The Dark Knight Rises *SPOILERS*

[CelticPredator]

if somebody was laughing at bane in the IMAX i was in i would have shot the place up.

I smell an infraction here, but I think it'll be justified.

You're a ****ing idiot. Shut up.

 

[CelticPredator]

Sounds like an Asian cuisine or some ****. "Could I have the Chicken Thalia pls."


That or a gay dude pronouncing "Talia".



I dunno. Is it really nitpicking when someone points out that Bane and Talia are in control of the situation but act like dumb ****s when the ball is in their court (or in this case a neutron bomb)?

Or is the audience supposed to just be oblivious and be like, "OH DAMN, OH SNAP STAP DAT BOMB B-MAN U GOT 11 MINUTES LEFT!" ? I thought these Nolan movies were more than "leave your brain at the door" type entertainment? They make you think right?

I get what you're saying CP but I get the feeling you have problems (character motivations, poopy Bane and Talia, dumb plots) as well but you're in it for "da spectacle and splosions" which isn't a bad thing.

Yes. And no. People *think* Nolan films are insanely deep and full of crap. But they're not. They're just movies. Meant to entertain you. He usually takes a cleaver route in telling a story. But his stories are normally very simple.

He's a big picture guy. He wanted to make a big film. There will be problems.

But I didn't see this movie for Bane's Plot. I saw it to see Batman rise.

 

[thenammagazine]

if somebody was laughing at bane in the IMAX i was in i would have shot the place up.

More like you would've hunched down in your seat, cowering into as small a ball as possible, afraid of getting your ass beat by the 13-year-old girl next to you complaining to her friends about having to sit next to a sweaty fanboy who smells like bologna and gym socks.

 

[CelticPredator]

Damn right.

 

[DiFabio]

I was waiting for people to jump on that. Surprised it took so long.

 

[CelticPredator]

The Coloradian took it upon himself to go after that ****ing moron.

 

[intothevoid]

I guess,
difference is that they are religious extremists,

Talia just had daddy Issues and Bane had Friendzoned issues lol


I just didn't like that they were willing to die,
if they all die, who was going to kill Batman? Bane pretty much said so, when Gotham is destroyed he is going to kill him, and Bane even left him his own personal caretaker, just so that Bruce would see the destruction,

i guess you could say Bruce would die of old age there, but still,

Bane never said he would kill Wayne once Gotham is destroyed, he said Wayne would have his permission to die - pay attention

And extremists are extremists, there is nothing Islamic about Al Qaeda. The fact they were prepared to die for their cause was perfectly in keeping with any extremist ideological group

 

[DarthBakura]

It is sort of nuts that Batman, Ra's and the ninjas just don't blow up while they're on the train.

Sort of like Senator Kelly from the first X-Men, but only bloodier.

Hahahahaha!

Batgoop, Ahnuld style!


Oh, wait... wait, I think he's trying to tell us something...

Speaking of the ninjas, where the hell did they go? Weren't they on the train when Ra's boarded? I seem to recall Batman goes straight into his ass whooping, entirely skipping over the ninjas. Is he just faster than Chuck Norris or something?

 

[DiFabio]

Bane never said he would kill Wayne once Gotham is destroyed, he said Wayne would have his permission to die - pay attention

And extremists are extremists, there is nothing Islamic about Al Qaeda. The fact they were prepared to die for their cause was perfectly in keeping with any extremist ideological group

Yeah, that's not really a plot hole, Void is right. I took it as, once Bruce witnesses Gotham's destruction then he could either kill himself or rot away in the prison.

I completely understand Blackmask's opinion of not liking Bane and Talia's motivations and decisions though. Both the ones that are backed up in the script as well as the ones that are either stupid or considered plot holes. It doesn't matter if it's explained or not, that doesn't stop it from being bad to people. That's definitely one of my problems with them.

It didn't help that I'm not really a fan of Ra's Al Ghul, Talia and Bane in the comics in the first place. I'm really not too fond of them. I love Denny O' Neil but I never "got" Ra's Al Ghul. Yeah, I know what his deal is with the environment and saving the world but I never dug it. After Batman Begins, the Liam Neeson Ra's Al Ghul was really the only one that I liked so I sort have had hope that Talia and Bane would at least be better than their comic counter parts (even though I would have preferred Batman's Rogues from Gotham) when they were announced. For me anyway.

After the film though, they weren't anywhere near acceptable to me. I REALLY despised these interpretations, especially Bane's. I think Bane's origin and motivations from the comics is a good one, that's one of the elements of the character (despite not really liking him) that I can appreciate. He's fine up until you get him involved with Ra's and the gang from that comic, "Bane of the Demon". This film butchers him though. I'd say it's just as extreme as the Batman and Robin interpretation of Bane except in the opposite direction. He's a silly character even though Nolan obviously tries to play it straight.

I think a live action Bane had potential if you stripped him of the LOS/Ra's Al Ghul relation, got rid of the contrived life support mask and made Bane his own man. Keep his little prison, focus on him being a mercenary, take out the cult **** and the cliched "I'm a dastardly villain" crap and I think he had great potential. I was one of those folks that thought going back to the LOS was a baaaaad thing. I got my dose of them in Begins, that was enough. Then TDKR lays them on you again but this time, even harder. So yeah, definitely a hard pill to swallow.

