אז אתה אומר שאתה לא רוצה לראות אותם ושוב מבקש מדע בדיוני...

המנהלים: jol9, Holiday_Armadillo, rc4991
felix_r כתב:חביבי, אתה קצת מוזר. ביקשת מדע בדיוני? נתתי לך 3 סרטי מדע בדיוני.
אז אתה אומר שאתה לא רוצה לראות אותם ושוב מבקש מדע בדיוני...
ג'ון קרטר אני לא יכול לראות כי אין לי כבלים,פרומתאוס לא מעניין אותי כל כך ואני לא יראה סרט קומדיה ביום אבל
misha כתב:התנין כתב:באטמן הוא לא אדם עם כוחות על וסביר להניח שמלחמה בפשע וקפיצה מגגות של בנייני ענק, תביא אותו למצב פיזי רע.
לא עד כדי כך. הוא לא סופרמן אבל גם לא לגמרי אדם רגיל.
בסרט מובהר שהוא הסתגר (ל8 שנים!) מבחירה ולא בגלל מצב רפואי כלשהו. ראית שכשהוא היה צריך לחזור, הוא חזר די מהר.
בכלל, גוטהם אף פעם לא אמורה להיות כה נקייה מפשע כמו עשו בתחילת הסרט, ובטח אין מצב שהיא עוברת 8 שנים בלי להזדקק לבאטמן. באופן כללי, הווייב האפל של העיר עם כל הדברים הנלווים לא היה פה, בניגוד לסרט הראשון.
אבל הלוואי שזו הייתה הבעיה היחידה של הסרט.
Okay, so here's my heavy-hearted critique on The Dark Knight Rises, one of the worst films (at least in terms of lost potential) that I've seen in recent times. All I wanted was for it to be just an inch better than The Dark Knight, and it would have sealed it's place as one of the very best comic book movies of all time. Instead, it turned out to be one big misfiring arrow.
And it's not just me, quite a few others (professional critics and general public alike) have been disappointed. Even Ari was ticked off by the ending, I was ticked off by almost every thing I saw. As Max put it, it's too generic, too standard, filled with plot holes and flaws. Even if I take the Batman mythology out of it, it's still a 5/10 film for me. Like I said it was either the case of Nolan trying too hard, or believing his own hype, or a bit of both.
Before I begin, I do want to clarify that after Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman are the three characters I know most about, in that order. I know them inside out, know all their incarnations like few do. And after having watched thousands of films, read hundreds of comics, for me to say this movie was a stinker should carry a bit of a weight. With two great films behind him, this was a great opportunity to go for the killing blow and create a timeless masterpiece. My word, what a missed chance, what wasted potential. It's a thinking movie-goer's nightmare.
It's clear this is a forced film to end the trilogy, to bring closure to the characters. At times it felt like a Ra's Al Ghul's movie, how his name was brought up every ten minutes or so. Instead of closing it out, this would have worked far better had they upped the ante, brought Batman to the mainstream, with him saving the day, with the city accepting him as their hero. Instead they tried creating a melodramatic mess - one that has little to none of the melodrama, but all of the mess.
Even if I take out 1 point from each of the 10 listed below, the movie ends up at 0. But as I said above, it's more of the potential, what I expected Nolan and his team to do. Instead they ended up doing the exact opposite. Instead of going out with the most awesome-st of bangs, they went out with a whimper. Sad, really.
Spoilers! Don't Read Below This Line If You Haven't Seen The Movie Yet!
This Isn't Batman
Sorry to say this, but Batman just got used by Nolan. Big time. His version of the character is without doubt the most ineffectual Batman ever. Dumb, always one step behind his villains, and relies too much on others. In comics, he's a champion fighter, master tactician, and scientific genius. In Nolan's take, the character looses almost everything that made him what he is. It was bearable in the first two films, but definitely not in the third.
Here he's just ineffective to the nth degree. And worse yet, this film is more about Bruce Wayne than Batman. Which makes it doubly worse. The main focus should always be Batman, interspersed with his real persona, and this way both Batman and Bruce Wayne have gravitas. I quite liked how early in the film he was working on his computer and traced Selina Kyle, but that was just that one moment. It all went downhill from there.
