The Dark Knight Rises reviews

User avatar
rolotomasi99
Associate
Posts: 1924
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Re: The Dark Knight Rises reviews

Postby rolotomasi99 » Fri Jul 27, 2012 1:15 pm

ksrymy wrote:
rolotomasi99 wrote:To me THE DARK KNIGHT RISES had some really bad lows, like the low of the whole prison-pit sequence.


Oh, man, I've been waiting to talk about this scene. What a predictable crock of shit. The only reason we get it in the first place is to usher in the twist and even then it gets a little convoluted. We're supposed to witness Bruce Wayne's/Batman's rehabilitation, but it is so dragged out that it hurts. This can all be blamed on the rule of threes however. And the whole "you have to take the rope OFF" to make it across the gap was played out like a Karate Kid movie. "Remove the rope, Daniel-san." Groan.

Also, how did he recover so fast from A VERTEBRA THAT IS SO BROKEN IT BREACHED SKIN? I guess Nolan is relying on the "He's Batman" card to get away with that.

It seems like Nolan owed Tom Conti a favor and wrote the whole thing as a favor to him.

The film would be fine if Batman just rehabilitated in some foreign hospital and got all philosophical for a second.


*Spoiler*

Well, Bane breaking Batman's back was completely fan-service. If Noaln really wanted to do that, they should have had Lucius create some sort of device that was helping him walk, similar to what he did to fix his previously injured legs.

As for the prison escape part, I think it was Nolan giving us a reason why Bruce Wayne would suddenly be willing to retire as Batman. This whole time he has been caring the weight of first his parents' death and then Rachel's death. It gave him the motivation to be Batman, but when he gave up that persona he was not able to transition back to being a regular person. That was what his whole fight with Alfred was about. I think the thing about letting go of his fear and pulling himself out of that hell hole was maybe a metaphor for Bruce Wayne pulling himself away from the darkness he has been wallowing in most of his life.

Hey, I am not defending that portion of the film, I am just trying to explain why Nolan possibly put it in there.

I really wish Nolan had killed Batman. Everyone assumed he was going to do it. I do not think Batman fans would have been that upset. If anyone had the courage to kill off a major superhero, I would have thought it would be Nolan.
"When it comes to the subject of torture, I trust a woman who was married to James Cameron for three years."
-- Amy Poehler in praise of Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow

Bog
Assistant
Posts: 825
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:39 am
Location: United States

Re: The Dark Knight Rises reviews

Postby Bog » Fri Jul 27, 2012 1:13 pm

rolotomasi99 wrote:However, nothing in the rest of THE DARK KNIGHT RISES could match the opening sequence with the sky-jacking. I certainly have never seen anything quite like that in any other movie (CLIFFHANGER comes the closest, but nowhere near as cool). I wish there had been more moments like that in the film, but I appreciated what I did see.


Of course those of us more in line with BJ's overall feeling will tend to agree here and those more inclined to view this monstrosity again will adamantly disagree with the Bay similarity. For me, personally, the dichotomy in overall review of this film starts right with this quote. I've never seen such a ridiculous, silly, discombulated, and disappointing opening, especially considering how much I felt the intro to Joker/bank robbery in TDK was straight phenomenal. The film was never able to get itself up off the mat for me after that abysmal opening. Basically, rolo was so exhilarated he couldn't wait for more of the same, and all I was thinking was if I left now I'd have an extra 150 minutes of my life unwasted.

User avatar
rolotomasi99
Associate
Posts: 1924
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Re: The Dark Knight Rises reviews

Postby rolotomasi99 » Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:57 am

The Original BJ wrote:To pop in briefly...as I was watching the last action sequence in The Dark Knight Rises -- which basically amounts to a fairly extended chunk of the movie's climax -- I thought, this doesn't feel like a Christopher Nolan film. This doesn't feel like a sequence that could only exist in this movie, shot only by this director. And then I thought, this doesn't feel THAT different from the climax to your average Michael Bay flick.

