The plot holes and symbolism of The Dark Knight Rises

Feature Alastair Stewart 13 Jun 2014 - 06:09

Do the lapses of logic matter in the face of The Dark Knight Rises' powerful symbolism? Alastair takes a look back...

This article contains spoilers for The Dark Knight Rises.

“A man is just flesh and blood and can be ignored or destroyed. But as a symbol… As a symbol, I can be incorruptible, everlasting.” Bruce Wayne in Batman Begins

It’s been two years already since the live action Dark Knight appeared on our screens with Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight Rises. Last month, meanwhile, we saw the first preview of Ben Affleck as Batman ahead of 2016’s Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice. And so before the memory of Nolan’s trilogy is overrun with thoughts on the Man Of Steel sequel, though, now seems like a good time for a look back at what The Dark Knight Rises achieved.

Now I don’t want to seem like a pedant - I love Nolan’s Dark Knight series - but, as far as plot holes go, the final film is the weakest of the trilogy. It’s not that the plot holes are unforgiveable, just that they’re awkwardly unavoidable compared to the studious pragmatism of Batman Begins or The Dark Knight.

Endless YouTube parodies have gleefully provided an answer to all unlikely feats of plot: [gruff voice] “…because I'm Batman!”

Entertaining as it is, can the film's numerous illogical plot points be explained in a way that actually reconciles it with the quality of the series as a whole?

Granted, a universe where a major city police force can’t figure out that it takes a billionaire to fund Batman’s equipment was never going to be stringently logical. But Nolan’s style is to make the most unusual, most fantastical of plots seem possible in the real world. He’s no fool. Anyone that makes Inception with a straight face is not only an ambitious auteur, but must have a meticulous eye.

For any trilogy to work it must have a respect for its own premise and its own boundaries. Yet Rises disregards much of the pragmatic story reasoning that defined its predecessors.

Rises adopts an even more tragic, operatic tone, and unapologetically spends time and plot concluding the story of Bruce Wayne and Batman. Yet its (visually stunning) action sequences and narrative threads are brought together with little thought as to how they logically occur, most notably in the third act.

Is The Dark Knight Rises, therefore, best understood as an examination of the symbolism and consequences of the Batman legend? Has it been wrongly criticised for its shortcomings when it is deliberately not in the style of Nolan's signature believability? All evidence suggests that the answer is yes.

The film, taken in sequence and as a whole, includes some shaky bridging scenes. But episodically, occasional sequences give a compelling exploration of whether Bruce Wayne is Batman, whether Batman is Bruce Wayne, and whether the two can survive without each other.

Batman's return in the first place is for the sake of sensationally demonstrating Wayne's triumph over his own injuries. The crime and police corruption endemic to the first two films, that made Batman's existence necessary, are no longer present. It's never made clear by Commissioner Gordon why it is that the police can’t handle Bane’s underground army, especially after establishing in the first third of the film that Gotham was a near crime-free city thanks to the Dent Act. 

In fact, when Batman does reappear, he’s a counterproductive distraction. Not only does Wayne know that he is a wanted fugitive, but he also ends up disrupting what was otherwise a pretty standard pursuit.

For the sake of Nolan building him up to knock him down, Batman leads, as Alfred says, a bloated police force on a merry chase to a literal dead end. Rises, more than any other film in the series, plays a great game of brinkmanship: breaking and plunging the hero into darkness so as to show off his strength at the expense of continuity and rationalism.

The problem with the shift from action to personal exposition is it doesn’t account for the missed opportunities to make as many symbolic, dramatic statements as it could. The movie has only a few outright memorable individual moments to this end, the most striking being the breaking of Batman’s back.

The choreography in the film's cage fight between Bane and Batman is balletic, the absence of music powerful. As Bane, Tom Hardy's strength is matched by his expression and theatricality. Christian Bale is glorious in his exhausting and will-driven fighting. Every punch hurts, and nothing deflects from the inevitable outcome facing Bale's older and weaker character.

The importance of the fight avoids the obvious question: how did Bane know that Bruce Wayne was Batman in the first place? In fact, how did Bane know where Lucius Fox keeps Wayne's arsenal? Intrinsic questions, ones that undercut the ferocious exchange between the film's two leads.

When Batman is defeated, his mask is pulled away and Bane casually discards it and saunters off. It’s a powerful scene and beautifully captured, but Nolan's choice not to focus on Bruce Wayne's face is a lost opportunity to properly break the character before our eyes. 

More than likely, the decision was made because of movie magic. Bale wears black eye shadow, as have all recent film incarnations of the character. Across the Nolan films there has always been an attempt to portray the suit as an appendage, with the wearer independent of the theatrics required to inhabit the in-world character.

There’s something curious in the idea of Batman - or any superhero - dressing up, because it is an uncomfortable reminder of the more far-fetched histrionics involved in the story. It would be attributable to psychosis in the real world. They become less symbolic, and eerily worldly, especially when combined with an exaggerated voice.

The unmasking scene marks a missed chance for some brutal realism, not least because the film is about Wayne obsessively fulfilling his need to be Batman. When he rises from the prison pit, it is with a self-decreed, messianic purpose to ‘save his city’, contrasted with the films before where he saw himself, in the words of Nolan, "as a catalyst for change, and therefore it was a temporary process, maybe a five-year plan that would be enforced for symbolically encouraging the good of Gotham to take back their city.”

The problem was circumvented when Wayne alights from the Bat vehicle holding his helmet, but you don't see him take it off. The same was true of Michael Keaton in Tim Burton's 1992 sequel Batman Returns, when he begins to take off his mask only for the angle to change to show he’s not wearing the black eyeliner that was there a moment before. 

The omission is compounded when Bane addresses the city from outside Blackgate prison in his iconoclastic bid to bring ‘freedom’ to the people. Why did he not hold up Batman's broken mask, or another piece of the suit, along with the picture of Harvey Dent? There’s a duality to the masks of Batman and Bane. The former hides his face with an open mouth, whilst Bane masks his voice literally. Blind justice versus twisted truth? Another missed movie moment.

In no short time, these omissions are rectified with the highly charged prison escape sequence. The bats flying overhead as Wayne ascends to a riveting score by Hans Zimmer defines not only the film's message, but the problems associated with it. How can you ignore that Bruce Wayne, escaping a prison, sneaks into Gotham – with time for a haircut while a nuclear bomb ticks down – with no explanation?

The prelude to the third act is the weakest, because it needs to take shortcuts in order to rush to the final showdown. The film’s predecessors had a natural flow that was never grandiose on this scale. Nolan subsequently tries to squeeze in as much as he can while taking us speedily to the conclusion. Having time to ascend a bridge and paint a bat signal in gasoline seems to question how imminent the crisis facing Gotham actually is.

It's highly entertaining, but in plot terms it's rather sloppy, especially when compared to the intricate explanations of the previous films, such as the journey into and out of Hong Kong in The Dark Knight. In The Dark Knight Rises, more questions than answers are generated. Why did Talia al Ghul invest all of her money in Wayne’s company, why did she sleep with him, and why did Team Bane not just detonate the nuclear bomb? Indeed, if we're being really, really picky, why did police officers stuck underground for five months emerge clean-shaven?

And yet by the closing segment, it's impossible to deny Nolan's success in bringing to a stunning conclusion Wayne's want to die and Batman's destiny to survive. Glossing over many of the mistakes owes much to the pathos of Zimmer's score, as well as the delightfully thoughtful ending sequence in Florence. 

