MovieChat Forums > The Dark Knight Rises (2012) Discussion > Your favorite and least favorite thing i...

Your favorite and least favorite thing in each film in the trilogy

posted 6 years ago by TheUltimateHippo (2250)
20 replies | jump to latest

Batman Begins:
- Favorite: The Tumbler chase after Bruce rescues Rachel from the scarecrow
- Least Favorite: Casting Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes, I didn't have a problem with the way Rachel's character was written but Katie Holmes just wasn't the right actress for the role, not very convincing as a District Attorney

The Dark Knight:
- Favorite: The interrogation scene
- Least Favorite: The fall from the penthouse, plus I just assumed that the Joker escaped in the chopper that Bruce arrived in but the way the scene ends makes it seem that Batman just abandoned all of the guests (including Dent, Alfred and US Senator Leahy) who were still being held hostage by the Joker, for all he knew the Joker could have just machine gunned them down.

The Dark Knight Rises:
- Favorite: The last 5 minutes, wraps everything up perfectly and is the most emotionally satisfying end to any trilogy, even with the Robin shout out (and no Blake IS NOT ROBIN), although the sewer fight is a very, very close second
- Least Favorite: The only real problem I have with this film is the Clean Slate Exposition, it sounded like the characters were breaking the 4th wall and talking to the audience, other than that the movie is pretty much perfect.

Finally my rankings of the Trilogy:
- The Dark Knight Rises - A+
- The Dark Knight - A+
- Batman Begins - A

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 6 years ago

BB
Favourite: Batman systematically eliminating the goons at the docks like a monster in a horror movie.
Least Favourite: I've got to agree: Holmes as Dawes was disappointing.

TDK
Favourite: The "mirror image" theme that is presented, juxtaposing Harvey (White Knight) with Batman, Two-Face himself, Joker and Batman, and so forth. It questions the duality of good and evil, the shades of grey involved, where the lines are, and what draws those lines and makes them acceptable.
Least Favourite: The lifeless nature of Gotham. After Anton Furst's amazing Gothic Batman '89 and the similarly-toned Batman Returns, after Batman Begins gave us the Kowloon slums standing in for the eerie, atmospheric, claustrophobic Narrows, Nolan made the major misstep of basically showing us Chicago/"LA from Heat". The city is so important in Batman's universe and it is grotesquely forgotten here.

DKR
Favourite: Wayne the recluse is a great starting point for some real gripping drama...
Least Favourite: ...that never goes anywhere. I don't really like this film and I was pretty disappointed by it, to be honest. It has a lot of plot holes, its story is overburdened with plots and characters, and it just disappoints me so much. All that potential and it's just blown. I can't help wondering if Nolan had a different ending in mind, using the Joker, and had to jump to make it work. If I must pick an absolutely least-favourite moment, it's definitely Blake "figuring out" Batman's identity by a "look in Wayne's eyes" followed by Bruce just basically going, "Yup, you got me. Your hunch is right."

Rankings:
-Dark Knight and Batman Begins are both A-
-Dark Knight Rises is C+

[–] TheUltimateHippo (2250) 6 years ago

Don’t worry, I have heard all of the complaints about TDKR and they aren’t legitimate and the film doesn’t have any plot holes.

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 6 years ago

I certainly disagree. There are definitely plot holes.

I'll never pretend I'm the ultimate arbiter on great cinema - if people like or love The Dark Knight Rises, I certainly can understand why they do - but I thought it wasn't as well-executed as the first two films in the Dark Knight Trilogy.

[–] TheUltimateHippo (2250) 6 years ago

It was executed just as well and in my opinion it is by far the greatest conclusion to any trilogy. It was definitely my greatest theater experience. I have heard all of the so called "plot holes" and they aren't legit, anyone who pays attention can debunk them. The biggest offender is "how did Bruce get back to Gotham"??? Just watch the first film and pay attention and it's not too hard to figure out.

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 6 years ago

I've never thought of Bruce getting back to Gotham being a plot hole. It would've been nice if they could have given more of an explanation, but I buy that Bruce is hyper-resourceful in a pinch.

No, for me the biggest thing that I can't get around is Bane bankrupting Wayne. He raids the stock exchange, hacks in, steals nothing, and nobody can even figure out what he did. It "just so happens" that after the raid Bruce Wayne has made a bunch of stupid trades, bankrupting Wayne. The plot hole is Wayne Enterprise's lawyers. They would fight the validity of those trades given Bane's very visible antics. They would fight because if Bruce goes down, that would plummet Wayne Enterprises' stock even further. If the real world is any indicator, the rich don't go bankrupt and find themselves instantly in a blacked out mansion with no resources. It all gets sown up so neatly for Bane. Too neatly. I don't buy it. Any trade made

I also mentioned that Blake "figures out" Bruce is Batman by a "look" and then Bruce cops to it without resistance. Maybe it's not really a "plot hole" since, I guess Blake might make that guess and Bruce could cave, but...it's a really, really, really, really, really big stretch and goes dead against Bruce's character.

There are other character problems - Gordon sends the cops into the sewers seems against his usual tactical, calm demeanor.

