The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

[The Revelator]

Originally Posted by MovieGeek

How the hell did they act like the second film never happened? Did you actually watch the movie?

Just because The Joker isn't mentioned doesn't mean the second film was ignored.

You're just bitching for the sake of bitching now.

Chill out... I'm aware that this film mentions the the 2nd film and obviously cannot take place without any of that film's events. I was referring to the Joker character not being referenced, I thought it was a cop-out, but it wasn't something that actively took my pleasure away from the movie until well after I first saw this one. Just thought it should have been made much more apparent since it was a turning point in Gotham's history. Why does everybody have to get so hostile so easily around here lately?

Everybody is acting like I hated this movie. As has been stated 2093740238402384 times now, the film is a technical marvel and stands as a culmination of Nolan's efforts as a filmmaker. I have major issues with the plot, however. No need to say what has already been said.

edit

I'm gonna watch this one more time. I like a lot of what I've read in this board and I'm gonna watch it with some new things in mind.

[Santa]

Originally Posted by Sea Hag

Because there was a small scene explaining that the auto-pilot was working.

Totally overlooked it. I am not sure that this is the only "excuse" for the scene in the cafe.

Originally Posted by Sea Hag

It's just not a good film bro

Maybe not as a whole, but within the trilogy it fits as an ending piece quite well. And one thing is for sure: it is a damn good action movie of epic proportions and has a very good score as well (which is strange because it is a Zimmer one). Not to mention the gorgeous IMAX sequences.

Originally Posted by Klown

That's all well and good, but you're willing to overlook the holes. Whereas some of us are not. I like the film. On the technical side, it's top-notch. It's the story that starts to crumble. I don't want to re-list everything that has been mentioned, but the list of holes is quite extensive. Sure you can nitpick any film, but they shouldn't bug you after the film is long over.

They didn't bug me in the first place, because of the epic proportions of the visuals and the overall positive impression of the fact, that everything and everybody has come to peace. Sure, there are imo too many glorification moments towards the end plus some inevitable tearjerkers, but I guess they were needed for a flick of such proportions. I don't like 'em at all, but those things can be overlooked due to the already mentioned other qualitites of the movie.

Originally Posted by bloodydollface

You can find plot holes in any movie. It's not that uncommon. But you when you have a trilogy, and loose ends and plot holes come into effect it can ruin a series. I loved the movie, but it isn't even close to a movie of the year nod or a perfect score. If you were rating the film solely based off of the visuals it would be perfect, but the story is not, and that's a problem. Not a major problem, but still a problem. Especially that this is the final movie in the trilogy. It needs to fill the loose plot holes, which contrary to some "do exist." Like you stated, the film does not need to be perfect, but it needed to address certain issues involving the story which were left out.

All of this, well written!

Originally Posted by Edo

I always thought plot holes were such a cheap way to shit on a film. I tend to look at more of the bigger picture, and it's not because I have low standards. I have a willingness to look over all the petty things that other people frivolously babble about. It just seems like people rage about these films just for the sake of raging.
I thought it was excellent, much better than I thought it would be since I'm not a huge TDK fan.

I agree with the plothole thing, but like rusted already said, it was directed by Nolan, not a B grade director from Italy or so. You wouldn't expect such mistakes from him at all. I only can assume, that he wanted to maintain a comicbook-like character and vibe for TDKR. That would be the only excuse...

Originally Posted by Shape

I'm not willing to overlook the holes...however, I am willing to look past the small things like, "how did Bruce get back to Gotham from the prison?", because there's a simple answer; he's Batman.

Yes, he is.
Another thing: everybody is talking about his broken spine after his fight with Bane. Would it have been really broken and damaged for good, he didn't have had the opportunity at all to walk again, because being permamently disabled and crippled. Spine cut = disabled.
But he is Batman.

Originally Posted by Shape

I don't dwell on the little things, that would ruin every movie for me. If I wanted something more real I wouldn't be watching science fiction. haha

Talking about plot-holes and unanswered questions...there is another film called Prometheus, which had similar issues, but the outcry wasn't by far as devastating like the one from TDKR. Ridley Scott is a perfectionist as well, but he managed to built in some odd things in his latest movie as well. Kinda strange, isn't it?

