39 replies to this topic

[TheHSBR]

I'm just rejoicing that you didn't suggest Megan Fox - LOL -

I was going to LOL but I restrained myself!

[FHC]

Even though some don't like her I think Olivia Wilde would be an interesting choice for Catwoman. She's a good actress, she's beautiful, and she has the cat-like elegance required for the part.

I don't know why, but I would have liked Jessica Biel in that part.

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

I don't know why, but I would have liked Jessica Biel in that part.

Biel's pretty hot.

I was thinking about the Catsuit and looking at it on the big cardboard cutouts they have down at the local Odeon advertising the film - I actually like the new look. At least she looks like nothing's going to fall out of it! I think it's practical and sexy.

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

I've just heard the news about the terrible shooting in the cinema in Colorado.

My thoughts go out to the victims and their families.

The eye-witness accounts I am hearing are horrible.

Apparently the Paris premier has been cancelled.

[JMW326]

I went and saw the movie today and even though I was not super excited about any of the trailers leading up to it, I enjoyed it emensly. I thought it was the best of the three and a pretty incredible movie. All of the actors did a great job but I tip my hat to Tom Hardy, Joseph Gordan Levitt and Ann Hathaway. Those three were the stand outs in this film.

[Destructor!!!]

I went to see it with no particular expectations, apart from a healthy respect for the awesomeness of the the previous film.

Honestly, I just felt unengaged. It was good, and servicable, but it didn't blow my socks off with originality the way TDK did.

In particular, I felt the ending was predictable and a little boring - it had been signposted in so many ways from so early in the film. The twist in the tail didn't stand up for me, perhaps on re-watching it some time I will spot the evidence that would back it up, but it just seemed ridiculous and unbeleivable to me.

Bane's voice kept making me laugh - it reminded me too much of this guy:


When I heard about the shootings, I was pretty shocked. I'm pretty pissed that the media (at least over here) is using it as an excuse to villify the genre.

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

When I heard about the shootings, I was pretty shocked. I'm pretty pissed that the media (at least over here) is using it as an excuse to villify the genre.

I've been away all weekend and haven't yet had the chance to see the film. I've got a queasy feeling that my thoughts about the film will probably coincide with yours. I really hope not, but I gained a less than favourable impression from the trailer as per my post at the top of this thread.

As for the media coverage of the shootings - the debate over here has inevitably centered around the gun laws in the US, however, I have been irritated by some kind of insistence that this kind of random massacre only happens in America, it doesn't, there have been no less than FOUR cases of a nut going on the rampage with a gun in Britain and Norway have just marked the first anniversary of the shootings that occurred at a youth camp.

I think it's a real shame that the media are using this tragedy to target the genre. Nobody really understands what creates these crazies and the vast majority of people who enjoy these movies do so in a rational way and don't go onto commit violent and murderous acts. Nobody - yet, if ever - knows why this particular nutter chose to attack people in a movie theatre and whether it wasn't simply an opportunist time to attack a large number of people he knew would be there for the midnight showing of a popular new film, and maybe not the subject matter of the film itself.

What does disturb me is that the youngest victim was apparently six years-old and as a mother I have to ask what the hell was this small child doing up at midnight watching a movie that I would never have considered suitable for a child under 12 years of age. The whole point of Nolan's vision of Batman is that it is adult and quite violent, and therefore not a place for children to be.

[Destructor!!!]

Yeah, noone wants to bring up what seems to be such a trivial point in the face of such outrage and tragedy, but it is a valid one. If the cinema ushers had been doing their jobs, those kids wouldn't have been there to get injured and killed... possibly ditto their parents.

As for the link to blaming "violent media"... well, it's an old conservative stalwart, it's true. But in this instance, the dude had dyed his hair, painted his face, and declared himself "The Joker" to the arresting officers. You can't trash them for making the link.

You can trash them for hooting for violent films and games to be banned while simultaneously massaging the ridiculous second amendment with scented oils.

