369 replies to this topic

[Jason LeBlanc]

Well, with the movie premiering tonight at midnight, its time to start this thread.

This is a thread for people who have seen the movie to discuss it with one another. Our Inception Spoilers Allowed Discussion Thread was pretty successful and I'm sure this one will be more so. All discussion about the actual movie once seen should take place here, and not in the spoiler-free Anticipation thread.

So if you don't want to be spoiled before you see the movie, but want to continue to discuss commercials, trailers, online reviews, etc, you should stay in that thread until you've seen it.

In this thread, the movie can be discussed freely - no need to put spoiler tags in your posts if you don't want to.




LAST CHANCE TO EXIT THE THREAD BEFORE POTENTIALLY SEEING A SPOILER!!!
















.

[KK.]

Well I just came home from the Batman marathon.

Batman Begins - This was a lot better than I remembered it. It really is a well-made origin story (one of the best I'd say). I guess The Dark Knight often overshadows this movie but I really enjoyed watching this again.

The Dark Knight - Well I wasn't surprised to find myself loving every minute of watching this again. Great acting obviously. Fantastic climax. Intelligent dialogue (as was in the first film). And one of the great strengths of this film is while it introduces several plot/thematic elements; the film really masterfully wraps everything together by the end. I know this film is not as loved here, but I think its brilliantly conceived.

Well, after two fantastic films of Nolan goodness, I was really hyped up for The Dark Knight Rises! And how did it go?

The Dark Knight Rises - Wow, what a mess of a film. I honestly did not go in expecting what I saw. I mean I knew the film might fall short of the over-hyped expectations but I at least expected a really well-made film. What I saw was unfortunately the worst film of Nolan's career. And this is coming from a genuine Nolan fan. There are several problems with this film.

First of all, one of the things I've admired about Nolan's films are their execution. As complicated as his plot get, I always find that he manages to tie his films’ together as a cohesive viewing experience. This is certainly not the case with The Dark Knight Rises. The film is ridiculously incoherent, bashing you with a vast array of explosions, random flashback scenes (there are a lot of them) and a sense of aimless meandering. It’s also frustrating to deal with the film’s consistent personality changes. There’s a point where it wants to be a heist film, an anarchy crisis, a character study, etc. etc. It’s almost like mindless rambling.

Now comes the characters. They got rid of Alfred early on in the film which I didn’t like. Lucius Fox’ character was poorly handled. And Joseph Gordon Levitt’s character was really annoying. Some lame innocent cop who keeps looking towards his “hero”, Batman. Yawn. And Bane was a disappointment. When I watched the trailer, I was expecting a character of real menace, but we didn’t get that. There was a lot of potential with Bane but he wasn’t used well. His back-story also really bogged him down. Oh and there was something really strange to the manner of his voice. Its mix in the film is pretty bad as it sticks out like a sore thumb. It was jarring and sounded highly unnatural in context. I could have also done without the whole Miranda/Talia twist.

Furthermore, this film relied on a lot of clichés. 2 hours into the film and we’re still getting the entire “Is he back? Is Batman back to save the day?” dialogue and it was exhausting. On that note, in the beginning of the film, we get the idea that Wayne has secluded himself for 8 years. But we don’t see much reluctance for him to get back to the Batman character. I thought that transition was poorly handled, but I suppose that’s a minor quibble.

It’s strange how much the film sticks out of Nolan’s established Batman universe. But I believe the point of the film was to focus on Bruce’s character. Still, there is so much you can take out in editing. There are a lot of pointless flashback scenes and it goes on to the extent that you can tell Nolan is trying a wee bit too hard to bring his trilogy to a “full circle”. I love the anarchy idea and the whole breaking down morality concept, but it isn’t explored well! I mean once Bane takes control of the city, it was actually really dull. And the clichés rose to the max. Calling in the president, or the all too overused “get rid of the bomb” concept. Using the bomb as an instrument of fear would make sense but I would have loved to see the film focus on how Bane destroys the city on moral grounds and really brings to the state of anarchy he wanted. But the film glosses over all that. And what the hell was the point of bringing in Cilian Murphy? At least his cameo in the previous film worked well in context, but with this film it was obvious he was just brought in for the sake of including him in some way. I also didn’t like how the film dangerously bordered Marvel territory with the final bomb sequences and chase sequences with the flying batmobile near the climax.

