Flaws of The Dark Knight Rises

Post Reply New Topic

I didn't get the impression that was part of the plan. Catwoman even says a cheesy line which implies that she knows that Batman got lucky that she turned up when she did.

Think about it like this: if the plan was to hit Bane with a projectile weapon, then why would Batman get into a fistfight with him in the first place? He could have just been caught off-guard instead. I really think that Batman's plan was to punch him in the face a lot. Now in fact this plan does actually work (it's the betrayal that throws a spanner in the works), but it's still a stupid plan, and not very Batmanly.

No, he had already beaten Bane "fairly", otherwise they wouldn't have resolved the conflict by saying "oh, somebody shoots him" since that would mean that Batman's scruples had rendered him incapable of ever defeating Bane himself.

It's pretty cliched for movies (and not just superhero ones) to have the first encounter with the villain end in defeat, followed by the hero's recovery, learning something about themselves and/or having a training montage or romantic entanglement, and finally a second victorious encounter.

He did find out Bane's weak spot. Punch him in the Grill.

I feel like that shouldn't have been too hard to figure out. The guy sounds like Darth Vader, there's obviously something important going on with his mask.

It's just that the earlier fight seemed perfectly designed to set Batman an interesting challenge. In the first fight, it is clearly established that Bane is a much better fighter than Batman, can see in the dark, cannot be distracted by Batman's gadgets, and has minions who will never betray him. Ever since that scene, I was thinking in the back of my mind: "How on earth is Batman going to beat this guy?" I was convinced that he was going to come up with something really clever.

I am sure that Bane really was brought up in a prison in the comics...so there was some discontinuing when it was shown that it wasn't him.

Oh, and was the Joker retained in the last film? I know Heath Ledger is dead, but I expected them to do something with his Joker role as a very small cameo.

They must have assumed that if they replaced Heath Ledger people would be pissed. But you'd think the Joker would be released with the other inmates.

I think the only villain in all three movies is Scarecrow (although only as Crane in DK and DKR).

He's Batman. He can find a way in.

I don't expect Heath to be replaced, but use some old footage of him as the joker escaping or something.

Flaw 3: Now this one actually got some people in the theater groaning it was so out there... So Bruce is dead and Blake is going to take up the role of Batman, everybody could see that coming as it's been foreshadowed the entire movie, it's pretty obvious he's like Dick Grayson only with a different name. So he goes to collect what Bruce left him in the will and reveals that his true first name is in fact... ROBIN... Robin Blake... Now honestly that's pushing it... And it just makes the whole Dick Grayson/Robin analogy way too f***ing obvious. Maybe if he revealed his true first name was Dick or Grayson that would different, but just straight up Robin? f***ing pushing it too far.

For a real Batman fan, I can understand why that would piss you off, but I do get why Christopher Nolan decided to use Robin instead of Dick Grayson. Let's face it, nearly every person alive knows Batman and his real name Bruce Wayne, whether you were a die-hard fan or not. Guarentee that if that was asked in a quiz, everyone who would take it would get that right.

But if you were asked in a quiz who was Robin's real name, unless you were a real Batman fan who read the comics and watched all the films and TV series, no one would really know, because basing him on the live-action films, he has only been in two. I remember I had to look up Dick Grayson myself when I saw it on the Wiki about Batman so i was surprised to see that it was Robins real identity. (I never read the comics, but seen the films and some cartoons when I was younger).

I think it was just basically that people knew Robin, but didnt really knew his real name Dick Grayson. So i think Chris just didnt want to cause any confusion to ending off the trilogy, and just decided to go ahead and use Robin as his real name instead. Because I remember that in an article they REALLY denied that Robin will be in the last film, so maybe this was some sort of film twist at the end.

I dunno that's my opinion about that flaw anyway. Please don't kill me for saying it ha!

For a real Batman fan, I can understand why that would piss you off, but I do get why Christopher Nolan decided to use Robin instead of Dick Grayson. Let's face it, nearly every person alive knows Batman and his real name Bruce Wayne, whether you were a die-hard fan or not. Guarentee that if that was asked in a quiz, everyone who would take it would get that right.

But if you were asked in a quiz who was Robin's real name, unless you were a real Batman fan who read the comics and watched all the films and TV series, no one would really know, because basing him on the live-action films, he has only been in two. I remember I had to look up Dick Grayson myself when I saw it on the Wiki about Batman so i was surprised to see that it was Robins real identity. (I never read the comics, but seen the films and some cartoons when I was younger).

I think it was just basically that people knew Robin, but didnt really knew his real name Dick Grayson. So i think Chris just didnt want to cause any confusion to ending off the trilogy, and just decided to go ahead and use Robin as his real name instead. Because I remember that in an article they REALLY denied that Robin will be in the last film, so maybe this was some sort of film twist at the end.

I dunno that's my opinion about that flaw anyway. Please don't kill me for saying it ha![/quote]