Nolan's Batman

Just saw the film. A few things I pondered whilst watching.

Why did he talk in the Batman voice when he was alone with people who knew his idendity (the Catwoman on the Bat bike scene)?

Why didn't he headbutt Miranda/Talia? I can only really remember it from Avengers where someone starts blabbing and get's interrupted by a punch or something.

Why didn't he use his super leg more often? He didn't kick Bane once.

Why didn't Superman sort this out? These comic worlds confuse me. On one hand you've got them all together fighting and then on the other hand they're unaware of each others existence. I think every DC superhero movie should end with Superman coming and saving the day.

Pondering aside it was a fine movie. Catwoman was better than expected. I dig Hathaway normally. She surprised me in a chick flick recently with being nude quite a lot. I liked that. Now she had this sexy accent and was bendy. Liked that too. Too bad that Hathaway and Scarlett are in different universes.
 
Just got back from watching it. I hate trailers and I think my expectations led to a slight disappointment. It was good, but not great, the two before it are far better.
 
CassiusClaymore said:
The Dark Knight had very little rewatch value.

I'm more surprised at everyone 'rediscovering' Batman Begins. It was always a good film. And very re-watchable.
Click to expand...

it was more to the fact that the last time I watched Begins was in 2005. While the first half was probably the best superhero origin ever made, I found the second half was a bit out of place. But it wasnt much of a problem last night, throughly enjoyable from start to finish. Maybe because after seeing the whole trilogy, I become to appreciate more what Nolan is trying to do.
 
CassiusClaymore said:
The Dark Knight had very little rewatch value.

I'm more surprised at everyone 'rediscovering' Batman Begins. It was always a good film. And very re-watchable.
Click to expand...

I've seen The Dark Night 5 times. I could see it over and over again. I never get tired of watching The Joker in particular. Outstanding film.

And now people are questioning little details (of TDKR) almost because it's becoming fashionable to do so. As if it shows some greater understanding of films in general. Which is rubbish. A few things here and there are definitely questionable but this sort of nit picking makes you wonder whether it's something that crossed their minds naturally as a consequence of watching the film or they were scratching the surface looking for things to pick on.
 
We get it amol, you loved Heath Ledger! Just think how many more movies you can be blown away by if you're obsessed by his performance in TDK.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
I've seen The Dark Night 5 times. I could see it over and over again. I never get tired of watching The Joker in particular. Outstanding film.

And now people are questioning little details (of TDKR) almost because it's becoming fashionable to do so. As if it shows some greater understanding of films in general. Which is rubbish. A few things here and there are definitely questionable but this sort of nit picking makes you wonder whether it's something that crossed their minds naturally as a consequence of watching the film or they were scratching the surface looking for things to pick on.
Click to expand...

Nothing is above critique, and nor should it be. If you removed your critical eye you'd basically every film ever made.
 
Scrumpet said:
The hallucinations in Begins are cooler than I remembered. Scarecrow was a thoroughly decent villain.
Click to expand...

Incredibly underused/underrated. I've always liked Scarecrow and thought, unless you're Joker and the Riddler, you could always use the Scarecrow.
 
On subsequent viewings I found Heath Ledger's joker to be a self-indulgent, pseudo-intellectual trying to communicate to us Nolan's ideas. Still a great performance, mind, but the script could have been made with more subtlety instead of making him sound like some insane philosopher. I got tired of his insipid ramblings.
 
LARulz said:
Incredibly underused/underrated. I've always liked Scarecrow and thought, unless you're Joker and the Riddler, you could always use the Scarecrow.
Click to expand...

Yeah I liked him myself in that film. Definitely a good villain.
 
thepolice123 said:
On subsequent viewings I found Heath Ledger's joker to be a self-indulgent, pseudo-intellectual trying to communicate to us Nolan's ideas. Still a great performance, mind, but the script could have been made with more subtlety instead of making him sound like some insane philosopher. I got tired of his insipid ramblings.
Click to expand...

Bullshit. You've missed the point entirely.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
I've seen The Dark Night 5 times. I could see it over and over again. I never get tired of watching The Joker in particular. Outstanding film.

And now people are questioning little details (of TDKR) almost because it's becoming fashionable to do so. As if it shows some greater understanding of films in general. Which is rubbish. A few things here and there are definitely questionable but this sort of nit picking makes you wonder whether it's something that crossed their minds naturally as a consequence of watching the film or they were scratching the surface looking for things to pick on.
Click to expand...

Why shouldn't they? That's what people do... Unless they're not allowed to criticise your favourite films or something.
 
