaz]

One major problem that I had with the ending, that I'm surprised wasn't brought up in this thread, is why Bruce Wayne faked his own death? No one, except his closest companions, knew that he was Batman. I understand faking Batman's death, but why fake Bruce's death? There's no reason for it.

Also, even if it was necessary for him to fake his own death, how does Bruce Wayne just disappear? He's a world famous billionaire in charge of Wayne Enterprises. That's like Bill Gates faking his own death and moving to Europe. Someone is going to recognize him.

And how long did Bruce and Selina wait at that cafe for Alfred to show up? Yes, they knew that Alfred goes there once a year, but they had no idea which day it would be. Did they simply sit at that table for 16 hours a day for months waiting for Alfred to take his vacation?

 

[Dream]

I'm surprised more people aren't upset at the whole Bruce gives up being Batman ending. Isn't that something he would NEVER do in the comics?

 

[Mike Farley]

But, as stated in this very thread, Movie Bruce isn't like Comic Bruce. The seeds for this ending have been sown all the way back in Batman Begins. He creates Batman, not as a disguise to beat up criminals, but as a symbol, larger than any one man. By the Dark Knight, he's already looking to pass Gotham's hero role to Harvey and quit to be with Rachel.

 

[Warped9]

I'm surprised more people aren't upset at the whole Bruce gives up being Batman ending. Isn't that something he would NEVER do in the comics?

Upset? No. Disappointed? Yes. But the groundwork for it had already been laid so in context of this story and Nolan's take on the character it wasn't a huge surprise.

Bruce and Selena only had to be aware of Alfred's arrival and to learn when he was headed for that cafe. Then they need only get there ahead of him.

 

[Captain Craig]

I'm surprised more people aren't upset at the whole Bruce gives up being Batman ending. Isn't that something he would NEVER do in the comics?

That & brooding over Rachel's death like a hermit for 8 years.

 

[DevilEyes]

What I do find sad, and this is about all superheroes, is that ever since the deconstruction of the superheroes got going in the '80s is the idea someone has to be psychologically flawed to even contemplate going beyond the norm to do something right.

No, people don't have to be psychologically flawed to do something right. But people definitely have to be psychologically flawed to dress in a funny costume and/or put on a mask and go and beat up the bad guys.

 

[Set Harth]

No one, except his closest companions, knew that he was Batman.

And Bane & the LOS. And Blake.

the Fueller cop

I have to agree that the Fueller cop was a useless character. However, since there was no such character in the film, its uselessness seems irrelevant.

 

[Warped9]

What I do find sad, and this is about all superheroes, is that ever since the deconstruction of the superheroes got going in the '80s is the idea someone has to be psychologically flawed to even contemplate going beyond the norm to do something right.

No, people don't have to be psychologically flawed to do something right. But people definitely have to be psychologically flawed to dress in a funny costume and/or put on a mask and go and beat up the bad guys.

Well, of course, this is where the suspension of disbelief comes into play. But the Batman of the early '40s and 1970s was not portrayed as psychologically flawed and only tenuously stable. That Batman wore his suit with the same confidence as Superman wears his. And that's the Batman I really want to see.

It's a matter of perception. In the real world why can some actors pull it off and not others. George Reeves and Christopher Reeve wore the costume with confidence. Dean Cain not so much. If there really existed someone who could do what Superman does then I don't think too many people would be harping about his outfit. Olympic athletes sometimes wear attire that would look odd outside of a stadium, but when you see them in action it looks completely different. In particular speed skaters come to mind. Now if a guy could derail a train with one punch I don't think folks will be too bothered by him wearing red and blue and sporting a cape. And if a guy is so seriously badass the punks and crooks are afraid to walk the streets at night then they've likely gotten over thinking about the guy's outfit---they just don't wanna see that symbolic shadow on the walls as they skulk their way home.

We might laugh at theatricality yet we can also be moved or impressed by it.

Then again this doesn't work no matter how you think about it.

Regarding the film I'm reminded of the many Elseworlds versions of Batman I've read over the years. The Nolan trilogy does work if you can see it as yet another Elseworlds story.