Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I had forgotten that, Corpses. I was more thinking of Alfred's "research" than Talia's origin story.

Alfreds research was kind of invalidated by the new information we got with the plot twit.

I do wonder where Alfred went after he left Wayne Manor,

Manchu wrote:I liked a lot about the movie but I didn't like the movie itself. Sloppy, long-winded narrative with no real justification plus overwhelming everything action plus frenetic editing ... ugh, I just walked out of the theater feeling beaten up. The villains' plans are either nonsensical or absurd -- I mean, either what they're doing just doesn't make any sense or it's just such a narrow, vindictive matter that I'm left wondering why I should care about these small-minded antagonists. Nolan's Bat-films are widely thought to be topical but this film lacked any kind of moral compass. It's treatment of real-world themes lacked reflection and responsibility. My review can be summed up as : this was the film we deserved but not the one we needed.

I wouldn't say the villains are completely nonsensical I mean the League of Shadows was portrayed as an extremist organization in both the 1st and 3rd film, so it would make sense for them to have a ridiculous plot scheme like a lot of real world extremist groups have.

Corpsesarefun wrote:Alfreds research was kind of invalidated by the new information we got with the plot twit.

I do wonder where Alfred went after he left Wayne Manor,

Yeah, I spent the rest of the film after he left saying "he's gonna turn up now" and he didn't turn up till the funeral. I'm assuming that he left Gotham before it fell, and so couldn't get back in after it had.

Eldarain wrote:

Manchu wrote:Was it ever mentioned in the film why he was thrown out? I mean, besides what Alfred heard (which I cannot even remember). Was that confirmed as the real reason or was there another reason or was he never actually in the LoS or was he never actually kicked out?

He was kicked out by Ra's because he was a constant reminder of the hell hole he left his wife and unborn child in.

That is what Talia said the reason was, Alfred said he was kicked out by Ra's for being to extreme, or something to that effect.

Ahtman wrote:That is what Talia said the reason was, Alfred said he was kicked out by Ra's for being to extreme, or something to that effect.

In other words, we have two explanations and no other information to back either up -- except that neither Talia nor Bane were present during Bruce's training (despite Bruce's training clearly taking place after Talia's rescue) ... which doesn't really mean anything. As for her being an unreliable narrator -- we don't have any reason to believe anything that she says. Can you guys remind me what else we have besides her word?

Ahtman wrote:

Eldarain wrote:

Manchu wrote:Was it ever mentioned in the film why he was thrown out? I mean, besides what Alfred heard (which I cannot even remember). Was that confirmed as the real reason or was there another reason or was he never actually in the LoS or was he never actually kicked out?

He was kicked out by Ra's because he was a constant reminder of the hell hole he left his wife and unborn child in.

That is what Talia said the reason was, Alfred said he was kicked out by Ra's for being to extreme, or something to that effect.

I'd say that Talia is more informed on the matter than Alfred, he simply found out that Bane was excommunicated and then suggested that he could have been excommunicated for being too extreme.

Although "Talia" is a liar.

She has no reason to lie to a man she presumes is as good as dead...

Corpsesarefun wrote:She has no reason to lie to a man she presumes is as good as dead...

Yeah, the villain always reveals the details of her plan to the hero when the hero has absolutely no chance of survival.
(apart from that one way that he could get out alive, but that's never going to happen is it?)

Corpsesarefun wrote:She has no reason to lie to a man she presumes is as good as dead...

If she's sane, which she isn't.

Corpsesarefun wrote:She has no reason to lie to a man she presumes is as good as dead...

She also expressed that she hated her father as well in the same speech. A person can be wrong without lying; she might not really understand why he booted Bane out and just assumed the reason. How many daughters would be angry at their father for not liking their boyfriend and saying she can't see him? How many fathers do it just to spite their daughter? I don't see an honest woman in that scene, but a petulant and angry child, upset with her father, and also upset at the man who took him away before she could act on her anger. I believe her words were "I could never forgive him... until you murdered him".

Ahtman wrote:I thought the point of not blowing up the city right away was to make the people think that things were going to get better over time, and force Bruce to watch it knowing that it was all a sham, then just laugh and blow it up anyway. They didn't blow up the city right away for the same reason that the Sheriff of Nottingham uses a spoon to cut out a man's heart, and not a knife. I'm not saying that they pulled it off perfectly, but I believe that was the intent.

Maybe. I think the idea was to let anarchy reign, and when people acted terribly, use that as moral justification to blow up the city. It's a lot like the Joker's boat trick at the end of The Dark Knight, except that was properly concieved and communicated to the audience, and came with a

The movie did show them receiving aid shipments from the US. and in fact a special forces team was smuggled in with one.

Sorry, I probably wasn't that clear. I don't mean logistically, we saw food get trucked in, and even distributed down to the police. I think that's how the spec ops guys were able to sneak in, but that scene moved very fast and I might have just assumed that.

What I mean is that we were given no real feell for how people acted in the chaos. Did the city devolve into complete anarchy, like the League of Shadows wanted? Or did most people shut up shop, like Matthew Modine did when he gave up on being a policeman? We just don't know, and given that's a major reason the League of Shadows was doing what it was doing, it seems a strange oversight.

