The Dark Knight Rises (2012) (1 Viewer)

[Bryan Ri]

Just wanted to poke my head in once again and say hello!
I saw TDKR opening weekend, but want to try and see it one more time before posting my thoughts. I've loved reading everyone's insights here, some of which I agree and disagree with.
Feels good to be back!

 

[Bryan Ri]

I just got back from my second viewing of The Dark Knight Rises. The first time I saw it was with a packed theater, opening weekend, and in IMAX. The first time I saw it I absolutely loved it. This afternoon I went by myself and sat in a regular theater with a half dozen other people. The movie didn't get better for me the second time around, and while it didn't get my adrenaline rushing like opening weekend, it was still a damn good movie.
What I like about TDKR is that it stays true to the themes and styles of the first two movies in the trilogy. Nolan's series has always been about Bruce Wayne and it stayed true here. Christian Bale solidified himself as the best take on Batman/Bruce Wayne to date. Michael Cane and Gary Oldman continued their fine performances, though I wish there was a way for the writers to give Gordon a bit more to do in this movie. Someone said this before here and I'll steal it from them now- I agree that Gary Oldman quietly stole The Dark Knight for me, and was a little disappointed that he didn't play more prominently here. Michael Cane's Alfred continued to be one of the heart and soul elements of these movies. In the comics/Nolan movies the Alfred/Bruce Wayne relationship has had the elements of father and son, and I'm glad that it continued to be powerful and not cheesy here.
How about some props for Anne Hathaway too? From the moment her name was revealed to be playing Selina Kyle on the original press release, how many of us even gave her a chance? Loved the take on her character both from a writing and acting perspective.
I have been a huge Batman fan my whole life. One of my all time favorite Batman story archs was the Knightfall storyline where Batman had his back broken. Ever since I was a kid I played out that comic series in my head as to how it would look in a movie. When Bane was announced as a character in the Batman and Robin movie, I was hoping to see some of that- cue massive disappointment. Fast forward to a couple years ago when it was revealed that Bane would be the villain in the Dark Knight Rises, I had cautious optimism. Then that one sheet came out with Bane walking away from a broken Batman cowl, and I said to myself 'Could it be? Is it too good to be true?' Low and behold, we have some elements of Knightfall in this story- Gotham in shambles, Bane creating chaos, Batman/Bruce Wayne broken. That said, here is my take on Nolan/Hardy's Bane. If TDKR was a silent movie, Bane would exude brutality, physicality, and evil in this movie. During quieter moments, his voice can be quite scary. When Bane is yelling or raising his voice, at times it took me out of the movie during this second viewing. His voice sometimes bordered on cartoonish. If you disagree that's fine, but as of now that's my take on it.
Overall this movie was a real treat to take in. I loved that the theme was really about testing the limits of a hero- just how much can Batman/Bruce Wayne take? How often do we get a great third act/finale to a series of movies? It wasn't a perfect movie, but it was a blast to watch and I can't wait to see it again. So many great moments throughout this movie, and the entire series, that I look forward to reliving for years and years to come. I was grinning ear to ear when Batman made his first return to Gotham in the beginning of the movie. When Batman told Gordon to light the flare to unveil the giant flaming Bat Signal, I cheered; it almost spoke to the people in Gotham as if to say "hang tight, I'm working on it.' The Nolan Batman movies have never felt like superhero, or comic book movies to me. Are there heroes and villains? Absolutely, but what makes them work really goes back to the theme of the series- anyone can be a hero. This isn't the Hulk or Thor or Superman. Bruce Wayne is a human being who had enough, and decided to do something about it- something that any of us could do in a variety of different forms.
Thank you to team Nolan for giving us this gift of three fantastic, entertaining movies!

 

[JonZ]

The film as a whole seemed lazy to me, and felt like Nolan's heart wasn't in it. I think he had said all he wanted to about these characters by the end of the second one, and returned simply out of obligation, not because there was a burning desire to tell this story. I was profoundly disappointed in it.