Originally Posted by Shape

It's apparent you're not looking for closure from the whole series but from the movies individually. I'm as big a Batman fan you'll find, but I still don't destroy the movie by noticing the little problems that weren't answered. The trilogy as a whole is quite perfect, but if you're looking at the movies individually you'll find the same unanswered questions in ALL of them.

Troof too. I you want to destroy any kind of movie, you will succeed.

[Justin_Voorhees]

Originally Posted by bloodydollface

For people who aren't as into this series (like yourself) as others, it's probably much easier to forgive or look over some missing pieces of the story. Just as it is with many other things, but die-hard fans and strong followers of the series, want and deserve closure on some things. Yes, it was a fantastic film, but it still left much to be desired by fans of the series.

Not for this fan lol. I thought it was a great ending to a great trilogy.

[bloodydollface]

Originally Posted by Justin_Voorhees

Not for this fan lol. I thought it was a great ending to a great trilogy.

Let me rephrase that, "most fans." It was a good ending, not arguing that, but there's still things left to be desired in the movie. I watched the movie again last night and this 3rd viewing did help clarify some things for me, but also noticed other things. One of them was Miranda Tate's death. It seemed kind of awkward and out of place in the movie, especially for her character. Her death didn't really seem "believable" to me. I would have liked to see a different ending for her character.

[Justin_Voorhees]

Originally Posted by bloodydollface

Let me rephrase that, "most fans." It was a good ending, not arguing that, but there's still things left to be desired in the movie. I watched the movie again last night and this 3rd viewing did help clarify some things for me, but also noticed other things. One of them was Miranda Tate's death. It seemed kind of awkward and out of place in the movie, especially for her character. Her death didn't really seem "believable" to me. I would have liked to see a different ending for her character.

Her death scene was pretty bad.

[Santa]

Gave it a rewatch today and just like the first time, it was fun to watch at. My home theatre system was pushed to its limits and the screen exploded with great eyeycandies. It really felt like that the comic book-feeling was purposed and incorporated intentionally, at least at those scenes, which were under heavy fire here. It worked better than in theater a half year ago and I got even accostumed to Gordon-Levitts performance and meaning in this film. Plus, the last scene in the french cafe was also coherent now, knowing, that Bruce Spoiler Below

applied a patch to the auto pilot function within his pod

prior to his abscence in the prison.
I would rate it 7 up to 8 now.
No major problem with it, except for the schmaltz at the end (funeral, statue and shit).

Originally Posted by bloodydollface

Let me rephrase that, "most fans." It was a good ending, not arguing that, but there's still things left to be desired in the movie. I watched the movie again last night and this 3rd viewing did help clarify some things for me, but also noticed other things. One of them was Miranda Tate's death. It seemed kind of awkward and out of place in the movie, especially for her character. Her death didn't really seem "believable" to me. I would have liked to see a different ending for her character.

Originally Posted by Justin_Voorhees

Her death scene was pretty bad.

Her death scene was the worst in recent movie history. She mumbles last sentences and then all of the sudden shuts her eyes -> dead!
Horrible and amateurish.

[Sykopath]

Originally Posted by bloodydollface

It was a good ending, not arguing that, but there's still things left to be desired in the movie.

I've read what other members' problems are with the film, however, you keep saying "there are still things left to be desired, "still things left to be desired"...like what? Please elaborate. It seems as if you just don't WANT to like the movie.

[bloodydollface]

Originally Posted by Shape

I've read what other members' problems are with the film, however, you keep saying "there are still things left to be desired, "still things left to be desired"...like what? Please elaborate. It seems as if you just don't WANT to like the movie.

I've stated several times that it is an outstanding movie. I loved it.