The Dark Knight Rises

Nolan is careful to never give in to the temptation to oblige the audience with a return to form hero. The Dark Knight Rises takes its time demonstrating Wayne's slow realisation that his limits, physically and mentally, have finally been superseded by what is required of the Batman legend. By the end, the restoration of the bat signal and Bruce's meeting with Alfred feel like satisfactory conclusion for the character and his creation. 

Ultimately, while stylistically different from Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight Rises concludes the essence of the story of Bruce Wayne. The former is set in almost complete darkness, the middle film a mix of the two, while the latter takes place almost completely in the light. It successfully bridges the three films, but in a manner, and with a conclusion, not expected of the filmmaker.

The blue-caped statue, reminiscent of the comics, is what this was about: the legend and the man, not the plot telling a singular Batman-centric story. Perhaps Bruce Wayne surviving a nuclear explosion and with no one recognising the missing billionaire are a small price to pay for the scope, ambition, and heart of this story.

As we await the new film, which pairs the bat logo against the most recognised symbol in the world (second only to Coca-Cola), it will be interesting to see how the Dark Knight mantle is next handled. Indeed, of Nolan's trilogy and the future of the series, the man himself said "to me, for that mission to succeed, it has to end, so this is the ending for me, and as I say, the open-ended elements are all to do with the thematic idea that Batman was not important as a man, he’s more than that. He’s a symbol, and the symbol lives on."

Wise words. 

Follow our Twitter feed for faster news and bad jokes right here. And be our Facebook chum here.

Disqus - noscript

At the end of the dark Knight, we had Batman- the dark knight, we had watched two films and he was now formed, but in THDKR we jump 8 years, he's a wreck and batman only has one more fight.

I know Alistair says Nolan didn't oblige audiences with a return to form hero but the problem was The dark Knight left him hitting form. The decision to fast track his career seemed more a result of Nolan wanting to close his trilogy that any good story reason. If Nolan had just closed out Batman's early years with his trilogy then it would have been more 'believable' to the characters set up in the earlier films.

Characters choices specifically Alfred's seemed made up to just finish the trilogy off rather than being choices true to character and as a result I just don't care about them.

Bruce Wayne began in Begins as a self pitying washed up loner, to start up Rises with effectively the character at the same point with a arbitrary 8 years gap stuck in just reenforces the idea that Nolan sacrificed good story to be able to cap of his trilogy.

Just think how much better the DC world would be at the moment if Nolan had kept his story to Batman's early years.

A terrible film. Littered with bad choices:
1) the retreat from neo realism to fantasy. So Batman fixes his bad leg with a magic leg support! Batman returns from terrorist land into Gotham - how?
2) the boring support cast who none of us care about. The worst being the kid from 3rd rock from the sun, who works out Wayne is Batman in a way that would make an Adam West Batman blush.
3) Caine. Caine signposting exactly how the film will end with his restaurant fantasy.
4) The broken back and the escape from the prison. I turned to my mate in the cinema and said "they'll need a fitness montage for him to get out of this". After a spot of DIY surgery and some sit ups he was fine. Rocky 4's montage was more convincing.
5) Catwoman. Talia. Both miscast, both had zero Chemistry with Bale.
6) No mention of the joker at all. Come on!
7) Bane's silly voice
8) Bane! The big bad was at least threatening. Uber weak way to die.
9) Gotham Police spending forever underground but still being Ok to fight Bane's baddies. It was like the A Team
10) setting up the New batman! Oh but plonking an orphanage up the Batcave. That'll cramp his style.

This was the one that made me go "Meh" and is still the only Batman film that I haven't bought on DVD. It was just a bit too....broken my back = fixed by wall climb! obvious and blatant illegal stock trading = trades still stand!, need to take over Gotham = lock police in sewer but don't kill them!

I forgot the illegal stock exchange!!!

I understand Nolan's desire to close out his trilogy, and it is still quite an enjoyable film despite it's issues however I can't help but imagine what kind of saga he sacrificed in order to do so. It feels like he skipped right to the end. He could have handed over the director's reigns for another two films to cover the intervening years (with no Robin, this is batman's story) and then taken the chair once again for a two part conclusion, allowing the necessary time to flesh out the elements mentioned in this article. Not that it is guaranteed Bale would have agreed to reprise the character for a total of 6 films but holy cow what a ride it could have been. What a ride.

Wow - if I conjure up a scene with a look of Wayne's face after Bane has taken it off - eyeshadow, blood over his lips, sweaty, wet hair and broken eyes, it gives me the chills.

You're right Alastair - that would have made such a HUGE impact. I'd have loved to see that.

An all honesty you might as well skip this movie and read Joker by Brian Azzarello. It works perfectly and is a thousand times more coherent and more fun that this movie was. the only thing i really loved about this movie was the chant in the soundtrack

I agree its got its hole and daftness, the gasoline bat symbol being amongst the worst. Still can't bring myself to dislike it though. At the end of the day however grounded in reality the series is, its still about a billionaire dressed as a bat.

BW finding his way back into Gotham unnoticed didn't bother me. He spent YEARS learning how to blend in and disappear entirely. The prison thing was a bit daft, i thought they should've just left out the "broken back" part.

I enjoyed this film when I first saw it in the cinema. Only a few months later when I watched it on Blu-Ray did I realise it's got plot holes big enough to drive a fleet of bat-mobiles through. Banes plan makes no sense at any level.

If Gotham is suddenly an island like Manhattan even if Bane did blow up the bridges and tunnels. Surely there would hundreds if not thousands of water craft at the Gotham ports that would make it pretty easy for all the citizens to leave. Also why would the state and federal government just stand idly by when a madman takes an entire city hostage? I doubt they just decide to say let's not send in teams of special ops but let's hope batman shows up and sorts things out.

Also how on earth did Bruce Wayne get from the tunnel prison which looked like it was in the Middle East to Gotham? With a severe spinal injury and no money and no documentation?

Still underwhelmed by this film not the end of the trilogy I wanted but hey that's just my opinion most of you loved it

When Gotham is ashes, you have my permission to try my exceedingly good cakes.

When I read point 4 I kept hearing the South Park song " we need a montage" good points all of them it was a let down for me, a lot of people liked it but I still think after watching it for a second time that it is boring for the most part

The stock market takeover actually succeeding in bankrupting Bruce Wayne would've been cut from an episode of the Adam West series as too far-fetched.

I've always wondered what affect Heath Ledger's death had on the plot of the third film. Nolan must have had a plan in place to end his trilogy, and no way would it have left out the Joker. Also, I know the conceptual reasons for killing off Two-Face at the end of The Dark Knight, but I hate how he's always a second string villain, they should have kept him for the final film. Perhaps they would have if they'd known Heath Ledger wouldn't be around.

I think the scene that jarred most with me was Alfred saying "Every year Master Bruce I go to a random restaurant in Italy that you don't know about in the hope of seeing you there because you've retired". Bruce: "That doesn't make any sense. Why are you telling me this?" Alfred: "Erm...I just wanted to set up the final scene of the movie Master Bruce. How will the viewers know it's a happy ending unless I very heavy handedly set it up."

Watched the Honest Trailers of Dark Knight Rises on Youtube. Hilarious!

