Escape to the Movies: The Dark Knight Rises

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

Brad Shepard:
snip

You mean: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-18921492 ? I don't know if it'll affect the sales, but there will surely be speculations connecting what's just happened to the plot of the movie(s).

MrCalavera:

Brad Shepard:
snip

You mean: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-18921492 ? I don't know if it'll affect the sales, but there will surely be speculations connecting what's just happened to the plot of the movie(s).

They are talking about a shootout scene.

Brad Shepard:
Anyone think the sales of this movie will go down now because of the Aurora shooting?

Possibly. I mean, the movie had to be a really huge disappointment if he went that far.

Brad Shepard:
Anyone think the sales of this movie will go down now because of the Aurora shooting?

Honestly, I see them going up because of the shooting. When there's a car crash on the Freeway people don't just go about their business, they stop a while to gawk (and back up the freeway those inconsiderate gawking idiots). Anyway point I'm getting at is everyone's going to think the movie caused it somehow and will go to investigate.

Farther than stars:
We all knew it was impossible for it to live up to expectations. Maybe if they'd used the Riddler and Catwoman as antagonists... but Bane just doesn't come off as a top-tier Batman villain. Bottom line, they were never going to top Heath Ledger as the Joker.

They could of topped it with Johnny Depp being the Riddler, that would of been epic, but we all know Bane is never the brains behind what goes on, he is the muscle, or at least should be :P

But meh, they tried something new, didn't work, it happens! At least bob said the film was at least good.

Oooh forgot to mention, we will see more Batman films, maybe not in this trilogy, but remember we have the Justice League Films coming in 2014/2015

Cheesebob:
What other A list non-ridiculous Batman villians could you have instead of 'Bane' though?

Poison Ivy maybe, and as i and others have stated, A Johnny Depp Riddler would of been epic.

Clayface maybe, but i don't think he fits with Nolan's style in these films.

Penguin could of been awesome. But meh, We are stuck with Bane, here is hoping that in the enxt set of films, we see Killer Croc.

Worst. Superman. Trailer. EVER.

Seriously bob, you didn't miss much, just watch the first 40 minutes of Batman Begins and you'll catch the gist of the trailer.

Alright. I need to carefully navigate around this post to where I won't get banned.

Let's see what I can do.

Bob. Stop it. I understand there is such thing as opinions, but when was the last time you reviewed a movie that managed to surpass your insane expectations? What movie did you watch here?

This movie legitimately blows Batman Begins out of the water. In ever way, shape, and form.

I personally thought it was better than the The Dark Knight, seeing as how Ledger's rendition of the Joker pretty much was the thing that pushed that movie from "good" to "great". But getting a second opinion on it (might wanna try that someday, you could sure as hell use it), they were either unsure, or still insisted that the previous film was a bit better.

This is the ending that the series deserved. It was almost too much to hope for, but it did it. I went in with high expectations, and I came out more than satisfied.

As well as every single other person in that theater, who genuinely cared enough about the movie to buy tickets to the midnight launch. It's now Avengers or Batman, just as there was Trekkies vs. Star Wars.

Cheesebob:
What other A list non-ridiculous Batman villians could you have instead of 'Bane' though?

Farther than stars:
We all knew it was impossible for it to live up to expectations. Maybe if they'd used the Riddler and Catwoman as antagonists... but Bane just doesn't come off as a top-tier Batman villain. Bottom line, they were never going to top Heath Ledger as the Joker.

Once you get past the weird and shocking voice that they had to re-dub, it's pretty impressive how well they adapted Bane for this. It's no Joker, and there really never will be another Joker. But the first half of the movie with Bane is superb. It's just as much his movie as the previous one was Joker's.

I need to leave this thread before I decide to take it upon myself to insist to everyone that's having second thoughts.

Gennadios:
Worst. Superman. Trailer. EVER.

Seriously bob, you didn't miss much, just watch the first 40 minutes of Batman Begins and you'll catch the gist of the trailer.

It was a teaser trailer, and a decent one at that. It was surprising to see how they were handling it.