And, yes, I do think the movie is better and far more in good taste than anything in Michael Bay's oeuvre. But I don't think there's anything heinous in comparing a blockbuster action movie directed by Nolan to a blockbuster action movie directed by Bay. In fact, this gets to the heart of my frustration with the recent pedestalization of Nolan and his filmmaking, that something like The Dark Knight Rises is viewed as SO profound that it shouldn't be spoken of in the same breath as action trash. Well...all I can say is, for me, the ending of The Dark Knight Rises felt a lot more like the end of a Transformers movie than the finale of, say, Children of Men.


I have to second what anonymous1980 said. While the finale does not match the heights of the action sequences in THE DARK KNIGHT or INCEPTION, it was more interesting than the over-sized destruction of THE AVENGERS finale because of how real it felt. I know they used some CGI to make the Bat soar, but they still built most of it. Also, I loved how Nolan used actual extras rather than computers in that big brawl.

However, nothing in the rest of THE DARK KNIGHT RISES could match the opening sequence with the sky-jacking. From what I have read, little CGI was used for that action scene. I certainly have never seen anything quite like that in any other movie (CLIFFHANGER comes the closest, but nowhere near as cool). I wish there had been more moments like that in the film, but I appreciated what I did see. You are right, it was no CHILDREN OF MEN. However, the studios were never going to let it be that great, no matter how much power Nolan has. INCEPTION was a success, but it was not as huge as THE DARK KNIGHT. Warner Bros wanted to make money, not be nominated for Best Picture. Even if Martin Scorsese directed a Batman film, it would never be anything other than pleasantly mainstream.
"When it comes to the subject of torture, I trust a woman who was married to James Cameron for three years."
-- Amy Poehler in praise of Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow

ksrymy
Adjunct
Posts: 1150
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:10 am
Location: Wichita, KS
Contact:

Re: The Dark Knight Rises reviews

Postby ksrymy » Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:49 am

rolotomasi99 wrote:To me THE DARK KNIGHT RISES had some really bad lows, like the low of the whole prison-pit sequence.


Oh, man, I've been waiting to talk about this scene. What a predictable crock of shit. The only reason we get it in the first place is to usher in the twist and even then it gets a little convoluted. We're supposed to witness Bruce Wayne's/Batman's rehabilitation, but it is so dragged out that it hurts. This can all be blamed on the rule of threes however. And the whole "you have to take the rope OFF" to make it across the gap was played out like a Karate Kid movie. "Remove the rope, Daniel-san." Groan.

Also, how did he recover so fast from A VERTEBRA THAT IS SO BROKEN IT BREACHED SKIN? I guess Nolan is relying on the "He's Batman" card to get away with that.

It seems like Nolan owed Tom Conti a favor and wrote the whole thing as a favor to him.

The film would be fine if Batman just rehabilitated in some foreign hospital and got all philosophical for a second.
"Men get to be a mixture of the charming mannerisms of the women they have known." - F. Scott Fitzgerald

User avatar
rolotomasi99
Associate
Posts: 1924
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Re: The Dark Knight Rises reviews

Postby rolotomasi99 » Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:35 am

Sabin wrote:I like rollercoasters. For me, The Dark Knight was a rollercoaster. It has highs and lows, the tension builds, and it was always thrilling. And while The Dark Knight Rises may have more action than its two predecessors, none of it felt as special as The Dark Knight's "little action set pieces." There may be a lot of dialogue but it didn't mean any more to me than the monotonous, unexceptional action, none of which I found inspired or terribly entertaining. My favorite scene is still when Christian Bale first meets Anne Hathaway. So, again: I'm not saying I don't like rollercoasters. I'm saying, there was nothing in The Dark Knight Rises that kept me along for the ride.

To me THE DARK KNIGHT RISES had some really bad lows, like the low of the whole prison-pit sequence. That portion should have completely been chucked. It brought the movie to a grinding halt when it should have been building to its climax.