I'm thinking specifically of Rush Limbaugh here (and whoever I heard on The Last Word With Matt Cooper on TodayFM earlier), so I may appear to be casting aspersions rather too broadly - I am aware that more liberal media sources have drawn the connection too.

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

Yeah, noone wants to bring up what seems to be such a trivial point in the face of such outrage and tragedy, but it is a valid one. If the cinema ushers had been doing their jobs, those kids wouldn't have been there to get injured and killed... possibly ditto their parents.

Very true. Even though I guess no one could have foreseen the tragedy that was about to unfold, but I am surprised the ushers didn't question the admission of children so young - so obviously underage for the film.

As for the link to blaming "violent media"... well, it's an old conservative stalwart, it's true. But in this instance, the dude had dyed his hair, painted his face, and declared himself "The Joker" to the arresting officers. You can't trash them for making the link.

Ah ... interesting, the only bit of that which made the news over here seems to have been the fact that the gunman had dyed orange hair. I understand why the media made the link now. A statement like that would be hard to ignore.

[The_Donster]

Finished up Batman Begins last night and just opened up my BD of TDK and plan to watch that tonight after I get everyone settled. Glad to see I'm not the only one who's been apprehensive to go and see this. Even before the tragedy I wasn't as stoked as I was for The Avengers. Hell, my wife and I saw a trailer of The Bourne Legacy and were jazzed about that. Still, this is one I feel needs to be seen in the theater and plan on seeing it sometime this weekend. Might try and get my yard work out of the way today, depending on what the mrs. has on the books. Then maybe I'll do a double feature of this and The Avengers over the weekend.

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

...But the movie itself is very far from "Meh" I'm happy to say!!



I was feeling a little less apprehensive after my daughter said she and a load of cadets went to see it and she "didn't want it to end"! She rates this movie highly and Tom Hardy - and if you knew the domestic politics in our household ... that is not praise to be given lightly to mum's favourite actor! That, and I'm used to her returning from a night at the multiplex being somewhat underwhelmed and she's very hard to please, but even she thought it was worth the 2hr and 40+ running time.

We went last night and here's the verdict...


WARNING!!! MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD!!!!!






Don't go expecting this to be a mere sequel to TDK and as heavy as TDK. This isn't as shocking as TDK and in some respects a little less dark ...although it is still deep and dark, and there's plenty of hard fighting, explosions, chases and other stuff that you would expect, although the adult feel of Nolan's franchise reboot is still very there.

The movie kicks off with one of the most inventive aerial scenes I've ever seen (and in contrast to the rather desperate trailer for the new Bourne movie that looks very missable - I mean how many times can you see the motorbike sliding down a railing routine before it becomes totally cliche?) and action kicks off right away. Nolan dispenses with the title credits so that you're tipped straight into the action - which I much appreciated.

I think the pacing is fine for such a long running time (which doesn't feel like a long movie) - although my husband disagrees and thought it dragged in places. Certainly Nolan likes a long lead-in to the final denouement, but the story is well worth taking the time to tell and is inventive and carries areal twist that we didn't see coming.

I have to be honest and say that while this film is an enjoyable roller-coaster ride - it isn't as good as TDK and this is mainly down to Bane. As an actor, Hardy is massively over-spec for this role, and as I feared, that mask gets in the way of what he can really do as a villain. You can tell from Hardy's eyes that he's putting 200% plus into his performance, but it is neutered by the face mask and even though they took the decision to over-dub Hardy's voice and run it through some kind of vocoder and it is recognisably his voice, and while it is menacing and powerful, the emotion is almost wiped out of it. I think Nolan picked Hardy because he's used him before with some success and because of his physique. Unfortunately Hardy's bulked-out and bloated physique is ridiculous for an actor who ought to turning his attention back to the stage doing Shakespeare and Ibsen if he really wants to hit the heights, but instead he's turned himself into a life-size WWF action figure and while that might be getting him roles in A-lister projects, but it keeps him firmly in the lesser colleague of A-Listers category rather than being A-List himself. Hardy's Bane comes nowhere near Ledger's Joker, and for that reason TDK remains the best movie in the trilogy. This is what I mean about TDKR being a little less dark because Ledger's Joker brought a damaged character who represented a total moral void and reflected what many criminal psychologists have come to understand about serial killers, whereas you might start to regard Bane as relatively moral and honourable. TDKR works hard to plumb the depths of human experience and works hard with the notion of "hope" but it doesn't have the emotional resonance that TDK managed to produce within me. Nowhere close in fact, but I think it would be unreasonable to expect Nolan to pull that off twice.

