The Dark Knight Rises

[Goldfoot]

Why? Some people like some of Nolan's movies without actually liking Nolan's work in general. Batman as a character/property carries enough of his own audience that it's conceivable some people are on board even if they have issues with Nolan's representation.

We should trust Nolan because of his history of choosing people in this series. Nolan picked Bale while he was at his Machinist weight, based on the conversation they had and the determination in his eyes. When it was announced that Ledger would be The Joker there was a huge backlash, only to have it all quelled when the prologue was screened and it was apparent how amazing that performance was. Nolan has acquired a very good reputation as a filmmaker, and for good reason. Rotten Tomatoes seems to be a fairly reliable source for determining the quality of cinema and Nolan's lowest movie on there is his first, which is only at 76%. I'd say that's still quite good for being his debut. As for fans of the franchise having issues with his representation, that's going to happen with everything. There are always people that have it set in their head how a character should be, and when there is any deviation from that they are going to dislike the version in the film. That doesn't mean Nolan chose badly, it just means people aren't able to let go of their strict expectations.

[Fixer808]

When it was announced that Ledger would be The Joker there was a huge backlash

I remember making a few Brokebat Mountain jokes...

[Corvus T. Cosmonaut]

Perhaps some feel that, Ledger aside, many of Nolan's casting decisions have been uninspired and/or could have been much better.

And, wait, Rotten Tomatoes? Really?

[october_midnight]

Literally EVERYONE I worked with, knew, hung out with, etc. said Ledger was going to be shit. I was the only one in my group that was like 'No, he'll kill it. Straight kill it.' My friend Luke asked me how I knew.

'He's probably a smart enough guy, and a decent enough actor, to know that 99% of the people out there already assume he'll suck at the role. So if he has any brain he's going to bust his ass and give the performance of his life JUST to prove them wrong.' And I think he did.

[richardp]

Literally EVERYONE I worked with, knew, hung out with, etc. said Ledger was going to be shit. I was the only one in my group that was like 'No, he'll kill it. Straight kill it.' My friend Luke asked me how I knew.

'He's probably a smart enough guy, and a decent enough actor, to know that 99% of the people out there already assume he'll suck at the role. So if he has any brain he's going to bust his ass and give the performance of his life JUST to prove them wrong.' And I think he did.

He absolutely did, and quite literally too. The Dark Knight was already a pretty heavy movie, but knowing that Heath died before he even saw the final cut, and that he put everything into that role just makes watching the film that more "weighty" for me. I know everyone says The Avengers is the best comic film of all time, and while I obviously can't deny it of the claim, I think I'll forever hold The Dark Knight as my pick for that crown. That is, until I see TDKR.

[Corvus T. Cosmonaut]

best comic film of all time

Nah; super-heroes aren't the only comic book movies.

[Lutz]

At least I'll again have a Baz Luhrmann movie to enjoy more than this.

[richardp]

I think TDKR will focus more on Wayne, the way Batman Begins did. Not only because trilogies always have to come full circle, but the story is about Wayne getting crippled by Bane and "rising" back up the retake Gotham.

[carpenoctem]

New trailer is so pretty. I was thinking during the trailer that every villain in Nolan's trilogy seems intent on having Gotham destroy itself from the inside out, like all they want to do is give it that little nudge (and by "nudge" I mean blow up hospitals and boats and chemically treat the water system), but I think it's interesting that rather than completely engineer the city's destruction themselves, they're more interested in just facilitating what they see as its inevitable destruction. Nolan's villains are all pissed-off, face-painting, mask-wearing nihilists of the finest order. When you compare, say, The Avengers' Loki to Nolan's Joker or Bane, the former is rendered almost cartoonish.

[richardp]

So Peter Sciretta from /Film and Harry Knowles are both talking about TDKR not making as much money as The Avengers because it will more than likely be an hour longer, therefor less screenings.

Wait.. so Avengers was 2 hours and 20 minutes, so did I miss the announcement that TDKR was going to be 3+ hours or what?

[marodi]

So Peter Sciretta from /Film and Harry Knowles are both talking about TDKR not making as much money as The Avengers because it will more than likely be an hour longer, therefor less screenings.

Wait.. so Avengers was 2 hours and 20 minutes, so did I miss the announcement that TDKR was going to be 3+ hours or what?

Really? Sounds like these guys are full of shit. Someone should remind them that Titanic, the second highest all time worldwide box office champ is 3 hours and 14 minutes long while Avatar, the worldwide box office champ is 2 hours and 58 minutes long.

The real mind boggling question though is why are they trying to find excuses for how much money a movie will make when it's not even out yet? Don't they have faith in said movie?

This is so ridiculous. Of course TDKR will be successful; there is no doubt in my mind about that. Pardon my French but to say that this movie (or any other) is not successful because it doesn't make $200 mil on its first weekend is fucking bullshit.

[AgentofChaos]

Really? Sounds like these guys are full of shit. Someone should remind them that Titanic, the second highest all time worldwide box office champ is 3 hours and 14 minutes long while Avatar, the worldwide box office champ is 2 hours and 58 minutes long.

The real mind boggling question though is why are they trying to find excuses for how much money a movie will make when it's not even out yet? Don't they have faith in said movie?

This is so ridiculous. Of course TDKR will be successful; there is no doubt in my mind about that. Pardon my French but to say that this movie (or any other) is not successful because it doesn't make $200 mil on its first weekend is fucking bullshit.

I don't think they mean long term gross (i.e Titanic, Avatar). Over time that will balance out, as everyone who wants to see it eventually will.

But for the opening weekend, which is the record set by Avengers, there will only be a certain amount of screenings possible in the 72 hour window. Even if it's only 20-30 minutes difference in run time, that could potentially make the difference between it breaking the record and not I suppose.

I think TDKR is definitely set up to make a run at it, but if you are looking at it in the truest logical sense, they may have a valid point. I mean TDKR could open as the 2nd largest opening weekend of all time, and that wouldn't really make a difference in my eyes. It would still qualify as a major success, and bested the previous film in the trilogy, so there is no need to pit the two films against each other. I mean some fanboys are moronic and look at it as a pissing contest (i.e IMDB boards), but I think most industry people are looking at it now in an objective way, since going into 2012 TDKR was by far the more hyped film, but 200.3M is going to be near impossible to beat. Movie writers like those two just enjoy being pundits trying to predict the future I imagine, they simply enjoy the battle, but don't have much of a rooting interest one way or the other. Either way it's enjoyable for them since no matter who wins, it's going to be a win for the industry with the biggest summer numbers ever, and that is what I believe they are likely driving the focus towards.

[Goldfoot]

But for the opening weekend, which is the record set by Avengers, there will only be a certain amount of screenings possible in the 72 hour window. Even if it's only 20-30 minutes difference in run time, that could potentially make the difference between it breaking the record and not I suppose.

First of all, fuck Peter. Second, they didn't even set the runtime for TDK until about a month before the film was released. I realize that doesn't mean it will happen that same way this time. I also realize that TDKR is only a little more than 2 months away, so WB could be setting the runtime any day now. As much as I'd like this film to be over 3 hours, I really do not see that happening. Third, even if it does have something like an hour more than Avengers, there should be enough demand that the theaters that can, will have more screens showing this one. The place I saw Avengers at has 20 screens, and they are managing to fit in 21 showings of it in one day. I'm not sure how many screens that is spread out to, but that is 63 showings for opening weekend, plus however many screenings they had at midnight. When I saw TDK at midnight, they had 29 screens showing it. I'm sure it would have been all 30, but for some reason (maybe contract), they had a showing of Mamma Mia. Anyway, it seems to me a longer runtime is only really going to impact small theaters, and I would guess the larger ones would make up for it. Avengers does have the (unfair) advantage of being done in 3D, though, which added a bunch of extra money onto the opening weekend figure.

[richardp]

I could absolutely care less about these two guys trying to predict how much money it will make. I just want to know where this 3 hour running time business is coming from, if there was an actual statement about it or if they're just assuming.

[Deadpool]

What's everyone's take on Bane?

I'm really intrigued by how he seems intent on "punishing" Batman/Bruce instead of strictly antagonizing him. Maybe there isn't a difference, but that's why I'd like to open the discussion on that topic. He's obviously the ultimate physical foil to Bats, but in the bigger picture, is he more threatening than Joker or Ra's? At his core, he doesn't seem too different from either, which is why I'm so interested in the nuances of his villainy like the "punishment" aspect. In any case, I'm looking forward to Bane breaking many bones and causing general carnage.

[Goldfoot]

That's been my main question about him; why is he trying to punish Bruce/Bats? What happened to Bane that makes him want vengeance against our hero? I'm sure a lot happened in the 8 year gap since The Dark Knight, and perhaps it was something during that time? Perhaps we will see the return of the League Of Shadows, this time with Bane as their "ace in the hole." Perhaps Bruce must be punished for stopping them the first time around. He allowed everything that happened since Begins to take place, and perhaps the city got much worse. I know that in the trailer it says they are at a time of peace, but we do not have context for that and we don't know when that started. That would be the trilogy coming full circle and returning to the idea of tearing a city down once it's reached its pinnacle of decadence.

[Lutz]

The original plan before The Dark Knight was to make two films with the Joker. The first with him at large and being bought in and then the second him on trial against Harvey Dent leading to the creation of Two Face.

Somewhere along the line I think they just took the whole idea and put in into The Dark Knight.

[littlemonkey613]

^Brilliant whoever decided they would make for a killer late 2nd and 3rd act.

[Wretchedest]

That's been my main question about him; why is he trying to punish Bruce/Bats? What happened to Bane that makes him want vengeance against our hero? I'm sure a lot happened in the 8 year gap since The Dark Knight, and perhaps it was something during that time? Perhaps we will see the return of the League Of Shadows, this time with Bane as their "ace in the hole." Perhaps Bruce must be punished for stopping them the first time around. He allowed everything that happened since Begins to take place, and perhaps the city got much worse. I know that in the trailer it says they are at a time of peace, but we do not have context for that and we don't know when that started. That would be the trilogy coming full circle and returning to the idea of tearing a city down once it's reached its pinnacle of decadence.

My theory has been that Bane hates batman because he knows about the Harvey Dent ruse? or because of that ruse at least....

[Goldfoot]

My theory has been that Bane hates batman because he knows about the Harvey Dent ruse? or because of that ruse at least....

You think he cares that deeply about something from 8 years ago? That had nothing to do with Bane, and I don't really see him holding a grudge on behalf of The Joker.

[thevoid99]

I think the theory about the return of the League of Shadows is what the third film will be about. They're returning to finish what they were set out to do. Twice, they've been foiled. First by the Wayne family when Bruce's father created the monorail for the city. Then by Bruce as Batman years later when he learns what they would do. The Joker was someone of his own. A true anarchist who wanted to show the world that people were as ugly as he is only to be foiled by Batman and Jim Gordon despite managing to corrupt Harvey Dent into insanity and later his own death where Batman and Gordon made him a martyr. In the third film, Bane is sent to not create an idea of what the League of Shadows did which was to destroy an already troubled world and start it all over again. This time around, it's just to destroy Gotham and its Dark Knight.

[Deadpool]

This is good stuff, gents. I could see Bane holding a years-long grudge on Batman or Bruce based on covering up the true nature of Harvey Dent, and letting that hate fester (I just remembered that picture of Bane holding a photo of Dent). Yet, even if he does have a grudge, it's most likely an extension of the League of Shadows making their return. Bane has to have some personal stake, though, which I don't think we can really predict until it's hopefully revealed in the film. I must say - I really like the idea of Bane being their "ace in the hole" like Goldfoot said. The trailers almost make him look like a General - not unlike the position Ducard was preparing for Bruce. Just like Brian Azzarello once said: the best Batman villains are a mirror for the Bat.

I guess we could assume that with Gotham enjoying peace-time, their decadence has made a comeback, and the gap between classes has expanded - hence Bane's reckoning..? Or maybe it's just taken that long to assemble the resources to try to destroy Gotham again.

This is where I need to stop mapping out this movie, and just hibernate until July 20th.

[Goldfoot]

This is good stuff, gents. I could see Bane holding a years-long grudge on Batman or Bruce based on covering up the true nature of Harvey Dent, and letting that hate fester (I just remembered that picture of Bane holding a photo of Dent). Yet, even if he does have a grudge, it's most likely an extension of the League of Shadows making their return. Bane has to have some personal stake, though, which I don't think we can really predict until it's hopefully revealed in the film. I must say - I really like the idea of Bane being their "ace in the hole" like Goldfoot said. The trailers almost make him look like a General - not unlike the position Ducard was preparing for Bruce. Just like Brian Azzarello once said: the best Batman villains are a mirror for the Bat.

I don't have a specific counterpoint to the idea that Bane is holding a grudge based on the cover-up, I just hope it's not something that petty. Though I did hear that in the comics his entire motivation was to take the spotlight away from Batman; nothing says "petty" like an ego trip.

I guess we could assume that with Gotham enjoying peace-time, their decadence has made a comeback, and the gap between classes has expanded - hence Bane's reckoning..? Or maybe it's just taken that long to assemble the resources to try to destroy Gotham again.

Don't forget Selina's comment about the wealthy living large and leaving nothing for everyone else. That goes right with what you're saying and is pretty indicative that the city has reached another pinnacle.

This is where I need to stop mapping out this movie, and just hibernate until July 20th.

I had told myself I was going to stay out of this thread, both in order to avoid ANY kind of spoiler and just so I wouldn't think too deeply about what the film is about. Then this trailer came out and I had to discuss it with as many people as possible. I'll probably retreat from anything Batman related in the near future, but right now this is all speculation and I'm enjoying it. Speculation based on what little we've seen, but speculation nonetheless.

[Fixer808]

I'm pretty sure we're going to go right back to "Begins". Bane may well be one of the guys who got fucked up by Wayne during his training in the mountains, perhaps. Or another lieutenant in the League's organization. There's no way Batman toppled the whole thing just by crushing Liam Neeson with a train!

[october_midnight]

You just destroyed my entire theory about liam neeson.

[PooPooMeowChow]

Bane is Liam Neeson's son.
Now you know.

[Lutz]

Didn't Bane marry Talia in the comics?

[ImTheWiseJanitor]

Not to interrupt. Ignore me. I just thought this was funny.

[Conan The Barbarian]

It could do it. I mean the trailer did play before the movie. And everyone seems pumped.

[Goldfoot]

It could do it. I mean the trailer did play before the movie. And everyone seems pumped.

I doubt it; Avengers has more mass appeal and it got a 3D release (Hello $30 million extra on opening weekend). I mean, I'm hopeful for TDKR, but it is going to do really well even without setting any records. TDKR has a bleak, somber tone to it whereas Avengers is an epic, mostly light-hearted ensemble film. Since its the final chapter in this series, many many people will see it, but it's going to be tough to compete with Avengers for best opening weekend. In the end, it doesn't really matter, because this isn't setting the stage for any sequels that might be in jeopardy.