Like you, I loved the moment when Bruce Wayne and Selina Kyle first meet. I wanted more of Wayne/Kyle and Batman/Catwoman. If Nolan had gotten rid of Cotillard's character, he could have replaced her with Kyle as the romantic interest.

Sabin wrote:What I didn't like about Inception is that it felt to me like two films:
The first film is a pretty cool Bond-like caper about traipsing about in someone's mind. The second film was an incredibly pretentious story about a man who cannot let go of his dead wife. Because the latter film is so emotionally constipated and so far from what Christopher Nolan does well, I did not care about any of that stuff.

All of Nolan's films are about men dealing with a dead woman -- wives in MEMENTO, THE PRESTIGE, and INCEPTION; a girlfriend in the last two Batman movies; a mother (and father) in BATMAN BEGINS; and a young unknown girl in INSOMNIA. You say Nolan is no good at this sort of thing, but he sure likes to come back to it time after time.

I found that scene when DiCaprio watches Cotillard jump to her death emotionally devastating. The pain on his face was so raw, and holds up on multiple viewings. Then again, I thought DiCaprio should have been nominated that year for his performance in SHUTTER ISLAND and should have won for J. EDGAR, so maybe I just have a blind-spot when it comes to DiCaprio's performances.

Sabin wrote:And the end result of Inception is a film so complicated that every scene requires its actors to explain what they are doing at ridiculous lengths. No scene can just exist without constant narration.

I agree with you 100% on this. There was so much unnecessary exposition. For me, it is what keeps INCEPTION from being a truly great film. I always assumed Nolan put the explanations in there to please the studios. There was no way they were going to fund something so ambitious and expensive if the nuckle draggers who usually go to action movies would be turned off by the film because they found it confusing. I doubt the man that wrote MEMENTO, which requires multiple viewings to unpack everything, wanted to have all those annoying discussions. His movie was well written enough for smarter cinema-goers to follow without those moments where he makes the characters explain it for the morons in the audience.

Sabin wrote:I've gone into what I don't like about The Dark Knight Rises but the reason I feel like it's essentially a Michael Bay film is b/c nothing really makes a lot of sense, there's nothing emotional to engage with, and more to the point it's cut like a montage with constant music and every moment is dialed to 11. That's Michael Bay.


I guess this sums up the fundamental differences in our view of this film. I think THE DARK KNIGHT RISES, even with all its flaws, is as good as a James Cameron film. His movies are often loud and confusing, but still meet a certain level of quality I have never seen in a Michael Bay film. At the very worst, THE DARK KNIGHT RISES is about as good as a Tony Scott film -- which is still better than a Michael Bay film. Maybe I just loathe Michael Bay more than most people. He really is the worst!
"When it comes to the subject of torture, I trust a woman who was married to James Cameron for three years."
-- Amy Poehler in praise of Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow

anonymous1980
Laureate
Posts: 5224
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
Location: Manila
Contact:

Re: The Dark Knight Rises reviews

Postby anonymous1980 » Fri Jul 27, 2012 4:20 am

The Original BJ wrote:To pop in briefly...as I was watching the last action sequence in The Dark Knight Rises -- which basically amounts to a fairly extended chunk of the movie's climax -- I thought, this doesn't feel like a Christopher Nolan film. This doesn't feel like a sequence that could only exist in this movie, shot only by this director. And then I thought, this doesn't feel THAT different from the climax to your average Michael Bay flick.

And, yes, I do think the movie is better and far more in good taste than anything in Michael Bay's oeuvre. But I don't think there's anything heinous in comparing a blockbuster action movie directed by Nolan to a blockbuster action movie directed by Bay. In fact, this gets to the heart of my frustration with the recent pedestalization of Nolan and his filmmaking, that something like The Dark Knight Rises is viewed as SO profound that it shouldn't be spoken of in the same breath as action trash. Well...all I can say is, for me, the ending of The Dark Knight Rises felt a lot more like the end of a Transformers movie than the finale of, say, Children of Men.