I haven't seen the movie yet, it arrives only next Friday here in let-down land (Brazil), I've got tickets to saturday, not Friday so I MIGHT, just MIGHT, escape the horde of teenager lunatics that insist on making jokes throughout the whole movie.
Well, what the frak is going on here MovieBob??? Lately I'm realizing something disturbing about your criticism: maybe you're just and extreme fan-boy. I say this because you put The Avengers on the top of the world, and sincerely, it's a good movie, but that's all it is, it's entertaining, didn't blow my mind away, but I didn't expect that either, so ok, nice movie, nothing much, the theatre nowadays is full of movies that have that effect (on me at least), I'll surely clap hands because doing a SUPER HERO movie that does that IS indeed a feat that proves the director's abilities. But what I find strange is that, wow, MovieBob would give it an Oscar if he could.
Batman The Dark Knight Rises: I'm not expecting much, I sure as hell don't expect it to be better than The Dark Knight (which I'm fascinated by), but I do think it will be better than Batman Begins (which was great at first, but then as you watch it again and again it becomes pretty weak). However, I've seen other reviews, from big folk, and they all loved it and many levels, and what is strange is, the things they loved the most is what MovieBob said aren't spectacular; for instance, I've seen a lot of praise on Tom Hardy's Bane, saying that the actor did a wonderful job expressing his feelings merely through his eyes, that Bale's Bruce Wayne/Batman finally got to shine as a great character (since so far he was sorta led by the villains) and that, well, the story was damn impressive, giving the series the closure it deserved (although there seems to be a few plot holes), making Nolan's Batman trilogy the best super hero series ever. And then there are the reviews that went deep into the philosophical aspects that the characters bring hidden inside them.
It seems to me that MovieBob is sort of a fan boy for this kind of thing, setting his standards so high they actually become hazardous to his criticism. What I'm saying is: hey, I really HATE everything Lord of the Rings, but were I to review the movies or book, I WOULD praise it, because it deserves the praise. I think MovieBob is letting his feelings get in the way of his professional view...

im ok with this. I never expected it to be better than the Dark Knight. that being said, when bob says a movie is ok and that he "enjoyed it" im fine with that since my tastes are significantly lower. example: i thought the Postman was an ok film.

Well, that's pretty much what I was expecting.

SamStar42:

shadowmagus:

SamStar42:
Gives a 'mild' spoiler warning.

Proceeds to tell the mid-film twist. Fucking hell Bob.

Which mid-film twist? That Bane breaks the Bat?

OT: This isn't a surprise. I expected it would be a good movie, but it wouldn't be as good as TDK and possibly even not as good as BB. Still, it'll get my money, if even for one show.

I've read about eight reviews. NONE OF WHICH stated that.

It's a dickmove. It might not be seen as a massive shock, but when he says 'i have to explain the plot' I didn't think he'd fucking go that far, considering that again, NO OTHER REVIEW has had to say that. Bob has pissed me off before but this is a new level.

This happened in the comics though, as a poster after this points out. It's literally Bane's biggest claim to Batman villain fame and was a huge plot point in the Batman canon. Personally, I felt it would have been more of a twist (and a disappointing one mind you) if something like this had not happened.

Sexy Devil:
Spoilered the big stuff in this post, not really any spoiler in my opinion are in the open but still if you want to know nothing about the movie then look away.

Just on the Bruce learning to be Batman again in the second act, can I just say I don't think that's what was happening. He fully admitted that he was completely prepared to die in the battle for Gotham while in that pit, but it never even occurred to him that he could die any other way until what's his face pointed it out. Seems more like the pit was doing double duty of reminding him that Batman wasn't just a thing about thrill seeking, and that he has an identity beyond Batman, which he had clearly forgotten in this movie. He got invested in the idea that he is Batman, when it was meant to be an incorruptible symbol and the pit set him straight. Hence why ENDING SPOILERS

So in my opinion it wasn't an unnecessary retreading of ground.

I disagree with the Bane stuff, the Selina romance, etc but really I doubt anyone cares about me arguing characterisation. I will say that the twist gave Bane's character all kinds of levels of depth (though I thought he was good before it).

Honestly I thought it was the best of the trilogy. Everything about it was just holy shit, they actually topped TDK to me. But to each their own, at least you weren't trying to hate it. Personally I held back the overpowering urge to piss just so I wouldn't miss a moment and I did it with a smile.

Also the Cillian Murphy cameo was nothing but awesome.