Ultimately, like I said, Batman was just used by Nolan to tell a story, he wasn't the main character in this film, even John Blake had more lines and screen time than Bruce Wayne, let alone Batman. Disappointing.
This Isn't Gotham, Either
I can't stress this enough. Gotham is a lost city, it's never free from crime. Every nook, corner and alley is riddled with it. But Batman still believes in it, therein lies the charm. And they want us to believe Mr. Batman was out of the scene for 8 years straight. The city never even had a lethal fire that required his services, let alone crime and all that. 8 full years, you say!
But much more than that it was the look of the city that killed me. They showed glimpses of it in Batman Beigns, far less in the second film, but here Gotham was non-existent. Where's the doom and gloom? Where's the Gotham media? And more importantly where are the average Gotham citizens? Show a few minutes of the street view, general populace? And keep it dark please, what's this "Dark Knight" or "Noony Night". Batman rarely comes out in broad daylight in full getup, anyway. More than dark, keep it mystic and mysterious. In a good way. They should a hint of it in Batman Begins, but here we're completely cut up from the city, and I didn't feel a thing.
And finally, not even a word about Joker? He's not the type of character to stay in Arkham Asylum for 8 years. He'd have escaped in a few months flat. I can understand they may not have wanted to go there in detail, in respect to Heath Ledger, but a small news paper clipping, Gordon talking about him, anything, just a hint.
Story, Script, Screenplay
All three sucked. I really disliked how Batman relied on Selina Kyle to lead him to Bane. When he knew she was a thief through and through. When he already had enough information from Blake and Gordon that Bane was in the sewers. Plus how did she find know where Bane was hiding in the first place? She wasn't working for him. Also how he let her steal the pearls with such ease, without sounding the alarm, or alerting Alfred.
Same goes for the stock exchange deal, and Bruce losing all his money. All his money, you say? Nice. Where's Wayne Enterprises liquid cash, foreign concerns, real estate and all that? Or did the company exist just in the stock exchange? And frankly, how could a attack on the stock exchange just drain someone of all his money, really.
And what's with the bomb? When Bane knew that his mission was to destroy Gotham, and he cared little for his life, he could just have found a way to initiate it earlier. Like they said to the security forces on the bridge that if any citizen of Gotham crossed it they'll blow the bomb. Why wait 5 freaking months? The whole nuclear bomb plot was lazy, cheap and terribly dragging. And not to mention, how little time there was to marinate. Everything moved far too fast in the last hour to really absorb anything.
I can go on here for hours, but all these plot holes and flaws really lower the movie down to below mediocrity. Batman Begins and The Dark Knight had their small share of flaws, but were covered because of a smooth storyline. This one is one mad mama, when it comes to these. Like I said, cheap lazy tricks.
Suspension Of Reality
I quite like how Nolan slapped (nearly) all of us into suspending reality. Is this supposed to be a grounded, real-world movie? When anything and everything can be suspended and modified to suit the events in the film. It's far easier to suspend reality and turn off the mind in a fun comic movie like The Avengers or other similar ones which you guys know all about.
But when your hallmark is grounded and gritty, these flaws, plot holes and mind-off moments just bite you hard. You can also add rushed to the above list, as I said above there are several pacing issues all through the two and half hours, etc. Bruce breaking his back? Is he stupid enough to go alone and face Bane when he knows he's got a bit of an army down under? Why not include Blake and take a few good officers? Then he never uses his gadgets at all? What about some gas pebbles, tiny grenades, or just a sniper dart gun to put Bane to sleep? Why couldn't he rip Bane's mask open the first time they met?
And did it really feel like Gotham was occupied for 3 or 5 months? Did it? The rich versus poor theme wasn't even sold perfectly? Showing the rich people fighting for food, while the criminal scums and poor ones living lavishly would have sold it better. Who sends all your police force (3,000) underground at the same time? All trapped, huh? Sure didn't looked like they were suffering when they came out, clean shaved, shiny uniforms, and all. Fox still wearing his suits? Sure didn't feel like he was disconnected from the outside world?
