The Dark Knight Rises

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
It's also obviously convenient for Nolan to "forget" both the skills & weapons that he gave Batman/Bale in the two previous films when it came to the Bane fight.

For f-sake...smoke pellets!??!
And yet later we see Bats

Spoiler:
using batarangs laced with tranqs.

Bats could've clenched them inbetween his fingers and punched them into Bane.

Originally posted by the ninjak
Bats could've clenched them inbetween his fingers and punched them into Bane.

He could've done a dozen different things...but did Nolan let him?

No.

Originally posted by Robtard
I'd say none of those really fit well in TDK. Somewhat in TDKR.

he used the cape to glide in Hong Kong and to save Rachel later on, he never uses the guns on his vehicles to kill; mostly just to blast shit out of the way.

I know Nolan is anti-cgi but remember Spawn's cape in the movie.
How effective it looked, how it flowed in the wind or wrapped around his body like it had a mind of its own...that was a beautiful usage of cgi & added yet another dimension to the character.

Nolan's Batman's cape just hang off his shoulders, lifeless.

In BB, Nolan established the potential of the "memory fabric".
The glide sequence over Gotham was awesome as was the brief glide with Rachel in his arms in the Batcave.

Then the sequence in BB when Batman's attempting to board the run away train...Nolan forgets the cape's potential once again & we see Bats dangling helplessly in danger off getting smashed by the rail's pillions INSTEAD of gliding swiftly onto the train carriage.

The same with TDK & the Hong Kong rescue scene. We see Bats glide effortlessly between the buildings...it's a majestic scene, it's the Batman in full glory. But when the plane flies pass & grabs the cable that Bats & gangster is attached too...once again Batman is seen as a dangling ragdoll, not in control of the elements.
It would've been a fantastic scene to see Bats holding onto captive gangster, cape outstretched flying like a demon kite behind the plane.

At least both Burton & Schumacher had the decency & respect to actually utilise the cape in their action sequences.

Originally posted by ares834
So you don't like how the character fights or looks? Fair enough. However, don't pretend that somehow makes him 2-dimensional or not have character growth.

And yet you still fail to establish "well defined" & great "character arc."

I figured you would have the brain power to know what those are.

But for the ignorant who failed fourth grade, a well defined character is one who has flaws and strengths. Their own typically unique personality and are believable.

A character arc is how a character grows and evolves over the course of the story.

Originally posted by ares834
I figured you would have the brain power to know what those are.

But for the ignorant who failed fourth grade, a well defined character is one who has flaws and strengths. Their own typically unique personality and are believable.

A character arc is how a character grows and evolves over the course of the story.

Wow, childish taunts & still no definition.

You seriously have no idea of Batman's characterisation if you're defending Nolan's version.

You.
Seriously.
Have.
No.
Idea.

No one has any idea about anything except me.

Originally posted by Darth Martin
Some of you are going a little overboard. Nitpicking every single detail, glitch, and inconsistency. I'm aware of all these things. But it simply isn't that big of a deal to me that I'm going to sit here and ***** about minor gripes and deter away from a truly epic film.

Another thing,

Spoiler:
I'm pretty sure Batman(in The Bat) does kill the driver of the truck Talia was in right before she went over the bridge.

Also, the glide feature was used in TDK during the Hong Kong scene beautifully. Are we really nitpicking that there isn't a scene of Batman gliding around in this film? Not sure if you noticed, but this time around he has a flying vehicle, which kind of makes the gliding aspect less relevant. But he applied his cape in both the first fight with Bane and in the rooftop fight with Catwoman.

im glad someone else isn;t worried about incessant nitpicking like others are

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
Wow, childish taunts & still no definition.

Nah, it's right there.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
You seriously have no idea of Batman's characterisation if you're defending Nolan's version.

You.
Seriously.
Have.
No.
Idea.

Now you're switching you're initial point.

You initially claimed Nolan made Batman a "2 dimensional character" which is simply not true. Sure, he may not be the same as he is in the comics, I never claimed he is, but within in the Nolan universe he is fully realized.

Originally posted by Mindset
No one has any idea about anything except me.

Don't let Doom hear that.

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
im glad someone else isn;t worried about incessant nitpicking like others are

Yep. I'm fine with people disliking the movie, that's understandable. But when people try to use nitpicks to justify their opinion and to "prove" that a movie is bad... It's just annoying.