I had a problem with the Bane/Talia thing as well. First off is the five month wait. Bane explains why he's doing it, but the problem is we find out that Bane is working for Talia, whos motivations are revenge and completing her fathers work. If those are her goals it then becomes stupid for her to wait so long. Giving Gotham hope and then pulling the rug from under them - thats Banes ideology, not Talias!

 

[WillG]

I had a problem with the Bane/Talia thing as well. First off is the five month wait. Bane explains why he's doing it, but the problem is we find out that Bane is working for Talia, whos motivations are revenge and completing her fathers work. If those are her goals it then becomes stupid for her to wait so long. Giving Gotham hope and then pulling the rug from under them - thats Banes ideology, not Talias!

 

[bugeyes]

Caught this last weekend and it's by far my favorite Batman movie of the Nolan trilogy. Good ending to the series. Well done!

 

[Chuck Anstey]

I saw this the past weekend and I am kind of neutral on it. One thing is I think this is the one movie of the series that is truly a comic book movie and no longer a what-if Batman existed in the real world. For the first time, Bruce Wayne really was Batman 24/7 even if not in costume and the normal billionaire was his alter ego. In the two previous movies it may have been said but wasn't really true. Bruce Wayne still referred to Batman as a separate entity from himself and something he had to become. He interacted with the world most of the time as Bruce Wayne during the first two movies but not in the third. He used "Bruce Wayne" to go undercover to find out what Selina was up to. Normal comic books have the superhero as the main character and only on occasion do they don their real world persona to interact with the public, just like TDKR.
Secondly, the whole 90 days under Bain rule was the two boats all over again. Completely and ridiculously unrealistic for the real world and the way real people behave but for comic book plots, not out of the ordinary. In a comic book, the masses are sheep and cower until the superhero(s) rescue them except maybe those in the military or police but still look to the superhero for guidance, just like in this movie. It also was the first time I believed people would take Batman as is and not look to capture him to take his mask off and so he could operate in the daylight and seem normal. We now have pseudo super-villain out in the open so a superhero out in the open seems reasonable.
I guess the problem I am having with the movie is that it tried to be a serious drama with all realistic locations and even brought in the President of the US but with the back drop of a true large scale comic book plot and that just doesn't work for me. I think it would have worked better if they kept the villains' plans much smaller or had not had the occupation but simply wanted to blow up Gotham and only Batman and a few other knew about it and had time to stop them.

 

[Simon Massey]

I got to see the IMAX version and thoroughly enjoyed it. A much better experience than the general release, the score and sound were outstanding. I have to say that Bane's speech seemed to me a lot clearer in the IMAX version and I understood pretty much all his dialogue this time, though I suppose that could be down to familiarity with the film now.
2 problems that came up this time for me.
1. The initial setup of plot elements relating to Wayne Enterprises was clearer to me this time and but I felt this should have been a lot clearer from the initial viewing. For example, Alfred refers to Dagget in an initial conversation with Bruce, which sets up his potential involvement with Bane, but because we don't even know which character is Dagget at that point, its easy to forget when you do finally meet him. Only noticed it this time because I knew who he was referring to. There are a few similar hints given in the initial 30 minutes which I guess reward repeat viewings but I suppose this is why the film initially seemed disjointed to me at first as they aren't strong or memorable enough within the film to be able to relate back to them when the plot does become clearer. Im all for Nolan not dumbing the film down, but I think he got the balance wrong here.
2. Miranda Tate - think this may be an editing problem. Near the end when Gordon is sentenced to exile, Bane calls for Miranda to be brought to him, yet in the next scene she is with Fox when Bruce returns for help, and then back with Bane again. Something seems to be missing or perhaps these scenes were originally in a different order.
Other than that, still enjoyed it and whilst not on a par with The Dark Knight, it is a great conclusion to the trilogy IMO. I personally would like to see Joseph Gordon Levitt in a future film but am equally ok if this is the end of this particular Batman story.

