The Dark Knight Rises **WITH SPOILERS**

Ken B. wrote: Alfred broke down because he didn't know yet.

If that's true then Alfred is the coolest cucumber in all the Batverse. You expect me to believe he sees Wayne after thinking he is dead and all he's gonna do is give him a small smile? After that reaction at the funeral I would expect a little more from the man who raised Bruce to manhood and became his true father.

Ken B. wrote: At the conclusion of the movie, I applauded, as did a sizable portion of the audience. Packed house, felt good.

Glad you enjoyed it Ken. I'd give it 2.5 stars out of five at this point. I needed more Batman. At least Bane and Catwoman were handled properly and were a joy to watch, excluding the two fights with Bane and Batman. If they weren't in costume I would have mistaken them for the thugs simply slugging it out in the background.

The audience I was with had a different reaction all together. Dead silence at the end, and there were a few laughs during dramatic sequences in the film.

Are you talking bad about Turner and Hooch?

Hell no! I'm just saying that I didn't mind Craig T. Nelson pulling the old "Haha! I'm actually a bad guy! Surpriiiised?" routine because it's a movie about Tom Hanks' house getting eaten by a dog, and the cocaine dealing aspect was just there to move the plot along, so I don't care.

This movie isn't a direct-to-DVD buddy cop movie, so having such a cheap, lazy plot twist was inexcusable.

I suppose if your looking for Batman to run around the city socking villains and using gadgets to climb up the side of buildings, you might be disappointed. But you shouldn't go into this movie expecting a modern version of the Tim Burton movies which had Batman doing Batman stuff all the way through. Different movies, different directors, different tone.

Bullshit. Batman Begins spent a good deal of time on the typical Batman stuff; his training, how he acquires his gadgets, beating up criminals in dark alleyways, perching on little peaks conferring with the fuzz; all the stuff you'd expect to see. Plus, it managed to cover the human drama/character study business just fine, and still clocked in at just over 2 hours.

TDK did have less of that, but it was still a Batman movie through and through. You start right off with the Joker's bank heist, then you go right into Batman's first violent encounter, then Joker hooks up with the mob, Batman jets off to China to kidnap the accountant, Joker crashes Wayne's party and confronts Batman... There are a lot of talk-y bits interspersed with that stuff, but the movie continuously ratchets up the momentum and the stakes, and Batman is in the game the entire time. It's no less narratively dense than the new movie, and it also is shorter and tighter.

This one keeps Batman out off the scene until we're well into the movie, gives him a few opportunities to play with his toys, beat up a few bad guys, and boom; he's out of commission again until the tail end of the flick. I'm sorry, but that sucks. Nothing changes about the character as he fights his way back from utter defeat for the second time that didn't already happen an hour into the picture. There is no narrative progression there, it's just depressing, and serves no purpose other than to get Batman out of the way so the film can start following this John Blake guy.

I wasn't expecting to see the Tim Burton flicks writ large, and I didn't want to see that. They already put Batman in at his lowest point between the end of TDK and the beginning of TDKR. Once they got over that bit, the rest of the movie should have concerned itself chiefly with Batman/Wayne's redemption and return, triumph over the forces of evil, and his stepping down as Gotham's protector for good. Now, all those things happen, but they do it at such a leisurely, distracted way that the plot becomes repetitive and tedious. It would have been nice, after two dreary, depressing films to see Batman bounce back, kick ass, and just do the whole fun Batman thing for a while. They tied everything up with a tidy little bow at the end anyway, so would just a little levity have damaged the movie that much?

The proto-Robin cop character, however, knows that evil will come again. He knows the city still needs heroes. He believes in Batman.

Yeah, so does Gordon. That was the whole point of his character in the first two. If anything, this picture should have seen Gordon stepping up and taking over for Batman. No, he's not the squeaky clean idealist that Dent was, because Gotham obviously can't handle a white knight. It's too corrupt. On the other hand, he's not Batman either. He believes in working within the system until, and only until, the system has utterly failed.

He's really the hero Gotham needs, and he's stuck playing second fiddle to everyone. In the third film, there's nobody left for him to take a back seat to, so they just manufacture some new character and stick him on truck watching duty. That's just a bad use of a good character.

Reflections and mirrors. All the way through this movie. She is the reflection of Catwoman. Seemingly good but evil. While Catwoman is seemingly evil but good. One with wealth and power, the other with little of either. She lends weight to Catwoman's character. She also lends humanity to the machine that is Bane. She adds to the movie.

And like I said, if she had been established as who she actually was earlier than the last 20 minutes of the movie, I might have agreed with this (though I don't see why we need to "humanize" Bane. He's still a mass murdering fuck, and the fact that he loves somebody doesn't change that). As is, she simply pops into existence in the last act, as she shares nothing in common after the big reveal with the character she played for the entire movie.

Whether it was expected or not, it was cheap and lame.

Why need Bruce Waynes arsenal. Because it's close. Because it's functional. Because it stabs another needle in the eye of the man who betrayed Ra's.