Ultimately, this movie was really messy. That’s what it was. With The Dark Knight, the plot was extensive, yes, but everything fits perfectly like pieces of a puzzle. It felt very cohesive with all its great ideas tied together effectively. Here, it just sounds like a bunch of ideas during a brainstorm session were tied together to make it as epic as possible while hinting at its predecessors. Cut out Bane/Talia back-story (really didn’t work for me), cut down on the flashbacks, get rid of Joseph Gordon Levitt’s character and focus more on the anarchy theme and this movie could have been something brilliant.

I could keep going on, but I’ll stop for now. I’m tired (its 5 in the morning) and I’m sure grammatical errors and logical fallacies are aplenty here. I’ll be watching the film again tonight with another group of friends so I’ll get a second chance to judge it. But boy, what a disappointment!

Oh and Zimmer’s score, while effective at times, was really loud and overbearing. It didn’t fit well at certain points. And the whole “cut and paste” process was evident during the film.

[Quint]

I only read your opening paragraph (for obvious reasons) but a big disappointment, huh? This could get nasty!

[KK.]

I only read your opening paragraph (for obvious reasons) but a big disappointment, huh? This could get nasty!

It was, and this is coming from a Nolan fan. Its his worst film I tell ya.

A shame, because this and the Hobbit were the two most anticipated films of the year for me.

But I'll be watching it again later tonight, so maybe the film will improve for me with a second viewing.

[Incanus]

Well I read only the first paragraph and now I am afraid to go see it on Sunday.

[indy4]

I just got back, and I loved it! I skimmed KK's post and I disagree with much of it, I'll post a more detailed review tomorrow. It was really really good.

[KK.]

Well I read only the first paragraph and now I am afraid to go see it on Sunday.

It's not awful Incanus. It's not bloody bad either. But it was terribly disappointing. And it was messy. I genuinely think this is Nolan's weakest film.

[crocodile]

Alright, I've just came from the showing.

The film is definitely more rough around the edges than any of its predecessors. Less stramlined and feels more like a 19th Century novel. The Dickens inspiration is now very clear to me. Not so much of a superhero film, which I think is that will enrage a lot of people. And while there are some slightly creaky parts in it, it is still a damn fine spectacle. The bad bits are really minor and might be overshadowed by the good bits. And there are plenty of them. Well, plenty, depening on what you expect from the film.

There is not a lot of Batman in it. It's a Bruce Wayne film, very much like Batman Begins. He's not the only important character, but at least this is very much about him and what he's about. They go much deeper into character than I anticipated. And that's a very strong bit in the film. Joseph Gordon Levitt's character is the heart of the film and I mean that in a good way. He serves as a nice counterpoint to the darker arc of Bruce. This story just needs this character. Anne Hathaway is indeed a show-stealer (in the entertainment's sense). Very good performance from her. Who would have thought? Bane is a good character, but in the end, he's also a retcon of sorts. Nolan's films are always advertised in certain sense, and then it turns out to be about something else. It happened with the previous three of his films and is very much the case here as well. Which is ultimately a good thing. There is much less of Gordon, Alfred and Fox. They are important, but their parts are significantly smaller, especially Alfred's. I miss them, but the story required to focus on some other things.

(Before I forget: I wish I hadn't read the spoiler in the other thread. This is a major one, guys!)

It all looks spectacular and there is some imagery in there that will stay with me for quite a while. The other two films' greatest strenghth was the plot. And while this film is even heavier on the story, it is the picture that lingers the most. There is something really scary about the concept of this story, the way things unfold. In fact I got somewhat frightened by it. Unsettling. Which is another thing that might turn some people off (especially the summer blockbuster crowd).

I will see the film again tomorrow morning, this time in IMAX. After which I will give my final verdict. Nolan's films tend to require a few viewings from me before I can make up my mind. It was the case after seeing both Inception and The Dark Knight Rises. So far I have intellectual problems with the film (which might or might not prevail), but on a purely emotional level it suceeds in a grand scale (literally). I was satisfied with the ending and it ties everyhting together. There are things that I'd hoped it would do... and it does.

Hans Zimmer. I kind of liked the score. The more familiar reused parts are actually welcome, they almost serve as a traditional superhero score. Who would have thought? The chants work well and there indeed some good bits in the score. Not in an orchestral sense. There too much music in the film, though, and sometimes (I kid you not) it overpowers the dialogue.

It is definitely solid and ambitious, in scope especially. But it might not be what the audience wants, I thought while watching. It is as far removed from The Avengers as you can get. If you want an entertaining summer blockbuster, then you won't quite get that. If you hate Christopher Nolan's so-called ovewrriten last two films, then... prepare yourself for even more of that. Alex and Quint will absolutely hate the film. And even the more refined and beautiful visual side (which is much more memorable from anything seen in the previous two) won't prevent that.


