-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
The Dark Knight Rises |OT2| The Legend... Continues
- Thread starter Guzim
- Start date
- Status
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
I rewatched the film four days ago and can barely remember anything about him. He's the guy that refused to come back out of his house when Gordon came knocking, right?
NotTheGuyYouKill
Member
Fair enough, what about Foley?
Foley's such a useless character. They should have brought Stephens back and kept him badass throughout the entire film.
Charles Foster Kane
Rosebud
And preferred to chase Batman instead of the people who had just occupied wallstreet and taken hostages.
Yep.
Movie needed to focus on Bruce and his core relationships to Alfred/Gordon/Fox. The fact that Alfred disappears 40 minutes in, that Gordon is bedridden for a good portion of the film, and that Fox's role is reduced to an expository character is aggravating.
If you going to make a movie about how he pushes those people away and eventually reconnects, you better reestablish those relationships in something more than offhanded ways in the last twenty minutes (or five in the case of Alfred).
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Yeah Foxx is used for exposition and more forced payoffs.
'I'm retired.'
'Well why don't you come and humor me anyway, if only so we can set up the autopilot bullshit device and this shitty new vehicle.'
'I'm retired.'
'Well why don't you come and humor me anyway, if only so we can set up the autopilot bullshit device and this shitty new vehicle.'
Reduced? That's his role in all three movies.
It bothers me because he is actually a character in TDK and has something of arc: supporting Bruce initially, disagreeing with his tactics later on, but ultimately having his faith restored in the end.
Goddamn, I miss TDK's treatment of the supporting cast (excluding Rachel).
Wrong. He had an arc in both BB and TDK. TDKR actually turns him into the exposition machine that people have joked about.
Charles Foster Kane
Rosebud
Yeah, big part of TDKR was fan service.
That's a completely different story then. Selina you could probably excise without affecting the plot or themes of the film, but Blake is integral. It's not just "cut Blake, easy fix!"
Blake is the proof of that happening!
BadAss2961
Member
I don't know about you, but I paid to see Lucius Fox Rises.
Charles Foster Kane
Rosebud
He did rise from the water.
But seriously, he was just there for expository reasons and because fans like him.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
He's a character in BB too. His being marginalised by Rutger Hauer, his peculiar interest with Bruce and eventual friendship after he saves Bruce's life, all coming together with Foxx eventually being put at the head of the Wayne board.
Yes, he's used for exposition in BB and TDK, but it feels perfunctory and forced in TDKR because that is ALL he is.
Yes, he's used for exposition in BB and TDK, but it feels perfunctory and forced in TDKR because that is ALL he is.
This is totally reductionist and misstates my argument.
I paid to watch Batman; that includes his interactions with developed characters who help flesh him out (by acting as support or foils) and are more than megaphones designed to deliver Nolan's overwrought plot.
Charles Foster Kane
Rosebud
Such a pity.
Yeah, I should have added he was a character in BB as well.
I know some people think that Bruce gets a little lost in TDK, but BB/TDK as a whole do a much better job balancing their ensemble than TDKR, where all the returning players are marginalized (or feel like parodies of themselves).
But I don't buy Blake as a proof of that transition. I understand that's what the movie wants you to walk away with, but I don't think the writing supports it. He isn't developed enough as an individual and his interaction with Bruce isn't extensive enough for me to understand that he was "inspired" by Batman in any capacity.
His actions don't feel particularly inspired by Batman; he's just a resistance fighter like everybody else (another notion that is woefully underdeveloped).
Charles Foster Kane
Rosebud
Just like Connie in The Godfather part III.
His being marginalized by Hauer is one of the clunkier scenes in the whole trilogy, it's full of weird deductions by the characters (I've just explained what the device is, why did you lose one?), it is blatant exposition, and is really only used to set up the "memo" gag for the end of the film. It's the punchline to a lame payoff joke. It's barely characterization. It's my least favorite scene in Begins.