You get the distinct impression from BB that the League of Shadows has operatives all over the world, in positions of real power. Presumably, that's how they engineered Gotham's financial collapse. They haven't infiltrated one private military company? They don't have any operatives in the former Soviet states, or maybe Pakistan that could get their hands on a nuclear weapon? Instead, they have to spend years getting Wayne to develop this reactor, worm their way onto the board of directors, wait around for some physicist to figure out how to turn it into a bomb, and send their most valuable agent (Bane), on a super high-risk kidnapping to get the guy?

Maybe I'm overthinking it, but maybe the plot is just overcomplicated.

Green Lantern wrote:

Ken B. wrote: Alfred broke down because he didn't know yet.

If that's true then Alfred is the coolest cucumber in all the Batverse. You expect me to believe he sees Wayne after thinking he is dead and all he's gonna do is give him a small smile? After that reaction at the funeral I would expect a little more from the man who raised Bruce to manhood and became his true father.

That scene in France, as I've said, was the one weak spot for me in the movie. Which is why I maintain that it was Alfred's fantasy and not reality.

I agree that the Miranda character wasn't given a lot of build up BUT we are told she was partners with Wayne on the clean energy project and lost a sizable amount of money but she is not bitter about it nor does it lessen her interest in Wayne.(so Wayne views her as a person more interested in the greater good than personal profit), she also throws lavish charity functions on her own dime (speaking to Wayne's philanthropic side), she's also pragmatic, a doer not just a thinker (as we see when she enters her security print into the reactor reasoning that to not do so will just get them killed for no reason), and she is in the same social circle as Wayne (like Catwoman is in the same social circle as Batman). Yes the romance is compressed time wise as happens in plays many times but it is not unreasonable that they become romantically connected. Also it happens at a time when Wayne is just re-entering the world. Anybody who has seen somebody who re enters "the market" after having been in a long term relationship fall for the first person to come along can well believe Wayne going for Miranda, not because she's Ms. Right but because she's Ms. Right Now. The whole "getting someone on the rebound" thing.

repoman wrote: That scene in France, as I've said, was the one weak spot for me in the movie. Which is why I maintain that it was Alfred's fantasy and not reality.

Alfred has one damn finely detailed imagination to go with that world-class poker face then. Selena is sitting across from Wayne at the cafe. If they had chosen not to show her in profile I would be inclined to side with you on the fantasy notion, Repo. I don't think it was fantasy and we got a heartfelt confession at Bruce's funeral for nothing. In mere moments they pissed on his performance Alfred's reaction by showing us that Bruce pulled one over on the world and Alfred, but Alfred is okay with that and simply gives his son a tip of the hat.

Good points on Miranda. I never said she wasn't written well and your points are well made. My issue was the trust that Bruce put into her without question. Why did he not trust the John Hurt looking board member over Talia? That's never established well enough IMO and neither is the whole plan to take away the Wayne fortune. They The Leagues succeeds on that front but nothing is ever made of its impact on Batman. He still has all the resources he needs to show up at the end and fake his death. So much pointless build up for nothing. Just like Talia. A woman who "hated" her father so much she was willing to die for his cause. <head scratch> HUH?

* Edited for clarification

Green Lantern wrote:

daveroswell wrote: Batman is doing Batman things by getting emotionally and physically beaten down and getting back up SOMEHOW. I don't buy that Batman is dead. Because shit, even a nuclear device can't stop this guy? REALLY? Why? Because he's BATMAN.

You just highlighted why I HATE the setup to this film, Dave. This element of Batman is crucial and the first two films established it very well. Even Alfred doesn't give up. In this latest installment BOTH men are neutered! Criminal character assassinations all around. Alfred gives up on Bruce? Uhh, no. That's stupid. And Batman calls it quits because Rachel dies? Say what? Isn't the death of loved ones the only reason he took up the cowl to begin with. Holy hell that eight year absence was ridiculous and soured the whole damn film for me.

And the whole faux death is even more strained. Why was that even necessary to begin with? He didn't fake his death to cover his eight year absence so why do it now? Because he's retiring? Then why the hell did he hand the cave over to Robin??? And for the love of Pete, why did Alfred break down at a funeral when he knows Bruce isn't dead? <commence rolling of eyes>

I think the story is a bit more complicated. It isn't Rachel's death alone; it's the realization Rachel picked Harvey over him. It is Bruce watching Harvey go over the edge, fearing he might do the same. Along with that, it is the feeling Gotham blames him for their problems, along with the fact the "big threats" such as the Joker and League of Shadows are gone. He fears his attempts to fix his world will come close to destroying it, and it almost happens. It is pointed out during the film he turned his back on the little guy, those orphans he can relate to.
Eight years is a long time, which may be the sticking point. Nolan did call the movie The Dark Knight Rises after all.

daveroswell wrote: I think the story is a bit more complicated. It isn't Rachel's death alone; it's the realization Rachel picked Harvey over him. It is Bruce watching Harvey go over the edge, fearing he might do the same. Along with that, it is the feeling Gotham blames him for their problems, along with the fact the "big threats" such as the Joker and League of Shadows are gone. He fears his attempts to fix his world will come close to destroying it, and it almost happens. It is pointed out during the film he turned his back on the little guy, those orphans he can relate to.
Eight years is a long time, which may be the sticking point. Nolan did call the movie The Dark Knight Rises after all.

