The Dark Knight Rises

Exactly!!! People have labeled him the intelligent filmmaker because they have been used to him promising so much. Nolan didn't start off making blockbusters as we all know, but now it seems because he's made two very smart blockbuster films, audiences expect Nolan to improve and improve in order to satisfy their needs. Yet if he makes one flaw, audiences will tear the film apart and Nolan for not delivering, where as in my eyes, he did deliver, and deliver very well.

But that doesn't make them bad. Or is that what we have to expect now ? A blockbuster is dumb = automatic bad. No! Absolutely no. I like dumb films yet fans or audience members make the excuse that a dumb blockbuster is always out for money and not for fans satisfaction. I don't believe that. I think there are some cases. But there are some films I've liked that get trashed by everyone regardless of whether they are good or not, because they didn't meet a certain quality. That annoys me.


I agree with that, but only if their complaints were necessarily and made sense. Not dumb little minor things that don't affect the plot.

That's their opinion :P

After a film like The Dark Knight, I stand by in my belief that certain people expected this to be better, and the marketing only made that thought greater. Inception may have helped too.

Only people can argue The Avengers did those plot elements better than Transformers.

Enough with the expectations argument! High expectations don't cause disappointment, the Batman trilogy itself disproves this!

When The Dark Knight was released in 2008 it followed one of the most successful marketing campaigns in film history, and carried over the immense good will from a very popular predecessor that was not only a big improvement over the dreadful Schumacher films of the 90's, but it also served as a long awaited release for an audience that for so long wanted to see Batman taken seriously.

The excitement was out of this world, and coupled with the tragic death of Heath Ledger months earlier, and the stories of his performance that spread like wildfire online (and that stunning teaser trailer), it became one of the most anticipated movies of the decade.

Then the opening weekend arrived... and 3 days and $158 million later, people realised that The Dark Knight had not only met those crazy expectations, it exceeded them.

Batman Begins had expectations too. Not as high as The Dark Knight's sure, but it looked like it was going in a better direction than the last one at least.

So, the fact that this series had already met expectations (twice), and considering Nolan's current run of form has seen him produce several great, or at least well received and interesting films, I think people are right to be disappointed with this films flaws.

On that last point in that particular, I want to say this: Just because you don't see something, doesn't mean it isn't there.


And with that I'm logging off the internet and going to the cinema.

__________________
"When I was younger, I always wanted to be somebody. Now that I'm older, I realise I should've been more specific."

But that still doesn't justify how one could try so hard to not find a movie disappointing just because few people think its good.
People find it disappointing as much as you'll see past the flaws & appreciate it. People can have their opinions rather than being referred to as nitpickers over & over again.
I am sorry I know you''ll loved the film.. I am just here to express my disappointment.

But you can't help it if most of the film is filled with it. & what's necessary if not that.
Those were certainly not dumb minor things.
Few years ago I would hear people raving how awesome Nolan's Batman movies are cos they are realistic, now people defend their enjoyment by dispensing the realism by calling it "just a movie", they have been just movies all along.

so you do agree that they ripped it off.. I clearly know the plot elements were accidentally identical. But why should it stop one from ciriticising it for the similarities, if it's there it has to be criticised.

Like the guy on IMDB post replied, why not just help us calm our disappointment & make us love the film. rather than accusations of nit-picking

So people should not keep any expectations from now on? People shouldn't expect better sequels?
& if the sequels don't deliver, people can't be disappointed?

Maybe because the film overhyped itself, or the person who found it dissapointing read so much reviews and insight into how good the film was, invested into so much marketing and hype that they ended up dissapointed because the promotion of the film promised so much, plus the positive reviews by people who weren't as hyped about it in the first place.

You have every right to be dissapointed. I'm not hating you for it.



To me, Nolan's film are more realistic than most other films, but not completely realistic. There are still things that could only be done in films to move forward the plot. As I said before, Films will always blend aspects of reality and realism to have it make sense in their film world. Not all of the time, but most of the time. I think with Nolan, he wants to make it as convincing as possible, but cannot get any part of the world he's in as convincing and realistic as possible, hence the minor flaws people pick out.



Let me rephrase that. People who saw both films can argue which was done better. I am not one of those people.

In future, I would be up for that. But these days, people make it quite difficult to accept that they were wrong about a film and believe that they were right and everyone else is wrong.

No. My thought is that don't buy into the hype and marketing ploy. Becuase for TDKR, the marketing was great and obviously raised people's expectations to the point where people thought it would top The Dark Knight. I think that thought started with the first reviews came out. But in my opinion, for franchises, don't invest too much into hype, because then we'll have more of this to come. Cynical arguing.

Spoilers

It isn't just the flaws as to why I didn't really like the movie. Nolan clearly lost his way making this movie, people may diagree but he stated that this movie would end the series, correct. Well for me the dark knight ended it because this just felt thrown together with a cheesy James bond plot and some very cheesy moments. I felt Nolan just threw anything in to try and connect it to the other batman movies and felt like he threw moments in at the start of the movie just to tie the end up, example the cafe seen couldn't of been more cheesier if Disney had done it. The dark knight flowed nicely from batman begins as a story, this movie tho felt out of place for me and everything felt crammed in and rushed along.

Nolan has never really been one for cheesy moments but batman and catwoman, who I felt by the way should of just been left out this movie where standing in the street kissing( pi****). Then they go and ruin Bane by turning him into a puppet like pyro posted earlier.