Spoony Kobayashi said:
Why shouldn't they? That's what people do... Unless they're not allowed to criticise your favourite films or something.
Click to expand...

Criticize away. But it seems to me as though some people sit and watch films ready to pounce on anything they can tear into. I can't relate to watching a movie in that manner. I understand picking on things that just cross your mind while watching. But it looks like some people are trying very hard to find things to rant about.
 
Brwned said:
This should really just be in the movie review thread...
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Back to the TDKR, I wasn't wow'd by Anne Hathaway's Catwoman. She was too much of a normal girl with black outfit on. Which isn't her fault at all. Her performance was actually very assured. But I think the character, at least in the suit, could have had a bit more "cattyness" to it.

Infact, although I absolutely loved this trilogy, one criticism of it is that, the superheros who were also shown in their normal form were shown too little in their superhero forms. Would have liked to see less of Bruce Wayne and more of Batman. Same with Catwoman. The Joker was fine because there isn't a normal side to him.
 
Moved them just to tidy things up.

I agree but Hathaway but for a somewhat different reason. She's a devious, sexy, ultra-flexible thief in a catsuit, but with a human side to her...it's a very easy character for people to love, and I thought the character itself was well formed. She didn't do particularly much with it though.
 
Brwned said:
Moved them just to tidy things up.

I agree but Hathaway but for a somewhat different reason. She's a devious, sexy, ultra-flexible thief in a catsuit, but with a human side to her...it's a very easy character for people to love, and I thought the character itself was well formed. She didn't do particularly much with it though.
Click to expand...

I thought those were the directions given to her - to make her as "normal" as possible, which she did in a refined and natural way. I think Nolan should have given the character a bit more complexity and rough edges. Infact, she could have been this editions "mixed signals" sort of character, the kind the audience isn't quite sure about. Instead you always felt in the end she was just a normal person who deep down was a good person and would end up doing the right thing. Bane was always going to be an evil fecker. Catwoman could have been the grey area.
 
Saw it last night and thought it was excellent. It was great seeing Batman actually using the Batcave properly in this one, seeing Bane breaking his back, and the cameo's from Ra's al Ghul and Scarecrow.

Just wondering what everybody's view on the ending is. Are we taking it at face value that Bruce Wayne lived and faked his death, or was it just Alfred's imagination and wishful thinking, making him see Bruce exactly how he'd always hoped to?
 
I'd like to think that he died. I don't know what kind of eject system was in place in The Bat but he had about 30 seconds to eject and get out of the blast radius.
 
Snow said:
I'd like to think that he died. I don't know what kind of eject system was in place in The Bat but he had about 30 seconds to eject and get out of the blast radius.
Click to expand...

He probably ejected as soon as he left the city, leaving the bat to fly on auto pilot before blowing up
 
Easy V said:
Saw it last night and thought it was excellent. It was great seeing Batman actually using the Batcave properly in this one, seeing Bane breaking his back, and the cameo's from Ra's al Ghul and Scarecrow.

Just wondering what everybody's view on the ending is. Are we taking it at face value that Bruce Wayne lived and faked his death, or was it just Alfred's imagination and wishful thinking, making him see Bruce exactly how he'd always hoped to?
Click to expand...

Bruce Wayne survived. He used two bat planes. The One that carried the bomb had autopilot.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
Criticize away. But it seems to me as though some people sit and watch films ready to pounce on anything they can tear into. I can't relate to watching a movie in that manner. I understand picking on things that just cross your mind while watching. But it looks like some people are trying very hard to find things to rant about.
Click to expand...

With me, I tend to watch a film and enjoy it in the moment. Then on my way out of the cinema into the real world, it'll dawn on me that there were moments of the films that made no sense other than contrive to progress the story to another sequence of events.

Such as:

Why could the bomb/reactor with a convenient bomb-mode countdown timer only be stabilised by the autopilot hardware of the bat? Very convenient for the script writers, not at all nonsensical or contrived...

Why did the prisoners in the pit all wear scarves around their faces to conceal their identities - but only in the parts where it was imperative for the script writers that the identity of one of the characters was withheld from the audience - and not in the later bits where Bruce Wayne was imprisoned?

Why, when you have been busting a gut to get to the bomb before the time is up, do you then spend the precious last minute or so listening to a dying woman blabbering on for a bit?
 
Garethw said:
Bruce Wayne survived. He used two bat planes. The One that carried the bomb had autopilot.
Click to expand...

Yeah in hindsight it really wouldn't be difficult for him to have put it on full thrust out to sea and ejected. At the time you just assume he drove it out all the way.
 
decorativeed said:
With me, I tend to watch a film and enjoy it in the moment. Then on my way out of the cinema into the real world, it'll dawn on me that there were moments of the films that made no sense other than contrive to progress the story to another sequence of events.