I think Bane was somewhat inert after capturing the city because there was no longer any real threat for him, and a villain without a threat tends to be boring. The should have had more for Gordon/Blake's resistance to keep him active while Bruce was finding his happy place.

That's the point. Bane did everything he was going to do, and then just sat there for the next hour or so being aimless until Batman re-appeared just as the bomb was going to go off. It's bad structure.

I think they could have cleaned the whole thing up, by having more interaction between Bane and Batman early on, pushing the final execution of Bane's bomb plot back at least half an hour, and ripping the 'city held hostage' part of the movie to about a third of the running time they gave it.

Hey, they could have put Batman's prison in the tunnels under Gotham, instead of being in India, and thereby allowed for Bane to come down and continue to taunt him. Bane could then be showing Wayne what the city is collapsing into, trying to force Wayne to admit the city deserves destruction. Instead of introducing yet another character in the Doctor to drip feed Wayne the backstory, we could have had Bane himself reveal it in little snippets. I think then you'd get the conflict between the two brought front and square in the movie.

It was pretty good, better than going to work in the morning anyway.

Speaking of going, it was first film I have ever had to walk out of and go to the bathroom (talky bit where Alfred was telling Bruce about the letter from his Ex).

Seriously though fellers you're over analysis it....whoops wrong forum.

Cheesecat wrote:I wouldn't say the villains are completely nonsensical I mean the League of Shadows was portrayed as an extremist organization in both the 1st and 3rd film, so it would make sense for them to have a ridiculous plot scheme like a lot of real world extremist groups have.

But no real world extremist group has a plot of get a bomb, hold a city to ransom, wait around for a month or maybe two, then blow up the city. What the hell were they trying to do between trapping the cops underground and siezing the bomb, and when Batman turned up at the end and stopped them?

The microwave gun in the first movie that evaporated the river but didn't hurt people made more sense.

sebster wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:I wouldn't say the villains are completely nonsensical I mean the League of Shadows was portrayed as an extremist organization in both the 1st and 3rd film, so it would make sense for them to have a ridiculous plot scheme like a lot of real world extremist groups have.

But no real world extremist group has a plot of get a bomb, hold a city to ransom, wait around for a month or maybe two, then blow up the city. What the hell were they trying to do between trapping the cops underground and siezing the bomb, and when Batman turned up at the end and stopped them?

The microwave gun in the first movie that evaporated the river but didn't hurt people made more sense.

Yeah, at the very least they should have dropped some mustard gas down in with the cops. What part of their plan was serviced by keeping them alive?

Bromsy wrote:Yeah, at the very least they should have dropped some mustard gas down in with the cops. What part of their plan was serviced by keeping them alive?

I have no clue, because I have no clue what the plan was.

Beat up Batman, and lock him away so he can't prevent plan. Achieved.

Trap cops underground. Achieved.

Capture weapons from Batman, to equip private army and with the above thereby control city. Achieved.

Get bomb. Achieved.

Tell USA it can't retake city because you've got bomb. Achieved.

feth about doing nothing for a month or more. Achieved.

I think the plan was 'torment survivors, force them to act in horrible fashion towards one another, then destroy city' - though I admit, I'm not sure on the 'why' and what the ultimate point of the many month delay was either so...

Alpharius wrote:I think the plan was 'torment survivors, force them to act in horrible fashion towards one another, then destroy city' - though I admit, I'm not sure on the 'why' and what the ultimate point of the many month delay was either so...

Make Gotham suffer as much as you can before it's 'inevitable' demise

sebster wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:I wouldn't say the villains are completely nonsensical I mean the League of Shadows was portrayed as an extremist organization in both the 1st and 3rd film, so it would make sense for them to have a ridiculous plot scheme like a lot of real world extremist groups have.

But no real world extremist group has a plot of get a bomb, hold a city to ransom, wait around for a month or maybe two, then blow up the city. What the hell were they trying to do between trapping the cops underground and siezing the bomb, and when Batman turned up at the end and stopped them?

The microwave gun in the first movie that evaporated the river but didn't hurt people made more sense.

I think the movie was trying to show a parallel between life in Gotham and Batman's imprisonment, it wasn't meant to be logical. There's many other scene's like that in The Dark Knight Rises where in reality they

don't make much sense but on a poetic or symbolic level they do. Like at the ending, when it seems like a highly unlikely coincidence that Alfred sees Bruce with his wife at the exact same restaurant that Alfred

envisioned in his dream, but the point of scene wasn't to be realistic but to show that Alfred's wish was fulfilled.

I mean, I get the idea of making the city devolve into barbarism or whatever razzamatazz they were trying for, but the cops in the tunnels - no purpose. Gas the helpless bastards, no one had any official contact with em anyways. Or, just put like 5 more bombs in, and collapse the tunnels on top of them instead of the whole convoluted trapping nonsense in the first place.

Alpharius wrote:I think the plan was 'torment survivors, force them to act in horrible fashion towards one another, then destroy city' - though I admit, I'm not sure on the 'why' and what the ultimate point of the many month delay was either so...