I agree completely with this. I absolutely loved the movie. I loved Bane as a villain. Every single line he had was solid fucking gold and he just fucking felt menacing. I loved John Blake and the way his character evolved. I loved the ending. I loved the scene on the football field. I have never been more satisfied by a movie before.

arc1991:
Oooh forgot to mention, we will see more Batman films, maybe not in this trilogy, but remember we have the Justice League Films coming in 2014/2015

I dread that soooooo much. Remember that Justice League "movie" that already exists? Look for it, it's so awful everyone should see it. It works kinda like a reality show (YES, you read it right), and I remember and overweight Flash in the most piss-poor imitation of costume discussing "Big Brother style" (the reality show) about how cool it is to be part of Justice League... So-Sad...
Obviously this Justice League would a big production and all but... I don't like the way it works in the comics already, plus the DC movie that really worked so far was Nolan's Batman, and I dare say Tim Burton's version was pretty fun, but that's all.
Well I didn't expect The Avengers to amount to anything good, and it was pretty entertaining, so I hope I'm wrong, on the other hand, I always expect some good out of the X-Men movies, and although they were all fun, they were also frustrating... Geez there's sooooo untaped potential for a good X-Men movie..

Brad Shepard:
Anyone think the sales of this movie will go down now because of the Aurora shooting?

I heard about that. Jesus, that's some fucked up shit. My heart goes out to those killed and their families. Damn fucking shame.

I think a seriously reworked version of Poison Ivy (and then have philosophical debate on how much it's ok to do to save nature exc.) or the riddler would have been waaaaaay more interesting. But i never much liked any of the new batman movies so i don't really care.

Wow. Sometimes I like to think that it would be nice to have a place to discuss things on the internet with a bunch of random strangers.

Then I see threads like this one and remember why that's a terrible idea. I think most of the people in this thread are just here to talk about how they hate MovieBob and read all of his articles and watch all of his videos just so they can find more ways to despise him. It's very... odd and off-putting.

The Internet. Is. Weird.

Waaghpowa:
I felt that Dark Knight dragged on a tad too long and could have done with being maybe 30 minutes shorter.

I'm glad I'm not the only person who thought that. When watching the film for the first time, I was convinced that they were setting up Two-Face to be the villain of the next film. Then they killed him off. *confusion*

JoesshittyOs:
Bob. Stop it. I understand there is such thing as opinions, but when was the last time you reviewed a movie that managed to surpass your insane expectations?

The Avengers, Cabin in the Woods or Captain America?

re who would make a better Nolan villain than Bane: the Riddler. Not stunt cast as Depp, but still. Do him as some sort of blend of Jigsaw and the villain from Speed. The Riddler works as a kind of detached academic that would mesh nicely with Nolan's preferences and Aesthetic.

As for the 'formula' for assessing Moviebob opinions: like most formulas that are surprising with their accuracy, if you examine it it's pretty obvious. Opinions vary person to person, yours will probably be different from MB's. So if MB's opinion couldn't be higher, you'll probably like the movie less than he does, and vice versa. I find the trick with reviewers is to find a few that generally lines up with your own opinions, and follow those regardless of what the rest say.

Otherwise: the review is telling me that this movie is what I already expected it to be from the trailers. Which means I'll enjoy it well enough.

Who cares about Batman? Everyone wants to know what you thought about Spider-man Bob! I'm sure you're just full of interesting and logical concerns regarding the movie.

I saw it last night. And although I did not like it as much as the Dark Knight I still really enjoyed it and found the ending to be a satisfying one. Better then the first in my opinion.

You know, if you don't think Bob's taste in movies, is good, or that his criticisms are accurate... why do you watch him at all?

I know I've disliked movies he's liked, and liked movies he hasn't, but I oftentimes find that his reasoning is at least sound; where we tend to differ is a matter of taste and he has admitted time and again that... you know what, never mind.

I will say that the revelation that Batman hardly ever shows up in his own movie is enough for me to give it a pass.

You'd have to be an absolute moron to think TDKR would be as good as TDK, Heath's performance was a once a decade performance. I'm thinking it would still be a great movie, just not as sublime as TDK and the general consensus appears to be exactly that. I probably won't be able to see it until Tuesday but I'm still quite excited.

I demand to know Bob's cridentials as to why the hell he's a film critique.
"It's good but something just doesn't feel right" IS NOT a valid review point!
"Avengers was better" is a manner of opinion, sure, But they're completely different movies. Why even compare the two.

I take absolutely nothing in this review seriously or even from the mouth of someone who knows what they're talking about.

Movie Bob, stop pretending and find a new career.

-throws down mic and walks off stage with hands in the air-

MetalMagpie:

JoesshittyOs:
Bob. Stop it. I understand there is such thing as opinions, but when was the last time you reviewed a movie that managed to surpass your insane expectations?