[QUOTE=13950270]Originally posted by Darth Martin
[B]Some of you are going a little overboard. Nitpicking every single detail, glitch, and inconsistency. I'm aware of all these things. But it simply isn't that big of a deal to me that I'm going to sit here and ***** about minor gripes and deter away from a truly epic film.

Another thing,

Spoiler:
I'm pretty sure Batman(in The Bat) does kill the driver of the truck Talia was in right before she went over the bridge.

Also, the glide feature was used in TDK during the Hong Kong scene beautifully. Are we really nitpicking that there isn't a scene of Batman gli

Originally posted by ares834

Yep. I'm fine with people disliking the movie, that's understandable. But when people try to use nitpicks to justify their opinion and to "prove" that a movie is bad... It's just annoying. [/B]

Well forgive me for being a Batman fan for over 30 years.
That's the point I'm trying to make..as a movie, Nolan is a great director with a unique scope of imagination.

I just simply think he lost the essence, the mythos somewhere in the grandness. Memento, The Machinist, The Prestige all proved that Nolan could create & focus on characterisation & not get lost in epic story telling.

Epic conclusion to the trilogy. I hope I am not being influenced with the hype from just having watched it but...it was great.

I really wouldn't have given two shitters if Batman was allowed to kill. Movies kinda write their own canon to me, as long as they keep the general idea, I'm usually down for something new.

I don't think they should reboot the franchise, Should wait a few years and then come back to it and maybe have Nolan on as a Producer.

Originally posted by Esau Cairn
It's also obviously convenient for Nolan to "forget" both the skills & weapons that he gave Batman/Bale in the two previous films when it came to the Bane fight.

For f-sake...smoke pellets!??!
And yet later we see Bats

Spoiler:
using batarangs laced with tranqs.

Spoiler:
Bane was part of the league of shadows and was trained. Bane even uses that to mock Batman at one point saying his tactics and flare are useless against him. The point being that Nolan pretty much established that no matter what Batman brought to the fight he was gonna lose. You can point to such and such device and say that 'COULD' have helped Batman that doesn't mean it would have made him any more effective.

The whole point of the scene was that no matter what Batman was going to bring he was going to lose. He throws Tranq Batarangs Bane was gonna dodge.

Batman tries to hit him with one in his hand. Bane would have grabbed his arm and made him drop them.

And if we are going by what could have happened Bane could have simply pulled out a gun and shot Bruce if he wanted to.

But I think that the main point is this.

Batman was A) unprepared for Bane to just basically get Catwoman to trick him.

and B) The scene was shown to depict that batman was going to lose that fight because Bane was his better.

Nolan could have extended the scene by 20 minutes and shown Batman using every single one of his toys against Bane if you wanted but the outcome was always going to be the same.

EDIT: Putting everything in spoiler tags for the benefit of people who haven't seen the movie 😛

Originally posted by ares834
Yep. I'm fine with people disliking the movie, that's understandable. But when people try to use nitpicks to justify their opinion and to "prove" that a movie is bad... It's just annoying.

I nitpicked the crap out of it and I still enjoyed it. 😄

I gave it a 7 which is a "great" on my movie scale.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I nitpicked the crap out of it and I still enjoyed it. 😄

I gave it a 7 which is a "great" on my movie scale.

Also you must be hard to please 😛

Originally posted by Newjak
So what you consider a 10?

Also you must be hard to please 😛

A 10 is an imaginary score as no movie can be perfect: mistakes will be made no matter which movie it is (prop placement, continuity errors, acting error, etc. It's impossible to make a perfect film, imo).

I am hard to please. It's difficult to get a 9 out of me. 😄

There's no such thing as a 10/10 film. A flawless film.

If there was it would melt everybody in the cinemas faces off.

Like opening the Ark of the Covenant. The face of God revealed.

Originally posted by dadudemon
A 10 is an imaginary score as no movie can be perfect: mistakes will be made no matter which movie it is (prop placement, continuity errors, acting error, etc. It's impossible to make a perfect film, imo).

I am hard to please. It's difficult to get a 9 out of me. 😄

Me I view a 10 as the film or films I've liked the best, obviously nothing can be perfect so why try and judge someone by putting it as a value on a scale. That's my reasoning.

I bet you would be one of those teachers that never give out As on papers 😄