Another strange thing is Batman taking nuclear bomb disarming time out of his schedule to paint a multi-story high flaming bat on a building.

There are more things I find everywhere from annoying to aggravating about the film. To each his own, I suppose, but I was quite disappointed by the third installment of Nolan's trilogy.

[–] TheUltimateHippo (2250) 6 years ago

- The lawyers were going to fight it and Bruce was going to get his money back. That wasn't the point, Bane and Talia only needed the plan to work in the short term so that she could find out where the reactor was. Gotham was going to be blown up before Bruce's lawyers could get his money back.

- It was to show that Blake understood the pain that was going through Bruce and he knew that the best way to get through life was to put on a happy face and practice smiling in the mirror so that his foster parents would want to keep him. He became an expert on that trick and that is why he was able to recognize that Bruce was doing the same thing.

- First of all we aren't supposed to think that Gordon made a good move, secondly the same exact thing happened in the previous two movies, Gordon sent every available unit to a hospital and Loeb sent all available units to the Narrows. Just because a character doesn't do what you want them to doesn't make it a plot hole, I think the dumbest thing ever is in Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Leia is a complete dumbass by immediately trusting Finn when it very easily could have been a setup (kind of like what happened in Total Recall), Finn could have been a double agent but no she even lets him sit in on attack meetings. However just because Leia was a complete dumbass doesn't make it a plot holes.

- He needed to rally the people of Gotham together to make a stand against Bane and it was to reassure the people of Gotham that he was the hero who was protecting them the whole time and they could trust him. My theater started clapping when that happened and it was an amazing moment. Also considering what a planner Bruce was (like how he fixed the autopilot six months ago) it's not outside the realm of reason that he constructed the flaming Batsymbol a long time ago. I'm not saying he did, I'm just not accepting that he did it as soon as he got back and "wasted time"

TDKR is by far the greatest conclusion to any trilogy.

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 6 years ago

The power gets turned off at Wayne manor. I don't think it would get that far. I don't even buy it working moderately in the short term. I guess you do, and that's fine, but to me, it's still a huge plot hole.

I know that it was done to show Blake understood Wayne. It felt rushed, cheap, and shoehorned in. It makes no sense that Bruce would admit to being Batman based on one conversation. There's a lot of other stuff around Blake I find frustrating, in terms of plot, character development, pacing, etc.

Every available unit is not the same thing as literally every cop. If we aren't supposed to think that Gordon made a good move, I'd say that makes it worse. Gordon is good at his job. This is his job. If we non-Commissioner people can tell it's a bad move, Gordon shouldn't be making it. That contradicts his characterisation in both the comic books and the previous two movies of the trilogy. As a minor note, I said this was a "character problem" not a plot hole. I listed it among other problems I have with the film. I know it's not a plot hole by the technical definition, but it's still sloppy script writing and character work.

The fire bat is activated by a flare set to liquid on the ice. It's unlikely that Batman set it up ahead of time. To me, that moment is like the kamikaze attack in Star Wars: The Last Jedi - it's a really cool moment, visually stunning, but raises some serious questions plot-wise.

I don't want to give the impression that I hate everything about the movie, either. While I was disappointed by it, I liked a lot of the action, there were some thrilling moments, Hathway's Catwoman was great, I liked the ending, and the setup a lot... There's just a lot of stuff I didn't like.

[–] TheUltimateHippo (2250) 6 years ago

Right again they were going to get Bruce's money back but they would just have to go through the legal process and even though Daggett wanted it to work in the longterm Bane and Talia didn't need it to, it was all a ruse so Talia could find the reactor. Shutting the power off that early may have been a bit premature but it's a minor nitpick. Chances are the program was able to cover it's tracks and make investments in Bruce's name on days other than the day of the holdup which was going to mean it would take more time to get the whole mess sorted out.

I didn't find it rushed at all, Blake and Bruce came from the same background and it was to show that Blake understood how Bruce's mentality worked.

They actually didn't send every cop into the sewer, if you watch the scene where the Special OPs arrive there are plenty of cops in the back of that convenience store. I didn't find it sloppy at all, Gordon knew what a threat Bane was and he wasn't taking any chances.

All Bruce would have to do is just pour gas connecting the Ice to the bridge, he very easily could have set up the flaming Bat Symbol months ago or years ago and then when he was ready to light it he just poured the remaining gas to connect to the bridge. The truth is I thought TLJ was better than TFA, but it was also bad for different reasons, the first 5 minutes or so really got my attention because immediately the acting was better and Williams' score was much better than Episode VII, then Poe prank calls the First Order and I quickly discover what kind of movie I'm watching.

Sure TDKR has some minor nitpicks that you can point out, just about all movies have them, even BB and TDK and pretty much every Star Wars film (although the Disney films have far bigger problems that the OT and prequels didn't).

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 6 years ago

I don't even think the stock market plan would work short term. Here's an Atlantic article explaining why it would definitely not work:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/07/banes-plan-to-bankrupt-batman-doesnt-make-any-sense/260191/

I still don't buy the Blake stuff. To clarify: I know what it was supposed to show me, but the connection between the two feels forced and implausible. I definitely do not buy that Bruce would admit anything based off of such a small interaction.