I have to sort of disagree with this. I thought the final action sequence is very much Nolan-esque in that it's very much coherent, the colors are muted and CGI is barely noticeable. I mean, the Bat doesn't look the least bit CGI. I think Nolan is an excellent filmmaker but I'm no Nolan fan boy either.

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4205
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: The Dark Knight Rises reviews

Postby The Original BJ » Thu Jul 26, 2012 7:11 pm

To pop in briefly...as I was watching the last action sequence in The Dark Knight Rises -- which basically amounts to a fairly extended chunk of the movie's climax -- I thought, this doesn't feel like a Christopher Nolan film. This doesn't feel like a sequence that could only exist in this movie, shot only by this director. And then I thought, this doesn't feel THAT different from the climax to your average Michael Bay flick.

And, yes, I do think the movie is better and far more in good taste than anything in Michael Bay's oeuvre. But I don't think there's anything heinous in comparing a blockbuster action movie directed by Nolan to a blockbuster action movie directed by Bay. In fact, this gets to the heart of my frustration with the recent pedestalization of Nolan and his filmmaking, that something like The Dark Knight Rises is viewed as SO profound that it shouldn't be spoken of in the same breath as action trash. Well...all I can say is, for me, the ending of The Dark Knight Rises felt a lot more like the end of a Transformers movie than the finale of, say, Children of Men.

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7397
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: The Dark Knight Rises reviews

Postby Sabin » Thu Jul 26, 2012 6:22 pm

rolotomasi99 wrote
I am not sure I totally follow your rollercoaster analogy. Are you saying you hate rollercoasters or you hate rollercoasters that you fall off of? While THE DARK KNIGHT RISES had some great action sequences, it sure seemed like it had less action than THE AVENGERS. In fact, that is what amazed me about THE DARK KNIGHT making more than $500 m. It had very little big action set pieces. The car chase in the middle was the most action packed moment, but that is nothing compared to the wall-to-wall destruction of the TRANSFORMERS films. While THE DARK KNIGHT RISES certainly has more action than its two predecessors, it still is filled with a whole lot of talking. Only Nolan is able to put that much dialogue scenes in an action film and still have audiences turn out in droves.

No, I like rollercoasters. For me, The Dark Knight was a rollercoaster. It has highs and lows, the tension builds, and it was always thrilling. And while The Dark Knight Rises may have more action than its two predecessors, none of it felt as special as The Dark Knight's "little action set pieces." There may be a lot of dialogue but it didn't mean any more to me than the monotonous, unexceptional action, none of which I found inspired or terribly entertaining. My favorite scene is still when Christian Bale first meets Anne Hathaway. So, again: I'm not saying I don't like rollercoasters. I'm saying, there was nothing in The Dark Knight Rises that kept me along for the ride.

rolotomasi99
Ultimately, I am not trying to say your opinion of THE DARK KNIGHT RISES is wrong. If you said you do not like action films, I would get why you did not like THE DARK KNIGHT RISES. This comes back to me not understanding your rollercoaster analogy. You said you like THE DARK KNIGHT. While this film is not as good as its predecessor, I did not think it was inferior enough to actually be called bad. However, if you thought INCEPTION was bad because it was too overwhelming, then I can see why you would not like this equally overwhelming (though far less tightly paced) film.
I am just clearly not understanding how you can compare any moment of THE DARK KNIGHT RISES to anything Michael Bay has made. Comparing any filmmaker to Michael Bay is the cinematic equivalent of calling someone Hitler -- you only do it to someone you really hate. Nolan loves the art of cinema and storytelling too much to be called Hitler.

Christopher Nolan likes Michael Bay. He has said this in writing. He's a fan. So is Steven Spielberg. At this point, I think Christopher Nolan films feel like Michael Bay films. On the basis of Inception and TDKR alone. And when i say they feel like Michael Bay films, what I mean is even though the way they make movies is somewhat difficult from their inception (no pun) to execution, the feeling is just as overwhelming. No highs or lows. Just constant pulsing forward movement.