 

[Seppo]

Well written Seppo. Ditto on most of it. "Rises" is my favorite of the series for some of the reasons you listed. It's also in my favorite top 2-3 films of all time.

Nice writeup Seppo. I agree with a lot of what you wrote.

Thanks, guys. My first attempt at writing a movie review.
I watched "Batman Begins" less than a week ago and have to admit I got choked up during the moment where Gordon puts the jacket on young Bruce. It was nice how they took elements from the first two movies and incorporated them in "The Dark Knight Rises", e.g. Scarecrow's brief appearence.

 

[Ashly Yeo]

After watching this for a third time this past weekend, it is still the best Batman movie in my book. But one thing had been bugging me for a while and perhaps folks here and reviewers may have mentioned it and that is the character played by Matthew Modine. Why was this character added to the story line and why was Modine picked to play this character of little significance? Until I happened to watch one of Modine's movies last night:

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

Modine's character in Full Metal Jacket is nicknamed JOKER. I may be reading too much into this but knowing Nolan, it could well be his way on putting the Joker in the final installment of the trilogy.

 

[Jason Charlton]

I finally saw the movie for the first time this weekend. I have not read this thread in hoping to avoid spoilers.

I actually had the weekend to myself, so I watched Begins and Dark Knight the night before seeing DKR.

Overall, I loved how the movies fit in so well together. Really enjoyed the ending to the trilogy, and feel it was a great wrapup. The first appearance of Batman accompanied by the "action theme" music literally gave me chills and got the adrenaline pumping. Maybe I'm dense, or was too wrapped up in the story, but the "surprise character reveal" towards the end really did surprise me.

I even got a bit misty-eyed during the last few minutes.

Well done Nolan!

 

[TonyD]

After watching this for a third time this past weekend, it is still the best Batman movie in my book. But one thing had been bugging me for a while and perhaps folks here and reviewers may have mentioned it and that is the character played by Matthew Modine. Why was this character added to the story line and why was Modine picked to play this character of little significance? Until I happened to watch one of Modine's movies last night:

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

Modine's character in Full Metal Jacket is nicknamed JOKER. I may be reading too much into this but knowing Nolan, it could well be his way on putting the Joker in the final installment of the trilogy.

No.

 

[Carlo_M]

Maybe I'm dense, or was too wrapped up in the story, but the "surprise character reveal" towards the end really did surprise me.

Didn't see it either, so don't feel so bad (either that, or we're both dense!)
Apparently, those who closely follow the comics knew of that character's existence, so the reveal shouldn't have been surprising. But for those of us who didn't know, I thought the twist was a secret well-kept.

 

[Ben Osborne]

Matthew Modine's character, Foley, isin the movie for several reasons:
* Someone had to be in charge of the police while Gordon was hospitalized
* He was an obstacle for Batman, making the Gotham PD hostile to him
* He was an obstacle for Blake, denying him the resources to properly investigate Bane's army
* He was a symbol of the people of Gotham. He's not evil, just not as committed to fighting injustice as he should have been . The years of peace have made him complacent.
* When he comes around at the end of the movie, his sacrifice demonstrates how Batman's example has inspired the people to be willing to stand up for what's right, even at a great cost to themselves
I admit that he's not vital to the story, but his character arc still serves the story.

 

[joshEH]

A source is stating that the upcoming Blu-Ray of The Dark Knight Rises may feature an extended cut of the film, that includes footage we know exists re-edited back into the movie:

"…according to our reliable spies, we will be able to see how Bane learns to fight, plus more scenes involving Ra's Al Ghul. The new Director's Cut is said to make the film about thirty minutes longer."

