Marc from www.followingthenerd.com gave us a review of TDKR
http://www.batman-online.com/features/2012/7/18/review-the-dark-knight-rises
Couldn't find any place else to say it so here it is.
I think TDKRises is the best of the whole Nolan Batman series. The problem is that we haven't set the bar very high in that regard. Nevertheless, I had fewer problems overall with this one the previous two (at least after a first viewing; may change my mind if I ever see it again).
I really enjoyed it and it ended on the right note for me. The John Blake character was a solid inclusion and the audience is left to think of what happens next. Wonderful job by Nolan and company and the Trilogy as a whole will go down as one of the best in the genre and one of the best overall.
8.5/10
People know what I think about TDK Rises, so I will refrain from beating the dead horse with the crowbar sitting beside my desk.
Though I will say this. Nolan is on record saying he would not blow up the balloon. There was going to be a definite end. I think Blake goes against that statement. He eats up way too much time for my liking.
for those who didn't like it, enjoy
http:/www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQJuGeqdbn4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQJuGeqdbn4)
That still shot of Bane looks more like Michael Rooker under the mask than Tom Hardy.
Anyway, I'm a fan of the film although having seen it twice now I find that the pacing is a lot slower than 'TDK' or 'Batman Begins'. My opinion on 'Begins' has definitely increased since my initial rather underwhelmed response to the film, my opinion on 'TDK' has remained roughly the same (yes, I can see why many people would feel that it's widely overpraised but it's still the best of the series), and my opinion on 'TDKR' has sadly declined somewhat although I'm still a huge fan of Hardy's Bane, especially his voice and I also really like the character of John Blake, a nice nod to the idea that one doesn't have to be a gadget-supported billionaire to be a hero.
Blake is hardly what you call a hero. He's one of the worst things about the trilogy.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Sat, 10 Aug 2013, 02:44
Blake is hardly what you call a hero. He's one of the worst things about the trilogy.
How's he not a hero? He's a working class guy who lost both parents at a young age but unlike the 'prince of Gotham City' he wasn't born with billions and didn't have the means to buy various gadgets and spend years in the wilderness training knowing he'd have a fortune to come back to. He pursued the best available route to him as far as becoming a 'hero' and that was to join the police force where he's clearly one of the sharpest, most able and most conscientious members of Gordon's force. Few if any of us can aspire to achieve what Bruce did simply because we weren't born with a silver spoon. However, any of us, assuming we had the courage and the integrity, could become John Blake. He's the Captain America to Wayne's spoiled, remote Iron Man and I've always been able to relate more to Captain America than that bratty douche Tony Stark.
I said he is hardly what you call a hero. He's definitely isn't a believable or effective one. Especially as a replacement to fill Bruce's shoes.
Sure, a hero doesn't need billions. And him having billions of dollars wouldn't have improved his situation, because nothing in the movie leads me to believe he's up to the job.
If it weren't for his handgun, those truck guys would've killed him.
If Gordon hadn't healed and taken out two LoS members in the hospital, Blake would've bought it.
If it weren't for Batman, the LoS men would've killed him in the snow after he was captured.
If it weren't for sheer luck that he didn't move closer, he would've gotten blown up by the army guys at the bridge.
I get the hope theme and all, but his next move is to put everyone in a bus.
If it weren't for Batman taking out the bomb, he would've gotten blown up with the kids and the rest of the city.
That is what we're shown in the movie. But that's all apparently going to change because he's found the batcave.
When Blake accidentally kills those cement truck guys and throws away his gun, seemingly making a choice not to use it any more, disgusted with his actions - soon after he's charging the hospital with a shotgun. Right.
He can guess people's secret identities because they had 'that look', but that's silly. And that's all. He's also the calmest hothead I've seen. They rammed that concept down our throats.
A lot of screentime was wasted on this guy. The movie felt like a John Blake set-up. That's how much time they devoted to him. I don't really care about the what ifs, I was more interested in the here and now, wrapping up Bruce's story that started in Begins.
But apparently the training is nothing and the will is everything, as Ras said in BB. This is false in relation to Blake. You just don't save a city because it has to be done. He's one of the key problems with the film's pacing. Remove him, and things start to improve.
QuoteBut apparently the training is nothing and the will is everything, as Ras said in BB. This is false in relation to Blake.
Indeed, I've seen a lot of defenders use this line to support why Blake would survive as Batman and it's a bunch of empty words, really.
When Ra's said that in Begins, he was referring to one incident. That Thomas Wayne failed to defend himself and his family. And he connected it to the idea that all the training Bruce was going through is useless unless you implement it.
He did
not mean that willpower
without training will make you a superhero. Just watch Kick-Ass's first attempt at crime fighting in the first Kick-Ass to see this in action.
John Blake is not Batman and should never become Batman whatever the film's ending implies, but so what? Because he's some lowly beat cop/detective rather than some masked billionaire vigilante that makes him less of a hero? In my books he's more of a hero.
In fact, one of the aspects that I like most about Burton's 'Batman' is that he presents a central character whose motives make him if anything more of a threat to the city than a figure who should be unambiguously praised as its saviour. Burton's Batman is still a hero but a nevertheless questionable one.
However, only at the end of his trilogy does Nolan finally try and correct the whole elitist notion he peddles throughout the first two movies - that only a multi-billionaire with years of advanced training and hi-tech gadgetry at his disposal with the single-minded pursuit of using his wealth to beat up villains rather than seek genuine cures to his city's ills can save society.
Difference is, Burton's Batman gets results. And that's what it's all about. It doesn't matter if he's a beat cop or a billionaire, the film shows us he's ineffective. Motives, willpower and all those things are irrelevant if you can't satisfactorily hold your own and save the day.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Sat, 10 Aug 2013, 04:10
Difference is, Burton's Batman gets results. And that's what it's all about. It doesn't matter if he's a beat cop or a billionaire, the film shows us he's ineffective. Motives, willpower and all those things are irrelevant if you can't satisfactorily hold your own and save the day.
Yeah at the end of the day, Keaton wouldn't have held up on the villains the way Bale does; they pretty much mock him that he can't kill no matter what
Quote from: riddler on Thu, 15 Aug 2013, 03:10
Yeah at the end of the day, Keaton wouldn't have held up on the villains the way Bale does; they pretty much mock him that he can't kill no matter what
Yep. At the start of B89, the two punks are left terrified. When Gordon sees Batman at Axis, he utters "oh my God." When he drops in to save Vicki at the museum, not a word is spoken until he leaves the scene. Joker and the goons are in shock amazement. Notice how Joker makes his "washing his tights" quip and then goes all focused once he notices the Batwing overhead. In TDK, Maroni is smug and gives Batman lip. He's dropped from a height, but even then is resolute in his views. Batman just grunts frustrated and moves away.