What I didn't like about Inception is that it felt to me like two films:
The first film is a pretty cool Bond-like caper about traipsing about in someone's mind. The second film was an incredibly pretentious story about a man who cannot let go of his dead wife. Because the latter film is so emotionally constipated and so far from what Christopher Nolan does well, I did not care about any of that stuff. And the end result of Inception is a film so complicated that every scene requires its actors to explain what they are doing at ridiculous lengths. No scene can just exist without constant narration. So for me, I didn't have that much fun in Inception because it never felt like a movie. It felt like a justification. Admittedly, it's a somewhat cool-looking justification with some cool scenes. Has nothing to do with not liking action films. That's my big problem with Inception.

I've gone into what I don't like about The Dark Knight Rises but the reason I feel like it's essentially a Michael Bay film is b/c nothing really makes a lot of sense, there's nothing emotional to engage with, and more to the point it's cut like a montage with constant music and every moment is dialed to 11. That's Michael Bay.
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

User avatar
rolotomasi99
Associate
Posts: 1924
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Re: The Dark Knight Rises reviews

Postby rolotomasi99 » Wed Jul 25, 2012 11:32 am

Sabin wrote:Then let me ask you: are you a Spider-Man 3 apologist? Will you go to bat for that movie? It certainly bit off more than it could chew. It was incredibly ambitious. It tried to tackle Venom, Sandman, and Harry Osborn as The Green Goblin (I don't recall if he ever referred to himself as "Hobgoblin" in the film, but Harry Osborn was never that character.). The only difference between the two is that The Dark Knight Rises takes itself far more seriously. Both films are unenjoyable messes, and keep in mind: whatever you're shaking your head and thinking when you think of how Spider-Man 3 is a different kind of failure than The Dark Knight Rises, that is exactly the kind of film I'm saying that Nolan's film is. The only difference I can see is that Spider-Man 3 didn't have a finished script going in.


I dislike SPIDER-MAN 3 for the same reason I dislike the two Schumacher Batman films, I do not like campy comic book films. I have no problem with comedic comic book films like SCOTT PILGRIM VS THE WORLD, but I cannot stand movies that tell bad jokes. The absolute worst scene in SPIDER-MAN 3 was the dance sequence, but everything about emo Peter Parker was cringe-worthy. The first two Spider-Man films had silly moments, but they were actually funny.
Also, SPIDER-MAN 3 has the type of plot hole that ruins a movie for me. The Osborne's butler knew Norman was the Green Goblin and Spider-Man did not kill him, yet he kept that information from Harry even though the butler knew it was making Harry a danger to himself and others. Only at the end does he finally say something. It was ridiculous!
SPIDER-MAN 3 does have at least one really good moment, when Cain Marko has first turned into Sandman and he is trying to solidify himself. I thought the music and visual effects came together nicely to make that a very touching scene. I wanted more of that and less of jokes clearly aimed at the kiddie crowd.

Sabin wrote:Nolan wants everyone to feel like they've just been through a rollercoaster. And so I'll just say to you if you enjoyed watching The Dark Knight Rises, then all the power to you. I can't tell someone they didn't enjoy a rollercoaster. For me, the only way a movie can be a rollercoaster is if I care what's going on on any level, and I did not. Because nobody acted in a credible fashion, nobody was terribly likable, there weren't any individual scenes that were especially interesting, and it went on forever, and loud loud loud. This is a huge rollercoaster, no doubt. But Nolan forgot to make sure there was something solid in place to keep people from falling off of it.


I am not sure I totally follow your rollercoaster analogy. Are you saying you hate rollercoasters or you hate rollercoasters that you fall off of? While THE DARK KNIGHT RISES had some great action sequences, it sure seemed like it had less action than THE AVENGERS. In fact, that is what amazed me about THE DARK KNIGHT making more than $500 m. It had very little big action set pieces. The car chase in the middle was the most action packed moment, but that is nothing compared to the wall-to-wall destruction of the TRANSFORMERS films. While THE DARK KNIGHT RISES certainly has more action than its two predecessors, it still is filled with a whole lot of talking. Only Nolan is able to put that much dialogue scenes in an action film and still have audiences turn out in droves.
Like I said, I really thought the movie needed some tightening of its timeline. However, its action sequences were coherent and thrilling, and its character development was more than I can expect from any other action film. The acting was better than some recent Best Picture nominees, and it had something interesting to say about the world we live in. Not since DISTRICT 9 have I seen an action film tackle such big issues. Neither film solved those issues by the time the credits rolled, but I appreciated how it fit into the overall storyline.