There are a lot of lame jokes/recurring lines in BB, though; sometimes it feels like the last third of the movie is just people parroting lines they said earlier in the film. It doesn't change the fact that Lucius and Bruce have a relationship that develops in BB/TDK that isn't taken any further in TDKR.
It's sort of like Han in ROTJ; he's there purely for the fans, because his character clearly is coasting off the development/goodwill of the other two films.
Synth_floyd
Banned
The first time I saw it in the theater I didn't really like it that much. Batman is injured at the beginning, shows up for a few scenes and then gets injured again. I saw it on a plane today and it was better. I could actually understand MOST of what Bane was saying, but still not all. It's a good movie but not great.
The plot doesn't make too much sense. Why is Bane and co. bothering to have the masses revolt against the rich people if they're just going to blow up the place in a few months? Why do they feed the cops, if again, they're just going to blow up the whole place in a few months? I did like Bane as a villain though, when I could understand what he was saying.
The plot doesn't make too much sense. Why is Bane and co. bothering to have the masses revolt against the rich people if they're just going to blow up the place in a few months? Why do they feed the cops, if again, they're just going to blow up the whole place in a few months? I did like Bane as a villain though, when I could understand what he was saying.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
You're wrong. The exposition for them losing the microwave emitter came in the form of another Wayne Enterprises employee coming to Hauer in the boardroom.
'Its...'
'Missing?'
The point of Foxx finding out via Earle's questioning about the device is so Bruce can find out via Foxx (since Earle would never tell him) and discover exactly how the LoS will be distributing their poison.
He liked giving people hope before destroying them. I forget why. Probably because he's in EVIL LOVE!
Well obviously like all villains, he needed a reason to prolong his actual goal. Bane wanted to provide the illusion of hope which he considered the ultimate torture of the mind, and something far greater than physical torture before he blew up the city.
smokeymicpot
Beat EviLore at pool.
Just rewatched all 3. Rises is decent just not enough Batman/Bruce. To much time on random side shit I really don't care about Robin or Catwomen. They are cool but just give me a pay off for the characters in the past movies.
No, it's not the exposition for losing the device, it's the exposition for how the device works. He comes to Lucius and asks about the microwave emitter, Lucius describes it and then says something like, "But I thought that program was shut down? Why, did you lose one?" because he somehow intuited that knowledge based on a simple question for info about the device. And then Earle says he's firing Lucius for some reason, capped off with "Didn't you get the memo?" What memo? That he's fired? What? That scene is awful.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Bro, maybe you need to watch the movie again.
Then the executive nods.
How the fuck is that not exposition for the fact that they've lost the device?
When Earle goes to Lucius he tells him 'Tell me everything you know about TECH#1857985 or whatever the fuck it is.'
Then Foxx says, 'Why, did you lose one?'
Which is understandable.
Dude, re-read my posts, I was saying the exposition in the scene I am talking about between Lucius and Earle isn't the exposition for the device being lost. Yes, that comes earlier in the film with the executive barging in. Lucius delivers different exposition about the device before asking "Did you lose one" randomly which seems to prompt Earle to fire Lucius.
vatstep
This poster pulses with an appeal so broad the typical restraints of our societies fall by the wayside.
After seeing this once in the theatre, I liked it a lot after watching it at home tonight, I love it. It seems much more re-watchable and better paced than TDK. For a movie that's almost three hours long, it really doesn't feel that way.
The audio on the BD is phenomenal, as is with the other two in the trilogy. The LFE is beastly even on my modest HTIB setup.
The audio on the BD is phenomenal, as is with the other two in the trilogy. The LFE is beastly even on my modest HTIB setup.
That 5 minute special feature about the Chant tickled my fancy. Great stuff. What a mesmerizing soundtrack.
So I have a stupid question:
The IMAX format is 1.44:1, right? That's the aspect ratio of the image in all IMAX scenes in TDK and DKR. When viewed at home on a 16:9 conventional widescreen set, and on the Bluray, the IMAX scenes pop out of the 1.85:1 (or is it 2:39:1?) that the standard portions of the films are shot at, and take up the whole screen, at 16:9. But that's not the whole image, is it? 16:9 is wider than IMAX, so you lose a bit off the top and bottom, right?