And besides, where's the outside world? Where's the US Army, just sitting in the HQs and observing the radiation? Ever heard of non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse (NNEMP). Or maybe laser target where the nuke was and send in something big along with Navy SEALs. They tried nothing, Bane tried nothing? Plus, what's with the hand-to-hand fighting. This isn't ancient China, folks. More so when they had guns. Even the police were engaging in brawls with the criminals towards the end? And the laughable plot of Death or Exile? Give me a break.
And what's with pit. Laughable. They had TV in the pit? Even more laughable. I was expecting it would be the real Lazarus Pit, the one where people healed. Instead it's just a pathetic little prison. How did Bruce Wayne get in there? How did he get out of there, after fixing his broken back (that's even more laughable in of itself) without a surgery or anything, and that too in around four months. And then he, what, flies to Gotham from half-way across the world with no money? And clean shaved? Talk about making an entry. Cheapo!
Stupid Subplots
What's with the film opening with a celebration of Harvey Dent Day? Is this the Police Story? So much so that even third tier police officers get plenty of dialog. Same with the orphanage subplot that took quite some screen time. Useless, and could have been significantly reduced (or done away with, altogether). I know he gave away his home to orphans, but this would have evoked the same emotional response had they taken out this orphanage subplot.
And what's with Blake using the orphans to spread the word of the evacuation? Terribly unsafe thing to do in a state of war. Worse yet, the orphans are the only people Blake is planning to get out of Gotham? Give me a break. Another very idiot subplot was Jen, the friend and accomplice of Selina Kyle, can't believe they put her in, and cut so many other corners. Even the Catwoman character (because, let's face it, that's what she is, even if the filmmakers would like us to believe otherwise) isn't worked out right. An accomplished burglar who steals from the rich has nothing to show for it. Ha!
Alfred The Grouch
Excuse me, but what was that? Alfred resigning was the probably the most unbelievable thing in the film for a purist like me. He'd never leave Batman, like ever. Cheap trick to garner emotional response. In fact, following the comics, both Bruce and Alfred have the strongest of relationships, not the fickle one they showed here. "Goodbye, Alfred", huh. In fact, Alfred would really never have argued with Wayne like this. He'd never shy away from his crusade like I said. They just sacrificed this character for the cheap little ending.
And even going by their version of the story, Caine should have had one (or two) more scenes. Maybe with Fox. I don't like how he completely disappeared during the middle of the story. Just like the Amazing Spider-man's Aunt May who isn't seen in the second and final act. That's weak, weak storytelling.
Bane
I sure did have a few problems with this character. More on that later, but hhy did Bane not kill Batman in the first place? Why leave lose ends like this? He seemed a much more ruthless character to do such a thing, knowing full well that a guy like Batman would try to escape. And that too from an open prison? Laugh, laugh! It is to laugh!
I can understand they wanted to keep it realistic by not including the serum, even in small quantities. I'd say just let him have a little serum, and instead of bulking him up using CGI, etc, make him invincible. And resistant to bullets, too. They already put reality out of the window, when they had Bane punching concrete columns out with his bare hands in the end.
And speaking of ends, what was that?! Building his character up to such levels, and in reality he was just a mercenary. No need at all to have him associated with Ra's Al Ghul, just brings the character down to a much lower level. And the end, being shot to bits by a cat? Talk about anticlimactic. Plus, the voice, the voice, surely it would have worked much better without a mask, with face painted in white and Bane speaking Spanish (with subtitles). Much more threatening, and people would have understood what he said.
I had no trouble understanding his one liners, or when he spoke a few sentences. But more than that, and it all got fuzzy and muzzy, enough that you had to pay attention to what he was saying, instead of smooth hearing.
