The Dark Knight Rises *SPOILERS*

[DiFabio]

BS...another one having a hard time with acceptance from the creator of Star Wars himself and another one not happy with beloved characters returning to the big screen

So you think Anakin as depicted in the Prequels, compliments Darth Vader as he's depicted in the original films just because Lucas made them? The prequels do the originals justice instead of taking away from them? You think that?

 

[wofford29]

Alright Fab, after reading your second post. You erroneously attribute the Joker turning Gotham on it's head as the point of TDK and continue to claim the themes of TDK are ruined by TDKR but you still haven't said why. Unless your sentence about not mentioning the Joker is why it doesn't connect.

On to the third.

 

[Niltusk]

Look I don't care what any of you say, the Star Wars prequels are $h!t. I mean it.

 

[a-dev]

Jesus, things are serious in here. So much for my attempt at levity.

 

[Niltusk]

Jesus, things are serious in here. So much for my attempt at levity.

At least everyone snapped out of their trance enough to see you changed the subject.

 

[DiFabio]

Alright Fab, after reading your second post. You erroneously attribute the Joker turning Gotham on it's head as the point of TDK and continue to claim the themes of TDK are ruined by TDKR but you still haven't said why. Unless your sentence about not mentioning the Joker is why it doesn't connect.

On to the third.

But you just said the posts I've made in the links don't contain any mention of themes, only plot and story points. But now you're stating that I claimed that the themes of TDK are ruined by TDKR?

I'm not sure a theme can contradict another theme? Have I actually said that? I've searched "theme" with my posts and don't see anything coming up. I even looked at the post that started your interest (the Joker one) and I didn't even mention a theme.

 

[Adolfo]

So you think Anakin as depicted in the Prequels, compliments Darth Vader as he's depicted in the original films just because Lucas made them? The prequels do the originals justice instead of taking away from them? You think that?

I think that I basically just appreciated seeing beloved characters returning to the big screen...granted they are different...but part of that reason it was a different time period...the first three films took place during Empire rule...different atmosphere...different mentality from all those living earlier...films made 20 years later too...again I was just happy to have Lucas wake up and finish his story...even if it wasnt to certain fans expectations...Anakin was an immature moron in pain...a baby...The Jedi were slow themselves at times..I guess a 1000 years of peace will do that to ya and Palpatine took advantage...and news flash...Anakin was a different person then he was as Darth Vader in the earlier films...you are sounding like Anakin wasnt enough of a Darth Vader for you,...well didnt he have to transform and change into Vader...Compliment...does that word mean "same" to you...that's my critique...otherwise again I was happy to see Star Wars Rise...LOL

 

[a-dev]

At least everyone snapped out of their trance enough to see you changed the subject.

I certainly didn't intend for anyone to actually take up the topic. It was just a bit of random light-hearted trolling

 

[wofford29]

But you just said the posts I've made in the links don't contain any mention of themes, only plot and story points. But now you're stating that I claimed that the themes of TDK are ruined by TDKR?

I'm not sure a theme can contradict another theme? Have I actually said that? I've searched "theme" with my posts and don't see anything coming up. I even looked at the post that started your interest (the Joker one) and I didn't even mention a theme.

Alright we'll skip themes and base everything off this sentiment of yours...

That's why I've said that TDKR is a contradiction to everything that goes on in TDK, because it is.

You're main points to support this seems to be lack of mentioning the Joker, 8 years of peace, and the hunting of the dark knight? Is that it in a nut shell of how nothing meshes and nothing is consistent and everything that came before it is contradicted?

 

[jye4ever]

POORLY written and executed main villain? Are you ****ing crazy? Bane was probably one of the most well written and original villains to see the big screen in a LONG time. You know what I think? I think YOU, are over thinking this movie WAY to much, I bet all you can think about when watching Rises is how bad it is and how many issues it has. I'm not going to list all the things you have issues with that are completely irrelevant to the enjoyment of a movie like Rises. This isn't ****ing Memento, this is a summer action movie, you're not suppose to take it that seriously, IT'S A ****ING MOVIE. If you made a list about all the things that are supposedly wrong with it then what's the point of movies? Is it really THAT bad? Really?