Such as:

Why could the bomb/reactor with a convenient bomb-mode countdown timer only be stabilised by the autopilot hardware of the bat? Very convenient for the script writers, not at all nonsensical or contrived...


The stuff they pluck out of batmobile does nothing to stabilize the bomb. It blocks the signal from the remote detonator. It has nothing to do with autopilot software either. That was set right by a software upgrade done by Bruce Wayne, possibly after the demo of batmobile by Fox

Why did the prisoners in the pit all wear scarves around their faces to conceal their identities - but only in the parts where it was imperative for the script writers that the identity of one of the characters was withheld from the audience - and not in the later bits where Bruce Wayne was imprisoned?


There could be any number of reasons. One of the reason is that the pit isn't a pit anymore, with the entire hope despair cycle disappearing after Talia rescues Bane. Even the pit doctor says that the pit is just Bane's prison now and it's not something they all enter and strive to get out. New establishment, new rules. May not be the most convincing argument ever, but you can argue.

Why, when you have been busting a gut to get to the bomb before the time is up, do you then spend the precious last minute or so listening to a dying woman blabbering on for a bit?

I haven't read much, but Talia and Batman always have a thing for each other. They just mucked around the bed before long. If I was Batman, I'd probably kiss Talia before getting my hopes up for nailing Anne Hathaway
Click to expand...

Let me try one by one.

I could be completely wrong, mind.
 
Went to watch it again with my brother this time, one thing that struck me this time was the quality of the soundtrack, really good. When I saw it the first time I felt it could easily be up there with the two first, but it's slightly worse upon second viewing, great first half, and loses up a little after that. Still believe it's one of the best trilogies ever made.

Being Danish I obviously get subtitles, but at the point where Blake loads the bus with kids the person who did the subtitles felt he had to put in "School bus" at that point, well freaking thanks for that great and totally not worthless pieces of subtitling.

Still laughed at Talia's death scene, so poorly acted. She has cracking tits though.
 
Ralaks said:
Went to watch it again with my brother this time, one thing that struck me this time was the quality of the soundtrack, really good. When I saw it the first time I felt it could easily be up there with the two first, but it's slightly worse upon second viewing, great first half, and loses up a little after that. Still believe it's one of the best trilogies ever made.

Being Danish I obviously get subtitles, but at the point where Blake loads the bus with kids the person who did the subtitles felt he had to put in "School bus" at that point, well freaking thanks for that great and totally not worthless pieces of subtitling.

Still laughed at Talia's death scene, so poorly acted. She has cracking tits though.
Click to expand...

Yes, yes she does.

Where might I examine this fact in greater detail? Anybody?
 
decorativeed said:
With me, I tend to watch a film and enjoy it in the moment. Then on my way out of the cinema into the real world, it'll dawn on me that there were moments of the films that made no sense other than contrive to progress the story to another sequence of events.

Such as:


Why did the prisoners in the pit all wear scarves around their faces to conceal their identities - but only in the parts where it was imperative for the script writers that the identity of one of the characters was withheld from the audience - and not in the later bits where Bruce Wayne was imprisoned?

I'm pretty sure they mentioned a "plague" that had sweeped the prison at the time, hence the scarves around their faces during the flashback scenes.
Click to expand...

I think...
 
It was a bit meh really. Even if it was very well made and the production values were through the roof. The story lacked in every aspect. The motivation the bad guys had was a bit stupid and everything that happened in the film was predictable as hell.
 
Silva said:
It was a bit meh really. Even if it was very well made and the production values were through the roof. The story lacked in every aspect. The motivation the bad guys had was a bit stupid and everything that happened in the film was predictable as hell.
Click to expand...

And tell me how that wasn't the case for the two previous films?
 
Possibly because the bad guys wanted to blow up the city, had the detonator, but wanted to wait for it to blow up itself... for no apparent reason.

The plot holes in this movie were awful, worse than the other two put together.
 
It's not as big a plot-hole as it seems, from a comic superhero perspective. Perhaps part of the "punishment" was having it all descend into murderous anarchy before the city was finally wiped off the map. The motivations and machinations of comic-book heroes are already absurd enough that it wouldn't seem out of place.
 
rcoobc said:
Possibly because the bad guys wanted to blow up the city, had the detonator, but wanted to wait for it to blow up itself... for no apparent reason.

The plot holes in this movie were awful, worse than the other two put together.
Click to expand...