Supporting Characters
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, I'll happily take all four new characters out from the film. It's too crowded. Add in one new one or at most two. At most two. Better stick at just one. Even if it is just Bane. Or someone else? Instead of giving the main characters enough time, we waste it on these new ones. How hard would it have been to show Gordon spending a minute or two with his wife and children with a few days left in the explosion? Or Alfred meeting with Fox? A meeting or two more between Gordon and Batman.
The more characters you put in a film, the less the focus comes on each. You really have to balance it out, or give powerful scenes to each to make it work. For my money there is far too little Batman action in here, while characters like Seline Kyle and John Blake take the cake and run away with it. Besides, this is the third part of a trilogy, why introduce an army of new characters - four new ones, the bunch of policemen, and all the folks in the pits, as well as the city officials and Wayne Enterprise board members. Give me a break!
But my absolute worst character here would have to be Miranda Tate, really took the charm out of the film. Go watch the scene when she's dieing in the car, and how weak they are. No disrespect at all to Indian Bollywood films (they are great for what they are), but it seemed like I was watching one, where a character takes five minutes to die and keeps on talking. Joke!
Robin? Seriously?
I mean, like seriously? As if all other stuff wasn't bad enough, you create a random character and then drop the bomb (pun intended) that it's Robin. While I knew this from the moment it was first announced that Joseph Gordon-Levitt signed on, Nolan probably intended it as shock-and-awe for the general audience. In the words of 12-year-olds: Lame!
And besides, nice touch leaving him the Batcave. How in the world is he going to fight crime, develop gadgets, trace criminals, and all that without money and training. Besides, he isn't the sharpest tool in the box to be Batman in the first place, anyway. Idealistic? I'm more idealistic than him. It was just another cheap shot. Whether Nolan was forced into it by Warner Bros, is another thing. JGL is a rising star, and maybe they want to carry on with his Batman in the future, but it will be very bland without the supporting cast, that's for sure.
Instead of having him, it would have been better had Gordon not rotted on the bed half the movie, and did most of the Blake's work, alongside Batman. Maybe even some hand to hand combat for good old Gordon. But when every other thing is wrong in a film, how much can a sensible soul complain. What's done is done!
Disrespectful
As I said above, it's disrespectful not only to the Batman mythology (which I can forgive), but it's disrespectful to the intelligence of the ones watching the movie too. Add in bad film making, and it's a real stinker. A minute or two left for the nuclear bomb to go off? Close call, huh? And instead of rushing out to throw out the bomb, Batman has enough time to talk to Talia, Selina and Gordon. And then with seconds left he heads out into the ocean with the bomb exploding. Sounds like B-movie from the 80s.
And his armor can sustain bullets, but not a knife from Talia? Besides, he sure looked like he was done and dusted after that, and a few minutes later the guy is laughing and running (running mostly). No sign of pain or loss of blood. Most of the movie is either overkill or corny. And ultimately, disrespectful to everything and everyone. Of course, with Nolan creating better movies every time, I was expecting it to be better than The Dark Knight. It's not even close. A big, big fall from grace.
Spoilers! Don't Read Above This Line If You Haven't Seen The Movie Yet!
Batman Begins was the best film based on the character by far, grounded in reality, yet personal. Great supporting cast, perfectly selected, each of which got adequate screen time. Sure it could be improved on a couple of notes (Rachel angle was just bad, more time could have been given to Bruce's parent's death, seeing as it was the first time it was portrayed in live action), but it was infinitely more personal and a true comic book movie. Joker stole the show in the second one, and deservedly so. But this one is so bad, it's not even good.
If you read all what is above, some of it may seem nitpicking, and some of it hindsight. But most of it are flaws, plain evident. I'm infinitely more disappointed because I expected greatness. A timeless movie for the ages. But critic opinion is divided, and it has little chances at the Oscars (according to a recent comment by an Academy official). Nolan crafted a soulless Gotham, an ineffective Batman and added in a weak 2D supporting cast to it. I'd have lived with that without saying a word, but combine this with bad film making and a stupid story, and I'm at loss for words to explain how bad it is. Only word I can think of (and used) is: disrespectful.