It would have been so much better if he had said:

"Every year Master Bruce, I go to a little cafe in Italy and eat a biscotti the size of a tangerine."

Well...actually (yes, I said that in my nerd voice).

Water craft exodus...Bane said specifically that if anyone tried to leave the city that the bomb would be detonated.

Special ops...They actually did send in special ops remember. They were murdered in that huge shootout scene right after they met with Comish Gordon.

Thank you for that.

Bane Boobies! ROFL!

i watched this last night and still really enjoy it, despite some of its problems. Maybe because its more of a sequel to Batman begins than The Dark Knight that jarrs a few people who were execting a film in a similar vein. I know its a little uncommon but for me BB is more enjoyable than TDK.

These are the points I tried to make to my friends after the movie ended and all I got were glares! Glad to see someone else had a similar list of thoughts! (especially #5 - it pained me)

Joker was brilliant!

Batman Begins is also my favorite. I loved the way the world was created (and laid out well enough that I could ignore Katie Holmes' acting). :) I think the villains were what edges it out over TDK for me though - three solid (even almost plausible!) villains. Crane is my favorite, so I'm glad he reappeared in both of the others.

The compulsion to set up an impressive pyrotechnic display of your symbol seems to be a bit of a common problem for Superheroes. Punisher (Thomas Jane version) must have spent ages rigging all those cars to explode in a Skull shape, on the off-chance that someone would by flying over in a helicopter at just the right time to see it. Daredevil took the time to do a huge DD in petrol for no real reason, although fortunately, it turned out Ben Urich was so good at journalism, he could detect petrol shapes (presumably he was hacking Matt's voicemail or something)

Anyways, back to the Dark Knight. It is disappointing, because Chris Nolan movies are usually so meticulously plotted, and there are areas on TDKR that just seem a bit sloppy. The biggest issue by a mile for me is the pacing. It's completely unclear how long Bruce spends in the pit. It's somewhere between half an hour and 12 months.

Also, the fight at the end between Bane and Batman is terrible. I can forgive the first fight, because Batman was supposed to be diminished, but the second one is like a brawl in a pub car park. It should have been like a fight from one of the Bourne movies, so fast you can hardly keep up. Should have been at night too, because the Batsuit looks a bit daft in the afternoon

How does Bane know he's Batman, well Talia know's his true indentity through her father who trained him, so it's obvious that she would have told Bane. Sometimes people read too much into films. What happened to just enjoying the spectacle. I bet you could pick any film and pick holes in the plot.

At the end ogf the day its a story about a billionaire playboy who dresses up as a bat, what do you want?

Its a film, what did you want 2 hours of Bruce Wayne blagging a lift back to Gotham?

I enjoy this film but I don't love this film like I do the other Nolan Batman movies. Among the many plot holes in the film I always wonder about the hole in the ground desert prison, how does Amnesty International not know about this place and shut it down.

The prison scene was not daft at all. when bruce asks bane "where am i ?" he replies "home, where i learnt the truth about despair" which is a literal reference that bruce was kept in the pit in the wayne manor backyard. also in that conversation you will notice any one else except bane. the latter images of people chanting desi basara are a simpley a figment of bruce's imagination. after all in that dark place you are bound to conjure up people who will both inspire you for strength as well as those who scare you. the only conversation bruce has in that prison is with a guy who looks like alfred and another like morgan freeman. they were father figures in this story. the other dream he has is with ras al gul which the audience is forced to accept as a dream. that is layers added to the script to keep the audience believing bane is the son of raz until the film's climax . dreams and fantasy are not new to the trilogy, after all in batman begins bruce wakes up from a nightmare in the opening scene.also when bruce finally escapes the pit you will see an indian palace in the background, that is a visual metaphor for wayne manor which was a palace in its own right. many other takes can be explained, eg sending people on to the ice , is to test the ice bcoz bruce was trained on sure footing by the league of shadows. finally when batman reappears in the scene with comm.gordon it he is standing on ice. it was the only way batman can enter the city, remember from the earlier movies wayne manor is out of the city limits and with all other entries blocked by bane's army, this was the only way to enter. when the movie shining came out if was dumped by critics simply bcoz they could not comprehend kubrick's ideas, tdkr could be another such case. i do agree with alastair's comments on the unmasking scene. in addition i also felt that in the last scene where they read bruce's will, it would have been more thoughtful if joseph gordon levitt's character gave his legal name as Dick Grayson/Yason Todd/Tim Drake instead of simply replying robin. in all it was a great film with a lot going on for one sitting. watch it more and it will make more sense. the script's ending is class as it takes after chales dickens - a tale of two cities.perhaps the best way to sum up batman's legend.

perhaps because you and dave are not gifted with intelligence.

He could have easily said, I took the Bat-Train to the Bat-Boat then went to the Bat-Airport and used my Bat-Passport to get on the Bat-Plane then I got a Bat-Taxi here.

if you watch that scene closely, you will notice that when the two traders are getting their shoes shined a lady enters the trading floor. they only show the back of that lady, but judging by the hairdo it was talia al gul. also in that scene when bane enters after the gun shots he nods at someone in the crowd almost acknowledging that person. bane was looking at talia, she was the one plotting the downfall of bruce. and as a member of the board she knew diluting waynes shareholding would force bruce to let her take control of the secret nuclear site.

"GARY OLDMAN: It's alright, everyone! Batman is here, so the ice isn't dangerous anymore!"

This article reminded me of the "abridged" script that did the rounds a while back. Brilliantly done - well worth a read.

if chris nolan has to bear such critisism, wonder whats in store for zack snyder. poor guy has to deal with superman also. and ben affleck/facebook man/wonderbooty will not help his cause either.

all of which was possible using his bat currency

My graduate degree and IQ say otherwise, but by all means continue to assess strangers' intelligence levels based on their film opinions and vote yourself up. The pettiness is kind of adorable in a small-minded sort of way.

i found the whole police living underground stuff massively far-fetched.

Yes, Rises had plot holes which everyone always bleets about, but Dark Knight had just as many, and also suffered from a rushed incoherent structure. Begins is the best of the trilogy by far.

Ha! He totally did vote for himself! Blatant, unfounded abuse followed by flagrant self-congratulation. This is some kind of twisted genius. :D (or not).

I would have loved it if he did say that. Quite nonchantly as well as if it was no big deal.

Plot holes aside loved this film

Did you come up with this, or have you read it somewhere. I found it quite interesting?

Funny how I understand all those big words you just used, seeing as how I'm so unintelligent. ;)

Did not sign out in order to vote himself up anonymously? Adorable indeed :)

Great idea about having Bane show the mask alongside the picture of Dent - that would have been amazing. I also think the show could have made more of the occupation and living under a totalitarian state. It doesn't seem to last very long and the people don't look very starved or bloody. I was expecting something like the scene from Children of Men - a totally desecrated Gotham. Even those chalk Batman symbols didn't have the desired impact in the end.
I think it was a very bloated finale, which would have benefitted hugely from some heavy re-direction, whilst keeping all the integral parts in place. Having Bruce recover twice was a bit too much and the whole clean-energy concept was extremely ham-fisted.
The opening scene, the Bane fight - especially the dialogue ("You think darkness if your ally...") - are, in my opinion, seminal Batman, totally epic. Handing over to Blake was cool, symbol carries on. There was just a lot of faff and it doesn't reach the heights of the Dark Knight because, to be fair, they are high heights to reach!