Karol

[KK.]

It all looks spectacular and there is some imagery in there that will stay with me for quite a while. The other two films' greatest strenghth was the plot. And while this film is even heavier on the story, it is the picture that lingers the most. There is something really scary about the concept of this story, the way things unfold. In fact I got somewhat frightened by it. Unsettling. Which is another thing that might turn some people off (especially the summer blockbuster crowd).

I thought they could have handled it better and made it even more frightening. They just gloss over the 3 month span. I would have liked to have seen the slow moral degradation of the people of Gotham.

I will see the film again tomorrow morning, this time in IMAX. After which I will give my final verdict. Nolan's films tend to require a few viewings from me before I can make up my mind. It was the case after seeing both Inception and The Dark Knight Rises. So far I have intellectual problems with the film (which might or might not prevail), but on a purely emotional level it suceeds in a grand scale (literally). I was satisfied with the ending and it ties everyhting together. There are things that I'd hoped it would do... and it does.

Good point. I'll be watching it again and maybe I'll like it more. Yes I suppose it does emotionally succeed but the the messy narrative is distracting. There is a lot of potential for brilliance here, and the film flirts at the side of the scale persistently as well. But it just doesn't hold up. Bane could have been a magnificent villian who could have frightened the life out of viewers. At least thats the impression I had from the trailer, but that didn't happen. I think Nolan tried to hard to make this epic and grand scale, thats why the film falters.

And I think this film will alienate a lot of mainstream viewers. No doubt a lot of people will come out theatre saying "EPIC" or "THAT WAS AWESOME". Well thats the kind of stuff I heard at my cinema. But for people expecting The Dark Knight but more grand scale, this film might be a strange.

Hans Zimmer. I kind of liked the score. The more familiar reused parts are actually welcome, they almost serve as a traditional superhero score. Who would have thought? The chants work well and there indeed some good bits in the score. Not in an orchestral sense. There too much music in the film, though, and sometimes (I kid you not) it overpowers the dialogue.

Indeed, it does. The music is incredibly loud and overbearing by the third act of the film. I just wanted him to tone it down for a lot scenes. Even with the quiet dialogue shots where the loud pounding blasts over it.

It is definitely solid and ambitious, in scope especially. But it might not be what the audience wants, I thought while watching. It is as far removed from The Avengers as you can get.

Indeed. Although the bomb shots and flying bat were bordering Marvel tendencies at some points.

Note: If you hate Christopher Nolan's so-called overriten last two films, then... prepare yourself for even more of that. Alex and Quint will absolutely hate the film. And even the more refined and beautiful visual side (which is much more memorable from anything seen in the previous two) won't prevent that.

Yes, Quint is going to hate this. I usually think that this so called "overwritten" nature of Nolan's films works incredibly well because it holds up at the end. He manages to wrap it up in a great fashion. I didn't think this was the case with this film. I really think he overwrote it. Probably because there was a lot of pressure about how epic this was going to be.

And frankly, I thought the previous films were visually more appealing than this film, although I definitely see what you're talking about. But there were several shots (like the Bane back-story) that felt out of place in Nolan's batman universe.

[Chaac]

There's no such thing as overwritting. There's either bad writing or slow minds that get tired fast.

[Quint]

Jesus, really put off seeing it at the cinema by KK's and Karol's thoughts. The protracted runtime I'd forgive when the end result is satisfying (as were the previous two), but I am indeed likely to walk out annoyed if the film is both long and messy. I'd have still gone if he'd kept it at the 2hr mark, but I'll probably wait for the Blu now.

[Chaac]

What's with people and long films? I don't understand. I don't find it a relevant factor.

[KK.]

Jesus, really put off seeing it at the cinema by KK's and Karol's thoughts. The protracted runtime I'd forgive when the end result is satisfying (as were the previous two), but I am indeed likely to walk out annoyed if the film is both long and messy. I'd have still gone if he'd kept it at the 2hr mark, but I'll probably wait for the Blu now.

Go watch it and give it a chance. I may have been a bit too harsh with my post, although I still think I brought up pretty valid points. I'll have my final verdict by the end of tonight.

There's no such thing as overwritting. There's either bad writing or slow minds that get tired fast.

I never thought this "overwriting" problem existed in the first place (hence the quotation marks). I always felt Nolan knew how to bring his plot together with a satisfying conclusion. This film on the other hand has a messy plot indeed.

[Quint]

There's no such thing as overwritting. There's either bad writing or slow minds that get tired fast.