To me, Talia was in there for shock value, plain and simple (even though most people knew she was in it from Day 1 anyway). Just a nice way of tying up the three films. She's almost as 1-dimensional as Bane, unless you count her Miranda Tate as unique entity. Would the film have been better if you chopped her and the LOS out of the "full circle" and wrote around them? I think so.

 

[intothevoid]

I'm surprised you don't like the characters in the comics, I always loved the Ras/Talia stories and Bane was interesting to me but never really written well apart from Knightfall and bane of the demon

The movie Bane to me is far more interesting than any comic or cartoon incarnation

 

[jye4ever]

Yeah, that's not really a plot hole, Void is right. I took it as, once Bruce witnesses Gotham's destruction then he could either kill himself or rot away in the prison.

I completely understand Blackmask's opinion of not liking Bane and Talia's motivations and decisions though. Both the ones that are backed up in the script as well as the ones that are either stupid or considered plot holes. It doesn't matter if it's explained or not, that doesn't stop it from being bad to people. That's definitely one of my problems with them.

It didn't help that I'm not really a fan of Ra's Al Ghul, Talia and Bane in the comics in the first place. I'm really not too fond of them. I love Denny O' Neil but I never "got" Ra's Al Ghul. Yeah, I know what his deal is with the environment and saving the world but I never dug it. After Batman Begins, the Liam Neeson Ra's Al Ghul was really the only one that I liked so I sort have had hope that Talia and Bane would at least be better than their comic counter parts (even though I would have preferred Batman's Rogues from Gotham) when they were announced.

After the film though, they weren't anywhere near acceptable to me. I REALLY despised these interpretations, especially Bane's. I think Bane's origin and motivations from the comics is a good one, that's one of the elements of the character (despite not really liking him) that I'm fond of. He's fine up until you get him involved with Ra's and the gang from that comic, "Bane of the Demon". This film butchers him though. I'd say it's just as extreme as the Batman and Robin interpretation of Bane except in the opposite direction. He's a silly character even though Nolan obviously tries to play it straight.

I think a live action Bane had potential if you stripped him of the LOS/Ra's Al Ghul relation, got rid of the contrived life support mask and made Bane his own man. Keep his little prison, focus on him being a mercenary, take out the cult **** and the cliched "I'm a dastardly villain" crap and I think he had great potential.

Talia was in there for shock value you, plain and simple (even though most people knew she was in it from Day 1 anyway). Just a nice way of tying up the three films. She's almost as 1-dimensional as Bane, unless you count her Miranda Tate as unique entity.

The whole Ras Back story is not what I pictured when Ras told his story to Bruce in Batman Begins.

I felt sorry for Ras in Begins, now I don't know if I do

What's interesting though is that Talia and Wayne both lost their parents.

 

[DiFabio]

I love Batman: The Animated series, nearly every episode. The ones that involved Ra's, Talia, "detective", "beloveds", deserts, Lazarus pits, shirtless sword battles and arguments over ideologies however were instant turn offs for me. After one viewing, those would be the ones I'd skip after seeing the title cards.

Likewise, I remember the disappointment I had with Arkham City when it turns out that Ra's and the gang are the over reaching masterminds in the story.

The only time I enjoyed it was when the twist occurred with Ra's in Batman Begins, that was about as much as I could take. The Liam Neeson Ra's, to me, is the only one that I liked. Of course after I saw the film, I went back in 2005 and looked at stories and comics I missed. I found I wasn't missing out on too much and that the Neeson Ra's was actually superior in my eyes. It was probably because he was so simple and straightforward and that other worldly crap was taken out. After Begins though I had my fill, enough Ra's and Co. It worked extremely well fusing it into Bruce Wayne's origin story, brilliantly even but I felt it was time to move onto the "better stuff". Film/Live action got to see Ra's Al Ghul, that was it.


So, for me when you're coming off TDK and you've dealt with Ra's in a previous film, I don't know, the villains didn't capture my interest once they were announced. I kept an open mind of course but not only were they characters that I didn't enjoy, the end result/final product after all the hype and anticipation was actually worse for me than those characters I disliked in the other mediums and stories.

Those extremist views, the cult like attitudes that Bane, Talia and the villains possessed and the scenarios playing out just like they did in Begins only more grandiose and more stupid just didn't do anything for me. I realized that I didn't want to see Batman go up against these guys again and it sort of deflated the "Bale Batman" when I think of how far in this League of Shadows element is in this interpretation. It's not just Batman's origin and training, it's his whole life.

It'd be like this. Picture your least favorite story element and villain/villains from Batman's 73 years of history. Got that picture? Got everything you dislike about them? That's how it is for me only Talia and League of Shadows (League of Assassins) were worse than I remember them in my youth.

The whole Ras Back story is not what I pictured when Ras told his story to Bruce in Batman Begins.

I felt sorry for Ras in Begins, now I don't know if I do

What's interesting though is that Talia and Wayne both lost their parents.