How long ago did you tell your wife that you love her?
Grow the **** up.

Who said anything about Bane?

Ummm, Talia was Bane's boss, aka the main villain.

You really didn't know I meant Talia when I said main villain?

You lost your **** on me and I wasn't even talking about Bane.

And what does growing the **** up or me telling my wife I love her have to do with anything?

 

[jye4ever]

DiFabio, grow the **** up will you!

 

[ZaCHw117]

Why are you loling?

Bruce's desire to retire stemmed from his desire of being with Rachel.

Rachel's dead.

Wrong.

Bruce's desire to retire stemmed from hoping that Harvey would be the hero Gotham needed. And that there would no longer need to be a Batman.

"Harvey locked up half the criminals in the city without wearing a mask."

Having Rachel was just a plus (and she wasn't even going to stay with him).

Therefore, the deaths at the end of TDK being blamed on Batman instead of Harvey allowed Batman to disappear. He would have retired at the end of TDK even if Rachel didn't die.

Why?

The Dent Act.

Rachel's death is the reason Bruce Wayne disappears. Not Batman.

I'm loling because no matter how hard Nolan shoves **** up the audience's ass, the answer is never good enough for some people.

 

[DiFabio]

I'm so confused. Is that an actual quote of mine? That second part?

Is the story of TDKR not contradictory to TDK when Batman isn't being hunted by Gotham in TDKR for his crimes (well, other than Foley trying to do what Gordon never could), no Joker, no responses from any of the individuals involved in the Dent conspiracy, Alfred's attitude has changed between films and the other things I mention?

Time has diluted my perception on how TDKR affected TDK and I admitted a few pages back that I'm not as fervor about arguing against it as I once was but I know I've been here before, discussing the same arguments.

That was back when TDKR was fresh in my mind a few days after it's release. (When we were all bickering if the Prologue made sense or was even necessary to the story).

 

[batfan08]

These things (e.g. arguments) are why I stay out of threads like this. Well, the time has come for me to say goodbye, again. Goodbye.

 

[jye4ever]

These things (e.g. arguments) are why I stay out of threads like this. Well, the time has come for me to say goodbye, again. Goodbye.

Nah, hang around, Nam should be here soon.

 

[Adolfo]

Time has diluted my perception on how TDKR affected TDK

You have it backwards...It was TDK that affected TDKR....The Joker created the film you hated..."It was all part of the plan"...LOL

 

[DiFabio]

Wrong.

Bruce's desire to retire stemmed from hoping that Harvey would be the hero Gotham needed. And that there would no longer need to be a Batman.

"Harvey locked up half the criminals in the city without wearing a mask."

Having Rachel was just a plus (and she wasn't even going to stay with him).

Therefore, the deaths at the end of TDK being blamed on Batman instead of Harvey allowed Batman to disappear. He would have retired at the end of TDK even if Rachel didn't die.

Why?

The Dent Act.

Rachel's death is the reason Bruce Wayne disappears. Not Batman.

I'm loling because no matter how hard Nolan shoves **** up the audience's ass, the answer is never good enough for some people.

You make me sick man, truly. Void does the same ****, "you don't understand it" but subtlety. That's always what it comes down to isn't it?


As soon as you saw my initial post you figured I was too dumb to comprehend that Joker set the trap to harm Dent, not Bruce. Which I thought was pretty insulting considering you know I'm just as much into this crap as you are. Nah, "I don't understand it".