You're right: Batman *could* have done all of that with the fire bat. But even that demands the question as to when he did it and to what end. Batman was retired and depressed for eight years. When did he put that bat there? I'm not saying he couldn't have, it's just a lot of disbelief to suspend.

The aggregate of the minor nitpicks, the major flaws, and the (to me) slipshod scripting add up to a Dark Knight trilogy ending that wasn't satisfying (for me). I respect that you love the movie, more power to you, but it just didn't work for me.

[–] ArmadilloKnight (456) 6 years ago

"I can't help wondering if Nolan had a different ending in mind, using the Joker, and had to jump to make it work."

I honestly do not think that he would risk having the Joker again. TDK was too perfect, and the Joker had reached his full potential already. TDKR was pretty much destined to be inferior to TDK. It was simply mission impossible for TDK's follow-up to surpass it. Unless Nolan had another serious stroke of genius, the Joker's participation in this movie would most likely feel downplayed if compared to his mastermind on TDK. Nolan would have at most had Joker on a cameo. I also think that he wanted to do it differently with each movie, and have a physical threat for the final movie, as he said in interviews.

[–] TheUltimateHippo (2250) 6 years ago

There's absolutely no way to know because after Nolan finished TDK he had no plans for a sequel and Inception was very much his primary focus. And TDKR is NOT inferior to TDK, it's on the same level and I think personally it's slightly higher than TDK.

[–] Ace_Spade (9552) 6 years ago

You're probably right - it's the comparison to the excellent second film that's doing this. He probably wanted to move from Joker to Bane. It's just that the Dark Knight Rises was so hit-and-miss for me that I figure something must have interfered with the scripting. It's just so (comparatively) messy.

Thing is, retrospectively, I like Batman Begins basically as much as The Dark Knight. The latter impressed me more on my first viewing, but when I think about them, I remember them as equally excellent films. Even while watching Dark Knight Rises, there were parts that weren't working for me.

[–] ss5mmyers (160) 6 years ago

Batman Begins:
Favorite: The tumbler chase
Least Favorite: The quick cut too close up fight scenes. Makes the action hard to take in.

The Dark Knight
Favorite: Heath Ledger as Joker
Least Favorite: Joker magically knowing the route they're taking Harvey Dent.

The Dark Knight Rises
Favorite: Tom Hardy as Bane
Least Favorite: Talia isn't built up as a character, just a quick reveal. The movie never really touches on the fact that Bruce caused her to be an orphan in his quest for justice after being made an orphan himself.

[–] TheUltimateHippo (2250) 6 years ago

That may have been an interesting angle to go with but I'm not sure how much of an emotional impact that would have landed considering:

- Bruce didn't actually kill Ra's he just didn't pull him off the train
- Ra's himself was trying to murder millions of innocent people while Thomas Wayne was just walking home
- Talia herself was trying to murder millions of innocent people so I doubt the audience would have sympathized with her

[–] ss5mmyers (160) 6 years ago

I was thinking it would lend more to Bruce himself realizing this was the path he was on with his desire to die in battle and coming to the realization he didn't need to be a martyr.

[–] TheUltimateHippo (2250) 6 years ago

Interesting, if done properly it could possibly work.

[–] howgamer (3933) 6 years ago

Batman Begins:
-Favorite: Scene at the docks or It's what I do that defines me followed by leap off building.
-Least Favorite: Rachel Dawes friend zoning Batman at the end because ???

The Dark Knight:
Favorite: Hit me/truck flipping scene
Least Favorite: The fall from the penthouse

The Dark Knight Rises:
Favorite: Sewer Fight
Least Favorite: Way too much, the stupidity of the CIA over the plane wreckage, Wallstreet heist followed by fraudulent trades, and Bane's death are the worst for me.

Ranking:
BB: A
TDK: A
TDKR: C

[–] TheUltimateHippo (2250) 6 years ago

There wasn't any stupidity with the plane wreckage, it didn't have to look like an accident, it just had to look like Dr. Paval was dead.

Lucius clearly said that longterm Bruce would be able to prove fraud but Talia and Bane didn't need the plan to work long term, the entire thing was so that Bruce would show Miranda the reactor.

Bane's death wasn't a problem, it may have seemed quick and abrupt but that's because at that point int he film the focus had shifted to Talia and Bane had already served his purpose (plus Bruce had already defeated him).

[–] howgamer (3933) 6 years ago

Yeah I get that we're supposed to believe all that, but it seemed silly to me.

You are 100% correct about Bane's death and exactly why I didn't like it. He served his purpose at that point in the film so rather than give him a semi-climatic death they just wrote the character out as quickly as possible.

[–] ss5mmyers (160) 6 years ago

I look at it as more of a retort to Bruce's no guns and no killing rule. Part of Bruce's arc in this is realizing Gotham doesn't have to be perfect to be good. Also, they make Bane somewhat sympathetic before he goes out and another big brawl might have wrecked that.