Bruce doesn't learn of Rachel's decision until the events of this film, so her decision wasn't a factor in the Batman's disappearance. I like where you're going with his fear that Batman may become more of a hindrance to a crime free Gotham but that is never explored. Why didn't we get to see Batman fight the battles the police couldn't handle while avoiding arrest? That would have been more interesting than learning Bruce Wayne simply hung up the cowl and called it quits. Batman is not a quitter. That's the trait that defines him AND Alfred and if the undercurrent of the entire first film. That theme was tossed out the window for this new installment and it was a poor choice.

And just what did the Dark Knight rise to in this film? To emerge from hiding to get his ass kicked by Bane and get sucker punched by the daughter of his mentor? Some rise. I would have much prefered to see him rise to become not only the hero Gotham needed, but a beacon of hope for the world to follow. Instead Wayne leaves the legacy dead while seemingly handing over the reigns to the new guy should he ever decide to put on the cowl. Mixed signal much?

I think you pretty much struck at the heart of why the movie left such a bad taste in my mouth, GL; Batman is just so ineffectual. So are Alfred, Gordon, and even Bane when you get right down to it.

These guys all spend so much of the movie either moping around, or crumpled up and licking their wounds. There's no fight in any of the good guys except Blake, and how are we supposed to get behind this Joe Blow Flatfoot when Gotham has just beaten the hell out of men that dwarf him in one character aspect or another?

Bane, of course, isn't defeated until the very end. He pulls off all his capers expertly, but he's essentially a puppet when all's said and done. He does Talia's bidding because he sees it as redemptive, but he never tries to articulate why. I guess he never gets a chance, because he gets perfunctorily dispatched as soon as we find out what his deal is. And the way he gets his, of course, makes Batman come off as even more ineffectual.

Aside from Catwoman, Blake, and Talia, none of the characters have any agency in the film. They simply march along and take their lumps as the script requires. They're occasionally allowed to assert themselves, but the choices they make hardly matter.

repoman wrote: The only problem I had was Alfred seeing Bruce in France at the very end. I choose to interpret that just as his fantasy and that Wayne is really dead.

I have two theories about this:

1. Alfred is drunk off his ass and seeing what he wants to.

2. They cut the part right after where you see a little top spinning on Alfred's table. BATCEPTION.

The Talia betrayal reveal was SO OBVIOUS - I called it the minute she showed up at Wayne manor and started the kissy-kissy. I don't know anything about the Batman universe (never read the comics) and it was so telegraphed they might as well have had a director's voiceover.

Pretty sure at some point Fox said that the Bat-suit had Kevlar in it, but she slips that knife in like it's weed fabric. Maybe it's a laser ninja knife.

The whole pit scene was boring, because you knew Bruce was going to escape. No tension whatsoever. What did that do for his character? We already know he can do a lot of push-ups and he's super determined and tough. So what?

The end scene with Alfred would've been better had they not shown who he was looking at; just a nod and a smile, leaving you to wonder if he saw Bruce or not. Instead, it's all just YUP BATMAN LIVED!

Delobius wrote: Pretty sure at some point Fox said that the Bat-suit had Kevlar in it, but she slips that knife in like it's weed fabric. Maybe it's a laser ninja knife.

In The Dark Knight, Fox says that the new batsuit is weaker at the joints, so it won't be as effective against knives.

</nerd>

The slow blade penetrates the shield.

All Batsuits are vulnerable to plot contrivances. It's their one weakness.

Hey, just to counter one negative you guys mentioned--in the Knightfall storyline, when Bruce is determined to get back into shape and don the cape and cowl again, Alfred does in fact leave him, fearing he'll have to watch Bruce die.

Also: The Pit is better than "psychic boyfriend battle" that the comics used to heal Bruce's back.

Ken B. wrote: Hey, just to counter one negative you guys mentioned--in the Knightfall storyline, when Bruce is determined to get back into shape and don the cape and cowl again, Alfred does in fact leave him, fearing he'll have to watch Bruce die.

Just becasue Alfred left Bruce in another form of medium doesn't make it okay. Especially since the first two films go to great length to underscore that Bruce will never quit and Alfred will never give up on him.

Ken B. wrote: Also: The Pit is better than "psychic boyfriend battle" that the comics used to heal Bruce's back.

True, and it would have had more impact if it had been the only "rise" we got to see in the film. It's that first "rise" that pissed me off. They should have called the movie The Dark Knight Retires or Catwoman Rises. Those would have been more appropriate.

Anyway, check out this guys review . I agree with it on all counts except for Bane. Bane was fantastic.

The review mentions a quote from Kingdom Come but I have no idea what it was, so if anyone knows the reference please share.