Ultimately, I am not trying to say your opinion of THE DARK KNIGHT RISES is wrong. If you said you do not like action films, I would get why you did not like THE DARK KNIGHT RISES. This comes back to me not understanding your rollercoaster analogy. You said you like THE DARK KNIGHT. While this film is not as good as its predecessor, I did not think it was inferior enough to actually be called bad. However, if you thought INCEPTION was bad because it was too overwhelming, then I can see why you would not like this equally overwhelming (though far less tightly paced) film.
I am just clearly not understanding how you can compare any moment of THE DARK KNIGHT RISES to anything Michael Bay has made. Comparing any filmmaker to Michael Bay is the cinematic equivalent of calling someone Hitler -- you only do it to someone you really hate. Nolan loves the art of cinema and storytelling too much to be called Hitler.
"When it comes to the subject of torture, I trust a woman who was married to James Cameron for three years."
-- Amy Poehler in praise of Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow

User avatar
rolotomasi99
Associate
Posts: 1924
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:13 pm
Location: n/a
Contact:

Re: The Dark Knight Rises reviews

Postby rolotomasi99 » Wed Jul 25, 2012 10:42 am

ksrymy wrote:I consider a fanboy to be anyone who has such an undying love for something that they reject any negative opinion about it. My roommate is a massive Batman nerd and has been since he was a little kid. I said I felt the ending was cheap, but the movie was solid throughout. He said that my opinion merited no discussion because it was wrong.


First of all, thank you for the kind words ksrymy.

Secondly, your definition of fanboy seems fair, but it just illustrates my point that everyone uses it differently. For example, many folks cite how much the Batman fanboys hate the Joel Schumacher Batman films, particularly BATMAN AND ROBIN. It seems other folks use fanboy as just a pejorative term for fans of geek culture, specifically comic-books and super heroes. I prefer your definition, though.
"When it comes to the subject of torture, I trust a woman who was married to James Cameron for three years."
-- Amy Poehler in praise of Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow

rudeboy
Adjunct
Posts: 1323
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 8:00 am
Location: Singapore
Contact:

Re: The Dark Knight Rises reviews

Postby rudeboy » Wed Jul 25, 2012 10:32 am

Penelope is on the money. For me, this is the first fully enjoyable, genuinely thrilling movie in the series. Without a Heath Ledger at the centre to dwarf all around it it tells a convoluted but compelling story in pretty expert style. Its Bale's best performance in the role by a mile, and he's ably supported all round, with Levitt and Hathaway the standouts. Only Marion Cotillard lets the side down. For once I'm very happy to disagree with so many people here - I had a fabulous time at this film.

User avatar
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 5830
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Re: The Dark Knight Rises reviews

Postby flipp525 » Wed Jul 25, 2012 9:46 am

The Original BJ wrote:Oh, and I do wonder what Penelope, wherever he may be, would have to say about this film.

Since you asked, here's Penelope's take: "8/10 Now, I've never been much of a fan of the Batman film, particularly Christopher Nolan's films, which have been, essentially, loud, incoherent and nihilist. The latest film is loud, but is quite coherent, with a story that's both easy to follow and complex (and if you're a student of the French Revolution, you'll get a real kick out of the film). Solid performances and impressive visual effects."
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."