All I meant was that Bruce was looking to hang it up until Joker messed up his plans by killing Rachel, inadvertently (because he was wanted to break Dent down). It's established WAAAAAAY before TDK and Harvey Dent even existed that Bruce wanted to give up his life as a crimefighter and spend his life with Rachel when she contemplates that Bruce will one day live a life with her after he's done with Batman. It's during that whole "rebuild Wayne Manor" scene.


Just goes to show, if there's any opposition in opinion with these Nolan Batman films the other person "clearly doesn't get it". Hell, why don't you dig deeper there Zach? Ever think that maybe Bruce wanted to get Dent in with the "hero with a face" role so BRUCE could have Rachel for himself? Not really digging either considering he has both of them on surveillance "watching them closely".

 

[Adolfo]

You make me sick man, truly. Void does the same ****, "you don't understand it" but subtlety. That's always what it comes down to isn't it?


As soon as you saw my initial post you figured I was too dumb to comprehend that Joker set the trap to harm Dent, not Bruce. Which I thought was pretty insulting considering you know I'm just as much into this crap as you are. Nah, "I don't understand it".

All I meant was that Bruce was looking to hang it up until Joker messed up his plans by killing Rachel, inadvertently (because he was wanted to break Dent down). It's established WAAAAAAY before TDK and Harvey Dent even existed that Bruce wanted to give up his life as a crimefighter and spend his life with Rachel when she contemplates that Bruce will one day live a life with her after he's done with Batman. It's during that whole "rebuild Wayne Manor" scene.


Just goes to show, if there's any opposition in opinion with these Nolan Batman films the other person "clearly doesn't get it". Hell, why don't you dig deeper there Zach? Ever think that maybe Bruce wanted to get Dent in with the "hero with a face" role so BRUCE could have Rachel for himself? Not really digging either considering he has both of them on surveillance "watching them closely".

No one here is calling you dumb...You get it but you are definetely having a hard time handling or accepting that The Death of Dent, The Jokers manipulation of Dent and the way that Joker Destroyed or at least got rid of Batman and that the Joker himself created TDKR...that is the issue here...You just dont like it

 

[DiFabio]

No one here is calling you dumb...

No, I know. But that's not the first time it's been insinuated that a member doesn't get something when they have clearly been invested with the project for just as long.




I think I'm done here. I read what I post in this thread and I don't even know why I'm bothering. The movies over. The series is done. We've all done this before. For some reason I would foolishly think that if I didn't back up my feelings I'd somehow be "wrong". Message boards sort of have that affect on me.

It seems to annoy everyone but Jye when I visit this thread (and I can understand it), so **** it, I won't post in here. It's just a movie, I don't like it and think it's dumb and over-hyped, but other people don't feel that sentiment and love it (which is fine, that never bothered me).

Stick a fork in it, it's done. I'm out this thread. I promise future posts on here (other sections) will be images or 100 words or less.

 

[jye4ever]

You make me sick man, truly. Void does the same ****, "you don't understand it" but subtlety. That's always what it comes down to isn't it?


As soon as you saw my initial post you figured I was too dumb to comprehend that Joker set the trap to harm Dent, not Bruce. Which I thought was pretty insulting considering you know I'm just as much into this crap as you are. Nah, "I don't understand it".

All I meant was that Bruce was looking to hang it up until Joker messed up his plans by killing Rachel, inadvertently (because he was wanted to break Dent down). It's established WAAAAAAY before TDK and Harvey Dent even existed that Bruce wanted to give up his life as a crimefighter and spend his life with Rachel when she contemplates that Bruce will one day live a life with her after he's done with Batman. It's during that whole "rebuild Wayne Manor" scene.


Just goes to show, if there's any opposition in opinion with these Nolan Batman films the other person "clearly doesn't get it". Hell, why don't you dig deeper there Zach? Ever think that maybe Bruce wanted to get Dent in with the "hero with a face" role so BRUCE could have Rachel for himself? Not really digging either considering he has both of them on surveillance "watching them closely".

The D has been revealed.

DummyFabio.