Yes, Bane is menacing and gets you asking questions as to "Who is he?" right from the get-go, but the intellectual aspects of Bane don't really come through accept that he appears to enjoy public oration ( a bit like Shinzon and with a similar background), and physically he is a match for Batman, but he doesn't really out-think anyone on the side of the goodies, and in then end - after the big reveal - he kind of goes out with a real whimper once he is fatally wounded and in tears. We are led to believe that when Batman and Bane meet for the final face-off that they will have been through the same ordeal, but this is false and Bane is finished off and virtually discarded far too easily once the twist has happened. Meh. Reminds me of Nero - sorry! - and basically they could have found any aspiring action-actor wannabe beefcake in any gym in LA and cast him in the role and it would have been as effective.

The acting merits all belong to Bale who layers his Bruce Wayne with ever greater nuances. What I love about this franchise has been the emphasis on Wayne and you do see rather more of Wayne than you do of his alter-ego Batman, and that's fine because it works and it means that when he's in the Batsuit, that it's really emphatic and the excitement really takes off with the crazy chases, fighting, explosions and really, really cool gadgetry. Nolan's big set-pieces really work and they are on a grand scale.

As before, his stirling supporting cast of A-listers really do their job. Not much to say except that there is much to enjoy in Oldman, Caine, and Freeman's performances. Marion Cotilliard really comes into her own at the end of the movie, and anyone doubting if Anne Hathaway could cut it as Serena Kyle (she is never referred to as "Catwoman") should be suitably mollified. I very much appreciated her in the movie - she has a lot of really good lines - and she's hot. Guys, you're not going to ignore her shapely behind when she's straddling the Bat-bike!!

As for whether, TDKR really hails the end of Nolan's franchise trilogy? Well, the door has been left open and if you're wondering just why that young, brave cop plays such a prominent role - then you'll know at the end... ... ... which also manages to be really rather touching.

[FHC]

I didn't want to say it, less I be offered to the acting gods as tribute, by you, but I see we agree on Mr Hardy and who could have played this Bane person. I can only help but think that Mr. Hardy did it for a huge paycheck.

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

LOL! I can be objective about Mr Hardy and I will not hesitate to say that Bane is not his best work. As for a huge paycheck - yeah well, he has a son to maintain and whilst his Mad Max project seems to be have been subjected to endless delays - this fitted in rather well, AND I am sure he would want to stay in Nolan's good books for future projects as Nolan seems to like to keep a "stable" of familiar actors to use in his projects.

My concern is that Hardy's physical bulk may well begin to do the talking for him ...at least as far as Hollywood is concerned, and he is a far more talented actor than that. To me, now, his playing Mad Max is not the best news of the year...although it might at least me we get to see his mobile features in action rather than his muscles the whole time.

[Daysleeper]

I haven't seen the movie yet, but I believe that Hardy just wanted to show his versatility. And he is a very good actor, ignoring his muscles and all. Have you seen Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy? He's terrific in that movie. And I have to say that I thought he was a horrible actor after Nemesis...
I bet it's also a lot of fun to be in many different movies, different genres. As an actor, you don't wanna do similar stuff all the time. Plus the Nolan factor. Plus being the villain in a big blockbuster movie. Plus being the bad guy following on Ledger's almost legendary (and imho a little bit overrated - he was very good, but I still prefer Nicholson) performance as Joker in the previous installation. Why should he have said no to that part?

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

I haven't seen the movie yet, but I believe that Hardy just wanted to show his versatility.