The Avengers, Cabin in the Woods or Captain America?

Bob spews out words that 'sound' like they're from a critique. Stuff like 'plot', 'structure' and 'subtext'.

No one should take his videos as a real review. Now you may say that even critiques have differing opinions, but when they go against the flow as many times as Bob... you have to wonder if it's sincere or just for attention.

Falsename:

MetalMagpie:

JoesshittyOs:
Bob. Stop it. I understand there is such thing as opinions, but when was the last time you reviewed a movie that managed to surpass your insane expectations?

The Avengers, Cabin in the Woods or Captain America?

Bob spews out words that 'sound' like they're from a critique. Stuff like 'plot', 'structure' and 'subtext'.

No one should take his videos as a real review. Now you may say that even critiques have differing opinions, but when they go against the flow as many times as Bob... you have to wonder if it's sincere or just for attention.

*shrug* Sometimes critics almost all agree. Sometimes most agree and some don't. And sometimes they're completely split. Since there's no scientific measure of a film's quality, that's just the way it'll have to stay.

There's really no such thing as a "real review" either. There's just people and their opinions. Some people are more skilled at explaining their opinions, and some people have background knowledge on a subject that makes their opinions more interesting. Those people are more likely to be able to make money as columnists and critics. But it isn't like being a doctor. There's no such thing as a "qualified" critic.

The two main uses of reviews are entertainment and informing consumer purchasing decisions. If you don't find MovieBob entertaining and his tastes aren't close enough to yours for you to use him as a guide for what films to see, then there really isn't much point in you watching his videos.

Personally, I watch the videos primarily for entertainment, as his taste in film is just a little too different to mine for his views to be especially useful to me. Even with the positive reviews (including this one), I probably won't bother to see Dark Knight Rises because I didn't particularly like The Dark Knight (or Batman Begins). Nolan's Batman just isn't my thing.

Rogue 09:
Who cares about Batman? Everyone wants to know what you thought about Spider-man Bob! I'm sure you're just full of interesting and logical concerns regarding the movie.

Sarcastic comment or did you miss his two Spiderman reviews?

*cannot detect irony very well on the internet*

Gotta disagree with Bob on this one. I found this movie fantastic, engaging and not at all poorly paced. The character of Bane was amazing. In my opnion, better then Batman Begins, on par with The Dark Knight.

A lot of people seem to needlessly be getting angry at Bob for his opinion. I'll state what I agree with before I go into counter-arguments: the film is poorly paced in the beginning and the faults in characterizations are there. It does seem like Nolan may have turned his back on his previous vision by including so many more comic book tropes than the other two films. That said, I thought it was much better than merely good.

The faults with the film's structure can probably be attributed to the ambition of the screenplay. I imagine it would be incredibly difficult to balance a nearly 3 hour film with such a large ensemble. It starts out a little slow and than drags a bit in the middle. The thing is that was a problem with both Batman Begins and to a lesser the Dark Knight, just less people noticed it because of how novel those films were. Both of those films are heavy in the telling/not showing so seeing it here was no surprise. Those were some of the things that kept the other films from being near perfect. This time around people knew what kind of spectacle to expect from Nolan, which may have lead to some letdowns as more of the cracks began to show. I feel that some of the more judgmental criticisms are a result of this being by Christopher Nolan, arguably the best director currently working. The problems with this film are similar to those in his other films, and while it would be terrific if he could improve I don't think it is fair to claim Rises is worse on those grounds.

The only way I could claim that this film was not on par with the others is if it tried to be different and failed. Some of the structure problems are a result of this film trying to tie all three together into a coherent narrative, and it succeeds at that. I also think that it's incomparable to the Avengers, so saying one is better than the other is trolling. You may like it more but if that's the case Bob you should make it clear.

The film makes a lot of callbacks to Begins and had to thematically resonant with that film more so than TDK. This let TDK be tighter, more thrilling and deeper, which is why I believe it's still the best. The Dark Knight did not have to worry about the overarching plot as much, so it could shine much brighter for it. Another thing TDK had for it that neither Begins or Rises had was a scene-stealing Oscar winning performance.

Heath Ledger's performance was never going to be topped, but I feel Tom Hardy did his damnedest. His hulking Bane was a different sort a terrifying, and he brought the same intensity to this as he did in Bronson. The problem I found was that at times it seemed like he was trying to be more like the Joker, reveling in the destruction he's causing, but he couldn't pull it off. He was supposed to call back to classic movie monsters, and I believed he succeeded in that. Hathaway was great as well, but I agree that the love interest angle wasn't developed as well as it should have been. She's still more interesting than Rachel ever was. Everyone else, particularly Oldman and Caine, performed as admirably as I expected them to.