Really good points made here!

How did Bruce Wayne die? We all know how Batman died. I am talking about Bruce Wayne. In the movie he was just dead with zero explanation. And don't feed me that "he died in the riots" BS. He was an important enough character to say anyhting about how he died.

Until I get a satisfactory answer I have disowned The Dark Knight Rises.

I may be wrong here, but was it not revealed that Bruce Wayne was Batman?

Whilst it wasn't outfight terrible I was really disappointed with how this film was structured... from Batman being gone for 8 years, to the rushed 3rd act I just found the film frustrating.

I think it would have been better if the film started with Bruce still being Batman but everytime he goes out the Police up their attempts to arrest him... during the opening set piece Batman can receive the leg injury and is cornered by Joseph Gordon Levitt's cop who lets him go because he believes in Batman... this can lead to him working out who Batman is by spotting Bruce's limp (it's better than the I just knew excuse). Despite being injured Batman goes up against Bane at the end of the first act and gets his back broken... and go from there.

Surely the biggest plot hole in the Dark Knight Rises is that the Dark Knight isn't actually in it?

I'm actually (almost) serious about this. The Joker kills a friend of Bruce's (note, friend, they were very explicitly not romantically involved at the time and she was actually kidnapped because of her connection to Dent rather than Bruce) and in response he... retires never to be seen again? Umm, really? Does that, even for a moment, sound like Batman to anyone else? At most he may take the night off and have a drink but that's about it. Instead he's gone for eight years during which time the city miraculously has no crime going on. And don't give me that 'oh there was still crime just not the big stuff' line either, Batman was born from a mugging gone wrong so will always be focused on bringing justice to Gotham.

Even when he comes back Bats is utterly useless. He screws up in the big chase, gets his ass handed to him by Bane simply owing to his arrogance (compared to Knightfall when Bane actually has a really good plan to bring him down) and when he returns the big plan is to storm the bad guys lair with every cop walking up the street in broad daylight towards the army with guns and tanks! This isn't Batman out-thinking his enemy , this is Zapp Brannigan!

I think the massive plot holes and leaps in logic wouldn't matter in the slightest if it was a bit more tongue in cheek. There is about 30 jokes (for lack of a better word) in the whole trilogy. 25 of them in Batman Begins (IMO the best). The fact is it is all far fetched nonsense, the last two just take themselves so damned seriously the plot holes stick out like a sore thumb. "Grounded in reality" Yeah, whatever, as many have said already it's about a man who dresses up as a bat. It's big dumb fun (or at least should be). It should be treated as such.

To begin Downvotes don't bother me at all.....
Nolan's 3rd film is up their with Batman and Robin in my opinion. The first two parts were great films, The Dark Knight is up their with Empire Strikes Back for me as one of the best sequels.
Dark Knight Rises is flat from the plot to the villain to the ending. I am sure their were plot holes in 1 & 2 but nothing on the scale of 3 which was very lazy and one of the biggest anti climaxes to a Trioligy ever.
I hope Nolan is back on form for Interstellar.....

I thought it was a pretty bad film when I first watched it, and I still do. After the first two, I couldn't believe it was made by the same filmmakers.

1: The explanation for why JGL's character knows Wayne is Batman is terrible, lazy and makes no sense.

2: The scene between Wayne and Alfred where they discuss Bane is one of the poorest-written exposition scenes I've ever seen.

3: Alfred leaving Bruce just for becoming Batman again after stating twice in BB that he "never!" would, after he had became Batman.

4: There being absolutely no sense of months passing when the police are trapped underground.

5: Why would you send EVERY police officer after Bane??

6: At the start, Batman being chased by about 50 police cars is ludicrous.

7: Ending the film with a big reveal that JGL is prbably going to become Robin and expecting us to give a toss when we've only just met him.

8: A little girl made the jump in the prison but Batman - a trained ninja - couldn't.

That's just of the top of my head. After the prequels (obviously), TDKR may be my biggest disappointment in cinema.

"Why would you send EVERY police officer after Bane??"

This is Gary Oldman's fault, partially.
Get me everyone.
What do you mean "everyone"?
EEEEVVVVVVERRRRYYOOOONNNNEEEE!!!!!!!!

"As we await the new film, which pairs the bat logo against the most recognised symbol in the world (second only to Coca-Cola)"

...?

Was slightly disappointed after watching it for the first time, mainly because of the wasted opportunity of Batmans arrival back in Gotham at the start, but the more I watch it, the better it gets. The sign of a good (not great) movie. I think enough time has gone by now that a new Batman can come on the scene, and Im cautiosly optimistic about Baffleck.

...?

ha having a nightmare here. HOW DO YOU ATTACH IMAGES?

Yes. And if he caught his own reflection in the sewers, Bruce might have seen the Joker's face in his own reflection.

That's brilliant.

A few of the characters figured it out but it was not revealed to everyone.

Also that prison seems to be a hole in the middle east, how did Bruce Wayne get back to Gotham, penniless as he was, so quick?

gave me a good chuckle!!!!

Good points about the fight, and I think they should have focussed on Bruce in the pit alot more and given it a real feeling that he was tortured by being down there and make the escape more necessary.
The one real plot hole that takes me out of the movie is when Bane sees the bat signal flame and says 'Impossible'... so ok we dont know Talia is Talia at this point but we just saw Bruce come back and meet Talia and she didnt think to mention it to Bane 'Oh by the way, Bruce Wayne is back in Gotham and he has hooked back up with Fox.....' that is a real plot hole... Bane doesnt know Bruce is back for the sake of the what...

That and Blake tells Gordon that Bane took some of the Wayne Enterprises board into the sewers and let the rest go, and then Bane says to Fox that there are still others waiting above...

Have seen this movie countless times because I love the trilogy, but it is the only one that didnt quite stick the landing. These movies put alot of plotting into the first act so that you can believe some unbelievable things by the third act, for example you see how the Joker carries out the bank robbery and killing the commissioner and by the time he blows up the hospital and rigs the boats you just believe he can do it. If you think about it too much it you can pick it apart. In TDKR the characterisation is spread too thin so you dont have that momentum with Talia, Blake or Catwoman to justify what they do or how they do it the third act

What a long moan

I tell you what, 'some', 'did' and 'by' can be a real roadblock to understanding. You should consider yourself well edumacated!

I really don't see the point in all this overly analytical pretentiousness. You liked the film or you didn't. No need to pick it apart bit by bit.

Everyone here is forgetting the real reason why he manged to a) not die in the explosion, b) get to Gotham, c) fix his back easily etc is BECAUSE HE'S BATMAN!!! DUH!!

If there's one scene which really riled me, it's when it's Bane vs Bats 2, and Bane says 'So you came back to die with your city' and Batman replies with 'No, I came back to stop you...' If i was Bane i would of smacked him in the face and said try again Bats. He should of said 'No I've came back to save it, or I've come back to kill you' (i no, Batman doesn't kill blah blah blah) but it's more bad ass then what he actually said

Agree with all of that.

Yeah it's good but far from being among the best Batman books.

To be fair, the actual line is a lot better than both of your suggestions.

Think you're on the wrong site, pal :)

Very true. But let's be honest, as good as they are, the films themselves are pretty pretentious. I mean you can make it as gritty as you like and say it tells us stuff about the human condition; but at the end of the day they're 3 films about a mentally unstable person that dresses up as a bat.