I didn't elaborate because most of the other members on here have basically already said what I would've said. But since you NEED me to, here it goes:

I didn't like the scene where Alfred saw Bruce in the coffee shop at the end of the movie. In my mind that just teases the audience. It's the end of the trilogy, it should wrap things up not throw out more and more possibilities of what happened to Bruce. IMO if they used that scene, they should have showed that Bruce escaped the ride in the "BAT" and then found peace in going on living like Alfred wanted Bruce to do. Now we don't know if Alfred just imagined him and Bruce did die, or if Alfred really did see Bruce and he had happened to survive the blast.

Also, Miranda Tate's death was just god-awful. It was poorly done and didn't seem like it was believable at all. It was bad acting and bad directing. I very disappointed in this scene.

The scene with ice is weird too. The first scene where the people get exiled, they fall through right away and hardly far out on the ice at all, then commissioner Gordon and shit ton of others go out there and the ice holds just fine. I thought that was kind of odd.

Like I said earlier, after a 3rd viewing, more of the plot and story started to make sense to me. However, I don't like how Nolan ended it. Nolan is a fantastic director and he did a good job on this film, but TDRK is not his best work. These things are all just my opinions on why I wouldn't call it a "perfect movie" or give it some "Movie of the year" nomination. You clearly thought it was flawless and that the actors were all perfect.... I just don't agree.

[Sykopath]

Originally Posted by bloodydollface

IMO if they used that scene, they should have showed that Bruce escaped the ride in the "BAT" and then found peace in going on living like Alfred wanted Bruce to do. Now we don't know if Alfred just imagined him and Bruce did die, or if Alfred really did see Bruce and he had happened to survive the blast.

What happened with Bruce couldn't be any more clearer; as it's been mentioned a couple times before (and proven in interviews), Alfred wasn't imagining anything. Seeing Bruce and Selina at the cafe was real. So yes, Batman did escape.

Also, Miranda Tate's death was just god-awful. It was poorly done and didn't seem like it was believable at all. It was bad acting and bad directing. I very disappointed in this scene.

The directing had nothing to do with that scene. David Goyer's dialogue isn't the strongest, and she's not the best actress out there. I wouldn't degrade the film just because she can't act. In a 3 hour movie she had about 10 to 15 minutes of screen time all together.

The scene with ice is weird too. The first scene where the people get exiled, they fall through right away and hardly far out on the ice at all, then commissioner Gordon and shit ton of others go out there and the ice holds just fine. I thought that was kind of odd.

Actually, Batman, Gordon, and the others were only a few feet out on the ice. Whereas, the guy who fell through was a good 20-25 feet away from shore, where the ice gets weaker. He was far enough out to where his whole body was able to fall through.

These things are all just my opinions on why I wouldn't call it a "perfect movie" or give it some "Movie of the year" nomination. You clearly thought it was flawless and that the actors were all perfect.... I just don't agree.

I do NOT think this movie is flawless, not in the least bit. However, I don't think it's as bad as what everybody says. The Dark Knight (among a lot of people) is held high in regards. But it has the exact same amount of small flaws as TDKR, but those seem to be overlooked. Why? Beats me.

I'm not trying to change your mind or opinion. You just seem to find the small things as problems, but some of those things can be clarified. It also seems as if some people are overlooking the answers to their questions.

[Heretic]

Originally Posted by Shape

I do NOT think this movie is flawless, not in the least bit. However, I don't think it's as bad as what everybody says. The Dark Knight (among a lot of people) is held high in regards. But it has the exact same amount of small flaws as TDKR, but those seem to be overlooked. Why? Beats me.

Not a chance. TDK did have it's questionable moments, which were pretty glaring:

- Batman leaving The Joker at his party

- Batman falling at least 3 stories, with no explanation as to how his suit could absorb such a blow, let alone Rachel.

- That cop awkwardly screaming "Things are worse than ever!" at the Dent press conference.

- The Joker blowing up an entire police station, killing/disabling everyone but himself.

-Two Face strategically putting his seatbelt on, to survive a horrific car crash.

- Maggie Gyllenhaal.

That's about it. If I were to bullet point TDKR's problems, this page would take 20 minutes to load.

I actually watched it for a third time today, and it does get far better than I initially thought. Seriously, if you've only seen it once, give it another chance. That being said, it still has some very basic issues, that I wouldn't expect to come from a Christopher Nolan film.