I see what you're saying, but I have to disagree. Bad writing occurs in Nolan's movies because the editor wasn't shrewd or brutal enough with the scissors.

[KK.]

There's no such thing as overwritting. There's either bad writing or slow minds that get tired fast.

I see what you're saying, but I have to disagree. Bad writing occurs when the editor wasn't shrewd or brutal enough with the scissors.

Oh Quint...how you'll hate this film. I almost pity you...almost

You'll probably hate it more than Prometheus.

[Quint]

Nah, as I've said - I've never cared enough about this trilogy, in spite of my enjoyment of it (I own the Blu rays)

[Chaac]

Well if you put a lot of stuff that's bad or doesn't make sense or is boring or nothing happens, then it's bad writing, not overwritting. Putting in and taking things out is an elemental part of both literature and cinema.

Now, when you write a long piece where nothing of that happens, then it's perfectly fine, not overwritten. But some people will be put off and prefer less ambitious stories.

[crocodile]

Overwritten (or overwrought, I can never tell) does exist, Chaac.

Anyway, there is looooooaaaaads of exposition in the film, which many people will find confusing. I while I myself enjoy long, heavy movies, a mass audience might be alienated by those. It has really entertaining bits, but the whole story is rather disturbing and rather scary. Not that there is a lot of violence in it. There isn't. It's the theme of the film. In short: Nolan might have gone a bit too far in the serious tone.

And it is defintely better than Prometheus. Light years ahead of it, in fact. The films ambition and intelligence is not questioned here. I'm just wondering whether this plate is served correctly, that's all.

Karol

[Chaac]

Who cares if people are alientated by it? I've always presumed that Nolan did pretty much what he wanted. Not some kind of all encompassing film trying to please everyone.

Particularly due to that, I don't know what to expect from this one.

[KK.]

I'm hoping I'll like it more with my second viewing. But for now, its not bad, but it wasn't as good as it could have been. As ambitious as the film is, it tries too hard to be epic and tries too hard to bring everything to a "full circle". I didn't think the anarchy concept was played as frightfully as it could have been.

By the way, did you have any issues with Bane's voice croc?

[Quint]

Well if you put a lot of stuff that's bad or doesn't make sense or is boring or nothing happens, then it's bad writing, not overwritting. Putting in and taking things out is an elemental part of both literature and cinema.

Now, when you write a long piece where nothing of that happens, then it's perfectly fine, not overwritten.

It's contrived to me. It's veiled inadequacies in Nolan's ability to let the film speak for itself, to fill in the gaps. It's plot for plots sake. For me, Nolan's Inception is one of the worst, most dull and turgidly overwrought scripts ever put to a motion picture. It's overwritten and then some.

What you call ambitious, I call phony and bland.

[crocodile]

I kind of enjoyed it for the most part. But there are some strangely delivered lines, which I'm not so sure about (especially in the opening sequence). The voice, as I understand it, was supposed to sound weird. A mixture of British accent with some sprinkles of unspecified foreignness.

Karol

[KK.]

Yes, but I'm referring to its mix in the film. It's placed far too much to the forefront and it really alienates itself from the scene. It sounds like someone just recorded the voice with a good mic over the already finished film.

[crocodile]

Yeah, it is all strange. I couldn't understand some of his lines to be honest.

Karol

[Chaac]

Well if you put a lot of stuff that's bad or doesn't make sense or is boring or nothing happens, then it's bad writing, not overwritting. Putting in and taking things out is an elemental part of both literature and cinema.

Now, when you write a long piece where nothing of that happens, then it's perfectly fine, not overwritten.

It's contrived to me. It's veiled inadequacies in Nolan's ability to let the film speak for itself, to fill in the gaps. It's plot for plots sake. For me, Nolan's Inception is one of the worst, most dull and turgidly overwrought scripts ever put to a motion picture. It's overwritten and then some.

What you call ambitious, I call phony and bland.

But I don't see stuff that's bad or doesn't make sense or is boring or where nothing happens in that script. If I did see that, I would call it things.

I do nitpick the scripts for Nolan's two Batman films because I see things there that I think are wrong. I haven't seen his others films (well, I have seen I good portion of Insomnia in two occasions, but I never cared about it.)

[crocodile]

Oh, KK I just now read your summary. You see I actually can see a clear arc and themes in the film, just as I did with the previous two. And I do think all the characters serve their purposes in the story. As a plot idea, is a very solid conclusion. My doubts come from few awkward moments and the general feel of the film. It is the execution I'm not so sure about, not the ideas behind it.