[/quote]misha כתב:לא רק מיומנויות מיוחדות, יש לו גם גישה לטכנולוגיה (שגם מגינה או מטפלת בו) שלאנשים אחרים אין. הוא פגיע אבל ההסגר שלו לא נבע משום פציעה. ברגע שהתחיל הבלאגן, לא הייתה לו בעיה למצוא פיתרון לבעיה של הרגל.
מבחינתי, ההסברים לא ממש מספקים.
misha כתב:אז זהו שגות'הם לא אמורה להיות אף פעם עיר שאין בה פשע, בטח לא בצורה כזאת טוטאלית. זאת תמיד עיר עם חיי פשע משגשגים. כל הסיפור הזה כאילו הכל בסדר וכולם שמחים וצוהלים במשך 8 שנים ולא זקוקים לבאטמן - לא מתאים אלא אם מתעלמים מהקומיקסים לגמרי. אבל זה כאמור רק עניין קטן, יש עוד כמה וכמה בעיות שפורטו למעלה.
לא כזה מצומצם, גם חלק מהמבקרים ביקרו אותו וגם ברשת ממש לא כולם מרוצים. הטענות באות בגלל שלא מעט אנשים ציפו שסרט הזה ישתווה או יהיה יותר טוב מקודמיו שהציבו סטנדרט גבוה.
misha כתב:לטרילוגיה עצמה כבר עכשיו מובטח מקום כבוד בין הטרילוגיות הגדולות אי פעם, הוויכוח הוא על הגדולה של הסרט השלישי, שלדעתי לא מגיע לרמה של שני האחרים, בטח לא לשני. אין בו משהו נוסף שמייחד אותו כמו שיש בסרטים הקודמים.
דווקא בIMDB מצביעים הרבה פאן בויז, הייטרים, שרבים מהם נרשמים כמה פעמים כדי להצביע. לדעתי דירוג המבקרים בRT נותן תמונה יותר טובה.
אין מצב שהסרט הזה קרוב לקומיקס מבין השלושה, אם כבר אז להפך. הראשון הוא הכי קרוב.
אז זהו, ששופטים את באטמן שונה בגלל שנולאן הראה כמה מוצלחים סרטים כאלה יכולים להיות. אף אחד לא ציפה מנוקמים לעלילה מיוחדת כי ברור שעם כל כך הרבה דמויות זה לא יקרה. אנשים פשוט באו להנות מהאקשן ומהאפקטים.
misha כתב:לטרילוגיה עצמה כבר עכשיו מובטח מקום כבוד בין הטרילוגיות הגדולות אי פעם, הוויכוח הוא על הגדולה של הסרט השלישי, שלדעתי לא מגיע לרמה של שני האחרים, בטח לא לשני. אין בו משהו נוסף שמייחד אותו כמו שיש בסרטים הקודמים.
דווקא בIMDB מצביעים הרבה פאן בויז, הייטרים, שרבים מהם נרשמים כמה פעמים כדי להצביע. לדעתי דירוג המבקרים בRT נותן תמונה יותר טובה.
אין מצב שהסרט הזה קרוב לקומיקס מבין השלושה, אם כבר אז להפך. הראשון הוא הכי קרוב.
אז זהו, ששופטים את באטמן שונה בגלל שנולאן הראה כמה מוצלחים סרטים כאלה יכולים להיות. אף אחד לא ציפה מנוקמים לעלילה מיוחדת כי ברור שעם כל כך הרבה דמויות זה לא יקרה. אנשים פשוט באו להנות מהאקשן ומהאפקטים.
misha כתב:לטרילוגיה עצמה כבר עכשיו מובטח מקום כבוד בין הטרילוגיות הגדולות אי פעם, הוויכוח הוא על הגדולה של הסרט השלישי, שלדעתי לא מגיע לרמה של שני האחרים, בטח לא לשני. אין בו משהו נוסף שמייחד אותו כמו שיש בסרטים הקודמים.
דווקא בIMDB מצביעים הרבה פאן בויז, הייטרים, שרבים מהם נרשמים כמה פעמים כדי להצביע. לדעתי דירוג המבקרים בRT נותן תמונה יותר טובה.