Basically, what I'm getting at is, are the original IMAX shots basically lost, and unavailable for home viewing? Kind of sucks.
So I have a stupid question:
The IMAX format is 1.44:1, right? That's the aspect ratio of the image in all IMAX scenes in TDK and DKR. When viewed at home on a 16:9 conventional widescreen set, and on the Bluray, the IMAX scenes pop out of the 1.85:1 (or is it 2:39:1?) that the standard portions of the films are shot at, and take up the whole screen, at 16:9. But that's not the whole image, is it? 16:9 is wider than IMAX, so you lose a bit off the top and bottom, right?
Basically, what I'm getting at is, are the original IMAX shots basically lost, and unavailable for home viewing? Kind of sucks.
Mmmmm ... I think I'll give in and buy a disc after all. Trilogy set wait is too much after reading posts like these.
Trilogy set is....out already? I mean, I was looking at it at HMV today. $39.99. Unless there's a high-end CE or something planned for 2013 that I don't know about.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
artist is saying the wait for the trilogy set is too long, so he'll instead opt to pick up the movie now and perhaps the trilogy set down the road anyway.
Dude can't get enough of those bat drink coasters.
Dude can't get enough of those bat drink coasters.
Discotheque
Banned
Doing the same thing except I'll sell these films when I get the trilogy.
On a rewatch. It's not as bad as I thought but it's still disappointing and stands out like a sore thumb amongst the other two films. Takes too long to get into the groove and once it picks up there are still some silly moments scattered, and some really dumb decisions too (just the whole arc behind Blake. I know it was setup for the ending but there was little logic to it)
Love the last 12 or so minutes though honestly Batman would have been just fine ending at The Dark Knight.
I'm almost positive Gordon says something that convinces Blake while they're talking in the car. It is at the very least implied. Now we're grasping at straws folks.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
I WAS GOING TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH ABOUT HARVEY DENT, BUT PERHAPS I BETTER NOT *puts envelope away*
Who thought that was a good idea?
Who thought that was a good idea?
NotTheGuyYouKill
Member
Trilogy set is....out already? I mean, I was looking at it at HMV today. $39.99. Unless there's a high-end CE or something planned for 2013 that I don't know about.
People keep saying there's some sort of ultimate set hitting next year.
Discotheque
Banned
Not to mention Bane telling everybody HAD NO IMPACT AT ALL on the rest of the story. They should have just left that out instead of ruining TDK's perfect ending.
edit: you know what? fuck all of Bane's useless speeches on second thought. Can't believe some liked him more than Joker. I'd have preferred him mute, plus he's just completely neutered after the Talia reveal.
NotTheGuyYouKill
Member
The first fight and Bane in the prison were fantastic.
The more I think about it, the more I wish it really were two movies... there's a ton of extra stuff that could have been fleshed out. Still love the movie though.
Discotheque
Banned
Yeah I liked his monologue to Bruce in the fight and prison. But the football speech and the Harvey Dent speech were so bad. The latter especially was just meaningless tbh.
NotTheGuyYouKill
Member
It's just justification for Bane to have a bigger army to impose his will on Gotham, even if it's as flimsy as it is. All those prisoners are locked up because of the laws made in Dent's honor, if it turns out he's a monster, then he can justify letting them go in a warped sense.
Really? No impact at all? What about pushing Blake forward in his critical view of the police, as well as prompting that fantastic shackles line.
I thought reading Gordon's speech was odd, especially since Bane obviously could have been lying, but it did have a point.
Yup. Exactly.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
The whole plot device of Gordon conveniently writing out a full confession that he decided not to say (but is perfectly fine mentioning to a large audience) is ridiculous.
mechashiva
Member
The IMAX stuff goes full screen.
NotTheGuyYouKill
Member
Your shrink never told you to write letters to/about people you hate and then not mail them?
And then mail them anyway?
- Status