In terms of versatility Hardy's already played franchise movie villians, criminals and tough guys - those roles have formed a huge part of his portfolio as an actor. This role didn't stretch him or increase his craft in any way, shape, or form ...IMHO!

And he is a very good actor, ignoring his muscles and all.

LOL! I know that! I've been following Hardy's career very closely since early in 2003! Arguably, he was better before he became the Incredible Bulk because the roles he was offered in those days tended to be indie projects with quirky characters that he had to act with a lot of intelligence.

Have you seen Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy? He's terrific in that movie.

Not yet! ...Though I do have a copy of the DVD through from Lovefilm.com to watch!

And I have to say that I thought he was a horrible actor after Nemesis...

Ironically that's where he got a lot of attention as being the best thing in a horrible movie!!

I bet it's also a lot of fun to be in many different movies, different genres. As an actor, you don't wanna do similar stuff all the time. Plus the Nolan factor. Plus being the villain in a big blockbuster movie. Plus being the bad guy following on Ledger's almost legendary (and imho a little bit overrated - he was very good, but I still prefer Nicholson) performance as Joker in the previous installation. Why should he have said no to that part?

I'm not saying that he should have said "no" to that part, but he and Nolan were supposed to have worked together to bring Bane to the screen, and IMO a lot of it misfired. At some point I think it does mean that an actor if he really wants to be a top-ranker has to be a little more selective about the projects he does. Going in to this project after Hardy had impressed in Inception it must have looked like a really good move for Hardy to have made and a complete no-brainer, but I think he couldn't deliver what he is a capable of behind a mask and his talent was squandered in a role that anyone could have done. That's my opinion - and in my opinion - had he have been given the role of The Joker, he would have out-acted Ledger.

Hardy has had a lot of varied roles and fulfilled them with varying degrees of success. He's probably the most versatile actor out there and proven to be so, but franchises - even in the hands of a guy like Nolan - are not usually Oscar material, and I say that in the full knowledge of Ledger's posthumous award.

EDIT

I understand that the DVD of TDKR might be worth a look too if they include a decent amount of extras - I have heard that there are deleted scenes that show more about Bane's early life which show him without his mask. I assume they cut them for running time and because it would have spoiled the twist at the end of the movie.

[Gothneo]

I have to say, I was underwhelmed by it, but less so then my friend who really set his expectations high for this film.

I agree that the opening scene is spectacular, but script issues got in the way of enjoying it right off the bat for me.

Then we cut to Bruce and Nolan makes a point of depicting him as wore-out, broken down, rode hard and put up wet... which latter on proves to be completely untrue. Basically Nolan takes us back to Batman Begins... and we should be past that at this point into the franchise.

Most of Bane's motivations make no sense until you find out that Talia is calling the shots, but as I said on another forum, when the whole plot is revealed, I couldn't help thinking about an Austin Powers Skit...

Dr. Evil: Scott, I want you to meet daddy's nemesis, Austin Powers
Scott Evil: What? Are you feeding him? Why don't you just kill him?
Dr. Evil: I have an even better idea. I'm going to place him in an easily escapable situation involving an overly elaborate and exotic death.
Dr. Evil: Close the tank!
Scott Evil: Wait, aren't you even going to watch them? They could get away!
Dr. Evil: No no no, I'm going to leave them alone and not actually witness them dying, I'm just gonna assume it all went to plan. What?
Scott Evil: I have a gun, in my room, you give me five seconds, I'll get it, I'll come back down here, BOOM, I'll blow their brains out!

That's who Talias plan plays out... Just all pretty pointless.

I hate to do it, but I rate it the worst of the trilogy, and I really wanted it to be great.

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

I have to say, I was underwhelmed by it, but less so then my friend who really set his expectations high for this film.

I think a lot of people got overly-pumped for this sequel after TDK - it was always going to be a tough act to follow, and I guess that some disappointment was - alas - inevitable.

I agree that the opening scene is spectacular, but script issues got in the way of enjoying it right off the bat for me.