-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7397
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: The Dark Knight Rises reviews

Postby Sabin » Tue Jul 24, 2012 10:10 pm

rolotomasi99 wrote
2. Other People’s Reaction To The Movie
What I really do not understand is being angry at a film that tries something ambitious and fails. It is not as if Nolan bit off more than he could chew. He simply knew the studio would allow him to say only so much on matters of socio-economic justice and the voice of the people vs the government. He said what he could while still finding time to slip in the action scenes required of a Batman film. He certainly is asking us to think at the movies more than most folks in the U.S. are used to. JURASSIC PARK might focus on the dangers of genetic engineering or DISTRICT 9 brings up racism and poverty, but both are ultimately sci-fi action flicks. Asking the audience to think about certain general topics (terrorism, class inequality, government authority, etc) without telling them what they should think is not the same as a plot hole.


Basically you're saying is this:

"It's not that Nolan tried to tackle too much, but rather that he did what the studios would allow him to do."

And then you make a point at the end that I don't entirely understand because Nolan is not asking us to think and there are countless plot holes in the film, but we won't get into that...

Your first point about a filmmaker biting off more than they can chew, sure. That's how I felt about Batman Begins. A difficult prospect to be sure, but admirable, promising, and I give it the benefit of the doubt. Then let me ask you: are you a Spider-Man 3 apologist? Will you go to bat for that movie? It certainly bit off more than it could chew. It was incredibly ambitious. It tried to tackle Venom, Sandman, and Harry Osborn as The Green Goblin (I don't recall if he ever referred to himself as "Hobgoblin" in the film, but Harry Osborn was never that character.). The only difference between the two is that The Dark Knight Rises takes itself far more seriously. Both films are unenjoyable messes, and keep in mind: whatever you're shaking your head and thinking when you think of how Spider-Man 3 is a different kind of failure than The Dark Knight Rises, that is exactly the kind of film I'm saying that Nolan's film is. The only difference I can see is that Spider-Man 3 didn't have a finished script going in.

I don't for one second think that Christopher Nolan was holding his punches because audiences can't handle a deep conversation about what is going on. There aren't many people in Hollywood on his level of power. Right now, Nolan has Spielberg power and everything is going to carry the title PRODUCED BY CHRISTOPHER NOLAN for a bit. I think he honestly thought this was sufficient. This is not the work of a writer or a director but rather a producer who has a vision of what his film needed to look and feel like, and so polishing the individual moments just kind of went unchecked. Nolan is a showman who is interested in creating a ride. That much is clear. He wants everyone to feel like they've just been through a rollercoaster. And so I'll just say to you if you enjoyed watching The Dark Knight Rises, then all the power to you. I can't tell someone they didn't enjoy a rollercoaster. For me, the only way a movie can be a rollercoaster is if I care what's going on on any level, and I did not. Because nobody acted in a credible fashion, nobody was terribly likable, there weren't any individual scenes that were especially interesting, and it went on forever, and loud loud loud. This is a huge rollercoaster, no doubt. But Nolan forgot to make sure there was something solid in place to keep people from falling off of it.


rolotomasi99 wrote
3. My Thoughts On Christopher Nolan
People seem to fall into a love-him-or-hate-him dichotomy with Christopher Nolan, and this board is no exception. I have made clear how much I love Nolan’s films, from his three small thrillers to his four large action movies. I have seen all of his films except FOLLOWING. Nolan clearly is very interested in the psyche. All his films tackle issues of identity -- who a person is and who they present themselves to be. I appreciate that Nolan wants the audience to ponder certain questions, but never expects us to accept a definitive answer.

I'm pretty much the only DKR hater on this Board right now, so I'll just answer directly. I loved Nolan. Following is just a calling card really. Batman Begins has moments. Insomnia is pretty cool. Memento, The Prestige, The Dark Knight...awesome. To put things in perspective, I didn't really enjoy Inception because I found it rather monotonously edited and sequenced, I didn't like how bloated the narrative was, and I didn't really care what happened, but I'll certainly concede that it looked cool and there were some cool moments. The Dark Knight Rises does not look cool and there are no cool moments really. Maybe one or two. After the plethora of iconic Batman imagery in The Dark Knight, that is a substantial letdown. Also, outside of Memento, I don't think that Nolan is very interested in the psyche or identity. I just think he makes films that look like they're interested in the psyche or identity. It's all surface.