Yep, as a rough plot point guide, I think you've already improved on what they actually came up with.

Agreed. Aside from all the things that made it really, really bad, I loved it.

Agreed. No sense of time in the pit at all. And the second fight, Bats wins just by punching him in the mouth? Eh?

Great point. We could have had 6+ movies at the quality of the first two rather than two great movies and one mad rush for the finishing line.

I think so too, thought the second is still very good.

Did Bane drug him somehow to make him think he was in some middle eastern hole in the ground or did Bruce Wayne know he was in his backyard and the middle easter hole was just imagery for the audience??
At least this is a completely original take on the whole thing and I actually quite like it. I bet even Christopher Nolan would say, "Man, I should of thought of that!"

Me, too. A superb superhero origin story. I still like the second a lot, though. Ledger is obviously astonishing.

In regards to #8, he did just get over having a broken back that was fixed by hanging from a rope and push ups. The little girl was perfectly healthy (perhaps a bit malnurished, but otherwise healthy)

With JGL as Kip!!

Hmmmm, good idea actually. Four or five movies are always better. And that way we could have had enough time for two more Man of Steel sequels before the rebooting of Batman within a Superman sequel.
On the other hand the trilogy is done and dusted and I am looking forward to what Zack Snyder is up to.

JGL was just the only cop to use his brain. Only a rich person could be Batman, check. It would have to be someone with the motive (like murdered parents), check...It shouldn't have been so hard for people to put 2 and 2 together, but apparently only JGL could. It's less believable that nobody else put it together than the fact that only JGL did..

Cheers! I just find it highly frustrating when I see sloppy or poor writing bugger up a potentially good story.

but in the film they have JGL go I knew you were Batman just from the way you looked. Which was lame and an excuse to have someone new discover his secret.

never fails to make me chuckle when a person labels a film such as the dark knight rises as 'terrible', it's a clear indication that the person knows absolutely nothing about cinema or have never actually seen a truly terrible film in their life

I would've loved when at the end Nolan had just shown Michael Caine's face. And a smile. The end.
I guess the somehow similar ending in Inception made it not possible to do it like that, but it would've been perfect regardless.

The movie's crap, who cares.

I still haven't read any good explanation for how he escaped the cock-a-doody nuclear explosion! (Other than 'Because he's Batman')

or he could have said "the only thing dying tonight is your freedom"

Or... "NOPE guess again Grill Face NYAAAAHHH!!!" this one works really well if for some reason Batman did an impression of Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Or...in a sarcastic voice "Nooooo I've just come to watch... DUH!"
:)

me too, pal. Me too. They fell into the same old trap of thinking bigger is better.

I thought this was a fantastic film and a great finish to the trilogy.Much better than any Marvel movie ( and i really enjoy the Marvel movies for what they are ).The complaining about plot holes can be applied to any film and is just needless nitpicking in this case.Its not Skyfall for example where the entire movie is an absolute joke.

Watch the honest trailer for Avengers on youtube.Hilarious1

1) Agreed. Something from Lucius would have made more sense.
2) He's Robin, we cared
3) aka Exposition Man. Nolan should have left that resolution dangling, giving us the choice of how it played out
4) That and the lack of sense of time passing in Gotham (or Wayne making it back) destroyed the pacing and hard earned realism from TDK
5) But hot though. Especially Talia...
6) One throw-away mention
7) Hardy taking the piss to keep up with Bale's bonkers grunt imo!
8) He has some pathos and then - bang bang your dead
9) Robin and others were passing them food and toiletries etc. We don't mention the 'truncheon action' that kept them all fit in the tunnel/cave
10) Did you see the cut scene when Leonardo's man-servant from Inception found the crotch area of the suit too tight and he emails Wayne for extra Kevlar..it didn't end well for not-robin-maybe-batman...

I need to rewatch it. I knew he was suspicious when he first met him, then through some good old-fashiosned police work he became sure of it...especially after he drugged Bruce Wayne on a flight from Gotham to Metropolis and then connected a top secret military device used to enter a target's dreams in order to extract sensitive information.

Bruce Wayne died when he put on the first extra constrictive Batman suit...oh wait...that's when all future Bruce Wayne's died..my mistake

He had himself dehydrated into a powder and was smuggled back to Gotham in a shipment of black tar heroine from the Middle East (he got the idea from watching episodes of Adam West's Batment as a kid). Then Robin used the rehydrator to restore him (or he was dropped in the river and rehydrated and then dried off by lighting the giant bat signal on fire before saving Gordon on the ice)...

1) the magic leg support is less believable than Bat-sonar cell phones or pretty much anything else.
2) I like Joseph Gordon Levitt but agree his character was kinda meh and the way he discovers Batman's identity was uber lame and still chaps my ass to this day. A quick scene or two of him using detective skills in his time off to deduce his identity would have made more sense - like his apartment having a wall of clues and pictures.
3) A little cheese sure, and not so subtle foreshadowing but I felt it was effective.
4) This is pretty standard film storytelling. While it is not the most creative sequence in the film, I can't fault Nolan for using a common and completely acceptable use of formulaic storytelling that just about every director with more than three films to their name has used.
5) I loved Catwoman. Talia not so much.
6) No mention of Falcone or any other criminal by name either. Scarcrow show up because the man just refuses to go away, he's a slippery little c*&% and adds a nice common thread. Dent/Two Face is only mentioned because his actions have a direct effect of the current story. Why would the characters bring him up?
7) I'm in the minority hear but I love Bane's voice.
8) Eh, he got his face smashed in by Batman in a total comeback. I didn't need much else. I don't think and epic character needs an epic death.
9)Fair enough. But this kind of goes with the same logic that in all three films batman is at some point surrounded by thugs with guns who just decide not to shoot him as he dispatches their team members.
10) there is nothing that says the new batman has to use the bat cave, that was merely where the stuff was stored. For the entire DK Bruce uses a separate Batcave. There could be dozens of hideouts all over the city that Bruce has bought and prepped, who knows.

While it is a slightly off scene in terms of the narrative, I don't think it is that problematic. I don't think Alfred really expected to see Bruce at the cafe, it was just a fantasy he indulged in while Bruce was gone. He tells it to Bruce as a way of explaining how deeply he felt about wanting him to move on. As part of the conversation it makes sense.

If this were David lynch and not Nolan, I may agree with you. Nolan doesn't do complex symbolism. What you see is typically what happened. Not to mention, what Bruce learns in the prison is confirmed in his confrontation with Talia. While he is a master detective, him magically deducing Bane's history seems far fetched.

I took it to mean both that one needed conviction to make it out and that the rope was not actually long enough to make it. Others could have made it they tired like the little girl, with no rope. That if you used the rope there was no way to escape, it was just there to torment the prisoners. To make the believe that there was some hope of escape, when in fact the physical symbol of hope was another prison bar.

Why is the "he died in the riots" BS. Bruce Wayne as a character in Gotham, was a pompus ass who went all Howard Huges in the end and nearly lost his fortune. In a riot that was largely aimed at the rich, where people were sentenced in weird ass mock courtrooms (if they were 'sentenced" at all) and then sent to death in a deep ass river covered with ice, who is going to miss one rich guy? Especially one no one liked.

They state it in the end of the movie. Bruce fixed the auto pilot on the Batplane's. Once he picked up the bomb he hit the autopilot to go over the ocean and ejected, presumably onto a roof top.