It doesn't necessarily mean it is bad or anything. But keep in mind that I watched the thing something like two hours after reading the news... and in the context of this, I've found the film to be really... upsetting (for lack of a better word).

I'll watch it tomorrow again with much clearer frame of mind (I hope). And in IMAX as well.

Karol

[Chaac]

But if it's upsetting or disturbing or scary or something that means it works, doesn't it?

[crocodile]

It does work, Chaac. It does. It's just a matter of "summer blockbuster enjoyment". In the end, this film is supposed to entertain.

You see, the Joker was merely teasing. And he was fun at the same time, in a way. He was talking about anarchy, but entertained us as well. This film actually goes to the places the other two films only talk about. It is both fitting and (I'll repeat myself again) upsetting. Do you get me?

Karol

[Chaac]

But you're describing it as entertaining with those words! At least for me.

Gah, I just need to see this.

[crocodile]

But you're describing it as entertaining with those words! At least for me.

Gah, I just need to see this.

From reading your posts on this forum, I predict you will like the film.

Karol

[KK.]

Reading my post again, a lot of that were minor quibbles I had with the film (I just said in an unfashionably raged, fanboy-like manner...it was late, I was tired). Anyways, while I still think there are several minor issues with the film, I too had my major gripes with the execution of it all.

There are some great ideas with this film. The themes of anarchy and the whole Bruce "rising" concept is wonderful stuff but its executed all wrong. I seriously genuinely think the film could have done without Bane back-story. To go on, the anarchy idea was an incredibly strong premise, but its executed in a fashion that really diminishes its impact. I wanted to be frightened of this Bane character, this masked menace who can send a city like Gotham to hell, but thats not the case here. That was the big fault of the film.

So yes, croc. Like its predecessors, this film has all the big ideas. But unlike something as masterfully crafted as The Dark Knight, its delivered all wrong here and it ultimately fails to hold up.

How did you feel about all the flashbacks? And the entire "get rid of the bomb" climax?

[Joe Brausam]

I could definitely have done without Bane's backstory, he was nearly humanized by the end, and that wasn't something I wanted from his character.

[crocodile]

How did you feel about all the flashbacks? And the entire "get rid of the bomb" climax?

Flashbacks didn't bother me, but I admit the inclusion of some of them was a bit heavy-handed. You see they only serve to emphasize of the themes and plot point of the trilogy, but for us, who know those films very well, they are quite redundant.

I expected such a climax, to be honest. It just had to be that. It worked for Frank Miller in the 80's and it works now. Even the bomb element seems to come from those comic books.

And I also like nods to "No Man's Land" comic book storyline. That was a strong one.

Karol

[KK.]

I've never read the comics before so everything I say is based off what I've seen in the past films. There was a large amount of focus on the bomb by the end of the film and that kind of strode a bit close to Marvel/Mission Impossible territory. It was a cliche that I didn't expect in this film and I would have preferred if stuff like that were left out of Nolan's Batman universe. I would have liked the bomb to be used as an instrument of fear while the focus is on how Bane degrades the morality that Dent's name so clearly established.

And I thought many of the flashbacks were redundant. But there was one that bothered me. Near the end, when Gordon finds out Batman's identity. Batman tells him about that little bit in his childhood. Now, Batman remembering that, I would understand. But Gordon's probably put his coat around a lot of people in his career, why would he suddenly remember that specific scene? Clearly from his encounter with Bruce in The Dark Knight, we knew that he didn't care much for Bruce Wayne after that, nor did he really know the guy. So why this sudden thought? That scene really seemed forced. Like Nolan went "oh we have to bring this film to a full circle! Let's add this bit here followed by yet another flashback". There were a couple of scenes like that that bothered me a bit.

[crocodile]

Yes, that's true.

Karol

[Mr Big]

I really liked it! It seemed really silly at times (Really? Nolan did the classic "Call the Preisdent" scene) but I found it really satisfying and exciting.

[KK.]

Yes, I didn't like that whole "Call the President" fiasco. This film really does become silly a lot, which is rather strange for Nolan's Batman films. And then there are lots of other issues too.

[Mr Big]

All of the flashbacks were unnecessary and they didn't keep in tone with the series. I really liked the prison scene with the "rising" thing though.

[KK.]

Agreed. The prison scenes were very interesting, especially on a thematic level. But because the film was kind of all over the place, these scenes sometimes felt out of place.

Like I said, a lot of potential, but execution is poorly handled.

[crocodile]

Oh yeah, "call the president", "love scene next to mantelpiece", Talia's death scene, some of the other cliche lines. Those things bother me.

Karol