Yeah, me neither. In fact, it was sort of better not having an explanation to what happened to Ra's with his back story then actually getting one. Too bad the League and history of Ra's Al Ghul didn't die with him in Begins.

It reminds me of the Star Wars prequels. Like making Boba Fett a clone, changing back stories, changing origins, creating answers to questions. Some things are better never being revealed IMO.

 

[crows]

I didn't know before but the whole 8 year gap was stupid, I understand Batman hiding but he didn't have to become a Nosferatu type of character, I thought that was too much, I did not think they were going to do that,

 

[jye4ever]

 

[thenammagazine]

​

 

[batfan08]

I kind of liked that they brought the League of Shadows back (I was going to say I really liked it, but as I thought about it, some things didn't quite add up). These guys are deep rooted extremists, and they've been around for a very long time (if their claims of destroying London, Rome, and Constantinople were true), I doubt they would stop after being defeated twice/losing their leader (as, again, I'm sure that a centuries old organization would be used to getting new leaders every once in a while). That being said, why would the League go after Gotham when the entire reason for it is no longer an issue?

Wasn't the entire point of trying to destroy Gotham so that it could be rebuilt as a better city? Didn't Batman technically accomplish that mission by taking the fall for Dent? The more I think about it, the more that Ra's would've been proud of Bruce, as, although they employed different methods, the outcome was, essentially, the same.

 

[devilof76]

The point of destroying Gotham was to punish it.

Don't listen to CelticPredator, he doesn't know what he's talking about (unless Talia and Bane are Decepticons, Bane very well could be with that ass mask).

Talia and Bane were bad villains with horrible plans and motivations.

Liam Neeson would be ashamed.

I don't get it. What do bad and horrible mean?

 

[DarthBakura]

So, I guess Batman really is faster than Chuck Norris? Or perhaps Chuck Norris was disguised as one of the ninjas that boarded the train and took them out for Batman as he fumbled outside on a grappling wire?

 

[Fernandofan08]

I love Batman: The Animated series, nearly every episode. The ones that involved Ra's, Talia, "detective", "beloveds", deserts, Lazarus pits, shirtless sword battles and arguments over ideologies however were instant turn offs for me. After one viewing, those would be the ones I'd skip after seeing the title cards.

Likewise, I remember the disappointment I had with Arkham City when it turns out that Ra's and the gang are the over reaching masterminds in the story.

The only time I enjoyed it was when the twist occurred with Ra's in Batman Begins, that was about as much as I could take. The Liam Neeson Ra's, to me, is the only one that I liked. Of course after I saw the film, I went back in 2005 and looked at stories and comics I missed. I found I wasn't missing out on too much and that the Neeson Ra's was actually superior in my eyes. It was probably because he was so simple and straightforward and that other worldly crap was taken out. After Begins though I had my fill, enough Ra's and Co. It worked extremely well fusing it into Bruce Wayne's origin story, brilliantly even but I felt it was time to move onto the "better stuff". Film/Live action got to see Ra's Al Ghul, that was it.


So, for me when you're coming off TDK and you've dealt with Ra's in a previous film, I don't know, the villains didn't capture my interest once they were announced. I kept an open mind of course but not only were they characters that I didn't enjoy, the end result/final product after all the hype and anticipation was actually worse for me than those characters I disliked in the other mediums and stories.

Those extremist views, the cult like attitudes that Bane, Talia and the villains possessed and the scenarios playing out just like they did in Begins only more grandiose and more stupid just didn't do anything for me. I realized that I didn't want to see Batman go up against these guys again and it sort of deflated the "Bale Batman" when I think of how far in this League of Shadows element is in this interpretation. It's not just Batman's origin and training, it's his whole life.

It'd be like this. Picture your least favorite story element and villain/villains from Batman's 73 years of history. Got that picture? Got everything you dislike about them? That's how it is for me only Talia and League of Shadows (League of Assassins) were worse than I remember them in my youth.





Yeah, me neither. In fact, it was sort of better not having an explanation to what happened to Ra's with his back story then actually getting one. Too bad the League and history of Ra's Al Ghul didn't die with him in Begins.

It reminds me of the Star Wars prequels. Like making Boba Fett a clone, changing back stories, changing origins, creating answers to questions. Some things are better never being revealed IMO.

To be honest, I too just dont like Ra's/Talia. I mean, comic wise I find them boring. BTAS episodes, watched them once just to say ive watched but they are instant skips. Bought some Ra's comics to read, just cant get into them.

Didnt mind Ra's in Arkham City, liked the fight etc, but ra's felt too supernatural for me. I didnt like that in batman. I liked the, well Freeze, Penguin etc, Croc, but the supernatural 600 year old stuff I just yawned at.

I liked Neeson in Begins, quite different to the League of Assassins in the comics but similar values etc. Talia was rubbish in TDKR. I liked Bane, but I viewed hims as a sort of Adolf Hitler character, really liked the take.

But yeah to me, Ra's is a very weak Batman character overall, Never liked Talia or anything to do with them at all.

 

[Viking Spawn]

I felt that way about Recall's reboot!