אין מצב שהסרט הזה קרוב לקומיקס מבין השלושה, אם כבר אז להפך. הראשון הוא הכי קרוב.
אז זהו, ששופטים את באטמן שונה בגלל שנולאן הראה כמה מוצלחים סרטים כאלה יכולים להיות. אף אחד לא ציפה מנוקמים לעלילה מיוחדת כי ברור שעם כל כך הרבה דמויות זה לא יקרה. אנשים פשוט באו להנות מהאקשן ומהאפקטים.
MTA2311 כתב:misha כתב:לטרילוגיה עצמה כבר עכשיו מובטח מקום כבוד בין הטרילוגיות הגדולות אי פעם, הוויכוח הוא על הגדולה של הסרט השלישי, שלדעתי לא מגיע לרמה של שני האחרים, בטח לא לשני. אין בו משהו נוסף שמייחד אותו כמו שיש בסרטים הקודמים.
דווקא בIMDB מצביעים הרבה פאן בויז, הייטרים, שרבים מהם נרשמים כמה פעמים כדי להצביע. לדעתי דירוג המבקרים בRT נותן תמונה יותר טובה.
אין מצב שהסרט הזה קרוב לקומיקס מבין השלושה, אם כבר אז להפך. הראשון הוא הכי קרוב.
אז זהו, ששופטים את באטמן שונה בגלל שנולאן הראה כמה מוצלחים סרטים כאלה יכולים להיות. אף אחד לא ציפה מנוקמים לעלילה מיוחדת כי ברור שעם כל כך הרבה דמויות זה לא יקרה. אנשים פשוט באו להנות מהאקשן ומהאפקטים.
לא קראתי את כל הדיון, אז יכול להיות שדיברתם על זה. אני מסכים איתך בנוגע לחולשה היחסית של הסרט לעומת השניים הראשונים, ולדעתי זה נובע בעיקר מהחולשה של "היריב" בסרט. ביין פשוט לא כריזמטי מספיק( בטח כשמשווים להופעה של הית' לדג'ר בסרט הקודם)... גם לא כל כך אהבתי את החזרה לעניין ליגת הצללים.
התנין כתב:misha כתב:לטרילוגיה עצמה כבר עכשיו מובטח מקום כבוד בין הטרילוגיות הגדולות אי פעם, הוויכוח הוא על הגדולה של הסרט השלישי, שלדעתי לא מגיע לרמה של שני האחרים, בטח לא לשני. אין בו משהו נוסף שמייחד אותו כמו שיש בסרטים הקודמים.
דווקא בIMDB מצביעים הרבה פאן בויז, הייטרים, שרבים מהם נרשמים כמה פעמים כדי להצביע. לדעתי דירוג המבקרים בRT נותן תמונה יותר טובה.
אין מצב שהסרט הזה קרוב לקומיקס מבין השלושה, אם כבר אז להפך. הראשון הוא הכי קרוב.
אז זהו, ששופטים את באטמן שונה בגלל שנולאן הראה כמה מוצלחים סרטים כאלה יכולים להיות. אף אחד לא ציפה מנוקמים לעלילה מיוחדת כי ברור שעם כל כך הרבה דמויות זה לא יקרה. אנשים פשוט באו להנות מהאקשן ומהאפקטים.
נכון אמרתי שיש הרבה פאנבוייז והייטרים שמגיבים ומצביעים אבל אתה לא יכול להתייחס לטיעון הזה ברצינות יתרה כשמספר המצביעים מגיע למאות אלפים. הרי ברוטן טומטוז ביקורת מייצגת טעם אישי של מבקר(כולה מבקר!)ותו לא. ועזוב שהסרט עומד על ממוצע מכובד של 87%, שזה יותר מבאטמן מתחיל למשל, ועם ציון מכובד של 8. עד היום רשימת הסרטים המובילה של IMDB לא ממש אכזבה, ואני חושב שהציונים מייצגים את דעת הכלל.
משתמשים הגולשים בפורום זה: אין משתמשים רשומים ו־2 אורחים