I agree. Walking out of the theater I was dissappointed. After some extra viewings I like the movie a lot more.

Well I think we'll have to agree to disagree then (which is fine-different opinions are part of life). I just think it's clumsy and it's only there for one reason; to set up the final scene. It took me out the story and made me aware of the inner workings of the script etc. I feel it's just too heavy handed and could have been a bit more subtle. I just spent the rest of the movie waiting for it (so never felt any peril for Batman because he can't die until Alfred sees him in Italy). But don't get me wrong I loved that movie when I went to see it and I suppose it's nit picking (in my defence the article is about the pros and cons).

Agreed. This was the biggest problem with the film in my opinion and some reworking such as the outline above would have served the film much more.

This needs to happen

its a lot better than The Dark Knight Rises and works as more coherent sequel although personally if I was Nolan I would have left it after the Dark Knight

It really was, a fantastic storyline with great characters (Harley Quinn making an appearance) and the same level of scariness as the Dark Knight

I'm sure if you picked apart Star Wars hard enough you would find even worse problems than these ones. The problem is that many people (with all due respect) have become cynical old men at even young ages, watching the '78 Superman with rose-tinted glasses. Fact is, both The Dark Knight and TDKR were major events in my teenage years. I have no time to be cynical about films that resulted in some of the best cinema experiences of my life, and resonated with me in a big way.

"The Joker kills a friend of Bruce's (note, friend, they were very explicitly not romantically involved at the time and she was actually kidnapped because of her connection to Dent rather than Bruce) and in response he... retires never to be seen again? Umm, really? Does that, even for a moment, sound like Batman to anyone else? At most he may take the night off and have a drink but that's about it. Instead he's gone for eight years during which time the city miraculously has no crime going on. And don't give me that 'oh there was still crime just not the big stuff' line either, Batman was born from a mugging gone wrong so will always be focused on bringing justice to Gotham."

This. About eight million times THIS.

No one has been able to explain to me why he's a cripple at the start of rises? He's fine at the end of the dar knight?

Bruce Wayne took the death of his parents and turned it into Batman.
Bruce Wayne took the death of a girl he kind of had a thing for and quit being Batman.

That, like Alfred - who now suddenly had no interest in Bruce even coming back, let alone becoming Batman - paints them as totally different characters than in previous films.

Definitely agree. Why people hold the second one up as such a masterpiece in comparison is bizarre to me when it has very similar problems and also seems like two films crammed into one very long one. I admire the ambition of the latter two, but Begins is the most successful at achieving what it sets out to do.

I'll see you that view, and raise you that I'm not much of a fan of Batman Begins either. On the other hand I do think The Dark Knight is really very good. But for me only one out of three is a winner.

Bruce Wayne is Batman?!?!?!!!!!????
Please give us SPOILER WARNINGS in future before RUINING the movie for me.

Everyone goes on about nobody making the connection of batman and Bruce Wayne dying on the same day, but Gotham was in complete chaos, it's not a leap to suggest the total number of people unaccounted for and believed dead was in the thousands.

He was shot and fell a distance far enough to kill harvey. We see him running with a heavy limp to the batpod. I think it was clear he wasnt 'fine.'

what nolan will definitely say is "man there goes another opinion"... thats the reason i watch his films. like inception each guy has a totally different take on the story. his scripts are made to inspire personal belief. in tdkr your really connecting the dots of each plot depending on whether you believe batman died at the end or not. this notion splits the audience where instead of accepting another opinion guys ,some like alastair prefer criticism. even if there were plots holes which may be the case, you should remember that nolan would surely have had a completely different continuation to the story of tdk, but due to the tragic circumstances he had to make changes. with respect to the great heath ledger he completely left the joker out of tdkr.

guess you did not see dave's 11th point. may as well tell you friends for one more glare. your well accomplished degree aside, your friends do think of you as unintelligent. now tell us that your a stranger to them too. i will confirm my pettiness is adorable in a small-minded way - your the one with the big brains, so how appropriate to support someone else's 10 points where you may have never had anything original of your own... seems similar to my pettiness of supporting my self, only it being less original. "it really is funny how you understand big words"

the story of bane's misinformed history was explained to bruce by alfred. watch the scene where alfred refers to bane as "born and raised in hell on earth" he also goes on to say that sometimes the pit lets someone out. bane history was not confirmed in the talia scene, bruce only understood where talia came from and that bane never escaped the prison.if you notice that when bruce imagines the prison story the young kid is fully bald, a reference to bane. but when talia tells him the true story, young talia has little hair and a scarf to suggest is was a girl. it was a similar interpretation to what alfred explained (which led to his dreaming), only difference being it was a boy. in essence what alfred told bruce initially was misinformed by whomsoever (I guess CIA coz they were after the league in the opening scene).how they got the CIA database records of bane/selina kyle etc .... well he's batman.

my interpretation based on my belief that chris nolan has a higher capacity for intelligence than all of us and would not make a dumbfounded film just for money like the critics say so . mine need not be similar to yours but that the whole point of these films.. different interpretations like inception. don't get started on whether batman died or not, we wont come to a consensus anytime soon. there may be plot holes which i may not see of, but to call it a plot hole would either make you smarter than nolan (which could be the case) or could also mean you cannot comprehend his ideas. im just fine accepting it as an intelligent film.

point taken,i vote you up for ending with ':D' (whatever that means). nice touch with the big words, well it was for her.

The child has slightly more hair, as if a month or two has passed from the first time we see the child. It's the same kid. Alfred just says that the pit spit him back, and that sometimes a man rises. And that no-one knows how Bane escaped. No mention of the actual climb. However, Batman, Bane, and Talia all discuss the climb quite specifically before Talia tell's the whole story. And then there is the Doctor who fixes Bane and assists with fixing Bruce and who is also shown in the Talia flashback but not mentioned in Alfred's story. His existence helps draw the conclusion that we are dealing with reality.You have a cool theory but the evidence in the dialog points elsewhere. And as I said, that just isn't Nolan's style. He tends to do things head on and let the themes present themselves in an extraordinarily honest way through the characters and more importantly through the characters perspective.

Except as mentioned above, those trades would have been declared invalid in real life

While I agree this is the weakest in the trilogy, I disagree with the reasons stated above.

Batman being somewhat counterproductive was part of the point. Not to show that Batman was back, but to show that he really wasn't. That chase helped illustrate the point, which Alfred then continues to elaborate on, that Bruce has lost his conviction and his way.

The cops might have been capable of taking care of Bane's army, the problem was that no one but 'Robin' believed Commissioner Gordon. And since they weren't taking it seriously, the league of Shadows were able to move their plans along to the point of no return. The issue was not that the police couldn't take care of Bane's army, it's that they wouldn't.

Why would Bane hold up the mask to Gotham citizens? Batman has been gone for 8 years and most believe he was a villian who killed the cities greatest hero, Harvey Dent. It isn't until after Gotham goes to hell that people start being more vocal about supporting and believing in the Batman. Plus, Bane was not demonstrating that he had defeated anyone, he was exposing the powers at be as corrupt liars who were benefiting from the suffering of Gotham. He wanted to keep their focus on the fat cats, not the actual heroes. Talking about Batman to any great length would have been counter productive.