I'm glad that there wasn't any subtext relating to events in our world. What was happening on the screen was limited only to the world that Gotham occupies. I'm annoyed by some critics claiming the Occupy Wall Street connection (like the George W. Bush connection from TDK) because it's too simplistic. TDKR even makes it clear that any of the extraordinary rendition from TDK was all for naught, since Batman still failed in saving Harvey Dent and subsequently had to lie about it. Batman may be in the 1%, but even as Bruce Wayne he donated his resources back into the city that raised him and gave back to the people. He's a socialist who understands that to make progress, compromises need to be made (even if he might enjoy those compromises to a potentially insane degree). Bane is not fighting for the down-trodden, he's manipulating them to bring about his own vision. He has more in common with the 1% in our world than Bruce Wayne does. The film is not exactly subtle about this either (again, telling and not showing) so it gets particularly irksome when it seems some critics are merely drawing the connections to attract page views. This film, as it should, links back to Batman's beliefs in Begins helping more to wrap up the overarching plot rather than the single film. Besides, Jonathan Nolan said beforehand that inspiration for this film came from A Tale of Two Cities: the story that takes place during the French Revolution where a wealthy man trying to right his wrongs sacrifices himself for an unrequited love while the country is torn apart. He took the fall so that she could live, while peasants were sending other aristocrats to the guillotine. The connections are there, something that exists in Nolan's world, not just ours.

And speaking of sacrifice:

In summary, the structure problems are more a result of linking the franchise together than of this particular film being noticeably weaker. This film set out to make a coherent trilogy and end it in epic fashion. In that regard, I believe the film was a great success.

Really, not as good as the avengers?

That's like saying Wine is not as good as Pepsi.Bad analogy, yeah.But what i mean is the Avengers was the most cliche "group of super heroes get together and kill baddies and then disappear again" type of crap.Okay, it was decent.But Every batman film triumphs over the kiddie stuff like Avengers and The amazing spider man.

Movie Bob is an idiot, it constantly amazes how try hard Movie Bob, Yahtzee and Jim can be just to get attention on the forusm.They're all like high up on their intellectual chairs when all they are is a couple of stupid fat blokes spewing their unnecessary bile of an opinion all over the internet.And you guys eat it all up.Like it's the word of god or something.Sad.

Not as good as the Avengers? I almost stopped watching right there....almost. The Avengers was a good fun romp of a ride but it was too corny to be great. I understand that corniness is par the course for that type of film and that the new Batman films are inherently different but that doesn't mean I don't prefer or like one more over the other or think, based upon my own expectations and preferences, which one is 'better'. I'm still a little overwhelmed with everything that I just saw to really form a fully-fledged out opinion about the Dark Knight Rises and I'll definitely have to watch it a few more times to completely soak it all in (something the Avengers doesn't have going for it) so I'll just throw out a few thoughts. I liked it very much and I believe 's almost as good as the Dark Knight but the lack of a Joker like level performance is noticeable and as interesting as I found Bane to be, I will concede he's certainly no Joker.

Still, I was emotionally moved by this film in a way I wasn't by the other two so it does have that going for it in comparison. To be honest though, when all is said and done and the three films can be watched consecutively I know I'll be satisfied and blown away each time I watch this grand finale. Having tempered my own expectations I am not disappointed in the slightest and am happy it is a fitting and 'almost as good as the Dark Knight' conclusion rather than being the 'second coming' many may have hoped it to be, which I was not anticipating whatsoever.

DemBones:

In summary, the structure problems are more a result of linking the franchise together than of this particular film being noticeably weaker. This film set out to make a coherent trilogy and end it in epic fashion. In that regard, I believe the film was a great success.

Exactly, as a single film TDK will probably always reign supreme, much like Empire does in the original trilogy, but the third film, in this case TDKR and ROTJ in Star Wars cases, whilst not as good as the previous film still rounds everything off practically perfectly with a highly satisying and coherent conclusion. In fact, the only third film in a trilogy that I can think of that is better than the first two films is Lord of the Rings ROTK, but that film was made at the same time as the other two with only one extra year of production so it is unsurprsing that the quality was not only consistent but ever rising with each films release.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here