They were pretty confident they were going to blow up the city either way, they just wanted to have a bit of a fun in the meantime, cause a bit of chaos, let people suffer for a bit. Meanwhile, Batman rots in prison. Nothing can go wrong right?

It's bad guy 101, straight from the 'James Bond Villain' textbook on how to be a bad guy.

I don't get why people pick plot holes in films like this. We are, after all, watching a film about a billionaire that dresses up as a giant bat and beats up bad guys. Enjoy it for what it is.
 
sonymobby said:
And tell me how that wasn't the case for the two previous films?
Click to expand...

It wasn't the case in TDK because the Joker had no sort of elaborated plan. He just caused chaos which I thought was brilliant in a way.
 
Cheesy said:
It wasn't the case in TDK because the Joker had no sort of elaborated plan. He just caused chaos which I thought was brilliant in a way.
Click to expand...

That's not really true is it? Take for instance the bank robbery. It was planned to perfection, even with the school bus coming out at exactly the right moment so that it can leave unnoticed. Joker just says he doesn't plan things, but he does. He put the cell phone inside the guy in a jail and he wanted to get away while putting away the DA and Rachel.
 
niMic said:
It's not as big a plot-hole as it seems, from a comic superhero perspective. Perhaps part of the "punishment" was having it all descend into murderous anarchy before the city was finally wiped off the map. The motivations and machinations of comic-book heroes are already absurd enough that it wouldn't seem out of place.
Click to expand...

Not just that. The government couldn't do shit. They made millions of people feel abandoned. It's a point many people try and make but Bane explains his reasonings pretty wellin the movie. Shouldn't be a puzzlement.
 
Just watched this again and I must say my impression of the film went down a little. The style and delivery were still brilliant but I feel like it was sorely lacking in substance compared to Begins and TDK where it had some themes going on in the film. It felt like Nolan's over and done with Batman at TDK and gave us all the Hollywoodized version here.

Another gripe I have with the film is that Nolan didn't do much to showcase Batman's gadgets and stealth ability, instead he engages his opponents in a fist fight. Its quite a let-down to be honest. In TDK we had this ultra cool scene where Batman used the sonar. In TDKR we didn't have any of that sort except for the flying machine.
 
fishfingers15 said:
That's not really true is it? Take for instance the bank robbery. It was planned to perfection, even with the school bus coming out at exactly the right moment so that it can leave unnoticed. Joker just says he doesn't plan things, but he does. He put the cell phone inside the guy in a jail and he wanted to get away while putting away the DA and Rachel.
Click to expand...

Yes, he did plan some things and he was certainly good at that planning, but in a lot of cases he just wanted to cause chaos. He wasn't really interested in the money that he would reap from the bank robbery, for example.
 
Garethw said:
Bruce Wayne survived. He used two bat planes. The One that carried the bomb had autopilot.
Click to expand...

Where did the second bat plane come from and how did he get into it, from the one that was carrying the bomb? What I mean is he was inside the bat plane that had a bomb strapped to it, and flew out of Gotham. There was no second bat plane, and he couldn't have got into it while midflight in the first one. He could have only done it by, firstly getting into the bat plane, saying "bye" to Gordon, then going round the corner, landing, setting it to autopilot and getting out. Which seems a lot of fuss considering the bomb is moments from killing everyone in the city. If he'd have done that, somebody would have also seen him flying away from the city in another bat plane. And we know he was in a bat plane, because we saw an interior shot of him inside one just before the bomb went off. So either he snuck off, out of the city, in a second bat plane that nobody spotted, or he was still inside the first one.

I just can't see any realistic way in which he survived it. I think it's much more likely that he gave Gotham everything he had left (i.e. his life), like he told Selina he wanted to, then handed the Batcave over to Blake. Then Alfred went to the same cafe he'd always wanted to see Bruce Wayne sitting at, and in his grief, imagined him sitting there with a beautiful girl, just like he'd always imagined. Having him survive an impossible situation, nullifying the emotional impact of his actions, then having Alfred and him give a knowing nod to each other, just seems far too hokey of a move for Nolan.
 
I think he survived based on the fact that they find out he has fixed the autopilot, that whole part of information would be quite pointless if he in fact hadn't used it.

He could've easily put auto pilot on and then jumped out of the plane gliding to the ground then going into a new one or something similar. We just see him sitting in one, we don't know if it's airborne so he could just sit in one.

I don't see why Batman would give his life unless he absolutely had to, which he didn't. As for giving everything like he said to Catwoman I think that could just as easily be interpreted like he was going to stop bane or die trying, not necessarily give his life for the city no matter what when he could survive and still stop the bomb.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.