First things first: NTF isn't a frequent story-breaker, but they've scooped things accurately before, including Thanos being at the end of The Avengers, and that G.I. Joe 2 is effectively a reboot. So this is definitely a rumor, but it's not from a completely-unknown site, and they're backing it confidently. So take all that with whatever amount of salt you feel is appropriate.
Secondly, it's important to note again that we know this footage exists. It's been well-established that additional scenes of Tom Hardy's origins as Bane were shot, included in a cut at some point, and that there also a ton of little moments and lines trimmed out of scenes to move them along quicker.
For example, Tom Lennon has mentioned that his doctor walk-on had an additional joke about Bruce Wayne picking up alcoholism instead of heli-skiing, because his liver is the only unfucked part of his body. This is also entirely evident by, you know, watching the film, which is the most breathless film of Nolan's career, and features more ruthless editing than anything he's ever been involved with.
On a purely academic level, this will be really interesting to see how much Nolan was forced to compromise, and in what ways. I'm kind of excited just for that. And as a fan of TDKR, I'm curious how this extended runtime will play (if this is true), because a three-hour Batman movie sounds really freaking long.
(Can we at least figure out where Alfred went during this film? Was he in Gotham during the meltdown, or was he hunting the most dangerous game in Zanzibar?)

 

[Carlo_M]

I think even the best filmmakers understand that an over-three-hour movie sometimes won't play well to the masses (although us die-hards love them!). So I'm not sure if Nolan was "forced" to compromise (i.e. by the studios) or just had to make tough choices because his inner filmmaker logic told him it had to play at a reasonable length, as most filmmakers do.
Also, I think with today's home viewing options for extended/director's cuts, he probably was more okay with making the cuts knowing they'd likely see the light of day if he really wanted them to, and for an audience that knows they want to see it.

 

[joshEH]

Very true, and this is in major, direct contrast to most of Nolan's other films, which are usually constructed and shot very specifically around their scripts, and include few, if any, deleted scenes.
For The Dark Knight Rises, though, Nolan pretty much maxed out the length of his film, as the platters which hold the IMAX prints of the film could not physically hold more film (this is why 70mm IMAX audiences missed out on the IMAX Skyfall preview and Man of Steel trailer -- there was literally no room left! ).
This is definitely an unprecedented constraint on the director, who saw his film limited by the purely-physical, logistical concerns of distribution, any studio frustrations or creative decisions notwithstanding. This means Nolan probably had to make more compromises in the edit than he ever has before, and thus may have some unprecedented interest in making his full vision accessible later on down the road.
("...Just release the fucking cut, Nolan.")
Which means that his traditionalism may ultimately hold sway here, but now he's definitely got a good reason to release a "Director's Cut" that he's previously never had before in his career.

 

[Malcolm R]

Finally got to see the film this weekend. Most of my quibbles and praise have already been covered. But I'd like to add my vote to the poor sound mix. There were scenes where the dialog was mixed so low it was barely audible, while in the action scenes the sound FX and explosions were nearly deafening.
That aside, I did love the film, and think it was a spectacular ending to Nolan's DK trilogy.
There was a comment earlier in the thread that the studio might want to completely sever ties with Nolan to move in a lighter direction for the next reboot, to allow for easier movement toward a Justice League movie. DC and Warner seem to be working pretty closely with Nolan to produce Man of Steel, so I'm not sure there is any real desire to move in a new direction. The guy just made the greatest comic book trilogy of all time, critically and financially. Where's the incentive to rock the boat?

 

[Sean Bryan]

This article seems to put a kibash on the rumor of an extended cut:
http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/confirmed-no-extended-directors-cut-of-the-dark-knight-rises-exists-or-is-planned-20120912#

 

[Jason Charlton]

Oh well, extended cut or not, I still thoroughly enjoyed the movie and will look forward to watching it again the day it's released on Blu.

 

[Citizen87645]

BD release date of December 4th, announced exclusively to Entertainment Weekly.

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/09/27/the-dark-knight-rises-blu-ray-exclusive/

No mention of deleted scenes being part of the bonus material.