But the point is they talked about that... and then when we reached that point in the movie they just ignored it completely. It was just forgotten about the whole time Batman was in prison and Gordon & Robin running about.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cheesecat wrote:I think the movie was trying to show a parallel between life in Gotham and Batman's imprisonment, it wasn't meant to be logical. There's many other scene's like that in The Dark Knight Rises where in reality they

don't make much sense but on a poetic or symbolic level they do. Like at the ending, when it seems like a highly unlikely coincidence that Alfred sees Bruce with his wife at the exact same restaurant that Alfred

envisioned in his dream, but the point of scene wasn't to be realistic but to show that Alfred's wish was fulfilled.

I don't think that particular parallel was planned for at all, to be honest. Nor can you explain away 30 or more days of time with 'its thematic'.

Really, it was just that Bane took out Batman on the eve of executing his big plan... and they then needed to pad out time in order for Batman to have all that League of Shadow's exposition explained to him, and to get fit enough to get back out of the prison.

They padded out this time in the most unconvincing of all possible ways... by having the villains just feth about for a month.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bromsy wrote:I mean, I get the idea of making the city devolve into barbarism or whatever razzamatazz they were trying for, but the cops in the tunnels - no purpose. Gas the helpless bastards, no one had any official contact with em anyways. Or, just put like 5 more bombs in, and collapse the tunnels on top of them instead of the whole convoluted trapping nonsense in the first place.

If you're going to just take out the cops to make sure your plan doesn't go to gak in a month's time... might as well just set the bomb off today to make sure your plan doesn't go to gak.

sebster wrote:

Bromsy wrote:I mean, I get the idea of making the city devolve into barbarism or whatever razzamatazz they were trying for, but the cops in the tunnels - no purpose. Gas the helpless bastards, no one had any official contact with em anyways. Or, just put like 5 more bombs in, and collapse the tunnels on top of them instead of the whole convoluted trapping nonsense in the first place.

If you're going to just take out the cops to make sure your plan doesn't go to gak in a month's time... might as well just set the bomb off today to make sure your plan doesn't go to gak.

Right, and that is what I or most logic driven people would do, ignoring the fact that it would probably be easier to just steal some nukes from the Russians, given a group like the LoS. The difference being I can at least understand why a group would get some sort of moral satisfaction out of making a city fall apart in a specific way. The cops thing still makes no sense at all in that scenario, given that they are supposed to just sit in the pit until the bomb kills them anyway.

Bromsy wrote:Right, and that is what I or most logic driven people would do, ignoring the fact that it would probably be easier to just steal some nukes from the Russians, given a group like the LoS. The difference being I can at least understand why a group would get some sort of moral satisfaction out of making a city fall apart in a specific way. The cops thing still makes no sense at all in that scenario, given that they are supposed to just sit in the pit until the bomb kills them anyway.

But they didn't make them fall apart. They just let them be, and apart from brief looting early on they seemed to get by just fine, and no-one among Bane or the rest of the League of Shadows seemed particularly concerned about any of that.

I mean, the city was dependant on food being trucked in... make people fight for that food. Show how basic those people would get when they're hungry.

Or you know, like in The Dark Knight, show that the villains are wrong about humanity. The Joker gave the two boatloads of people their moral predicament and they refused to do whatever it took to protect themselves. This film set up much the same debate, but then forgot to actually show anything to address this. The moral debate between Batman and Bane was, basically, not really addressed at all.

I don't think leaving the cops trapped was out of character. Bane is all about leaving 'hope' around to increase the despair. The cops being trapped gave the populace false hope, which made the despair worse. Plus it had the same effect on the cops.

As for the month inactivity. It wasn't 'inactivity', but rather they won and were enjoying the results.

The league isn't about the quickest, logical path to power, but rather about how to perpetuate an idea. Their plan worked towards that.

skyth wrote:I don't think leaving the cops trapped was out of character. Bane is all about leaving 'hope' around to increase the despair. The cops being trapped gave the populace false hope, which made the despair worse. Plus it had the same effect on the cops.

As for the month inactivity. It wasn't 'inactivity', but rather they won and were enjoying the results.

The league isn't about the quickest, logical path to power, but rather about how to perpetuate an idea. Their plan worked towards that.

having not seen the movie and leaning more and more against seeing it (or maybe just renting) maybe this is answered but, where is the Army? That sounds completely unbelievable.

Bane has a nuke that can be set off at any time and hundreds of people on watch, if anyone from outside of the city interferes the bomb goes off.

Corpsesarefun wrote:Bane has a nuke that can be set off at any time and hundreds of people on watch, if anyone from outside of the city interferes the bomb goes off.

Thats still sounds stupid. You'd have the military on your ass so fast it would make your head spin.

There were there, they surrounded the city entirely.

Corpsesarefun wrote:There were there, they surrounded the city entirely.

Thats not the same. If you have terrorists or armed forces taking over a US city, that city would be overrun within 24 hours, if nothing else by local units of the national guard.
Plus you couldn't do that in a real US city. The local citizenry would blow you to heck.

EDIT: I'll move off my point as its distracting from the thread.