In terms of there not really being a script at that point - I agree, the visuals were spectacular and inventive, but it was a little hard to follow what was actually going on in that scene.

Then we cut to Bruce and Nolan makes a point of depicting him as wore-out, broken down, rode hard and put up wet... which latter on proves to be completely untrue. Basically Nolan takes us back to Batman Begins... and we should be past that at this point into the franchise.

Hmmm, Nolan does rather love his own premise doesn't he? TBH, I didn't find that such a distraction because I've never followed the franchise in comic books and my only previous Batman experiences had been the cheesy and camp 60s Adam West TV show and movies, and the late 80s movie reincarnation with Michael Keaton. For me, this broken down Bruce works because it sets him apart as not just a superhero, but a human being trying to bring justice to a troubled city with some good friends and very cool gadgets... if that makes sense.

Most of Bane's motivations make no sense until you find out that Talia is calling the shots, but as I said on another forum, when the whole plot is revealed, I couldn't help thinking about an Austin Powers Skit...

Dr. Evil: Scott, I want you to meet daddy's nemesis, Austin Powers
Scott Evil: What? Are you feeding him? Why don't you just kill him?
Dr. Evil: I have an even better idea. I'm going to place him in an easily escapable situation involving an overly elaborate and exotic death.
Dr. Evil: Close the tank!
Scott Evil: Wait, aren't you even going to watch them? They could get away!
Dr. Evil: No no no, I'm going to leave them alone and not actually witness them dying, I'm just gonna assume it all went to plan. What?
Scott Evil: I have a gun, in my room, you give me five seconds, I'll get it, I'll come back down here, BOOM, I'll blow their brains out!

That's who Talias plan plays out... Just all pretty pointless.

I hate to do it, but I rate it the worst of the trilogy, and I really wanted it to be great.

OOOOOps! Should that be a "spoiler alert???" LOL - I guess by now that most people who were going to see this have seen it. Yep, I agree with all of the above. I didn't see that twist coming - nor did my hubby - but it kind of makes any desire to see this again (apart from deleted scenes and nerdy extras) and buy the DVD a bit "meh"!!!

I also did get to see Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy this week which I thought was engrossing and beautifully shot - though I have a couple of nerdy objections to some period inaccuracies such as there would be no speed bumps in 1973, and the Dual belt-drive turntable box shown in the background in once scene would have housed the exact same model that my husband bought as a state-of-the-art budget turntable ten years later!! Hardy was pretty good in this as Tarr, but he has worked in similar roles to this before.

[Daysleeper]

I have finally seen TDKR, and I wasn't impressed. It's an okay movie for my taste. But I don't think TDK was that great, either. That doesn't mean I didn't like it and wasted two hours of my life. Not at all. It was good enough and enjoyable, but just not my type of Batman movie. Guess I'm just not into Christopher Nolan's version of Batman. What I did like was Anne Hathaway as Catwoman. I've expected her to be... mis-cast, but I thought she was pretty good. Not Michelle Pfeiffer-great, but pretty good (and hot). That said, I have to take back all my premature criticism of her in that role.

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

I really liked Anne Hathaway - I thought she made a corking Catwoman - and as you say suitably hot enough for the role. I quite liked her costume as it was both sexy and pragmatic. I know there was a lot of discussion about her possibly not being able to pull it off, but straight as I am, even I thought she looked pretty hot on the Batbike!!

Actually, I very much appreciated the strong role Selina was given - I thought she was smart and sassy ...and tough. I think Michael Bay could learn a few lessons as to how to included female interest in popcorn movies that are both interesting to boys and girls equally.

I don't think TDKR is the greatest movie I've ever seen, but as a standard archetype of a "Summer Movie", then it's probably one of the more intelligent of this year's offerings, and a whole bunch smarter than Prometheus!!!!

[VulcanFanatic]

Anyone pick up the DVD or Bluray of DKR? Walmart had the whole trilogy (5 discs) for 27.99, pretty good deal i thought. Nice feature length batmobile special feature and lots more.