It is clear why Bane would know who Batman was and where his stuff was. Bane was part of the League of Shadows and the league of Shadows has always known who Batman was, they burnt down Wayne Manor in BB. They and Talia have been watching him and plotting their revenge for years.

DKR was already long enough and had a fair amount of montages. Did we really need to see Bruce sneaking into Gotham? IS it that hard to imagine that a man a resourceful as Bruce Wayne, who spent his early twenty's in other countries going from nothing to finding a hidden fortress of killers on a god forsaken mountain BEFORE becoming batman. Is it beyond the realm of imagination that after years of fighting crime he either had some offshore bank accounts, hidden Batcaves, or just plain skills enough to manage to make it back to the states. When he gets out of the pit there is a giant freaking palace behind him, New York it ain't but it's far from the middle of nowhere. IT may have been nice to see a little explanation, but after 6 hours of movies up to that point, I think the audience is knows enough about Bruce Wayne and is smart enough to fill in a tiny blank.

The giant flaming Bat signal is not just for fun. To win he needed to let as many citizens know that a rebellion was about to happen and if they were willing to fight now was the time. I think flying unto a bridge and taking twenty minutes to make a giant sign is a more reasonable use of your time than going door to door recruiting people, or just starting a fight and hoping that people notice and join in. While the movie focuses on the fight with the cops I doubt that was the only one. Either way, it was a good way to boost the morale of his 'troops' before going to war.

Bruce was no where near the bomb when it went off. That was clearly covered when Fox tries to figure out what he could have done differently and is told that Wayne fixed the auto pilot. Why would anyone notice that Bruce Wayne specifically went missing and was therefore the Batman when countless other rich people were killed and their bodies went missing into the depths of the Gotham River.

I would defiantly argue that DKR predecessors did not have an even flow. One of the biggest complaints lobed at DK by critics (justly I might add) is that it's third act is clunky and drags on.

I think most people like DK because it is just much more artistically done. It has better cinematography, a larger scope of Gotham as a world, more character driven stories. BB is more rooted in action. The first two acts are so good that it's easy to forget how bloated the third one is.

I don't think they meant to imply that Bruce would have remained broke. Despite it being an illegal stock trade, and an obvious one, it would have taken time for the authorities to correct the problem. Especially as Bruce's was probably not the only one who was attacked. And before anyone had time to do that the LoS took over Gotham. They were just trying to make Bruce more vulnerable before they attacked.

I thought the exo-skeleton thing was from Lucius.

I agree that it was clumsy foreshadowing. And I can see how that could pull someone out of the film.

Good comments there. Side note: is Knightfall worth reading? Like, is it actually a good Batman story or was it no more than an excuse to have an 'event', a la The Death of Superman?

Bonus upvote for using 'cock-a-doody' :-)

Chris Nolan batman movie in order of excellence:
1. Batman Begins
2. The Dark Knight
3. The Dark Knight Rises

not sure about the legality... but i thought thats why selina got bruce's fingerprints

So because my friends didn't agree with my opinion of a single movie, now they too think I'm unintelligent? I have a lot of evidence to the contrary, but if it helps you sleep at night, go ahead and believe that.
Also, what's unintelligent about agreeing with someone else's points rather than just restating some of them in your own words? I rather think it's more obnoxious to feel the need to hear (or, in this case, see) your own words that say the same basic things.

I see you are a relatively recent addition to the site's commenting cohort, as indeed I am, though not quite to the same extent.

I don't think this is the type of site you think it is. Have a look through some other articles and their comments and you will see how atypical your insults are.

I am conscious that it is very difficult to gauge the age of a poster (even prose style is not awfully reliable), so I hope this is received in the spirit it intended.

For what it's worth, if I were in your shoes and had misjudged a new site, I would simply be adult, apologise and move on to enjoying a discussion of topics rather than posters.

It isn't any better than skyfall or JJtrek. All of these movies fall into the exact same plot traps that most modern action flicks fall into. It's that idea that if the film appears urgent enough, then no one will notice the nonsensical plot.

These directors have gotten way too big. And these writers need to be drawn and quartered.

no, he took the death of his parents and became a self pitying recluse eventually vanishing for 7 years then he eventually be came batman when he came out his slump.
After the death of rachel he became a self pitying recluse who hid away for 8 years before eventually coming back as batman.

Pretty similar

I never said Alfred was the same, I said his choice to leave bruce wasn't true to character but seemed more designed to get the character out of the way as the writers couldn't think what to do with him

Yeah, I will say that one of my least favourite aspects of TDKR is how clearly Gotham = New York. I think the Crysler building was even in one shot?! And scenes of the president, the bridges, Wall Street... it made it seem too much like the real world in order to make these half-formulated political parallels Nolan decided to put in there.

So I'll agree that TDK 'looked' better, and the world-building was more on-point, but the editing wasn't great - that tunnel action sequence is incoherent. But the Joker was amazing obviously, and the first two acts (aside from Rachel being awfully written) were solid.

big time mate, totally totally agree. TDKR it was a massive massive let down and the decisions made in pre-production kind of astonish me. dropped the baton big time.

I much prefer this interpretation over what's generally accepted about the film. As someone else replied, I think if it were true then Nolan would have made it a bit more clear with an exposition scene or a big reveal. Plus there's the fact that someone must have been keeping Bruce fed and watered after Bane had gone while he was unable to move. But it really is an excellent theory and could have added much more to the film.

surely even batman needs food and water on a daily basis, but talia's twisted plan was not to kill bruce till the very end (to feel the fire of twelve million souls he has failed) so the league must have kept him captive and alive. its all just one's interpretation, i also accept what you guys mean in terms of filming styles etc... its true films like mulholland drive got me looking deeper into the story based on visual metaphors.your assessment in that aspect is spot on.

i will certainly apologize to you, given your preference for a mature discussion. but i never insulted you have i. i agree we are here to discuss the issue and not the person. while my comment was certainly insulting, this article itself is insulting leading to criticism in some of the comments to the extent of the filmmaker being 'daft'. where you are in the right to support the cause of rebecca's opinion/criticism, i am simply doing the same for those involved in the making of the film.

sorry for the insults, i hope you will agree that you have reciprocated equal measure. granted it would be unintelligent of me to gauge your intelligence based on your commenting. i take it back.now please put this to rest.

Whilst I am struggling to find the point in the article where the author calls Mr Nolan stupid or comments on his relationships with his friends, given that you have indeed apologised above, perhaps it would be better to draw a veil and leave it there.

won't be much of a struggle to look above at daves comment seconded by rebecca . where the article is well meaning, i never insulted the author either. put it to rest, i have apologized to the person and never did insulted you originally.

