The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Off Topic Discussions > Batman - The Dark Knight Rises *Spoilers in thread*
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 07-22-2012, 10:48 AM
Roysten's Avatar
Roysten Roysten is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 918
Default

Ha, he did get back to Gotham from the prison (Africa?) seemingly quite easily, the film doesn't dwell on it much and it doesn't bother me a great deal but it is a valid question.

Bane as a simple henchman was quite disappointing, for me it immediately renders his character and everything he did before as pointless, and any kind of character chemistry with batman also pointless. Is kind of summed up in the film when Catwoman blasts him to a quick undignified death.

I kind of hope it doesn't just get picked up by 'another director for hire' and continued. I think that the only way it can really go is down from here, would Bale do another film, if Blake took on the mantle of batman would it be well-received and would his character have the same gravitas and arc?

Though with the ending as it is I think it's almost set-up for a direct sequel, more so than from the previous film.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-22-2012, 11:06 AM
samwiseb samwiseb is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,207
Default

If it's so obviously set up for a direct sequel, then that's probably a good reason to not have one. Prove them wrong.

I'd like to think a movie can have a perfect ending without everyone assuming it 'must' mean that a sequel is called for. ("See, now we KNOW Spock will be back in the next film... Told ya.")
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-22-2012, 12:02 PM
Roysten's Avatar
Roysten Roysten is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 918
Default

Ha that is a good point, hopefully one they'll heed to when thinking next year 'what would make a good summer boxoffice hit in a year or two?'
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-22-2012, 12:08 PM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

The one thing that's sure is that WB will have to do something post Nolan, because Batman is bigger than just his three films.

The problem is it was easier to follow Schumacher than it will be (for the moment) to follow Nolan with whatever that is.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-22-2012, 12:34 PM
Saquist's Avatar
Saquist Saquist is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,257
Default

"This may be controversial but I'd have taken out Catwoman altogether, I agree with Kevin in that she seemed to be there simply to forward certain plot points, her own redemption arc is left wide open and instead she takes up a fair amount of airtime which could have been achieved easily enough without her. Bane being the henchman... it just invalidates him as a character and so he may as well have just not been there either, thinking about it everything he did could have been achieved by another of the mercenaries and instead he simply becomes the physical foil for batman,"~Roysten

I thought this was an interesting perspective. One that I found true only after I read it. Painful as it is to say, Cat was my favorite. What can I say but that I like strong women that don't bow to men. I liked the redemption story and I like the commonality between her and batman. Yes it's done alot but the common pain will always be there between those to characters. I think it would have reduced the movie to something more direct or too direct. But essentially you're right she wasn't quite that pivotal. (Although I don't think Batman would have been captured quite as easily)

But isn't it a question of which villianess was more necessary...Al Ghul's daughter or Catwoman. I like the idea of catwoman working for Bane, that made sense that she was just a henchwoman too...

I tried to sympathize with Talia's need to continue her father work but she and he were exiled. I'm with you on that. I ddin't quite buy the motivation to kill her self, Bane and all her cohorts. Most Villains have an exit strategy when they don't there is usually something more concentrated to the Revenge. Having her as an outkast of her father dilutes the raw rage of his death in my figuring.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-22-2012, 12:44 PM
Roysten's Avatar
Roysten Roysten is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Yorkshire, England
Posts: 918
Default

She was good, well portrayed, interesting and one of the more fun parts of the films, definitely added a lightness that would have been missed in her absence. But as I said I think there was too much going on, in my mind they should have picked fewer things to concentrate on, had that been Catwoman then her story arc would have for me being more satisfying and worthwhile rather than a superfluous addon.

Thinking about it she was a more effective villain then Bane and Talia, as at least her character and motivations were a bit more accessible and defined.

It would be interesting if they'd cut Talia out, kept Bane as the sole main baddy and then given the opened up air time taken from Talia and allowed Catwoman's character to be a bit more finished.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-22-2012, 01:09 PM
samwiseb samwiseb is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,207
Default

I don't like thinking of Catwoman as incidental either, as I loved her in this. I doubt it would ever have occurred to me how easy it would be to remove her, had others not mentioned it.

I found the whole business with the pit to be superfluous, and if anything were to be taken out I would vote for that. The fact that is was halfway around the globe (something I don't even think I picked up on initially) just made it more distracting. I also didn't feel the pit was well enough visualized to get the point across. I mean he's climbing up a wall... then suddenly he's on top of a ledge (we skip over him climbing toward it) trying to jump onto another ledge. No clear indication that protrusions from the wall would suddenly stop, forcing him toward the ledge. I think it's that whole chunk of the middle act that leaves me feeling like I still don't (really) understand what all the chanting was about. ("Rise." Okay. Apparently that was it)
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-22-2012, 01:23 PM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

My first thought was that the pit was consciously there to echo Batman Begins when young Bruce fell down into another pit. Only this time he didn't have his father to pick him up. He had to do that himself. I think that's a reflection of (as the film flashes back to) his father's words 'Why do we fall?', well 'so we can pick ourselves back up'.

In this case after being physically literally broken. Although yeah, I find his recovery a tad fast. At least that's my initial take on it's presence. Another callback to the circle of the story.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-22-2012, 01:26 PM
samwiseb samwiseb is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,207
Default

And thereby what some critics probably meant about the themes being too literal this time.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-22-2012, 01:36 PM
Saquist's Avatar
Saquist Saquist is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by samwiseb View Post
I don't like thinking of Catwoman as incidental either, as I loved her in this. I doubt it would ever have occurred to me how easy it would be to remove her, had others not mentioned it.

I found the whole business with the pit to be superfluous, and if anything were to be taken out I would vote for that. The fact that is was halfway around the globe (something I don't even think I picked up on initially) just made it more distracting. I also didn't feel the pit was well enough visualized to get the point across. I mean he's climbing up a wall... then suddenly he's on top of a ledge (we skip over him climbing toward it) trying to jump onto another ledge. No clear indication that protrusions from the wall would suddenly stop, forcing him toward the ledge. I think it's that whole chunk of the middle act that leaves me feeling like I still don't (really) understand what all the chanting was about. ("Rise." Okay. Apparently that was it)
I recall Kevin making that point in his review about how far away this tunnel was and how Bruce makes it back seemingly without too much effort. it's a good point. I don't believe it's a plot hole unless you consider him being broke and destitute as being serious blockades to traveling across the globe.

The whole hole in the ground prison was a bit tried. I don't think it was awful but it was a definite tangent in the story to remove Wayne from the mix at the same time sparing his life and I always have a problem with stories whose vilain doesn't take the first oppourtunity for victory by killing the protagonist. If Joker did that..I wouldn't care because he's clearly mad and prefers the sport of the game rather than the victory or conclusion.

I wonder what this would have been like without that scene...without Bruce Wayne removed from the story.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:50 AM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.