You say that his style is not overwhelming like Tim Burton or Steven Spielberg. I can't think of anything more overwhelming than Christopher Nolan movie. He definitely has a style at this point as singular as either of those filmmakers, and on the basis of The Dark Knight Rises, it's definitely as overwhelming as any Michael Bay movie. There is a laziness to story in this film that is as hacktacular as any Michael Bay movie.

I understand you love the film and I read your entire post. I'm not going to respond to everything and turn it into a debate, but I'll just say if you liked it you liked it. To me, it felt like the work of someone who didn't understand why I liked his earlier work.
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

ksrymy
Adjunct
Posts: 1150
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:10 am
Location: Wichita, KS
Contact:

Re: The Dark Knight Rises reviews

Postby ksrymy » Tue Jul 24, 2012 5:35 pm

rolotomasi99 wrote:6. My Thoughts On The Epithet “Fanboy”
I asked this question before but never received a satisfactory answer: what is a fanboy? I know what it means, but I keep seeing people throwing it around in a context that does not seem correct. I always thought a fanboy was someone who usually is a fan of sci-fi/fantasy media (print or film), and who has little to no interest outside of those two genres.


I consider a fanboy to be anyone who has such an undying love for something that they reject any negative opinion about it. My roommate is a massive Batman nerd and has been since he was a little kid. I said I felt the ending was cheap, but the movie was solid throughout. He said that my opinion merited no discussion because it was wrong.

Wrong.

We all see that the film isn't perfect but to people like my roommate it is Citizen Kane.

Now Batman fanboys and Nolan fanboys are not one in the same. I find that Nolan fanboys tend to think he's a modern-day Orson Welles. They think director and picture are the same thing. Nolan did not get nominated for Inception because a vast majority of the impressive shots (save for the hallway fight) were CGI done by the visual effects crew, art director, DoP, etc. with Nolan input nonetheless. This goes to say a lot about the action genre in and of itself though. An action movie has to be an epic (Gladiator, Crouching Tiger, Ben-Hur, etc.) to even get noticed. The Dark Knight was a superhero movie which is one of the most generic action movies available. It's along the lines of all those one ordinary man vs. terrorists films that exploded after Die Hard came out. I find Nolan's writing and ideas to be much more effective than his directing and the effects of it are wearing thin. He wants every film with dark lighting (Inception being the only film that is bright some of the time). And it's not a pitch black kind of dark but a "the light bulbs in this expensive hotel or street light have 20 watts in them" kind of dark. His leads seem to always be the same character. They are all male who looks down and look up with a scowl or a squint. And there's hardly a nice female character in any of his films. Now, I'm not saying he's bordering on Lars von Trier misogyny levels, but the women (save for Ellen Page in, you guessed it, Inception) are also pseudo-antogonists with only a few redeeming qualities. I have not seen Following so I can't judge on the women there. Now that I realize it, I think I may have problems with his characters, but the actors in the roles always seem to overcome to monotonous characters he's written yet again.

Now, most Nolan fanboys aren't you. From what I've read by you, you are an actual film fan who can spot flaws in any beloved film and you are quite intelligent. Nolan fanboys would scoff at everything in that last paragraph, but you are able to accept my valid (re: not "wrong") opinion.

If you would like me to clear anything up, I'd be more than happy to do just that, rolo.
"Men get to be a mixture of the charming mannerisms of the women they have known." - F. Scott Fitzgerald

Greg
Tenured
Posts: 2735
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: Greg
Contact:

Re: The Dark Knight Rises reviews

Postby Greg » Tue Jul 24, 2012 4:49 pm

I don't know where this places me in Nolan fanboydome. I loved Inception and saw it twice; but, I have yet to see any of his Batman films, as they just failed to generate enough interest in me.
"Wall Street is not the solution to our problem. Wall Street is the problem!"

Ronald Reagan, corrected


Return to “2012”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest