Saturday, July 21, 2012
F This Movie! - The Dark Knight Rises
Order tickets for the F This Movie! screening of Die Hard on August 2nd.
Download this episode here. (35.3 MB)
Email F This Movie! at fthismoviepodcast(at)gmail.com
Subscribe to F This Movie! in iTunes
Like F This Movie! on Facebook and follow F This Movie! on Twitter
Also discussed this episode: The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Margaret
Assume there will be SPOILERS in the comments below.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Sorry to anyone who had already commented on the podcast. There was an iTunes issue and I had to BURN THE LAST POST TO THE GROUND. When it was ashes, I reposted and all the comments were lost.ReplyDelete
Oh, well there goes my comments that proved that all I said and everything I've ever said about anything is completely right.ReplyDelete
But for the record, thanks for the shout out. Appreciate it.
You had the ending of Inception figured out and everything. I just wish I could remember what you wrote. Oh well.Delete
The shout out is well deserved. You guys are great.
I might be alone in this feeling (and it could be magnified because of the CO tragedy) but I was really having a bummed out time with this movie. I felt it most with the attacks on Gotham which almost felt too realistic for a movie of this kind. It's like taking United 93 and plugging it into a superhero movie. That being said, the last act was very strong, I enjoyed the ending and many of the performances but it's kind of an icky movie for me and probably my least favorite of the three.ReplyDelete
You are not alone. I was really disappointed with this film. Logic and believability were absent. By far, the weakest film in the trilogy.Delete
Honestly, I saw the movie at 8:30 am after a dentist appointment. Probably not an ideal choice. Like the intrepid podcasters, I'll certainly have to revisit TDKR to fully formulate my analysis.ReplyDelete
But I'll also have to see it again because, whether it was novocaine or deliriousness, I seem to have been completely bewildered by the precise mechanics of Batman's "sacrifice."
I understand that Lucius (and we) find out that Bruce had actually fixed the autopilot function six months ago, thereby allowing him to orchestrate his grand escape and spend the rest of days copulating with Selina Kyle all around the globe.
But...I...wh....were there not shots of him INSIDE the Bat-copter as he was taking it out to sea? Did I literally imagine this? I thought we saw him sitting in there, all contemplative and at peace? I left the theater feeling a lot like Annie Wilkes:
And here's the thing. I was under the impression he was dead. So when we DID find out that he fixed the autopilot, I interpreted that to mean that even though he had a perfectly safe method of disposing of the bomb, he CHOSE to kill himself doing it. This is obviously a much darker end to an already pretty grim series.
I just missed something....right, guys?
I'm not totally sure what you're asking. There were shots of him inside the BAT, but we're to assume he got out. Probably ejected into the ocean. It just wasn't seen. Or are you thinking that he really did die, and that the final shots are just Alfred's fantasy? Because I'm reading that idea floated around online, and I want to shake those people. This movie is not Inception. Not ever movie is Inception.
It was a bit of a cheat though. We see that Bat blast through the building, fly over the bridge with the school bus on it, we then get a shot of Batman in the Bat, then we see the Bat fly off over the water where the bomb explodes.Delete
It doesnt leave a lot of room for Batman to escape. Without that one shot on him in the Bat we could say he got out while still in Gotham etc, but as it stands we are to believe he is in the Bat until we can no longer see clearly whether he escapes or not. So if thats the case, how could he escape the blast radius?
Of course the answer is "He's The Goddamn Batman, so shut up you square!"
but, just saying.
But it is definitely not Inception, Bruce is alive at the end, which just makes that one shot all the more frustrating.
Oh, it's definitely a cheat. It's just that it's one more thing for which I'm willing to suspend disbelief. There's a lot of that in this movie.Delete
Was anyone at all reminded of Indiana Jones in the fridge at the end of the film?Delete
I wish they would have at least given Bale a Donald Pleasence-scar on his face at the diner.
I'll admit that the different cities thing didn't really bother me so much, but probably because I'm so clueless about geography that I wasn't paying attention to which city was which. On a thematic level, I guess it makes sense, but I could see being pulled out of the movie if you really start noticing the changes in location.
I liked Bane as the villain, and thought the movie did a good job of reinventing him and making him work...for the first two-thirds. Once it's revealed that Talia Al Ghul is running the show, all the piss is taken out of Bane as a charismatic leader and he becomes the Bane of Batman and Robin -- just the brawny henchman of the female villain (not really, but you get the point). The movie seems to give up on him as a character, which is why even his death feels like an anticlimax.
I have to see it again for sure. As I come to terms with my problems with the movie, I'm actually liking it more. But another viewing and those problems might just be more pronounced. And I actually did feel like this was a Christopher Nolan movie, because many of the problems are problems in a lot of his movies -- and I say that as someone who really, really likes Christopher Nolan movies.
So let me know when you guys are re-watching it, because that's what I felt I needed too. IMAX, here I come.ReplyDelete
I have watched the move a few times now and I have found my enjoyment grow each time. I have a couple ideas why that is but I dont know for sure. It just is better.Delete
Holy crap. Well I'm about to type a sentence that I thought I would NEVER have to type...Here's my defense of "The Dark Knight Rises".ReplyDelete
I actually came out of my screening of "TDKR" enjoying it very much and being really satisfied. Shocking I know. True, the movie isn't on par with "The Dark Knight" but the flaws/nitpicks weren't that huge afterwards to make me feel disappointed.
1. I really, really loved the first fight between Batman and Bane and am SHOCKED by the indifference being shown towards it. I thought it was kind of a big deal since in the history of Batman films we've never seen Batman get as phyically man-handled and ass-kicked to severity that he does.
2. I thought that it being shown that Bane saved Taila in the prison gave him a small amount of humanity. Though I agree that his death was anti-climatic.
3. My thought as to why Batman fakes his death is this...He did it for Alfred. I'm pretty sure that spending five months in hell on earth will make anyone soul search, and I believe that is when Bruce Wayne decided that Alfred was right and it was time to put up the cowl. I also figured with Alfred's murky past, he could fall off the grid and even Bruce would have a hard time finding. I know it's reaching and probably doesn't hold water, but I'm sticking to it for right now.
4. On a more lighter note, I got kind of a vibe that there was more of "relationship" between Selina Kyle and her assistant/lover?(Juno Temple, who's there to move the plot and nothing more). It's subtle, so subtle I think that it's hard to see, but my much wiser wife thought the same thing too. So maybe there's something on the cutting room floor. I don't know.
This is just one man's opinion, however.
Here's hoping your second viewing is better, Patrick, and as always great podcast!
I'm not really bothered by the Juno Temple stuff. I think it's distracting because we recognize her, but if it was a no-name actress we might not care as much. It's a situation where it can either be viewed as a) the suggestion of some sort of life Selina has that occurs off screen, which is a good thing or b) the leftovers of a better developed story and relationship which somehow serves the overall narrative but, when chopped up, just adds to the bloat. Which is a bad thing.Delete
I'm actually choosing right now to view it as the former, but I may be kidding myself.
I agree with Shannon's statement about the first fight between Bane and Batman. It was the best fight scene I have seen outside of martial arts movies and Haywire. The blows were extremely brutal and appeared to be very painful for Batman (not so much Bane because of the mask)Delete
By the way, this is my first post on this site. I think your podcasts are great and have been an avid listener since discovering this site when I was on an Avengers review craze back in May. Keep up the good work
To be clear. No, I never thought the ending was an Inceptiony dream thing. But that's a pretty lousy manipulation of images to make us think he died. But hey, what are movies if not lengthy manipulations, amiright?ReplyDelete
As I was leaving the theater, I saw some very small kids waiting in line, and I was so tempted to warn their parents of the scars that were about to be inflicted.Delete
Seriously, two and a half hours of doom and gloom, ten minutes of wallowing in Bat-Death, and a quiet nod is just going to make it better? I don't envy those parents.
I guess the parents should know better. The movie is PG-13, and it's a sequel to The Dark Knight, which is HARDLY a kids' movie even if it is based on a comic. That's too bad.Delete
I blame those little kids being there to 1) everybody being scared to leave their kids with babysitters or just any adult that they THINK they know and 2) the massive push by advertisers to "come see the first showing" so that Mom and Dad would rather bring the kids than miss it.Delete
That being said, I remember being taken to movies when I was a kid that were too old for me and zoning out about what was on the screen because it didn't interest me.
I was more scared by happening onto a showing of "The Naked Prey" on TV when I was a kid. And I think that's a G rated film.
Some minor gripes: Didn't like Bane's Voice Dub change for the opening scene. That was the only scene altered for that reason, mainly 'cause of the complaints people had after seeing it before MI4. And it showed.ReplyDelete
Looking back, I wish it was Marion Cotillard who had led Batman to Bane and watched through the gate. Then, Bruce Wayne would know in prison what he was truly up against instead of a third act surprise.
I was surprised how many shots from the trailer were used for just their middle section instead of the entire clip. Michael Caine crying in every scene he was in and having his character leave.
How did Bruce Wayne get back to Gotham?
However, I thought it was very good and I can't wait to own the blu ray.
@Cameron - That one script change would have helped fix two of my biggest problems with the movie. Where were you when Nolan was writing this thing?Delete
Now that you put that in my head, I'm mad that it's not what's in the movie.
I've got a Leibster award for you...come check it outReplyDelete
I resent having to watch a movie more than once to tell how much I liked it. I mostly enjoyed TDKR, but it left me with the same hollow feeling as Patrick and Mike. I actually thought it came together in the ending, but I hate it when a move takes shortcuts. Even as a sequel to Batman Begins and ignoring Dark Knight, this movie is by far the most comic-books, and more of a standard Hollywood Summer blockbuster than any of Nolan's other films. Lots of cool looking stuff that existed only to look cool, and even less of an emphasis on character than usual for the director. AND YET, as I said before, I had a good time. I didn't find Selina to be that groan-worthy, and I was at lest partially surprised by the twist at the end (which I thought did more to humanize Bane than emasculate him). I'm fine with Bruce faking his death for the same reason I'm fine with him and Gordon hiding the truth about Dent in DK. If Batman had simply retired, he'd be forgotten. As the mysterious person who gave his life for the cit who had hated him, he becomes an enduring symbol and an inspiration to others. Plus, there are laws against helping someone fake his death, so leaving Alfred and Lucius in the dark was probably a good idea. Because Nolan's Batman universe is all about adherence to logic as it pertains to federal criminal statutes.ReplyDelete
I'm fine with him faking his death, too. That I get. I'm not really confused about how he retires; I'm confused THAT he retires. But maybe I just need to rethink what the overall story of Bruce Wayne really is. I didn't feel like there was anything in all three movies that built towards him walking away, so I'm still trying to wrap my head around that decision.
And I totally agree that the reveal does humanize Bane, but it strips him of his authority as a leader and an organizer. He becomes just a henchman instead of a criminal mastermind. Again, maybe I'm overthinking it. Sounds like we're all on a similar page...for now, anyway.
The real problem is that defending the movie requires coming up with explanations for why certain choices work, instead of pointing to elements in the story, or the trilogy, that justify those choices.Delete
It feels like we've gotten a lot of movies this year that have significant problems, but can still be enjoyed (see Spider-Man and John Carter). TDKR isn't a dumb blockbuster, but only in comparison to your average blockbuster. Compared to most of Nolan's movies, it's a mess. If Dark Knight and Inception are beautifully assembled jigsaw puzzles, this movie is a too-full suitcase that needs to be sat on to get it closed.
That's how I feel after one viewing. I need to see it again to decide whether I can live with the story problems and bloat. On the podcast, you suggested this movie wouldn't make as much money as Avengers because not as many people would see it again. The genius of Nolan is that he made a movie that REQUIRES a second viewing, whether you want to or not.
Yeah, you're probably right.Delete
Also, "back breaking homework"? I see what you did there.
@Erich - The big difference between a Christopher Nolan movie like Inception (or even The Dark Knight) and The Dark Knight Rises is that with the former, I wanted to see them because I wanted to revisit them and see things I had missed or just enjoy the experience of seeing them again. I knew on a single viewing that they were great. It sounds like we all want to see TDKR again just to decide whether or not we LIKE it.Delete
@Ross - I don't mean to suggest that TDKR is frustrating just because I didn't walk out of it feeling good. It's ok to have a movie -- even a superhero movie -- that isn't entirely "fun." But it does need to work on its own terms. I'm still not sure the movie does. We'll see.
Having said all of this, I still like the movie better than Amazing Spider-Man.
To put it in pro wrestling terms, which all film reviews should, Bane was given an excellent monster heel push and then got beat with a schoolboy.ReplyDelete
If I'm not mistaken, I thought I read somewhere that there was a 4-hour cut of the movie that was shown to execs.... it might've been a rumor, I don't know. It would explain some of the leaps in character and story development that the movie makes. The film is full of big ideas that never get entirely fleshed out, limited by the time frame to tell the story. If ANY movie deserved to be split-up, it should've been this one. It's just too big. There are three or four movies going on during this thing- Batman/Bruce Wayne's fall and rise, the Bane/League of Shadows/Talia al Ghul journey, Gotham's cataclysm,"revolution" and subsequent survival, and Catwoman's redemption(?)... maybe five, if you count Blake's origin as Gotham's new protector... Nolan ambitiously attempts to get it all in under one roof and his eagerness to tell a real and compelling story is constrained by the fact he just doesn't have enough time to do it, so he takes the short-cuts.ReplyDelete
I got to see the trilogy, all in one sitting in the theatre and on pure entertainment valu, I walked away having actually liked Batman Begins more than the other two. (I also hadn't seen it really since it came out originally)The Dark Knight is still my favorite, but seeing all three back-to-back, I did enjoy the first one much more.
It seemed like every character, except for maybe Maggie Gyllenhall's turn as Rachel, encourages Bruce to BE The Batman. And there's no bigger cheerleader than Alfred. He even goes back on his hesitation during The Dark Knight when Bruce empties out his ad-hoc batcave warehouse and decides to hang up the cowl in response to the Joker's threats.
As an arc throughout the three movies, it just doesn't make sense for Bruce to want to give it up, ESPECIALLY since the only reason for quitting (Rachel's death) is put aside when a new threat shows up. Which makes me think, will Warner Bros. "new" take on the Batman franchise be Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns? (again?) Are we to believe he hangs it up to trot the globe with Selina Kyle? If so, then it should've been their relationship we should've been focused on rather than the one with Talia... and if that's so, then we don't really need Talia. It would've been enough for a Catwoman betrayal and jettison the Talia storyline entirely which could keep Bane as the chief mastermind. Well... woulda, coulda, shoulda... Who am I to question the Master?
PS... I agree Batman is on the WRONG side of the Occupy Gotham struggle... I get that it's Bane taking advantage of the politics of class warfare... but it still feels as if we walk away believing Batman is the protector of the status-quo and that flies (pardon the pun) in the face of the superhero archtype. Batman is essentially Zorro, an avenger for the people, more specifically the "little guy"... And in the two sequels, he not only is pretty tight with the establishment, he becomes as much the schemer the Joker done warned us about.
All well said, sir. I don't know how much else I can add to that.Delete
I said as much in an earlier comment, but it does seem like a lot of people have gone back to Batman Begins and realize it's better than they remember. That's interesting. I feel like all three movies share some similar problems (I really like the first two, and MIGHT like the third one?). They're just the most exaggerated in TDKR.
After seeing TDKR, I was actually glad I hadn't sat through the trilogy in one sitting. It felt like that third movie might be more than I can handle, since it wore me out just watching it on its own. Doesn't sound like your enjoyment of it was hampered by that, though.
The Talia storyline should have been tossed. Or at the very least FIXED.
I really don't need to see it again to come to grips that it is easily the worst Batman movie, and probably one of the worst Nolan flicks. He is really good, but he has some story telling issues that are becoming a trend. And if comparing the 3 movies is wrong, I don't want to be right.ReplyDelete
TDK A- This would have been a "B" without a saving performance by Ledger.
Comparing the movies is NOT wrong. It seems like a lot of people are revising their opinions of Batman Begins in the wake of this movie -- whether it's because they've watched it again for the first time in a long time or because they realize it does a lot of things that maybe DKR does not do.Delete
Not saying that's what you're doing, by the way. My guess is that it's always been your favorite.
BB is quite good as a 'comic book' action movie. Batman himself blasts around like it ain't no thang and does some pretty ballin' (read: assholish) things. The BB version of Batman Gets Shit Done. Plus, you have the awesome trippy scenes (monster Batman is great), and NO Gyllenhall (sorry could never look at that face and buy her as this great love interest). And goddamn ninja!! I keep remember more good things as I type this :]Delete
Michael, you bring up a great point about breaking the movie in two parts. We know WB isn't afraid to do it with an established franchise(I.e. Harry Potter). I think the main reason for not splitting it was that Nolan wanted to move on to other projects.ReplyDelete
Interesting you brought up "The Dark Knight Returns" because looking back at that book the resolution in it was kind of silly as well. I know, its an apples and oranges comparison because they are in different realities, but it's funny how it is viewed as a masterpiece and "The Dark Knight Rises" is being viewed as a disapointment.
As a HUGE comic book fan (and nascent comic book creator) I am overjoyed that Nolan can bring the whole superhero genre to this level of discussion, and for this, I give him tons of credit. Say what you will about the problematic issues of each film, for Nolan to bring this much expectation out of an otherwise "man-in-spandex" excercise in power fantasy says a lot about him as a storyteller. It's what many superhero comic book creators aspire to do in the comics themselves, yet so few achieve, let alone bring those ideas to the mainstream with critical success. I really hope the same can be carried through to the new Man of Steel movie we will all be talking about NEXT summer.ReplyDelete
Supes definitely needs a shot in the arm and you would think all those ingredients you mentioned will make for an inspiring turn... But why oh why can't I stop wringing my hands?ReplyDelete
I have a page full of notes sitting beside me full of points that I was going to make, but upon arriving here I see that most of them have been made already. It seems that the general consensus among us F Heads is that the movie wasn't terrible, but as film fans we expected more from Nolan. That's where I've landed on it after the weekend to think about it and let it settle in my head. It's not a bad movie by typical Hollywood standards, but for Nolan this is far from the quality we've come to expect. For a Nolan film, yes, it's pretty bad. The screenplay is full of leaps in logic, the characters do and say things that doesn't feel like them at all, and the big one for me is that Nolan spent a lot of effort showing how driven and obsessed Bruce was with his cause. I don't think the ending fits his universe or the kind of stories he tells. The epilogue felt so forced and practically had a big Crayola colored bow on it, which is not who this Batman is or how he thinks or behaves. It feels like this movie was written by people who hadn't even see the first two. And with the lack of Batman in this movie, I wonder if Nolan even wanted to make this movie. Does he even like Batman? He sure treated the character like an afterthought, or worse, a MacGuffin. Patrick said that he's not really sure what the movie was about. I'm not either. It makes some statements, but this movie doesn't have a whole lot of a story to tell. It's a lot of people sitting around staring at their shoes and looking like they just stepped in something.ReplyDelete
I am actually looking forward to a reboot, not because I didn't like these movies, but because I want to try to see these comic book properties as similar to their printed comic book counterparts. In comics the creative team is always in flux. When a writer and artist have said what they came to say, they move on to the next project and a new team comes in with a new story. Superman or Batman or Spider-Man or the X-Men this month will not look like the same book this time next year. I'd kind of like to see a similar thing happen with comic book movies. I like that Sam Raimi's Spider-Man movies exist alongside the new one and that we have a Tim Burton produced Batman saga and now a Nolan saga, and that they feel totally different. Different people can bring different things to these properties. In the 40s and 50s you had the serials, and I think it would be awesome to have something like that again...for there to always be something like that in theaters. I know we're a long way from that, but I think the possibility of that is exciting. If they can make good movies (and not movies like Green Lantern and Ghost Rider) then I'm fine with reboots.
Anyway, for now I have desire to see this again. I'll watch it again on Blu-Ray and see how it holds up with some distance on it. Another thing that befuddles me is that this movie has a 93% freshness score on Rotten Tomatoes among audiences. How can that be? I had several random encounters this weekend with total strangers who asked me if I'd seen it and told me how much they loved it. When I aired some of my grievances with the plot, the questionable story elements, and the strange choices, they all agreed on my points, but didn't care. They got what they came for and were totally in love with it. Would it have even mattered if this movie had been even more bloated and lazy? they love it just because it's Batman?
Is it the power of the character or did Nolan build such goodwill with the first two that people are in his corner no matter what?
Though I dug the podcast, I have to point out that the greatest moments through it are when Patrick does the Batman and Robin Bane unexpectedly.ReplyDelete
So on Kumail Nanjiani's video game podcast, Film Critic Hulk posited a theory based on things he had heard that Nolan's originally planned third chapter was based largely on Heath Ledger's Joker and when Ledger died it broke his heart and he felt like he was done and wanted to walk away from the project. Warner Brothers backed up Brinks trucks and also told him that he could direct anything he wanted to before he did the third Batman movie, which is what gave him the opportunity to direct Inception. He had neither the heart nor the desire to start over and do this movie, but did it for the opportunities it afforded him. I feel like I had heard something similar to that a while back, and who knows if that is true at all, but it does have a ring of credibility to it. I have now stooped to passing on third and fourth hand information like a town gossip. I also hear Doug has been away from the show for a while because he's in rehab.ReplyDelete
P.S. I miss Doug.
i am only 35 minutes into the podcast (will finish tomorrow) and i have not read all the comments above, so i apologize for any repeated thoughts. 2 things pooped out at me during your conversation in the early part of the podcast:ReplyDelete
1. it would be interesting if the idea was that for him to be successful he had to learn to fear death, because if i remember correctly, the only reason bain didn't kill him earlier was because he didn't fear death. he would seem throughout his journey that he learns all the right things at the right times.
2. you have my permission to dine?! excellent.
hope to have some time to put down some more thoughts about dkr after i finish your podcast. i have already seen dkr twice and would definitely confirm your thought that a second viewing makes a huge difference in the experience. i still stand by my tweeted rankings, though.
damn it... pooped = poppedDelete
I thought it was a good movie, just not as good as the first two. I like endings that surprise me IF there were clues along the way that I didn't pick up on. On my second viewing I really struggled to find the clues even as I was looking for them.ReplyDelete
What did the scar on Cotillard's back mean?
I thought Bain's mask was punched a lot in the first fight, I didn't understand what was different the second time to make it come loose?
I had no problem with the way Batman faked his death... and the shot of him that implies he is in the BAT is a closeup that doesn't really tell you what he is in. Maybe an eject vehicle of some kind?
It was cool to see the two cameos of Hines Ward...Looks like after retiring he may have found his new career!
For a atom bomb that is that unstable, it sure holds up pretty good being bouncing around in a truck during a car chase and pretty rough accident, not to mention being bounced around on the flight out of Gotham.
Very cheesey Robin reveal. And it seemed to me like Blake's accent changed a couple times throughout.
I don't really understand anyone's complaints about the movie being to dark or gloomy... Seems like a pretty bad situation. Maybe they could have tossed in a musical number during one of the crazy mob scenes in the streets.
I agree that the relationship between Bruce and Selina did not lead me to believe that they would end up together... If that was an important point of closure, they could have put something in to bridge that gap.
I was under the impression that the Batsuit could block "slashing weapons", but he still gets stabbed. I think the ribs are one of the only parts of his body the armor doesn't protect?
I understand Batman's rules of not killing people, but it seemed kind of strange that he would fly down in the BAT between the goons and the police, just to disarm some the "big guns" and allow thousands of cops (completely out gunned)to get shot up by machine guns in a street battle. He could have just taken the goons out while he was there, but, hey, I guess that's why he is the Batman.
Any city that would send all of their law enforcement into the sewer system at the same time deserves to have some struggles with crime control.
Hathaway was the weakest link in my mind as a lead, but she wasn't given the most to work with. btw... what was the program she wanted? I wish there was a character that would spell out exactly what the Clean Slate Program would do... Just kidding... One of a couple forced conversations.
The scarecrow thing threw me a little.
Anyway... my thought organization does not compare to what is above in previous posts, but get over it.
Gonna finish the podcast tonight...
After listening to some more indecision, then I will decide what to do with this movie... exile or death.
You have my permission to dine.
oh, and another thing... Bane and his boss die, the bomb blows up over the bay, and then all of the sudden all the criminals, inmates, insane people are on the street on their knees with their hands behind their heads? Did all their weapons vaporize? If it was that easy, the cops could have stayed in the sewer and waited it out.Delete
I’ve watched TDKR twice already and I’m still dumbfounded by how Catwoman is getting universal praise. Anne Hathaway did a very good job with what was asked of her. But my biggest complaint about Catwoman in Nolan’s Batman is that every time Catwoman (not Selina Kyle) was onscreen, it felt like she was in a different movie. She had quippy one-liners during dire situations. She could beat up numerous trained attackers in her small to medium sized frame wearing a suit with no armor or protection. I would’ve suspended my disbelief if it was any other action movie, but this is the Nolan rooted in reality Batman universe. No one had a problem with this? Even when she kissed Batman during ticking nuclear bomb?ReplyDelete
I heard that Bale specifically never wanted a Batman & Robin duo in the Nolan films, but Catwoman was essentially Robin in this movie. Batman & Catwoman were partners during the rooftop fight scene, sewer fight scene and the bomb chase finale. And most of all, her “costume” wasn’t practical. Unless anyone knows a soldier that goes into battle wearing a skin tight leather suit and high-heeled boots?? Catwoman in this movie was basically no different than Robin in the Schumacher films and the 60s Batman.
The biggest question I had walking out of this movie was why did Nolan choose to portray this kind of Catwoman in his movie? I heard that Jonathan Nolan advised Christopher that he had to address the Catwoman character, if this was indeed his final installment into the Batman mythos. It was obvious from the way Catwoman/Selina Kyle was written and filmed that more work was put into that character than any other new character in the movie. Maybe, Christopher Nolan went out of his way to make sure he wouldn’t receive his usual criticisms about weak female characters in his films.
During my two screenings, the female audience reacted positively whenever Catwoman or Selina Kyle did something theatrical or made a joke. So I think Nolan succeeded with Catwoman in creating a new template for the female “action-hero” genre. But unfortunately in my opinion, he failed in executing it in his own Batman universe. I guess that makes me a sexist or a misogynist lol
I don't disagree with anything you've said, except that disliking the Catwoman character's presence in the movie makes one a sexist. I liked watching Anne Hathaway on screen. She seemed to be having fun and is very nice to look at. She also had no function in the movie besides a) being a convenient plot device and b) having Catwoman show up in the movie. It just felt like fan service, and it's the same kind of thinking that partially derailed the initial Batman movie cycle (with every new installment, more and more familiar characters were stuff in just so fans of the comic could see them in a movie) and even Sam Raimi's Spider-Man movies (mostly just 3). No one figured out how to make Selina Kyle matter in either plot or theme, so it just amounts to Anne Hathaway looking great and beating people up. Her breath, jokey dialogue sounded like the TV show at best, like Poison Ivy in Batman & Robin at worst. She's not at fault. It's how she was written.Delete
You nailed it: she's in a different movie. I touched on this on the podcast, but it's actually jarring to watch two people in costume fighting side by side. It's so much more comic booky than anything in this trilogy. Maybe that's the kind of thing I'll come to terms with better on a future viewing.
Thanks for posting! Great to hear from new voices.
Patrick, little by little I feel like a stalker by annoying you every weekend with broken download links, but what can I do. Still catching up...ReplyDelete
This one doesn´t work.