Nope. I'm afraid I can't see where either of those posts calls Mr Nolan stupid or comments on his relationships either.

its just my interpretation, your ideas are equally thought provoking. i did read your earlier post and i too was taken aback when i first saw the scene where joseph gordon levitt (blake) so easily identified bruce as the caped crusader. after all the main excitement to the previous films/comics was how the identity of the batman was unknown. but once again i will try and stretch things . one of batman's methods of keeping his id a secret was to speak in a different tone than his usual bruce voice. in begins there is a scene when he tells rachel (clearly in bruce's voice/ not batman)"its not who you are but what you do that defines you" thats how rachel first knew it was bruce who is batman- in that sequence there is a kid who was lost who also heard the conversation.i think this kid was the young blake. in the scene in tdkr, they both make a connection being orphans (on how orphans are angry 'in the bones' which ultimately reflects on their faces).also blake tells bruce "My mom died when I was small, it was a car accident, I don't really remember it." he cannot remember because he was also hallucinating from the drugs when the accident happened. he also goes on to say that he taught himself the same face(perhaps from that day in begins not any wayne foundation event). in essence blake was bullshitting bruce on how he knew him from the wayne foundation and bruce knew this as well. blake clearly believed in the idea of batman being secret and perhaps this was the reason bruce gave him the location of the batcave in his will. additionally blake never told comm.gordon too,and its clear in the final scene in tdkr gordon said he knew 'who batman was' and blake became circumspect (although the both knew individually).in a way blake always aspired to be batman (or perhaps create a similar but new identity as robin).further the story of tdkr takes place 8 years after events of tdk. i think this was added to the script perhaps intentionally so that like the case in of talia, even blake grew from a kid to an adult during the storyline period.

not sure where i ever commented on relationships either. if you call it a terrible film, quite obvious that is was made by a terrible filmmaker. i never mentioned 'stupid', i did state insults and terrible = insult. the best way to sum it up is that dave and rebecca think the film is terrible(unintelligent/illogical) to them, suppose you should request them to apologize as well. i again reiterate that i never commented anything about you, so why have anything against me. i did apologize too as you suggested.

I have nothing against you! But I'm afraid that doesn't mean I can agree with things which are clearly not the case.

I am struggling slightly to follow your English but you certainly called both posters unintelligent and suggested that Rebecca's friends think she is glaringly unintelligent and now a stranger to them (if you are not sure where - both are a few lines directly up from here!)

The argument that disliking a film equates to personally insulting the filmmaker and therefore justifies personal insults from yourself is patently ridiculous.

ultimately they disliked what i liked .you did identify my arrogance in putting down others and i have apologized to that person for the insult, why are you stirring up things further. it does not help when you state that you cannot follow my english(you did reply in the exact context of what i had meant, so you do understand my english) and eventually call me ridiculous. go back to your own words where you cannot rely on prose style to suggest one's age and maturity. this is no formal discussion we are having. although what you have commented above surfaces as insulting, i take it that you mean well in your intentions. now please leave the matter to rest.

Once again you seem unable to distinguish between person and a product. I most certainly have not called you ridiculous! I said that the argument you appeared to be making was ridiculous.

Perhaps I should also clarify that whilst I don't like Pepsi, this does not represent a personal grudge, hatred or disparagement on my part for whoever it is that heads up Pepsi production these days.

No need to request that I let the matter rest. No further inaccurate prompts will spur no further replies!

while you certainly want to have the last say and i would be much obliged if you did so, by identifying my argument as ridiculous says a lot about me as a person. the analogy of pepsi and its consumers does not represent a personal grudge where you would expect an apology.not much to distinguish between product or person if you would expect someone to apologize and tread your own line of ethical conduct. you need not have the last say, ill state it for you - i was wrong and you were right.

Thank you.

peace !

Peace indeed!

Otherwise known as...in order.

Thank you for chiming in. :) I usually ignore those types of comments, but this case grated on me since it was a personal attack and I felt the need to defend myself (and logic!) a bit (I do think it took me more aback because DoG comments don't usually skew that way). The funny thing is that I don't actually dislike the film - I just find it to be a bit absurd in many of the sections that one post had mentioned so I wanted to throw them support.

TDKR just killed it for me. I thought it was awful after the splendid TDK.

he has an emergency beacon chip implanted in his brain and a t-1000 unit came to the rescue.

I thought it was a fun movie and held together as a whole fairly well. As genius and utterly enthralling as TDK was for the first two acts it dropped the ball terribly in the third...those boats, that rushed Two face escapade, the Gordon family who we've seen twice opening their door to recieve some news being the hostages... The Jokers climax being subsumed by the rushed 2face...Oh god I hate that act. The previous two acts were undeniably brilliant though, and I was very disappointed with the silly plot of Begins.

I enjoyed the 3rd on a pure fun basis, but don't consider it a great film, and I'm SO GLAD I'm not the only one who thought Begins was pretty damn flawed.

I'm very pleased others liked it more but I just didn't find it that engaging. I think it did do a good job of making the previously "silly" world of comics more palatable to a mainstream audience and also made established fans feel they were being taken very seriously.
But as someone who isn't in the former category and doesn't worry about the latter, I missed out on those pluses and just had a film which was ok but lacked the interest and excitement of the Dark Knight.

Urgh, he didn't retire because of Rachel, he retired because Batman was a symbol and whatever Gotham needed. And he needed to be a villain, Dent's killer, as it would ruin the justice system if it is found out that Dent is a murderer, and that would make the Joker right. Batman united the city, made Dent a hero and brought about the Dent Act, which cleaned up the city. All of this is actually in the movies if you would watch them

Also, in The Dark Knight Returns, Wayne retires, so yes it does sound like him

1) he gets back by; a: being a billionaire who is well known. b: having ties to smugglers. c: keeping a batsuit in reserve. d: stole enough cash to board a plane
2) a detective works out that a billionaire who's family was killed by mobsters and has a distinct face might be the guy who has his own tank, and fights mobsters, also the batman and bruce wayne showed up at the same time, and you have a problem with that.
4) don't talk in the theatre. his back wasn't broken, he had a dislocated vertebra.
6) he was beaten. broken. it doesn't matter if you want more joker, the actor died, the character was so beaten that 'the joker' probably hung himself.
8) getting shot in the gut isn't weak.
9) the a team didn't have stuff like this, the police were being smuggled supplies.

the rest of your list is saying what happened / personal opinion, maybe you wanted to make the list go to 10.

"as well as the delightfully thoughtful ending sequence in Florence. "

Featuring a recently deceased billionaire that had previously appeared on the front cover of Forbes and had died, with no-one staring at him and whispering to their partner "doesn't that guy over there look just like Bruce Wayne?". It'd take a day of him sitting in a cafe in Florence before it was trending on Twitter and would be a news story.

There's a few moments in movie plotting where writers have to cut corners. Not shooting the droid escape pod in Star Wars doesn't make sense (is the empire budgeting on ammo?), but there's so many in TDKR that it doesn't feel like a journey, just a series of cool scenes.

"Begins" didn't enthuse me either. As a reboot it certainly set the scene in an gritty and engaging way, but I found it kinda boring. It was like watching the first episode of a new show - all character and plot set up - it works on that level, but for me is just a precursor to the much more entertaining "TDK". "Rises" didn't capitalise on what made "TDK" work, and I found to be closer in tone to "Begins"...and really a bit dull. Some great characters but seemed muddled. Plot holes don't trouble me too much - you can always find ways to explain them (whether logically or not). As a complete trilogy it's OK, but I think there's plenty of scope for someone to one day steal the Batman crown from Nolan.

On the subject of The Dark Knight. In the UK the 2008 film still hasn't been shown on terrestrail TV. Small matter I suppose as most of us will own the Blu Ray or DVD, but seems odd considering Hunger Games (2012) premieres this weekend. Inception (2010) also hasn't been on despite most 2010 films having been on more than once. A few other Warner titles from 2008 have yet to be shown too (like Star Wars The Clone Wars film, and Get Smart). Is this just Warners pricing the UK TV channels out of the bidding for them?

Sponsored Links