Are They good enough reasons for you, it had nothing to do with the bar set so high.

He went undercover to learn how criminals think and how to fight. It was the organized crime and corruption that took his parent lives and that was what he went after. When it was gone he had nothing else to do. I cannot explain it more simply then that.



You've just described 99% of every film ever made.

Who was chasing who?!? If someone is chasing you and you have a way out in a specific place, where the f*** are you going to lead the chasers?


Since when? I certainly don't think that of him. I think he certainly cares more about story and characters than other filmmakers, but he's no P. T. Anderson. He makes crowd-pleasing spectacles that aren't mind-numbingly offensive to people intelligence. Every one of his films has had fairly obvious flaws in both dialog and plot, but we love them because they aren't Michael Bay s***storms.

__________________

Bane did not have the charisma, physical presence and/or acting chops to carry the part.

If the very first scene there is this over-complicated abduction sequence more reminiscent of the Adam West comic satire rather than the gritty realism of the 1ast two movies or the dark menace of the graphic novels.

We have Bane (obviously) in the hood with his little sing-song voice somehow baffling the keystone kops with his villain monologuing while his comic minions (anybody thinking Despicable Me here) trash their plane.

Then he tells one of his minions to stay and die with the plane and there is an absolute moment of suspended belief - why would this guy agree in such an abject manner other than because the script says so? There is nothing happening on the screen or in the character interactions to support the sequence.

Bane is not menacing, he is almost effeminate. He looks tiny in that over-size coat clutching his lapels all the time. He is not able to convey any emotion/expression through his eyes/eyebrows. His little pudgy hands barely peek out the cuffs of his sleeves - in the few scenes he is shown with much of his upper body bare - he looks like the gym tourists who ignore diet and discipline thinking a few reps here and then on chest and arms make up for a real full body routine.

Not that sexual ambiguity cannot be menacing - think of Ledger in his clown face and nurses uniform. That sounds in print like it should be comical yet Ledgers screen presence absolutely creeped me out in that sequence - he scared me.

Erm... did you see a different version of TDKR than me?

__________________

I don't think so.
I think I just saw it without the expectation of liking it just because I wanted to like it.

I saw the 1st movie with no expectations and was drawn in to the realism of the story - truly a Batman Crime Detective movie. The bounds of reality they stretched were comparatively very modest for a superhero movie.

I saw the 2nd movie thinking it was over-hyped and the much ado about Ledger driven by his tragic death. I was completely blown away - amazed at the strong story line, character development and of course the Villain.

Perhaps I was expecting something more, but I thought the Avengers was over-hyped but delivered - this one just fell flat. The story was dis-jointed, too many would be 'hero's' crowded the screen, the extra length was not necessary this time as characters were not developed so much as they were paraded through their cameos and the Villain?

Well, I covered that.

Sorry, I just didn't like it but I respect that you did.

Okey doke.

I think Tom Hardy was The perfect choice and did what he could with the role. His body and look were fine it's just the character went down hill.

Fair enough.
Perhaps I'm taking out my disapointment in the movie on Hardy.
I really did want to like it - but then aqain, for the reasons I stated above - Hardy/Bane just really fell flat for me in presentation.

For God Sakes Clive Owen would have been a better Bane . . .

Hardy's physical presence and charisma was fine, even his acting was pretty good for a nowday villain.

I s'pose everyone has a different point of view, but I think the opening scene was really cool and a great starter for the movie.

Finally, what did you expect? I know Hardy is 5'10" while Bale is 6'0", however it was a good match up. How obvious would it be if they found someone from the street who is 6'5"? How many actors that are 6'5" could play the role of Bane how Hardy played it?

Better Casting.

I still think Bane fell flat - he just wasn't scary and the role specifically calls for a phyiscally imposing guy.

Maybe there are not a lot of established actors out there with the right dimensions - but yes - there is the opportunity to bring in somebody who could have filled the role. Unknowns don't necessarily mean un-talented and I wouldn't want someone else to play the role like Hardy played it.

There is no actor out there that could of got the body hardy did tho.

??????

That was one of my main points - the guy was mis-cast.
I'm sorry, if the role calls for a certain body type - you need that body type.

Hardy looked like a midget in his over-sized jackets and as far as build?
I see guys in the gym everyday with better builds - For Christs Sakes give a UFC guy a shot - Rampage Jackson played Baracus with more nuance than Hardy did with Bane.

The guy was completely mis-cast.
Why would they do that? Did Nolan owe him something?
I don't get how everyone chooses to overlook the elephant in the room.

In a year, nobody will be talking about Hardy or TDKR.
They know they screwed up in casting, I watched the Reelz special on TDKR last night and they interviewed everybody BUT Hardy.

He had a one line response to a question on the red carpet.
He Was a Joke.

Hardy is one of the finest actors around at the moment, and plzzz u want to give one of the biggest roles in the film to a UFC fighter?. Hardys build was impressive and his body language was fantastic, hardy wernt the problem.

It would be, Tom Hardy is one of the best actors out there right now.

And someone in here said something like he doesn't have the acting chops? course he doesn't...

Guilty as Charged

Danny Devito is a great actor.
He has played everything from slapstick to romantic comedy to serious drama - is he Bane?

No and he isn't vain or egotistical enough to attempt a role he is not suited for.